So have cellphones destroyed the camera market?

[smoke665]

Interesting read, what say you? Did Smartphones Kill the Camera Industry? Vivo Responds

 

[greybeard62 34]

Pretty much the way of things.

They have definitely destroyed the point and shoot camera market.

 

[10acres]

I would agree that it has changed the market entirely. Since I got my first smartphone, I have put away my point and shoot and my camcorder for the convenience reasons. I thought it would be convenient to just have my smartphone on a trip to Alaska a couple of years ago. Boy was I wrong. My stupidity pushed me to do better. I jumped into the world of DSLR’s because they were less expensive and plentiful. I don’t regret that decision at all now.

Most people will just keep using their smartphones because of the convenience and they happen to have pretty darn good cameras on them. We now live in a world where social media rules.

 

[cgw145 170]

Jeesh, these "simple tales for tiny tots"articles just won't go away. The iPhone is my visual Moleskine notebook. Not ancient but I've shot a huge variety of camera systems before phonecams got good enough to matter. The generational divide in imaging choices is real.
I do see truly involved amateur photographers migrate quickly to what some consider "premium"
p&s cameras--Fujifilm and Ricoh cover that market. They spend on imaging software and computer power. Phones are so closely enmeshed with social media. Acceptance of that level of image quality is behind flagging camera+optics sales. Love shooting my old Mamiyas and Bronicas. But as a bystander asked me in Toronto recently, "how long does it take to upload?" from the big Mamiya RB67 Pro S I was shooting...So many factors behind purchase decisions but the ability to shoot and send an image almost anywhere is foremost right now.

 

[JoeW2 2]

Because we're photographers, we're focusing on the gear. And we all admit a good camera phone is handy and always there but there is so much that it can't do that a DSLR or Mirrorless will do. And that's the wrong perspective on this issue.

Cameras were originally exclusive. Expensive, film costly too, you really needed to study photography (because you didn't get instant gratification) and needed to know how to develop your film (or send it away for a week).

Then you had point-and-shoot (instamatics, brownies, etc.) and the number of people taking snapshots increased. And so you saw those little photosltands where you could drop film off and get it in 1-2 hours. Drug stores, Walmarts, etc. were developing film.

Then you got digital. And you didn't need to ration your pictures, you could shoot a gazillion and hope that some came out. And a lot more people started taking pictures. They mostly didn't have training and a lot of them never got past automatic.

Then camera phones got a lot better. And that exploded the number of people taking pictures. No training, no developing. Instagram's popularity is due almost entirely to its connection cellphones and people taking pictures that way.

Professional photographers used to have a firm hire them to take head shots of staff. Realtors use to hire photographers to take interior shots. Newspapers used to have staff photographers. But having hundreds of millions of people taking photos (and posting them online) with no real technical barriers (other than affording a phone and having internet access) decreases the market for DSLRs and Mirrorless cameras. And I'd argue it's not the phone that's doing that. It's that there are hundreds of millions of people taking photos and posting them online and they don't use DLSRs/SLRs/Mirrorless cameras to do it. Yeah, the vast majority of them are with phones. But it's not that the phones are superior in most regards to DSLR/Mirrorless. It's that people are hiring fewer photographers (unless you're big in your genre) and the world is flooded by photos.

 

[smoke665]

All good points, but we live in a click/scroll world of instant gratification, where photograps don't hold a revered place anymore. As mentioned above the world is flooded by photos. The advent of social media made it more about showing off your cute kid eating an ice cream cone rather than creating a memory of a day in the park. With so many choices to look at, the viewer scroll through so fast that the quality of the image is irrelevant, the even sadder truth is it's doubtful that anyone actually looks at all of them. Especially when you see someone flooding FB with 50+ pictures of their vacation.

Then there's the cost issue, dropping a $$$$ on a new phone with a good camera, instant connectivity, and now built in editing functions make it very hard to justify a separate camera.

 

[Ysarex114 108]

Interesting read, what say you? Did Smartphones Kill the Camera Industry? Vivo Responds

They've changed the camera market. They are the most appropriate choice camera for the vast majority of people for whom they are immediate convenient and more than adequate. More people take photos now than ever before and that's good and that's because of cell phone cameras. (My daughter takes photos of my grandkids. Yay! If not for the phone camera she wouldn't. We tried buying her a small purse-size compact and it didn't really catch, but she uses her phone camera. Yay! I see pics of my grandkids!) The compact cameras that some of these folks would have purchased are now superfluous and that market is basically gone. The phone cameras have also taken a big bite out of the enthusiast camera market such that more serious snappers who would have purchased a low end ILC camera are instead satisfied with the phone camera. The ILC camera manufacturers now have a much smaller customer base to sell to and will have to adjust.

