The future of photography.

[MJUK]

This report is interesting reading. Maybe explains why Fuji and Panasonic are delivering some very appealing deals on cashback offers and free lens deals?? They are losing money and are therefore trying to capture consumers into their system by offering attractive deals on cameras which then leads to sales on lenses? I personally hope the CSC market doesn't pale into insignificance - I like the idea of continued product development and enhancement in this part of the market.

http://petapixel.com/2013/12/30/report-claims-nikon-canon-sony-will-survive-smartphone-revolution/

Matt.

 

[Caracus]

For most people camera phones and tablets are 'good enough' and to be fair they are. The markets been increasingly eaten up from the bottom with first the cheap point and shoots suffering and now the compact system cameras suffering to an extent.

 

[HoppyUK]

I think the opening line says it all really: The camera industry is turning into a two-tier market, with Canon, Nikon and Sony DSLRs at the top, smartphones at the bottom and nothing in the middle".

Things are moving relentlessly that way, and it's not good news for enthusiasts. Slower development, less choice, higher prices.

 

[woof woof]

I agree that phones are pushing compact cameras out but I just don't believe that in the near future anyone not shooting with a phone will have a big fat Canon or Nikon DSLR and big fat lens.

I think there'll be many people like me who want more than a phone can offer but don't want to carry something with the bulk and weight and in your faceness of a conventional Canon or Nikon DSLR+lens.

Personally I think that for many people mirrorless CSC's will be the way forward, if blokes in Europe and America can stop assuming that a massive camera and lens automatically means quality and if European and American men can stop believing that the size of their gear affects in some way the size of their manly tackle.

 

[StephenM]

I think that this is based on the mass market; the writing was on the wall from the moment that electronics companies entered the camera market place, with their background in consumerism. Only what sells in bulk is of interest, to meet the economies of scale and massive income needed to fuel research and development.

If you discount this, and look outside the mass market, there is still a lot of diversity. After all, there are more people making large format film cameras than DSLRs - they just don't make as many! Photography as a hobby used to be a minority pastime, with everyone having a box camera but few regarding themselves as photographic hobbists. Surely it's still the same, even if the word "photographer" has been devalued to mean someone with a camera phone rather than an interest in photography?

It may well be that the number of digital camera makers will decline, but from my perspective that won't be such a big deal. The menues may change, but the basic functions will remain the same. DSLRs are effectively a monoculture compared to the variety of camera types that were in common amateur use 50-60 years ago (when I started in photography). Then there were SLRs, TLRs, field cameras, monorails, press cameras, rangefinders in 35mm and larger, folding roll film cameras etc.etc. How many digital equivalents of these basic types are there?

All that is needed is enough manufacturers and publishers prepared to cater to a niche market. That might be a problem, but mechanical film cameras seem to last longer than electronically based cameras, so I presume that as long as film is still made, we can keep calm and carry on.

 

[Caracus]

I agree that phones are pushing compact cameras out but I just don't believe that in the near future anyone not shooting with a phone will have a big fat Canon or Nikon DSLR and big fat lens.

I think there'll be many people like me who want more than a phone can offer but don't want to carry something with the bulk and weight and in your faceness of a conventional Canon or Nikon DSLR+lens.

Personally I think that for many people mirrorless CSC's will be the way forward, if blokes in Europe and America can stop assuming that a massive camera and lens automatically means quality and if European and American men can stop believing that the size of their gear affects in some way the size of their manly tackle.

Freudian innuendo aside mirror less cameras are still some way from being able to replace SLR's for all users/uses. I own two mirroless bodies and two SLR bodies and still prefer the SLR's when I don't need to be a bit more discrete or travel light.

There will still be a market for CSC's it just that they occupy a fairly niche position

 

[woof woof]

Freudian innuendo aside mirror less cameras are still some way from being able to replace SLR's for all users/uses. I own two mirroless bodies and two SLR bodies and still prefer the SLR's when I don't need to be a bit more discrete or travel light.

