The future of the big bodied DSLRs when traveling.

To me personally, a DSLR and vacation do not fit at all. When on vacation, I want to have as much relaxing experience as possible. A DSLR presents a lot of challenges, from weight to being a nuincance to my family. Generally, this is an opposite of relaxing. And since I value convenience more than a postcard photo, my DSLR stays home. As a Nikon shooter, I was really looking forward to DL cameras prior to my vacation this August. Didn't want another brand, again mainly due to convenience of having similar files for post-processing. Well, an old FZ150 served the purpose, mostly used by my 10-year old daughter. Didn't miss my DSLR a bit. Gave me more chances to master creative cellphone photography ;-)

You ask where big bodied DSLRs will feature in the future of travelling, I would say no but then they didn't feature in the past of travelling either. Its only in perhaps the last 10-15 years that the average person has used SLR cameras. Go back as far as the 70s, certainly the 80s and there were point and shoot cameras that produced images good enough for the average user. Modern cell phones are the equivalent (and better quality arguably) of disc cameras; consumer digital compacts are the equivalent to 35mm compacts, etc. The camera companies had a good decade or two as digital technology was coming to the fore where to buy a higher end camera was usual, and to upgrade that camera every year or two was not considered a waste; but that period is coming to an end.

The problem is modern technology is so good that we forget that the modern "entry" level stuff is as good or better at doing its job as medium to high end was in the late 20th, early 21st century.

I have similar arguments with audiophiles at times: They talk about how bad MP3s and speaker docks sound. But in reality people have moved from cassette players and low end "stack" systems and mini-systems to these, and MP3 played through a reasonable speaker docks sounds as good or better than the average person has ever heard!

Different strokes for different folks. Happy to take my cameras and a few lenses when I travel. Don't really think much about what others are doing, or what they think of me. Less concerned with what the future holds for other folks and their travel habits.

Alphoid said:

And yes, cell phones will match dSLRs for quality in a decade or so. They're already good enough in good conditions to not matter. We already could make a cell phone competitive with a dSLR for image quality in all condtions, just not at reasonable cost, shooting speed, and battery life.

Click to expand...

I'm prepared to be proved wrong ... but cell phones will never match a dSLR for reasons related to physics ... unless you make your cell phone MUCH larger, MUCH thicker and have real optics then physics dictates that there will always be a compromise vs a dSLR where such concerns are secondary.

javiair said:

More like an observation than anything, but just wondering where does the big bodies DSLR fit when traveling on vacation?

Last month I went to London and Paris with a short stop in Frankfurt.. spent 10 days vacationing and I noticed that I only saw a few people with big bodied DSLRs. Most if not everyone was taking pictures with their cell phones.

Click to expand...

Three destinations that I've spent time in, and would not make a point carrying a DSLR for.

On the other hand, when I travel to the Scottish Highlands, the Italian Dolomites or Patagonia, that's when I will consider a DSLR a basic part of my travelling kit.

DVT80111 said:

loitokitok said:

I'm more concerned about big bodied passengers when travelling, especially when I find myself sitting next to one.

Click to expand...

9 out of 10 that is an American tourist.

Click to expand...

With socks in their sandals?

Eloise said:

Alphoid said:

And yes, cell phones will match dSLRs for quality in a decade or so. They're already good enough in good conditions to not matter. We already could make a cell phone competitive with a dSLR for image quality in all condtions, just not at reasonable cost, shooting speed, and battery life.

Click to expand...

I'm prepared to be proved wrong ... but cell phones will never match a dSLR for reasons related to physics ... unless you make your cell phone MUCH larger, MUCH thicker and have real optics then physics dictates that there will always be a compromise vs a dSLR where such concerns are secondary.

Click to expand...

I'd say (and hope) that cell phones in a decade will match DSLRs of today. Now the big question is will that technology move to big camera to make them even better?

javiair said:

More like an observation than anything, but just wondering where does the big bodies DSLR fit when traveling on vacation?

Last month I went to London and Paris with a short stop in Frankfurt.. spent 10 days vacationing and I noticed that I only saw a few people with big bodied DSLRs. Most if not everyone was taking pictures with their cell phones.

Go to a landmark.. cell phone.. museum.. cell phone.. no matter where we went, I was almost the only one with a big bodied DSLR and my D610 with the simple 24-85mm combo was not that big. It got me thinking with the huge advancement of cell phone technology where does the DSLR stand? Would it be reserved for special events and sporting events? Do you think that cell phones will eventually match full size DSLR bodies?

