DSLRs and P&S both dying off?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, Apr 6, 2010.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    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/
    RichA, Apr 6, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    On Mon, 5 Apr 2010 18:47:56 -0700 (PDT), 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/



    Thom Hogan makes the cardinal error of confusing the effects of a
    recession with a paradigm shift in camera buying habits. He was
    highly credible as a technical expert on Nikon equipment, but he's
    losing credibility now that success has gone to his head and he is
    straying into areas that he knows nothing about. If he isn't careful,
    he's in danger of becoming another Ken Rockwell.

    The alleged "success" of Micro Four Thirds and other mirrorless
    large-sensor cameras is a feature of the market in only one country,
    and that is Japan. Sales of "mirrorless DSLRS" are currently as high
    as 30% of the non P&S market. But that success is not replicated
    elsewhere. In Europe, sales are a much lower proportion of the market
    and in North America, they are well below 5%.

    So unless you live in Japan, the mirrorless large-sensor camera is
    still a fairly insignificant part of the market. Even if some growth
    in North American sales is yet to come, it's far too soon to be
    signalling the demise of the DSLR.

    However, there is some truth in the idea that most DSLR buyers have no
    need of a DSLR. But we didn't need Thom Hogan to tell us that; there
    is a very long history of people buying cameras that are far better
    than their need and/or ability would indicate.
    Bruce, Apr 6, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 12:14:27 +0100, Bruce <> wrote:

    > there is a very long history of people buying cameras that are far
    > better than their need and/or ability would indicate.


    You have that bass-ackward, as usual. A person with talent can create award
    winners with any camera. ANY camera. It's those that require relentless
    crutches and the forgiveness of RAW, fast auto-focusing, programmed
    exposure modes, and cropping from large pixel-counts who have to always try
    to recover from their incessant snapshot disasters. For them no camera will
    ever be good enough, because they themselves can never be good enough. It's
    that amazingly simple you stupid ****. You forget, we've all seen your own
    incessant [SI] disasters. Still looking for that "talent mode" on any
    camera, are you? Of course you are. If only you could buy one with that
    much sought-after feature, then the viewers of your crapshot "photography"
    would be eternally grateful.
    Outing Trolls is FUN!, Apr 6, 2010
    #3
  4. RichA

    Chris H Guest

    In message <>, Outing Trolls
    is FUN! <> writes
    >On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 12:14:27 +0100, Bruce <> wrote:
    >
    >> there is a very long history of people buying cameras that are far
    >> better than their need and/or ability would indicate.

    >
    >You have that bass-ackward, as usual. A person with talent can create award
    >winners with any camera. ANY camera.


    That is not true. Some very talented photographers who can see good
    pictures (i.e. composition) may not be able to use the equipment to get
    a good picture. You need the skill to be able to use the tools as well
    as the creativity as a photographer.

    It is possible to take pictures now that were just not possible in the
    past.


    --
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
    \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
    Chris H, Apr 6, 2010
    #4
  5. RichA

    Ofnuts Guest

    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. 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.

    --
    Bertrand
    Ofnuts, Apr 6, 2010
    #5
  6. RichA

    Chris H Guest

    In message <4bbb42ed$0$30031$>, Ofnuts
    <> 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.

    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.

    >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.


    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"


    --
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
    \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
    Chris H, Apr 6, 2010
    #6
  7. RichA

    Ofnuts Guest

    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
    Ofnuts, Apr 7, 2010
    #7
  8. RichA

    Chris H Guest

    In message <>, Neil
    Harrington <> writes
    >
    >"Chris H" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> In message <4bbb42ed$0$30031$>, Ofnuts
    >> <> 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 /\/\/\/\/
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
    Chris H, Apr 7, 2010
    #8
  9. RichA

    Chris H Guest

    In message <>, Neil
    Harrington <> writes
    >
    >"Chris H" <> 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 /\/\/\/\/
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
    Chris H, Apr 7, 2010
    #9
  10. RichA

    Chris H Guest

    In message <>, Neil
    Harrington <> writes
    >Chris H wrote:
    >> In message <>, Neil
    >> Harrington <> writes
    >>>
    >>> "Chris H" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> In message <4bbb42ed$0$30031$>, Ofnuts
    >>>> <> 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.

    >
    >Well, that's interesting.


    And you can see the standard (or lack of) of those pictures.... but they
    are "good enough" for what they want.

    >> 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)

    >
    >I'm sure you're right about that. My great-nephews and -nieces all have cell
    >phones and I don't believe even one of them owns a P&S.