There will still be a market for CSC's it just that they occupy a fairly niche position

In Europe and the USA maybe but in other places, if we believe what we read, CSC's now outsell DSLR's.

At the moment I can only see DSLR's having an advantage over CSC's in one area, shooting moving things, and I'm pretty sure that CSC's will catch up. In fact we're beginning to see improvements already. Apart from that I'm struggling to think of anything my 20D did or my 5D or any other DSLR does better than my G1 and A7 or any other CSC but there are quite a few things that the CSC's do better, at least for me.

There's the OVF/EVF argument but I think that at some time it'll be difficult to argue that an OVF is better and even now most people taking pictures do so with a screen rather than an EVF with OVF's possibly being way down the list of essential things for a great many people. People even use DSLR's at arms length and use the back screens to compose and shoot.

Regardless of what advantages I can think of for DSLR's I do think that whatever advantage a DSLR has over a CSC will be only an advantage for a small number of buyers/users and in that sense I think that DSLR's are possibly more niche than CSC's as most people taking pictures (with camera phones, possibly) don't shoot sports, they shoot stationary people and things and vid and (arguably) a CSC does those things better than both a camera phone and DSLR.

 

[HoppyUK]

In Europe and the USA maybe but in other places, if we believe what we read, CSC's now outsell DSLR's.

At the moment I can only see DSLR's having an advantage over CSC's in one area, shooting moving things, and I'm pretty sure that CSC's will catch up. In fact we're beginning to see improvements already. Apart from that I'm struggling to think of anything my 20D did or my 5D or any other DSLR does better than my G1 and A7 or any other CSC but there are quite a few things that the CSC's do better, at least for me.

There's the OVF/EVF argument but I think that at some time it'll be difficult to argue that an OVF is better and even now most people taking pictures do so with a screen rather than an EVF with OVF's possibly being way down the list of essential things for a great many people. People even use DSLR's at arms length and use the back screens to compose and shoot.

Regardless of what advantages I can think of for DSLR's I do think that whatever advantage a DSLR has over a CSC will be only an advantage for a small number of buyers/users and in that sense I think that DSLR's are possibly more niche than CSC's as most people taking pictures (with camera phones, possibly) don't shoot sports, they shoot stationary people and things and vid and (arguably) a CSC does those things better than both a camera phone and DSLR.

It's not about CSCs or DSLRs, it's about distinct user groups that are polarising around Smartphones vs Serious Cameras - the former for snapshotters and memory makers (ie the vast majority) and the latter for photography enthusiasts (ie us, a tiny minority). Any middle ground left will most likely be taken up by smartphone attachments like the Sony QX (as per the OP's original link). It's such an obvious development that takes smartphones deep into CSC territory.

I don't think CSCs have ever outsold DSLRs, though they've got close in some markets. CSC sales are declining, while DSLRs are holding, and that's been the trend for the last year or so.

 

[LCPete]

It's not about CSCs or DSLRs, it's about distinct user groups that are polarising around Smartphones vs Serious Cameras - the former for snapshotters and memory makers (ie the vast majority) and the latter for photography enthusiasts (ie us, a tiny minority). Any middle ground left will most likely be taken up by smartphone attachments like the Sony QX (as per the OP's original link). It's such an obvious development that takes smartphones deep into CSC territory.

I don't think CSCs have ever outsold DSLRs, though they've got close in some markets. CSC sales are declining, while DSLRs are holding, and that's been the trend for the last year or so.

yes think that you are right
I've been doing quite a lot of my photography lately at the zoo and have noticed that the majority of people taking snaps now use their phone and a few guys like myself with DSLRs
not that long ago most people used a compact camera or bridge but now its phone cameras

 

[Pookeyhead]

The compact camera is dying, yes. Not big news... we've known this for ages.

To suggest that only Nikon, Canon and Sony will survive though, is utter crap.

Leica
Mamiya/Leaf
PhaseOne
Pentax

In fact, all the big names in serious, professional gear will survive, because there will always be a need for serious professional gear.

