Smartphones Are Killing the Camera Industry

One thing I miss about the Canon vs even the best phone cameras is being able to take high-MP macro shots.
No way to get a crazy close, super detailed shot of electronics or, a wedding ring, or anything else.

That said , my XS takes some pretty dang good shots of everything else.
 
Joust said:
If you can blow up the picture you made to the size of a print for a wall, it's "good enough" in my book. More importantly, the VOLUME of pictures you can take with the convenience of just reaching into your pocket for a device you are already carrying is impossible to compete with.

Does a DSLR have a place? Sure. In the same sense that an F-1 car has a place. For most people, though, a Corvette does just fine.
Click to expand...
OK, you're way overstating the quality of a phone. It's not a Corvette. Sub 20k car (what's that, a Toyota Versa?). Now if you were talking about something like a Nikon D5 (F1) or a Z7 or a D850, you'd be in Corvette land.
A sub 500 dollar camera like the D3400 is at best a Camry.
 
g00z13 said:
So true, the only thing thats different now is that our Cell phones take pictures that are great, whereas a DSLR will take amazing pictures, can change the exposures, f-stops etc. Most people are happy with their cells phones. DSLR are for those dedicated few. :)
Click to expand...
Take a picture at dusk and phone will give you a super noisy picture. The Dynamic range of any modern DSLR will blow away every phone out there. If you're doing snaps outside during the day or you have ample lighting when it's dark, then fine, but outside of that, phones barely take adequate pictures. And of course since even low end DSLRs shoot raw, you have a much greater ability to recover if there's a problem (and no, even though some phones can shoot raw, they still barf when it's dark or very high contrast).
 
I would like a camera attachment on my phone. Take it off when not in use. Plug in when i want it.
 
I'm 35. I recently invested in a Sony A7 and some primes. I genuinely enjoy taking photos with a nice camera. The iPhone is okay for capturing a memory, but it does not scratch that itch for me.
 
If you're just a casual looking to take a picture or two without thinking too much, or post your vacation photos to Facebook/Instagram then a phone is more than enough.

But my Note 8 can never replace my A7r III and the quality photos it takes.
No phone will, at least not for another 20+ years. The phone camera sensor is nowhere close.
 
We have a photog forum here, btw, if you want to see some truly amazing pictures, go there and take a look.
 
nilepez said:
Take a picture at dusk and phone will give you a super noisy picture. The Dynamic range of any modern DSLR will blow away every phone out there. If you're doing snaps outside during the day or you have ample lighting when it's dark, then fine, but outside of that, phones barely take adequate pictures. And of course since even low end DSLRs shoot raw, you have a much greater ability to recover if there's a problem (and no, even though some phones can shoot raw, they still barf when it's dark or very high contrast).
Click to expand...
I agree completely, no phone can ever match a DSLR especially at night. the amount of noise is horrible. However, my note 8 does a decent job at that, I've gone hiking and taken pictures at night that had more light in them than the actual scene. The amount of noise was low. Like i said, took a great picture however a DSLR would blow it out of the water no contest.
 
g00z13 said:
I agree completely, no phone can ever match a DSLR especially at night. the amount of noise is horrible. However, my note 8 does a decent job at that, I've gone hiking and taken pictures at night that had more light in them than the actual scene. The amount of noise was low. Like i said, took a great picture however a DSLR would blow it out of the water no contest.
Click to expand...

The amount of light you can pick up with a DSLR is mind blowing, I've taken pictures in my backyard by the light of the full moon, you have to really start cranking up the ISO, but with an equivalent film speed of 64000 or better, you can get some great night shots with a nice wide lens. lot of noise, but that's to be expected.

it's always a trade-off, low light is either high noise and high iso with shorter exposure times, or low(er) ISO and longer exposure times. which is why real cameras always trump cell phones for such things, total control of the camera.
 
This thread got me to thinking. About 13 years ago, I purchased a $100 Olympus P&S camera. I think it is a 4mp camera, it uses XD cards, and a proprietary cable for USB connection. I picked that model because it excelled at super close up shots of tiny details, something that was important to me at the time. I haven't used that camera for a while, mainly due to the fact I have lost the USB cable, and finding connectivity for an XD card is difficult, and I haven't needed the super close up shot for a long time.
I just tried a similar close up shot with my iPhone, and it could not properly focus and give a clear close-up shot. Certainly "good enough" for casual and larger shots, but it can't outperform for close-ups a cheap camera from the last decade!
 
Ron.jpg


Last Camera I bought was 2010 for my daughter's 13 birthday trip to Disney World. Thought it was great for 1080p shots. Then the Samsung Galaxy phones came out. Literally had that camera for less than a year and the phone had more options. Kodac Camera, can't remember model. But now with these phones, yeah it's buh bye. If pro photographer, I can understand, but families don't want to carry huge cameras any more. My first trip to Disney, my father carried that big ass VHS camcorder around lol. Second trip was just regular camera. :)
 
nilepez said:
OK, you're way overstating the quality of a phone. It's not a Corvette. Sub 20k car (what's that, a Toyota Versa?). Now if you were talking about something like a Nikon D5 (F1) or a Z7 or a D850, you'd be in Corvette land.
A sub 500 dollar camera like the D3400 is at best a Camry.
Click to expand...