    It is mainly the older generation who still need a son/daughter to set
    up their phone for them who do not even know it has a camera that are
    still buying P&S but this is a diminishing market.

    I would be surprised if many people under 50 buy P&S these days. At
    least not the low-mid range ones.

    --
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
    \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
    Chris H, Apr 7, 2010
    #10
  11. RichA

    Ofnuts Guest

    On 07/04/2010 19:59, Neil Harrington wrote:
    > 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?


    See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeiss_formula>. The idea is that a
    good eyesight won't distinguish details smaller than 1/1780 of the
    diagonal of a picture looked at from a distance sufficient to see it in
    full in one glance.

    --
    Bertrand
    Ofnuts, Apr 7, 2010
    #11
  12. RichA

    Chris H Guest

    In message <>, Neil
    Harrington <> writes
    >> I would be surprised if many people under 50 buy P&S these days. At
    >> least not the low-mid range ones.

    >
    >I don't know. My nephew (early 40s) has a little Canon, shirt pocket size,
    >and his phone is a Blackberry. Do Blackberrys have cameras too? (Apparently
    >they have everything else, but my ignorance of cell phones is pretty
    >complete.)


    No idea. Probably it has. Almost impossible to find one without these
    days. I still keep a Nokia 6210 as I sometimes need a phone without a
    camera to visit some customers

    >My newest cell phone has a camera, a whopping 0.3 megapixels.


    Then it is old... it is difficult to find one with less than 5MP. Flash
    and light for video.


    --
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
    \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
    Chris H, Apr 7, 2010
    #12
  13. RichA

    Jeff R. Guest

    "Rich" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    > I agree, but I hate cellphones, blackberries, iphones, etc. The people
    > glued to them are frigging zombies.


    A certifiably stupid justification for hate.

    An excellent indication - however - of *credibility*.
    Good to know for the future.
    And the past.

    --
    Jeff R.
    Jeff R., Apr 8, 2010
    #13
  14. RichA

    Will T Guest

    On Wed, 7 Apr 2010 12:26:12 -0400, "Neil Harrington" <>
    wrote:

    >
    >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.
    >


    You must be some kind of snapshooter. When I am documenting many unique
    species in the wild, their unique behavior is what sometimes helps to
    define them as a unique species. This cannot often be recorded in simple
    still images. CD-quality stereo audio-recording is also an asset to the
    professional nature photographer.

    Get out much? No, of course not. You're just another pathetic armchair
    photographer troll of usenet. You just proved it.
    Will T, Apr 8, 2010
    #14
  15. RichA

    Rich Guest

    On Apr 7, 8:17 pm, "Jeff R." <> wrote:
    > "Rich" <> wrote in message
    >
    > news:...
    >
    > > I agree, but I hate cellphones, blackberries, iphones, etc.  The people
    > > glued to them are frigging zombies.

    >
    > A certifiably stupid justification for hate.
    >


    Zombie.....careful not to bump into anyone on the street with your
    head down, glue to the screen...
    Rich, Apr 8, 2010
    #15
  16. RichA

    Jeff R. Guest

    "Rich" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    On Apr 7, 8:17 pm, "Jeff R." <> wrote:
    > "Rich" <> wrote in message
    >
    > news:...
    >
    > > >I agree, but I hate cellphones, blackberries, iphones, etc. The people
    > > >glued to them are frigging zombies.

    >
    > >A certifiably stupid justification for hate.

    >


    > Zombie.....careful not to bump into anyone on the street with your
    > head down, glue to the screen...


    Can you read?

    I'm calling you a dick since you appear to hate cellphones just because some
    people enthusiastically use them.

    Didn't even admit to owning one myself.

    I suppose you hate cars because some idiots drive way too fast.
    ....and alcohol because some people drink too much...
    ....and food because some folk are obese...
    ....and air because some people hyperventilate...
    ....and gravity because some folk insist on lying down...

    (it goes on)

    You confirm your idiocy with every keystroke.

    --
    JR
    Jeff R., Apr 8, 2010
    #16
  17. RichA

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Jeff R. <> wrote:
    >"Rich" <> wrote in message
    >On Apr 7, 8:17 pm, "Jeff R." <> wrote:
    >> "Rich" <> wrote in message


    >> > >I agree, but I hate cellphones, blackberries, iphones, etc. The people
    >> > >glued to them are frigging zombies.

    >>
    >> >A certifiably stupid justification for hate.

    >
    >> Zombie.....careful not to bump into anyone on the street with your
    >> head down, glue to the screen...

    >
    >Can you read?
    >
    >I'm calling you a dick since you appear to hate cellphones just because some
    >people enthusiastically use them.


    He hates anything that he doesn't want. Compact cameras are too cheap
    and better cameras are too expensive.

    --
    Ray Fischer
    Ray Fischer, Apr 8, 2010
    #17
  18. RichA

    Chris H Guest

    In message <>, Neil
    Harrington <> writes
    >
    >"Chris H" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> In message <>, Neil
    >> Harrington <> writes
    >>>> I would be surprised if many people under 50 buy P&S these days. At
    >>>> least not the low-mid range ones.
    >>>
    >>>I don't know. My nephew (early 40s) has a little Canon, shirt pocket size,
    >>>and his phone is a Blackberry. Do Blackberrys have cameras too?
    >>>(Apparently
    >>>they have everything else, but my ignorance of cell phones is pretty
    >>>complete.)

    >>
    >> No idea. Probably it has. Almost impossible to find one without these
    >> days. I still keep a Nokia 6210 as I sometimes need a phone without a
    >> camera to visit some customers
    >>
    >>>My newest cell phone has a camera, a whopping 0.3 megapixels.

    >>
    >> Then it is old... it is difficult to find one with less than 5MP. Flash
    >> and light for video.

    >
    >No, actually it's brand new, just got it before going down to Florida last
    >month. It's a Motorola W376g, on the TracFone system if you're familiar with
    >that. No flash, and no video that I'm aware of. Just this cheapo 640 x 480
    >camera.
    >
    >I'm amazed to see you speak of 5MP cameras in these phones. I realized mine
    >was exceptionally low res, but somewhere I got the idea that the bigger ones
    >were 1.3 MP or so.


    Most of the phones I can see in the UK are 3-6MP


    --
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
    \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
    Chris H, Apr 8, 2010
    #18
  19. In rec.photo.digital Chris H <> wrote:
    > In message <>, Neil
    > Harrington <> writes
    >>Chris H wrote:


    >>> 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)

    >>
    >>I'm sure you're right about that. My great-nephews and -nieces all have cell
    >>phones and I don't believe even one of them owns a P&S.


    > It is mainly the older generation who still need a son/daughter to set
    > up their phone for them who do not even know it has a camera that are
    > still buying P&S but this is a diminishing market.


    I was standing at a bus stop with an old couple the other day. I
    entered the bus stop code into my phone and the bus tracker web site
    told me when the next buses were really coming (as opposed to the
    fictional printed timetable). It's a free service. The old couple were
    amazed!

    They were even more amazed to discover that I was using exactly the
    same model of mobile phone as they had. They'd been having lots of
    trouble with theirs and asked my advice. They'd only had theirs for a
    few months and hadn't got the hang of it at all. Their first mobile
    phone you see.

    The crux of the problem seemed to be that it wouldn't turn on. It
    turned out that they didn't know where the on switch was. They'd never
    suspected that thing on top of the camera which didn't look like a
    button. It did have a little red circle on it, but their old eyes
    hadn't noticed that.

    I asked about the camera manual. "Oh, we don't read manuals!" they
    explained, rather like vegetarians explaining that they didn't eat
    meat.

    Funny thing was I was older than them :)

    --
    Chris Malcolm
    Chris Malcolm, Apr 10, 2010
    #19
  20. RichA

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Mon, 5 Apr 2010 18:47:56 -0700 (PDT), 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.

    Rich, what do you have against cellphone cameras? Criticizing a cellphone for
    having a camera is like criticizing a car for having a map light. If you don't
    need it, don't use it, but there are times whan it can come in handy.

    Bob
    Robert Coe, Apr 10, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Hugo Drax

    Photography is a dying field and will dissapear

    Hugo Drax, Feb 6, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    33
    Views:
    816
    Gordon Moat
    Feb 9, 2004
  2. =?iso-8859-1?Q?=B1?=

    MeatClod and His "Last Dying Gasp"

    =?iso-8859-1?Q?=B1?=, Jul 31, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    593
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?=B1?=
    Jul 31, 2004
  3. b
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    1,080
    Plato
    Apr 21, 2006
  4. =?Utf-8?B?TWljaw==?=

    Hibernate / shutdown both fail to turn PC off

    =?Utf-8?B?TWljaw==?=, Sep 27, 2007, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    558
    John Barnes
    Nov 2, 2007
  5. T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz

    swen dying off

    T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz, Mar 3, 2004, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    469
    T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz
    Mar 4, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page