The Smartphone is killing the point & shoot camera.

Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by Dan C, Dec 3, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dan C

    Dan C Forum Fotographer Thread Starter

    Location:
    The West
    Makes sense I guess. IMHO the social networking trend isn't going away and camera makers are really losing ground. People are so used to uploading photos instantly, and smartphones are starting to come with pretty good cameras. Why aren't more p&s cameras coming with some WiFi or Bluetooth connectivity to phones?

    Of course an itty bitty teeny little lens and sensor isn't going to really compete with a good p&s, but that's not enough to stop their decline.

    Crazy times.

    dan c

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/04/technology/04camera.html?_r=1&src=twt&twt=nytimes

     
  2. Metralla

    Metralla Joined Jan 13, 2002

    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    It bugs me when people post a crappy low-rez picture of their equipment here and then apologise at the same time "sorry about the cell phone photo". There is no value in posting a poor photo.
     
  3. Synthfreek

    Synthfreek I’m a ray of sunshine & bastion of positivity

    And that's a KILLER camera she has.
     
  4. jv66

    jv66 Estimated Dead Prophet

    Location:
    Montreal
    Very good point the article brings up. I have a Canon 5D mark II and bring it on my many trips around the globe. My friends (especially on Facebook) and some of the people who've hired me want my pictures to be up instantly. They don't understand that the way I shoot (and my camera by itself in RAW mode) does not lend itself to instantly being able to upload photos online. Nothing can wait anymore...
     
  5. SamS

    SamS Forum Legend

    Location:
    Texas
    Yes, that is annoying. However there are as many junk P&S cameras as there are junk cell phone cameras. Any decent smart phone camera is as good as any ~$100 P&S.

    I'm a terrible picture-taker, but I turned around and took this 1 min ago from an iPhone. I think most would have a hard time determining that it was from a phone vs. real (inexpensive) camera. Little fuzzy, but the light is poor...
     
  6. jv66

    jv66 Estimated Dead Prophet

    Location:
    Montreal
    You're right, most wouldn't notice the noise in that photo but it's the first thing one notices if they know what to look for in what camera was used.
     
  7. Metralla

    Metralla Joined Jan 13, 2002

    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    OK, that's a surprisingly good photo. I'm quite impressed - you must have turned up the lights to get that.
     
  8. SamS

    SamS Forum Legend

    Location:
    Texas
    Yeah, the noise bugs me too, but it is much worse indoors. P&S still have a comparable amount of noise, in my experience.

    Just turned on the overhead room light. Part of the decent quality can probably attributed to Apple's automatic/built-in HDR dynamic range software. Yeah, it's cheating a bit but P&S cameras probably use something similar.

    I won't pretend the iPhone (or any decent smartphone) camera is anywhere in the same league as even a $500 SLR, but at least the photos are not embarrassing. I bet in 3 years, smartphone cameras will really knock your socks off.
     
  9. Pinknik

    Pinknik Senior Member

    It's bad for the point and shoot business, but I don't think it's a big deal in some sort of photo quality or artistic way. I've been around long enough to have seen plenty of crappy polaroids, 110 pics, the disc camera, etc. Cheap crappy cameras and the non-Ansel Adams's who use them have been around forevah.

    This non-Ansel Adams has a Sony point and shoot, and the next camera I get will be one too, perhaps even nicer. However, I'm on the Steve Hoffman forum, so the fact that I'm weird like that is self evident. :)
     
  10. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Perhaps photos of equipment are a different beast, but for photography in general, I've said it before and I'll say it again: what's important is getting the photo. Capturing the moment. A great camera is useless if you are fumbling around with it and miss the shot or don't even have it with you because it is too big or awkward. A good, low quality shot is 100% better than high quality nothing.

    This coming from a person that uses a semi-pro DSLR almost exclusively.
     
  11. Metralla

    Metralla Joined Jan 13, 2002

    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    I agree if it's a shot that you need to get to capture the moment. I was referring to photos of hifi systems that aren't going anywhere.
     
  12. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR!

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    Yes, that is a sad trend of modern life. The good news, pretty much everybody now has a camera in case of emergency, or in the event of a once-in-a-lifetime moment (like a baby being born or a flying saucer landing for a minute in your backyard). For vacations and quick shots, a semi-decent camera phone isn't horrible. I've been surprised by how good the iPhone 4 camera is, for example. It ain't a Canon EOS-D5, but it's a lot better than a 1965 Instamatic.
     
  13. Dan C

    Dan C Forum Fotographer Thread Starter

    Location:
    The West
    True that. But since I use a big DSLR kit for work I've always loved my various p&s cameras when I'm off work, the smaller the better. We just bought a wonderful Canon S95.

    I don't have a good smartphone yet, I'll be getting one early next year when my current plan is up. Maybe I'll be a smartphone convert and our poor S95 will collect dust. We'll see!

    dan c
     
  14. filper

    filper Forum Resident

    Is the camera on the iPod Touch any good ?

    How many megapixels ?
     
  15. Doug Sclar

    Doug Sclar Forum Legend

    Location:
    The OC
    I've got a 5D Mk II and a G9. I also recently got a Epic 4g phone with a 5mp camera.

    They each have thier advantages. There is no doubt that the smartphone is more convenient in that it's more likely to be with me most of the time.

    In reality the G9 is a lot more convenient than the 5D, but there is no comparasion. It takes great pictures but the 5D Mk II can do so much more, not to mention it has much better glass. I have several fast L series lenses which almost cost as much as the camera and are worth every penny.

    I find the G9 to be much easier to use than the smart phone as well. It has better glass than the phone and a larger aperture, less noise and a better flash just to name a few things.

    The main advantage of the smart phone, besides always being around, is that it can immediately email the photos.
     
  16. paradiddl

    paradiddl Forum Resident

    Location:
    Finland
    I think mobile phones still carry the first, bad impressions of people's experience. The first years with mobile phone cameras have been really horrible.I've seen some pictures and HD video shooted with my friend's new Nokia N8, and I must say I was impressed. I also liked the capability to plug the phone to an HDTV and view pictures and videos on excellent quality. That feature ofcourse has been around for a while now on digital cameras but not so much on mobile phones.

    As long as people can't tell the difference in quality, who cares about the source? Like pointed out above there are crappy, small lenses on both categories. I've seen, noisy, blurry and terrible-looking shots on budget cameras too.

    I also will gladly see fusion of mobile/camera and the mobile phone cameras improving. Mobile is one of those things I always carry around, but I carry my Canon digital camera on various, special occasions. My Nokia 6233 is now almost 4 years old and it has a non-flash 2MP lens. So the difference is drastic between the quality. When I know I will need a camera, I'll take it with me. But I think when it's time for me to buy a new mobile, I will find my Canon completely unnecessary.


    @filper
    The 3G iPhone/iPod cameras are good but they need a stable hand. You can get nice shots but they get easily blurry. The shutter is not as fast as it could be, I guess. No experience on iPhone 4G.
     
  17. markshan

    markshan Forum Resident

    Location:
    Pittsburgh, PA
    The iPod is killing the home stereo.
     
  18. Drew

    Drew Senior Member

    Location:
    Grand Junction, CO
    Makes perfect sense really.

    I have a friend who is a pro photographer with thousands of dollars in equipment
    and a few years back he said to me the following, "Do you think I want to carry
    a DSLR around all day when I take the family to the amusement park? No way!
    I have the smallest\lightest point & shoot Nikon makes for days like that."

    Using that logic he'd probably be the first to jump use smartphone for days like that.
     
  19. Dan C

    Dan C Forum Fotographer Thread Starter

    Location:
    The West
    Earlier I was saying camera makers should produce good p&s products that act more like smartphones. Something with a real lens and high resolution but that can instantly upload to social networks, etc.

    Turns out Kodak actually makes something just like that called the 'Slice'. Cute little concept, but with Kodak's sad luck of late it probably won't go anywhere.

    http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2364166,00.asp

    dan c
     
  20. Dan C

    Dan C Forum Fotographer Thread Starter

    Location:
    The West
    HT started killing the home 'stereo' before the iPod was even a dream.

    dan c
     
  21. Parkertown

    Parkertown Tawny Port

    I'm not bothered by the picture at all Sam. I think it looks great.

    But seeing all the records un-alphabetized is just unnerving...go take care of this right now!

    :D
     
  22. Dan C

    Dan C Forum Fotographer Thread Starter

    Location:
    The West
  23. noname74

    noname74 Allegedly Canadian

    Location:
    .
    Love seeing Boris in your collection!!! I just listneed to the EP they did with Ian Astbury...not my fav Boris release but it wasnt a disaster.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine