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

[Zodiark1593]

15 minutes ago, D13H4RD said:

Yeah, same with the RX100. Pretty nice compacts.

The Canon uses the same Sony sensor, so I tend to think of the G7X and the RX100 as kind of step-siblings. One of these days, I might move to M4/3 due to size and cost, though I don't see myself going for anything larger than that. For now, I'll just focus on mastering my own camera.

[jiyeon]

19 hours ago, Zodiark1593 said:

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).

Not sure if there's a saying about good tools & a bad eye vs bad tools & a good eye, but this would sure apply here. I also had the same thing when I used to do Instagram, people would ask what type of camera I had and I'd say it was just my Nexus 5X.

[ilyfrankh]

5 hours ago, D13H4RD said:

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.

A big draw to many of the current X-series Fuji cameras are the presets and straight-out-of-camera JPGs. I know a few photographers who bought Fuji's as secondary (personal-use) bodies for the Classic Chrome setting entirely.

4 hours ago, Zodiark1593 said:

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

Pretty much any modern APS-C from the past 2-3 years can produce very usuable images at 6400+ ISO.

[Zodiark1593]

7 minutes ago, ItsMe!Entropy said:

 

Pretty much any modern APS-C from the past 2-3 years can produce very usuable images at 6400+ ISO.

Usable, most certainly. Effortless, well the noise is probably great enough by this point to carefully consider the compromise, hence "struggles". Though I will say my Canon G7X mkII produces usable images up to 6400 ISO, and that's a 1" format sensor. 

 

And tbh, I just pulled a high ISO number without thinking about it. I probably shouldn't have even referenced an ISO number at all in my post, and just kept it at "high speed, low light photography." Late night, no coffee in the morning, etc.

[ilyfrankh]

33 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

well the noise is probably great enough by this point to carefully consider the compromise, 

I definitely get your sentiment, but getting a properly exposed photograph is by far the most important thing to nail. Because if you're shooting in a dimly lit room, there is no compromise to make. You either get a usable photo or you don't.

Here's two Fuji X100s shots @ 4000 ISO (same sensor as the XT-1, 2013)

 

[Zodiark1593]

27 minutes ago, ItsMe!Entropy said:

I definitely get your sentiment, but getting a properly exposed photograph is by far the most important thing to nail. Because if you're shooting in a dimly lit room, there is no compromise to make. You either get a usable photo or you don't.

Here's two Fuji X100s shots @ 4000 ISO (same sensor as the XT-1, 2013)

Compromise as far as shutter speeds go, is what I refer to. If the motion is on the slower side, one can probably get away with reducing ISO in exchange for a slower shutter (maybe a little motion blur occurs on the hands, for those playing instruments), but when things start going fast, better to reach for the higher ISO to keep a sharp image.

 

Here's another shot from the live music event I went to, taken at 4000 ISO at 1/60 shutter, and 21mm focal length (x 2.7 crop factor = ~57mm in 35mm terms). I definitely like your shots a lot though.

 

 

[Misanthrope]

7 hours ago, Sauron said:

Not surprising.

 

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

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.

True, yet I think a single thunderbolt dock might be convenient enough to not having to wait for wireless displays too much. This can add in monitor, peripherals, charging and even local storage so the "work" stuff stays at works which is something that's also going to be meet with some resistance for some stuck-in-the-past companies and their policies (There are many places that for example still flat out refuse practical and cost saving measures like telecommuting because of their unwillingness to address their policies regarding employees handling company data, I know, ridiculous given how these companies are often not particularly hard targets to get through in data theft and ransomware cases anyway)

 

Now as for the need for "real" laptops I think I can actually narrow it down to something more concrete: real keyboards and other peripherals. I can totally picture a "half-dumb" laptop or just partial one where it's basically a nice screen, keyboard and track pad combo but the processing power is not really that impressive at all until it gets a reliable, strong cloud connection or docking.

 

Because yes such a need exists but you'd be surprised how much of the extra productivity has to do with the physicality involved with high skilled professionals than actual computational power provided the latency is fully addressed.

EDIT: Forgot to mention: All of this overall it's still transitory while we develop the tech and loose the taboo to embrace Brain-Computer interfaces. Then we can just "think" our way through interfaces, no need to worry about silly things like typing and clicking or peripherals.

[Zodiark1593]

10 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

 

 

Because yes such a need exists but you'd be surprised how much of the extra productivity has to do with the physicality involved with high skilled professionals than actual computational power provided the latency is fully addressed.

I would have to agree. For example, Lightroom runs very competently on my Snapdragon 821 device. While it takes a little time for the full resolution preview to come up, I don't feel that computation resources really limit me here when working with 20 MP raws.

