Has the digital camera industry hit a wall?

I also use a simple prepaid plan. Calls and texts have no limits, but data use available at full speed is low if used as many do. But like above, data is never turrned on unless I'm out of wi fi range and really need to look something up on the internet. And when out and about, seldom need it. I don't know what most folks are paying now but have heard of crazy high cell phone bills.

I would still buy an apsc over full frame because of the lens cost, weight and physical size of lenses I want to provide the reach I want. But if they start making only FF capable lenses, and the used market dries up, that's a new problem I suppose.

By the same token, I get along with the 10mp crops from my 24mp APSC body. So still ahead in EFL. But I only drag it out when I need the fast af and handling of the optical viewfinder. Most other stuff is done on smaller sensors like 1/1.7" and 1". They are all I need for most use. This is the digital age, stuff keeps getting smaller and smaller with newer tech. FF is old and obsolete.

There are some sound points here.

The 'entry level' market will, I think, shrink much further - largely due to the fact that smartphones now ARE the entry level cameras.

However, all is not lost. The ubiquity of smartphones gives a larger potential market than ever. A percentage of smartphone photographers will become more serious about photography. They will then, many of them, move on to ILCs as these provide a versatility simply not available to phone cameras.

It nay only be a small percentage but a small percentage of a very big number is still a big number.

I have little interest in buying new cameras until they come up with something game changing, like truly global shutter or something.

I have plenty of "old" cameras that I will keep using until the shutters fall off.

Plus inflation and cost on these new bodies and lenses is getting ridiculous. I have the money to buy but I don't appreciate getting fleeced regardless of my ability to pay.

Or more interest to me would be getting my old cameras to work at a higher level.

I am watching the deep AI developments with great interest, especially in regards to AI programs that write blogs or programming scripts autonomously based on some loosely defined parameters. I ask myself, could it perhaps write some new firmware for my powershot pro1 or my 5d classic that would push up against the hardware limitations of these old cams but offer superior performance vs the final firmware?

Very good point. I keep an open eye for this also. Along the same lines, I wonder how much of the "advancement" we have seen in recent years in newest cameras are physical and how much is actually just done in processing wizardry? Has anyone actually counted the pixels in their 50mp cameras? And do newest cameras have superior physical components that allow higher iso ratings, or more sophisticated processing that allows higher iso ratings? Smartphones are evidence of this possibility that could just as easily help results from large sensor pro cameras as it does for tiny sensor phone sensors. I can remember when I used to typically up the resolution from my 2.7mp D1h to 24mp and get 16x20 prints made. I still have one on our wall. And this process that took me some time to process could be built right in the camera this day and age. Maybe I should find some new batteries and get the D1h out of the drawer?

Mackiesback said:

This has been discussed in many threads here, none of this is a surprise at this point. PCs, TVs, Cell phones, all new technologies have hit a saturation point and cameras are also there. One thing that is not often mentioned is that the camera market would have gotten there even if cell phones did not exist, just like every other new technology.

While there are lots of new features to enjoy on cameras today vs ten years ago, the images sure don't look much different. So yes, like all new technologies, cameras have somewhat hit a wall.

An interesting comparison would be the auto industry. While there is certainly market saturation for automobiles, the industry remains robust. More of a necessity than a camera, for sure, but maybe an indication that all in the camera industry is not gloom and doom, that companies don't have to fold or merge, that we will get new models from a variety of brands.

Click to expand...

I think thats an interesting point and I would actually argue that the digital compact market which phone cameras replaced was already in significant decline. By the time that happened prices of standard compact cameras really had nosed dived relative to the early 00's to the degree I suspect a lot of the profit margin had vanished.

I do think the way sales figures are reported in the camera industry is rather questionable looking purely at units when arguably its an industry in which profit margins differ much more than most consumer goods. The amount of profit a manufacturer might earn from one professional FF ILC camera for example may well be 100 times greater or more than it earns from a basic compact.

I think really were seeing the camera market settle back into a similar kind of situation to what existed prior to digital, at least for the major camera manufacturers if not the film producers.

Marty4650 said:

There seems to be widespread belief that smartphones have killed this industry.

Click to expand...

That seems to be mostly among people who only have a vague interest in photography, but it is a pretty common narrative used to describe why so many pictures are taken with smartphones these days. It's very simplistic.

Marty4650 said:

Because they have gotten pretty good,

Click to expand...

This is another common narrative. It's a false dichotomy to classify a camera as either good or bad. Smartphone cameras aren't as terribly as they used to be. Compared to a real camera, they're still pretty bad.

Marty4650 said:

and everyone has one, and they are good enough for taking snapshots.

Click to expand...

Now you got down to the bone: good enough. They aren't "good" they are "good enough."

Marty4650 said:

Which is pretty much what most people were doing with their Canon Digital Rebels and all the entry level SLRs from other makers anyway.

And I am pretty certain this is a big part of the problem, but there are two other big factors that many people overlook:

• Product Maturity - New models are certainly better, but not that much better to justify the cost for most people. And even a ten year old digital camera is still good enough for the needs of most snapshooters.

• Market Saturation - The pipeline is filled. Everyone who ever wanted a digital camera now has one. Or two. Or ten. There aren't any new users who want more than a smartphone.

Click to expand...

I'd bet that plenty of people get interested in photography on their phone and buy a camera as a result. But not huge numbers.

Marty4650 said:

And none of this will change. So comparisons with past sales are meaningless. The entire market has been radically changed, and digital cameras are no longer a mass market item. They are something for high end users and hobbyists only. And that means two things... much higher prices, and more features that only specialists would ever use.

What is your take on this?

Has the digital camera become the new VCR or mP3 player?

Click to expand...

No. The VCR and MP3 players performed a function that is still very much in demand, just in a different way. A camera performs a function that can only be performed by a camera, whether that's on a phone or an ILC. The MP3 player as a standalone item has virtually vanished with a few exceptions. The VCR turned into the DVD player and then the Blu Ray player and now the streaming box. The camera won't morph into something else because its function can't be done without a lens and sensor.

Marty4650 said:

Forced out of the mass market by changes in technology and popular tastes? With a 90% decline in sales, we can assume a 90% decline in web traffic for sites like DPReview, since their primary focus was "reviewing new cameras" and there aren't very many to review.

Click to expand...

We're just going back to the film days of cameras. That's it. There was a huge surge and now that's calmed down.

Marty4650 said:

My own view is that In the end, there will always be high end users and hobbyists, but probably not enough to sustain so many manufacturers. So some camera makers will thrive and others will disappear or consolidate. And there will always be new cameras available for those willing to pay for them. And those new cameras will always be a little bit better than last year's models.

Click to expand...

It was bound to happen.

I remember reading DPR almost every day about 10 years ago. It seemed there were exciting developments all the time.

And we've had some pretty good stuff these last couple years, such as Canon FINALLY putting IBIS in its cameras after poo-pooing the idea and saying that lense IBIS was superior.

Again, I've earned enough at this point to even be able to buy an R3, but I just don't feel any motivation to do so because I think that I still have plenty to master with what I have, and I've reached a level where I can produce what I want with what I have, even if it doesn't have the newest IBIS or a 100 mpixel back-lit sensor.

In addition to the inflation and price hikes that I've mentioned, I also feel offended by the cripple hammering that all the makers engage in (not just Canon).

I don't want to have to buy 4 different cameras because they want price segmentation.

I would rather they sell the same basic functionality and perhaps differentiate by chassis build quality (cheap plastic --> aircraft plastic --> magnesium --> admantium?).

Again, if deep AI gets to the point where we can have some off the shelf consumer solutions, then I'd be more excited about getting some custom firmware for my old powershot pro1 for instance, so that AF accuracy and speed could become more accurate and faster.

I'm rather optimistic.

Reason: I'm even more into music than into taking pictures. 10 years ago, everbody seemed to think that guitars are dead. No new stars or guitar players in videos, more clubs than live music etc. And you could just see the sales going down every year. Some guitar companies were pressured to "diversify".

Last year Fender sold more guitars than ever before in its entire history - and more than 50% of the buyers are women.

Here in Berlin, I see more and more young people, esp. women, with analog film-cameras.

Cameras - if the industry does its job - are like bicycles or, sorry, guitars.

When cars became affordable to everyone, bicycles were just used by old or poor people, you would want at least a moped, everything but a bicycle.

Today, bicycles are as desirable as never before: practical, easy to maintain, climate-friendly, fast.

Taking pics with your smartphone - that isn't the next cool thing anymore, just that boring stupid ordinary device everybody and your grandpa uses - is like recording music with your answering machine.

The market for small sensor compact cameras is dead and will remain dead. But - with the technology available today - MFT, APS-C and FF have a future. Cameras that are more expensive than a good smartphone - about 800-1200,- today - will remain a niche product, but if the manufacturers offer good cameras in the 800,- - 1.200,- range, they could be much more successfull than many of us expect today.

People like to learn things they are interested in and they like to become better at doing it - maybe inspired by the pics they took with their smartphones. And smartphones don't offer this. And they like to be taken serious like if you play a real instrument, and for this you need a dedicated camera, not that ordinary boring smartphone.

DirkPeh said:

And they like to be taken serious like if you play a real instrument, and for this you need a dedicated camera, not that ordinary boring smartphone.

Click to expand...

I'm not quite convinced that is the case anymore...

If you are depending on the camera industry to somehow make you more "creative." you've already lost the game.

Brian

It is not that cameras and photgraphy are going to disappear all together. Of course there will always be photographers and cameras around. The point is that photography will not be a mass market anymore in which a number of manufacturers can survive. We will see less companies aiming at the remaining customer group - largely professionals and serious hobbiest. Prices will be higher than in the past. The key customer goup of the future will have a keen interest in quality and will lean towards FF and MF. Smaller formats will slowly be replaced.

DirkPeh said:

I'm rather optimistic.

Reason: I'm even more into music than into taking pictures. 10 years ago, everbody seemed to think that guitars are dead. No new stars or guitar players in videos, more clubs than live music etc. And you could just see the sales going down every year. Some guitar companies were pressured to "diversify".

Last year Fender sold more guitars than ever before in its entire history - and more than 50% of the buyers are women.

Here in Berlin, I see more and more young people, esp. women, with analog film-cameras.

Click to expand...

Those young people with film cameras are Prenzlauer Berg or "new" Wedding folks for whom this is just one way to express how exceptional they are. Nothing of long term consequence for the market, I am afraid.

DirkPeh said:

Cameras - if the industry does its job - are like bicycles or, sorry, guitars.

When cars became affordable to everyone, bicycles were just used by old or poor people, you would want at least a moped, everything but a bicycle.

Today, bicycles are as desirable as never before: practical, easy to maintain, climate-friendly, fast.

Click to expand...

DirkPeh said:

Taking pics with your smartphone - that isn't the next cool thing anymore, just that boring stupid ordinary device everybody and your grandpa uses - is like recording music with your answering machine.

The market for small sensor compact cameras is dead and will remain dead. But - with the technology available today - MFT, APS-C and FF have a future. Cameras that are more expensive than a good smartphone - about 800-1200,- today - will remain a niche product, but if the manufacturers offer good cameras in the 800,- - 1.200,- range, they could be much more successfull than many of us expect today.

Click to expand...

I am afraid not. The major advantage of a smarphone is that image is instantly availbale for sharing. One or two clicks and the image you took at that concert, at the beach, at the restaurant is out there with your friends and family, or people you don't even know. You can't do that with your camera. Forget those fiddely apps that try to achieve connectivity with the phone. I'd say the vast majority of people with phones don't take images to have something to remember in the future (most don't even have a proper back-up), put the share the moment.

DirkPeh said:

People like to learn things they are interested in and they like to become better at doing it - maybe inspired by the pics they took with their smartphones. And smartphones don't offer this. And they like to be taken serious like if you play a real instrument, and for this you need a dedicated camera, not that ordinary boring smartphone.

Click to expand...

You can take very good images with a good smartphone. You can even edit so that the majority of folks looking at them on a phone, pad, or screen like them. In fact, I know a number of folks who got themselves a proper camera - only to be utterly disappointed by the image quality especially in low light and low contrast settings. Smartphones turn those images into something people like.

Nielk Mike said:

You can take very good images with a good smartphone. You can even edit so that the majority of folks looking at them on a phone, pad, or screen like them. In fact, I know a number of folks who got themselves a proper camera - only to be utterly disappointed by the image quality especially in low light and low contrast settings. Smartphones turn those images into something people like.

Click to expand...

I can't predict the future, but it is fun to do. My experience is a bit different.

Younger people, who use their smartphone cams a lot, show a lot of interest, when I'm taking pictures with a "real" camera. I'm good at taking photos and know most of the technical important stuff, but definetely not the most advanced photographer on earth.

When they see my pictures, some of them start to become too shy to take pictures with their phones or show them. Last week, I was showing a collection of pictures from an event on my smartphone, some taken by me, most taken by smartphones - an iPhone 12 by a professional tv-camera man. He is good at taking pictures. When one of my pictures came, a friend of mine immediately said: this isn't from a smartphone, isn't it, it looks too good? And this was a pic taken seconds after the iPhone shot from the same perspective.

It is as it is with music: if you love music and are good at it, you might love your first preset-synths or some loops you put together, but if someone comes along, who uses real stuff, the difference becomes obvious, even if the later is in some aspects less perfect. It is the sound that is real, like "real" pictures have something computational photography can not archieve.

When I was young, I was interested in photography, but I stopped doing it. The cams I could afford weren't good, it was that experience to take 24 pictures in weeks and then you would see the results in small prints weeks after some of the pics were taken and you forgot what you wanted to archieve and how the camera was set up. And you had to pay for films and the development.

Maybe some of the buyers of film cams are posers - saw a young girl in her early 20s with a hasselblad in the park today - but so are many people, who buy guitars or synths, but not all of them.

What you wrote about people being dissapointed after buying a dedicated camera is my experience, too.

If the manufacturers do their homework, they will prevent this from happening, but at the same time draw the users away from the auto-modes.

Without making a judgement about how good they are at doing it: I like Fujis concept to put all the high-tech stuff available into their cams in transparent menues - but to offer all the traditional controls on the body and even the aperture-ring on the lenses.

Guy Called Brian said:

If you are depending on the camera industry to somehow make you more "creative." you've already lost the game.

Click to expand...

If camera industry depending on consumer to somehow make more "creative", camera industry already lost the game.

Various social media introduced various style/concept/method (via smartphone) to consumer, attract consumer to their plaform. These social media create creative apps for smartphone, expand smartphone features.

That's why current camera still lack easy use "Instant share to social media" features.

Nokia Symbian OS/Windows Phone come with apps but fail to introduce easy use UI, not popular. Smartphone not popular until iPhone introduce easy use UI (although expensive than Nokia/Windows Phone).

Spotify popular because easy use (although music quality a bit low), especially instant switch to different plaform (phone/TV/HIFI) via similar UI. Spotify allow continues play music on TV/HIFI via same apps/UI on smartphone.

forest dream said:

Guy Called Brian said:

If you are depending on the camera industry to somehow make you more "creative." you've already lost the game.

Click to expand...

If camera industry depending on consumer to somehow make more "creative", camera industry already lost the game.

Various social media introduced various style/concept/method (via smartphone) to consumer, attract consumer to their plaform. These social media create creative apps for smartphone, expand smartphone features.

That's why current camera still lack easy use "Instant share to social media" features.

Nokia Symbian OS/Windows Phone come with apps but fail to introduce easy use UI, not popular. Smartphone not popular until iPhone introduce easy use UI (although expensive than Nokia/Windows Phone).

Spotify popular because easy use (although music quality a bit low), especially instant switch to different plaform (phone/TV/HIFI) via similar UI. Spotify allow continues play music on TV/HIFI via same apps/UI on smartphone.

Click to expand...

Why would we need the same access to the internet on our cameras, we have that on our phones. The market has changed and the cameras manufacturers are still selling souped up Old designs. Time for a Steve Jobs in the photographic world.. New innovations to the fore… L

LeicaEye said:

forest dream said:

Guy Called Brian said:

If you are depending on the camera industry to somehow make you more "creative." you've already lost the game.

Click to expand...

If camera industry depending on consumer to somehow make more "creative", camera industry already lost the game.

Various social media introduced various style/concept/method (via smartphone) to consumer, attract consumer to their plaform. These social media create creative apps for smartphone, expand smartphone features.

That's why current camera still lack easy use "Instant share to social media" features.

Nokia Symbian OS/Windows Phone come with apps but fail to introduce easy use UI, not popular. Smartphone not popular until iPhone introduce easy use UI (although expensive than Nokia/Windows Phone).

Spotify popular because easy use (although music quality a bit low), especially instant switch to different plaform (phone/TV/HIFI) via similar UI. Spotify allow continues play music on TV/HIFI via same apps/UI on smartphone.

Click to expand...

Why would we need the same access to the internet on our cameras, we have that on our phones.

Click to expand...

May be Nokia asked similar question "Why smartphone need connect internet since consumer has larger screen easy type keyboard from powerful PC".

LeicaEye said:

The market has changed and the cameras manufacturers are still selling souped up Old designs.

Click to expand...

These camera maker (except DJI) follow traditional design which no need much innovation.

LeicaEye said:

Time for a Steve Jobs in the photographic world.. New innovations to the fore… L

Click to expand...

DJI Ronin 4D has lot innovation. May be we need such innovation in compact mirrorless camera (e.g. M50).

Why M50 popular, occupied almost 30% Canon selling? It is because affordable, lightweight, easy use (compared with other camera).

forest dream said:

LeicaEye said:

forest dream said:

Guy Called Brian said:

If you are depending on the camera industry to somehow make you more "creative." you've already lost the game.

Click to expand...

If camera industry depending on consumer to somehow make more "creative", camera industry already lost the game.

Various social media introduced various style/concept/method (via smartphone) to consumer, attract consumer to their plaform. These social media create creative apps for smartphone, expand smartphone features.

That's why current camera still lack easy use "Instant share to social media" features.

Nokia Symbian OS/Windows Phone come with apps but fail to introduce easy use UI, not popular. Smartphone not popular until iPhone introduce easy use UI (although expensive than Nokia/Windows Phone).

Spotify popular because easy use (although music quality a bit low), especially instant switch to different plaform (phone/TV/HIFI) via similar UI. Spotify allow continues play music on TV/HIFI via same apps/UI on smartphone.

Click to expand...

Why would we need the same access to the internet on our cameras, we have that on our phones.

Click to expand...

May be Nokia asked similar question "Why smartphone need connect internet since consumer has larger screen easy type keyboard from powerful PC".

forest dream said:

The market has changed and the cameras manufacturers are still selling souped up Old designs.

Click to expand...

These camera maker (except DJI) follow traditional design which no need much innovation.

forest dream said:

Time for a Steve Jobs in the photographic world.. New innovations to the fore… L

Click to expand...

DJI Ronin 4D has lot innovation. May be we need such innovation in compact mirrorless camera (e.g. M50).

Why M50 popular, occupied almost 30% Canon selling? It is because affordable, lightweight, easy use (compared with other camera).

Click to expand...

could be me but I don't see how compact mirrorless cameras can be compared with or take advantage of the way the DJI is made :

FrancoD said:

could be me but I don't see how compact mirrorless cameras can be compared with or take advantage of the way the DJI is made :

Click to expand...

I means innovation. Not direct copy from DJI Ronin 4D.

Assume below is future TRUE pocketable $699 Ricoh GRz series (less than 300 gram), are it will popular?

• 26MP BSI-CMOS sensor
• Dual base ISO 800/6400
• Fixed trio-phase power zoom 20-24-28mm equiv. F2.8. Edge soft at F2.8 but entire lens sharp at F4.
• Built-in ultra thin electronic variable ND filter (instead of film type ND filter) - monochrome LCD + polarizing filter.
• Simulate ISO 50 via sensor ISO 800 + electronic variable ND filter.
• 180 degree flip-out screen (allow waist-level shooting or selfie), still maintain pocketable.
• Similar to GRIII, weak IBIS in pocketable body.
• Similar to R7, "auto-level" feature that can slightly rotate the image sensor itself to keep your images straight.
• Film Simulation (can purchase via app).
• Remove PASM dials, replace by unmarked dials.
• Dual shutter release around with unmarked dials. each shutter release has different "Full Press Instant Snapshot/Video" setting. E.g. Shutter A=Snap focus distance 3.5m, Shutter B=Snap focus distance 1.5m.
• Allow customize user profile - U1...U9, each user profile has own "Full Press Instant Snapshot/Video" setting.
• Full Press Instant Video - means direct record video in predefined setting.
• Similar to Nikon Z fc, small monochrome top-plate LCD (recycle Casio digital watch screen, display two line info at left side of top-plate, similar to Casio digital watch below) E.g. M1.5-5.5=Snap focus distance 1.5m & DOF=1.5m until 5.5m; F5.6=aperture 5.6; U3 = user profile 3.

Casio digital watch

• Oversampled 4K 30p up to 5 minutes.
• Oversampled 1080p 120p up to 5 minutes.
• Built-in GPS (with standalone GPS button at side of camera). When press GPS button, camera will auto turn on GPS > capture current location > turn off GPS, all photo after that will tag with this location, saved battery power.
• Similar to Spotify, use smartphone app configure and sync menu setting to camera via internet.
• Built-in SIM card slot. Instant share with social media via SIM-card (without phone). User can configure multiple Flickr/Twitter/Instagram/Facebook... social media account in smartphone app and sync to camera. Once social media accounts configured (and turn on via Q menu), JPEG (powered by Film Simulation and GPS location name) will auto upload to social media 10 seconds after captured. User allow delete unsatisfied photo before upload.
• 3.5 jack audio jack for external mic, USB Type C PD charge, no HDMI port.

Marty4650 said:

The entire market has been radically changed, and digital cameras are no longer a mass market item. They are something for high end users and hobbyists only. And that means two things... much higher prices, and more features that only specialists would ever use.

Click to expand...

True.

Marty4650 said:

Has the digital camera become the new VCR or mP3 player?

Click to expand...

Not true; those technologies were supplanted by better ones. Maturity and obsoletion are two different situations.

Marty4650 said:

With a 90% decline in sales, we can assume a 90% decline in web traffic for sites like DPReview, since their primary focus was "reviewing new cameras" and there aren't very many to review.

Click to expand...

Some of us prefer a mix of DPReview gear and non-gear topics.

Marty4650 said:

My own view is that In the end, there will always be high end users and hobbyists, but probably not enough to sustain so many manufacturers. So some camera makers will thrive and others will disappear or consolidate.

Click to expand...

Very true. We've seen this happen in many other industries.

Marty4650 said:

And there will always be new cameras available for those willing to pay for them. And those new cameras will always be a little bit better than last year's models.

Click to expand...

Mechanical watches are still improving, 50 years after the quartz watch was introduced, which had the same effect on the watch market as cell phones have had on the digital camera market. I enjoy my mechanical watch and my digital camera.

Maturity needs to be gracefully accepted and enjoyed when it inevitably happens...