So have cellphones destroyed the camera market?

[webestang6410]

We sell more of those plastic 35mm film cams (Kodak Ektar, Agfa, Ilford) and disposable film cams (mostly Fuji) then we do PnS dig cams.

 

[webestang6410]

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

I remember when our ONE SINGLE phone was on the wall, to see our photos we had to wait, unless you had a polaroid, our instant messages were little folded squares of paper you would pass in class and our search engine was library index cards.

 

[KJ_North]

 

[smoke665]

We sell more of those plastic 35mm film cams (Kodak Ektar, Agfa, Ilford) and disposable film cams (mostly Fuji) then we do PnS dig cams.

I wish I would have thought up the idea of the disposable camera. There were even cardboard models that could be custom printed! Though the whole digital transformation they've continued to be popular. Amazes me!

 

[Don Fischer]

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

I think there's two answer's to that. First answer is yes and second is no! A cell phone is simply a cell phone. Compared to a high dollar camera they take acceptable photo's but nothing great. Most American's settle for expectable in a heart beat. My son beams when he tells me how much his cell phone cost and especially what all it will do.

Something most don't get is that all a DSLR, no matter what it cost does is record a scene. The contex of that is developed by the user and most user's haven't a clue what all they might do with a camera today! Imagine if the cell phone was simply an entry level camera! You know a modern Brownie. Interest would be lost. I strongly doubt many people get a cell phone just to take photo's with! Probably not, they buy it to make phone calls with! then at some point realize they can also take photo's with them. But let the photographer show up to record their wedding with a cell phone and it's gonna hit the fan. And make no mistake, there are a lot of people who probably wouldn't care so long as the price is right.

 

[JoeW26]

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.

Yes, SOME newspapers still have staff photographers. But the trend has been to do without: https://www.scanmyphotos.com/blog/2...PewHMdGh8lHMnKR_SCSiTtEbwogi4czO3iRVqyp34SYv5 and At newspapers, photographers feel the brunt of job cuts and Why newspapers are closing the shutters on staff photographers

 

[LWW1]

Pretty much the way of things.

They have definitely destroyed the point and shoot camera market.

The smartphone is the point and shoot camera of 2025 just as the D-SLR was the SLR's replacement.

I still have film cameras but very seldom use them.

 

[Don Fischer]

I think camera company's are destroying themselves. Each company has to many models! If your a beginner, where do you start. What's the next step up from there. maybe eliminate the entry level if there is one and use a decent point and shoot in its place. All they really need is an entry level and advanced level and a pro level, that three different models! Seem's like Lica had P&S and they are expensive models! Have only ever seen one Lica in the field and the lady didn't even know what it was. To someone owning that expensive camera cost means nothing. This lady had about a $3000 point and shoot! Money means nothing to these people, all they want is to take a picture and feel if it cost more it's gonna do a better job, just ain't true. My present P&S is a Panasonic with a Lica lens and it shoot's as good of photo's ad my D7000! cost about the same or a bit less. Huge problem in this country is if it cost more American's think it's better. Just ain't so. To me that $3000 camera should be a pro level camera but God forbid anyone consider a P&S pro level. You can take a bad photo and fix it all up, even into a different photo with some of the edit programs out today. I like my Nikon cameras, been using them a long time but these days my most used camera is my Panasonic P&S!

Another thing I've noticed is the ability to use the modern DSLR. I started out with a Voigtlander, think it would be called a bridge camera, no changeable lens. Went from there to a Nikon FM and the change was simple. I was fairly new and FM was pretty easy to figure out. Felt the next step was something I though was a good camera, an F5. Well graduated to a D70 and never did learn what that F5 could really do but got about as good of photo's from the D70 as I did the F5. Next step was a D7000 and not much Left to learn with the D70 but been with the D7000 a fair number of years now and do alright with it but a lot of it is simply way over my head. If the D7000 was a film camera I'd want my FM back and go back to having my film done and printed for me, If, that is, I could still afford the film and processing! These advancement's in DSLR's have soared the film prices and God only knows what it's done to processing.

Problem I think is camera companys that used to make affordable camera's gave it up for do everything cameras and not much entry level to speak of. I've had a Canon P&S and another I can't remember who made it and a Nikon. All were inexpensive and none worth the price. Now I haven't used the more expensive Canon or Nikon so don't know about them but I'd never pay less than $300 for a P&S again. really short life spans on them. They did take decent photo's while they lasted but best I got out of one was a year and it went ten toes up! Now that I think of it, trying the better Nikon and Canon I'll probably never do. Just looking at them brought back to many bad memory's. Those real entry level Cheap, not actually inexpensive, P&S's simply brought back to many bad memory's.

 

[LWW1]

I think there's two answer's to that. First answer is yes and second is no! A cell phone is simply a cell phone. Compared to a high dollar camera they take acceptable photo's but nothing great. Most American's settle for expectable in a heart beat. My son beams when he tells me how much his cell phone cost and especially what all it will do.

Something most don't get is that all a DSLR, no matter what it cost does is record a scene. The contex of that is developed by the user and most user's haven't a clue what all they might do with a camera today! Imagine if the cell phone was simply an entry level camera! You know a modern Brownie. Interest would be lost. I strongly doubt many people get a cell phone just to take photo's with! Probably not, they buy it to make phone calls with! then at some point realize they can also take photo's with them. But let the photographer show up to record their wedding with a cell phone and it's gonna hit the fan. And make no mistake, there are a lot of people who probably wouldn't care so long as the price is right.

Well said.

The cellphone replaced the point and shoot.

The D-SLR replaced the film SLR.

The film SLR replaced the rangefinder.

The rangefinder replaced the plate film field camera.

The late film camera replaced portrait painter.

The portrait painter replaced the cave paintings.

Time marches on, the song remains the same.

 

[Tartness9094]

I have a Pixel 7a which has a pretty good camera on it and I have taken some great photos with it but the quality is only good for social media posts because as soon as you start zooming in on the image, the quality quickly degrades. They are getting better but to get the best you have to pay a lot of money. The big downside for me is the ergonomics and that is where compact cameras will always beat the mobile phone

 

[Peter (Pete) Ruma]

This is a thread I’ll be keeping my eye on, as I just received my new iPhone “17 pro.” Apparently the camera is absolutely next-level, but I haven’t really experimented too much with it yet. I’ll see what it can do in the near future. I live in Florida and there are a lot of good possible shots of some of the local “nature spots.”

 

[Don Fischer]

This is a thread I’ll be keeping my eye on, as I just received my new iPhone “17 pro.” Apparently the camera is absolutely next-level, but I haven’t really experimented too much with it yet. I’ll see what it can do in the near future. I live in Florida and there are a lot of good possible shots of some of the local “nature spots.”

I know a number of people using cell phones and they have something in common. All their photo's are stored in the phone and they never print any of them! To me, a cell phone is a phone and I don't have one anymore. If I did I still wouldn't get rid of my cameras or that, try to take nice photo's with it. I'd make phone calls with it!

 

[KJ_North]

I know a number of people using cell phones and they have something in common. All their photo's are stored in the phone and they never print any of them! To me, a cell phone is a phone and I don't have one anymore. If I did I still wouldn't get rid of my cameras or that, try to take nice photo's with it. I'd make phone calls with it!

Pretty much exactly the same for me. While I have a cell phone i take a pic only if I need to quickly send a photo out of necessity. Otherwise I use my Camera. I couldnt care less what a cell phone can and cannot do on a photo.