 

Addendum: Though my phone gets hotter than the bloody sun when working on an image for awhile.

[D13H4RD]

1 hour ago, Zodiark1593 said:

I would have to agree. For example, Lightroom runs very competently on my Snapdragon 821 device. While it takes a little time for the full resolution preview to come up, I don't feel that computation resources really limit me here when working with 20 MP raws.

 

Addendum: Though my phone gets hotter than the bloody sun when working on an image for awhile.

I tried using LR on my phone to edit a 187MP RAW file from the Panasonic LUMIX S1R. 

 

Never again XD

Edited June 16, 2019 by D13H4RD

[Zodiark1593]

15 minutes ago, D13H4RD said:

I tried using LR on my phone to edit a 187MP RAW file from the Panasonic LUMIX S1R. 

 

Never again XD

o_0

 

I question if my desktop could handle a 187MP RAW file...

[ilyfrankh]

3 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

o_0

 

I question if my desktop could handle a 187MP RAW file...

Lightroom on the desktop already starts chugging with 30 MP files... Performance has been slowly going to shit ever since Creative Cloud. I'm just waiting for the release of a better alternative (DarkTable, CaptureOne or RawTherapee anyone??). 

[Zodiark1593]

16 minutes ago, ItsMe!Entropy said:

Lightroom on the desktop already starts chugging with 30 MP files... Performance has been slowly going to shit ever since Creative Cloud. I'm just waiting for the release of a better alternative (DarkTable, CaptureOne or RawTherapee anyone??). 

I noticed that too when using the healing tool, and the brush. The brush gets pretty rediculously slow, and these are with 20 MP files. Wonder if it has to do with almost never touching the GPU for much of anything at all?

[ilyfrankh]

1 minute ago, Zodiark1593 said:

I noticed that too when using the healing tool, and the brush. The brush gets pretty rediculously slow, and these are with 20 MP files. Wonder if it has to do with almost never touching the GPU for much of anything at all?

Yeah, the optimization is just complete garbage. Pretty sure Adobe is just raking in the money with the subscription service so they've becoming complacent with pushing out performance patches.

[Zodiark1593]

1 hour ago, ItsMe!Entropy said:

Yeah, the optimization is just complete garbage. Pretty sure Adobe is just raking in the money with the subscription service so they've becoming complacent with pushing out performance patches.

Seems like Photoshop runs like a dream though, and actually uses the GPU for stuff, so it might not be Adobe as a whole, rather the team that maintains Lightroom.

 

Just returned from the Placerville Fair here with more than a fair share of low light, high ISO stuff. Will see how they turn out once imported. 

[Eduard the weeb]

Well duh, cameras are a much more niche market now then a few years ago because entries level DSLRs to take photos of the kids for example aren't something you need when you have a phone that has a decent camera. However the companies are probably just fine, the current market is much more sustainable because people buying lenses and cameras now are people picking it up as a passion like me for example.

[Sauron]

6 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

Now as for the need for "real" laptops I think I can actually narrow it down to something more concrete: real keyboards and other peripherals. I can totally picture a "half-dumb" laptop or just partial one where it's basically a nice screen, keyboard and track pad combo but the processing power is not really that impressive at all until it gets a reliable, strong cloud connection or docking.

So basically a classic thinkpad with a modded high resolution screen

6 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

EDIT: Forgot to mention: All of this overall it's still transitory while we develop the tech and loose the taboo to embrace Brain-Computer interfaces. Then we can just "think" our way through interfaces, no need to worry about silly things like typing and clicking or peripherals.

Well I don't think that's a taboo so much as it is currently unfeasible. Also a keyboard can be very efficient in the hands of a skilled user, not as fast as thought but even with a direct connection to the brain there would have to be some predetermined commands which ultimately limit your speed.

[D13H4RD]

9 hours ago, ItsMe!Entropy said:

Lightroom on the desktop already starts chugging with 30 MP files... Performance has been slowly going to shit ever since Creative Cloud. I'm just waiting for the release of a better alternative (DarkTable, CaptureOne or RawTherapee anyone??). 

Definitely Capture One. Been mulling the upgrade to Capture One Pro as I've been really liking the Express version that works with my Fujifilm RAF files. 

 

I've been really unimpressed with the performance of Lightroom. Even with 24.3MP ARW files from the Sony a6000 (which is an absolute cakewalk for my system), Lightroom chugs along so slowly to the point where it's just really painful. 

[Big Head Tech]

This doesn't surprise memost modern flagship smart phones perform as well as most cameras under $200. Unless you're a professional or shooting a ton, there's no need for a camera. Most smart phones, especially flagship ones work perfect for vacations and casual site seeing. Plus you don't have to carry more around and phones are water resistant now days too!