Grim future for the camera makers?

Started Apr 27, 2013 | Discussions
digitallollygag
Regular MemberPosts: 286Gear list
Like?
Grim future for the camera makers?
Apr 27, 2013

For those of you who haven't read it yet, the posts about Apple and Canon from Thom Hogan's website are worth a read:

http://www.bythom.com/

Still, I wonder if some of the decline of "conventional" camera sales as opposed to smartphones is partly because of world economic conditions, or perhaps with people upgrading less what with the "diminishing returns" we're seeing in digital photography.

I see a tough road ahead for the established players (Canon, Nikon) and perhaps even with the m4/3 companies.  When I was in Las Vegas a few weeks ago I counted roughly 30 smartphones for every DSLR in use by the tourists.  Surely this hasn't escaped the notice of the execs at Canikon has it?

 digitallollygag's gear list:digitallollygag's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Olympus E-410 Nikon D5100 Nikon D100 Pentax Q +15 more
peevee1
Senior MemberPosts: 6,247Gear list
Like?
Re: Grim future for the camera makers?
In reply to digitallollygag, Apr 27, 2013

No doubt. I bet 2012 was the top for cameras, and a great culling has begun. There are still niches where phones cannot compete - superzoom and tough/underwater fixed lens cameras and interchengeable lens cameras.

Technologically, CDAF and on-sensor PDAF improve so fast, in 5-10 years there will be almost no new APS-C DSLRs/DLSTs - those dinosaurs will be left in FF for pros and fans of lugging heavy equipment, and all consumer interchangeable lens cameras will be APS-C and maybe m43 mirrorless.

1" and less MILCs do not make sense as 1" is easily possible in a superzoom 7x-10x camera with decently bright fixed lens (RX100 with EVF and longer zoom), and neither body nor AF interchangeable lenses become much smaller than m43. Although Nikon might persist for some years if they invest into f/2 zooms, 20x zooms, weather sealing etc, and not try to stay within constrains where they were beat by a pocket cam a year ago.

A stop or 1 1/3 EV low light etc improvement awaits all sensors (but especially small ones for cost reason) with multi-layer technology, removing 2/3 light loss on color filters.

Also, Nokia 808 demonstrated what is possible within a phone - a largish sensor with huge number of pixels (with hardware binning) and bright lens makes digital zoom even more viable than it is now. Some optical zoom is also possible in addition, and tough/underwater body, making tough camera niche disappearing too.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
gloaming
Contributing MemberPosts: 780
Like?
Re: Grim future for the camera makers?
In reply to peevee1, Apr 27, 2013

I would guess that something like 60% of all camera purchases are by people who would rather carry all the capability they ever squeeze out of their cameras in a smaller package called a cellphone.  The beauty is that, while they wait for feedback from their sent images, they can text someone else about meeting them for dinner.  What's not to like?  And who would want to text with a three pound door-stop slung around their neck or slapping against their hip bones or belly?

I expect to see the demise of two or three camera makers, or maybe some corporate mergers first...then their demise.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
SkiHound
Senior MemberPosts: 1,307
Like?
Re: Grim future for the camera makers?
In reply to digitallollygag, Apr 27, 2013

I think images posted on social networking sites like FB reflect current trends. I have tons of friends and friends of friends who post images of their dinner, pics of friends, pics of places they are at right now... Many of the images are technically very poor. But the normal users of that kind of media really don't care at all about what we call IQ, and they often don't seem to care much about basic things like exposure, much less composition. People may appreciate a really nice photo, but most folks don't really care very much about making them. It's mostly about documenting where they are and where they've been and sharing that with the friends. In that roll, cell phones largely make compact cameras superflous and just one more thing to buy and carry.

