pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: News story says smartphone cameras may rival DSLRs  (Read 6975 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: March 02, 2014, 06:59 »
0
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know all about bokeh and lens quality and physics and shutter lag and blah, blah. And yes, currently dslrs and cell phones are two different animals, obviously. I guess what I was trying to say is that it doesnt matter how great a photo is technically speaking or if it was shot in a studio or the best models in the world posed and you can see every hair on their head. If the buyer wants something less its moot. Trends come and go so why not exploit a trend if there is money to be made. Take your special photos and apply a filter, strip the metadata and call it a phone pic if it will make you money.

That's a completely different point.

btw, what you are trying to say in many words is that a dslr shot does anything that one from a smartphone can, and no vice versa.


ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #26 on: March 02, 2014, 08:31 »
0
Well, we're all got it wrong.
I just found this in a freemium paper - "World's best camera in a compact waterproof smartphone"

Trying to work out how this passes the ASA.
Is it because 'world's best camera' is totally subjective, and anyway, the best camera is the one you have with you', or are they being 'cute' with the wording and all they're claiming is that of all the compact waterproof smartphones in the world, theirs is best? Sneaky!
Interestingly, their website doesn't have that attention-grabbing headline, but just says, "The best of Sony in a compact waterproof* smartphone"
http://www.sonymobile.com/gb/products/phones/xperia-z1-compact/?gclid=CNyl4OH587wCFafKtAodfykAug
which surprisingly was the page I was taken too when I Googled "World's best camera in a compact waterproof smartphone". The other Sony pages reached by that search similarly have different taglines; however I also found this page:
http://www.sonymobile.com/gb/legal/testresults/xperia-z2  (NB 'legal') and
http://www.sonymobile.com/gb/legal/testresults/xperia-z2/#best-camera-and-video
Where of course it means that at the time of its release, some study found it the best in its class (compact waterproof cameras).
Hmmmm

« Reply #27 on: March 02, 2014, 12:47 »
0
what some punter might feel looks great on his web-page

Unfortunately, those punters make up a good portion of MS sales.

« Reply #28 on: March 03, 2014, 04:23 »
+2
If I were a buyer, I wouldn't be too vexed by noise levels or artifacts in work like this:

http://benlowy.tumblr.com/

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #29 on: March 03, 2014, 06:38 »
0
look at the latest Sony NEX, they're already able to produce saleable images especially if downsized to 12MP.

I own both an NEX-7 and 5DMII. At lower ISOs the image quality is about equal. No need to downsize. I love my 5DMII but rarely use it now. I'm planning to pick up an A7R.

« Reply #30 on: March 03, 2014, 11:55 »
+1
I suppose the other thing to consider is that all of the advances that go into phone cameras can also be put into high end pro cameras keeping them at least a step ahead.

A more reasonable argument is that a phone can take a picture that looks fine on facebook or instagram or whatever and if that is all you want or need then a big pro camera is overkill.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #31 on: March 03, 2014, 11:57 »
0
I didn't say Cell Phones were threatened into becoming obsolete, I said Pocket Cameras. Just in case there was some confusion. Two different animals. It's not about photo buyers, it's about image quality and availability.

Nah, no argument with subject... your points are right on target for the discussion.

I don't say ignore cell phones or the trend or the market. If people are buying tiny, fuzzy, crappy, photos... go make some and sell them. Go with the flow = follow the money.

What I'm saying is, Cell phones will not REPLACE or "rival" DSLRs for many reasons. Other people have pointed out quality, image size, shutter lag, lens, sensors and a bunch more. The original message says may rival DSLRs and another one a couple weeks ago says "will make DSLRs obsolete".

I'm speaking about cameras not sales or marketing. The original article had nothing to do with Microstock sales, it was about consumers.

I'm looking at technology for producing high quality images. Does that explain my viewpoint better.

"Pocket cameras are rapidly becoming a thing of the past, because of cameras in phones."

I encourage everyone to dump their bulky, outdated, DSLRs and get one of these great little camera phones. Please, do it as soon as possible. (See Ya!)   ;)

Well, this begs an extended conversation. Do buyers care about what an image is shot with and do they even know better? (other stuff here)
While I'm not intending to steal the thread this discussion grows in several directions.  This is to say that even if smart phones do not/cannot completely replace DSLR's they are a major threat to us unless we get on board and start shooting/uploading content as time and technology evolves.