Just had me thinking thats all. Ill be honest, it did get me about thinking mirroless like a Sony. But the problem is that I have Nikon lenses and there isnt an adapter that is reliable with Nikon Lenses when it comes to Auto focusing.

Or I just bring my cell phone and that will save weight and room in my luggage.

Click to expand...

The lenses are the weight and bulk problem. I use my 1ds with a pair of pancake Voigtlander lenses, a 20mm and a 40mm, and you can walk all day without the kit causing any problems.

Joseph V. Morris said:

Get out of London and Paris, you'll feel much more at home. You may even see people using tripods! Why, you may even see field cameras! Besides, it's good for you. It's a whole 'nother world and one worth seeing.

Click to expand...

+1

javiair said:

Last month I went to London and Paris with a short stop in Frankfurt.. spent 10 days vacationing and I noticed that I only saw a few people with big bodied DSLRs. Most if not everyone was taking pictures with their cell phones.

Go to a landmark.. cell phone.. museum.. cell phone.. no matter where we went, I was almost the only one with a big bodied DSLR and my D610 with the simple 24-85mm combo was not that big. It got me thinking with the huge advancement of cell phone technology where does the DSLR stand? Would it be reserved for special events and sporting events? Do you think that cell phones will eventually match full size DSLR bodies?

Click to expand...

I know London quite well and Paris a little, Frankfurt not at all. Those places though are places where you can either go as a tourist or goto as a photographer.

As a tourist who is only taking a D610 and 24-85 ... whats the point (IMO)? In most situations you are going to get as good photos with a mid-market compact. I wouldn't rely on smart phone matching the quality ... they are too limited outside of perfect conditions; but things like Panasonic (Leica) LX100 are perfect. For most people's needs even the smart phone will get what they want - snaps to share with friends.

However these cities can offer a lot for the photographer who goes out to photograph them. Ultra-wide angles especially for interesting architectural and cityscapes.

Eloise said:

I'm prepared to be proved wrong ... but cell phones will never match a dSLR for reasons related to physics ... unless you make your cell phone MUCH larger, MUCH thicker and have real optics then physics dictates that there will always be a compromise vs a dSLR where such concerns are secondary.

Click to expand...

What physics? As far as I know, physics dictates how image quality relates to aperture dimensions. There are no physical requirements on thickness or overall size.

If I were to put a 5x10 array of cell phone cameras on the back of my phone, I believe I could make a phone which was no bigger than my existing cell phone, but beat dSLRs for image quality.

Alphoid said:

Eloise said:

I'm prepared to be proved wrong ... but cell phones will never match a dSLR for reasons related to physics ... unless you make your cell phone MUCH larger, MUCH thicker and have real optics then physics dictates that there will always be a compromise vs a dSLR where such concerns are secondary.

Click to expand...

What physics? As far as I know, physics dictates how image quality relates to aperture dimensions. There are no physical requirements on thickness or overall size.

If I were to put a 5x10 array of cell phone cameras on the back of my phone, I believe I could make a phone which was no bigger than my existing cell phone, but beat dSLRs for image quality.

Click to expand...

Lens distance for one thing. The SPACE for decent optics. Also to put a 5x10 array of phone cameras you would need a BIGGER phone.

A smart phone is always going to be limited; it may have good IQ (they already do) but only in certain limited conditions ... the limits are going to be expanded by never eliminated.

Eloise said:

Lens distance for one thing. The SPACE for decent optics.

Click to expand...

That's mechanics and engineering, not physics. Physical arguments are of the form:

• "To keep noise levels reasonable, we need enough surface area to capture enough photons to keep shot noise down"
• "Optics is limited by diffraction. For a given resolution, we need a given aperture size"

And so on. Physics really does need a big amount of surface area to capture photons, and arrays do that.

How much space decent optics requires depends on engineering constraints, not physics constraints. But arrays of small sensors can give very good optics with very little thickness even with 2016 engineering.

Eloise said:

Also to put a 5x10 array of phone cameras you would need a BIGGER phone.

Click to expand...

Why? The camera already fits behind the screen. The phone would only be slightly bigger if you did no further engineering to try to shrink things. We're talking iPhone 1 thickness with iPhone 6 technology. That's hardly impractical.

Eloise said:

A smart phone is always going to be limited; it may have good IQ (they already do) but only in certain limited conditions ... the limits are going to be expanded by never eliminated.

Click to expand...

Why?

Alphoid said:

Eloise said:

Lens distance for one thing. The SPACE for decent optics.

Click to expand...

That's mechanics and engineering, not physics. Physical arguments are of the form:

• "To keep noise levels reasonable, we need enough surface area to capture enough photons to keep shot noise down"
• "Optics is limited by diffraction. For a given resolution, we need a given aperture size"

Click to expand...

Lens distance and space for optics are physical constraints. Engineering can go so far, but you canna break the laws of physics!

Alphoid said:

And so on. Physics really does need a big amount of surface area to capture photons, and arrays do that.

How much space decent optics requires depends on engineering constraints, not physics constraints. But arrays of small sensors can give very good optics with very little thickness even with 2016 engineering.

Alphoid said:

Also to put a 5x10 array of phone cameras you would need a BIGGER phone.

Click to expand...

Why? The camera already fits behind the screen. The phone would only be slightly bigger if you did no further engineering to try to shrink things. We're talking iPhone 1 thickness with iPhone 6 technology. That's hardly impractical.

Click to expand...

No they don't ... an iPhone camera fits ABOVE the screen.

Alphoid said:

Alphoid said:

A smart phone is always going to be limited; it may have good IQ (they already do) but only in certain limited conditions ... the limits are going to be expanded by never eliminated.

Click to expand...

Why?

Click to expand...

Because you're still not going to fit a large range zoom to a smart phone.

Looks, smart phone cameras are (and will get better over time) great for most people. The kind of people who had small compact cameras and were happy in the days of film. But (and this is my opinion) they will never be a substitute for the versatility of a full SLR system.

I travel a lot (and I live in Paris). I think that your statement about "big body dslrs" is misleading:

- the majority of dumb tourists use smartphones

- compacts have almost disappeared, but there are a number of superzoom bridge cameras

- APS-C DSLR's are pretty common, usually in the hands of determined-looking individuals.

- Mirrorless was invisible for a long time but I see them sometimes, especially in the hands of Japanese tourists

- Full-frame DSLR's (what you call big body dslr's) have always been rare. The people using them often have big bags (and are usually American)

When I'm on holiday I use an APS-C and a selection of flashes, lenses etc. compatible with my full-frame DSLR. If I see something I really like I promise to myself to come back another time with a full-frame DSLR and take the time to do it properly.

same here.

My DSLR is "only" APS-C. Never went the 24x36 route because I could see the additional cost for me, and the additional revenues for the vendors, but did not really see a useful difference in IQ.

And, my DSLR is now 6 years old - and I'm still waiting for a good reason to "upgrade" it, and not finding any.

So I mostly only use it at home, every once in a while, for a couple natural light portraits of the kids using my nice 85mm f1.4.

I wouldn't even dream to weigh myself down with it on a trip, business or leisure.

And I'm likely not the only one to think that, to judge by ILC sales being about HALF of what they were at the 2012 peak.

javiair said:

More like an observation than anything, but just wondering where does the big bodies DSLR fit when traveling on vacation?

Last month I went to London and Paris with a short stop in Frankfurt.. spent 10 days vacationing and I noticed that I only saw a few people with big bodied DSLRs. Most if not everyone was taking pictures with their cell phones.

Go to a landmark.. cell phone.. museum.. cell phone.. no matter where we went, I was almost the only one with a big bodied DSLR and my D610 with the simple 24-85mm combo was not that big. It got me thinking with the huge advancement of cell phone technology where does the DSLR stand? Would it be reserved for special events and sporting events? Do you think that cell phones will eventually match full size DSLR bodies?

Just had me thinking thats all. Ill be honest, it did get me about thinking mirroless like a Sony. But the problem is that I have Nikon lenses and there isnt an adapter that is reliable with Nikon Lenses when it comes to Auto focusing.

Or I just bring my cell phone and that will save weight and room in my luggage.

Click to expand...

Do you think you would see the same crowds of folks shooting SLRs? Most of those folks, transported back in time, would either be shooting those drugstore camera/film combo contraptions or nothing at all.

I'd say 90% of current DSLR/Mirrorless IL users are not true photographers. Most of these folks will eventually de-graduate to cell phones. That process has already started as evidenced by the many DSLR users who have switched to mirrorless. The new is rubbing off. The collective herd is finding out that SLR/IL photography requires effort, physical, mental, and maybe something one is only born with, talent.

javiair said:

More like an observation than anything, but just wondering where does the big bodies DSLR fit when traveling on vacation?

Last month I went to London and Paris with a short stop in Frankfurt.. spent 10 days vacationing and I noticed that I only saw a few people with big bodied DSLRs. Most if not everyone was taking pictures with their cell phones.

Go to a landmark.. cell phone.. museum.. cell phone.. no matter where we went, I was almost the only one with a big bodied DSLR and my D610 with the simple 24-85mm combo was not that big. It got me thinking with the huge advancement of cell phone technology where does the DSLR stand? Would it be reserved for special events and sporting events? Do you think that cell phones will eventually match full size DSLR bodies?

Just had me thinking thats all. Ill be honest, it did get me about thinking mirroless like a Sony. But the problem is that I have Nikon lenses and there isnt an adapter that is reliable with Nikon Lenses when it comes to Auto focusing.

Or I just bring my cell phone and that will save weight and room in my luggage.

Click to expand...

I don't know if it's because I was looking for them, or people actually had them, but on my recent trip to Europe I saw a lot of ILCs. All kinds. DSLRs and MILCs. Canon, Nikon, Sony, MFT, Fujifilm... no Pentax though. It may just depend on where you are.

I don't mind traveling with a "big" ILC kit. My only regret on the last trip was bringing the wrong lenses. I had a bag full of primes and 1 zoom (17-40L). When I got home I sold all my primes for zooms. I do print and want to futureproof my photos for large viewing (looking to get a 40"+ 4K monitor soon) so a small sensor compact won't do

Eloise said:

Lens distance and space for optics are physical constraints. Engineering can go so far, but you canna break the laws of physics!

Click to expand...

"Physics" and "physical" have very different meanings. No laws of physics are being broken by fitting things in tight physical constraints! That's just engineering.

Eloise said:

No they don't ... an iPhone camera fits ABOVE the screen.

Click to expand...

Fair; I didn't realize that. In either case, I hope you wouldn't dispute that having a phone even twice as thick as today's skinniest phones:

• Wouldn't make it impractical
• Would allow a camera array

The skinny phones already have issues with bending in a back pocket. There's starting to be pressure to make them thicker.

Eloise said:

Eloise said:

Why?

Click to expand...

Because you're still not going to fit a large range zoom to a smart phone.

Click to expand...

Depends on what you mean by large. 10 phone sensors give you the same surface area as a dSLR sensor. With fast lenses. A Phone with 25 sensors, as I proposed, would be able to have 10 wide angle, 10 normal-to-long, and 5 moderate telephoto (perhaps with slightly smaller sensors for the telephoto).

That plus crops is quite competitive with a dSLR. It won't match a Sigma 200-500mm f/2.8, mind you, but it will beat a dSLR+kit lens for wide angle, for portrait, and compete with a dSLR with an inexpensive telephoto lens (which tend to be in the f/4-f/8 range).

Eloise said:

The kind of people who had small compact cameras and were happy in the days of film.

Click to expand...

They do very well for me too, in good lighting conditions. My phone takes more photos than my LX100 or my full frame, actually, since a lot of it is outdoors in daylight without too much action. I picked a phone with what was at the time in the top 3-4 phone cameras on the market for that reason. My big-uns come out either for low light, fast action, or fun.

Eloise said:

But (and this is my opinion) they will never be a substitute for the versatility of a full SLR system.

Click to expand...

It will be... different. The thing about camera arrays is they also provide lightfield information, which gives many types of versatility dSLRs don't have. Lytro dipped their toes in, but didn't really do a great job with it.

StIves said:

javiair said:

More like an observation than anything, but just wondering where does the big bodies DSLR fit when traveling on vacation?

Last month I went to London and Paris with a short stop in Frankfurt.. spent 10 days vacationing and I noticed that I only saw a few people with big bodied DSLRs. Most if not everyone was taking pictures with their cell phones.

Click to expand...

Three destinations that I've spent time in, and would not make a point carrying a DSLR for.

On the other hand, when I travel to the Scottish Highlands, the Italian Dolomites or Patagonia, that's when I will consider a DSLR a basic part of my travelling kit.

Click to expand...

A DSLR would be great for the Scottish Highlands and the Italian Dolomites. (I can't say anything about Patagonia because I haven't been there.) However, lately I have been traveling with a m4/3 camera. I took my GX8 to Scotland and got some great pictures.