 

[MJUK]

I think the article accurately points out the facts by making reference to figures around declining sales. Panasonic are producing some cutting edge cameras such as the GX7, yet it appears that consumers are happy with point and shoot straight out of a mobile phone or tablet. I guess the CSC market will continue to capture true photographers who don't want the significant weight of slr kit and from reading the forums I see this a lot. Whether this niche market will support ongoing product development in mirrorless technology, I don't know. I personally am in this situation myself....should I invest in full frame slr or continue to build on my micro 4/3 set up.

 

[Pookeyhead]

Invest in what suits you best. Even if Panasonic or Olympus stop making 4/3rds gear tomorrow... who cares? It's not like yours will disappear into a cloud of smoke.

 

[HoppyUK]

The compact camera is dying, yes. Not big news... we've known this for ages.

To suggest that only Nikon, Canon and Sony will survive though, is utter crap.

Leica
Mamiya/Leaf
PhaseOne
Pentax

In fact, all the big names in serious, professional gear will survive, because there will always be a need for serious professional gear.

And those brands have what market share? Low single digit % for the lot of them together, not relevant to the bigger debate.

I'm hopeful that Pentax will pull through, given Ricoh's backing. But the question for the other big electronics brands (Sony, Panasonic, Samsung etc) is do they want to be bothered with enthusiast products (ie high-end cameras/lenses) in the photo market where they actually have very little commitment, and also no foreseeable chance of market leadership against Canikon's joint 80% or so? They'll simply exit, and invest their time and money in markets with better return.

Invest in what suits you best. Even if Panasonic or Olympus stop making 4/3rds gear tomorrow... who cares? It's not like yours will disappear into a cloud of smoke.

This is not about the gear we've got, but the future of the companies that make it. The thousands of pounds worth of kit we have now is of no use to them; they're only concern is the camera we're going to buy next, hopefully soon. And not many folks would buy a Panasonic or Olympus or whatever if they thought those brands were going to give up on the photo market.

Sorry to be gloomy, on today of all days, but the outlook for enthusiasts and the brands we know and love is not a good one. What's happening with smartphones is a huge market shift, IMHO it's a bigger challenge for manufacturers than the transition from film to digital. That was relatively easy, a mere technological challenge if you like, because the camera market never went away. What's happening now is way different - the market for cameras below enthusiast level (define that how you like, but DSLR-ish) is evaporating at an alarming rate.

HNY

 

[Pookeyhead]

And those brands have what market share? Low single digit % for the lot of them together, not relevant to the bigger debate.

I beg to differ. The article suggests that only Canon, Nikon and Sony will be making cameras. That is patently not true. It is relevant to US though. We're not consumers of snapshot cameras... well.. I'm not anyway. Volume doesn't concern me. So long as professional gear is still developed and produced, who cares? I'd be quite happy to use an iPhone for every day snapshots of crap to stick on Facebook or memories of family events.

Someone will always make a quality compact camera though, I reckon. It will probably end up being a choice between Nikon or Canon, as those will be the only volume manufacturers or cameras of any kind eventually... but so what? Seeing that's the choice the VAST majority of SLR users limit themselves to voluntarily anyway... (shrug). It's only consumer compacts we're talking about here.

Will 4/3rds go? Probably, yeah. Professionals don't really use it, and the consumer will buy whatever you tell them to... and probably are quite happy with the sqillion mega pixel phones anyway

 

[simonblue]

As long as there is a camera about that i can use,i will be happy

 

[HoppyUK]

I beg to differ. The article suggests that only Canon, Nikon and Sony will be making cameras. That is patently not true. It is relevant to US though. We're not consumers of snapshot cameras... well.. I'm not anyway. Volume doesn't concern me. So long as professional gear is still developed and produced, who cares? I'd be quite happy to use an iPhone for every day snapshots of crap to stick on Facebook or memories of family events.

Someone will always make a quality compact camera though, I reckon. It will probably end up being a choice between Nikon or Canon, as those will be the only volume manufacturers or cameras of any kind eventually... but so what? Seeing that's the choice the VAST majority of SLR users limit themselves to voluntarily anyway... (shrug). It's only consumer compacts we're talking about here.

Will 4/3rds go? Probably, yeah. Professionals don't really use it, and the consumer will buy whatever you tell them to... and probably are quite happy with the sqillion mega pixel phones anyway

Okay, I see where you're coming from - enthusiast/professional gear will always be available because there will always be enthusiasts and professionals wanting to buy it. Yes, agreed.

However, the bad news is that if demand for the lower-end consumer-grade stuff currently manufactured by all the major brands, simply goes away (as seems inevitable) then there will be an almighty rationalisation and downscaling, and the less committed brands will turn their attention elsewhere. For those that stay, the transition will be a very tough gig in business terms - closing factories, losing staff, keeping shareholders on-side, especially if it needs to be done quickly - but assuming the necessary changes are implemented, the end result for us will be slower technological development, less choice, and higher prices.

 

[Deleted member 67219]

To be honest, I can't see why you'd buy a compact camera nowadays if you own a half decent phone. And if you have a contract you most likely have a half decent phone because it gets upgraded every 18 months at a cost much cheaper than buying a half decent compact!

 

[woof woof]

,It's not about CSCs or DSLRs...

I agree that it's not just about flappy mirrors v not. I think for people who think about it and care about it as a hobby it's more about acceptable performance and quality and the package (bulk and weight for many people,) and other than caring it's about marketing and perceived quality and in some markets an important factor is what men prefer.

I read an interesting write up recently which predicted that the most popular format would be a small sensor format of at the most one inch (he hoped it would be as big as that.) The author may be wrong but I think that his general point was good. Most people today shoot with things we geeks would struggle to call cameras but they're good enough for most and as they improve the need to own an actual camera will reduce even more.

Will 4/3rds go? Probably, yeah. Professionals don't really use it, and the consumer will buy whatever you tell them to... and probably are quite happy with the sqillion mega pixel phones anyway

Obviously some pros do use MFT just as some use Leica etc... I often read some of their blogs and it seems clear that they see the advantages of CSC's and they use them to good effect.

Personally I think (and hope) that some sort of CSC will continue to exist above the camera phone. I've been aching to leave DSLR's behind and IMVHO CSC's are now at a level at which you lose no image quality to a DSLR. There may be performance advantages to each in turn and DSLR's will still have advantages in a small number of areas for a small number of people but I can't see that situation lasting long. I can't see myself returning to DSLR use and there must be thousands like me and if there are CSC will continue.

Anyway, of the big three mentioned maybe Nikon is the most at risk?

 

[Pookeyhead]

Obviously some pros do use MFT just as some use Leica etc...

Not enough to sustain a market based on it.

Anyway, of the big three mentioned maybe Nikon is the most at risk?

Both Nikon and Canon will be fine, as they have a large professional user base who don't mind paying a premium for professional gear. At the end of the day, the pro buys what the pro needs to earn a living, and no one else takes the DLSR market seriously enough to produce a range of pro equipment. As lower end cameras disappear from the line up, pro gear will increase in price, that much is certain... but again, the pro will just write this off as a tax deductible expense.

Will either stop making consumer DSLRs? Probably, yeah.

Is this a good thing? Probably, yeah. Serious photography will probably start default back to the position it used to enjoy: Something that requires experience, commitment, knowledge and capital investment, instead of how it is today, where anyone with a couple of hundred quid and a copy of Elements can pretend to be a professional. Elitist? Probably... but the standards of photography will improve when we clearly mark the lines in the sand and photography once again becomes the province of those who are seriously committed to it.

Bring it on I say. Anything that stops Joe Bloggs from setting up as a one man band with a consumer level DSLR, taking crap portraits and lowering people's expectations of quality is a good thing in my book. Maybe the demarcation between professional and Have a Go Joe will widen and the photographic industry will benefit as a result. God knows it's on it's arse at the moment.

