cbtsam Loc: Monkton, MD

There was a time when, if you wanted to try photography, or just shoot your friends and family, and you wanted to do it well and could afford it, you'd buy something like a Canon Rebel. Then, you might get seduced, and buy something much better, or you might not. Today, you just use the phone, so the likelihood of getting seduced goes down.

DICK32

Is photography a hobby or an insanity? I think that there will always be a place for artfully done photography. It is an artform that will endure. But cellphone cameras are improving and more convenient to use. Both have their place.
The carrying of long lenses and tripods is insane--until you see the art you've created. I went through the MET--Metropolitan Art Museum in New York. Their art collection is encyclopedic. 1,000's of years of art is there from all over the world. Who invented layers that we have in Photoshop? I believe it was Di Vinci. He put layer over layer. He applied the bottom layers with his fingers. And put layer on top of layer. Step back and look at his painting--you see that it looks 3 dimensional--you can do that with a photograph too. Try it. He also dissected corpses to see bone and muscle structure.

Some of the best artists were engineers. Samuel Morse--who invented the Morse Code was a great portrait artist and Di Vinci who designed aircraft and military weapons. If I saw a painting I liked I took a pic with my camera and used my cell phone to get a pic of the title block because it was clearer than the camera and I didn't have to adjust my camera settings.

hj Loc: Florida

dwmoar Loc: Oregon, Willamette Valley

yes, it was!!!

WCS

Love your Vision... and humor!

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Smartphones have EXCELLENT cameras now. For most people, there is little to no need for a point-and-shoot dedicated camera. So the low end of the "real" camera market (whatever that means) is a mere shadow of what it once was. And most of the folks who bought film SLRs, travel zoom cameras, and even entry level dSLRs, have now acquired smartphones and looked at their old cameras, saying, "Uhhhh, no."

It's the convenience factor. I take my iPhone everywhere. I take my Lumix when I have a specific set of photos or video clips to record. The best camera you have is the best one you have on you when you need one... I use my MILC system for really intentional, pre-meditated photography. Otherwise, it stays at home.

photoman022 Loc: Manchester CT USA

I haven't bought a new camera in years. The next camera I buy will be used from MPB. When I first started digital photography there was always some sort of pressure (to which I did not succumb) to buy the newest (and, by inference) the greatest. New versions of the same basic camera came out yearly and you weren't "really" a photographer without the latest iteration. I think most photographers haven't given in to the pressure.

Also, many photographers made the transition to DSLRs between 10 and 15 years ago.

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

So, are the prices coming down to boost sales

gouldopfl

I purchased my original mirrorless from them with less than 1000 accuations for about 250.00 less than a new one. I still use my EOS R and it has given me very good usage. I purchased the EOS R6 but I decided to return it. It has some advantages over the EOS R but not for my money for the type of photography that I do. I will be looking at new cameras as they come out, however a 30 mp ff sensor is all I need for personal photography now. I just wish that Sigma would come out with some fast primes at a good price and a 150- 600 that is fast for the R mount. Fortunately, the EF adapter is very good.

mikegreenwald Loc: Illinois

Right on!!!

hj Loc: Florida

Currently, Apple's latest mobiles are only capable of up to 2x optical zoom, though this can be extended to 10x with the addition of digital zoom. So How is there little need for a point-and-shoot camera than has 50X - 60X and more zoom factor. BE REAL! What can I do with a 2X zoom factor on iPhone?

Photocraig

My DSLR an EOS 77D (Mirror I know!)) costs less than the current crops of Smartphones. The typical KODAK user of the past Century did no more than record and share their moments and memories, including an occasional travel photo. The film processors used to joke that a typical roll of film was 36 exposure with a Christmas tree at both ends.

And to give credit, we've all seen some really nice images made using the smart phone. Mine has more capabilities than the first three cameras I owned--and WAY more portable. ANDDDDD, no film.
C

hj Loc: Florida

... AND little zoom. 2X zoom - no thanks I like 50X zoom.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

No, a smartphone will not suffice for all uses of a camera. I didn't say that, nor should anyone expect that. Most really decent point-and-shoot zoom cameras operate in the 3X zoom range and simulate moderate wide angle to moderate tele usage. (Lumix LX-100 II is a great example)

Travel zoom cameras usually are not pocket cameras, which offers certain encumbrances for those who travel light.

According to the last survey I read, the smartphone is used for over 90% of image-making today. Most of that is for social media usage — casual event photography, selfies, parties (well, pre-Covid, anyway), personal porn, grocery lists, and other simple uses. Average Jane or Joe isn't going to do bird-in-flight work with it.

A few years ago, several big-name newspapers fired all their high-dollar photojournalists and gave smartphones to their reporters. They kept a FEW good photographers and some serious equipment, and gradually built the staff as they could afford it. But with the news world transferring to the Internet, advertisers jumped to the Internet as well. That has cheapened photojournalism.

It's quite understandable how the photo market has changed. I used to go to Photo Marketing Association International shows, back in the 1990s to 2010. There were in excess of 45,000 people at some of them! By 2015, PMAI ceased to exist, after decades of industry service. The change began in the mid-2000s, and accelerated in 2008, after the introduction of the iPhone, the recession, and the rise of social media and online photo/video sharing sites.

The digital revolution democratized photography, pissing off tens of thousands of "school portrait professionals" who were really just opportunist picture takers selling machine prints (I know, I worked for one of their labs!). As film died a gooey death by 2007, many older "pros" quit the business and were replaced by young folks making 1/4 of what the older film photographers had made. At one point, the big portrait companies were paying photographers barely above minimum wage. Many still went bankrupt, or were no longer viable, sold to Lifetouch, and eventually, Lifetouch sold out to Shutterfly.

While some of us need and use our dSLRs, MILCs, travel zooms, and serious point-and-shoot models, the market for the little Canon Elph and similar cigarette-pack size cameras has all but evaporated. Good riddance.

Everything changes... like sandcastles on a beach. I'm sure a new paradigm will be along in a few years, probably replacing smartphones and smartwatches with smart glasses. Maybe we'll become cyborgs, who knows?

John Hicks Loc: Sible Hedinham North Essex England

I think Delderby is correct most use smart phones to take snaps, whereas those who take photographs use cameras, I use lenses between 11mms up to 600 mms and use speeds from 500th up to 2000th of a second so a smart phone will not capture what I want take photographs of