 

[VidThreeNorth]

. . .

Professional photographers used to have a firm hire them to take head shots of staff. Realtors use to hire photographers to take interior shots. Newspapers used to have staff photographers. But having hundreds of millions of people taking photos (and posting them online) with no real technical barriers (other than affording a phone and having internet access) decreases the market for DSLRs and Mirrorless cameras.

Newspapers still have staff photographers. A paper cannot rely on "the public" getting the photo they want. The proper layout proportions are needed. Does a picture tell the story that the paper wants? Is the picture in time for the story to be current? Also, it avoids Copyright issues.

 

[smoke665]

The ILC camera manufacturers now have a much smaller customer base to sell to and will have to adjust.

I've thought the same, but adjust how? Obviously having internet connectivity would be a big draw for the social media crowd, maybe AI powered editing built in, oh and since it's connected, text and phone.....uh isn't that a cell phone?

@VidThreeNorth Yup, and add to that, fashion, commercial photography, forensic, medical, scientific, etc., but that's a smaller more specialized market. IMO the higher prices on that equipment would be out of reach for many.

 

[KJ_North]

I think there is becoming a bigger separation between the person who simply takes a photo not thinking about the scene or anything other than "I captured my friend" or heres a selfie of me. Oh look there's a squirrel.

From people who are after MORE. I think all of us here are A) Photography enthusiasts. B) Its a hobby or maybe a living for a few.

Point is its more than just I took a shot of you with my cell phone that after I share it will be forgotten about. Whereas I bet most of us on here every now and then look at shots we captured long ago and remember where and when and why we took the shot to begin with.

 

[Ysarex114 108]

I've thought the same, but adjust how? Obviously having internet connectivity would be a big draw for the social media crowd, maybe AI powered editing built in, oh and since it's connected, text and phone.....uh isn't that a cell phone?

For one they're going to have to adjust to a smaller market and probably more tightly focused product. I don't want my camera directly connecting to the Internet. The dumber my camera is the more I like it. I won't even use pattern/matrix metering because it tries to second guess me. If we differ it's always wrong and I'm always right, therefore turn it off and don't let it annoy me. Anything that slightly smells of AI gets any kind of foothold in my camera and I can't turn it off the camera is up for sale.

@VidThreeNorth Yup, and add to that, fashion, commercial photography, forensic, medical, scientific, etc., but that's a smaller more specialized market. IMO the higher prices on that equipment would be out of reach for many.

 

[smoke665]

For one they're going to have to adjust to a smaller market and probably more tightly focused product

But then the "Economy of Scale" kicks in (where less product produced drives the cost up per unit), passed down the line to the consumer where higher prices depress the market even further becoming a vicious circle. To be clear we are talking about the entry level P&S/compact market here, at what price point would you say no to a "dumb camera" in that market.....$200, $500, $1000, $2000?

 

[Ysarex114 108]

But then the "Economy of Scale" kicks in (where less product produced drives the cost up per unit), passed down the line to the consumer where higher prices depress the market even further becoming a vicious circle. To be clear we are talking about the entry level P&S/compact market here, at what price point would you say no to a "dumb camera" in that market.....$200, $500, $1000, $2000?

That market is dead and gone -- what will survive will be ILC cameras for professionals and serious enthusiasts, and yes it will contract.

 

[smoke665]

I think there is becoming a bigger separation between the person who simply takes a photo not thinking about the scene or anything other than "I captured my friend" or heres a selfie of me. Oh look there's a squirrel.

Yup, as the available market shrinks, manufactures will devote less time to developing new models and the price will go up. I bought a Canon Powershot several years ago. Still have it, still use it, great little camera to stick in your pocket. I can't remember the price, but it wasn't much maybe $100. Convenience, quality, and value in a neat little package, now they're over $600. Would I make that same purchase today...probably not, considering the cellphone in my pocket now was close to $1k, takes equivalent photos, and allows me to upload on the go.

@Ysarex Given the price of the current offerings of ILCs they're rapidly forcing all but the serious hobbiest and professionals out of the market.

 

[KJ_North]

Quite honestly I wish i could get just "A phone" and not the camera aspect at all. Bring me back my Blackberry!