Standards in quality and knowledge are seriously lacking these days... even in people who profess to be keen amateurs. The knowledge of the keen amateur 20 years ago was far in excess of what it is now. Ease of use is all very well... but it ultimately saturates the pantheon of available images into one great big lowest common denominator.

 

[ukaskew]

No mention of Samsung in there, who are at least experimenting with bridging the gap between smartphones and compacts in interesting ways. I would guess they have the finances to see it through as well.

Fuji seem to be pressing into the professional market quite nicely too, I think X mount will be around for some time, even if it ends up being low volume high-cost gear (more so than it is now).

Sony worry me more than any camera maker, they don't seem to have any coherent, consistent policy, A mount, E mount, FE lenses, strange combinations (A3000, an Alpha with an E mount), their naming terminology confuses me, and I read about the stuff every day. If any of the formats is going to get left behind / phased out next I predict it will be a Sony one.

Either way there are plenty of people out there who want more than a smartphone camera but not a full DSLR. Canon and Nikon aren't exactly setting the world on fire in that arena yet, when really they had the opportunity to be the big players in those markets. I guess shortsightedness with trying to protect their consumer lines may ultimately mean both their CSC and consumer DSLR lines suffer, so far Micro 4/3s has been the biggest benefactor of that.

In 10 years time I wonder what the average amateur motorsport photographer will be shooting with, for example.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Photography is both a profession and a hobby.
The snapshot market has always been a different animal, to main line photography.
For a long time is was served by a sector of the camera industry, who chose to specialised in it. (Kodak)
There was no alternative way for non photographers to capture family snaps.

Today Just about every personal communication device can take snap shots.
To a large extent this market is in the process of being lost to main line camera makers.

However serious camera users usually have a variety of needs
and a variety of camera types to serve those needs

I have a pocket compact ( minolta G600) ( kept in the car)
a medium sized compact ( fuji X20) (goes for walks)
An a DSLR (Canon 40D) ( mostly out of date and out of mind)
All are capable of capturing excellent photographs.

In the last days of film,
I had an Olympus XA (still have)
A Rolleiflex
and an Olympus OM1n (still have)
These served similar roles.

If a I owned a smart phone, I may not have much need for the Minolta compact, but I do not.
Photographers are always going to have a need for a variety of camera types.
they will still disagree on what types they use ( to the benefit of camera makers)

They will all, at some stage, add the communication and GPS ability of today's smart phones.

As now, some keen family snappers will up grade from their smart phones, to enter the world of Photography.

They will still need a serious but entry level model to move to.

This is about organic change not the demise of an industry.

 

[woof woof]

Not enough to sustain a market based on it.
Will either stop making consumer DSLRs? Probably, yeah.

But if they rely on a small number of pros there will be little development and high prices. Maybe Canon will be the new Leica. My point about Nikon was that they're a camera and lens company whilst for the others cameras are just one of the things they make and maybe that'll mean they can sustain losses in their camera divisions for longer... assuming they're willing to do so for whatever reason.

Standards in quality and knowledge are seriously lacking these days... even in people who profess to be keen amateurs. The knowledge of the keen amateur 20 years ago was far in excess of what it is now.

Harsh I think. The game has changed and I don't agree that 20 years ago people knew more than they do now, they just know different things now.

 

[Pookeyhead]

In 10 years time I wonder what the average amateur motorsport photographer will be shooting with, for example.

Probably pro gear, like many do now. At the end of the day, there's not a massive difference in price between pro gear and pro-sumer gear.

But if they rely on a small number of pros there will be little development and high prices. .

I know... that's what I said. There's no doubt pro prices will rise. Quite steeply. Not a massive issue if you are genuinely a professional.. you'll get your investment back. Only the amateur who wants pro gear will suffer.... but tough... they're making gear for professionals.. not amateurs. There will be development though, because the pro end of the market, from both Nikon and Canon has always listened to what the pro needs and designed accordingly. That's why you can choose from D4, D3X, D800, D800E etc. All pro models, with very different needs on mind. That won't change. If you are manufacturing gear for the pro market, you deliver what the pro asks for. Anything else is financial suicide.


