Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

dslrbodies.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 393 posts

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#51

Post by mysterypie »

tqkxzugoaupvwqr wrote: post #21
askafriend wrote: post #7

I could only imagine if Apple took all of their camera expertise from the iPhone and all of their existing Chip expertise and all of their Operating Systems expertise to create a Semi-Pro Mirrorless camera. Imagine full iOS integration, super fast A-11 Bionic chip (same as iPhone), high throughput wireless components, custom OS (like WatchOS), developer API, W2 chip for Bluetooth pairing, OLED screen, and beautiful l…

Sounds like an iPhone with a bigger camera chip. I don’t think Apple will venture into dedicated camera equipment. The iPhone camera is one of the big selling points and keeps people upgrading. Apple will not sacrifice their cash cow for a comparatively niche market. A dedicated device also goes against the unification that Apple seems to pursue.

> Apple will not sacrifice their cash cow for a comparatively niche market.

I never understood that reasoning. As an individual, I can't simultaneously develop 10 different products, but a large company sitting on billions in cash could develop 1000 niche products simultaneously.

In fact, some large companies (Procter & Gamble, 3M, General Electric) have thousands or tens of thousands of products.

To use your Apple example, why couldn't Apple create a professional camera division, giving them $25 million startup money, and tell them to never bother the iPhone team, but do give them access to the source code, engineering drawings, and contacts in the supply chain.

It seems very fashionable for tech companies to be very narrowly focused. They work on the one thing that is making the most money at that moment. If any experimental development isn't a wild success, it's shut down right away. All of those make sense if you're an individual or struggling startup, but if you have billions just sitting there, what's the harm in trying many things at once?

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#52

Post by anoother »

dagw wrote: post #48
newsbinator wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple could take their MacBook experience and make a phenomenal netbook. There's no argument that it would be the finest netbook of all time. But that, too, would be moving in the wrong direction.

Apple could take their MacBook experience and make a phenomenal netbook. They kind of did when they released the MacBook Air.

And even moreso, the new 'macbook'

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#53

Post by Angostura »

askafriend wrote: post #7

I could only imagine if Apple took all of their camera expertise from the iPhone and all of their existing Chip expertise and all of their Operating Systems expertise to create a Semi-Pro Mirrorless camera. Imagine full iOS integration, super fast A-11 Bionic chip (same as iPhone), high throughput wireless components, custom OS (like WatchOS), developer API, W2 chip for Bluetooth pairing, OLED screen, and beautiful l…

They were pretty pioneering with the Quicktake camera in the 1990s, but ducked out when digital cameras started to become mainstream https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_QuickTake

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#54

Post by gt_ »

jrimbault wrote: post #26
Steve44 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a lot of the problems relate to the experience of the person behind the camera. Often you can see the choppiness when things are moving. That to me looks like they are using a high shutter speed which is inappropriate for cine work. In still photography if you take a picture of a waterfall on a bright day at 1/1000 you'll see every crisp drop, shooting at 1/30th will give a little bit of smoothing motion blur…

Maybe someone here can answer my question: During panning shots (horizontal, vertical), in recent films the image is blurry and uncomfortable (for me). Similar panning shots in earlier films seem cripser and more "comfortable". Is there a technical reason (shutter speed fashion) ? Or is it in my head ?

It's called 'Rolling Shutter'. This was never a problem until the advent of using CMOS sensors for motion recording. It basically started with the Canon 5D and iPhone video.

As a camera operator, this crap technology gave me my first gray hairs. It allows for the processor and write tech in the camera to only handle one line of pixels at a time instead of the entire frame. In response, camera departments had to invent the term 'Global Shutter' to describe the proper way to do it, in which the entire frame is captured at once.

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#55

Post by deepGem »

My ideal camera is just a simple autofocus camera which has two modes of operation. Standalone and paired with a phone. Standalone mode is built for speed - just manual controls, snap and shoot. No screen, no buttons at the back nothing. Just the PSAM dial, front and back wheels for shutter aperture control. When paired with a phone - AF and all the gimmicky stuff to be done using the phone's interface which will also act like a viewfinder. Of course you can still use manual controls on the phone app. You can even edit the images on the phone and like the OP says, bloody mount the camera somewhere, sit in your tent and shoot. What all fancy stuff you can do - once you have all the controls on the phone. Automatically fire when a bird takes off and fun things like that.

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#56

Post by oblio »

mysterypie wrote: post #51
tqkxzugoaupvwqr wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like an iPhone with a bigger camera chip. I don’t think Apple will venture into dedicated camera equipment. The iPhone camera is one of the big selling points and keeps people upgrading. Apple will not sacrifice their cash cow for a comparatively niche market. A dedicated device also goes against the unification that Apple seems to pursue.

> Apple will not sacrifice their cash cow for a comparatively niche market. I never understood that reasoning. As an individual, I can't simultaneously develop 10 different products, but a large company sitting on billions in cash could develop 1000 niche products simultaneously. In fact, some large companies (Procter & Gamble, 3M, General Electric) have thousands or tens of thousands of products. To use your Apple e…

Big companies usually work either by C-level exec fiat or by middle management promotion plans. Neither of which usually want small fish. If you work for a $100 billion company and you say: I need $25 million to pursue an idea that might make the company 2x or 3x, there's a good chance they'll say: no, sorry. We prefer to invest that $25 million to either improve our $5 billion product or invest in an idea that could become another $5 billion product.

And from this we get the innovator's dilemma :)

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#57

Post by spiderfarmer »

I'm just a consumer ofcourse but I don't get it.

If Sony would stop making as many smartphone models and add a couple of those engineers to their DSLR team, they should be able to solve most of these issues pretty quickly.

Sony makes about 5 different smartphone models each year. If they focused on shipping just one or two I guess they'd have more time to develop a better DSLR?

This would give them a big advantage over Nikon and Canon. Sony has a lot of knowledge and experience that Nikon and Canon don't have. Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, USB-c, batteries are all great in their smartphones. Why not use that to make their cameras better?

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#58

Post by spiderfarmer »

oblio wrote: post #56
mysterypie wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple will not sacrifice their cash cow for a comparatively niche market. I never understood that reasoning. As an individual, I can't simultaneously develop 10 different products, but a large company sitting on billions in cash could develop 1000 niche products simultaneously. In fact, some large companies (Procter & Gamble, 3M, General Electric) have thousands or tens of thousands of products. To use your Apple e…

Big companies usually work either by C-level exec fiat or by middle management promotion plans. Neither of which usually want small fish. If you work for a $100 billion company and you say: I need $25 million to pursue an idea that might make the company 2x or 3x, there's a good chance they'll say: no, sorry. We prefer to invest that $25 million to either improve our $5 billion product or invest in an idea that could…

That's why they should take that 25 million and invest it in startups that might become competitors one day.
Post reply on HN