-- hide signature --

www.bjaphotos.smugmug.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Cailean Gallimore
Senior MemberPosts: 6,082
Like?
Re: Grim future for the camera makers?
In reply to digitallollygag, Apr 27, 2013

We have tourists in droves all year long, and I'm seeing many more people using phones, to take photographs than even a year ago. The writing is on the wall.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
frank-in-toronto
Senior MemberPosts: 1,009
Like?
Re: Grim future for the camera makers?
In reply to Cailean Gallimore, Apr 27, 2013

for sure, the p&s end will fade away.  and yes, sales of entry level dslrs and mirrorless will suffer too.  but the higher-end (enthusiast) will always be around.  the camera manufacturers most likely see the writing on the wall.  perhaps that's why FF have dropped in price.  perhaps that's why they're milking the temporary market for u43.  most likely, they will amalgamate.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MoreorLess
Senior MemberPosts: 3,005
Like?
Re: Grim future for the camera makers?
In reply to gloaming, Apr 27, 2013

gloaming wrote:

I would guess that something like 60% of all camera purchases are by people who would rather carry all the capability they ever squeeze out of their cameras in a smaller package called a cellphone.  The beauty is that, while they wait for feedback from their sent images, they can text someone else about meeting them for dinner.  What's not to like?  And who would want to text with a three pound door-stop slung around their neck or slapping against their hip bones or belly?

I expect to see the demise of two or three camera makers, or maybe some corporate mergers first...then their demise.

Really though I'd argue the market has already adjusted to this change, phone cameras largely replaced basic compacts by 2-3 years ago and even before that the margins on lower level compacts were much smaller.

The whole era when compacts really drove the market was IMHO a bit of a blip in the history of photography that was never going to last, since then the market has returned to something closer to the days of film with higher end users bringing in more profit.

I'd argue that todays market might if anything be a bit friendlier to multiple manifacturers if only because its more diverse. The era were compacts and DSLR were the only two options that everyone was shoehorned into is over and were now seeing a heck of alot of products between the two catering to smaller userbases. The overall pie might be a little smaller but its likely to be sliced many more ways than it was in the past.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
donaldsc
Senior MemberPosts: 1,684
Like?
Re: Grim future for the camera makers?
In reply to digitallollygag, Apr 27, 2013

In any group of people, there will be a significant number who feel that a large felt art painting over their plastic covered couch is great art and there is a limited number who appreciate good art.  I suggest that the same demographis applies to cameras.

-- hide signature --

Don

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Cosmo Not
Junior MemberPosts: 28
Like?
Re: Grim future for the camera makers?
In reply to gloaming, Apr 28, 2013

I would guess that something like 60% of all camera purchases are by people who would rather carry all the capability they ever squeeze out of their cameras in a smaller package called a cellphone.  The beauty is that, while they wait for feedback from their sent images, they can text someone else about meeting them for dinner.  What's not to like?  And who would want to text with a three pound door-stop slung around their neck or slapping against their hip bones or belly?

I expect to see the demise of two or three camera makers, or maybe some corporate mergers first...then their demise.

The people you describe are social addicts, not photographers. They are not taking sales away from DSLRs as those people would not have bought a legit DSLR in the first place. Anybody serious about photography will buy a DSLR regardless of their phone. Seperate markets.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
timo
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,500
Like?
Re: Grim future for the camera makers?
In reply to digitallollygag, Apr 28, 2013

You may be right about the impact on P&S users, but in fact I think a lot of people are now taking photos who would not have been taking them before at all, not even with a P&S. Don't forget, a few years ago Facebook, Instagram etc. didn't exist.

I don't know any DSLR user whose habits have been affected in any way by smartphones. I think they are utterly different devices used for quite different purposes, in most cases by different people.

Totally off-topic, I would like to know the camera usage habits of people after they have bought their their first DSLR or micro 4/3 - do they use it less after the novelty has worn off?  I think quite a few people may buy affordable DSLRs who wouldn't have in the past, and do not really engage with them for the long term. I can think of a few individuals personally.

-- hide signature --

tim

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PK24X36NOW
Contributing MemberPosts: 917Gear list
Like?
Re: Grim future for the camera makers?
In reply to digitallollygag, Apr 29, 2013

digitallollygag wrote:

For those of you who haven't read it yet, the posts about Apple and Canon from Thom Hogan's website are worth a read:

http://www.bythom.com/

Still, I wonder if some of the decline of "conventional" camera sales as opposed to smartphones is partly because of world economic conditions, or perhaps with people upgrading less what with the "diminishing returns" we're seeing in digital photography.

