Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


Are proper cameras doomed?


mikehit e2
5 7.1k 11 United Kingdom
14 Feb 2014 1:34PM

Quote:I see it is also Semantics Day. Tongue Actually you are kinda making my point for me. Multimedia devices are, seemingly, the way forward.


I think Keith's point is important when you are making claims about changes in the market place.
Twenty years ago you either had a camera or you didn't. Now, if you buy a phone the camera comes with it and those people can be automatically classed as 'camera owners' whether or not they use it as such. And it distorts the analysis. Suppose one person has a cameraphone and no camera, one has MFT and one has DSLR. The DSLRS are 30% of the 'camera owning public' - 20 years ago the modern-day cameraphone owner would not have spent money on a camera and DSLRs would have been 50% of the market.
So can you really lump together the 'coincidental' camera owner (where it is in a phone) with those people who make a positive decision to by a dedicated camera?

As usual: lies, damned lies etc

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Carabosse e2
11 39.7k 269 England
14 Feb 2014 4:44PM
I maintain the nature/purpose of photography has changed. The devices used to capture images have been instrumental in that but there are other factors, eg social media... the likes of Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat et al.

Either you roll with it, or you don't. Wink

There will always be a market for the vinyl record.... albeit a very small, niche one. There will always be a market for cameras which only take photos.... and ditto.
discreetphoton e2
10 3.5k 20 United Kingdom
14 Feb 2014 5:13PM
I'm not sure the advertising industry would agree with you; stills photography is at the heart of everything they do.
Carabosse e2
11 39.7k 269 England
14 Feb 2014 5:16PM
From AP

ap-reuters.jpg

keithh e2
11 23.4k 33 Wallis And Futuna
14 Feb 2014 5:37PM
The news report was actually a very well quoted piece by Yu Yoshida from Credit Suisse. It was one mans view.
Carabosse e2
11 39.7k 269 England
15 Feb 2014 12:03PM
Anyway I'll bet nobody else on here has a remote control for their mobile phone! Tongue
22 Feb 2014 4:23PM
Or the remotest control of it? Smile
keith selmes
11 7.1k 1 United Kingdom
22 Feb 2014 5:06PM
Carabosse e2
11 39.7k 269 England
22 Feb 2014 5:24PM

Quote:Have to admit, there are times when a "proper" camera just won't do Smile
http://img3.catalog.photos.msn.com/Image.aspx?uuid=4106c008-200a-4d14-be3e-d1ab7ae9d968&w=628&h=498&so=2



That is hilarious! Grin
discreetphoton e2
10 3.5k 20 United Kingdom
22 Feb 2014 11:11PM
I don't see what's hilarious about it.
Good graphic impact though, with a good color palette.
Carabosse e2
11 39.7k 269 England
23 Feb 2014 1:38AM

Quote:I don't see what's hilarious about it.
Good graphic impact though, with a good color palette.



It looks like someone taking a 'selfie' whilst wearing a full burka identical to those around her! Grin

I agree it's a striking photo though. Smile
23 Feb 2014 10:39AM

Quote:
That is hilarious! Grin



I have to agree with you but the PC brigade won't and would have all the humour removed from the population.
discreetphoton e2
10 3.5k 20 United Kingdom
23 Feb 2014 10:45AM
Fair enough, I didn't read it that way, just looked to me like someone taking a photo.
8 Mar 2014 12:25PM
I would say that the phone camera is - to most - the modern day equivalent of the old box camera. The limited capability of the box type camera produced variable results for various reasons - which led to the excited oft quoted expression "Did it (they) come out OK?" OK being a recognisable picture.

The auto exposure (and later the auto focussing) compact film cameras produced results which pleased a later generation of similar users.

Still more so the digital compact successors.

They all produced results which were acceptable to the users thereof.

The level of acceptability has obviously risen over the years.

The phone camera meets the requirements of many, producing - to them - acceptable results. And it is immediately accessible as has been said earlier in this thread.

However, I doubt if the instant results replaces the awaited excitement of "seeing if they come out" of days gone by, but that is another discussion! Smile
Carabosse e2
11 39.7k 269 England
8 Mar 2014 7:55PM
I'm inclined to agree, Jas. The key thing is, as you indicate, that the results are 'good enough'.

I.e. good enough for the purposes for which most imaging devices are used, viz. small images on internet websites - including EPZ of course.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.