Are interchangeable lens cameras becoming niche products

[Sootchucker]

Let me start by saying I love my gear (both Olympus and Nikon), but a recent holiday to Croatia and our annual upcoming trip to London got me thinking.

For the Croatian trip, as usual I packed a body and some lenses (in this case my OM-1, M.Zuiko 12-100, Leica 8-18, M.Zuiko 50mm F1.2). However I also had with me my GoPro 9 in the Mod case with extra batteries and the new Volta grip along with my iPhone 13 Pro. When I was on holiday I shot lots of Video and images, however on arriving home and checking them, I only used the OM-1 half a dozen times and for the other several hundred it was either my iPhone or the GoPro. To be honest, for the intended output (on a 4k TV combined into a "holiday" movie), the image quality was more than acceptable (actually much more than acceptable). When I thought about it, I think it was mainly because we did a lot of walking and the temperatures were between 40-45 deg C so I just didn't want to lug around a backpack with me in that heat, so instead used a small "bum-bag" I'd taken which worked perfectly.

Now of course when it comes to low light photography, shallow depth of field (although I have to say the iPhone's Cinematic video mode does a pretty convincing job of achieving ultra shallow DOF), and of course wildlife photography with long lenses, they will still be the preserve of interchangeable lens cameras (at least for the time being). However, for everything else, (so I'm talking general holiday images etc,), I'm finding I want to take just the GoPro and iPhone more and more now for it's ultra light weight, still amazing stabilization, and from the GoPro's perspective, the ability to go in the water with it and still very good image quality, that I'm leaving the big cameras back at home, and to be honest, not really missing them ?

Anyone else finding this, or am I the last to realise ?

Here's a few examples from the iPhone. Nothing award winning but more than good enough for holiday memories methinks ?

 

[andrewc]

Whilst I take a dSLR along in our motorhome on holidays, often I won't use it, unless there is a special thing I'm wanting to photograph. I do take my Canon G1X compact with me and will often choose that - any my iphone.

 

[cambsno]

In agreement - I am taking my XT3 away less and less, X100F and iphone 13pro in most cases. Going away tomorrow to Jersey and working out what to take!

 

[Nod]

I'll be taking the Fuji kit with me in a couple of weeks because some of the places we'll be visiting are new to us and I don't have any shots of them yet so want the best I can get. I'll be taking a couple of action cams and a compact as well and they'll probably get as much use as the ILCs.

 

[imattersuk]

I took a Sony A7R III and 2 lenses on holiday this year and it was a PITA in the heat so hardly used it. My best shots were taken on the iPhone 13 Pro.

My ideal set up would be Fuji X100V + iPhone 13 Pro, if I’ve still got the Fuji by the time I go away again that will be my combo, fits in a very small man bag plus wallet, phone, glasses etc.

 

[RichardC27]

For most people doing travel / holiday / day out photography then yes they are becoming a niche product. Any recent flagship smartphone will take more than good enough photos for 99% of people, and most of them have multiple focal lengths available now too. So using a dedicated ILC is more because you want to, the process of taking photos etc more than final image quality for most people now. I wouldn't look at the photos in the OP and immediately tell they'd been taken on a phone. A few years ago there was an obvious difference in quality between a phone and 'real' camera but mobile photography has come a long way in the past few years.

I took my X-T4 and the little 18-55mm lens on holiday to Croatia earlier this year and used it once, as my Pixel 6 takes photos that are absolutely fine for holiday snaps. But, I'd absolutely love an X100 series camera, I feel like I'd use it a lot on holiday.

That said, for more specialised photography, like sports, macro, portraits etc then no a phone won't do the job.

 

[woof woof]

I don't like using phones for photography or back screen shooting.

Years ago I took my Canon 5D with 50mm f1.4 but some won't be happy with just one lens. In more recent years I've taken a Panasonic or Sony mirrorless camera and a compact. The last couple of times I've taken my Sony A7 with 35mm f2.8 which is a very compact combination and a Panasonic TZ100 which is a 1" sensor compact with a 25-250mm lens.

Most people seem to just use phones. I see very few people with dedicated cameras. When in Thailand and Singapore I think westerners were the most likely to be seen using Canon/Nikon DSLR's but I've seen very few Fuji, Sony, Panasonic or Olympus cameras out and about and that goes for the UK too.

 

[The Duke of Bork]

Interchangeable lens cameras have always been a niche product. Even in the "heyday" of SLRs, many more people were using compact cameras (Olympus Trip, anyone?), 110 pocket cameras, even disposable cameras, than ever used cameras with interchangeable lenses. Photographic enthusiasts have a skewed perspective...

 

[Phil V]

Interchangeable lens cameras have always been a niche product. Even in the "heyday" of SLRs, many more people were using compact cameras (Olympus Trip, anyone?), 110 pocket cameras, even disposable cameras, than ever used cameras with interchangeable lenses. Photographic enthusiasts have a skewed perspective...

This
There has always been leaner periods, and periods of popularity,
But ‘niche’ fits the whole history.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

The question has been asked before and you may well find most people now default to phones with all that this entails. They think they need only need 6" resolution to be displayed on phone screen and apps alike. Until they don't but that's their problem. They actually have mostly no basic photography knowledge to take advantage of scene and light anyway so anything better would be actually wasted on them and this creates business opportunity for us. So yes that is becoming a niche, and you may think that's a good thing.

Would I use a phone for anything other than note taking / ref shots? Hell no. IQ is nowhere near there. Yes, it is not anywhere near there even with all AI trickery they employ but it is sure adequate for above use is bright sunny conditions.

 

[RichardC27]

The question has been asked before and you may well find most people now default to phones with all that this entails. They think they need only need 6" resolution to be displayed on phone screen and apps alike. Until they don't but that's their problem. They actually have mostly no basic photography knowledge to take advantage of scene and light anyway so anything better would be actually wasted on them and this creates business opportunity for us. So yes that is becoming a niche, and you may think that's a good thing.

Would I use a phone for anything other than note taking / ref shots? Hell no. IQ is nowhere near there. Yes, it is not anywhere near there even with all AI trickery they employ but it is sure adequate for above use is bright sunny conditions.

Modern phones are absolutely incredible in low light. That's actually where most of the progress has been made. Yes the IQ falls apart a bit if you want to view them on a big monitor or make big prints from phone photos, but 99.999% of people don't do that.

To say people using phones have no photographic knowledge to take advantage of a scene etc isn't true. A camera is a camera, and composition, framing, use of light etc all still apply. Yes you don't have as much control but that's all part of the fun. I get immense satisfaction from taking good quality images with a phone. As the saying goes, the best camera is the one you have with you. A modern smartphone with a decent photographer using it will take better photos than someone with no skill using a DSLR and kit lens.

 

[woof woof]

A modern smartphone with a decent photographer using it will take better photos than someone with no skill using a DSLR and kit lens.

I suppose a lot hangs on how you judge the photo. Some of the greats from the history of photography were taken with technically poor kit but does it matter? It's a personal decision. I suppose for clear sharp pictures of birds in flight it definitely matters but for a holiday picture of the Mrs stood at a location? Possibly not.

As I've said 100 times. Mrs WW and her mates are constantly swapping pictures and some look nothing short of stunning on the phone but when I look at them on my pc technical issues are there to be seen. Do I/you/we care? Clearly some of us do as we continue to use our expensive cameras but on the other hand how much does a top end phone cost? I bet a lot more than my Sony A7 and 35mm are worth today.

 

[tijuana taxi]

My travel kit is Panasonic GX9, 12-45 and 9mm.
Fits into half of a Billingham Hadley Small and weighs not much.
Along with a bottle of water and some other bits like money its not a burden.
Phone to me is just for calls, texts and some useful stuff like maps or directions.

So no I don't think cameras are a niche product just an alternative.
Phones play video and music, but other devices still get used for that media.

 

[Sangoma]

First time I took just compacts when I had dSLRs available was 2008.

I took a Lumix TZ1 and a Pentax Optio Z10 (tiny with 7X optical zoom with no protruding lens)

Last thing I needed was to look like a you-know-what tourist, nor did I want the temptation of flashy gear.

