Cameras for Pros, Smartphones for everybody? The death of an industry? (Page 2): This article was posted a couple of weeks ago. I though it rather clearly and thoroughly explained the...

fourlocks Loc: Londonderry, NH

This article was posted a couple of weeks ago. I though it rather clearly and thoroughly explained the shortcomings of smartphone cameras as compared to DSLRs.

https://www.quora.com/Are-smartphone-cameras-getting-better-than-DSLRs/answer/Bill-Otto-5?ch=17&oid=385774971&share=ca197d11&srid=uGOz5F&target_type=answer

MrMophoto Loc: Rhode Island "The biggest little"

ncribble wrote:

A different point to consider.

I suggest the iPhone will expand photography. Today 86% of the people in the US have smart phones with cameras (google). The majority is taking photographs because they have a camera in their pockets, and the social media to share those photos. I suggest this will give birth to generations of photo enthusiast who will travel beyond the smart photo in their photography journey.

Absolutely right! What the Brownie and all those Plastic point n shoot cameras did for photography as a past-time so will the smartphone cameras. It introduced millions of people to the possibilities of photography. Most will only use them for snapshots and social media sharing, but there will be enough of them that will want to go further and step up to a "real camera". I was a high school photo teacher (now retired), at the beginning of every semester, I would tell my classes that almost all of them will probably never go beyond the snapshot phase, that's OK. If they left ,my class with a greater appreciation for what it takes to make a truly great photo, then I can feel I did a good job.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

fourlocks wrote:

This article was posted a couple of weeks ago. I though it rather clearly and thoroughly explained the shortcomings of smartphone cameras as compared to DSLRs.

https://www.quora.com/Are-smartphone-cameras-getting-better-than-DSLRs/answer/Bill-Otto-5?ch=17&oid=385774971&share=ca197d11&srid=uGOz5F&target_type=answer

I began with a Kodak Instamatic camera, then got a rangefinder camera when that was inadequate. Why should smart phone cameras be different??

ArtzDarkroom Loc: Near Disneyland-Orange County, California

Photography at a professional level with "real cameras" will probably continue, I hope.

Of course there are still so many things a smartphone cannot do that a "real camera" can. How long will that last? When digital first came the scene, we were disappointed with the quality of images. "When digital gets to 6 megapixels, it will be equivalent to 35 mm quality." My iphone passed 6mp a long time ago and they are only getting better.

What I am suggesting is the collapse of the lower end of the "real camera" market. Unfortunately, I suspect it means the failure of many supporting industries that bolster the desire and sales of "real cameras".

Remember film? Can Kodak, or Fuji film claim still to be important (in sales) to photography?

BebuLamar

ArtzDarkroom wrote:

Ricoh, Nikon, Canon, Sony and other camera makers ... (show quote)

It just go back to normal like you said in the 70 where only a few people have camera but still there are camera manufacturers just like the old days.
As for AI photography it can be called imaging but not photography as you do not record the light.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

BebuLamar wrote:

It just go back to normal like you said in the 70 where only a few people have camera but still there are camera manufacturers just like the old days.
As for AI photography it can be called imaging but not photography as you do not record the light.

That depends. AI can consist of analyzing a scene and recording what the subject would have recorded.

gwilliams6

billnikon wrote:

When smart phones can do this, I will use one, end of discussion.

I have always loved these shots by you Bill.

And I agree with you. Smartphones aren't replacing what I can accomplish with professional cameras and gear.

Cheers and best to you.

(Download)

gwilliams6

PetaPixel: " CIPA figures show that camera sales, especially for mirrorless models, are on the rise, and jumped 40% by value last year, which is the second year in a row that shows major gains for the camera industry as it emerged from the doldrums of the coronavirus pandemic. Feb 27, 2023"

That jump in value means people are spending more per unit for their traditional camera choices ,so people must feel they have some greater value than their smartphones for quality image making, and they are willing to pay more for the features and performance they want. .

Cheers

PhotogHobbyist Loc: Bradford, PA

ArtzDarkroom wrote:

Ricoh, Nikon, Canon, Sony and other camera makers ... (show quote)

I started my avocation of photography the same year you recieved your Sears/Ricoh camera. Maybe because of that I feel a close connection with film photography. I was a bit reluctant to accept digital photography, but with the decline of film availability and the increased cost of developing and printing I finally caved. That did not eliminate my connection/affection for film. I still have thoughts of trying out my old film SLRs

Now with the increased availability (and "urging") of MILCs I continue my preference for DSLRs as well as my thoughts of film photography. I am not a prognosticator nor do I have a crystal ball, but I do feel, and strongly believe, DSLR photography will continue for some time. The resurgance of interest in film photography has supported this theory, as has the return to vinyl records for listening to music. I do not believe mirrorless camera photography will take over in a revolutionary way, but, like digital, it will be evolutionary over many years. And even then no one can say with certainty that DSLRs will no longer be manufactured and sold to all levels of photographers.

PhotogHobbyist Loc: Bradford, PA

rehess wrote:

That depends. AI can consist of analyzing a scene and recording what the subject would have recorded.

Did you possibly mean, "AI can consist of analyzing a scene and" providing an illustration of how the subject could have appeared under ideal or different conditions.

Gary C K Loc: Palm Desert, Ca

Great point, that is how I feel.
Thanks for saying it.

Basil Loc: New Mexico

gwilliams6 wrote:

PetaPixel: " so people must feel they have some greater value than their smartphones for quality image making, and they are willing to pay more for the features and performance they want. .

Cheers

Bingo!

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

PhotogHobbyist wrote:

Did you possibly mean, "AI can consist of analyzing a scene and" providing an illustration of how the subject could have appeared under ideal or different conditions.

NO - I really did mean that AI could mean taking an actual photo. It doesn’t always mean manufacturing an image. In the field of Computer Science, AI has always meant what it sounds like - basically like the ‘bots that call us regularly.

delder Loc: Maryland

jlg1000 wrote:

Remember the time when non-enthusiasts and non-ohotographers used Kodak 110 plasticky cameras?

This - albeit much better - is what cellphones are. They do well in their niche (casual shooting and quick sharing) but they fail miserably outside it.

Dedicated cameras will only disappear if something *better* arrives... Maybe an AI so powerful that it can create stunning images from a collection of cellphones which are scattered nearby the subject or something like that.

I actually like your Idea but am extremely frightened by it @ the same time!

terryMc Loc: Arizona's White Mountains

ArtzDarkroom wrote:

Ricoh, Nikon, Canon, Sony and other camera makers ... (show quote)

Calling sitting in your mancave and typing or speaking into your computer any kind of "photography" is just bizarre...