Why don't they provide internal memory in cameras?

[Bora Cyprus]

Think about your laptop the first thing to go wrong is built in card reader. In fact when two things are combined one always go bad first built in DVD or VCR. Always goes first

A laptop hard-disk is more similar to internal memory than a card reader. Why would it go bad first or second?

 

[Bora Cyprus]

Since most of the cameras has 4k shooting options, It would be awesome if cameras have 32/64 gig internal memory. It would solve many problems including expensive cards, forgot card at home..etc

GB for GB, the internal memory is more expensive than the external one.

Check the price of the smartphone to see this inconvenient truth.

 

[Bora Cyprus]

My point was to have internal memory with SD slots. Use only SD card if you please.

 

[donaldsc]

They used to, and it was awesome. Use the internal storage or the card slot, or both.

Yes, they used to have internal image memory, but it was slow, only held a few pictures, and it was an awful user experience! I've been using digital cameras since 1989, and I remember the way it was.

I much prefer having ZERO internal storage memory!

I can't believe people are complaining about the cost of a few gigs of storage. Like that would impact the cost of an ilc by more than 2%.

$1000 for a camera, 2% is $200, much more expensive than most cards!

Plus you are limited to the memory the manufacturer chooses, not the best on the market if that's what you want!

Lastly you then have to tether your camera to download the files...again there was a time you HAD to do that! Much prefer using card readers!

Is that the new math??

 

[Tom_N]

I agree with OP.

Memory is dirt cheap for the manufacturer. It would probably add a buck or two at most to the build of a camera and the manufacturer could pass that on to consumer with a substantial mark up to increase their profit.

It will cost a camera maker more than "a buck or two" for 64 GB of flash, especially the better grade of it that some seem to think that they will get.

And yes, if a manufacturer builds that into the camera they will include a "substantial" mark up, relative to the cost of a comparable flash card. Then, where are the savings? There is no motivation for manufacturers to include internal flash if the only reason is that the camera buyer wants something "expensive" for free.

 

[HRC2016]

If you forget your memory card then maybe photography is not for you.

 

[tkbslc]

... It would solve many problems including expensive cards..

So, you are assuming internal memory will be completely free and not included into the retail price?

Just the thought of downloading stuff over the camera`s USB instead of a dedicated card reader makes me fall asleep...

Good point in data transfer, plugging in the camera is painfully slow.

It doesn't have to be. Copying from an iPhone to a PC over lightning cable is very fast. Camera makers just insist on using 2005 port technology and then convincing us that's a good thing because now we can carry use a separate card reader.

 

[mkphoto79]

... It would solve many problems including expensive cards..

So, you are assuming internal memory will be completely free and not included into the retail price?

Just the thought of downloading stuff over the camera`s USB instead of a dedicated card reader makes me fall asleep...

Good point in data transfer, plugging in the camera is painfully slow.

It doesn't have to be. Copying from an iPhone to a PC over lightning cable is very fast. Camera makers just insist on using 2005 port technology and then convincing us that's a good thing because now we can carry use a separate card reader.

Well I have yet to see a camera that uses a Apple lightning cable so my statement is still accurate. With what we have available its painfully slow.

 

[araudan]

in, I can't think of one single drawback. Even just something small like a 4GB internal would be a huge benefit even if it just gets disabled as soon as you stick the SD in.

Physical space, heat and security are some reasons. The manufacturers are packing a lot of tech in already. They likely could make room for internal memory but some users wouldn't want any extra bulk. More components using power can generate more or prevent dissipation of heat which doesn't help cameras at all. Some photographers wouldn't want any chance that an image could be left on a camera once a memory card is removed. Some situations in some ares of the world could put people at risk.

Like anything else there are pros and cons. How you see it depends on POV.

 

[tkbslc]

If you forget your memory card then maybe photography is not for you.

Your above comment has to be in the top 10 dumbest things ever posted to dpreview. Maybe top 5.

 

[HRC2016]

If you forget your memory card then maybe photography is not for you.

Your above comment has to be in the top 10 dumbest things ever posted to dpreview. Maybe top 5.

You can't argue with evolution. Not everyone is meant to be a photographer (or any other hobby or profession). Photography requires attention to detail, among other things. Many of us take steps so we don't leave gear behind. Those have been discussed on other threads.

Forgetting important tools doesn't mean you're a bad person or still can't have fun.

 

[Bora Cyprus]

Dear great photographer,

I was talking about general person who likes to take photos. It could be casual photographer who wants to learn photography. Since we are used to internal memory in phones these days, I believe internal memory is going to happen for cameras as well since memory are getting cheaper day by day. But you will still use SD cards, since you are a pro level photographer. Please don't bother to comment with your great insights. We will learn by time.

 

[John_A_G]

My point was to have internal memory with SD slots. Use only SD card if you please.

Like every other feature a subset of consumers might like, manufacturers do a cost-benefit analysis. Internally memory chips would be part of the board (like they are on phones). This means more real estate/bigger board needed and it adds cost that they have to pass along to the consumer.

Clearly, manufacturers have decided the benefits aren't worth the added costs. For example - how much memory to include? too much and it raises the cost to make the device. Too little and it will be useless many consumers.

You make comments in this thread about memory getting cheap, but that's true of memory cards too.

Your "want" is merely one of thousands of "wants" subsets of consumers have. Clearly not enough consumers have the same want.

Now, why have we seen more and more phones with internal memory vs. cards? First, because it can be a money maker - upcharges for more memory. Second, weather sealing. As there is a higher demand for devices that are more water resistant we see more devices sealed.

I think it's perfectly OK for you to want it. But the simple answer of why they don't do it is not enough people want it.

 

[tkbslc]

If you'd have started a thread asking for a camera with ridiculous hardware specs, you'd have plenty of support. "Yes, friend, I too would like a full frame 20-200mm f2 pancake zoom that is waterproof!"

But when you ask for something easily doable, cheap, useful and reasonable? "Burn the witch!"

 

[stevenj2]

No problem ever with the internal memory in any Android phone, tablet nor the iPad i have. Only the occasional micro SD read only or locked or failures. It's just outdated practice of the camera mfgrs the oldtimers here make excuses for.

Really is anyone expecting to have the DSLR of today, worried about using in another 20-30 years and the viability of internal memory?

 

[Richard B99]

Since most of the cameras has 4k shooting options, It would be awesome if cameras have 32/64 gig internal memory. It would solve many problems including expensive cards, forgot card at home..etc

I have Mavic Air and I appreciate 8 gig internal memory. It's good enough for 1080p videos and photos for a single day shoot.

It would be a btave man to do that. C an you imagine the outrage and opprobrium directed at the first manufacturer from these forums. Nikon took one slot off its D7500 and you would have thought the world had ended. Most poeple hate Apples no card policy too and the prices they charge for additional onboard memory. Few if any camera manufacturer has the brand strength to get away with that.

Other than that, it’s not a daft idea if it were coupled with really good WiFi transferability, inbuilt apps in an open ecosystem to manipulate images and an onboard SIM card...

 

[Bobthearch]

Since most of the cameras has 4k shooting options, It would be awesome if cameras have 32/64 gig internal memory. It would solve many problems including expensive cards, forgot card at home..etc

I have Mavic Air and I appreciate 8 gig internal memory. It's good enough for 1080p videos and photos for a single day shoot.

It would cost more.

I like having memory that is upgradeable, expandable, and replaceable.

If you don't remove the cards from your camera, and there's generally no reason to, in essence they are functionally performing exactly as internal memory.

Having only 8GB of memory would suck, as would a ripoff memory upgrade pricing scheme similar to Apple's.

--
Personal non-commercial websites with no ads or tracking:
Local photography: http://ratonphotos.com/
Travel and photography: http://placesandpics.com/
Special-interest photos: http://ghosttowns.placesandpics.com/

 

[Jestertheclown]

They used to, and it was awesome. Use the internal storage or the card slot, or both.

Yes, they used to have internal image memory, but it was slow, only held a few pictures, and it was an awful user experience! I've been using digital cameras since 1989, and I remember the way it was.

I much prefer having ZERO internal storage memory!

I can't believe people are complaining about the cost of a few gigs of storage. Like that would impact the cost of an ilc by more than 2%.

$1000 for a camera, 2% is $200, much more expensive than most cards!

How much . . . ?

2% of 1000 is 20.

A good deal cheaper than many cards; dependent upon their size etc.

Plus you are limited to the memory the manufacturer chooses, not the best on the market if that's what you want!

Lastly you then have to tether your camera to download the files...again there was a time you HAD to do that! Much prefer using card readers!

"It's good to be . . . . . . . . . Me!"

 

[mamallama]

Since most of the cameras has 4k shooting options, It would be awesome if cameras have 32/64 gig internal memory. It would solve many problems including expensive cards, forgot card at home..etc

I have Mavic Air and I appreciate 8 gig internal memory. It's good enough for 1080p videos and photos for a single day shoot.

It would cost more.

I like having memory that is upgradeable, expandable, and replaceable.

If you don't remove the cards from your camera, and there's generally no reason to, in essence they are functionally performing exactly as internal memory.

Having only 8GB of memory would suck, as would a ripoff memory upgrade pricing scheme similar to Apple's.

Some older P&S cameras have a token internal memory for dire emergency use that can record maybe a few dozen pictures. My old Lumix LX5 has it but I've never had an emergency to need it.

--
Personal non-commercial websites with no ads or tracking:
Local photography: http://ratonphotos.com/
Travel and photography: http://placesandpics.com/
Special-interest photos: http://ghosttowns.placesandpics.com/

 

[Mike_PEAT]