Live data from Hacker News

The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

photographylife.com

171–180 of 196 posts

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#171
post #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.

That's what happens when non-tech companies make products with fixed firmware, and don't back it with a commitment to upgrade and maintain it - almost SaaS like.

It's hard to go back to a regular (non-upgrading) car after driving a Tesla, for example. If some camera maker realises that software is just as important as hardware, and continuously upgrades one model for 5 years, including tight integration with apps, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention how every phone camera geotags every image automatically, but that's still a bulky $500 add-on for DSLRs, if it's even available for your model.

My 5 year old DSLR has GPS tagging for every photo. I mostly keep it off because it kills the battery. I suspect most serious photographers don't care about geotagging.

I suspect most serious photographers don't care about geotagging.

If by "serious" you mean "studio," then you're probably right.

But there are plenty of "serious" photographers that find geotagging very useful. Newspaper photographers, travel photographers, scientific photography, etc...

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#173

There are 2 reasons for the decline of the DSLR camera. The first is the complete lack of innovation. Without any meaningful APIs, end users cannot do much with their DSLR. There's no app store where I can buy apps to enhance my DSLR. There's a lot of room for creative photography if we could only program our own DSLRs. Smartphones, on the other hand, often do provide such APIs. This is how you get people doing astro…

>The first is the complete lack of innovation. Without any meaningful APIs, end users cannot do much with their DSLR. There's no app store where I can buy apps to enhance my DSLR.

I disagree here entirely. The DSLR "app" market predates and has been the inspiration for all of these apps we see on phones. Photoshop filters, lightroom presets and actions, etc. All of the stuff that that inspired things like instagram filters have been around for decades now, and have consistently always been a step ahead on power and quality. You don't run them on camera, but... you wouldn't want to! When you're shooting with a DSLR you're shooting for consumption at higher resolutions than you can see on your LCD display. You want to be able to look at things in more detail than you could ever do on the camera itself.

>The other reason is much more banal. For various reasons, people jumped to the DSRL bandwagon thinking that would make for better photos compared to more compact cameras (false for most people)

You're right here, but I don't think people actually wised up to this.

If we're talking specifically about DSLRs, mirrorless cameras are just better for most people at this point - Sony has almost single handedly rendered DSLRs obsolete for the vast majority of use cases where people need prosumer or professional cameras. If we're talking about prosumer+ cameras in general, it's even simpler than your reasons: Most of the people taking pictures with their phones are doing so for people who are consuming them on their phones.

You simply don't need a DSLR or mirrorless or medium format camera when everyone viewing your pictures is also using a phone. People aren't getting photos printed, and they're not viewing them on monitors. I'm really impressed with my iPhone 11 Pro camera - it works fantastic! - for viewing photos on the phone. But throw it up on my 4K monitor, and the pictures don't compare at all to my old D5300, much less my a7r 3 or even my rx100 m7 (assuming good shooting conditions and manual mode - the 11 Pro auto settings are quite good and significantly better than the 5300, and in some situations seem to be about as good as the rx100). I haven't gotten any printed to put up on display, but just seeing how poorly they compare when I'm looking at them in Lightroom, I wouldn't want to.

The way the majority of people consume photography has changed, and the requirements for producing photos for that medium has changed with it.

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#174
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the problem is that there are two nearly polar opposite desires for UI and processing, that require totally different approaches to a camera. One is the smartphone user who desires good quality for whatever the situation, who just wants a photo uploaded to Instagram or whatever, NOW. They don't want to learn how to adjust exposure compensation to expose-to-the-right for optimal raw image quality. This user wa…

> This user wants all the control, all of the time: they've invested time and effort into nailing exposure, mastering autofocus, all while composing beautiful shots. A smartphone interface is not what you want: the best images are often captured in difficult environments where a touchscreen just gets in the way and you must have hard control points. You'd be surprised. Enthusiast users clamor for good autofocus, want…

I've got some complaints when it comes to my a7r 3s interface, and I assume the 4 hasn't changed much, so I'm probably in the group you're talking about, but...

Having better autofocus, automatic HDR and bracketing, etc., to me, has nothing to do with having a smartphone like interface or computational photography.

I do want those things (or, kind of - I want better autofocus across the board, and I want the option of automatic hdr and bracketing) but I don't want an iPhone or Android style camera interface. That's damn near the opposite of what I want.

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#175
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…

> 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 amazing and more than good enough for 99% of people.

These computational imaging capabilities are good enough for 99% of people because they're taking pictures on their phone and viewing them on their phone. They are NOT good enough for professional uses.

https://spectre.cam/full-res/Full%20Size%20Comparison%20for%... This sort of thing would be completely unacceptable on a prosumer+ camera. There's some programs out there that can do similar things on your computer, like Luminar, that are significantly better at it - but are also using significantly more computing power to do it. Doing the same sort of processing in Luminar on a raw out of my a7r 3 takes 30-40 seconds to apply on an i7-7700k running at 5.2Ghz, and the results still sometimes come out looking similar to the iPhone shot.

The tech isn't nearly there for this to be used on standalone cameras. Maybe in 5-10 years, but certainly not today.

