Is modular system like Sony DSC-QX10 the future of consumer cameras?

rjbell

Suspended / Banned
Messages
4,421
Name
Robert
Edit My Images
Yes
Hasselblad has announced something similar the true zoom. Do Canikon need to move fast and create a lens/sensor modular system to be used with your phone?

Do you think this may be the future of consumer cameras, build the hardware make the software open source?
 
I'm too old for these things :D for me phones are for calling people with and it's only recently I became vaguely aware of texting, being able to go on the net and taking pictures :D but I think I read somewhere that sales of the QX10 thingy were higher than initially anticipated so they must be selling to someone.

I don't think that these things are going to dominate the market this year but at some point in the future it's anybody's guess.

I stopped caring all that much what Canikon do some time ago and now they're pretty much a complete irrelevance to me (I think that Sony, Panasonic and Olympus are doing the interesting stuff in bodies and lenses plus Sigma too) but I expect that DSLR sales will have to drop further and sales of other non DSLR picture taking devices will have to rise much further to persuade either of these companies to seriously jump into a market that'll eat into their own DSLR sales, just look at their CSC offering to date, hardly market leading. If and when Canikon do make a serious move into non DSLR cameras it'll be interesting to see if they can match Sony or if it'll be their names that get them the sales rather than their kits merit.
 
Hasselblad has announced something similar the true zoom. Do Canikon need to move fast and create a lens/sensor modular system to be used with your phone?

Do you think this may be the future of consumer cameras, build the hardware make the software open source?

Not a new idea though - Sony's add-on modules were launched three years ago. I thought they had big potential then, basically parking the smartphone tanks on the front lawn of 'proper'cameras but after an early flurry, sales have been slow and there hasn't exactly been a flood of similar products. It seems that mass consumers are not interested in carrying extra bits and pieces - it needs to be integrated into the actual phone, at the press of a button, without adding bulk.

Enter the iPhone-7 (amongst others) with dual lenses and sensors. There's a lot that can be done that way, with software merging the images from two (or more) cameras to mimic the effects of one larger sensor, and/or different focal lengths, without affecting the form factor. Early days yet, with reports of shallow depth-of-field effects being somewhat subject-dependent for the software to work well, but the potential is obvious. Shallow DoF and that 'professional' look is one of the increasingly few things that draws buyers to DSLRs and is a mainstay of wedding photographers.

Purists may scoff at it, but the danger - if that's the right word - is that it might actually work :eek: The effectively larger sensor area will also improve low-light performance substantially and reduce noise.
 
I watched an interesting video on YouTube on how to save the enthusiasts market. Youngsters that want an improvement over their phone but not a archaic camera. It basically needs to be a phone but better.
 
Hasselblad has announced something similar the true zoom. Do Canikon need to move fast and create a lens/sensor modular system to be used with your phone?

Do you think this may be the future of consumer cameras, build the hardware make the software open source?

No. No they don't.
 
Not a new idea though - Sony's add-on modules were launched three years ago. I thought they had big potential then, basically parking the smartphone tanks on the front lawn of 'proper'cameras but after an early flurry, sales have been slow and there hasn't exactly been a flood of similar products. It seems that mass consumers are not interested in carrying extra bits and pieces - it needs to be integrated into the actual phone, at the press of a button, without adding bulk.

Enter the iPhone-7 (amongst others) with dual lenses and sensors. There's a lot that can be done that way, with software merging the images from two (or more) cameras to mimic the effects of one larger sensor, and/or different focal lengths, without affecting the form factor. Early days yet, with reports of shallow depth-of-field effects being somewhat subject-dependent for the software to work well, but the potential is obvious. Shallow DoF and that 'professional' look is one of the increasingly few things that draws buyers to DSLRs and is a mainstay of wedding photographers.

Purists may scoff at it, but the danger - if that's the right word - is that it might actually work :eek: The effectively larger sensor area will also improve low-light performance substantially and reduce noise.

This may be true for the *technology*, but not for implementation.

A mobile phone simply isn't the best way for a camera to be used, it's just the most convenient. No matter how good the tech in the phone is, it's still in a phone. A flat, non ergonomic software driven square of thin plastic and glass.

Something you can actually hold, with manual, fast physical controls will always be better, even if the hardware inside was equal. But for a happy snapper and social media whore (90% of the modern population) that doesn't really matter.

I can't stand this modern obsession with making everything for a phone, I find them so boring and soulless, and I'm fed up with seeing zombies with their faces continuously buried in them! They've become a bit of a modern scourge IMO...
 