Perhaps a Corvette is overstating. I think a Camry is more along the lines. I'd bet that majority of pictures taken just reside and are viewed on a phone, sent electronically, or put on MyFaceGram. In which case they are functionally the same. It's about getting groceries from the store, for most.
 
nilepez said:
OK, you're way overstating the quality of a phone. It's not a Corvette. Sub 20k car (what's that, a Toyota Versa?). Now if you were talking about something like a Nikon D5 (F1) or a Z7 or a D850, you'd be in Corvette land.
A sub 500 dollar camera like the D3400 is at best a Camry.
Click to expand...

EH...D3400 with a fixed 2.8 100-300mm lens I'd take any day over any cellphone camera.

I have an iphoneX, the camera is so bad on it I never use it except for garbage photos I have no use for after the picture is taken.
 
Smashing Young Man said:
I bet most of the remaining DSLR sales are people buying for video reasons, not photography. I'm in the market for a new DSLR myself right now, and it's purely for video solutions.
Click to expand...

I think one of my next "big" purchases is going to be a full-frame DSLR.

My current ones are Pentax K-01 and Pentax K-30.

The Pentax K-1 Mark II will probably be my next big purchase as far as camera gear goes.
 
Nope, cameras are killing the camera industry.

6mp with a decent lens was good enough for even the most demanding casual photographer, and those started at a little over $100 ten years ago. Even the mid-range has done nothing for the last ten years (my G11 is still quite capable a decade later, because I will never need more than 11mp).

HDR was supposed to save the consumer camera industry, but doing that cheaply required a tripod. I think most camera phones feature some take on this tech anyway.

The consumer camera industry was already dying before the smartphone invasion. The death is just moving twice as fast as it would have been.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
Cell phones are definitely kicking the crap out of the point and shoot industry.

The camera industry is kicking the crap out of the interchangeable lens business though. They got a surge out of the fact that as P&S became more niche, the price difference between a decent one and an entry level DSLR was minimal. They got a wave of buyers who weren't going to be repeat business. For the prosumers and pros, generationally there jsut hasn't been much change. So sales fall off.

When I got into the DSLR thing, it was 10 megapixels and iso 800 was decent, 400 was great, and anything over 800 was marginal. 4 years later, and I get nearly double the pixel density, iso out to 12000 is good, and it's now about as small and convenient a package as you can get with a mirror. 4 years after that? the APS-C offerings are about the same, or worse. If I want anything improved in terms of technology, I have to go full frame or mirrorless. ,Which is basically the same as swapping systems. Effectively my lenses are useless, my bodies are useless. So unless you shoot enough to wear out bodies, there's a MASSIVE incentive to make do with what you have. Maybe buy some more glass for it, which only makes the barrier worse.
 
My own opinion is that while cell phone some cameras are getting at least equal to P&S pocket cameras, they have a very long way to go to come anywhere near the image quality of four thirds, DX, FX and mirrorless cameras. The tiny sensors and microscopic optics and processing capability of a smartphone just doesn't come anywhere near the capability of a dslr or the newer mirrorless cameras just coming on the market the last few years. smartphones simply doesn't come with the capability to swap arount fast lenses to pull those images in from a mile away until it is right there in front of you or to make those truly panoramic side angle shots with a little distortion.

Certainly those that normally use a P&S pocket camera or a smartphone camera are not interested in getting the best quality or creating a photographic masterpiece. They wouldn't walk into a wedding passing themselves off as "professional" then run around taking pictures with a smartphone. For the person that is happy taking the average shot, the smartphone cameras are just fine. For anything more demanding they will reach for something more purpose made with a larger sensor and more flexibility.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
If I go out to a crowded place where its going to be pictures of friends at arms length, my V30 does fantastic.

If I go on a trip I take my D5300 because it can ZOOM and phones are incapable of handling the 600 feet away shots. Also it doesn't drain my phones battery lo loo lol.

If my phone had a variable 30-110mm zoom and could use grey card calibration I might junk the D5300.
 
Smashing Young Man said:
I bet most of the remaining DSLR sales are people buying for video reasons, not photography. I'm in the market for a new DSLR myself right now, and it's purely for video solutions.
Click to expand...

All of the DSLR owners I know well (not very many) do very little video with their camera's. I know my best friend and I don't bother with it at all.
 
Master_shake_ said:
Well duh. Unless you're a pro a camera phone is good enough.
Click to expand...
I'm not a pro. That doesn't stop me from wanting to take pictures that aren't garbage quality. Phones are just fine for quick no care shots. They were useless for any picture that you want to actually turn out nice.
 
The adage 'the best camera in the world is the one you have on you' and not having to tote around more stuff being preferred is why every leap in cell phone camera capability can be tied to an erosion in stand alone camera sales. Can't say that sudden drop off is surprising. Pretty sure the new iPhone has variable fstop in it's camera now. That's going to be nice when it's matured.
 
