Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Photography General Interest

Photography General Interest Neat Photo stuff NOT particularly about Rangefinders.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 05-15-2019   #41
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,885
Instax is a red herring. There are no less than a dozen Fujifilm Instax cameras on Shopgoodwill.com at any one time. These are those that actually make it to the auction side of the charity. There are countless others sitting on shelves and in bins at every other charity shop as well. This shows that Instax is not a huge force but just the next shiny thing that someone will try for one pack of film then relegate to donation. Want a $50 instant camera for $10? I'll point you to five of them any day of the week.
Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-15-2019   #42
aizan
Registered User
 
aizan's Avatar
 
aizan is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Torrance, CA
Age: 37
Posts: 4,532
Thom Hogan's been saying forever that camera companies should make their stuff communicating, programmable, and modular. I wonder why they haven't done it yet.

https://web.archive.org/web/20180113...d-thom-do.html
__________________
Ugly Cameras
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-15-2019   #43
Steve M.
Registered User
 
Steve M. is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,276
Can't say that I've held up my end on this as I've never purchased a new camera or lens in my life, but have bought lots and lots of film, paper, chemicals, etc.

I've posted these before, but the first is from my cheap Cricket phone of 2 years ago, the next is from a later Xfinity phone, and the last one is from a film camera (Canot FT-b, 135 2.5, Arista EDU Ultra in Mic-x). The phones obviously aren't going to challenge Tri-X, but the other colour stuff looks OK to me. The power of the phone isn't about having the highest image quality, it's about having it with you all the time.





  Reply With Quote

Old 05-15-2019   #44
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 6,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emile de Leon View Post
It had to happen sooner or later..
Only 2 cameras will survive ..
The Veriwide..and the 8x10..
I verimuch hope so
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-15-2019   #45
NickTrop
Registered User
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
NickTrop is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,023
1. The new cameras followed the trend of PCs. As faster processors and more RAM and larger HD became rapidly available, your PC was obsolete the moment it was purchased. New model, after new model, after new model waited in the wings? And now it's all leveled off. No talk of "processor speeds", what have you.

2. This was true with cameras and "megapixels". Mine (Nikon) has 24. It was made in 2012. Their latest Z (2019) also has 24 MP. I'm good. This is leveling off like PCs did. And that's why I disagree with those who kvetch about the product lifecycle of digital cameras. It was following the doubling of MP resolution as the PC market did with processor speed, RAM, and storage.

3. It will be interesting to see if Sony stays in the market after two years. I know, I know -- they're all the rage at the moment. But Sony is known for going in and out of consumer markets -- consumer audio, HDTVs, smart phones... and the other electronic giants Samsung, Casio bid hasty exits from the consumer photographic segment. Much of Sony's success will depend on their penetration into the professional market as opposed to advanced amateur segment.

This is one of the reasons why I stick with Nikon and if not Nikon, Canon. Nikon over Canon because of decades of backwards compatibility resulting in mass-produced high quality used glass that's reasonably priced, and great sensors. Nikon right now provides the best bang for the buck -- hands down. (Canon is falling behind in this [sensor tech] area. Leica is a joke. Sorry. They just are.) Plus, I feel a certain loyality to the companies that have served the photographic community for over 100 years. And I simply don't trust that Sony will be around in the long run -- especially if a market is poised to rapidly shrink by 50% in 24 months.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-15-2019   #46
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
The photography arrogance and elitism I encounter here at RFF at times stuns me!
I don’t believe that using the right tool for the look you want while wanting it to feel right in your hands is elitist though. It’s most likely the reason most off ended up at RFF in the first place.

I have the latest iPhone ... and it’s ok. But I’d rather use my Fuji’s and the Ricoh gr3 because they feel right and the photos I make with them are more in line with the quality i expect.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-15-2019   #47
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
I donít believe that using the right tool for the look you want while wanting it to feel right in your hands is elitist though. Itís most likely the reason most off ended up at RFF in the first place.

