DSLR the next rotary phone

Mackiesback said:

nicodimus22 said:

sportyaccordy said:

I don't think nicodemus will be back lmao. WOW

Click to expand...

I came back. I pointed out that the chart says it's usage, but he now says it's about the percentage of satisfied customers...for some reason...has nothing to do with the breakdown of usage.

Also, learn to spell my name, shortyaccordy.

Click to expand...

Wow, I cringed when I read your first post on this, now I actually feel bad for you.

When it says 79% of people in their twenties are on Facebook, that means the other 21% of people in their twenties are not. That number is completely independent of what the group in their thirties is doing. Or forties, or fifties.

This survey compares what percentage of people in each individual age group are on FB, not what percentage of total usage the age group represents.

Click to expand...

I know. That's just not what I want to see.

Is the concept of a simple pie chart really lost on people? Of current FB users, break it down into groups so we can clearly see the percentages.

--
http://www.naturecratephoto.com
http://www.etsy.com/shop/NatureCratePhoto
https://www.etsy.com/shop/TarantulaFocused

nicodimus22 said:

Mackiesback said:

nicodimus22 said:

sportyaccordy said:

I don't think nicodemus will be back lmao. WOW

Click to expand...

I came back. I pointed out that the chart says it's usage, but he now says it's about the percentage of satisfied customers...for some reason...has nothing to do with the breakdown of usage.

Also, learn to spell my name, shortyaccordy.

Click to expand...

Wow, I cringed when I read your first post on this, now I actually feel bad for you.

When it says 79% of people in their twenties are on Facebook, that means the other 21% of people in their twenties are not. That number is completely independent of what the group in their thirties is doing. Or forties, or fifties.

This survey compares what percentage of people in each individual age group are on FB, not what percentage of total usage the age group represents.

Click to expand...

I know. That's just not what I want to see.

Is the concept of a simple pie chart really lost on people? Of current FB users, break it down into groups so we can clearly see the percentages.

Click to expand...

Anecdotally talking to my daughters, I get the sense that none of their friends use Facebook (FB). They use Instagram or Tiktok.

But here's the thing.

Just because they don't use FB now when they are young, does not mean that they will not use FB when they are older.

I just look at my older daughter.

She is now doing some coaching at her cheer club. So she has had to create a FB account, because that is how the club communicates amongst the coaches as well as with the athletes and their parents.

When we take my youngest to a cheer competition, my wife has to make sure to have her phone and FB running, because the coaches and other parents from the team are co-ordinating themselves using FB.

Confirming that everyone is in the building.

Or if the team is being moved up a slot, that all the parents know that.

Co-ordinating a spot to meet at the venue to hand the athletes over to the coaches.

Etc.

So . . . if the kids grow up and the organizations they join either as members or employees decides to use FB, then they will get pulled into the fold.

So, I am wondering if the curve of % of users per age group will be a bell curve, and remain so . . . as individuals grow up and move through phases.

Take care & Happy Shooting!

TacticDesigns said:

mamallama said:

felix from the suburbs said:

My dear father passed away years ago in his late 80's. He kept his rotary phone and refused to switch. When my kids were much younger, they thought it was cool to go to Granddad's home and use the rotary phone. There was something vaguely satisfying about turning that rotary dial and letting it spin back to its starting position. Then doing it again for the next number. Maybe for some of us, DSLRs can bring the same kind of fleeting fun.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

+1

TacticDesigns said:

I got the same joy out of my family's old wind-up Victrola with the vibrating pickup and needles that became dull.

Click to expand...

+1

I've got an old piano.

I tinker around on it every now and then.

I would really like one of those new Roland GOiano 88 electronic pianos!

https://www.roland.com/ca/products/gopiano_go-88p/

I would never have to tune it (my piano is out of tune).

If I wanted to practice, but not disturb anyone, I could just plug in a pair of headphones.

And if we wanted to move it from room to room, I could just grab it and "GO"! LOL.

To me, an electronic piano makes so much sense.

But . . . I doubt if I went to a music hall to listen to a concert pianist, that I would watch them play a concerto on an electric piano.

I would assume they would want to play on a nice grand piano.

The acoustic sound. The feel of real keys.

To me, there seems to be a place for both in this world!

Take care & Happy Shooting!

Click to expand...

That's a great way to put it!

I have an electric piano... but when I come across an acoustic piano, I get excited! It's a totally different experience. No different than driving a manual transmission, or cooking something from scratch, etc. For some the experience still matters

Yep you are right - that is the percentage for each age group that are "users of FB". Nothing in this discussion about who's a happy user - whatever that means.

