DSLRs and P&S both dying off?
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Going Behind The Grid At 700mm With The Old Wimberly II
Next: looking for a camera that fit's my styles
From: Neil Harrington on 7 Apr 2010 12:26 "Chris H" <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote in message news:9EmJ3EK1d0uLFAwf(a)phaedsys.demon.co.uk... > In message <4bbb42ed$0$30031$426a74cc(a)news.free.fr>, Ofnuts > <o.f.n.u.t.s(a)la.poste.net> writes >>On 06/04/2010 03:47, RichA wrote: >>> I don't think the DSLR line in Hogan's graph should be narrowing that >>> much, people are still overwhelmingly buying Canon and Nikon and they >>> don't have mirror-less cameras, but it makes sense compacts are going >>> away and (yuck!) cellphone with cams are rapidly expanding sales. >>> >>> http://www.bythom.com/ >> >>I don't agree with his vision... the market is split by sensor size: >>full-frame, APS-C/four-thirds, P&S, phones. > > I think the phones will replace the medium to low end P&S "all" the kids > (actually almost everyone, not just the kids) have phones with cameras > that are "good enough". Unless they are really into photography they > will be happy with a phone. Outdoors, probably. Indoors, I don't think so. Do any phones have flash? (I'm not up to date on cell phones at all.) People like to take pictures indoors too, and those I've seen taken with phones have been miserable at best, even by the lowest possible standard. > > Those that want more will go DSLR or a Bridge camera. The DSLR > enthusiasts (as a back up) and minimalist photographers etc will go high > end P&S but this will be a comparatively small market. Bridge cameras/superzooms certainly have their appeal, but until they can do a LOT better than the present crummy EVFs it doesn't seem likely they'll challenge low-end DSLRs. I recently bought a Panasonic FZ35 and it's an amazing little camera, especially at the price -- but after using it for a while, what a joy it is to go back to even an extreme-low-end DSLR like the D3000. Of course the FZ35 does have that impressive 18x zoom, the equal of which will probably never exist for a DSLR, certainly not without a huge penalty in price, size and weight. But that seems to me its only real reason for existence, and I question how many consumers have any real use for that much lens. > >>Of course the mirror will disappear, but it's peripheral. Canon & Nikon >>will someday make mirrorless bodies with APS-C sensors that will have >>all the functionality of current APS-C DSLRs and use their current >>lenses, and some later day do the same with FF bodies. Only when we see EVFs with resolutions in the megapixels. I don't think that will be any time soon. > > I agree... however by that time will the stills camera have been > replaced by the movie camera with interchangeable lenses? It is heading > that way now and the mirror is just "in the way" The mirror is just in the way for video, true. But I don't see video replacing stills, ever. Right now it has a good deal of novelty value and I've noticed the kiddies especially love video in their P&S cameras. For a while. Then their interest in it seems to disappear to be replaced by the next novelty.
From: Ofnuts on 7 Apr 2010 12:49 On 07/04/2010 18:26, Neil Harrington wrote: > Only when we see EVFs with resolutions in the megapixels. I don't think that > will be any time soon. The Lumix G1 is already in the megapixel range (even if they cheat a little with the number). The 1/1780 rule in the DoF computation has some physiological basis. It tells us that a "true" 3Mpix EVF will be very difficult to distinguish from an optical VF and that a 6Mpix could even be better in most aspects. -- Bertrand
From: Chris H on 7 Apr 2010 12:55 In message <KPidnfbiyYK7LyHWnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Neil Harrington <never(a)home.com> writes > >"Chris H" <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote in message >news:9EmJ3EK1d0uLFAwf(a)phaedsys.demon.co.uk... >> In message <4bbb42ed$0$30031$426a74cc(a)news.free.fr>, Ofnuts >> <o.f.n.u.t.s(a)la.poste.net> writes >>>On 06/04/2010 03:47, RichA wrote: >>>> I don't think the DSLR line in Hogan's graph should be narrowing that >>>> much, people are still overwhelmingly buying Canon and Nikon and they >>>> don't have mirror-less cameras, but it makes sense compacts are going >>>> away and (yuck!) cellphone with cams are rapidly expanding sales. >>>> >>>> http://www.bythom.com/ >>> >>>I don't agree with his vision... the market is split by sensor size: >>>full-frame, APS-C/four-thirds, P&S, phones. >> >> I think the phones will replace the medium to low end P&S "all" the kids >> (actually almost everyone, not just the kids) have phones with cameras >> that are "good enough". Unless they are really into photography they >> will be happy with a phone. > >Outdoors, probably. Indoors, I don't think so. Do any phones have flash? Yes most of them. And good low light capability. In fact most of the pictures on face book are taken indoors on phones. 90% of the kids are not going to bother with a P&S... are not? Have not bothered. They all have camera phones but VERY few have a separate camera of any sort (other than a web cam) -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
From: Chris H on 7 Apr 2010 12:58 In message <KPidnfbiyYK7LyHWnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Neil Harrington <never(a)home.com> writes > >"Chris H" <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote in message >The mirror is just in the way for video, true. But I don't see video >replacing stills, ever. People said similar things about 35mm film replacing 120 roll film.... > Right now it has a good deal of novelty value and >I've noticed the kiddies especially love video in their P&S cameras. You mean their phones... I don't know any with P&S cameras. I have done photos at a couple of 18th parties.... I had the only camera there that was not a phone. -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
From: Neil Harrington on 7 Apr 2010 13:59
Ofnuts wrote: > On 07/04/2010 18:26, Neil Harrington wrote: >> Only when we see EVFs with resolutions in the megapixels. I don't >> think that will be any time soon. > > The Lumix G1 is already in the megapixel range (even if they cheat a > little with the number). That's interesting. > The 1/1780 rule in the DoF computation has > some physiological basis. It tells us that a "true" 3Mpix EVF will be > very difficult to distinguish from an optical VF and that a 6Mpix > could even be better in most aspects. I'm not familiar with the 1/1780 rule. What's that about? |