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#176

There are 2 reasons for the decline of the DSLR camera. The first is the complete lack of innovation. Without any meaningful APIs, end users cannot do much with their DSLR. There's no app store where I can buy apps to enhance my DSLR. There's a lot of room for creative photography if we could only program our own DSLRs. Smartphones, on the other hand, often do provide such APIs. This is how you get people doing astro…

>The first is the complete lack of innovation. Without any meaningful APIs, end users cannot do much with their DSLR. There's no app store where I can buy apps to enhance my DSLR. I disagree here entirely. The DSLR "app" market predates and has been the inspiration for all of these apps we see on phones. Photoshop filters, lightroom presets and actions, etc. All of the stuff that that inspired things like instagram f…

> You don't run them on camera, but... you wouldn't want to!

I'm talking about APIs that control focus, aperture, shutter etc - not post processing. Phone companies have performed more innovation on this front than camera manufacturers.

I want to write a program that will focus stack for me. As in I want to tell my camera to take N photos, each with a slightly different focal point. I want to specify the boundaries (min and max focus). Bonus points if it stacks all the photos in the body as well. Photoshop cannot do this for you.

You already see it in some phones - great nice shots with low noise because the camera is taking N pictures and taking the median of all the pictures. Why can't I program my DSLR to do this?

As for my other point - it was that most DSLR owners never needed a DSLR. They were fine with prosumer/compact cameras, but decided to pointlessly pay an extra for DSLRs. Some a huge amount extra for full frame. DSLRs never should have been this popular. This story should have been about the decline of compact cameras had that alternate history played out.

Why don't camera manufacturers allow me to do this? I know if I overdo it I'll damage the lens, but that's simply not enough of an excuse. There are ways to mitigate these concerns.

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This user wants all the control, all of the time: they've invested time and effort into nailing exposure, mastering autofocus, all while composing beautiful shots. A smartphone interface is not what you want: the best images are often captured in difficult environments where a touchscreen just gets in the way and you must have hard control points. You'd be surprised. Enthusiast users clamor for good autofocus, want…

I've got some complaints when it comes to my a7r 3s interface, and I assume the 4 hasn't changed much, so I'm probably in the group you're talking about, but... Having better autofocus, automatic HDR and bracketing, etc., to me, has nothing to do with having a smartphone like interface or computational photography. I do want those things (or, kind of - I want better autofocus across the board, and I want the option o…

>I've got some complaints when it comes to my a7r 3s interface, and I assume the 4 hasn't changed much, so I'm probably in the group you're talking about, but...

A7R III is already another crowd, there are tons of people like simpler DSLR (e.g. Nikon D3500), simpler mirroless (e.g. Olympus PEN) and compacts (tons of models). Those could all use a "smartphone like interface" and "computational photography".

Now, for more hardcore enthusiasts:

>I do want those things (or, kind of - I want better autofocus across the board, and I want the option of automatic hdr and bracketing) but I don't want an iPhone or Android style camera interface.

Well, I'm a pro photographer (or have been, more into dev now, with a side of video), but I absolutely could use all that things.

Though by iPhone or Android camera interface I don't mean seeing the same thing in your mirrorless screen.

I mean more like the ability to download/write apps, advanced functionality made simple, things to automatically update/sync/post images, etc.

Think more like Magic Lantern -- and the ability to write or download stuff like that with an official API.

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I completely agree. But there was a period of several years, maybe 2010-2016 when they didn't. And especially at the beginning of that time, oh, I remember cringing when I saw friends' baby pictures they took at the time with their phones. I'm culpable of jumping ship to the new but worse technology too early myself, but in this instance I didn't stop carrying my "real" camera until the iPhone 6s.

I am taking photos of my small child with a new iPhone and a Fuji X-series and the latter is so far superior it is no contest. I expected the new iPhone to be a big improvement over my 6s but in most of my use-cases it is not - low light, interior shots.

Yeah, low light. Definitely. It's not something I shoot much anymore.

There was a period where phone photos looked bad even when viewed on phones, then for a long period of time they looked great on the phone but when viewed on a monitor they were absolute shit.

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#179
post #61

Most of the images in that article were outdoors with lots of natural light, stationary subjects, wide angle compositions, and a large depth of field. Basically ideal conditions for smartphone photography. I find that in many everyday situations my smartphone just doesn’t cut it. Trying to take photos of my kids running around at dusk or indoors, for example. Or trying to take a decent portrait. I bought an A7iii to…

How old is your smartphone? My wife just upgraded from an iPhone 6S to an 11 Pro and that new camera is impressive. Things have come a long way even in just the last few years, we should assume they’ll keep getting better for at least a little bit yet.

I just got an 11 Pro for the camera. A lot improved but it’s not a panacea. Blurry photos are still likely in the evening. Photos straight into the sun actually worsened because of the HDR (that I can’t disable anymore), making the sun and nearby clouds look like they have a “shadow”

Re: The Smartphone vs. the Camera Industry

#180
post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why do we still have to mess about with camera tethering when it should be seamless to have photos transfer to a device for professional shoots, or to your smartphone for posting to social media? I think this is the real answer for the standalone cameras: treat it as an extension of the smartphone. It's embarassing that in 2019 it's _still_ not possible to wirelessly transfer RAW files from a camera to a phone. I h…

This is a real pain. And the fact camera OS are mostly proprietary walled gardens means others can't add these simple features either. For Sony cameras, the fact they can run android .apk's allows some workarounds for jpg/raw WiFi transfer, see http://www.stg-uploader.xyz/ You can backup via WiFi to Google photos or FTP, then open from there with mobile Lightroom on your phone/tablet

> For Sony cameras, the fact they can run android .apk's allows some workarounds for jpg/raw WiFi transfer, see http://www.stg-uploader.xyz/

That only works for the older ones unfortunately. They dropped the installable app thing a few years ago.

Post reply on HN