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

[IAmAndre]

I'm curious to know how many of the cameras sold today are GoPro devices. That's the only type of camera a lambda consumer like me would consider buying.

I think that price is also a factor. Buying a phone with a good camera is most of the time cheaper than phone + dedicated camera.

[D13H4RD]

8 minutes ago, IAmAndre said:

I'm curious to know how many of the cameras sold today are GoPro devices. That's the only type of camera a lambda consumer like me would consider buying.

I think that price is also a factor. Buying a phone with a good camera is most of the time cheaper than phone + dedicated camera.

Probably a significant number alongside the Fujifilm Instax cameras. 

[Ross Siggers]

11 hours ago, VegetableStu said:

that'd be the galaxy camera, LOL

Fun fact, I actually won a Galaxy Camera in a competition, when they were first released.

But I've always had an SLR, so I resold it for cash monies   

[Zodiark1593]

1 hour ago, Misanthrope said:

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

I'll just build a home server then. No problem.

[RejZoR]

8 minutes ago, VegetableStu said:

kinda depends on how much we're taking into account in the comparison o_o Canon does industrial imaging (x-rays, semiconductor lithography machines, optics for other machines) and print media machines as well, so without this context it might seem that Canon could do fine with being where they are right now.

 

not sure about fuji and nikon though o_o

Olympus also makes a lot of industrial imaging, from medical to manufacturing parts.

[RejZoR]

1 minute ago, VegetableStu said:

holy heck, that's a name I've never heard in a long time, LOL

Because they mostly operate in those areas. In consumer market, they are rather irrelevant yes.

[D13H4RD]

1 hour ago, VegetableStu said:

not sure about fuji and nikon though o_o

Fujifilm is doing quite well still. Their diversification strategy back in the early 2000s all the way to 2006 worked out tremendously well for them with their venture into beautification/skincare with Astalift being very successful alongside pharmaceuticals.

 

While this made their photography division cover only a small amount of the total company in terms of revenue, that has been doing well. The Instax is selling quite well still and the X-series is growing fast despite the general downturn of camera sales.

 

As for Nikon, their outlook is less rosy.

[Zodiark1593]

7 hours ago, D13H4RD said:

Fujifilm is doing quite well still. Their diversification strategy back in the early 2000s all the way to 2006 worked out tremendously well for them with their venture into beautification/skincare with Astalift being very successful alongside pharmaceuticals.

 

While this made their photography division cover only a small amount of the total company in terms of revenue, that has been doing well. The Instax is selling quite well still and the X-series is growing fast despite the general downturn of camera sales.

 

As for Nikon, their outlook is less rosy.

I've been meaning to get my sister an Instax for some time. Will make for a nice birthday npresent I think.

 

Nikon does also make scopes for rifles and binoculars. Getting ahold of a military contract or two should keep them alive.

 

8 hours ago, VegetableStu said:

holy heck, that's a name I've never heard in a long time, LOL

I have my mom's old Olympus here I break out sometimes. The battery is pretty much RIP though. If you think Olympus an unusual name however, ever hear about Kyocera? My first digicam was a Kyocera Finecam L3v.

[Commodus]

Not at all surprised.  We're now at a point where the smartphone is not only the more convenient camera, it's frequently good enough that you may feel little pressure to bring a dedicated camera with you when you intend to take nice photos.  There are shots I've taken with my iPhone XS that really do look like I took them with a DSLR or mirrorless cam, and not just because of depth of field from the portrait mode (which is imperfect, to be clear) -- it's the tone, the exposure, the dynamic range.

 

I have a Sony mirrorless cam that I'm tempted to upgrade, but I have fewer and fewer reasons to do so.  I can't help but think that we'll have phones in five years that obviate the need for anything but pro cameras -- even the enthusiast DSLR/mirrorless models may feel a bit pointless.

[D13H4RD]

6 minutes ago, Commodus said:

I have a Sony mirrorless cam that I'm tempted to upgrade, but I have fewer and fewer reasons to do so.  I can't help but think that we'll have phones in five years that obviate the need for anything but pro cameras -- even the enthusiast DSLR/mirrorless models may feel a bit pointless.

They'll still find a spot with people like me, who make up a comparatively small amount of people out there. There's just something in them that we like that isn't as easily replicated with a smaller sensor camera without stacking a couple of exposures.

 

Plus, we have made Frankenmonsters like this Sony a6000 with a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art DG HSM designed for the Sony FE mount. It's so utterly impractical and it gives you hand-cramps after a while of using it. But it's part of why I find it so strangely amusing.

 

In short though, we just enjoy shooting, regardless of what we use.

[Commodus]

3 minutes ago, D13H4RD said:

They'll still find a spot with people like me, who make up a comparatively small amount of people out there. There's just something in them that we like that isn't as easily replicated with a smaller sensor camera without stacking a couple of exposures.

 

Plus, we have made Frankenmonsters like this Sony a6000 with a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art DG HSM designed for the Sony FE mount. It's so utterly impractical and it gives you hand-cramps after a while of using it. But it's part of why I find it so strangely amusing.

 

In short though, we just enjoy shooting, regardless of what we use.

Oh, I won't disagree with you on this front.  Lenses and the sheer size of dedicated cameras' sensors give them advantages, especially if you have specific desires.  It's just that smartphones are quickly hollowing out the "I just want to take a good photo" class of user, and the combination of sensor upgrades with computational photography might just enable pictures that previously required something like that A6000 to achieve.