I have the latest iPhone ... and itís ok. But Iíd rather use my Fujiís and the Ricoh gr3 because they feel right and the photos I make with them are more in line with the quality i expect.

The frequent sneering at anything less than a 'real' camera is what I'm referring to.
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-15-2019   #48
Takkun
Ian M.
 
Takkun's Avatar
 
Takkun is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sunny South Seattle
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM View Post
Instax is a red herring. There are no less than a dozen Fujifilm Instax cameras on Shopgoodwill.com at any one time. These are those that actually make it to the auction side of the charity. There are countless others sitting on shelves and in bins at every other charity shop as well. This shows that Instax is not a huge force but just the next shiny thing that someone will try for one pack of film then relegate to donation. Want a $50 instant camera for $10? I'll point you to five of them any day of the week.
Phil Forrest
Phil, I am slightly inclined to agree with you, but I also have to wonder how many of those are there because of the shoddy workmanship (and indeed, I've rarely found any camera gear at Goodwill that is actually functioning, sadly). My SO has gone through two Instax cameras whose retractible lenses jammed, but still loves the format. She's on to a Lomoinstant now and it's surprisingly holding up.

I also want to peg it as a short-lived fad, like anything else sold at Urban Outfitters, but the format has been gaining steam for two decades now, Impossible Project licensed/purchased the Polaroid name, and there's been rumblings of a pack film revival for a few years. I don't know if it'll stick around for another two decades, but it's at least outlived Disc Film. Can't say I haven't been tempted to buy one of the Lomography models.
__________________
Ian M., Seattle
Current bag contents: M 262 + M5, XA in the coat pocket.

currently trying to find a use for a Nikon D2.
--
my infrequently updated blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-15-2019   #49
Pioneer
Registered User
 
Pioneer's Avatar
 
Pioneer is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Age: 65
Posts: 3,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by blan01 View Post
Glad to see Pentax is still alive and doing OK

I agree. I'm not sure how they are doing it but it is certainly nice to see they are still hanging in there.


For me though digital is pretty much a dead horse. No need for it when I can still get all I need out of my old film equipment. All of it is still very capable of producing amazing results. And quality?? It is very hard to beat an 8x10 contact print when you are looking for quality.
__________________
You gotta love a fast lens;

It is almost as good as a fast horse!
Dan
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-15-2019   #50
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
The frequent sneering at anything less than a 'real' camera is what I'm referring to.
I think it’s because while a cellphone can be used to produce a good image in good light, it still isn’t that fun to use, haptics and ergonomics wise, for many people. If people sneer at digital in general here, you can’t expect phones to go over well.

Libyan Sugar and Office Romance are two great photo books made with iPhones (4 and 5 I believe) and that sticks in my head. It’s a serious tool when used by a serious photographer for sure.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-15-2019   #51
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 6,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
The frequent sneering at anything less than a 'real' camera is what I'm referring to.
Well, this site is called rangefinderforum so there will be bias. Cuz, well, u know the rangefinder thing.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-15-2019   #52
Ccoppola82
Registered User
 
Ccoppola82 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: NY
Posts: 281
I’m so used to having a camera or 2 on me that I often forget that my phone actually takes pictures. Weird but true.
__________________
Leica M2/M6
Hasselblad 500CM

Instagram
Coppola_Art
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-15-2019   #53
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
 
Darthfeeble's Avatar
 
Darthfeeble is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Logtown, California, USA
Age: 72
Posts: 1,457
Perfect parallel to the computer industry. Soon, if not already, the phone market will be saturated and that will cause the next decline.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-15-2019   #54
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
I think itís because while a cellphone can be used to produce a good image in good light, it still isnít that fun to use, haptics and ergonomics wise, for many people. If people sneer at digital in general here, you canít expect phones to go over well.

Libyan Sugar and Office Romance are two great photo books made with iPhones (4 and 5 I believe) and that sticks in my head. Itís a serious tool when used by a serious photographer for sure.


