Live data from Hacker News

The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

photographylife.com

131–140 of 196 posts

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#131
post #89

This author made a small amount of fame a few years back (2012) claiming the dx format is dead. He was obviously wrong about that. He’s wrong about this, too.

I must have missed the memo that the prosumer and enthusiast photographer groups are drying up. I know a oddly large number of enthusiasts and would-be pros around town and they all own DSLRs.. Half of my good friends own expensive Sony point and shoots.. Nikon's stock is down over 2013 but I'm not seeing the end days reflected in that. AMD was down for ages but computers didn't go out of fashion. I recon smart phone…

> Nikon's stock is down over 2013 but I'm not seeing the end days reflected in that.

I would not point to Nikon as the DSLR bellwether (and I'm a Nikon shooter). Nikon has moved into mirrorless at a glacial pace. The Nikon 1 system was a joke. If I didn't have so much Nikon glass, I would have moved on to Sony years ago.

The new Nikon Z bodies give me hope, but the Z6 and new Z50 made some weird decisions particularly around memory cards. The Z6 uses the XQD which are super expensive and the Z50 eschewed dual slots which I make use of in d7100. The new Z mount also means I'm probably going to end up replacing many of my lenses anyway.

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Sony could realistically do both in one product. They already make flagship smartphones that are hardware-competitive with everyone else's flagships. They supply the camera sensors for everyone's flagship product. They have the best DSLM and reasonably competitive lenses. Just take their current flagship smartphone, double the thickness to fit a halfway-between-smartphone-and-full-frame sensor, an SD card slo…

The Sony smartphone I used to have put its low-light noise reduction behind DRM keys and if you unlocked the bootloader it irreversibly turned the camera into a piece of shit. It’ll be a cold day in hell before I buy another smartphone from them, especially for anything camera related. Plus the built-in camera app was awful to use, but 3rd party camera apps had awful image quality. I don’t know if that was Sony’s fau…

After the rootkit debacle I'm surprised that anybody on the tech side would still buy Sony gear. As a brand they're burned for me and I used to be quite the fan.

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#133
post #25

Maybe because this is something very close to my wheelhouse, but this article seems to be overly wordy for something obvious. Smartphones are simply more convenient than a standalone camera can ever be. Add on top of that the incredible computational imaging capabilities that have been developed over the past few years and the quality of images you can get from the size of optics and pixels that these devices have is…

Camera companies are user hostile and the people buy them are used to it. Terribly menus and interfaces, and they don't even care. Even their key features, like video recording are reduced to a 29 minute limit due to an old expired regulation (hello Sony A7iii). USB-C ports for data transfer that can't be used for charging. The list goes on.

> Terribly menus and interfaces

Well there is a bit of something you know. Think of it like vi or emacs. I know the Nikon menu system. It's easy for me to move around and do what I want. My wife has a Sony mirrorless camera and I curse every time I have to go into the menu system because it's foreign to me.

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#134
post #114

Was to a birthday of a person just having his first child. There were photos of his childhood/life, not stellar, but just sentimental, physical pictures of his life. Judging from what is sold in all the crap decoration stores around, people have a real longing for this kind of sentimental stuff. I think a lot of them will awake horrified in 10-20 years, when they notice that all this sentimental stuff is basically ho…

Smartphone cameras have been better quality than compact cameras for a few years now, and can sometimes give "good" cameras like the RX100 a run for their money.

I'm much happier with the ergonomics and quality of my phone camera than I ever was with my dedicated cameras, even a dSLR I owned for a while. On top of that, I always have it in my pocket and the response time is insanely short compared to a dedicated camera.

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#135
post #25

Maybe because this is something very close to my wheelhouse, but this article seems to be overly wordy for something obvious. Smartphones are simply more convenient than a standalone camera can ever be. Add on top of that the incredible computational imaging capabilities that have been developed over the past few years and the quality of images you can get from the size of optics and pixels that these devices have is…

I can dig that. Somebody (was it Apple?) came up with the idea that a phone could be a camera as well. And that a phone is really a communicator so it must support email etc. Now somebody should simply come up with the idea of a camera that is also a phone. I mean you did but somebody should make that idea a reality. Hey, my camera is ringing ...

Definitely not Apple. I remember cameras on phones way before the first iPhone came out. They were low res3, but nevertheless less, a camera on a phone.

If I ever need to think about who invented the first X, it's usually not Apple. They do a great job at making things better.

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#136
post #25

Maybe because this is something very close to my wheelhouse, but this article seems to be overly wordy for something obvious. Smartphones are simply more convenient than a standalone camera can ever be. Add on top of that the incredible computational imaging capabilities that have been developed over the past few years and the quality of images you can get from the size of optics and pixels that these devices have is…

Sony is clearly listening. Their range of mirrorless cameras (NEX before, and A6??? now) seem to cater exactly this segment.

I shot Sony since the NEX series came out, starting with the 5000R. Paired with a fixed Zeiss 24mm this camera took absolutely astounding images. Pair a Sony with a smartphone and you get easy upload to social media. What's missing, exactly?

Incidentally I sold all my Sony gear last year. The UI and handling of these cameras is just as ugly as any smartphone can be. It takes seconds to start. The animated/touch UI is just fancy, but slows any operation down. Most modern cameras have humongous menus which are hard to navigate and make little sense as dozen of features get added, but Sony is really on the worst end when it comes to placement and behavior of all the functionality they pack into their cameras, which is sad.

Their "app" store is the most useless thing I've ever seen, including stuff which should be bundled in the camera but when used precludes the functionality of the camera itself.

I'm lucky I always had a great group of friends from which we exchanged cameras and I was able to use most of the others you mention too. If you pick any Nikon, Canon or Fuji camera and start taking pictures you immediately realize why menus are placed in a certain way, the UI is intentionally minimal, and why the body is shaped the way it is. It's a night and day experience if you know what you're doing. No operation takes more than half a second to perform. It's form-follows-function. These cameras cater to pros _first_. You don't need to upload to social media and/or you basically never want to have smartphone-like post-processing in camera because the normal workflow is to either take the built-in jpeg because it's already good enough, or process the raw yourself. Transferring the image via wifi/ble/nfc is decent enough in most 2017+ mirrorless cameras.

Granted, Sony made _huge_ steps forward since the NEX line, but you can definitely see how the camera is influenced by the smartphone market. Sony even released the QX1, which essentially is a camera _for_ the smartphone.

Somehow I have the impression that smartphones themselves will eat away all the middle market as the small optics keep improving. If you want images for instagram you'll probably never care about the improvement in image due to a larger sensor anyway. But a pro will definitely seek superior handling and behavior in a camera, and that is almost tangential to how a smartphone operates.

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#137
post #10
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they're getting really close simulating shallow depth of field with depth sensors and computational photography, but in the same way there is no replacement resolution-wise for 8x10 and other large formats, its better just to use the real thing

If people demand it they may simulate medium format. But yeah seeing large prints from LF or MF cameras the whole image looks very different, more immersive of the scene.

There are no real differences beyond those arising from differences in aperture and focal length. For example, here are two very similar shots, one shot on a DX format DSLR and the other shot on 4x5 film:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B4v6yNyRkl5uUThuRm9tVWhGNU...

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B4v6yNyRkl5ua1BlMzNHVlRUUH...

The one exception would be movements: most 4x5 cameras can do tilt and shift, whereas tilt/shift lenses for DSLRs are very expensive and specialist.

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#138

Seems to me, the biggest argument is iPhone camera is 12MP baseline DSLR is 24. If you are 100% certain you need that additional clarity in your photos (maybe landscape) then you go with DSLR. Otherwise the smartphone is the way to go for all your family photos and videos, etc. I would be VVV nervous if I was a camera manufacturer...

Megapixel is not the only thing that determines how good a photo will look. That was a game played by manufacturers, just like how back in the day with CPU people tried to measure a computer quality based on Mhz and Ghz.

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#139
post #2

The strangest thing is the camera industry's non-response to smartphones. There's a fellow named Tom Hogan who writes in extreme detail about the camera industry and noticed years ago that camera makers should open up their APIs and work much harder to integrate with smartphones. Here's one recent example of that message: http://dslrbodies.com/newsviews/are-customers-asking-for.htm... Still, Apple discovered a user p…

When all one has is a smartphone, everything starts looking like something that can be integrated with said smartphone.

And as is typical one ends up with a half-assed solution that will stop working in 2 years when Apple/Google change some API or the app isn't maintained any more.

No matter how awesome it seems at launch and how good the quality, anything relying on smartphones is basically disposable.

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I meant to say is that Apple cherry-picks one photograph in perfect conditions, people think "wow, what a great camera, must buy!" and then totally miss the opportunity to photograph in non-perfect situations without realizing what they're missing. If I were Sony or Nikon or Canon, I would buy the subway ad next to Apple's and show a stunning night shot as their example. In comparison, the iPhone camera might no…

Hell, Apple was busted a few years ago calling a DSLR image an iPhone picture, when someone looked at the EXIF data.

Huawei and Samsung (at least twice) have been caught doing that. I’d need a citation to believe Apple has done so.
Post reply on HN