Live data from Hacker News

DPReview.com to close

dpreview.com

261–270 of 387 posts

Re: DPReview.com to close

#261
post #130
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do think times have changed though, DPReviews fortunes arguably have mirrored the fortunes of the ILC (interchangeable lens camera) market. The site (along with flickr.com...) was a daily visit for me 15 years ago at the height of the DSLR boom, but I honestly now can't remember the last time I checked. ILC/DSLR annual sales volume peaked in ~2010 I believe, and has rapidly declined ever since really, another victi…

I'm seeing a lot of people discussing sales numbers; here is one article showing the decline in terms of both lens and interchangeable lens cameras shipped: https://bythom.com/newsviews/real-camera-economics.html . Lenses appear to have declined by about 66% from 2012 to 2022. Cameras, by a little under 50%. This decline makes sense to me. I have a Fuji XT4 which I like a lot, but, also, starting around the iPhone 13…

> starting around the iPhone 13, phones got really good.

ILC cameras also got really good.

I'm not at all doubting that smartphones are the primary cannibalization vector, but even for people who prefer to use cameras with significantly larger sensors than can be put into a smartphone I think the cameras themselves reached a point years ago where it became difficult even for ILC enthusiasts to justify upgrades on a regular basis because what people already owned was "Good Enough". I reached this point with the Sony A7R Mk3 and other people probably reached this point sooner.

For years it felt like Canon and Nikon were kind of aware this would happen with ILCs and were dragging their feet on camera body tech making incremental upgrades behind where the technology should have been if they were competing full speed, and then other vendors like Sony just came smashing in without being part of this implicit agreement and pushed camera body tech along extremely quickly for a few years (with Canon/Nikon having to follow along to some degree to keep up) and it didn't take many iterations of this pushing the technology to where it could be for ILC camera bodies to be something you feel no itch to upgrade from year to year because the shiny new thing is an extremely marginal upgrade.

So the cannibalization of the market probably had two fronts, the larger one from smartphones, and a smaller but still significant one from "Good Enough" (which is an issue smartphones are starting to run into as well).

Re: DPReview.com to close

#262
post #38
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're spot on, this is _THE_SITE for extremely detailed analysis of of cameras/lenses/etc. I have no idea what will end up filling the gap of losing something like this. I hope Chris and Jordan continue on their Youtube journey and make the content they've been making, but man, there's still a need for a detailed text based site with super indepth info about modern camera equipment. Such a bummer.

While I agree that there is some valuable content on the site, there are certainly others to fill in the spots... You want detailed look into equipment? Checkout Ken Rockwell's site[0], or byThom[1] [0]: https://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/reviews.htm [1]: https://bythom.com/reviews--books/index.html

Those sites are a fraction of DPReview's content.

In all seriousness, where is DPReview's content going? Forums of over 1,000,000 posts. Solid reviews of older cameras. All gone, hopefully to some archival site.

It's really surprising to see that content just disappear. Reminds me I need to backup my hard drive...

Re: DPReview.com to close

#263
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I agree that there is some valuable content on the site, there are certainly others to fill in the spots... You want detailed look into equipment? Checkout Ken Rockwell's site[0], or byThom[1] [0]: https://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/reviews.htm [1]: https://bythom.com/reviews--books/index.html

Ken Rockwell is a blowhard that copy/pastes info into every "review". His sharpness comparisons are laughable, as is his blatant fanboyism (which went from Nikon to Canon. It's funny to read the things he said about one brand 10 years ago and compare it to what he says about the same brand today). I would not put him into the same category as DPReview with a straight face. DPReview gave us the exposure latitude and h…

Rockwell is entertainment sprinkled with some useful insight - but you have to be very careful with him.

Re: DPReview.com to close

#264

Wow... I've been reading their comprehensive reviews and news for over 15 years. DPR got me into DSLR videography as a hobby which I've spent well over $10k on – much of it at Amazon. This really sucks as I don't know of another source I consider as authoritative for objective, thorough reviews and analysis of not only product but technologies and trends. Super disappointed in Amazon for not at least keeping the 25 y…

> I don't agree with those saying mobile photography/videography has (or will soon) make DSLR/mirrorless irrelevant. I like to go backpacking. I used to always take my Full Frame Camera and a couple of lenses, after several years of going with the same crew, they finally convinced me that I should just leave the extra pounds behind and use my phone. I won't do it again. The difference in the image quality, if you act…

I find something like the Ricoh GR III a great compromise - APS-C sensor, brilliantly sharp lens, tons of control, in the body of a small P&S.

Re: DPReview.com to close

#265
As a relic and few remaining photo enthusiast I will not buy any photo or related gear from amazon.com anymore. End of story. 23 years I've been on dpreview always daily. I loved watching dpreviewTV too. (doubt the 'Camera Store' in Calgary will be able to take them back)

This is ridiculous for a company as rich and huge as amazon. Go shut down IMDB next so I won't buy any movies from you anymore either.

Re: DPReview.com to close

#266

Phil Askey's Photo Review (DPReview's old name) was a pioneer in camera reviews even in back 1998/99 when I first encountered it. I remember it was run from Singapore with the url philaskey.net/~photo or something. He used to review cameras in such clarity and detail that it was so popular among digital camera nerds. Huge loss!

I was trying to remember the old name. I believe it was just Phil running a blog solo? Content was slow to appear but incredible quality when it did.

It would be great if someone took it back to its roots.

Re: DPReview.com to close

#267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the reality is that most people who were doing photography don’t need what ILCs offer. I was talking to a sweet old lady on one of the last days I was in California. She was showing me some of her work, and TBH, small-aperture landscape / portrait photos that are to be viewed on a smartphone don’t need to be taken on an ILC. Even bokeh can be hacked for a base class of photos. To put it in another way, ILCs w…

I used to think that, but the more I take pictures with my phone the more I disagree. My iPhone is very very good at taking iPhone pictures. That is to say all the places and people I take pictures of with my phone look the same. It's a lovely seductive sameness, don't get me wrong. But my phone "knows" what pictures it wants to take and takes them. It needs me less and less. I don't think we're all that far away fro…

I actually think cameras in general take photos that look the same.

Painting on the other hand, that has individuality. The different pigments and brushes and brush strokes in the painting, that gives a sense of uniqueness.

In addition, you are more free to position people in paintings than with photographs.

Cameras are great for the folks shoveling content around, but maybe not what you want if you are trying to develop an individual vision.

Re: DPReview.com to close

#268
post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The iPhone is waterproof and you can take a photo with the physical volume up/down key. I've used it underwater a couple of times, none of my other proper cameras would be able to do that. My two cents.

Which model? And does it survive saltwater? How deep? Asking for a me who doesn't want to fuck up a thousand euro phone trying something stupid next time I'm at the seaside :)

Took my 12 mini on a day of kayaking, water got into the lenses and broke the faceID camera. The water in the lens eventually evaporated, but the faceID cam seems permenantly broken.

They are water resistant, but I wouldn't use it in water as a matter of course. Maybe if its in pristine/as new condition, at best - I've dropped mine a few times, which probably didn't help.

Re: DPReview.com to close

#269
post #3

Dang, I'm actually surprisingly sad about this. DPReview is _the_ site for extremely detailed analysis of cameras. When I want to buy something I go through their report first, and it's always extremely informative. It feels like this kind of layoff is part of an end of an era. Amazon used to NEVER cancel projects that customers were using. They just straight up Did. Not. Do. It. I once had to get approval from my VP…

Indeed. The interchangeable lens camera market has stabilized (on a revenue basis at least), but it seems unlikely to ever again be a fast growing consumer market. That said, we're talking about a pretty affluent community of users. Keeping the site up in some basic way would have been a relatively cheap way to keep generating the positive brand image the site generated in that community.

I wasn't exactly overflowing with happy thoughts about Amazon before this move, but the sudden shutdown isn't helping. I suppose their exec staff is doing us a favor by reminding us all to support more regulation of behemoths like these...

Re: DPReview.com to close

#270
post #3

Dang, I'm actually surprisingly sad about this. DPReview is _the_ site for extremely detailed analysis of cameras. When I want to buy something I go through their report first, and it's always extremely informative. It feels like this kind of layoff is part of an end of an era. Amazon used to NEVER cancel projects that customers were using. They just straight up Did. Not. Do. It. I once had to get approval from my VP…

Indeed. The interchangeable lens camera market has stabilized (on a revenue basis at least), but it seems unlikely to ever again be a fast growing consumer market. That said, we're talking about a pretty affluent community of users. Keeping the site up in some basic way would have been a relatively cheap way to keep generating the positive brand image the site generated in that community. I wasn't exactly overflowing…

What regulation would have helped here? “No buying a website with the intent to develop it but then changing your mind”?
Post reply on HN