Slim Pickins: I disagree that it's "too hard" or "too confusing" for people. It's all about convenience. And since nearly everyone now has a phone with at least some form of camera and they are going to use it instead of carrying around a separate P&S so it makes sense people would be buying less dedicated units. Especially as the phone cameras become more and more capable. That is probably the biggest factor.
Also as others have pointed out - phones and the plans to operate them are anything but cheap. The 99% don't want to make a separate investment to basically do the exact same thing. It's redundant and I think that is starting to show.
Personally speaking I love diving into a new manual, a new menu system, and learning all the intricacies, etc. because I like the so called technical side as well. It's weird seeing people complain that anything that requires more than a swipe or tap as 'too hard'. Smart phones - never has there been a more inappropriate name. (snark)
If I just met you on the street and you wanted to show me some pics of your new dog/kid/boat what would you do?
The smartphone is not just a photo-taker, it's a photo-sharer.
Don't assume it's just the taking the photo part that's hard or confusing, its afterwards where it becomes hard work. Anyone who's transferred photos from a camera or SD card to a computer knows it's can be a pita to get the photos off their camera to show other people to view either on their own portable pocket display to someone standing right next them or send to someone else's portable or desktop display 100 miles away.
rsf3127: Last year my wife, her mother and her siter went on a tour to Europe. They took their smartphones and I lend her my NEX-5N (set to auto mode, teached her how to charge the battery and told not to press any button, except on-off and the shutter).99% of the pictures were taken with the smartphone, even if she said that the 1% that she took with the camera was of far higher quality.
Easy answer - because it was easier to look at, select and show each other the pics they just took on their phones.
Jonath: I haven't read the full article, only this summary on DPR (sorry), but for me the big issue here is printing, or lack of. Before digital all 'snaps' (a polite way of referring to consumer photographs) had to be printed if you wanted to look at and share them with others, even in the early digital age they were printed too. One consequence of the smartphone and tablet (let's face it loads of people walk around taking picture and videos with their tablets) is the decline of printing, these devices are not only convenient for taking pictures, but also viewing / sharing them, with no, zero, zilch effort. No downloading, memory card issues or the like. Can the normal camera ever compete with this? Add in iCloud and sync across all devices and this for me is what is killing cameras for the public, I only need one device to shoot and view my pictures, I can then see them wherever or whenever I want.
Jonath, all the sharing and viewing and uploading you mention is exactly what cameras should have been doing long before even before the iPhone came along. The camera makers were already ceding this territory to people taking and sharing pics with their Nokias and Motorola dumb phones.
Apple simply added a phone and connectivity along with a basic camera to their MP3 players.
Nikon and Canon could have just as simply come from the other direction and added a phone and connectivity along with a basic MP3 player to their cameras.
But they never did. Still don't.
anthony mazzeri: I think the DxO ONE is showing the most promise. Rather than fighting the phone camera onslught, they have decided to ride it. Which is something I always expected for years from the DSLR makers to embrace by releasing a 'blank' DSLR model or even a compact with an iPod dock to use an iPhone as the full back/LCD/controls. Pretty much basically what speaker/stereo companies realized they should be doing to rake the money in as soon as they saw the first iPhone. Even Thom Hogan has an article listing this an obvious expectation we will be seeing soon - back in 2007. But still nothing. Nada from the big camera makers at all. It's now taken non-camera smaller third-party DxO to pick up this ball and run with it, which has just been sitting out there in the middle of the field untouched by the two big league players for 8 years now.
@Zero, let's talk when it's out. At this point in time before it's even been released, you and others like Androole above your last post are just concern-trolling about imagined poor handling and quality-control of a product you haven't even tried yet despite initial early hands-on previewers all saying the exact opposite..
Elandreth: "Is it the smartphone or lack of fun that's killing the camera?"
I disagree because the irony is I actually don't take pictures with my iPhone because it's not as much of a fun process for me.
CameraLabTester: "Camera companies are struggling to sell cameras..."
You would too, if the market is saturated.
Inhabitants of today's modern civilization have at least one camera in their possession. They replace them every two years.
Everybody was satisfied with their phones. Before the iPhone.
I even recall all the journalists constantly and annoyingly cooing in every article about their fantastic 'can't live without' connected expensive Blackberries... before we saw how quickly and comprehensively berries can get crushed by complacency..
It's not a precarious connection at all. I can support the full weight of my older (and therefore even heavier) iPad via its small lightning connector, so the tiny and lightweight DxO attachment shouldn't be a worry in the slightest. On what grounds are you saying it's a delicate connection?
The mobile phone market was saturated and everyone had one. Before the iPhone.
I think the DxO ONE is showing the most promise. Rather than fighting the phone camera onslught, they have decided to ride it. Which is something I always expected for years from the DSLR makers to embrace by releasing a 'blank' DSLR model or even a compact with an iPod dock to use an iPhone as the full back/LCD/controls. Pretty much basically what speaker/stereo companies realized they should be doing to rake the money in as soon as they saw the first iPhone. Even Thom Hogan has an article listing this an obvious expectation we will be seeing soon - back in 2007. But still nothing. Nada from the big camera makers at all. It's now taken non-camera smaller third-party DxO to pick up this ball and run with it, which has just been sitting out there in the middle of the field untouched by the two big league players for 8 years now.
Few people at the time, or even now, realized the J1 and V1 were Nikon's attempts to emulate the iPod and more-featured iPhone, right down to simplifying the controls and making them available in white etc - and then charging 200% more for it. The fact they thought this is all that was required shows they have absolutely no clue why people like and use, and pay more for, Apple iDevices. So now they've finally gone full circle all the way back to what they know best with the J5, a camera that looks and operates from the '80s. They just don't know what to do.
AbrasiveReducer: Took them longer than Adobe, but then I don't pay Apple $20 a month.
Adobe don't give you an imac or macbook for the same $20.
tompabes2: If only it had an EVF... but forcing you to couple it with a phone (iphone, android or whatever) is not a good idea. First of all, it will take you several seconds to be ready to take a picture. Of course this is not acceptable for any serious amateur, let alone a professional. Next, you depend on phone battery, and when you run out of power you won't be able to take pictures, regardless of the fact that your "camera" might still have battery power.I'm eagerly waiting for someone to change the design of cameras. Why do we need a display? We don't. We can take as many pictures as we want, now that memory is cheap. We don't have to review pictures on the device, we can just take pictures and select them later on a real monitor. An EVF would be enough for most users, without taking away the possibility to connect it to the phone to review pictures, but it should be an OPTION.This product looks like a lost opportunity to me.
Why? This is exactly why you can switch the screen off when shooting with the Ricoh GR/D for instance.
Vignes: I thought the Panasonic phone with 1 inch sensor was the truly connected one with a Single piece hardware design which would have taken lots of R&D effort from the Japanese mfr. This Apple/DXO effort seems lazy and lo cost. probably cost them less to make which would yield a lot of profit from the apple fan base.And DXO rating their own... conflict of interest!
Okay, so your issue is their headline because a phone's inbuilt camera is already 'connected'?
Well then, so too is the iPhone's own inbuilt camera as well... but still they talk about the accessory camera as being the truly connected one, so they obviously must mean something different to what you're interpreting it as.
And no, not similar to the Sony Q units at all. iPhones are flat for a reason. So is this new DxO iPhone accessory camera.
I have no idea what Sony's Q camera designers were thinking, or who they thought would be buying them. Not flat phone owners for sure. Did they even stop to ask why none of their own Sony phones are ever shaped like 6x7cm cylinders?
FYI, you can take photos when not connected to an iPhone - shoot 'blind' as you say without a display for review.
I actually agree with you about not needing a display and I look forward to using it this way myself.
Pixel Peter: I will study all the possibilities and perhaps buy.But to be honest. This so called dp-article reads like one big commercial.
It's just the curmudgeonly nature of many older members of society to berate anything new or different and compare unfavourably to the traditional ways. It's how talk radio always survives and market research focus groups always fail. ;)
The CM1 requires iPhone owners to sell their perfectly good iPhones and swicth to a whole new Android one instead, which makes it the ultimate failure as an iPhone accessory...
"Made in Paris and San Francisco" writ large around the DxO's base means it's a collaborative effort between DxO and Apple so it's an iPhone accessory for iPhone owners, not for people looking to buy a new Android phone.
Apples and oranges.
Kivivuori: To me, it looks the beginning of a modular camerasystem
Imagine this one with a larger sensor etc. and you can build your own model by adding necessary parts like EVF, fully articulating LCD, grip which is matching your hand.... whatever.
If the Ricoh GXR screen/control module was a retina-display touchscreen with 64-bit iOS and upgradeable apps and telecommunication and internet capabilities, it surely would have been.
alatchin: I carry my phone in my pocket and my camera in my hands... when i am having a coffee and have the urge to share i take my phone out of my pocket and get some pics to snapseed and upload...
But that is me... i kept my last camera for about 5 years, over that time apple has had 2 or three ports on their phone... then i cant upgrade or need 2 phones, one to use with my camera and my new phone. Do i need 2 data plans... or do i need to share from my old phone to my new?
Imagine having a great shot and you phone rings...
Having said all that... i use android :)
Lightning is basically USB 2 anyway just with a proprietary port to prevent plugging all and sundry non-compatible keyboard and mice and external drive devices in which Apple doesn't support with iOS.
So there's no reason they can't move up to USB C or 3 and still keep the same lightning port.
To be honest, even to myself all my own comments sound like I'm being paid by DxO - while all the negative commenters sound like they're being paid by competitors!
But it's just enthusiasm for a new device I've been wanting for a while and would llike to have. It's good to see the DPR guys getting enthusiastic over it as well.
I've actually been expecting the establishment Canon or Nikon to come up with something like this first for the last eight years since the iPhone was first released (and so has Thom Hogan with his near identical 'Nikon' mock-up from 2009), but like with mirrorless it clearly needed an outsider to pick up the ball and run with it.
goblover: So, to use it you have to physically plug it to the iphone? How many steps does it have to take before you can actually shoot? Am imagining someone using it, fumbling to attach the thing to an iphone 6, dropping it in the process, broke the connection and leaving it in the iphone 6.
On the product website, there's a three second video intro of attaching it to an iPhone and taking a shot. Maybe even less.