Reading mode: Light Dark

Have camera makers "abandoned" entry level?

Go to last post
tbcass said:
There's a general trend among young people to be less interested in high-quality anything. High-fidelity sound doesn't matter to them. Quality complex music isn't appreciated much anymore.
Click to expand...
I think that this is pretty much a general thing among young folks and one that has been true for pretty much all of time, not any kind of new trend. Young folks generally are focused on things other than any kind of connoisseurship... that's something that typically comes later.
 
robgendreau said:
robgendreau said:
I suspect I can get much better results shooting RAW with a larger sensor camera than the small sensor phone cameras. That said a phone camera may be a good teaching tool if used manually and a stepping stone to a dedicated camera.
Click to expand...
And consider what one does with photos. I noticed that the only time younger folks wanted to print was with instant film. And the sharing features of the digital cameras was horrid compared to film. So they preferred phones because that's the best and quickest way for them to accomplish their workflow. Whether results are better with a big sensor depends on what one is trying to accomplish. Since these kids grew up with phones, their aesthetics are more attuned to its strengths. Overall they weren't nearly as interested in high res or low noise as camera nerds in these forums; indeed, they like film for it's retro grainy look hence the popularity of instant cameras and Lomography.
Click to expand...
I find it fascinating how much cell phones have altered young people's tastes in cell phones. Granted, I'm old enough that if I had grandkids they'd be old enough to have cell phones...

Look at Instagram: how many photos are selfies shot from arm's length. That's "normal" for gen Z. Show them a picture taken from the 6ft "hyperfocal" distance of grandpa's instamatic and they think the extra distance makes the people look "cold" and "abstract." You've gotta' be right in people's faces. I think it's even affected concepts of personal space.
robgendreau said:
But many do want more eventually, especially in video. Many more of them shoot that than the olds here. It's a huge factor in camera choice.
Click to expand...
Exactly. And since video features help lower the prices of still cameras, while also increasing still photography performance, it's a win-win.
 
Mackiesback said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
In the Nikon Z30 announcement article, someone commented that "all manufacturers seem to be abandoning entry level and budget restrained photographers."

Does anyone here believe this?

I remember going camera shopping with a friend around 1984. He ended up with a Nikon FG, Nikon's entry level camera of the day. The FG launched in 1982, at $325. Running that through the US inflation calculator, that's $975 in 2022 money. There are a ton of capable cameras today at that price point.

I honestly believe that the "entry level" is in better shape than it has ever been before.

As for the severely "budget restrained", there's always the used camera market. So many of us started out that way. My Nikon FM2 and FA were both used cameras, as were my 50/1.4, 20/2.8, 35/2.8 PC (shift lens), 55/3.5 macro, 105/2.5, 200/4 macro. And the 50/1.4 radioactive Pentax Super Takumar I bought used for my ancient Vivitar 220.

I was in my late 20s and working as an engineer for a few years before I treated myself to a brand new camera. By that time, I’d put a lot of film through used gear. And again, it's 2022 with KEH and eBay. Back in 1980 the used market was a shelf at couple of local camera stores, classified ads in a local newspaper, one camera show a year, notices on a corkboard at school, and word-of-mouth sales at a local camera club.

So again, I'd say that the "budget restrained" market is also in better shape than it's ever been before.
Click to expand...
To some extent in the camera maker's eyes they have. Not coming out with new models at a very consistent rate, under certain price points is a pretty good indicator. For many years Nikon/Canon had under $500 kits available at mass retailers all the time. Do you see any of that now? I don't. I am not sure abandoned is the right word, but a hard trend is obvious.
Click to expand...
I saw entry level DSLR kits on display at Target two days ago.

I've seen them recently at Best Buy.
Mackiesback said:
I understand how the used market works, but that is of value to the entry level shooter is they are savvy enough to figure it out. It is of no real benefit to the camera companies.
Click to expand...
It never has been.

But has the entry level ever really kept a major camera company afloat?
 
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
robgendreau said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
I suspect I can get much better results shooting RAW with a larger sensor camera than the small sensor phone cameras. That said a phone camera may be a good teaching tool if used manually and a stepping stone to a dedicated camera.
Click to expand...
And consider what one does with photos. I noticed that the only time younger folks wanted to print was with instant film. And the sharing features of the digital cameras was horrid compared to film. So they preferred phones because that's the best and quickest way for them to accomplish their workflow. Whether results are better with a big sensor depends on what one is trying to accomplish. Since these kids grew up with phones, their aesthetics are more attuned to its strengths. Overall they weren't nearly as interested in high res or low noise as camera nerds in these forums; indeed, they like film for it's retro grainy look hence the popularity of instant cameras and Lomography.
Click to expand...
I find it fascinating how much cell phones have altered young people's tastes in cell phones. Granted, I'm old enough that if I had grandkids they'd be old enough to have cell phones...

Look at Instagram: how many photos are selfies shot from arm's length. That's "normal" for gen Z. Show them a picture taken from the 6ft "hyperfocal" distance of grandpa's instamatic and they think the extra distance makes the people look "cold" and "abstract." You've gotta' be right in people's faces. I think it's even affected concepts of personal space.
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
But many do want more eventually, especially in video. Many more of them shoot that than the olds here. It's a huge factor in camera choice.
Click to expand...
Exactly. And since video features help lower the prices of still cameras, while also increasing still photography performance, it's a win-win.
Click to expand...
Aesthetics certainly do change with the gear being used and the generation of people using that gear. I wonder though just how much of the whole "cellphone aesthetic" has filtered down to the world of art photography? Certainly a more spontaneous, more casually composed (with "mistakes" like blur and over/under exposure more accepted) aesthetic became the thing in the art photography world when compact 35mm cameras became widely available. To my mind this pushed photography into becoming more of it's own medium, rather than one that took it's cues from painting...
 
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
In the Nikon Z30 announcement article, someone commented that "all manufacturers seem to be abandoning entry level and budget restrained photographers."

Does anyone here believe this?

I remember going camera shopping with a friend around 1984. He ended up with a Nikon FG, Nikon's entry level camera of the day. The FG launched in 1982, at $325. Running that through the US inflation calculator, that's $975 in 2022 money. There are a ton of capable cameras today at that price point.

I honestly believe that the "entry level" is in better shape than it has ever been before.

As for the severely "budget restrained", there's always the used camera market. So many of us started out that way. My Nikon FM2 and FA were both used cameras, as were my 50/1.4, 20/2.8, 35/2.8 PC (shift lens), 55/3.5 macro, 105/2.5, 200/4 macro. And the 50/1.4 radioactive Pentax Super Takumar I bought used for my ancient Vivitar 220.

I was in my late 20s and working as an engineer for a few years before I treated myself to a brand new camera. By that time, I’d put a lot of film through used gear. And again, it's 2022 with KEH and eBay. Back in 1980 the used market was a shelf at couple of local camera stores, classified ads in a local newspaper, one camera show a year, notices on a corkboard at school, and word-of-mouth sales at a local camera club.

So again, I'd say that the "budget restrained" market is also in better shape than it's ever been before.
Click to expand...
I'm going to say yes they have.

While you have good points I must remind you of the last days of film cameras.

The Canon Rebel GII sold for $199.99 with a kit lens in the early 2000's, That's $125 less than your friend's 1982 Nikon FG. I realize the GII is/was all plastic however the FG had limited electronics.

Today one can purchase a Canon Rebel T100 for $329.99, again, only $5.00 more than your friend's FG.

Sure, the T100 doesn't have all the current bells and whistles but I see no effort by camera makers to fill this segment of 'entry-level' in their current mirrorless lines. You know, people who don't need a video camera for still photography.

Also, the Canon EF/EF-S and EF-M lens mounts (and probably the Nikon F mount too) are now obsolete so entry into the EOS lens system for new comers with those mounts leaves them with used stock. So why invest in used when the source for replacement lenses and bodies only becomes more and more limited in both availability and in decent condition?

Anyway, if a new interchangeable lens camera user wants to enter into the latest, sustainable for the near future gear, the Sony a6000 at $649.99 is really all there is.

Your position of inflation isn't lost on me but where are the stripped down cameras for still photography? It seems that video is the future of digital maybe that's why film is still around.
 
Last edited:
Aaron801 said:
tbcass said:
There's a general trend among young people to be less interested in high-quality anything. High-fidelity sound doesn't matter to them. Quality complex music isn't appreciated much anymore.
Click to expand...
I think that this is pretty much a general thing among young folks and one that has been true for pretty much all of time, not any kind of new trend. Young folks generally are focused on things other than any kind of connoisseurship... that's something that typically comes later.
Click to expand...
Believe it or not when I was in my 20s between 1965 and 1975 we were very conscious about quality. SLR cameras, high-quality stereo systems, and fancy cars were very important to us.
 
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
Mackiesback said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
In the Nikon Z30 announcement article, someone commented that "all manufacturers seem to be abandoning entry level and budget restrained photographers."

Does anyone here believe this?

I remember going camera shopping with a friend around 1984. He ended up with a Nikon FG, Nikon's entry level camera of the day. The FG launched in 1982, at $325. Running that through the US inflation calculator, that's $975 in 2022 money. There are a ton of capable cameras today at that price point.

I honestly believe that the "entry level" is in better shape than it has ever been before.

As for the severely "budget restrained", there's always the used camera market. So many of us started out that way. My Nikon FM2 and FA were both used cameras, as were my 50/1.4, 20/2.8, 35/2.8 PC (shift lens), 55/3.5 macro, 105/2.5, 200/4 macro. And the 50/1.4 radioactive Pentax Super Takumar I bought used for my ancient Vivitar 220.

I was in my late 20s and working as an engineer for a few years before I treated myself to a brand new camera. By that time, I’d put a lot of film through used gear. And again, it's 2022 with KEH and eBay. Back in 1980 the used market was a shelf at couple of local camera stores, classified ads in a local newspaper, one camera show a year, notices on a corkboard at school, and word-of-mouth sales at a local camera club.

So again, I'd say that the "budget restrained" market is also in better shape than it's ever been before.
Click to expand...
To some extent in the camera maker's eyes they have. Not coming out with new models at a very consistent rate, under certain price points is a pretty good indicator. For many years Nikon/Canon had under $500 kits available at mass retailers all the time. Do you see any of that now? I don't. I am not sure abandoned is the right word, but a hard trend is obvious.
Click to expand...
I saw entry level DSLR kits on display at Target two days ago.

I've seen them recently at Best Buy.
Click to expand...
Huh. Kinda though they were discontinued, perhaps I was foreshadowing.
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
I understand how the used market works, but that is of value to the entry level shooter is they are savvy enough to figure it out. It is of no real benefit to the camera companies.
Click to expand...
It never has been.

But has the entry level ever really kept a major camera company afloat?
Click to expand...
Arguably yes. Without going to deep into margins with data we are all just guessing about anyway, look at the breakdown of Nikons sales over the last decade. The reason they have fallen to a distant third is the erosion of this market segment. They very well may have been carried by this category.
 
tbcass said:
Aaron801 said:
tbcass said:
There's a general trend among young people to be less interested in high-quality anything. High-fidelity sound doesn't matter to them. Quality complex music isn't appreciated much anymore.
Click to expand...
I think that this is pretty much a general thing among young folks and one that has been true for pretty much all of time, not any kind of new trend. Young folks generally are focused on things other than any kind of connoisseurship... that's something that typically comes later.
Click to expand...
Believe it or not when I was in my 20s between 1965 and 1975 we were very conscious about quality. SLR cameras, high-quality stereo systems, and fancy cars were very important to us.
Click to expand...
I guess it depended on what crowd that you were hanging with. When I was in my teens and 20s back in the 80s, folks had cheap boom boxes for music and few I knew even cared about photography. Even when I studied photography for a bit at a university, it didn't seem to have a real culture of fancy gear. I remember a grad student or two with Leica, but that seemed to be more of a curiosity than something that the rest of us lusted for. It was far more about the work - who understood the craft best and was the most creative with it. It was almost a point of pride if you shot with an old Pentax K1000, but could wow the class with the work that you made with it...

--
my flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/128435329@N08/
 
Last edited:
By the 80s standards were going down.
 
Supisiche said:
The ~$500 camera needs a comeback.
Click to expand...
when folk ask me what camera to buy and i ask them their budget they nearly always say 500 ponds ...i say use a phone
 
I am sure it has already been said, but Camera makers have abandoned entry level because the customer base has for the most part abandoned entry level cameras in favor of upper level smart phones. The entry level offerings have reportedly never been profitable, and are no longer a corporate investment that is drawing in sufficient numbers of new customers or creating increased levels of sale for higher end lenses and bodies.
 
Last edited:
ARHK said:
tbcass said:
Mackiesback said:
For many years Nikon/Canon had under $500 kits available at mass retailers all the time. Do you see any of that now?
Click to expand...
Yes, I do.
ARHK said:
I don't. I am not sure abandoned is the right word, but a hard trend is obvious.
Click to expand...
The Canon EOS Rebel T7 EF-S 18-55mm IS II Kit is widely available for $479.
Click to expand...
Yep plenty of Canon kits with defunct lens mounts are available.
Click to expand...
They are not defunct if they are currently available. The high-end Canon 5DM4 and 1DxMIII use the same EF lens mount. The 1Dx is still prized by sports shooters.
 
tbcass said:
Yes. Smartphones are the new entry level.
Click to expand...
Smartphone main features is smart + phone. Smart - personal computer for consumer browse internet/social media, paid bill, gaming... Phone - communication tools for contact family/friend/business...

Photography/videography just sub features of phone.

Many entry-level phone still popular although has worst sensor.

If dedicated camera has worst IQ, then ...
 
justmeMN said:
justmeMN said:
egk4260 wrote: The entry level offerings have reportedly never been profitable,...
Click to expand...
A low-margin sale is more profitable than a lost sale.
Click to expand...
And no sale is more profitable than selling at a loss. Historically, I suspect the companies were OK with low margin models as a way of building brand visibility and loyalty, but when the models started actually losing them money that became hard to justify.

Smartphones had pretty lousy cameras until the last few years, but they were good enough for most people and the convenience couldn't be beat. Now we're seeing high-end phones competing on their cameras, because there's so little else to differentiate them. It's oddly reminiscent of how entry-level cameras used to be advertised. I have a Pixel 6 Pro, and for vacations and casual shooting of random subjects it's much better than I had expected.
 
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
As for the severely "budget restrained", there's always the used camera market.
Click to expand...
Yes! Finally! Somebody else sees it!

We live in an information era so any savvy beginner is probably going to go used. There's no way camera manufacturers can compete with the millions of used camera bodies available for basic photography. The only real reason to go super new is for video.
 
It's a shame if they have - point-and-shoot cameras and so-called advanced compact cameras are all most people need, especially most of us here if we are going to be honest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Can lower end bodies or so called entry level ff camera mounts handle big bulky lenses?
Replies
12
Views
13
beagle1
B
Dick Dastardly
APS-C is now entry level
6 7 8
Replies
149
Views
150
Jaime100
J
studio460
Nikon FM3A | Nikon Df: Lens compatibility . . .
Replies
16
Views
453
GeoffRG
G
DavidMillier
Entry level camera market appears to be dead
2 3
Replies
57
Views
58
liggy
liggy
S
Nikon z5ii vs z6iii real world shooting experience
Replies
3
Views
515
ernest56
E

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top