LaForet: Dedicated Cameras are Coming to an End for all but

I am sharing this on every photo forum I am a member of as we are either working or hobbyist photographer who have probably bought a mirrorless/SLR camera. I find it a fun topic to talk about, assuming you aren't selling these still cameras.

Vincent LaForet was the first to promote the coming of HD video onto SLRs making his thoughts on the ongoing decline of still cameras have weight.

Without further adieu read this blog post below.

http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2015/02/ ... -but-pros/

Note to Vincent: Get someone to proof read for you.

This video below expounds LaForet's thoughts with some rounded numbers

http://youtu.be/bfCJDIf-NeA

Here are some more precise numbers to supplement the blog and video.

http://lensvid.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Infographic-1920-1200-ver-2-0.jpg

Source: http://lensvid.com/gear/lensvid-exclusi ... y-in-2013/

Production, Shipment of Digital Still Cameras  in 2014

42.8 million - still cameras covering point & shoots, mirrorless and SLRs
- 29.28 million point & shoots
- 3.17 million mirrorless
- 10.32 million SLRs

Production, Shipment of Digital Still Cameras  in 2013

61.0 million - still cameras covering point & shoots, mirrorless and SLRs
- 44.19 million point & shoots
- 3.18 million mirrorless
- 13.64 million SLRs

Production, Shipment of Interchangeable Lenses in 2014

22.3 million lenses covering crop & full frame
- 5.7 million full frame lenses
- 16.6 million crop lenses

Production, Shipment of Interchangeable Lenses in 2013

25.88 million22.3 million lenses covering crop & full frame
- 6.01 million full frame lenses
- 19.87 million crop lenses

vs

1.3 billion smartphones shipped in 2014

Of which 1 billion are Android and 193 million are iPhones

Makes me wish I used all the money I spent on Canon & Apple gear went into Apple stock at $7.00/share in 2002.

What makes the smartphone market so big is that a sizeable chunk of smartphone users are on contract so they get upgraded phones every 12, 24 or 36 months. These upgrades are "pushed" on them rather than us working/hobbyist photographers "pulling" these upgrades with our still cameras.

I also think just like the PC shipping figures still cameras are either abandoned in favor of smartphones/tablets or upgraded based on need (the subject they're photographing needs XYZ feature or the camera broken down and isn't worth repairing).

Less than 1% of those buying a still camera of any sort buys a SLR. The 1% of the 1% of SLR buyers buys a double grip pro body like a Canon 1D X or Nikon D4S.

It puts into perspective where/who we are today. Doesn't it?

With this in mind do you find yourself thinking perhaps the next upgrade you will skip all together?

Considering some compacts, even phones maybe, can shoot 4K video it is hardly surprising that the 1Dc was not selling at 12k. What do games console makers do? Sell the console cheap and make a tonne of money on the games. Likewise maybe C,N,S could be doing the same with camera bodies to sell lenses?

I thought I'd seen this before, here's my reply as posted on BPN:

Honestly, I can't see this happening in the time frame he proposes("in the next few years"). Here's my reasoning:

1) Physics is physics, there's no way the glass you can pack into a smartphone will equal the image quality of a Nikkor 800 f/5.6 VR, etc..

2) Ditto for sensors.

3) Even if the smartphones close up the gap in IQ a little there will still be lots of non-professional enthusiasts that will be wiling to come off the hip for the ultimate in image quality.

I'm not knocking camera phones, it's just that they're not there yet and unless there's a quantum leap in electronics and optics they won't be there in "the next few years". IMHO... I use my iPhone a lot for pictures, it's always in my pocket. But the IQ doesn't compare to my Nikon gear and, as an amateur enthusiast, that's what's important to me.

I just got back from a trip to Yellowstone, it was really convenient to shoot with the iPhone for group shots and some panos and incredibly easy to share them but the Nikons were the go-to rig for shots I really want to remember and print. Not to mention that most of those go-to shots I never could have gotten with the iPhone.

My $.02/worth, YMMV.

Best,
Bill

It's an odd statement as I'd argue that photography as a serious hobby has never been more popular.   Why would a mother who likes to photograph her child playing soccer suddenly switch to a smartphone?   Or a retiring baby boomer who likes wildlife?   Or the countless other reasons over the last 15 years that people have bought a DSLR over a point & shoot.   That's not suddenly going to disappear.   What has disappeared is the growth in DSLR sales as a lot of people buy a camera and expect it to last them 10-15 years.   The camera companies have to adjust accordingly or do a better job motivating the consumer to upgrade.

I don't put much weight behind what Mr. (I’ve been a photographer for 25 years now. I learned on black and white film and transferred to C-41 and then Chrome E-6.  I was classically trained in a black and white darkroom and in color reversal and cibachrome printing. I was also one of the first staff photographers at The New York Times to shoot with then high-end digital cameras in 1999 – the $22,000 Canon D2000s) is saying and for this reason. The replacement of "today's" dslr's by "today's" internet connected devices is only important for specific groups of people, most of whom are not photographers but are people who thrive on social networks and just happen to take pictures. To think just because you can instantly upload a picture to facebook, twitter, instagram, or g+ will override quality of an image is just a, to put it mildly, very non-photographer thing for Mr. (I’ve been a photographer for 25 years now) to say. He knows that. What he doesn't say is he now considers social media more important than the creative process of being a photographer. To bad, it will be his loss. But I'm sure his social media followers will grow. That should tell you everything you need to know about what is really important to Mr. (I’ve been a photographer for 25 years now.)

You gotta think of statistics as a lie at best. They never give you the whole truth and can often mislead greatly, especially if manipulated. The problem is they focus in so close on one aspect that they miss the main facts and truth sometimes completely. Some of the best quarterbacks ever for example might have poor statistics, but in fact they may have been better than say Montana. One has to take into account the front line, coaches, moral of the team and a plethora of other factors. But we eat them up, we so want divisive answers. Personally, my mark IV is going strong still and did not suffer the two year purge. Because it's just as good as most other cameras(that's changed recently though now). I did not upgrade. I'm sure for others it has been the same so no mystery that still slr digital sales went down. Doesn't mean the venue is disappearing.

And pro images will take pro equipment.  As far as end quality goes, pro lens and sensors and bodies will give better images always than a camera phone because whatever software might improve n cell phone use can also be developed for pro cameras if desired. True enough there's a definite place for the camera phone in every serious photogs pocket, and as far as content that can do as well as pro gear, but not for serious quality and versatility .....if it even is possible, it will be a long ways off. I thought te article was mixing up two very different end uses for cameras. They are different markets.

Paul

Most seems to have forgot that most of the time, image quality is not important in most of the photographs to most people in the world. I think that's what "The Age of the Standalone Still Camera is Coming to an End for all but PROS" is saying. But I would add "photo-enthusiasts" after "pros" though.

I can't imagine walking around shooting birds with my phone lol