Since then I just take Lumix TZ series, very unlikely to need anything better for low light, and must have a viewfinder, as there is always bright sunshine.
Videos are excellent too.

Has suited me perfectly., and done what I want.

I certainly would not walk around with a latest phone, that would be inviting liberation.

 

[Bebop]

Interchangeable lens cameras have always been a niche product. Even in the "heyday" of SLRs, many more people were using compact cameras (Olympus Trip, anyone?), 110 pocket cameras, even disposable cameras, than ever used cameras with interchangeable lenses. Photographic enthusiasts have a skewed perspective...

Yes! I left my Pentax SLR at home when I went off to Australia for a year, and took a little Olympus XA2 … and yet my Pentax with a 50mm was really not very large.
I still have my XA2 for which I‘d swapped for a bass guitar. I got the better deal

I use my phone more and more for holiday/family type shots. It’s not the same experience though.

 

[ancient_mariner]

As some have said, they have always been a niche product. A while back I did use the phone for 'daily' pictures, but the images are almost always unsatisfying, and it feels like I'm wasting opportunities. I'd almost rather not take pictures at all than use a mediocre camera system.

 

[piper]

Think you are probably right and phones do most things well for most people.

I use mine mainly for documenting stuff but also, stating the obvious, since I always have it it gets used for snaps often.

I absolutely hate not having an EVF/OVF however and trying to take pics from an LCD screen - no matter how bright it is.

Not taking a DSLR or FF/APSC Z with me often is mostly laziness but also to do with practicalities. I do use both UWA and very long lenses a lot and so, I have moved back to where I started: m43 specifically my oly em5.1, and for the last 4 years or so, mainly my Nikon 1 systems which get me from 18mm to 810mm in an ILC in an incredibly small and portable packages when out travelling.

I just prefer the output of even a 1 inch to that of my iphone 2020SE. You can mask the small DR of very small sensors pretty well with AI/Comp photography but no well enough for me.

No doubt larger sensors in phones - up to 1 inch - and/or folded optics are here or nearly here so its even goimng to be more niche perhaps

 

[rob-nikon]

Interchangeable lens cameras have always been a niche product. Even in the "heyday" of SLRs, many more people were using compact cameras (Olympus Trip, anyone?), 110 pocket cameras, even disposable cameras, than ever used cameras with interchangeable lenses. Photographic enthusiasts have a skewed perspective...

I was going to say that phones have caused the loss of compact cameras rather than ILC’s. There wouldn’t have been many that would have taken an SLR and a bag of lenses just for family holiday snaps. Most would have have had a compact camera and that’s why phone cameras are probably good enough for 90% of camera users.

Personally I’ve always carried my ‘proper’ camera with me only if I plan to visit certain photographic location specifically to take photos. General holiday snaps will be via the phone. That’s just the way of the world now.

As some have said, they have always been a niche product. A while back I did use the phone for 'daily' pictures, but the images are almost always unsatisfying, and it feels like I'm wasting opportunities. I'd almost rather not take pictures at all than use a mediocre camera system.

I think it really depends on the camera and phone you have and your photographic outlook. Ive got an iPhone 7 and the cameras ok but not great. If I looked closely it won’t be as good as the canon r6 I have. On the latest iPhone models (13?) they seem to have pretty good output, definitely good enough for the majority of the public and that’s the key point.

Just look at how things have changed. In the 90s I used to take the film for processing straight after the holiday, now we can share photos online instantly whilst away. That’s meant printing of holiday snaps is in much lower volume than it once was and pretty much the loss of nearly a whole industry.

 

[Pound Coin]

Cameras were specialist items, largely limited to hobbyists and professionals, then the era of Instamatics democratised photography, then better design and mass manufacturing meant that ILCs were available to far more people.

Then someone put a camera on a phone.

(ILC)Cameras are now specialist items, largely limited to hobbyists and professionals.

 

[lindsay]

I used to use compacts for holidays - I had a lovely Contax something or other, and before that an Olympus Mju.
I don't really do holidays any more, but on the odd occasion when I'm making a trip, generally in the car, I'll take a DSLR outfit - Olympus or Nikon depending on what I think I'll be shooting and how far from the car. If I'm in pure snapshjotting holiday mode though, I'll use an Olympus OM10 with a couple of lenses, that fits into a belt mounted messenger style bag.

 

[Nikon_Nick]

I’m off to Turkey in a couple of weeks, and throughout the planning of the holiday, in my mind, I was going to take my A7R3 and 24-105, but the more I thought about it, the less appeal carrying it around had. So I decided that any photos I want to take will be with an a6000 instead. I’ll be using it with the Sigma 30mm f1.4 and that is it. I have a lightweight carbon travel tripod which will also be in the suitcase for me to use for some early morning/sunrise beach shooting. I will also be taking my GoPro for pool and ocean video/photos with my Daughter. The quality I can get from this kit is more than adequate for holiday memories, and I’m glad I decided against taking the other stuff. Just not needed.

 

[Ed Sutton]

Cameras were specialist items, largely limited to hobbyists and professionals, then the era of Instamatics democratised photography, then better design and mass manufacturing meant that ILCs were available to far more people.

Then someone put a camera on a phone.

(ILC)Cameras are now specialist items, largely limited to hobbyists and professionals.

The Box Brownie democratised photography long before the Instamatic. Ever since then there have been 'professional' cameras, 'hobbyist' cameras, and 'family' cameras (for want of better terms). The phone is the latest in the line of 'family' cameras.

 

[KavKav]

I have my trusty Nikon D700 and a fat bag of decent Nikon glass but nowadays it rarely sees the light of day unless I want to use my 60mm macro. My days of lugging heavy Nikon gear around are long gone and are not missed although I would never part with the kit. Now I like to travel much lighter and I find my Fuji X-E4, Sony RX1, Sony RX100V, Nikon Coolpix A and Leica X-Vario are in my ‘choose two from five’ works well, depending where I am going and what I ‘think’ I might want to photograph. It is clear I have ‘GAS‘ but I like my toys and enjoy choosing what kit I want to take with me. The downside is I am a better camera buyer than a photographer although I have picked up a bit after a 50 year photography learning curve. My barber is a Leica Q2 man and knows his stuff and we are friends enough for him to criticise my efforts without restraint and that is so educational as long as you are prepared to ‘listen and learn’ on the photography never-ending learning curve!
I do wish Fuji would bring out a decent 18mm f2.8 pancake X lens though!
Have a good weekend TP boys and girls!

 

[Pound Coin]

The Box Brownie democratised photography long before the Instamatic. Ever since then there have been 'professional' cameras, 'hobbyist' cameras, and 'family' cameras (for want of better terms). The phone is the latest in the line of 'family' cameras.

I think it is good to have terms, like this, as they help to get behind the distilled down headline that can introduce an alarmist bias.

 

[Pound Coin]

Actually, thinking about @KavKav has said (fat bag of decent Nikon glass) there has been a trend of increasing hugeness. Down to auto focus, stabilisation, large apertures, better design of elements, and so on.

Having been an OM1 user I was surprised at how big the DSLR equipment was, and just accepted it getting bigger as I got better glass.

The new OM-1 takes far better photos than a reasonable DSLR did 10 years ago, and without the bulk. It is a much more manageable size and weight.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

To answer the original question...

No, because they always have been niche products. Ever since George Eastman was granted U.S. patent no. 388,850, for a rollfilm camera, the default camera design has been a box with a lens fixed at one end and a light sensitive surface at the other.

My best guess is that sales of cameras with a lens fixed in place outnumbered sales of cameras with interchangeable lenses by something like 100 : 1, throughout the 20th century. It may be that the high price of early digital cameras lessened that gap for a while but it soon returned, spurred on by the competition between the companies specialising in camera manufacture and those specialising in phone making.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

What has changed most is not so much the cameras we use, but the advent of Social media..

To feed that voracious appetite the smart phone rules supreme. with things like go pro and small mini drone cameras. and others like the Ricoh 360 Theta X
taking on more specialist roles. And at the touch of a button completely blurring the boundaries between still and video.

Conventional Photography, as followed by enthusiasts, has become something of a back water in the wider field of imagine sharing in most peoples social lives.