Last edited:
I can't stand this modern obsession with making everything for a phone, I find them so boring and soulless, and I'm fed up with seeing zombies with their faces continuously buried in them! They've become a bit of a modern scourge IMO...

The saddest thing is seeing people nominally together but one or both looking at a phone. I have an ex like this, she can't last 5 minutes without looking at her phone and sadly that includes when driving.
 
The saddest thing is seeing people nominally together but one or both looking at a phone. I have an ex like this, she can't last 5 minutes without looking at her phone and sadly that includes when driving.

Yep, the amount of times I've been out for a meal and I've seen couples sat opposite each other, both tapping away on their phones and not even talking to each other. It's quite sad.

Don't get me started on using phones when driving, I've had to literally pick up the pieces on numerous occasions [emoji35][emoji35][emoji35]
 
Last edited:
I think touchscreen can be more intuitive and faster than manual controls. we're all use to finger gesturing to zoom you just need others for exposure comp, aperture etc.. it could be very fast with the right software. Totally customisable.
 
Last edited:
This may be true for the *technology*, but not for implementation.

A mobile phone simply isn't the best way for a camera to be used, it's just the most convenient. No matter how good the tech in the phone is, it's still in a phone. A flat, non ergonomic software driven square of thin plastic and glass.

Something you can actually hold, with manual, fast physical controls will always be better, even if the hardware inside was equal. But for a happy snapper and social media whore (90% of the modern population) that doesn't really matter.

I can't stand this modern obsession with making everything for a phone, I find them so boring and soulless, and I'm fed up with seeing zombies with their faces continuously buried in them! They've become a bit of a modern scourge IMO...

LOL Jim :D

You and I might think like that, but most people disagree. You see lots of DSLR users with excellent optical eye-level viewfinders, shooting in live view with the rear LCD. Many (most?) mirrorless CSCs don't have eye-level viewfinders now. Last year Apple sold 226m iPhones, Canon sold 7m cameras.

Those zombies with faces buried in iPhones should get a life! They need to fire up the PC and bury their noses in TP forums - our very own Facebook for photographers ;)
 
I think touchscreen can be more intuitive and faster than manual controls. we're all use to finger gesturing to zoom you just need others for exposure comp, aperture etc.. it could be very fast with the right software. Totally customisable.

I don't agree, there's only so much you can access on a touch screen without having to access other menus, especially with the sized screens we use.

Give me something I can flip with my thumb without my eye even leaving the viewfinder, oh, I have that already :)
 
Younger people often have a different outlook and point of view though and many would rather look at a screen than through a VF and even if people like us see disadvantages, they wont.
 
LOL Jim :D

You and I might think like that, but most people disagree. You see lots of DSLR users with excellent optical eye-level viewfinders, shooting in live view with the rear LCD. Many (most?) mirrorless CSCs don't have eye-level viewfinders now. Last year Apple sold 226m iPhones, Canon sold 7m cameras.

Those zombies with faces buried in iPhones should get a life! They need to fire up the PC and bury their noses in TP forums - our very own Facebook for photographers ;)

Yes, indeedy, but you can't really compare sales, not meaningfully. I bought an iPhone, but not because of its camera. People buy phones as they are a modern necessity, to be used for a couple of years then disposed for the next dull slab of plastic and glass (or metal in the case of iPhones...). For a lot of people it's replaced laptops / computers more so than cameras (to complement our other modern obsession, social media). Mobile phones have become a first world parody which has created its own dependant user base (we got on fine without them before!)

I agree there are lots of DSLR owners out there holding their cameras at arms length using liveview etc, but, these are more likely the same people who bought a DSLR as they thought it would automatically turn them into David Bailey, whilst never leaving auto mode or even knowing what the lens release button does.
 
Last edited:
Worldwide consumer camera sales would disagree with you.


I've not said camera sales haven't declined due to phones - of course they have (as have laptops, MP3 players, hi fi separates, sat navs, calculators, kindles etc etc and even torches). Everyone used to have a camera, it's always been part of life. 9/10 times it was a point and shoot. These are the same people that are now quite happy with camera phones. I'm saying you can't compare iPhone sales to DSLR sales as people buy phones for many reasons and uses, not primarily or just for its camera. I didn't get mine for its camera, I hardly use that aspect. (If you've replaced your DSLR with a phone camera you never needed a dslr in the first place.)

But regardless of sales, it still doesn't mean a camera isn't better housed in a camera housing than in a 5mm thin rectangle regardless of how good the tech is, which was my main point above in reply to the OP.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top