Digital camera shipments at their lowest since 2001 thanks to the smartphone

[D13H4RD]

It's no real secret that the rise of the smartphone and the rapid improvements in the performance of the typical smartphone camera thanks mostly to computational technology has resulted in lower demand for standalone digital cameras, specifically compacts and entry-level ILCs. 

 

With an 84% drop since 2010 to reach 19.4 million by the end of 2018, this makes it the lowest figure since 2001. 

Quote

After a little spike in 2010 up to an all-time high in camera sales of 121 million units, down things went again. Digital cameras (mixing both those with built in lenses and interchangeable lenses) have dropped 84 percent in shipments (from CIPA members) since 2010. At 19.4 million shipments last year, that's lowest number since 2001. While it mostly impacts portable compact cameras, high-end interchangeable lens camera shipments have shrunk as well.

It's important to note that whilst much of the decline lies in the compact entry-level and entry-level ILC market, the sales of pro-sumer, enthusiast and professional-oriented ILCs have dipped as well, likely due to users of these cameras changing their camera bodies at a less frequent pace, with much of their purchase lying on lenses. 

 

The smartphone has since become the single most popular tool for photography, mostly down to its simple nature of being a phone, and one that is small and light enough to be taken anywhere without causing a huge burden. Coupled with how their image quality has since become more than acceptable for many casual use cases and the ease of sharing them, it's not too difficult to see why the traditional camera is falling by the wayside, although enthusiast and professional-oriented cameras will still largely hold up. 

 

Source: PC Mag

 

Opinion 

Spoiler

Not much of this is a surprise. Considering that many people tend to use cameras to capture holiday photos and life's precious memories, it would make sense that they would prefer to have a camera that's always with them during most times and the popularity of social media has just increased the appeal of using a smartphone for snapshots over buying a dedicated camera, especially since many smartphones have image quality more than good enough to match, or even eclipse many small-sensor compacts. 

 

With all that said, I still prefer to shoot on my Fujifilm X-T3 and Sony a6000, mostly because I like and appreciate the objectively better quality I get from these cameras and I find them more engaging to shoot with thanks to their more focused ergonomics amongst other features like the excellent video features on the Fujifilm or the excellent tracking autofocus systems on both camera. They're absolutely beyond overkill for snapshots, and they are something extra to carry, meaning that not everyone will do so, but that's probably why I'm weird 

 

[DrMacintosh]

When phones these days have smartHDR and optically assisted 10x zoom...what else could you ask for that requires a dedicated camera unless you're doing photography as a hobby or as your job? 

 

Most people just want to take pictures of their dogs or something. 

[D13H4RD]

1 minute ago, DrMacintosh said:

optically assisted 10x zoom...

Good thing they don't do this lol

[DrMacintosh]

5 minutes ago, D13H4RD said:

Good thing they don't do this lol

I mean, phones are point and shoot. Any optical zoom is good for the user. 

[D13H4RD]

Just now, DrMacintosh said:

I mean, phones are point and shoot. Any optical zoom is good for the user. 

I mean having an extending lens barrel which extends to a ridiculous extent. 

 

That one went from 55mm to 200mm (82.5 to 300mm in 35mm equivalent FoV) 

[Bouzoo]

5 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

When phones these days have smartHDR and optically assisted 10x zoom.

No one has 10x optical yet. Many of those high optical zooms, like 3x in P30 Pro and 5x in Oppo Reno are not really those values but it sounds better than 2.6x zoom for instance. It is still amazing how far they're pushing and the results.

 

5 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

Most people just want to take pictures of their dogs

Do we have a problem here mate?

[DrMacintosh]

Just now, Bouzoo said:

No one has 10x optical yet.

I know that, that's why I said 10x optically assisted. iPhones for example, have a 2x optical sensor which then digitally zooms in 5x beyond that optically assisted image to render 10x zoom. 

[poochyena]

19 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

When phones these days have smartHDR and optically assisted 10x zoom...what else could you ask for that requires a dedicated camera unless you're doing photography as a hobby or as your job? 

 

Most people just want to take pictures of their dogs or something. 

Most phones have no zoom, a few have 2x, and very very few have 3x or higher. Most just have digital zoom which is literally just cropping.
Annoying things with phone cameras is their post processing that can really mess up a picture and make editing harder, and how easily the lense can get scratched since there is no lens cap.

[D13H4RD]

3 minutes ago, poochyena said:

and how easily the lense can get scratched since there is no lens cap.

A small scratch on the lens cover isn't going to dramatically affect IQ. 

 

But when there's a huge camera hump that only large cases can make up for, it makes it more susceptible to damage 

[Guest]

46 minutes ago, D13H4RD said:

Good thing they don't do this lol

 

Well I was looking at a DSLR (or whatnot the shop assistant said), but I just can’t justify the ~400-500 for a camera, that does a similar enough job on my phone, and I’ll probably use 1-2 times a month or on holiday. It’s great if you have the time or job to use it, but I carry my phone everywhere, it’s all there etc.

[jiyeon]

I once was going to buy a digital camera for myself after using a Canon EOS 5D (IV I believe?) back in high school in photography class to further my Instagram quality. What held me back on a camera was that it would've set me back at least £500 at the time, a figure I wasn't willing to swallow for a single-purpose item, when my phone - which at the time was an iPhone 6s - could do what a camera could do.

 

Glad I didn't invest in one in the end, my iPhone 8 Plus does everything in a camera that I want it to. My family has a long history of photography nerds with their own DSLRs but I'm not following suit.

[givingtnt]

I think it's also important to make it clear that many people buy older, used camera gear because it's inexpensive compared to brand new items.
Phone cameras Physically, IE due to physics cannot ever replace a traditional full frame or APS-C camera. for the same reason Astronomers don't use binoculars to look at distant galaxies.

Sure, for everyday photos of things people won't ever look at again phones are fine.. but those "shot on an iphone" 15ftx5ft posters of apple ?
Yeah. sorry to break it to you...

[Zodiark1593]

1 hour ago, seoz said:

I once was going to buy a digital camera for myself after using a Canon EOS 5D (IV I believe?) back in high school in photography class to further my Instagram quality. What held me back on a camera was that it would've set me back at least £500 at the time, a figure I wasn't willing to swallow for a single-purpose item, when my phone - which at the time was an iPhone 6s - could do what a camera could do.

 

Glad I didn't invest in one in the end, my iPhone 8 Plus does everything in a camera that I want it to. My family has a long history of photography nerds with their own DSLRs but I'm not following suit.

Honestly, the tool you use is quite irrelevant so long as you achieve the result you want. Some people thought I had an expensive camera when they look at my pictures. Just an enthusiast compact camera.(Canon G7X mkII).

[_Hustler_One_]

4 hours ago, D13H4RD said:

Good thing they don't do this lol

WUT?!

[porina]

I feel my personal photographic needs mirror the camera sales chart. I got into photography as a hobby sometime in the 2000's, and went inactive sometime in 2010's. I see parallels with how computing is affect by phones for the masses. Phones are "good enough" for basic computing tasks. Social media posts, photos, messaging, gaming even. Camera of course plays part of that. Have computers died? Not even close. While not every household will have a desktop these days, laptops are still pretty common.

 

These days, I mainly use my phone camera as "good enough" for a random forum post, or social media filler. There's still no chance I'd use one for what I used to do for photography more seriously. Then again, I was interested in two areas which have their particular needs, wildlife, and astrophotography. I kept my camera equipment, even if I rarely use it much. Zoom and responsiveness are two factors I miss, on top of ergonomics. Traditional cameras could also borrow more from the smartphone generation though. More software control where it helps, but not as a substitute for physical buttons.

 

I'm seeing cameras go up in placement, but they're not giving up on entry level still. I have a friend who recently got an entry level Canon DSLR because even iphone cameras were not up to the job (arty stuff). Earlier this year, I even dusted off my superzoom ultracompact camera. It wasn't that great, but still outdid phone cameras for more distant subjects.

 

Longer term, camera sales will probably bottom out. Maybe not all the current players will remain able to survive, but not all will die either.

[Zodiark1593]

5 hours ago, DrMacintosh said:

I know that, that's why I said 10x optically assisted. iPhones for example, have a 2x optical sensor which then digitally zooms in 5x beyond that optically assisted image to render 10x zoom. 

I fail to see why "digital zoom" should even be a factor when anyone can just crop out what is needed after the shot with similar resolution loss. Tbh, there is way more control over the shot when you crop manually as opposed to digitally zooming in as you can choose how to frame your image.

[TahoeDust]

I very rarely bust out the DSLR anymore.  The camera in my iPhone Xs Max has really impressed me.

[AkatsukiKun]

8 hours ago, D13H4RD said:

Good thing they don't do this lol

what weapon is that?

[williamcll]

The big winner here seems like sony (and a bit of Leica and Zeiss) since most other camera manufactuers don't sell to smartphones.

[Tamesh16]

i dont know, i have been taking picture for years, and i still have a crappy cannon mirrorless camera, its quite expensive to get into that market, plus even though i take pictures quite a bit, lenses still confuse me and its one of the main reason i havent bought a 'professional' camera as yet, 

even though i do jobs for organisations (i just know my sensor really well) 

thats really the case for people i have seen, who have smartphones but buy  a better camera for use of family pictures to be printed and stuff, and cant really use them well

[poochyena]

One more thing i'd want to point out. Its MUCH easier to adjust settings on a camera than a phone. The physical buttons and knobs on a camera make making adjustment infinitely easier than trying to adjust settings on a touch screen and going through menus. Also mirrorless cameras have a pop out screen so you can see what the camera sees even if you are taking a picture at a weird angle.

[D13H4RD]

7 hours ago, seoz said:

I once was going to buy a digital camera for myself after using a Canon EOS 5D (IV I believe?) back in high school in photography class to further my Instagram quality. What held me back on a camera was that it would've set me back at least £500 at the time, a figure I wasn't willing to swallow for a single-purpose item, when my phone - which at the time was an iPhone 6s - could do what a camera could do.

 

Glad I didn't invest in one in the end, my iPhone 8 Plus does everything in a camera that I want it to. My family has a long history of photography nerds with their own DSLRs but I'm not following suit.

To be honest, if it's for Instagram, even a RX100V, let alone the EOS 5D Mark IV will be supremely overkill as Instagram tends to use extremely lossy compression, which will negate many of the advantages of using a larger sensor camera except perhaps depth of field but that's another matter. 

 

Although to be clear, the 5D Mark IV is a bit of a different animal as that's Canon's enthusiast/professional-oriented 35mm DSLR. I know someone with one who does weddings for a living. 

 

1 hour ago, AkatsukiKun said:

what weapon is that?

Fujinon XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 mounted on a Fujifilm X-T3 

[Misanthrope]

Most expected result of the world since Digital Cameras killed film cameras.

 

What most of you here probably don't expect is cellphones eventually doing the same thing to laptops and desktop computers. Shit we're already have bumbling attempts at folding phone/tablet hybrids and on this very news section talk about researching 2nm processors and Streaming services for gaming (Completing the already available streaming services for well, everything else you do as a consumer or office worker with a computer)

 

So ultimately you will get a single cellphone device as your computer. If you want the ergonomics you will be able to fold out into a more comfortable screen and keyboard and at home you can probably just beam your device to your TV/Monitor wallpaper (Like a literal wallpaper: just cover entire wall sections of your house with AMOLED panels). Even the famous content creators will probably pay for a special subscription that provides them extra processing juice remotely somewhere in Azure or AWS.

So enjoy custom PCs while you can, they're not meant to last.

[D13H4RD]

14 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Snip 

They'll probably just remain as a small niche tbh, same as to why Fujifilm still makes film even though they're nowhere near as popular as they used to be. 

[Misanthrope]

1 minute ago, D13H4RD said:

They'll probably just remain as a small niche tbh, same as to why Fujifilm still makes film even though they're nowhere near as popular as they used to be. 

I think it might evolve into a very different kind of hobby myself but I am not really basing this on anything bear that in mind.

 

What I picture is that computational power will not be a thing that's needed once we advance a lot more in infrastructure for remote services. Well that is, for consumers overall it wont be.

 

But obviously we'll need to have people building and maintaining huge data centers. People building powerful computers to power those data centers.

 

Hobbyists will probably get second hand/slightly older tech and just use that to continue the PC enthusiasts hobby. The catch is that it will no longer be the pretty glorified game of putting together Legos it is today: it will be as difficult as it is today to deal with server parts so the niche will be considerable smaller but enthusiasts, well chances are that right now you don't have to learn a lot about enterprise hardware but you could and will have to.

 

It can potentially be equally exiting to see what kind of things come out of people just figuring out how to make enterprise hardware look cool and keep things like noise under control but the hobby will continue, albeit with perhaps 70+ % of the users on this forums for example gone for other less expensive and less involved hobbies instead but still