In terms of cost, a top phone and the other products I mentioned will match the outlay of most "serious" photographers so is certainly not a cheap option.

 

[ancient_mariner]

I think it really depends on ........ your photographic outlook

Yes. I tend to differentiate between something to send to friends or rellies and photographs made for me.

 

[Tysonator]

When I am on holiday I see alot of people with DSLR / mirrorless cameras even 20 something youngsters, so there is a following. The main places are nature venues espically in italy because of all the amazing building in towns and cities.
My weapon of choice is my Canon 7Dii with a sigma 17-70 OSS HSM on a black rapid sling. i really like the handling, feel and easy of use of the 7Dii, however is is big and heavy ( not that I worried about carrying around, the issue is carry on luggage which I only have on summer holidays ), so I purchased a Sony A6600 mirrorless and that is a small form factor camera. Great for city breaks, holidays, day trips to London, indoor music gigs. Down side, I can not change settings as quick as the 7Dii, bit fiddly, however eye detection is a game changer.

So are interchangeable lens camera becoming a niche product, I believe IMO yes and no.
There is more choice now, the tech is very, very good and more affordable at low end of the market. The top end of the market is a niche as top end pro DSLR's which were always out of reach of amateurs, especially film as the leaning curve very swallow and the cost very high !

 

[the black fox]

A hard one to quantify , for my wildlife I use a olympus 1-mkiii with a few lenses , but if travelling abroad I would take my go.pro look alike for underwater and swimming pool stuff and a Panasonic fz10002 for general scenics . The i.phone 12 I have is good but not quite up to the standards of a decent camera .
I think a lot of choice if going abroad or down south in this heat ,is down to the fact that sun tan oil is needed quiet often and that’s not coming anywhere near my expensive gear

 

[woof woof]

I think that for a great mix of compactness, reduced weight and image quality it's difficult to beat a mirrorless camera and a compact prime. If you are happy with just one lens. Luckily I am

I hope the smallness shows up here

GX80 and 14mm f2.5.

Sony A7 and compact prime, it might well be the Sony 35mm f1.8 or possibly the Voigtlander 35mm f1.4.

 

[RichardC27]

So, here's two recent photos of our dog. One taken with a Pixel 6 phone, one taken with a Fuji X-T4. No portrait mode or anything like that on the phone photo, I think that almost always makes a photo look awful Both have been processed in Lightroom. I can't see a huge difference in IQ between these two images at reasonable viewing sizes. Pixel peeping does show an advantage to the Fuji but it's closer than you'd think.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

When I am on holiday I see alot of people with DSLR / mirrorless cameras even 20 something youngsters, so there is a following.

There's certainly a following.

However, in any touristy place, look at all the people taking pictures. I'm fairly sure you'll see that most are using phones, the next largest group will be using fixed lens cameras and only a small minority will be using interchangeable lens cameras.

We all need to be aware of (and allow for) what the psychologists call "selective attention". It's the process by which we handle information overload: ignoring any input that isn't relevant to our current interest. All animals exhibit this and the bigger the brain, it seems, the more powerful this effect is.

Those fixed lens cameras are there in their millions, you just need to see them!

 

[Tysonator]

I agree most holiday snapping is on phones as that is the camera people have with them all the time. As i mentioned I have seen a reasonable number of prople with DSLR's and mirrorless cameras for a sector that has been hit hard by smart phones.
For younger people it is social media influencers are to blame for DSLR's and mirrorless use, older people,..well people like me who are died hards and our offspring my take up the use as well.
I have even seen father, mother, son and younger daughter at Beaulieu motor museum all with cameras !

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

When out on Wednesday for a photo safari, as I was walking back home I saw something rather rare: a family with a father carrying a Canon DSLR (couldn't read the model on the front, but I am guessing full frame as the camera body was rather large)

Granted, I do live in a tourist town and when the bus tour full of people from Asia pulls up, it proves true the stereotype of each person taking photos almost all of the time with a DSLR / MILC or a compact camera. Almost never a phone.

I would suggest people have their heads in their phones so often that we no longer notice them taking photographs unless they are selfies.