Samsung Ditches Digital Camera Business

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Samsung has lost all interest in producing and selling traditional cameras, and who can blame them, as most people are complacent with their smartphone sensors these days. The company will try to continue the business with specialty products that include 360 and VR cameras, however. I don’t think Samsung’s cameras measured up well to the likes of Nikon, Canon, and Fujifilm, so they probably won’t be missed.

Samsung Electronics has recently stopped producing and selling digital cameras, hinting at the Korean tech giant’s departure from the waning market, industry sources said on April 7. “We no longer produce and sell digital cameras,” said a Samsung official on condition of anonymity. “But we will create a new camera product category to continue the business.” The new category may include cameras for smartphones and other mobile devices and the Gear 360 camera that captures high-resolution images and videos in 360-degrees.
 
Actually, they will be missed- they had technology that even embarrassed Sony in terms of sensor and autofocus performance, and lens designs that stood shoulder-to-shoulder with the best.

And Samsung's focus was in mirrorless technology, something Canon and Nikon are approaching extremely slowly (despite having the technology).
 
I have worked with a lot of professional photographers and not once did I see them use a Samsung. I highly doubt they will be missed, but by a small niche community. Their focus is on camera phones which makes sense and I would rather they focus their attention there anyway.
 
zamardii12 said:
I have worked with a lot of professional photographers and not once did I see them use a Samsung. I highly doubt they will be missed, but by a small niche community. Their focus is on camera phones which makes sense and I would rather they focus their attention there anyway.
Click to expand...

Well, no ####, that's because Samsung didn't cater to professionals (who tend to stick with Canon and Nikon for their support services as much or more so than the product's technical capabilities). They focused on consumer/prosumer markets, and their NX series cameras and lenses were pretty damn good for the price.
 
STR said:
Well, no ####, that's because Samsung didn't cater to professionals (who tend to stick with Canon and Nikon for their support services as much or more so than the product's technical capabilities). They focused on consumer/prosumer markets, and their NX series cameras and lenses were pretty damn good for the price.
Click to expand...
Sony was consistently better,with smarter products. Samsung cant design electronics for shit, compared to Sony
 
Spire3660 said:
Sony was consistently better,with smarter products. Samsung cant design electronics for shit, compared to Sony
Click to expand...

Praising Sony's electronics design, lol...

I'm not claiming Samsung is better or worse, but Sony is a low bar...

 
Sony makes great stuff, if you are willing to pay for it.They make a lot of cheap shit too.
 
Dang it. Well I'm hoping to pick up some nice Samsung lenses for my NX500, active market or not. NX500 btw, is an NX1 packed into a point-n-shoot body. To say that Samsung failed in the market is ridiculous.
 
Smart move , it was always treated as a bastard child by Samsung anyways. Might be good time to snatch up a bargain.
 
It seems Samsung is in the middle of restructuring operations, as they sold off their printing unit not long ago.
 
mnewxcv said:
To say samsungs cameras didn't measure up is ignorant. The nx1 was and is a beast. For the small step they took into the camera world, they left a big footprint.
Click to expand...
Yeah at 1500 it better be good. The one I purchase was a piece of shit, yeah it was the 100ish price point so i didn't expect much.. but shit, childrens toys took better pictures.
 
The Samsung NX-1 was impressive but at the same time releasing a new camera platform then abandoning it straight away is a dick move from Samsung and they have lost any reputation they had with cameras forever. Even if they try again down the track, no one will take a gamble on them again by buying into the platform.
 
aokman said:
The Samsung NX-1 was impressive but at the same time releasing a new camera platform then abandoning it straight away is a dick move from Samsung and they have lost any reputation they had with cameras forever. Even if they try again down the track, no one will take a gamble on them again by buying into the platform.
Click to expand...

If you bough Samsung, you knew you were taking a gamble. And until they decided to quit the market after the NX-1 (this story isn't news), it was a decent gamble, as Samsung had a better chance than Sony with their expansive market presence.
 
Do people even buy non-SLR, phone-less digital cameras anymore?

I haven't seen one in some time.

Personally, I used to argue that I didn't care about phone camera quality, because it could never be good enough for anything but stupid hipster pictures of food. My last couple of phones however have had remarkably good picture quality, and I find myself using my SLR less and less, and I almost feel badly about it :p

At some point I should probably sell my camera gear. I use it so infrequently these days. My body - while it was great when new) is pretty old by modern standards (Nikon D90) but I ave quite a bit of money invested in fancy lenses that are mostly just collecting dust...
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Do people even buy non-SLR, phone-less digital cameras anymore?

I haven't seen one in some time.

Personally, I used to argue that I didn't care about phone camera quality, because it could never be good enough for anything but stupid hipster pictures of food. My last couple of phones however have had remarkably good picture quality, and I find myself using my SLR less and less, and I almost feel badly about it :p

At some point I should probably sell my camera gear. I use it so infrequently these days. My body - while it was great when new) is pretty old by modern standards (Nikon D90) but I ave quite a bit of money invested in fancy lenses that are mostly just collecting dust...
Click to expand...

The NX500 28MP raw photos definitely looked better than what my phone shoots. So yes, some people do use non SLR cameras. Mirrorless is a huge market.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Do people even buy non-SLR, phone-less digital cameras anymore?

I haven't seen one in some time.

Personally, I used to argue that I didn't care about phone camera quality, because it could never be good enough for anything but stupid hipster pictures of food. My last couple of phones however have had remarkably good picture quality, and I find myself using my SLR less and less, and I almost feel badly about it :p

At some point I should probably sell my camera gear. I use it so infrequently these days. My body - while it was great when new) is pretty old by modern standards (Nikon D90) but I ave quite a bit of money invested in fancy lenses that are mostly just collecting dust...
Click to expand...

I think if you take the time and play with an SLR for an image that you need to get you'd have a change of heart. For happy snaps a phone camera is fine, but for important things,nothing beats having a decent lens and good metering.
Actually, I find that images coming from a camera all have a certain flat look to them and it's obvious when you compare with even a jpg output from a decent slr.
- The other factor is that there will always be a subset of people who just plain enjoy playing with a "real"camera..
 
Chapeau said:
I think if you take the time and play with an SLR for an image that you need to get you'd have a change of heart. For happy snaps a phone camera is fine, but for important things,nothing beats having a decent lens and good metering.
Actually, I find that images coming from a camera all have a certain flat look to them and it's obvious when you compare with even a jpg output from a decent slr.
- The other factor is that there will always be a subset of people who just plain enjoy playing with a "real"camera..
Click to expand...


I'm not arguing against this. I agree with it wholeheartedly. When I take pictures I consider "important to get right", I definitely reach for the SLR. I just do that less and less frequently.

I used to grab my SLR, my 35-70mm F/2.8D and my SB900 flash when I wanted to capture pictures at a party. These days I have little reason to do anything but use my phone.

Portraits, pictures of my rig for these forums ( :p ) or when I get in the mood for landscape photography are still areas I use the SLR. It's just that I used to feel the need to grab it more often than I do now that cellphones capabilities have inched up, generation over generation.

I still think the crazy high resolutions in cellphones that out-resolve their optics are stupid though.



The following four pics were probably the last time I grabbed the SLR, and I didn't even bother to take my time and do it right...

32371281490_2882672eb3_c.jpg


28795387173_e091b6c2b7_c.jpg


19039313541_c888a20f99_c.jpg


19929929986_b9ebf7c6be_c.jpg


All of them for silly forum showoff pics... Lol
 
Last edited:
Zarathustra[H] said:
I'm not arguing against this. I agree with it wholeheartedly. When I take pictures I consider "important to get right", I definitely reach for the SLR. I just do that less and less frequently.

I used to grab my SLR, my 35-70 F/2.8D and my SB900 flash when I wanted to capture pictures at a party. These days I have little reason to do anything but use my phone.

Portraits, pictures of my rig for these forums ( :p ) or when I get in the mood for landscape photography are still areas I use the SLR. It's just that I used to feel the need to grab it more often than I do now that cellphones capabilities have inched up, generation over generation.

I still think the crazy high resolutions in cellphones that out-resolve their optics are stupid though.



The following four pics were probably the last time I grabbed the SLR, and I didn't even bother to take my time and do it right...

32371281490_2882672eb3_c.jpg


28795387173_e091b6c2b7_c.jpg


19039313541_c888a20f99_c.jpg


19929929986_b9ebf7c6be_c.jpg


19929929986_b9ebf7c6be_c.jpg


All of them for forum showoff pics... Lol
Click to expand...

I DO recall seeing your pics actually! I was so impressed when I saw your monitor setup...
- I re-read your post. Total brain-fart on my behalf. Lol...Apologies...:arghh:
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
All of them for stupid forum showoff pics... Lol
Click to expand...

Dang, see a cellphone would not give you such nice photos! They have come a long way though, making point and shoot cameras pretty much moot except for superzooms or underwater (although even the water thing is less so now that phones are getting waterproofed) and the high cost of mirrorless micro 4/3rds less attractive since it's all about the camera you have when you need it and that is usually your phone. Phones will not replace SLRs, at least not for a long ass time anyway though! I am surprised Samsung is just dropping out of the digital camera business all together though, especially since they have to develop sensor tech for their phones anyways...
 
wolfofone said:
Dang, see a cellphone would not give you such nice photos! They have come a long way though, making point and shoot cameras pretty much moot except for superzooms or underwater (although even the water thing is less so now that phones are getting waterproofed) and the high cost of mirrorless micro 4/3rds less attractive since it's all about the camera you have when you need it and that is usually your phone. Phones will not replace SLRs, at least not for a long ass time anyway though! I am surprised Samsung is just dropping out of the digital camera business all together though, especially since they have to develop sensor tech for their phones anyways...
Click to expand...


Yep, but think of it this way.

First one of those pictures is from Summer 2015. Last from February this year.

That's 4 pictures in a year and a half.

At what point do I say, hey, my bag full of camera gear valued at a few thousand bucks isn't worth it for less than 3 pictures a year on average...

Especially my pricey 70-200mm F/2.8G AF-S which I actually haven't used in 4-5 years since I took this pic in Florida:



I don't know what it's worth today, but I bought that lens for $1,200 used back in the day...

I don't get enough use out of this stuff to warrant owning it anymore.
 
The challenge to using cellphones is three-part:
  1. The available focal lengths are fixed- you have ultra-wide on the selfie cam, and wide (usually 28mm-35mm equiv.) on the rear, and maybe a narrower 50mm-equiv. second rear module
  2. Dynamic range from the small sensor is limited, which means that you need to use multi-shot HDR functions to capture many real-life compositions well beyond landscapes
  3. Apertures are fixed, so you're limited in your ability to cut light
However, as phone camera software gets better (and phones have the best processors), you could easily see having a landscape mode where focus stacking and exposure bracketing can be used to rival the picture quality of larger systems for static compositions, at least.

And the last point is that a need to use something other than a phone camera really comes from output- Facebook is limited to 4MP (2048x2048 max), and while that seems constricting, it's still more than most sub-4k computer displays. If your only medium is online, an advanced camera phone can do quite a bit.
 
Samsung had some great tech and ideas, but at the end of the day I don't think they competed hard enough in a tough market. I ended up going with a Sony a6000 mirrorless two years ago over a Samsung, and I haven't once regretted it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top