....plus... they'll stop wasting money on designing crap like the Nikon Df... which, let's be honest, will be bought by amateurs FAR more than professionals.

 

[HoppyUK]

While smartphones have already wiped out compacts, this is the kind of 'camera' that will take the middle ground http://www.sony.co.uk/product/dsc-qx-series/dsc-qx10 Sony's QX is a compact device with a lens and larger sensor that clips on to a smartphone (actually, it doesn't even need to be attached) and integrates seamlessly with the smartphone for control and viewing, with full connectivity to social networking etc built in. It's a no-brainer. Thinking about getting one myself.

Nikon is ultimately owned by Mitsubishi, probably as safe as it gets. Canon is already shifting up-market and heading into pro video. Olympus and Fuji, IMHO not on safe ground as far as cameras are concerned, for different reasons. Ricoh will give Pentax a decent shot I hope, still a good enthusiast brand, but they'll expect a decent profit return - could be a dark horse Sony has got what it takes, they'll be around, when they've made their mind up. Panasonic, Samsung? They will go where the best profit can be found.

David, you seem to think that what's happening is a good thing. All I can say is, I disagree.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The Professional market would not exist with out the far larger serious Amateur one to support it.
This has always been the case.
The professionals have always been the last to accept new ideas. (automation)
They are altogether too small a sector to support any thing on their own.

That may seem unlikely when you see the large expensive kit used ... but most of it is bought by amateurs and those with out monetary constraints.
The majority of research is done to uplift the entire edifice. Professionals benefit from the almost one off style production of the top few lenses and bodies. They contribute little if any profit.

 

[ukaskew]

Standards in quality and knowledge are seriously lacking these days... even in people who profess to be keen amateurs. The knowledge of the keen amateur 20 years ago was far in excess of what it is now. Ease of use is all very well... but it ultimately saturates the pantheon of available images into one great big lowest common denominator.

I would definitely class myself as a very, very keen amateur, I would also say my knowledge is seriously lacking. That's a personal choice though, I love visualising images then trying to capture them, but I have no interest in learning the real nuts and bolts of photography (or digital editing), a simplistic knowledge of the relationship between shutter speed, aperture and ISO gets me by quite happily in the digital world and has served me extremely well, opening up opportunities I never imagined. Follow me around somewhere like New York City and it would be a 101 on how not to take photos, most probably, but it works for me and it's the thing that makes me happiest after my family.

If digital wasn't here I would probably have never touched photography, I would imagine that's true of many people, I see that as a positive though. I struggle to see how equipment that makes any aspects of photography easier is a bad thing, my wife loves capturing nice photos, but her tiny compact holds that back. I bought her a NEX body, left in full auto it's dramatically improved her photos, and subsequently her enjoyment of taking them. That's a win win, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[HoppyUK]

The Professional market would not exist with out the far larger serious Amateur one to support it. This has always been the case.

The professionals have always been the last to accept new ideas. (automation)
They are altogether too small a sector to support any thing on their own.

That may seem unlikely when you see the large expensive kit used ... but most of it is bought by amateurs and those with out monetary constraints.
The majority of research is done to uplift the entire edifice. Professionals benefit from the almost one off style production of the top few lenses and bodies. They contribute little if any profit.

Absolutely true.

And the enthusiast market would not be half as rosy without the (big!) snapshotter market to feed R&D and bring scale economies to manufacture. This is why we will have less new products at higher prices.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

To be honest, I can't see why you'd buy a compact camera nowadays if you own a half decent phone. And if you have a contract you most likely have a half decent phone because it gets upgraded every 18 months at a cost much cheaper than buying a half decent compact!

You seem to be correct according to how the market behaves, although personally I can't see any smartphone produce even half decent results... But THEY don't see that and THEY don't care.

The only compacts that we may have in a decade may something like Sony RX1 or Leica M9 (the higher end versions for the serious photographers and rich celebs). And lets wait for Apple and Samsung to come up with some trendy photo mobile gear for the trendy uncle Bobs. I bet they are working on it. I am fine with that as long as there will be some decent pro gear at the price point of no more than 6D or 5DIII + good lens.