I enjoy taking my nikon out to take some good photos. Have also done a couple weddings and birthday parties. The camera is about 5-6 years old and still takes significantly better photos than my pixel I use at work.

Even the point and shoots do take better photos but it is a middle ground that is becoming less desired. The convenience of having a phone that takes decent photos in your pocket at all times with almost no start up time is great for most people. I myself probably take more photos with my phone than i do my dslr, but if it is a photo I am taking that matters or am being paid or providing photos for another, i use the dslr.

The thing is, the dslr style cameras and now the newer shutterless ones are also evolving. I try not to snob off to the phone photographers as it really comes down to the person behind the camera is 80% of the photo, the 20% is the camera (to a degree of course).

I will say though that looking through a real viewfinder is a very unique way of looking at the world and trying to capture a moment of it.
 
I used to cary my DSLR and cell when I went on Vacation. the DSLR was for those low light, close up shots or fast moving frames. the cell phone was for Facebook back in the day. Just got too tiresome carrying two cameras, and more importantly keeping an eye on the DSLR so it wouldn't get stolen or forgotten somewhere. I've been trained to always check my wallet and cell phone haha
 
My wife made 4x6 prints straight from her iPhone 8. Looked great on screen, but the prints turned out terrible.

The phone camera might be good enough, but its damn boring to use. I usually take my A6300 because its pleasure to use and I love the rendering from the prime lenses. And if I want to make large prints, its always available.
 
kinda like driving a manual for me, I love driving and being in tune with the vehicle. versus an automatic where i feel like i'm a passenger. same concept when it comes to cameras
 
g00z13 said:
kinda like driving a manual for me, I love driving and being in tune with the vehicle. versus an automatic where i feel like i'm a passenger. same concept when it comes to cameras
Click to expand...

What? lol
 
Smashing Young Man said:
I bet most of the remaining DSLR sales are people buying for video reasons, not photography. I'm in the market for a new DSLR myself right now, and it's purely for video solutions.
Click to expand...

Why do people waste time with a DSLR purely for video when you can get a proper video camera without bullshit mirror that will shoot better video, faster with a better back illuminated sensor...
 
g00z13 said:
So true, the only thing thats different now is that our Cell phones take pictures that are great, whereas a DSLR will take amazing pictures, can change the exposures, f-stops etc. Most people are happy with their cells phones. DSLR are for those dedicated few. :)
Click to expand...

I think you hit it right on the nose ;) the DSLR is to the hobbyist and the professionals. Beyond that, yeah cell phones have killed off the dedicated digital camera.
 
Smashing Young Man said:
I bet most of the remaining DSLR sales are people buying for video reasons, not photography. I'm in the market for a new DSLR myself right now, and it's purely for video solutions.
Click to expand...
Maybe on some, but once you get up beyond a mid line camera, most are taking photos. However, it's worth nothing that a lot of pros have to do both and I'm sure there are plenty of amateurs that do both, but if your main thing is Video, I'd think you'd want an actual video camera that can shoot longer than 30 minutes. Personally, I rarely shoot video. I just don't enjoy it. For the most part, if I'm going to do that, I'd rather just use my phone.
 
Joust said:
Perhaps a Corvette is overstating. I think a Camry is more along the lines. I'd bet that majority of pictures taken just reside and are viewed on a phone, sent electronically, or put on MyFaceGram. In which case they are functionally the same. It's about getting groceries from the store, for most.
Click to expand...

Not sure what that grocery bit is about, but I agree for most people, a phone is good enough.

shad0w4life said:
EH...D3400 with a fixed 2.8 100-300mm lens I'd take any day over any cellphone camera.
I have an iphoneX, the camera is so bad on it I never use it except for garbage photos I have no use for after the picture is taken.
Click to expand...
I just got an XS Max (but haven't activated it yet), but as a rule, I think the iPhone is good enough in the day, but after that, it's rough going. Most of the time when I take a picture that needs a flash, I'll pull out a 2nd phone or a friends phone and use the flashlight to light the scene, because I find that looks better than the flash, but this will be my first new phone since the 6s+
 
Exactly
nilepez said:
Not sure what that grocery bit is about, but I agree for most people, a phone is good enough.


I just got an XS Max (but haven't activated it yet), but as a rule, I think the iPhone is good enough in the day, but after that, it's rough going. Most of the time when I take a picture that needs a flash, I'll pull out a 2nd phone or a friends phone and use the flashlight to light the scene, because I find that looks better than the flash, but this will be my first new phone since the 6s+
Click to expand...

Hey never tried that before but definitely gonna have to give it a try. My note 8 actually took really good night pictures but i’m selling that soon.
 
g00z13 said:
Exactly
Hey never tried that before but definitely gonna have to give it a try. My note 8 actually took really good night pictures but i’m selling that soon.
Click to expand...

I can believe that. I've seen a few android cameras that I felt took better pictures at night than my iPhone (esp when using a flash).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top