And so is a pin hole if you like fuzz and vignetting! lol
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #55
NickTrop
Registered User
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
NickTrop is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,023
This reminds me of the record industry. Big boom when there was the switch from vinyl to digital -- CDRs. Windfall times with people re-purchasing old dead catalog in a new physical format. Gotta hear Dark Side of the Moon on digital, mahn! Physical Graffiti has been off the charts for 10 years -- now it's tracking again, on CDR! A decade or so later the record industry was crying that sales were down when that format changed again -- this time not in the record industry's favor but in Apple and other's favor. The fact was, was that those sales numbers when digital formats arrived were unsustainable to begin with, the product of an era where consumers were willing to spend to transition to a new and better technology. It worked in the record company's favor the first time. But it came up tails for them the next time.

So it goes with the camera companies. The record lables are still around, most/many of them (I don't keep tabs...). They found a way to survive. Scaled down. Merged.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #56
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM View Post
Instax is a red herring. There are no less than a dozen Fujifilm Instax cameras on Shopgoodwill.com at any one time. These are those that actually make it to the auction side of the charity. There are countless others sitting on shelves and in bins at every other charity shop as well. This shows that Instax is not a huge force but just the next shiny thing that someone will try for one pack of film then relegate to donation. Want a $50 instant camera for $10? I'll point you to five of them any day of the week.
Phil Forrest

True. Also Instax film does nothing to support traditional film. Fujifilm has discontinued an enormous number of emulsions during the meteoric rise of Instax. Instax offers nothing to traditional film users.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #57
Peter Wijninga
Registered User
 
Peter Wijninga's Avatar
 
Peter Wijninga is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,912
https://www.fujifilmholdings.com/en/...2019q4_001.pdf
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #58
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Wijninga View Post

Imaging solutions showing a drop in profits. The only part of the company that is not growing.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #59
Dogman
Registered User
 
Dogman is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ccoppola82 View Post
Iím so used to having a camera or 2 on me that I often forget that my phone actually takes pictures. Weird but true.
Yep.

Me too.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #60
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickTrop View Post
This reminds me of the record industry. Big boom when there was the switch from vinyl to digital -- CDRs. Windfall times with people re-purchasing old dead catalog in a new physical format. Gotta hear Dark Side of the Moon on digital, mahn! Physical Graffiti has been off the charts for 10 years -- now it's tracking again, on CDR! A decade or so later the record industry was crying that sales were down when that format changed again -- this time not in the record industry's favor but in Apple and other's favor. The fact was, was that those sales numbers when digital formats arrived were unsustainable to begin with, the product of an era where consumers were willing to spend to transition to a new and better technology. It worked in the record company's favor the first time. But it came up tails for them the next time.

So it goes with the camera companies. The record lables are still around, most/many of them (I don't keep tabs...). They found a way to survive. Scaled down. Merged.

Your analogy is somewhat right, but only partially. Downloading is what destroyed the record labels, not Apple. The vast majority of profits for music is gone and has not returned with digital sales. Dozens of record labels went bankrupt and now only a few remain. Artists mostly cannot make money recording anymore. It's touring where the money is since that can't be stolen by downloading. The music industry is a shell of its former self and is not thriving in any sense of the word. Probably the type of future where the camera industry is heading.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #61
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,624
I was surprised that ILCs were down 35% in January and I don't think have recovered in the ensuing months. These are not the P&S cameras I would have expected (and which undoubtedly were also down). Are these the ASP-C kit cameras or ILCs more generally? In other words, how far up the food chain do these declines extend? It is no wonder we are seeing the emphasis on FF and larger (and more expensive). The iPhone is eating the other cameras' lunch.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #62
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
I was surprised that ILCs were down 35% in January and I don't think have recovered in the ensuing months. These are not the P&S cameras I would have expected (and which undoubtedly were also down). Are these the ASP-C kit cameras or ILCs more generally? In other words, how far up the food chain do these declines extend?

The decline is pretty much across the entire industry. The only way camera companies are able to mitigate these losses is by raising prices. We are seeing a lot more $2000 and $2400 lenses than in years past and the large drop in sales volume is the reason why. Prices will continue to go up as companies must have revenue to offset fixed costs.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #63
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
I think itís because while a cellphone can be used to produce a good image in good light, it still isnít that fun to use, haptics and ergonomics wise, for many people. If people sneer at digital in general here, you canít expect phones to go over well.

Libyan Sugar and Office Romance are two great photo books made with iPhones (4 and 5 I believe) and that sticks in my head. Itís a serious tool when used by a serious photographer for sure.

I certainly do not enjoy shooting with my iPhone, but the results are so good that I will accept that with the return that I no longer need to have my Fuji X100 with me. I have saved enormous money stepping off the upgrade path with digital cameras. 7 years since I last bought a digital camera! Previous to that I upgraded all the time, at one time owning 15 digital cameras.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #64
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,624
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
I have saved enormous money stepping off the upgrade path with digital cameras. 7 years since I last bought a digital camera! Previous to that I upgraded all the time, at one time owning 15 digital cameras.
No wonder the camera industry was booming.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #65
seagrove
Rich
 
seagrove is offline
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by PRJ View Post
It is to be expected with mature technology. Newer cameras have had diminishing returns for years now. There is very little difference between older cameras and newer ones. The megapixel race is over. People realized that they don't need "better" when their old camera was more than good enough "back then" and is still more than good enough now. The whole mirrorless thing is just a sidestep to something different that has little to do with performance in an effort to increase sales.
Totally agree with this sentiment. I used a pair of Nikon D2H bodies for newspaper/commercial work for a decade. Even had one image from these 4.1MP beasts cropped by half and blown up to 6 feet x 12 feet for use on a billboard!
__________________
Rich
http://meandmyx100s.blogspot.com
Yashica Electro35 GS, Fujifilm X100S (both silver & black bodies), TCL-X100, WCL-X100, sold everything else!
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #66
Prest_400
Multiformat
 
Prest_400's Avatar
 
Prest_400 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Sweden/Spain
Posts: 883
I now am reaping the benefits of such a market, as a person without much budget I tend to allocate resources towards the film side. Finally upgraded my m43 to an EM5 which I bought off an estate. Cheap, almost new, body that may be 6-7? years but can have a long service life. Likewise, I was lucky to get the 35-100 2.8 from a photographer that got it from a gig and sold it cheap.


I do eye in the newer m43 for their "HiRes" mode, or the Sony Alphas, to squeeze higher quality and use it as a "film scanner". Finally, with software like NLP and excellent digital cameras, there is a heir to the ancient lab scanners.


As tools, of course I do see the advantage of the latest generation of bodies. But 2012 seems like "decreasing returns" good.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #67
seagrove
Rich
 
seagrove is offline
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
I certainly do not enjoy shooting with my iPhone, but the results are so good that I will accept that with the return that I no longer need to have my Fuji X100 with me. I have saved enormous money stepping off the upgrade path with digital cameras. 7 years since I last bought a digital camera! Previous to that I upgraded all the time, at one time owning 15 digital cameras.
How did you justify to yourself (because only you really matters in this question) having 15 () digital (I assume) cameras at one time? The most I have ever own was two and they would both get a workout. I currently have just two cameras (a Fuji X100S w/WCL attached and a X100S w/TCL attached). Even when I was a working newspaper shooter I never owned more than two. When I sold them both (Nikon D2H bodies) had exceeded their shutter lifes but continue to work. Having never bought into the MP race since 4.1MP was more than sufficient for most of my work, the only reason I saw to jump on the next iteration (at the time it was the Nikon D3) was for the increase in ISO sensitivity and less noise. But to each their own I guess.
__________________
Rich
http://meandmyx100s.blogspot.com
Yashica Electro35 GS, Fujifilm X100S (both silver & black bodies), TCL-X100, WCL-X100, sold everything else!
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #68
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
No wonder the camera industry was booming.

There's probably many like me, for sure. It's been wonderful stepping off the upgrade train. Chasing the dragon is very distracting.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #69
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by seagrove View Post
How did you justify to yourself (because only you really matters in this question) having 15 () digital (I assume) cameras at one time?

No real justification really. I have a lot of money to spend and cameras were my primary interest at the time. I could always find a new camera that did something ever so slightly different than the ones I already owned. Plus, I enjoyed collecting Fujifilm cameras. 90% of my cameras were all Fuji's and so I built up a (for me) nice collection. Many of them are gone now as I simply don't shoot digital much as I converted over to film almost exclusively. I am certainly not anti-film. I have many Fujifilm film cameras and as well as Nikon and Canon SLR.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #70
ChipMcD
Registered User
 
ChipMcD is offline
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Wijninga View Post
Because it's not much fun making pictures with a phone. And, as you know, high-end phones sales -with enhanced camera capabilities, are tanking.
I agree. I'm only up to an iPhone 7, but the shutter lag on that thing reminds me of ca 2000 point and shoots. They are also hard to hold securely. The output is nice though, and I agree that they are perfectly fine for 99% of folks who just want a no hassle photo.

It will be interesting to see whether camera production reaches equilibrium before it is totally uneconomic for any manufacturer to continue. There are still blacksmiths and farriers, but my guess is that the breakeven point to manufacture what they need in the way of tools and materials is a lot lower than making cameras and film.

I'm an old man. my cameras will likely outlast me, and I think black and white film will still be made as long as I can still use it. After me, the deluge! ;-)
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #71
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
 
Darthfeeble's Avatar
 
Darthfeeble is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Logtown, California, USA
Age: 72
Posts: 1,457
I have a friend who travels a lot and uses FB an awful lot. Her favorite camera is an older Samsung that will let her post picture straight from the camera to FB. She likes it so well that she spent the cost of the camera again to have it repaired. I see that as a possible avenue for the manufacturers, and oddly there aren't any that do that now.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #72
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
And so is a pin hole if you like fuzz and vignetting! lol
Sure is...that’s the point. All cameras are capable of making an incredible image. However, part of what makes photography fun for many is that you enjoy using the camera. If you do, you’ll most likely remember to use it more.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #73
ChipMcD
Registered User
 
ChipMcD is offline
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ccoppola82 View Post
Iím so used to having a camera or 2 on me that I often forget that my phone actually takes pictures. Weird but true.
Yep. I often don't remember that I have a camera on me, even when I don't have other cameras on me.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #74
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChipMcD View Post
It will be interesting to see whether camera production reaches equilibrium before it is totally uneconomic for any manufacturer to continue. There are still blacksmiths and farriers, but my guess is that the breakeven point to manufacture what they need in the way of tools and materials is a lot lower than making cameras and film.

How many global blacksmith companies are there? None. The infrastructure to support designing millions of cameras,producing them, selling them, and then providing after sales support is enormous and requires a lot of revenue to keep the doors open.


Camera makers are experiencing severe revenue drops, year after year after year.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #75
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,624
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthfeeble View Post
I have a friend who travels a lot and uses FB an awful lot. Her favorite camera is an older Samsung that will let her post picture straight from the camera to FB. She likes it so well that she spent the cost of the camera again to have it repaired. I see that as a possible avenue for the manufacturers, and oddly there aren't any that do that now.
If all you are doing is posting to FB, may as well use a phone. That is what they are designed to do.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #76
jawarden
Registered User
 
jawarden is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
The latest camera sales numbers are in and the bloodletting that the industry has been undergoing the past several years shows no signs of letting up. There's still a massive contraction in the camera market with revenues down severely. Something has *got* to give.



What is going to save the traditional camera industry? Can it be saved?
  • Canon down 23%
  • Sony down 7%
  • Nikon down 21%
  • Fujifilm down 3%
  • Olympus down 24%
  • Ricoh (Pentax) up 4%
  • Overall camera shipments (CIPA) were down 25% in dollars
  • Overall lens shipments (CIPA) were down 13% in dollars
Just my opinion of course, but I think a really great camera or three, and perfect lenses to go with them, delivered and marketed professionally from Nikon (for instance) won't do much to diminish the 21% figure you cite. The pie is simply getting smaller for the industry, and it's likely that a complete re-think of their core business is in order (and hopefully underway).

Aiming to compete with phones is problematic; innovating around the phone crisis is where the action is. I'm sure there are talented product development and marketing analysts working on the what comes next problem, from inside or outside the companies listed. It's a rich project because the companies have so much history and talent to leverage in new directions.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #77
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
 
Jamie Pillers's Avatar
 
Jamie Pillers is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 4,012
I've just read this entire thread... whew! I've come away with two thoughts:


First, I expect that no matter what happens to the industry (photo making tools, whether camera or phone), we will always end up with tools that do the job. Some of us get used to doing the job one way and hang on to that. Others jump from one tool to the next. But as has always been the case, successful use of the tool will depend on the brain/eye/talent, not on the tool.


And second, I now realize that I'm somewhat intrigued by the idea of accepting the challenge of doing my photography with a phone. Its tempting... selling off all this gear and live with an ever-ready phone! Hmmm....
__________________
Talk to a stranger today!

Fuji X-H1; X-Pro1; XF10; Polaroid 250 (waiting for an 'art' project)

Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #78
Mackinaw
Think Different
 
Mackinaw is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: One hour south of the Mackinaw Bridge
Posts: 3,487
Quote:
Originally Posted by jawarden View Post
......The pie is simply getting smaller for the industry, and it's likely that a complete re-think of their core business is in order (and hopefully underway)........
I read the Canon article in the Nikkei. The current market for interchangeable lens cameras is about 10 million /year. Canon sees it dropping, but stabilizing, at about 5-6 million/year. In the future, Canon will be concentrate more on industrial, surveillance and medical imaging and less on consumer-grade cameras.

Jim B.
__________________
My fancy-schmancy gallery:
http://snowcountryphotography.com

My RFF Gallery:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...user=1453&sl=m
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #79
charjohncarter
Registered User
 
charjohncarter's Avatar
 
charjohncarter is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Danville, CA, USA
Posts: 8,615
Cell photo tech is probably able to be put into a thimble so put a cell photo in a DSLR. They already have a screen and GPS.
  Reply With Quote

Innovation for innovations sake is a losing game
Old 4 Weeks Ago   #80
Tim Murphy
Registered User
 
Tim Murphy is offline
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 378
Innovation for innovations sake is a losing game

Dear Board,


In all honesty, who here could not survive with a 12 to 16 Mpeg camera?


Eventually the early adopters stop adopting all the innovations. Who really cares among the majority of users that you can take a photograph using only the light provided by lightning bugs so long as you have a $ 4000.00 camera body and it's corresponding $ 6000.00 lens.


I have newer used cameras, but my most reliable camera remains my Canon EOS 1DMKII. It focuses better and faster than almost anything I own. I take pictures of animals and birds and get some very good ones out of it because of how well it performs. I know there are days when it will struggle to acquire focus because of less than perfect light combined with f4 and f5.6 lenses, so on those days I stay home.


Eventually they, meaning camera makers, will learn that there is a realistic limit to how much you can dump on people before they say they are full.


Regards,


Tim Murphy


Harrisburg, PA
__________________
Then the coal company came with the world's largest shovel
And they tortured the timber and stripped all the land
Well, they dug for their coal till the land was forsaken
Then they wrote it all down as the progress of man.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 20:08.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.