1. StewartR

    StewartR Efrem Zimbalist Jr Advertiser

    Messages:
    11,563
    Name:
    OFF THE GRID UNTIL DEC 12TH
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
  2. KIPAX

    KIPAX Waldorf

    Messages:
    19,915
    Name:
    KIPAX
    Edit My Images:
    Yes

    Am about half way through and it seems to me all the extra bits, new innovations? are aimed at people who can't take a decent photo and the camera fixes it for you...
     
  3. viewfromthenorth

    viewfromthenorth

    Messages:
    2,635
    Name:
    Andy
    Edit My Images:
    No
    That would be useful for 98% of the people who own cameras and smart phones then!
     
    Bebop and jakeblu like this.
  4. LongLensPhotography

    LongLensPhotography

    Messages:
    13,511
    Name:
    Truth Teller
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Well the likes of canon and Sony would be crazy not to replicate such features in their cameras. With like for like software larger sensors and better optics would always have the upper hand
     
    petersmart likes this.
  5. HoppyUK

    HoppyUK

    Messages:
    22,705
    Name:
    Richard
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Cheers Stewart :) DPReview also video'd that interview and have now put it up here
    https://www.dpreview.com/videos/5389410276/google-pixel-3-camera-feature-deep-dive

    There is no doubt that this is the new revolution in photography (mirrorless is just a minor divertion). It's as significant and 'disruptive' as the basic phone camera has already been to mass market photography, and now this new tech seriously threatens the enthusiast end - whether we like it or not. And it's advancing fast - we've seen nothing yet :eek:

    What's not to like about that? Well, nothing for the 'greater good' but personally I hate the way that the knowledge and skills (and equipment) I've acquired over the last few decades are being increasingly eroded.

    Exactly.
     
  6. Willo

    Willo

    Messages:
    689
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Totally agree, they have pretty much seen off most the compact market and starting to nibble at the entry level market. Will I be getting rid of my A7iii? No, but I do use my phone much more as it's just more convenient and image quality is more than good enough.
     
  7. petersmart

    petersmart

    Messages:
    4,500
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Unfortunately throughout history the superior technology has usually supplanted the inferior.

    Which is why we now have the internet, cameras in smartphones, USB 3 etc etc.

    But there will always be room for the truly great in any sphere.
     
  8. StewartR

    StewartR Efrem Zimbalist Jr Advertiser

    Messages:
    11,563
    Name:
    OFF THE GRID UNTIL DEC 12TH
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Phone camera "convenient"? I guess it is, so long as you're not trying to take pictures on a sunny day. That's the bug bear for me.
     
  9. furq

    furq

    Messages:
    1,077
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Wonder how long before computational photography can pull this off?

    (Yeah, why would it want to etc etc)

    x.jpg
     
    LongLensPhotography likes this.
  10. Bearair

    Bearair

    Messages:
    1,765
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    The technology is incredible, for me though investing £700 in a phone is simply too much. My phones get abused and rarely last a year!

    I do look forward to a couple of years time when I can buy this type of phone for a couple of hundred quid.

    But as has been mentioned what destroys camera phones for me is the lack of a viewfinder. Are there any indications phone companies are developing tech to get around this?
     
  11. frod

    frod

    Messages:
    492
    Name:
    Kev
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    you mean, the same reason why people buy 35mm sensors and fast primes?
     
  12. Erty

    Erty

    Messages:
    66
    Name:
    Andrew
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    You mean replicate the bokeh blur? Can't see why they couldn't do that already on high resolution pictures. Computers already compare neighboring pixels to alter pictures.

    Selective sharpening/unsharpening could allow you to replicate a f/1.4 lens with a f/4- saving you from buying a £1000+ lens (so you can instead buy £200 software, haha). More importantly, any lens at f/4 may make sharper pictures than f/1.4, so you get a better overall effect.

    On a smartphone it wouldn't work- they would have to use face detection and scene recognition to create out of focus backgrounds.
     
  13. Lindsay56

    Lindsay56

    Messages:
    154
    Name:
    Lindsay
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    The thing is, when things become easy and purchaseable, they lose value. As a result they are taken for granted and become less desirable, accelerating the loss of value. Until the point where it becomes niche and then acquires rarity or curiosity value. Keynesian economics. Hence why we now pay a lot for handcrafted items that could be purchased for pence if machine-created, but we perceive the value that is added (never mind the quality) by the effort of the craftsperson.

    Of course that is a very middle-class wealthy southerner view.
     
  14. HoppyUK

    HoppyUK

    Messages:
    22,705
    Name:
    Richard
    Edit My Images:
    No
    You're a bit behind the curve of what's already happening with smartphones.
     
  15. HoppyUK

    HoppyUK

    Messages:
    22,705
    Name:
    Richard
    Edit My Images:
    No
    That's exactly what's happened to professional photography - technology has all but wiped it out as a viable career beyond a few niche areas.
     
  16. Erty

    Erty

    Messages:
    66
    Name:
    Andrew
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Both me and my smartphone are behind the curve.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice