Saving the compact camera

[itsastickup]

To contradict Canon, I think smartphones are the enemy.

So what does a consumer compact bring that a smartphone doesn't? Not much. And it's (mostly) missing the ability to instantly or easily upload to facebook.

Perhaps what's needed is a 'facebook' or 'social' camera whose specs would get itself some street cred with a bit of hipster appeal.

Fit it with a low MP APS-C sensor with a quality f2.8 35mm lens, for some DOF control and ultra high ISO and DR, and the hipsters might bite. Maybe enough to make a marketing splash, in my fetid imaginings.

Then it needs superior connectivity. If not an android 3G chassis, which would mount up the cost far too high, wifi coupled to a really good-n-simple android or iphone app on the smartphone. I think generally the smartphone is going to be there for most buyers any way, so one may as well make use of it. Even without android or a smartphone, an tcp/ip stack + LUA and then facebook/google+/flickr support should be easy enough.

And give it a classic, clunky look.

Any body got any better ideas?

 

[meland]

To contradict Canon, I think smartphones are the enemy.

So what does a consumer compact bring that a smartphone doesn't? Not much. And it's (mostly) missing the ability to instantly or easily upload to facebook.

Perhaps what's needed is a 'facebook' or 'social' camera whose specs would get itself some street cred with a bit of hipster appeal.

Fit it with a low MP APS-C sensor with a quality f2.8 35mm lens, for some DOF control and ultra high ISO and DR, and the hipsters might bite. Maybe enough to make a marketing splash, in my fetid imaginings.

Then it needs superior connectivity. If not an android 3G chassis, which would mount up the cost far too high, wifi coupled to a really good-n-simple android or iphone app on the smartphone. I think generally the smartphone is going to be there for most buyers any way, so one may as well make use of it. Even without android or a smartphone, an tcp/ip stack + LUA and then facebook/google+/flickr support should be easy enough.

And give it a classic, clunky look.

Any body got any better ideas?

--
Dpreview blocker :
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/344311

Well the minute we start using terms like 'hipsters' we are probably years out of date already.

In my opinion the cheaper end of the compact camera market is already gone and there is no point in trying to protect it.

Smartphone users are already happy with what they offer, other than perhaps zoom range, so the only people to whom you are going to be able to sell a low MP APS-C sensor with a quality f2.8 35mm lens, for some DOF control and ultra high ISO and DR, are a few enthusiasts and that's a tiny market. Not saying it's not a good niche idea but it isn't going to rescue the compact market.

No, I suspect the battle ground will move to relatively large sensored, fixed zoom cameras. And when I say relatively large, I mean probably about 1". Such cameras can offer impressive zoom ranges, be reasonably sized and offer an appreciable advantage to a smartphone user who wants more - but without going to the expense or fuss of either a DSLR or mirrorless CSC.

Nikon got lambasted for their 1 Series but I suspect they were probably just a bit early for their intended market and history may well prove them to be right.

 

[Serickmetz]

Nope compact cameras are dead.

 

[Dennis]

So what does a consumer compact bring that a smartphone doesn't?

A zoom lens. If you're looking at the average consumer digicam, that's mostly it.

And it's (mostly) missing the ability to instantly or easily upload to facebook.

Well, that, and people aren't going to replace their cell phones with cameras, so selling them a camera means convincing them to carry two devices. So connectivity might be a must-have, but then the camera has to sell itself on something else.

Fit it with a low MP APS-C sensor with a quality f2.8 35mm lens, for some DOF control and ultra high ISO and DR, and the hipsters might bite.

I think anyone who would choose that would choose it whether it uploads to facebook or not.

Any body got any better ideas?

Nope. I think that's why Canon is taking the approach they're taking. Cell phones are here; they're taking market share and it's up to camera manufacturers to sell cameras to people who want them (and convince people to want them).

• Dennis
  --
  Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com

 

[yardcoyote]

I am kind of in the one inch sensor camp at this point. I think connectivity plus a much bigger sensor plus better glass are all going to be necessary to get at least some people to carry a very small camera in addition to their phone.

I had a very basic small sensor point and shoot and pretty much stopped carrying it when I got my DSLR last year-- either I carry the big guy (actually a modestly sized crop sensor Pentax) or I just use my iPod camera, which is the same as the one in the previous generation iPhone. However, I still miss having a proper camera with a better lens and some controls with me all the time.

The latest thing to catch my eye is the new NX F1 from Samsung, which looks like it is going to be a super tiny one inch sensor camera with interchangeable lenses, including (at least in the rumors) some primes, one of which may be a 40mm equivalent. Looks quite nifty to me, as I prefer a prime to a zoom.

As it is, I think most small cameras in the future will be the tools of artists and bloggers and/or the walk around cameras of enthusiasts rather than family or casual snapshot cameras. The phone camera will take over that job.

 

[crashpc]

I have an idea. This is not our problem :-D

Let them fight their problems...

 

[Klaus dk]

Nope compact cameras are dead.

Strange - I just took a couple of pitures with mine, it seemed perfectly sound.

 

[Serickmetz]

Nope compact cameras are dead.

Strange - I just took a couple of pitures with mine, it seemed perfectly sound.

Lol your too easy going on them because you can handle the bigger stuff too ;D

 

[yonsarh]

Nope compact cameras are dead.

yes we can now see compact cameras now cost around 100-200 bucks.

 

[tcg550]

To contradict Canon, I think smartphones are the enemy.
--
Dpreview blocker :
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/344311

Enemy of who?

And what is a Dpreview blocker script?

 

[pavi1]

Fit it with a low MP APS-C sensor with a quality f2.8 35mm lens, for some DOF control and ultra high ISO and DR, and the hipsters might bite. Maybe enough to make a marketing splash, in my fetid imaginings.

Heard of Fuji X100 and X100s? Eye-Fi card and your high quality pics can become low quality Facebook pics in a matter of seconds.

 

[sportyaccordy]

Perhaps what's needed is a 'facebook' or 'social' camera whose specs would get itself some street cred with a bit of hipster appeal.

 

[sportyaccordy]

Cheap P&Ss are dead. I said it before. The only way for manufacturers to claw back the ground lost to smartphones is to make smartphones of their own. CaNikon already have experience with

• WiFi
• Touchscreens
• Electronics/manufacturing

Everyone sources things like processors, antennas etc. And Android already has a proven, robust platform for them to build the phones with. It's a no brainer. It would be less of an effort than their mirrorless platforms.

 

[sportyaccordy]

I am kind of in the one inch sensor camp at this point. I think connectivity plus a much bigger sensor plus better glass are all going to be necessary to get at least some people to carry a very small camera in addition to their phone.

Why not just put a 1" sensor on a phone, since you have to carry the phone around with you anyway? Since it's being marketed to "hipsters", I'm guessing things like manual controls and accessory support aren't important... meaning ergos compromised for form over function would be OK. Not to mention, seems pretty stupid to have 2 devices, when one does everything the other one does.

Yep... the most logical conclusion is to just make higher quality cameras for phones. Zeiss and Leica could pimp out their names some more.

 

[hdr]

... In my opinion the cheaper end of the compact camera market is already gone and there is no point in trying to protect it ...

... No, I suspect the battle ground will move to relatively large sensored, fixed zoom cameras. And when I say relatively large, I mean probably about 1". Such cameras can offer impressive zoom ranges, be reasonably sized and offer an appreciable advantage to a smartphone user who wants more - but without going to the expense or fuss of either a DSLR or mirrorless CSC ...

Right on.

Today, compact cameras of every sophistication and spec exist and are improving by the day. More and more professional photographers are wowing, marvelling over or coming to relish the sophistication of today's compact cameras than ever before.

Thus, the need to 'save' the compact camera should never have to arise.

With kindest regards.

--
Depth haz been the mizzing dimenzion for long enough, but still, few are bothered with 3D.
Enjoy Free-Viewing Colorful 3D Without Glasses:- http://www.singaporegallery.com

 

[Draek]

To contradict Canon, I think smartphones are the enemy.

So what does a consumer compact bring that a smartphone doesn't?

• Larger sensor
• Decent ergonomics
• An actual shutter button
• Optical zoom
• Optical stabilization
• Its own, dedicated battery

And do keep in mind all those sans the sensor and maybe the shutter button are inherent to the category: a smartphone with decent ergonomics for photography for instance would be absolutely awful for everything else a smartphone is supposed to do, and similar issues arise with the rest of the list.

Not much. And it's (mostly) missing the ability to instantly or easily upload to facebook.

You're never, ever making a camera where it's easier to share an image on social networks than on a smartphone. Ever.

Perhaps what's needed is a 'facebook' or 'social' camera whose specs would get itself some street cred with a bit of hipster appeal.

Fit it with a low MP APS-C sensor with a quality f2.8 35mm lens, for some DOF control and ultra high ISO and DR, and the hipsters might bite. Maybe enough to make a marketing splash, in my fetid imaginings.

Even in the most optimistic of cases, you've long abandoned the category of digital compact and are deep into premium FLC territory —which is neither a category that needs saving right now, nor one you want to compete in with nothing but Facebook sharing functionality. The Coolpix A had many more advantages to it, and it's still considered a critical failure.

Then it needs superior connectivity. If not an android 3G chassis, which would mount up the cost far too high, wifi coupled to a really good-n-simple android or iphone app on the smartphone. I think generally the smartphone is going to be there for most buyers any way, so one may as well make use of it. Even without android or a smartphone, an tcp/ip stack + LUA and then facebook/google+/flickr support should be easy enough.

Samsung already has that in its wifi-capable cameras, which range from $100 basic point-n-shoots to its newer NX ILCs. It's pretty useful, I'd say, but it's still somewhat more cumbersome than simply taking a photo with your smartphone in the first place —thus I can easily see people making use of it, even a few switching brands to have it, but switching product lines altogether? yeah, no. I don't even see someone buying a more expensive camera to have that functionality, nevermind going from "no camera, I'll just use my smartphone" to whatever price you're aiming your product at.

And give it a classic, clunky look.

Any body got any better ideas?

Yup: mourn our loss and move on.

 

[MoreorLess]

Well the minute we start using terms like 'hipsters' we are probably years out of date already.

In my opinion the cheaper end of the compact camera market is already gone and there is no point in trying to protect it.

Realistically I think that the cheaper end of the compact market was already dying when it became cheap. You look back 10-15 years and low end compacts where being sold for sub $150 that they have been for recent years.

Smartphone users are already happy with what they offer, other than perhaps zoom range, so the only people to whom you are going to be able to sell a low MP APS-C sensor with a quality f2.8 35mm lens, for some DOF control and ultra high ISO and DR, are a few enthusiasts and that's a tiny market. Not saying it's not a good niche idea but it isn't going to rescue the compact market.

No, I suspect the battle ground will move to relatively large sensored, fixed zoom cameras. And when I say relatively large, I mean probably about 1". Such cameras can offer impressive zoom ranges, be reasonably sized and offer an appreciable advantage to a smartphone user who wants more - but without going to the expense or fuss of either a DSLR or mirrorless CSC.

Nikon got lambasted for their 1 Series but I suspect they were probably just a bit early for their intended market and history may well prove them to be right.

The problem with the Nikon 1 series for me is that it doesn't really exploit its smaller sensor offering no size or cost saving relative to m43 options.

Nikon need to be saving a lot more size than they have thus far, especially in the lenses.

 

[MoreorLess]

If cameras like the Sony RX100 and the Canon G1X mk 2 can start to come down to the $300-400 range I think you'll start to see a significant growth in the market for them.

 

[meland]

If cameras like the Sony RX100 and the Canon G1X mk 2 can start to come down to the $300-400 range I think you'll start to see a significant growth in the market for them.

Really? Even at a reduced price who is going to want them? Of course a few enthusiasts might, those that haven't already bought one that is, but again tiny numbers.

 

[MysteryLemon]

Seriously. The compact camera as a consumer tool doesn't need saving. It's already dead, and no fancy marketing or gimmicky functions is going to draw the consumer away from their smartphones.

For the consumer, it's all about ease of use and convenience. Carrying a dedicated camera and a phone around with you isn't convenient. Nor is it to have to remove the SD card to plug into a PC to then upload to facebook. Yes, there are wifi cameras these days but they are cumbersome and slow to use. The smartphone can so all this without even leaving the camera app, and the difference in image quality really isn't that far off, especially when all you do is upload them to facebook where they are resized and compressed anyway.

Camera manufacturers took FAR too long to get with the times. Facebook has been around for 10 years, the smartphone almost the same. Why are we only JUST seeing wifi enabled cameras?

People who want or need a good camera for image quality these days buy a DSLR or Mirrorless. Everyone else just uses their phone. The consumer compact doesn't even get a second thought. Let it die. No one wants them any more.