« Reply #32 on: March 03, 2014, 16:47 »
+1


...............

nobody is innovating anymore because there's just no space left for innovation, they reached the peak already, as a product it's fully mature and complete now, new models will be just small cosmetic upgrades.

yep, next they'll be closing the patent office because there's nothing new coming in...

and IBM could ignore personal computers because they were a fad...

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #33 on: March 03, 2014, 17:56 »
0

« Reply #34 on: March 04, 2014, 02:17 »
+1


...............

nobody is innovating anymore because there's just no space left for innovation, they reached the peak already, as a product it's fully mature and complete now, new models will be just small cosmetic upgrades.


yep, next they'll be closing the patent office because there's nothing new coming in...

and IBM could ignore personal computers because they were a fad...


It all finished 114 years ago, or earlier:
 From 1900:

    "There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement" - Lord Kelvin


From a bit earlier:

    "So many centuries after the Creation, it is unlikely that anyone could find hitherto unknown lands of any value." - Spanish Royal Commission, rejecting Christopher Columbus' proposal to sail west.

These and other fine quotes about how science is finished can be found here: http://amasci.com/weird/end.html

« Reply #35 on: March 04, 2014, 03:22 »
0


...............

nobody is innovating anymore because there's just no space left for innovation, they reached the peak already, as a product it's fully mature and complete now, new models will be just small cosmetic upgrades.


yep, next they'll be closing the patent office because there's nothing new coming in...

and IBM could ignore personal computers because they were a fad...


It all finished 114 years ago, or earlier:
 From 1900:

    "There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement" - Lord Kelvin


From a bit earlier:

    "So many centuries after the Creation, it is unlikely that anyone could find hitherto unknown lands of any value." - Spanish Royal Commission, rejecting Christopher Columbus' proposal to sail west.

These and other fine quotes about how science is finished can be found here: http://amasci.com/weird/end.html


The interesting part would be if you could get the plebs the read books like 'The emperors new mind' from Penrose. After reading their tabloid science for rednecks articles about evil monster blackholes growling in space, where even the most sensationalist speculation is stated as a fact...  they would be faced with an actual scientist saying that we although we have admirably accurate models, we haven't got the slightest clue about how the world actually works.

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #36 on: March 04, 2014, 08:14 »
+1
look at the latest Sony NEX, they're already able to produce saleable images especially if downsized to 12MP.

I own both an NEX-7 and 5DMII. At lower ISOs the image quality is about equal. No need to downsize. I love my 5DMII but rarely use it now. I'm planning to pick up an A7R.

The 5D has always been totally overestimated, it's a camera of the past, it can't even beat the nikon D600 or the D7100 in pretty much any department.

I'm curious about the next Sonys, as much as i hated Sony in the past i must admit they're the only ones now along with Sigma who are serious about innovation and value for money.



Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #37 on: March 04, 2014, 08:21 »
0


...............

nobody is innovating anymore because there's just no space left for innovation, they reached the peak already, as a product it's fully mature and complete now, new models will be just small cosmetic upgrades.

yep, next they'll be closing the patent office because there's nothing new coming in...

and IBM could ignore personal computers because they were a fad...

Well, the only improvements will be on the TFT screens and memory cards and price but you can forget any radical change regarding battery life, weight, apps, OS, and much more.

Sorry guys but there will be no more "next big thing" anytime soon.

What we need is a new set of pro mirrorless cameras with 72mm sensors and huge lenses, this race to miniaturization is total nonsense, big sensors and big lenses is the future.

« Reply #38 on: March 04, 2014, 08:34 »
0
The 5D has always been totally overestimated, it's a camera of the past,

Funny, I have made my living with various versions of 5D for the last eight years... not bad by an overestimated camera :P

« Reply #39 on: March 04, 2014, 09:02 »
0
The 5D has always been totally overestimated, it's a camera of the past,

Funny, I have made my living with various versions of 5D for the last eight years... not bad by an overestimated camera :P

Me, too, though I'm on a 6D now. But I think he's right about the first and second versions now being easily surpassed. That doesn't mean they can't take exceptional pictures but the newer cameras are more capable all-rounders,  particularly in difficult conditions, and have some handy additional functions (I loved automatic sensor cleaning when I went from the 5D to the 5DII, I really like the high ISO performance and GPS function on the 6D).

« Reply #40 on: March 04, 2014, 09:47 »
0
I didn't say Cell Phones were threatened into becoming obsolete, I said Pocket Cameras. Just in case there was some confusion. Two different animals. It's not about photo buyers, it's about image quality and availability.

Nah, no argument with subject... your points are right on target for the discussion.

I don't say ignore cell phones or the trend or the market. If people are buying tiny, fuzzy, crappy, photos... go make some and sell them. Go with the flow = follow the money.

What I'm saying is, Cell phones will not REPLACE or "rival" DSLRs for many reasons. Other people have pointed out quality, image size, shutter lag, lens, sensors and a bunch more. The original message says may rival DSLRs and another one a couple weeks ago says "will make DSLRs obsolete".

I'm speaking about cameras not sales or marketing. The original article had nothing to do with Microstock sales, it was about consumers.

I'm looking at technology for producing high quality images. Does that explain my viewpoint better.

"Pocket cameras are rapidly becoming a thing of the past, because of cameras in phones."

I encourage everyone to dump their bulky, outdated, DSLRs and get one of these great little camera phones. Please, do it as soon as possible. (See Ya!)   ;)

Well, this begs an extended conversation. Do buyers care about what an image is shot with and do they even know better? (other stuff here)
While I'm not intending to steal the thread this discussion grows in several directions.  This is to say that even if smart phones do not/cannot completely replace DSLR's they are a major threat to us unless we get on board and start shooting/uploading content as time and technology evolves.

Hi UnclePete,

I was more responding to the "idea" that your post sparked, not directly you. My key point is that "do buyers really scrutinize an image for quality? Some maybe do. 

Uncle Pete

« Reply #41 on: March 04, 2014, 10:06 »
0
Sorry to hack out all the long winded quotes (guilty as charged)

Yes I'd agree. Some people just want their photo and that's good for a website or small ad. Some people want a big, high quality image for printing. That's also good.

Smartphone "rivaling" DSLR? HA! And the other article said DSLRs are obsolete and will be replaced by smart phones. I think not.  :)

You are correct, it depends on the buyer and final use. I'm thinking in commercial terms and someone else, like the article is speaking in consumer terms?

I'm thinking of what a camera is capable of doing, a cell phone, takes snapshots. A DSLR, well the options are immensely larger and more varied.

That's why I originally added that pocket cameras were what's going to be rivaled (or already have been surpassed) by phone cameras. And pocket P&S cameras are soon going to be pretty much a thing of the past. There's no need or demand, because they don't offer anything in the way of better photos or price.

For the others, true Sony has always been interested in innovation and creativity. Remember Betamax? El cassette? How about Minidisc? I owned a Mavica (recorded to floppy discs for those of you who don't know or remember) I loved it! Really cool Sony product!

Sony generally also make some pretty good quality products and doesn't just dump hype onto the market. You pay for what you get, but it's GOOD! So they are the most likely to fight their way into the dominance by Canon and Nikon. In my opinion.

So the sooner people stop buying large sensor, large cameras, and start depend on their phone for their photos. The better it will be for us to not have new "professionals" that just got a camera for Christmas or their Birthday. That's my positive view of this.

http://www.youtube.com/user/MWACattack


Hi UnclePete,

I was more responding to the "idea" that your post sparked, not directly you. My key point is that "do buyers really scrutinize an image for quality? Some maybe do.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
2343 Views
Last post August 27, 2008, 15:30
by News Feed
12 Replies
5936 Views
Last post August 28, 2008, 23:25
by RH
4 Replies
3049 Views
Last post January 22, 2009, 16:45
by leaf
0 Replies
1271 Views
Last post January 04, 2012, 06:50
by rubyroo
26 Replies
10478 Views
Last post April 08, 2017, 04:58
by dragonblade

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle