Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 24 Apr 2019 (Wednesday) 11:47
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Accelerated market contraction for DSLRs

 
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,922 posts
Gallery: 148 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 4058
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
May 03, 2019 23:59 |  #31

.

DesolateMirror wrote in post #18855787 (external link)
I wonder how their market projections are related to this: https://petapixel.com …e-with-3rd-party-flashes/ (external link)

New tech? Testing the waters? Trying to hold onto market share for accessories like flashes? Will there be some backlash if they keep doing it?

According to the comments on that page and a related reddit thread the hate train has already left the station.

.
That is so petty and small that it makes me hate Canon. . All my cameras and most of my lenses are made by Canon, but now I hate the company. . What do I do? . Guess I'll keep using my current gear, but just make sure not to buy any Canon stuff in the future, unless they stop this petty low-life practice.]


.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,147 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5907
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
Post edited 6 months ago by TeamSpeed. (2 edits in all)
     
May 04, 2019 05:43 |  #32

If this is the case, then that means all those remote triggers that folks use too won't work, correct?

Doesn't surprise me at all really.... The options/features game Canon had been playing already has me miffed, this is just a continuation of that at a new level.

This also eliminates some Canon's own flash features too so if you think you are okay using an EX flash of some sort, there will be some functions not available to you.

I said it with the 6d2 release and I stuck by it, that release signaled a new direction at Canon that I felt heralded the end of innovation that they have been known for. When they release a camera years later as a successor but use 5 year old tech, it didn't send the right signal. I think their R&D had been decimated by lower sales year after year, and it has shown since the 6d2 release.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,125 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 9576
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Houston, TX
     
May 04, 2019 06:16 |  #33

Wilt wrote in post #18855656 (external link)
The popularity of social media posting is of greatestappeal to those who have the need to shoot a Selfie and then send it to others to share their life. How many serious photographers WANT to be in front of the lens?! I take photos of grandkids that the parents' smartphones can never take, and then I share the photos on a CD/DVD that I send them! They can post to social media, when/if they are so inclined...not me!

Lol that's a gross generalization. The majority of people posting photos on social media are not posting selfies. Social media is just a great outlet to share and view photos. Social media for me these days is all about photos...I no longer have a FB, but enjoy instagram. Hell flickr and this forum are technically social media.


focalpointsphoto.com (external link) - flickr (external link) - Instagram (external link)
α7ʀIV - α7ʀIII
Sigma 14-24 f2.8 ART - Zeiss Loxia 21 - Sigma 35 f1.2 ART - Sony 35 1.8 - Sony/Zeiss 55 1.8 - Sony 85GM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,125 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 9576
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Houston, TX
Post edited 6 months ago by mystik610. (2 edits in all)
     
May 04, 2019 06:35 |  #34

Smartphone cameras simply got to a level where they were good enough for the average shooter who isn't willing to invest the time to learn how to use a standalone camera, so standalone cameras simply aren't worth the hassle anymore.

That said, I'm a real believer that one day traditional interchangeable lens cameras will be replaced by smaller multi-camera smartphones and/or standalone multi-camera devices. The technology is in its infancy right now, but I think that moore's law will bring the sensitivity, resolution, and processing power of these small sensors to a level where computational photography can create the same photos our ILC cameras can.... without a lot of the optical limitations.

If/when that happens, I have doubts that I'll care to lug all this gear around anymore.

Here's a shot from my Samsung Galaxy S9+ which has a dual camera set-up vs a shot from my a7rIII.


s9+

IMAGE: https://live.staticflickr.com/904/42134279572_9e380d2acd_h.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/27cg​co5  (external link) galaxy s9 plus (external link) by Carlo Alcala (external link), on Flickr


a7rIII:

IMAGE: https://live.staticflickr.com/980/41459969914_8867727223_h.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/26aF​bBu  (external link) a7rIII FE 50 (external link) by Carlo Alcala (external link), on Flickr

focalpointsphoto.com (external link) - flickr (external link) - Instagram (external link)
α7ʀIV - α7ʀIII
Sigma 14-24 f2.8 ART - Zeiss Loxia 21 - Sigma 35 f1.2 ART - Sony 35 1.8 - Sony/Zeiss 55 1.8 - Sony 85GM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
THREAD ­ STARTER
Combating camera shame since 1977...
Avatar
9,897 posts
Gallery: 15 photos
Likes: 2362
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
May 04, 2019 07:58 |  #35

DesolateMirror wrote in post #18855787 (external link)
I wonder how their market projections are related to this: https://petapixel.com …e-with-3rd-party-flashes/ (external link)

New tech? Testing the waters? Trying to hold onto market share for accessories like flashes? Will there be some backlash if they keep doing it?

According to the comments on that page and a related reddit thread the hate train has already left the station.