But like the rotary dial phone, they must come out with something equivalent to replace them first. When that happens, we'll rehash this.

sportyaccordy said:

TacticDesigns said:

mamallama said:

felix from the suburbs said:

My dear father passed away years ago in his late 80's. He kept his rotary phone and refused to switch. When my kids were much younger, they thought it was cool to go to Granddad's home and use the rotary phone. There was something vaguely satisfying about turning that rotary dial and letting it spin back to its starting position. Then doing it again for the next number. Maybe for some of us, DSLRs can bring the same kind of fleeting fun.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

+1

sportyaccordy said:

I got the same joy out of my family's old wind-up Victrola with the vibrating pickup and needles that became dull.

Click to expand...

+1

I've got an old piano.

I tinker around on it every now and then.

I would really like one of those new Roland GOiano 88 electronic pianos!

https://www.roland.com/ca/products/gopiano_go-88p/

I would never have to tune it (my piano is out of tune).

If I wanted to practice, but not disturb anyone, I could just plug in a pair of headphones.

And if we wanted to move it from room to room, I could just grab it and "GO"! LOL.

To me, an electronic piano makes so much sense.

But . . . I doubt if I went to a music hall to listen to a concert pianist, that I would watch them play a concerto on an electric piano.

I would assume they would want to play on a nice grand piano.

The acoustic sound. The feel of real keys.

To me, there seems to be a place for both in this world!

Take care & Happy Shooting!

Click to expand...

That's a great way to put it!

I have an electric piano... but when I come across an acoustic piano, I get excited! It's a totally different experience. No different than driving a manual transmission, or cooking something from scratch, etc. For some the experience still matters

Click to expand...

+1

It is different!

But both IMHO can be engaging.

It's like . . . Supertramp and their electronic piano sounds are perfect!

But I want to hear Elton John on a grand piano! LOL.

I think an electronic piano is a lot more convenient . . . but when I go from an electronic piano back to my old "analog" piano . . . I really like that engaging feel of the key engaging the hammer and hitting the strings.

Take care & Happy Shooting!

you can't take selfies with them

TacticDesigns said:

I just look at my older daughter.

She is now doing some coaching at her cheer club. So she has had to create a FB account, because that is how the club communicates amongst the coaches as well as with the athletes and their parents.

When we take my youngest to a cheer competition, my wife has to make sure to have her phone and FB running, because the coaches and other parents from the team are co-ordinating themselves using FB.

Confirming that everyone is in the building.

Or if the team is being moved up a slot, that all the parents know that.

Co-ordinating a spot to meet at the venue to hand the athletes over to the coaches.

Etc.

So . . . if the kids grow up and the organizations they join either as members or employees decides to use FB, then they will get pulled into the fold.

So, I am wondering if the curve of % of users per age group will be a bell curve, and remain so . . . as individuals grow up and move through phases.

Take care & Happy Shooting!

Click to expand...

You sure they are doing this on FB or messenger ? FB account required but messenger is the ap, but not the social media aspects. My kids all have FB and use it mostly for the messenger application and the fact all their friends still have FB from a few years ago when it was cool and the main squeeze. My youngest never connected and she and all her dance / cheer / school friends skipped that.

Kind of like my generation having and AOL, Yahoo account, LOL.

While DSLRs have been in production we have seen antenna'd mobile phones go the way of rotary phones. Then flip phones went the way of rotary phones. Then multimedia phones went the way of rotary phones. Now we're at smartphones and suddenly this is the one that's finally going to destroy everything.

Thomas166 said:

Recently I was at a family wedding and I took one of my older Nikon D3300 just to shoot for fun. I asked one of my young niece to snap a photo of me and the groom and she couldn't just look through the view finder. When I showed her how she then asked me "how you do a selfie with this?". I think in the very near future you can set a rotary phone and a dslr on a table and then ask the young generation to use them and only about 10% might know. Do you think there will still be pro photographers in 20 or 30 years from now?

Click to expand...

I used to bring my Df or D5 for some low light snapshots, but figured out most waiters/waitress were both clueless and fumble fingers with a DSLR / mirrorless Sony no different, but EVERYONE knows how to shoot the smartphone, frankly with the new computational photography on the latest generation I find the need for a fast lens and big sensor for those low-light snapshots pretty non-existent and happy with what the latest iPhone takes.

Jonsi said:

While DSLRs have been in production we have seen antenna'd mobile phones go the way of rotary phones. Then flip phones went the way of rotary phones. Then multimedia phones went the way of rotary phones. Now we're at smartphones and suddenly this is the one that's finally going to destroy everything.

Click to expand...

Not included is your laptop/tablet, and now there is your iPhone, Moore's Law assimilates all





--
" Today's Pictures Are Tomorrow's Memories "

chipmaster said:

TacticDesigns said:

I just look at my older daughter.

She is now doing some coaching at her cheer club. So she has had to create a FB account, because that is how the club communicates amongst the coaches as well as with the athletes and their parents.

When we take my youngest to a cheer competition, my wife has to make sure to have her phone and FB running, because the coaches and other parents from the team are co-ordinating themselves using FB.

Confirming that everyone is in the building.

Or if the team is being moved up a slot, that all the parents know that.

Co-ordinating a spot to meet at the venue to hand the athletes over to the coaches.

Etc.

So . . . if the kids grow up and the organizations they join either as members or employees decides to use FB, then they will get pulled into the fold.

So, I am wondering if the curve of % of users per age group will be a bell curve, and remain so . . . as individuals grow up and move through phases.

Take care & Happy Shooting!

Click to expand...

You sure they are doing this on FB or messenger ? FB account required but messenger is the ap, but not the social media aspects. My kids all have FB and use it mostly for the messenger application and the fact all their friends still have FB from a few years ago when it was cool and the main squeeze. My youngest never connected and she and all her dance / cheer / school friends skipped that.

Kind of like my generation having and AOL, Yahoo account, LOL.

Click to expand...

For my daughter's cheer club, they do a combination of FB and messenger.

For communication between the parents and the coaches at a competition it is messenger.

But each team (in the club) has its own FB page. That is where the coaches, parents or kids can post something. When I take pictures at a competition . . . I clean up some and give them to my wife to post there. Other parents are posting videos from the competitions. Or just random things throughout the year. When the athletes do really well at a competition, the coaches post things to the team's FB page, like when they get Zero Deductions. Or if we've left the competition . . . and during the next session . . . they determine our team has won first place for their level for all sessions. Things like that.

And then the club has a main FB page when they want to quickly post something to all the teams (so they don't have to post to all the individual team FB pages.)

So as a parent, you got to follow the main club FB page, your kid's team FB page and your kid's team messenger chat group.

For my daughter . . . when one of the kids she is coaching does a new stunt, she is supposed to record it and send it to the club to showcase on the main FB page.

But my daughter can post to the local club's FB page if she wants to.

But she needs to be part of the coaches FB page.

But that is the thing.

As a communication tool for a club, it works pretty well.

A lot more efficient than trying to communicate / co-ordinate through emails. LOL.

Take care & Happy Shooting!

grsnovi said:

Not sure why you assume that everyone there "knew" that you had a purpose. Was there an announcement that a photographer was covering the event and that images would be available for all afterwards? Those folks with the phone may have just wanted an immediate image to share online and figured you'd get a better shot than they would.

Click to expand...

When there is someone walking around with a camera taking pictures of every table, every speaker, guests at the bar, the stringed quartet, when the organizer asks people to gather for a shot or two, I give a bit of credit to the logic that most of us have to put 2 and 2 together. I assume you would have eventually figured it out as well. Or perhaps I shouldn't assume.

And why, if these people had no clue that I was the photographer of record, would you think that they would think that I'd take a better picture than they would? Maybe they had that logic I spoke of and figured after three hours or so of seeing me move around the event taking several hundred shots that maybe I was the photographer of the event considering that I was the ONLY person doing said photography.

I'm just passing along something that I experienced, nothing more.

David

felix from the suburbs said:

My dear father passed away years ago in his late 80's. He kept his rotary phone and refused to switch. When my kids were much younger, they thought it was cool to go to Granddad's home and use the rotary phone. There was something vaguely satisfying about turning that rotary dial and letting it spin back to its starting position. Then doing it again for the next number. Maybe for some of us, DSLRs can bring the same kind of fleeting fun.

Click to expand...

Rotary phones often sounded better than the cheaper push button land line phones. They really put good engineering into the microphone and speaker - the whole phone in general was well engineered.

And land line phones sound miles ahead of cell phones. Copper wires are much better at conducting voice than whatever digital compression is used nowadays. Maybe one day we'll have the bandwidth to have phones that are actually good as phones.

David Pavlich said:

I shot an 80th birthday event. The fellow was a founding father of an engineering organization. At the end, he and the other 'celebrities' were on stage so that I could get some shots of the group before they headed for the exits.

I had two people try to hand me their phones so that I could take pictures of the group. I was a little surprised since I had been there the whole time moving about taking shots during the event. I guess I shouldn't assume that just because I was the person that was moving around with a camera that they would know that I was there for a reason.

In the end, when I finished getting the shots, I did take the pictures for the two that asked. That was a first and had never happened before or since.

David

Click to expand...

There could be any number of reasons they did that, despite knowing you were the photographer of record.

• Not connected to the host / it would be awkward to ask for one photo
• No guarantees they would get it anyway
• Immediate gratification (can check to make sure they look good)
• Wouldn't know how to get a photo out of an email and onto their phone (you'd be surprised)

I remember when CDs versus Vinyl was a thing. Now vinyl is niche.

I remember when command line versus GUI was a thing. Now command line is niche.

I remember when film vs. digital was a thing. Now film is niche.

I remember when Blackberry vs. touch smartphone was a thing. Now Blackberry is niche.

There will still be DSLRs, but they're heading for niche.

I bought my first mirorrless in 2013. That would put me in either the innovator or early adopter category.

The laggards will be the noisiest ones.

Everybody ask themselves, where are you?

PhotoFactor said:

I remember when CDs versus Vinyl was a thing. Now vinyl is niche.

I remember when command line versus GUI was a thing. Now command line is niche.

I remember when film vs. digital was a thing. Now film is niche.

I remember when Blackberry vs. touch smartphone was a thing. Now Blackberry is niche.

There will still be DSLRs, but they're heading for niche.

I bought my first mirorrless in 2013. That would put me in either the innovator or early adopter category.

The laggards will be the noisiest ones.

Everybody ask themselves, where are you?

Click to expand...

I have no idea where I would land on that curve. I got rid of all my film gear last year, my DSLR and Sony DSLT this year. I am moving forward with new iPhone SE, 1" premium point and shoot, and m4/3 camera (no EVF). No more desire for APS-C or full frame stuff. What I have is good enough.

Maybe there should be a place on that curve for "downsizer".

Yes, D3300 is rapidly becoming "rotary phone".

Jonsi said:

While DSLRs have been in production we have seen antenna'd mobile phones go the way of rotary phones. Then flip phones went the way of rotary phones. Then multimedia phones went the way of rotary phones. Now we're at smartphones and suddenly this is the one that's finally going to destroy everything.

Click to expand...

Antenna'd/flip phones didn't have cameras, so they're not relevant to the discussion. A lot of the early smartphones (Blackberry, Treo etc) didn't either.

I don't think it's a coincidence that all digital camera sales peaked around 2010-2012. Iphone 1 comes out 2007. 1st Android comes out 2008. Galaxy S comes out 2009 along with 4G wireless internet. Instagram launches in 2010, Facebook mobile launches 2011. So there's a pretty clear and obvious shift in how normal people took and viewed photos that replaced the camera and computer with smartphones. Will they "destroy" everything? I don't know; sounds an awful lot like a strawman (who claimed that?). But if smartphones aren't a major reason camera sales are down by over 80% from their peak, what is?

sportyaccordy said:

Jonsi said:

While DSLRs have been in production we have seen antenna'd mobile phones go the way of rotary phones. Then flip phones went the way of rotary phones. Then multimedia phones went the way of rotary phones. Now we're at smartphones and suddenly this is the one that's finally going to destroy everything.

Click to expand...

Antenna'd/flip phones didn't have cameras

Click to expand...

Of course they did.

sportyaccordy said:

But if smartphones aren't a major reason camera sales are down by over 80% from their peak, what is?

Click to expand...

Talk about strawmen... Show me where I've ever said otherwise.

You should probably ask someone who's interested in phones, or at least interested in arguing with you.

Jonsi said:

sportyaccordy said:

Jonsi said:

While DSLRs have been in production we have seen antenna'd mobile phones go the way of rotary phones. Then flip phones went the way of rotary phones. Then multimedia phones went the way of rotary phones. Now we're at smartphones and suddenly this is the one that's finally going to destroy everything.

Click to expand...

Antenna'd/flip phones didn't have cameras

Click to expand...

Of course they did.

Jonsi said:

But if smartphones aren't a major reason camera sales are down by over 80% from their peak, what is?

Click to expand...

Talk about strawmen... Show me where I've ever said otherwise.

You should probably ask someone who's interested in phones, or at least interested in arguing with you.

Click to expand...

If you're not interested in discussing how phones have impacted camera sales, why are you posting in a thread about how phones have impacted camera sales?