MF is an interesting one. Some reports suggest the companies in this sector are also failing. Will it die unless Canon + Nikon step in?

P.S. I don't see the possible "death" of small sensor compact cameras as a bad thing. They were largely inadequate for pro use and larger printing, and rather unnecessary for the masses with the new smartphones catching up. All people care is waving them at arms length and posting facebook mugshots today.

m4/3 format doesn't really concern me at all. Either they have to become cheap and small phone addons or acquire bigger sensor to hit the pro market. Sensor tech is getting cheaper, so small sensor is no longer a good excuse.

 

[Deleted member 67219]

You seem to be correct according to how the market behaves, although personally I can't see any smartphone produce even half decent results... But THEY don't see that and THEY don't care.

Well to be fair, have you ever seen a low end compact produce 'half decent' results? I haven't. Even the Panasonic I bought a few years ago with a 'Leica' lens couldn't really be used above ISO100 without looking quite frankly gross, and it cost me over £300.

 

[MJUK]

I have seen some low end compact cameras (Sony, Panasonic, Canon) produce some superb results that far exceed the ability of a pinhole camera on an IPhone or similar. In the right hands, a compact camera in realistic photographic conditions can provide very pleasing results.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

Well to be fair, have you ever seen a low end compact produce 'half decent' results? I haven't. Even the Panasonic I bought a few years ago with a 'Leica' lens couldn't really be used above ISO100 without looking quite frankly gross, and it cost me over £300.

Your and mine expectations are far above any casual user. I probably have seen decent output once or twice, but it was done by someone fairly skilful and most likely at ISO100 on tripod... You can't expect that from most users.

The main difference between smartphone and any odd compact is the fixed wide lens (that many don't have a clue about using properly) vs slow zoom. I could only guess how many care to use more magnification for portraits - wideangle bad light mugshots being the very worst showcase of the everyday snaps.

Sensor sizes have caught up a bit recently with cheaper compacts
Iphone 5S / Samsung S4 - 1/3.0" - and wide fixed lens.
Sony Zperia Z1 - 1/2.3"
average compact 1/2.5" and slow zoom lens.
"premium compact" - as large as 2/3 (Fuji X10) or 1.0 (Sony RX100) - probably too expensive for the masses. You could buy D3200 for not much more if you care about quality

Are we going to see zoom in a smartphone next?

 

[StewartR]

Are we going to see zoom in a smartphone next?

That's so 2013.

http://www.samsung.com/uk/consumer/mobile-devices/smartphones/android/SM-C1010ZWABTU

 

[LongLensPhotography]

That's so 2013.

http://www.samsung.com/uk/consumer/mobile-devices/smartphones/android/SM-C1010ZWABTU

OK, maybe that doesn't look so great in this incarnation (and I would argue Note is not an ergonomic phone either). There is also some weird development from sony in lens add on accessory market. The QX10 thing is a bit of a laugh now, but once they sort out all the communication and usability issues it could get popular with some enthusiasts?

But if I am brutally honest, it would be nice to see almost everyone become stuck with just 35mm equiv max fixed lens camera phone. Those mega zoom compacts started to look scary at one point. So it could suddenly open up some difficult and lost markets for us. And even better, most people will never try to learn about lighting the scenes or portraits...

 

[HoppyUK]

Some links on all this:

The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2013/12/29/business/29reuters-japan-cameras.html?_r=0

Thom Hogan http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/smartphones-shatter-mirrorl.html

 

[Pookeyhead]

Both those links pretty much sum it up for me. No one wants mirrorless. Those of you in here that do, are a very small minority I'm afraid. The selfie generation don't want cameras... not even ones that can connect to a phone... they want their phone to BE their camera, and crave the connectivity it offers. So long as phones can deliver images that appear to be, at face value, as good as those from a compact camera, then they're happy. Fewer and fewer people will buy compact cameras. Compact cameras themselves are becoming a niche market for those who crave quality now... hence the Fuji X100s etc.. I mean.. £700 for a compact camera?? That's not a sustainable market in this day and age.

It's clear. The writing is on the wall. The market will continue to polarise. Smart phone cameras and SLRs. My estimate, is that sales of low end SLRs will also take a nose dive.

Thom Hogan's article is understandably biased, and more optimistic regarding mirror-less, but still pretty much says the same things.

When smart phones can produce images of this kind of quality , or this kind of quality then obviously.... most people will understandably not want to carry a camera around. Most people in here will slag that image off in terms of quality... perhaps rightly so... but come on... the average bloke in the street? It's probably better than any other camera he/she has owned until this point! Why on Earth would they buy a camera as a separate device?? ... and the market for serious enthusiasts who want a mirrorless system is just too small to be viable.

Those who don't get this are probably just emotionally invested in a mirrorless system already and refuse to see facts.... either that, or just fan boys. Mirrorless is all but dead if you ask me. When so many analysts are telling us that the mirrorless market is just unsustainable, then it probably is.

 

[PaulButler]

David, the links in your post #35 are returning a 403 Forbidden ...

One question re mirrorless, is it likely that DSLR's will end up without a mirror? I appreciate that the mirrorless discussion above is likely aimed at the smaller camera systems but technology has a tendency to migrate into other areas.

 

[HoppyUK]

David, the links in your post #35 are returning a 403 Forbidden ...

Note to mods - I missed those embedded hot links like that need to be more visible, not dark blue!

One question re mirrorless, is it likely that DSLR's will end up without a mirror? I appreciate that the mirrorless discussion above is likely aimed at the smaller camera systems but technology has a tendency to migrate into other areas.

I'd like to think that mirrorless as a breed isn't done yet, though I agree that large volume sales to non-enthusiasts will never return. CSCs are the closest we've got to the Holy Grail of a solid-state camera, with no moving parts, ie no flipping mirror, no optical viewfinder, and no and mechanical shutter. There are a lot of advantages to that, the main one being lower cost as all those mechanical components are very expensive, perhaps more expensive than the sensor these days. Plus smaller/lighter. The technology we have now isn't quite there yet, but can't be far away.

It's interesting that Canon has had a lot of stick for their late and lukewarm entry into mirrorless. So did they see this coming? Seemingly no one else did, not even Sony when they launched their QX add-on cameras that to their surprise have been an instant sell-out success. If this is the kind of product that will take the middle ground, what's left of it, I wonder if compact camera manufacturers could turn their hand to that. I don't think Apple currently has the manufacturing capability, not yet.

 

[Pookeyhead]

David, the links in your post #35 are returning a 403 Forbidden ...

Working fine here. I can't rehost as they're not mine. These are links direct to the sites they are published on. All works fine here.

One question re mirrorless, is it likely that DSLR's will end up without a mirror? I appreciate that the mirrorless discussion above is likely aimed at the smaller camera systems but technology has a tendency to migrate into other areas.

Unlikely, as the one of the main reasons DSLRs exist is the bright, optical viewfinder that so many desire. Take the mirror away, and you lose that.

 

[HoppyUK]

Working fine here. I can't rehost as they're not mine. These are links direct to the sites they are published on. All works fine here.

Unlikely, as the one of the main reasons DSLRs exist is the bright, optical viewfinder that so many desire. Take the mirror away, and you lose that.

Not working for me either, but I'm sure the point is well made

 

[PaulButler]

Working fine here. I can't rehost as they're not mine. These are links direct to the sites they are published on. All works fine here.

Thanks for getting back to me, I tried on a different system and get the same message - maybe it needs a log in or something (though I didn't see any evidence in the url that it should) - but no probs I suspect I know the type of image you are trying to show.

Unlikely, as the one of the main reasons DSLRs exist is the bright, optical viewfinder that so many desire. Take the mirror away, and you lose that.

I did think that, however I suspect that evf's will continue to develop to a speed and standard that will be at least as good - although the ones I have tried to date I don't like, I do see the potential there.