Seems like all TTL flashes and triggers should still work. Which makes the elimination of the center pin even more weird.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
55,381 posts
Likes: 2366
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
May 04, 2019 10:48 |  #36

mystik610 wrote in post #18855929 (external link)
Lol that's a gross generalization. ...

mystik610 wrote in post #18855936 (external link)
Smartphone cameras simply got to a level where they were good enough for the average shooter who isn't willing to invest the time to learn how to use a standalone camera, so standalone cameras simply aren't worth the hassle anymore....

You lament that someone makes a gross generalization and next post, you do the same. :):) Seriously, I bet if you polled all of the average shooters, many if not most are perfectly capable of using a SLR and it has nothing to do with laziness or unwillingness to learn. Probably more like a phone cam is so convenient, right in your pocket, and delivers images nearly as good as a SLR for day to day needs.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,125 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 9576
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Houston, TX
Post edited 6 months ago by mystik610. (2 edits in all)
     
May 04, 2019 10:52 |  #37

gjl711 wrote in post #18856039 (external link)
You lament that someone makes a gross generalization and next post, you do the same. :):) Seriously, I bet if you polled all of the average shooters, many if not most are perfectly capable of using a SLR and it has nothing to do with laziness or unwillingness to learn. Probably more like a phone cam is so convenient, right in your pocket, and delivers images nearly as good as a SLR for day to day needs.

Lol fairpoint.

But saying all people who use social media are shooting selfies for the sake of sharing...come on. Anyone who uses social media knows that's flat out wrong. The majority of the photos on a typical social media site are not selfies


focalpointsphoto.com (external link) - flickr (external link) - Instagram (external link)
α7ʀIV - α7ʀIII
Sigma 14-24 f2.8 ART - Zeiss Loxia 21 - Sigma 35 f1.2 ART - Sony 35 1.8 - Sony/Zeiss 55 1.8 - Sony 85GM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,922 posts
Gallery: 148 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 4058
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Post edited 6 months ago by Tom Reichner.
     
May 04, 2019 11:05 |  #38

gjl711 wrote in post #18856039 (external link)
You lament that someone makes a gross generalization and next post, you do the same. :):) Seriously, I bet if you polled all of the average shooters, many if not most are perfectly capable of using a SLR and it has nothing to do with laziness or unwillingness to learn. Probably more like a phone cam is so convenient, right in your pocket, and delivers images nearly as good as a SLR for day to day needs.

.
I actually agree with what mystic said - that most people who use cell phones as their main camera aren't willing to invest the time to learn how to use a proper camera. . Nor are they willing to carry one around with them.

I don't think that is a gross generalization at all - I think it is a fact. . And a rather obvious one, at that. . This is based on what many people I know have said about using a cell phone as a camera vs. having a separate camera.

The vast majority of people who regularly use a cell phone to take pictures didn't bother to take pictures years ago before cell phone cameras became a thing. I know literally hundreds of people who never carried a camera around or learned how to use one back in the pre-cellphone days. But now these same people use their cell phones to take pictures on a daily basis.

I do think that what Wilt said IS a gross generalization, and an incorrect one at that. . The vast majority of people that are involved with posting photos on social media are NOT posting selfies on a routine basis.


.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RDKirk
Adorama says I'm "packed."
Avatar
13,135 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 638
Joined May 2004
Location: USA
     
May 04, 2019 13:37 |  #39

When I was a little kid, there were a hell of a lot of casual snapshooters carrying around Kodak Brownies and Polaroids. Into the late 60s and the 70s, there were a hell of a lot of casual snapshooters using Instamatics and the new even easier Polaroids.

A hell of a lot of people. Picture quality, compared to a smartphone today, sucked. But a hell of a lot of ordinary people carried their Pocket Instamatics around with them and made a religious thing of dropping off the cassette at the five-and-dime store every other week.

As I said before, there was a bubble of interest in higher-quality cameras that began in the latter 80s as cameras with interchangeable lenses and adjustable controls got much, much, much easier to operate with cheap zoom lenses, automatic focus, and computer-automated exposure--all bursting forth in the 80s. That bubble merged with digital imaging in the latter 90s and with the personal computer boom. All those factors of ease and automation in the last two decades of the 20th century served to pull the Instamatic/Polaroid market segment away from the kind of camera that really best suited them.

But this never meant that the people of that market segment enjoyed carrying around the weight and bulk of those cameras. This market segment is of people who like to use cameras to document what they do, but making photographs is not actually per se "what they do." That market segment never liked carrying around bulky cameras.

Cell phone cameras absolutely fill the bill for their documentation needs. It's a perfect tool for their desires. Cell phone cameras burst the bubble created by easy-to-use bulkier cameras.


TANSTAAFL--The Only Unbreakable Rule in Photography

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jeff_56
Senior Member
285 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 67
Joined Jan 2013
Location: SE Ohio
     
May 04, 2019 14:19 |  #40
bannedPermanent ban

RDKirk wrote in post #18856113 (external link)
When I was a little kid, there were a hell of a lot of casual snapshooters carrying around Kodak Brownies and Polaroids. Into the late 60s and the 70s, there were a hell of a lot of casual snapshooters using Instamatics and the new even easier Polaroids.

A hell of a lot of people. Picture quality, compared to a smartphone today, sucked. But a hell of a lot of ordinary people carried their Pocket Instamatics around with them and made a religious thing of dropping off the cassette at the five-and-dime store every other week.

Both pocket cameras and cell phones suck as far as quality but cell phones are much better than those 110 cameras of times past and way better than the Polaroids. The people I remember who were serious about photography way back when were using twin lens reflex Brownie clones and were getting good photos with them. There were people who carried pocket cameras but anyone with a real interest used something better.

Just saying.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kf095
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,509 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 278
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Canada, Ontario, Milton
     
May 04, 2019 15:08 |  #41

Yesterday I was in Aden camera at Yonge street. They didn't have battery in, for RP, only in R.
I checked EVF... I sincerely apologize, terribly sorry, I was considering RP as smaller body replacement for 5D MKII. But, EVF is still not good to me. Again, I'm very sorry to be honest and tell openly how I feel about EVF.
Most likely I'm a last douchebag on Earth who doesn't see anything good in EVF.
I realize here isn't much OVF non DSLR gear left. Overpriced and sometimes gamble Leica M series and few crop sensor models from FujiNoFilm.

So, it isn't really about mirror or no mirror, but OVF to me. DLSRs are still most common system for OVF. Mirrorless are mostly stuffed with EVF these days.

I believe in total decline of camera sales. Due to global and total prevalence on mobile phones. I see local and regional media using phones now instead of cameras. For interviews and events coverage.


Old Site (external link). M-E and ME blog (external link). Film Flickr (external link). my DigitaL and AnaLog Gear.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Croasdail
making stuff up
7,520 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 522
Joined Apr 2005
Location: North Carolina
     
May 04, 2019 16:55 |  #42

"A hell of a lot of people. Picture quality, compared to a smartphone today, sucked."

As a boy growing up in Europe, we travelled everywhere.... and I shot my experiences with a Kodak Instamatic. For a long time I thought those images were just fine.... until they weren't and a got a Minolta SRT-101. Just last week I was scanning those into lightroom. Great memories, but from a photo quality stand point... nothing to long to go back to.

But it is completely fair and correct to say today what average snap shooters are shooting with, and the results they are getting, are a million times better than my generation thought was just fine and met their needs. The average phone camera is more than capable enough to capture what 95% of people want and need.


Mark
Its by knowing and mastering all the rules that you learn which ones you can break.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RDKirk
Adorama says I'm "packed."
Avatar
13,135 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 638
Joined May 2004
Location: USA
     
May 04, 2019 18:13 |  #43

Jeff_56 wrote in post #18856132 (external link)
Both pocket cameras and cell phones suck as far as quality but cell phones are much better than those 110 cameras of times past and way better than the Polaroids. The people I remember who were serious about photography way back when were using twin lens reflex Brownie clones and were getting good photos with them. There were people who carried pocket cameras but anyone with a real interest used something better.

Just saying.

I made that point. People who carried around the Instamatics did not consider making pictures a thing that they did. They would not call themselves "photographers" (amateur or otherwise). They just did things and used a camera to create a visual memory of the things they did or places they were. People who were serious used more serious cameras.

There was only a confluence of the snapshooters and the serious photographers during the last twenty years of the 20th century, and that only because "serious" cameras became much more user-friendly.

But the snapshooters never did like carrying them around; only serious photographers were actually bore that burden willingly.

So now the snapshooters have a very good alternative...and they're taking it.


TANSTAAFL--The Only Unbreakable Rule in Photography

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,922 posts
Gallery: 148 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 4058
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
May 04, 2019 19:21 |  #44

.

RDKirk wrote in post #18856228 (external link)
So now the snapshooters have a very good alternative...and they're taking it.

.
And it's not only those snapshooters, but now there are millions upon millions of people who never used to keep a camera with them at all, who are now taking pictures regularly with their cell phones.

The notion that almost everybody used to have an instamatic with them most of the time is a false notion. . It never was that way.


.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RDKirk
Adorama says I'm "packed."
Avatar
13,135 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 638
Joined May 2004
Location: USA
     
May 04, 2019 19:51 |  #45

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18856256 (external link)
.

.
And it's not only those snapshooters, but now there are millions upon millions of people who never used to keep a camera with them at all, who are now taking pictures regularly with their cell phones.

The notion that almost everybody used to have an instamatic with them most of the time is a false notion. . It never was that way.

.

I said "hell of a lot of casual snapshooters."

I did not say "almost everybody."


TANSTAAFL--The Only Unbreakable Rule in Photography

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5,386 views & 100 likes for this thread
Accelerated market contraction for DSLRs
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is rsturboguy
844 guests, 327 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.