[Tamesh16]

15 minutes ago, D13H4RD said:

Sony a6000

always wanted a alpha 7 pro, i mean i am quite confused by lens , but is it a good choice ?

btw used mirrorless cameras with attached lens for about 6 years 

[D13H4RD]

Just now, Commodus said:

Oh, I won't disagree with you on this front.  Lenses and the sheer size of dedicated cameras' sensors give them advantages, especially if you have specific desires.  It's just that smartphones are quickly hollowing out the "I just want to take a good photo" class of user, and the combination of sensor upgrades with computational photography might just enable pictures that previously required something like that A6000 to achieve.

Probably won't be long given the advances on the computational side of things.

 

But I also think that camera companies are taking notice and are beginning to incorporate some of what's used in phones. Fujifilm had mentioned that they were interested in incorporating some aspects of computational photography into their X-series bodies, although how they will do so is uncertain as of now, and they'll likely have to do it in a manner that doesn't take control away from the user.

[D13H4RD]

8 minutes ago, Tamesh16 said:

always wanted a alpha 7 pro, i mean i am quite confused by lens , but is it a good choice ?

btw used mirrorless cameras with attached lens for about 6 years 

By Alpha 7 Pro, you mean the Sony a7Riii?

[Tamesh16]

3 minutes ago, D13H4RD said:

Sony a7Riii

https://www.sony.com/electronics/interchangeable-lens-cameras/ilce-7-body-kit

this, thats wayy too expensive for me

[D13H4RD]

Just now, Tamesh16 said:

https://www.sony.com/electronics/interchangeable-lens-cameras/ilce-7-body-kit

Don't go for that. Sony's first-generation a7 is very flawed.

 

Aim for an a7iii or if you really wanna penny-pinch, a7ii

[Zodiark1593]

38 minutes ago, Commodus said:

Oh, I won't disagree with you on this front.  Lenses and the sheer size of dedicated cameras' sensors give them advantages, especially if you have specific desires.  It's just that smartphones are quickly hollowing out the "I just want to take a good photo" class of user, and the combination of sensor upgrades with computational photography might just enable pictures that previously required something like that A6000 to achieve.

Phones are pretty much the best "Point and Shoot" in that even the most uninitiated of users can get reasonable results. I would like to see 1/1.7" or larger sensors become commonplace though, as even the best phones struggle in low light, high speed photography. (Though in fairness, what non-full frame camera doesn't struggle at 6400+ ISO)

[D13H4RD]

3 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Though in fairness, what non-full frame camera doesn't struggle at 6400+ ISO)

The X-T2/X-T3? Those can produce usable photos at 6400 ISO

[Zodiark1593]

8 minutes ago, D13H4RD said:

The X-T2/X-T3? Those can produce usable photos at 6400 ISO

6400 ISO is about the limit for my G7X as well. Any higher, and the image rapidly goes from grainy to some strange, tv-static kind of oddness.

[D13H4RD]

5 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

6400 ISO is about the limit for my G7X as well. Any higher, and the image rapidly goes from grainy to some strange, tv-static kind of oddness.

This one's shot at 6400ISO on the X-T3

[Zodiark1593]

18 minutes ago, D13H4RD said:

This one's shot at 6400ISO on the X-T3

 

This rabbit (better than cats btw)  was shot at 1600 ISO on my G7X mkII, and the guy playing the synthesiser (live music in a poorly lit pub) at 3200 ISO. Don't really have any other high ISO examples as of yet. Will be heading to a fair tonight, so I'll probably be putting those ISO numbers up quite high.

[D13H4RD]

1 minute ago, Zodiark1593 said:

This rabbit (better than cats btw)  was shot at 1600 ISO on my G7X mkII, and the guy playing the synthesiser (live music in a poorly lit pub) at 3200 ISO. Don't really have any other high ISO examples as of yet. Will be heading to a fair tonight, so I'll probably be putting those ISO numbers up quite high.

Wouldn't be surprised if they come out quite grainy. We are comparing a camera that utilizes a 1-inch sensor versus one that is APS-C

[Zodiark1593]

16 minutes ago, D13H4RD said:

Wouldn't be surprised if they come out quite grainy. We are comparing a camera that utilizes a 1-inch sensor versus one that is APS-C

For the size, still rather usable, and plenty better than any phone I've gotten my hands on (worlds better than my phone for that matter). Image stabilization is pretty godly too, as I've been able to handhold shots as slow as 1/4 with reasonable reliability, so aside from capturing action, low light isn't usually a problem.

 

Also, the 1-inch description is kind of a misnomer, as the sensor is actually 16mm (amusingly, the same size as 110 film). Heck, M4/3 falls a couple mm short of an inch diagonal.

 

[D13H4RD]

5 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

For the size, still rather usable, and plenty better than any phone I've gotten my hands on (worlds better than my phone for that matter). Image stabilization is pretty godly too, as I've been able to handhold shots as slow as 1/4 with reasonable reliability, so aside from capturing action, low light isn't usually a problem.

 

Also, the 1-inch description is kind of a misnomer, as the sensor is actually 16mm (amusingly, the same size as 110 film). Heck, M4/3 falls a couple mm short of an inch diagonal.

 

Yeah, same with the RX100. Pretty nice compacts.

[Sauron]

Not surprising.

 

Me? They can take my mirrorless from my cold, dead hands.

13 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

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)

That's true but so far there hasn't been a very successful hybrid. Right now it's simply more convenient to have a dedicated tablet or laptop/convertible than having some clunky mechanism to mount a smartphone on a larger screen. I think it will be drastically more feasible if and when we get some good wireless displays - at that point you could just pull the screen and keyboard out and use your phone for office work while it's in your pocket. Still, there will always be a niche for "real" laptops and even desktops, just like prosumer cameras, at least until cloud computing becomes indistinguishable from a local machine.

 

Either way by the time any of that actually becomes the case we'll have had plenty of time to get our hardware fix.