I see a tough road ahead for the established players (Canon, Nikon) and perhaps even with the m4/3 companies.  When I was in Las Vegas a few weeks ago I counted roughly 30 smartphones for every DSLR in use by the tourists.  Surely this hasn't escaped the notice of the execs at Canikon has it?

The decline in sales of "conventional" cameras has to do with market saturation and diminishing returns as respects upgrades to existing equipment, and is totally unrelated to smart phone sales. Smart phones are communication devices, they aren't cameras. Their built in camera functions will never replace dSLR cameras, because they simply aren't the right tool for photography, and will never match the quality of bigger sensors. For social media snaps and such, sure they'll see heavy usage - so what. Try to photograph something that is in motion with your smartphone "camera," and you'll rarely get the shot you were looking for, since you have to wait for the "smart"PHONE to get around to actually taking the picture (by which point the "moment" has passed).

New flash - I have a smart phone, and I didn't buy it to replace my dSLR camera and lenses, or even to replace any meaningful portion of the things I would use my dSLR camera and lenses for. I bought it to replace my old, damaged cell phone (mainly), and to use as...wait for it...a phone (and a mobile internet access device). When I use the camera "feature," I am instantly reminded of how poor a tool a smartphone is for taking pictures.

 PK24X36NOW's gear list:PK24X36NOW's gear list
Nikon D810
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rhlpetrus
Forum ProPosts: 23,507Gear list
Like?
More consumers every year
In reply to digitallollygag, Apr 29, 2013

Well, I think a decent m,arket for good cameras will always be there, smartphones are ok, but try to shoot anything with just a small amount of backlight and the results are disastrous.

It'll be smartphones, ML cameras at m43/aps-c sized sensors and dlsrs for some time for FF, then eventually all ML as well. But I see a good 10-20 million/year IL camera market, don't forget people in China, India and my country (Brazil) are getting richer every year, they also want cameras. Those 3 countries, then other Asia and later Africa make for 3/4+ of the world population or over 7 billion. 20 million serious cameras/year look like an easy target IMO.

-- hide signature --

Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/
Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)

 rhlpetrus's gear list:rhlpetrus's gear list
Nikon 1 V1 Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 Nikkor 10mm f/2.8 Nikon AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
digitallollygag
Regular MemberPosts: 286Gear list
Like?
Re: Grim future for the camera makers?
In reply to PK24X36NOW, Apr 30, 2013

PK24X36NOW wrote:

digitallollygag wrote:

For those of you who haven't read it yet, the posts about Apple and Canon from Thom Hogan's website are worth a read:

http://www.bythom.com/

Still, I wonder if some of the decline of "conventional" camera sales as opposed to smartphones is partly because of world economic conditions, or perhaps with people upgrading less what with the "diminishing returns" we're seeing in digital photography.

I see a tough road ahead for the established players (Canon, Nikon) and perhaps even with the m4/3 companies.  When I was in Las Vegas a few weeks ago I counted roughly 30 smartphones for every DSLR in use by the tourists.  Surely this hasn't escaped the notice of the execs at Canikon has it?

The decline in sales of "conventional" cameras has to do with market saturation and diminishing returns as respects upgrades to existing equipment, and is totally unrelated to smart phone sales. Smart phones are communication devices, they aren't cameras. Their built in camera functions will never replace dSLR cameras, because they simply aren't the right tool for photography, and will never match the quality of bigger sensors. For social media snaps and such, sure they'll see heavy usage - so what. Try to photograph something that is in motion with your smartphone "camera," and you'll rarely get the shot you were looking for, since you have to wait for the "smart"PHONE to get around to actually taking the picture (by which point the "moment" has passed).

New flash - I have a smart phone, and I didn't buy it to replace my dSLR camera and lenses, or even to replace any meaningful portion of the things I would use my dSLR camera and lenses for. I bought it to replace my old, damaged cell phone (mainly), and to use as...wait for it...a phone (and a mobile internet access device). When I use the camera "feature," I am instantly reminded of how poor a tool a smartphone is for taking pictures.

While you and I agree smartphones simply aren't the right tool for photography, there is a tidal wave of young people worldwide who regard it as the ONLY tool for photography.  In addition, there are folks like my wife who won't even pick up the simplest point-and-shoot camera, but now that she has an iPhone, she has suddenly discovered "photography".  Eeek!  I bought her a Canon S95 for Christmas a couple of years ago, and she was immediately turned off to the fact she had to download a 100+ page instruction manual!  I now use that camera when I don't want to haul the D80 or the D5100 around, otherwise it would collect dust.

I recently went into a local store to look at cameras and they informed me they no longer stock ANY point-and-shoot OR DSLR cameras.  When I asked the pimply-faced store associate why, he immediately reached into his pocket for his Samsung Galaxy and replied, "This is why".  That kind of statement should strike fear into the hearts of the Canon and Nikon executives.

We who prize minimal fractional-second shutter lag, full-manual exposure control capability, 4-to-8fps bursts, and big enlargements have seen the light, and it definitely isn't with smartphones.  But we are now a minority.  Whose fault is this?  It is the fault of the established camera companies who are not promoting the value and features in their products, and that is where I completely agree with Thom Hogan.

 digitallollygag's gear list:digitallollygag's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Olympus E-410 Nikon D5100 Nikon D100 Pentax Q +15 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Roger99
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,335
Like?
Re: Grim future for the camera makers?
In reply to digitallollygag, Apr 30, 2013

Really all this was inevitable.  For those who only need to snap smart phones are a good option.  They fill the slot that the Kodak Instamatic filled in film days.  A (sometimes) fair quality snapshot for the memory alone.   Anyone who wants to make more serious images with real control will always go for more serious kit.  A camera phone is never going to give you good depth of field control for example and it is going to be some time yet until there are decent mass produced sensors for these little disposables.  We have seen in many ways a false market through the introduction of digital cameras that had to even out eventually as most people realized that expensive cameras weren't going to last them as long as they thought.  Unless they were going to get picture serious, $1500 on a camera every two or three years can be only seen as ridiculous.  Now that the excitement of digital has died down we will see things more evenly but by no means will we see mobiles take over completely.  They will be as ubiquitous as Instamatics but like Instamatics will fill completely different niches.  Real photography will always need real cameras.

digitallollygag wrote:

For those of you who haven't read it yet, the posts about Apple and Canon from Thom Hogan's website are worth a read:

http://www.bythom.com/

Still, I wonder if some of the decline of "conventional" camera sales as opposed to smartphones is partly because of world economic conditions, or perhaps with people upgrading less what with the "diminishing returns" we're seeing in digital photography.

I see a tough road ahead for the established players (Canon, Nikon) and perhaps even with the m4/3 companies.  When I was in Las Vegas a few weeks ago I counted roughly 30 smartphones for every DSLR in use by the tourists.  Surely this hasn't escaped the notice of the execs at Canikon has it?

-- hide signature --

The one serious conviction one should hold is that nothing should be taken too seriously.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain an idea without necessarily accepting it. -Aristotle
..oh, and I see by the lack of responses that I am right yet again.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jon404
Senior MemberPosts: 1,804
Like?
Re: Grim future for the camera makers?
In reply to digitallollygag, Apr 30, 2013

Retired from Qualcomm 3 years ago... the company that designs the chips that go in smartphones. I can tell you -- for an absolute fact -- that if Samsung or LG or Apple came to us with a request for a fully-featured smartphone camera... the chip support... it would be done, and done fast. The software-engineering side moves very, very rapidly. I doubt that camera makers like Nikon and Canon have any comprehension -- of how fast the chip-based 'submarine technology' is coming up at them, like a hungry shark at a fat and lazy swimmer.

So much, of course, is software. And, basically trivial to make a 'digital darkroom app' to let out the user's creative side on whatever passes for RAW on a smartphone. Probably apps out there already; I haven't kept up. Beyond that, wouldn't be hard to build in a radio-wireless trigger for external flash... and, watch out, suddenly you've got a VERY portable 'pro' product. Wedding candids, anyone?

-- hide signature --

--

Jonathon Donahue -- author, 'Drawing for Money' and 'Self-Publishing Secrets', at http://Jon404.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lance B
Forum ProPosts: 27,372Gear list
Like?
Re: Grim future for the camera makers?
In reply to Cosmo Not, Apr 30, 2013

Cosmo Not wrote:

I would guess that something like 60% of all camera purchases are by people who would rather carry all the capability they ever squeeze out of their cameras in a smaller package called a cellphone.  The beauty is that, while they wait for feedback from their sent images, they can text someone else about meeting them for dinner.  What's not to like?  And who would want to text with a three pound door-stop slung around their neck or slapping against their hip bones or belly?

I expect to see the demise of two or three camera makers, or maybe some corporate mergers first...then their demise.

The people you describe are social addicts, not photographers. They are not taking sales away from DSLRs as those people would not have bought a legit DSLR in the first place. Anybody serious about photography will buy a DSLR regardless of their phone. Seperate markets.

Exactly.

 Lance B's gear list:Lance B's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lance B
Forum ProPosts: 27,372Gear list
Like?
Re: Grim future for the camera makers?
In reply to Cailean Gallimore, Apr 30, 2013

Cailean Gallimore wrote:

We have tourists in droves all year long, and I'm seeing many more people using phones, to take photographs than even a year ago. The writing is on the wall.

LOL. I think you're mixing up a few things here.

They are using cell phones now because previously those same people wouldn't have even bothered with a camera beacuse they are too lazy to carry one round with them. Now they have a cell phone, which their dreary little lives dictate they cannot do without, and so they now take a cursory photo just so as they can brag to their social group.They ooh and aah about how good the result is and it is those same lazy people will say, "why do I need a DSLR when I can get this great result" showing some tiny image on a cell phone which has been taken in good light under optimum conditions.

The thing is, there are so many that aren't so lazy and go the extra yards to get the ultimate best photo quality that their money can buy and decide to "lug around" a DSLR to accomplish that end. Most people are lazy, need convenience and need thei social media hit and that is why cell phone are so popular.

 Lance B's gear list:Lance B's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ulric
Senior MemberPosts: 2,629Gear list
Like?
Re: Grim future for the camera makers?
In reply to timo, Apr 30, 2013

timo wrote:

You may be right about the impact on P&S users, but in fact I think a lot of people are now taking photos who would not have been taking them before at all, not even with a P&S. Don't forget, a few years ago Facebook, Instagram etc. didn't exist.

I don't know any DSLR user whose habits have been affected in any way by smartphones. I think they are utterly different devices used for quite different purposes, in most cases by different people.

Totally off-topic, I would like to know the camera usage habits of people after they have bought their their first DSLR or micro 4/3 - do they use it less after the novelty has worn off?  I think quite a few people may buy affordable DSLRs who wouldn't have in the past, and do not really engage with them for the long term. I can think of a few individuals personally.

-- hide signature --

tim

I bought an M43 camera, then a bunch of lenses, then a second M43 body last year to replace my old film SLRs, but what they also replaced was the camera in my phone. The small size allows me to carry a real camera all the time, everywhere and use it for virtually all my photography. I looked at my phone and the newest photo is from 11 days ago, the second newest 13 days, then 21 days. Before, I used it all the time.

 Ulric's gear list:Ulric's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
AndraM
Regular MemberPosts: 204Gear list
Like?
Re: Grim future for the camera makers?
In reply to frank-in-toronto, Apr 30, 2013

Admit it, you just wrote that comment so you could use the word "amalgamate."

 AndraM's gear list:AndraM's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Tokina AT-X Pro 100mm f/2.8 Macro +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tex
tex
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,321Gear list
Like?
Thom's articles on this are great, but....
In reply to digitallollygag, Apr 30, 2013

(I should also say his DX/FX articles are REALLY great...)

The "but" is---sort of touched on by someone above, but not really---is that Thom seems as clueless as the camera companies.  He suggests a marketing approach for compact cameras along the lines of: "Daddy, why are your camera pix so much better than my phone pix?".

The problem here is that he assumes that a very high majority of people can actually tell the difference between a phone photo and a camera photo, quality wise, without being walked through it step by step----a laborious process best done in a classroom, not a marketing campaign.  Let's use an example, my dad.  He couldn't tell the difference between pix from different devices.  In fact, he couldn't tell the difference between between a Monet, Pisarro, or early Renoir, or any of a huge number of similar cases of artist' works over the centuries, even if the paintings came alive and jumped down off the walls and started to b*tch slap him.  In fact, they'd kill him before he could reliably tell the difference.

Well, he must be quite the dunce, you say.  Actually, he's a highly educated 1%-er(& I am not one!!!) who has been either Chairman or President or CEO of 5 Fortune 500 companies, has a house full of pretty decent antiques (good advice) and a few nice paintings (more advice), along with some bad ones (very bad advice).  He has (maybe is still serving?) on the board---& has also been president of the board--for a museum in one of the U.S.'s second tier major cities.

So, if he can't tell the difference, how does Thom (or the camera companies) expect Joe Schmoe or Sally Average to tell the difference?  Not only can't they, they don't really want to or care once you show them.  It's a picture of their kids at rec league soccer.  It's a pic of them at a bar after they're half-lit.  It's a pic of them smiling in front of (insert famous slightly OOF landmark---and it doesn't matter that it's slightly OOF because the picture is not about the landmark!).

Face it:  for most daily pic taking applications, the phone is the best way to go now.  It's small, you got it with you, and it does so many other things that are dead useful.  Even where I work, in a museum, the conservation people and the registrars are using phones for conditioning and reference photography (even these trained professionals, with far more discerning eyes than the vast majority of people, can't really tell much difference from better photography...). I'm about to get my 1st smartphone, and it will be the new Samsung Galaxy S4.  And that will be plenty of camera for my happy snaps and 99% of the photos I'd want to take of my family, & I'm not even getting it for the camera part.

And that's not because I can't tell the difference---I've now got many thousands of $$ invested in cameras from mirrorless through FF to multiple film MF to 4x5 LF, accessories for them, and studio and portable lighting, multiple cases and/or carrying bags/belts.  I'm a trained artist whose education goes through grad school.  I've been a gallery director at two places, an art professor, had shows and gotten grants, and now work in a major museum. I've been going to museums since I could walk, and after my immediate family art is what I care about the most in the world. But I almost never pull that gear out for my casual snaps (my NEX7 has been doing this of late, but once I have the phone....)---I'm not Sally Mann, whose family shots were also her pro work.

I say: hooray for these phones.  It's what we've needed all along.  The death of all these tiny little interchangeable craptastic cameras in their myriad forms and colors can't come fast enough.  Then let's have the camera companies/divisions re-group and focus on photographic instruments of a higher order.  This will mean some will die off or decide it's not worth the candle.  Oh, well.  They're companies, and companies go bust or change for sundry economic reasons(and bad decision making/strategies) all the time.  Kodak moment, anyone?  For us enthusiasts, semi pros, artists, and commercial pros, this will ultimately be a good thing.  Or do you want the camera companies/divisions to continue to divide their resources from their best products to a bunch of low order goofy consumer junk that is headed to the graveyard at light speed?

-- hide signature --

tex_andrews
"Photography is the product of complete alienation" Marcel Proust
"I would like to see photography make people despise painting until something else will make photography unbearable." Marcel Duchamp

 tex's gear list:tex's gear list
Sony Alpha 7R Pentax 645Z Tamron AF 28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) Rokinon T-S 24mm 1:3.5 ED AS UMC +15 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads