Camera phones will replace DSLRs!!

[Geoffc]

We keep hearing this claim being made and for some scenarios I would agree that it could happen, however not for all by a long way.

Last night my son and partner had their engagement party in a dimly lit and noisy room above a bar in Manchester. The younger people probably thought it was bright and quiet!

I took my D800, 24-120f4 and my SB900 flash. I've already seen photos on Facebook from camera phones and I've now posted mine. The phone images are so dark and grainy you can barely see people, whereas mine are nicely lit and balanced images that really show the place off. At ISO 800 I could light the room with the SB900.

It was also so dark in the corners of the room that I couldn't actually make faces out through the viewfinder, but the camera AF in conjunction with the SB900 red AF light was fast and accurate.

Ok I had over £3000 of gear and they had multi function devices, but nonetheless I know which won the day. I do appreciate the fact that I lugged a heavy camera around all night and as it's my hobby that's ok, however if phones ever take over it will be another Concord retirement moment where we move backwards in our evolution.

 

[bordsmnj]

I had a similar thought tonight. As I walked over to get a drink of water I saw my camera sitting on the dinning room table. I thought it looked ....big. Technology grows in leaps in bounds. So, I think in a few short year our cameras will not be as bulky as they are now. I mean I have no complaints but I just don't think the size will be necessary any more beyond being big enough to attach a lens to. What do you think cameras will be like in 10 years?? -Jas

 

[Silven]

Sony's new A7R comes to mind........

 

[BackdoorArts]

I went to a concert Friday night and sat in the front row next to a friend. I had my D600, he had his iPhone 5. Difference in photos is night and day. That said, he'll always be able to take his phone in.

I don't believe the camera phone will ever kill the DSLR, but I believe mirrorless will supplant it eventually. And I believe that at some point there's going to be a seriously good camera in a phone that will change that game as well, but I can't see the idea of a single purpose image capture system ever going away. It will adapt more and more of the functions that people love about cameraphones (immediate upload/sharing capability, built-in wifi and editing, touchscreens, GPS, etc.), but the minute you list its main purpose as something other than that you have to deal with all the size and ergonomic issues that go with that.

 

[wud]

Someday we will get raw files with our phones. I've tried my friends mirror less (was it Leica?) and the quality are pretty amazing. It's not fast, but he don't need that. He had Nikon D3 before this (but sadly it got stolen).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dave_W]

If DSLR's remain the same and do not evolve with time, then yes, I would agree that cell phone cameras may someday eclipse DSLR's. However, I don't believe this will be the case. It seems more likely that as cell phone cameras evolve so too will DSLR's in a way that will always keep a quality gap between the two. I wouldn't be surprised if this gap narrows over time but I don't see the two equalling one another any time soon.

 

[Geoffc]

I went to a concert Friday night and sat in the front row next to a friend. I had my D600, he had his iPhone 5. Difference in photos is night and day. That said, he'll always be able to take his phone in.

I don't believe the camera phone will ever kill the DSLR, but I believe mirrorless will supplant it eventually. And I believe that at some point there's going to be a seriously good camera in a phone that will change that game as well, but I can't see the idea of a single purpose image capture system ever going away. It will adapt more and more of the functions that people love about cameraphones (immediate upload/sharing capability, built-in wifi and editing, touchscreens, GPS, etc.), but the minute you list its main purpose as something other than that you have to deal with all the size and ergonomic issues that go with that.

Jake, if you're referring to your Musikfest Cafe pictures on Flickr they are pretty stunning and I was going to ask what your post processing workflow is. They are extremely sharp. They would not be possible with a phone camera.

 

[nmccamy]

Eventually photographs will be the product of some kind of strange camera that can project the image onto atoms (perhaps 3D hologram like) with the resolution equal to the space between atoms. Archaic lenses won't be used. Instead, atom characteristics will be collected for a given area and used to create the image. There won't be any kind of detectable distortion, and the image will be identical to the source. In essence you will see exactly what you would see when viewing the real source, in 3D.

 

[Steve B]

Eventually photographs will be the product of some kind of strange camera that can project the image onto atoms (perhaps 3D hologram like) with the resolution equal to the space between atoms. Archaic lenses won't be used. Instead, atom characteristics will be collected for a given area and used to create the image. There won't be any kind of detectable distortion, and the image will be identical to the source. In essence you will see exactly what you would see when viewing the real source, in 3D.

But probably not in my lifetime

 

[wornish]

I am surprised as this is Nikonites that no one has mentioned the Nikon 1 series. They are mirrorless very small and light and also give amazing results. OK not as good as a D800 in low light but blazingly fast to focus and superb IQ. You can take one anywhere you can take a mobile phone.

 

[Dave_W]

I am surprised as this is Nikonites that no one has mentioned the Nikon 1 series. They are mirrorless very small and light and also give amazing results. OK not as good as a D800 in low light but blazingly fast to focus and superb IQ. You can take one anywhere you can take a mobile phone.

I'm thinking the reason there's not much chatter about the 1 series is because very few of us own one. Both Nikon and Canon have sunk a ton of capital into the mirrorless cameras but so far they've not caught on with the general public, let alone the pro-sumer/pro market. As a result, Nikon has sweetened the 1 series with an f/1.2 lens which is definitely getting my attention. The only concern I have is glare. If the glare on the screen of the N-1 is anything like the glare on my D800 LCD then not having a view finder will be difficult. That said, I'm enjoying watching the price of these cameras go lower and lower as Nikon searches for a way to ignite this series. At some point soon I'm sure I'll be a buyer.....just not quite yet.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I'm thinking the reason there's not much chatter about the 1 series is because very few of us own one. Both Nikon and Canon have sunk a ton of capital into the mirrorless cameras but so far they've not caught on with the general public, let alone the pro-sumer/pro market. As a result, Nikon has sweetened the 1 series with an f/1.2 lens which is definitely getting my attention. The only concern I have is glare. If the glare on the screen of the N-1 is anything like the glare on my D800 LCD then not having a view finder will be difficult. That said, I'm enjoying watching the price of these cameras go lower and lower as Nikon searches for a way to ignite this series. At some point soon I'm sure I'll be a buyer.....just not quite yet.

I don't see any serious future for any type of camera that doesn't have a viewfinder with an eyepiece, that you hold up to your eye. A plain screen on the back just does not work ergonomically, and it never will. You can't hold a camera steady enough if you have to hold it out far enough in front of you to be able to look at a regular screen. As much as Nikon and others (Even Hasselblad, if you'll believe it.) are trying to push such cameras, I don't believe they will ever sell very well to serious photographers. I don't think they'll ever be anything more than an upscale version of a cheap point-and-shoot camera.

There's a type of mirrorless camera where you look into an eyepiece, just as on a DSLR, but what you see is not an SLR-type optical viewfinder, but an electronic screen. Most of these cameras even tend to resemble a DSLR, albeit a bit smaller and lighter. If the DSLR ever becomes obsolete, that, I think, is what will take its place. An SLR is all about the viewfinder; that's what separates an SLR from every other type of camera. I don't see any good reason why an electronic viewfinder can't be as good as an SLR-type optical viewfinder, or why a camera based on this sort of configuration can't be as good in every way as a true DSLR, with the added bonus of being mechanically simpler and therefore less expensive and more reliable. They don't seem to be there quite yet, but I am sure that they will be, at which point, there'll be little continued purpose for the true DSLR.

 

[wornish]

Optical viewfinders are superb and natural but they can't do focus assist or increase sensitivity. Electronic viewfinders will supersede its innovation and unstoppable.

 

[JDFlood]

[SUP]I have an iPhone 5s (It's camera has a larger sensor than previous models, faster lens too), a Leica X2 (mirrorless APS-C), A Fuji XE-1 (mirrorless APS-C), and a D800. I have my phone with me at all times, I have either my Leica or Fuji with me at all times, and when I anticipate really going to get good photos I take the D800. Each in accending order takes better photos, each significantly. Each is larger and heavier than the former. It's going to stay like that for a long time! (It has been like that for a long time). Each form factor will get better, advance further. Don't forget, next year will be the year of 4K monitors and TVs... this will be the preferred viewing devices of photos... driving the need for much higher resovolution photos (than an iPhone, or APS-C.

iPhones replace the DSLR...very funny. JD[/SUP]