Will Smartphones Replace DSLR and Mirrorless Cameras?

40 Comments

1. We will never can predict 100% what will happen in the future. Technology advancement goes so fast right now. I grew up in the 80's and 90's , I experienced how fast the technology goes, my first computer was an intel 186 computer, I used 5.25 inch floppy drives that only holds 720 kb and hard drives is so expensive for so little space. And right now I don't even know how many cores that the current microprocessor has and how fast are they, and a tiny micro sd card can hold up to 512Gb. I also experience the transition from film to digital , my first digital camera was jvc model GC-S1U , a 0.4 megapixel camera that I bought for $200 USd back then and that thing is revolutionary at that time. And now we have 60 megapixel sony a7R IV and even xiaomi note 8 pro has 64 megapixel camera. Smartphone camera used to be crappy , and now I use xiaomi note 5 and I was mesmerized by the quality of the picture from its camera, the result is sharp , low noise and color is great. Right now yes you still need dslr for some spesific purposes like wildlife, sports, flash photography, portrait that has bokeh and etc, but for general snapshot, street portrait, landscape, family picture the smartphone camera is getting better and better that you don't need to bring a separate camera. Who knows, 5 years from now, smartphone camera has 500 megapixel, 500 times zoom with f/1 lens, super wide angle lens, extreme low light capabilities, 20K video at 500 fps, 60 frame per second shooting, 10 stop image stabilization, 20 stop dynamic range, wireless flash control, full manual control. It might seem impossible right now, but you'll never know , technologies goes fast.

2. You got me on QUALITY. I worked in TV Production doing newscasts for 36 years. Quality has been dumbed down to such a degree the consumer doesn't even notice. You used the example of audio. I'll use the example of THIS VIDEO. You cut from yourself, BACK TO YOURSELF, in your video countless times. That was, and still is, a no-no in TV production. It's a jump cut! As editors we would use a "cutaway/B-roll/flash frame" before we'd ever cut from a talking head back to the same talking head. But now, thanks to YouTube, people are used to "jump cuts." And vloggers? Don't get me started. Virtually all vloggers don't take the time to do cutaways. They just keep showing their pumpkin head talking, but people don't care. To be honest, I don't care either and I'm part of the problem, but I do notice "quality" is vanishing.

3. 1) Conventional cameras need better OOC JPG's and options. Telling a smartphone they have to process their raw files in LightRoom to get a decent image is too inconvenient.
   2) We need cameras to explore open source operating systems and plugins. Being able to write and add your own plugins could revolutionize the market.
   3) There is still a market for entry levels cameras (under $500). But they need to compete on the weaknesses of smartphones…lack of zoom, low light performance, lack of features, and lack of rugged protection. Ironically as smartphones become more and more expensive…uber cheap cameras could find a niche again and make a small comeback.
   4) Better cloud integration is tough…without sacrificing image quality. I just don't think we have the technology now to sync large batches of raw files the cloud in a manageable amount of time. A camera could cheat and only export heavily compressed jpgs…but that is tough. 5G (as you mentioned) could help on this front.

4. I agree with everything you say about the quality. On a song sheet for the guitar, for example, the chords shown will be up and down the neck of the instrument – some difficult to perform. Yet the song can almost always be played on the top three of four frets. And the listeners who buy the song don't give a flying friar tuck which chords are covered; they just like the song, and probably won't be able to tell the difference anyway(!).

5. My ideal: (Olympus/Panasonic) Smartphone – body about twice thickness, but touch screen only, like phone. 1" sensor, behind glass, a newly designed internal sliding mount (more like flash hotshoe design) so smooth in pocket, and a set of primes (24, 35, 50, 85, equiv.) which are better quality and so lock more securely than the clip-on ones, with autofocus contacts built into lens mount, like TTL flash contacts… ?

6. You are spot on. Convenience is key. A bulky camera needing 5 steps to get a picture from camera press to facebook is not convenient. Well done!

7. What about Fuji GFX 100 types? FUJI ON AN OPPOSITE DIRECTION.

8. I'm actually surprised that non-rugged compact cameras haven't already disappeared from the market.

9. Cameras can't compete with smartphones in convenience. If they want to survive they should use the processing technology and computational photography so average consumer can get the pic ready to share with one press but with much better quality and more control of a real camera.

10. A big problem with phone cameras is the ergonomics are horrible – no grips, dials or buttons. What are your thoughts on why the Olympus Air didn't succeed? It was generally well regarded. It seems like a perfect bridge product between camera & phone. I think an updated version, lighter & smaller with better ergonomics and connectivity would be a big hit.

11. I agree, the question will simplify the start line and every line, to be able to sell more. I believe that quality of smart phones never will replace cameras, is a way to simplify for people taking pictures with phones unknowing the techniques are needed to learn to take pictures.

12. 90+% of users have already forsaken cameras for phones. The point and shoot market is almost non-existent. It's just enthusiasts, geeks and a few professionals who keep the business going. Evolution I'm afraid.

13. I was speaking to a camera dealer this weekend and he was telling me about the rise of interest (& prices) in film cameras amongst the younger generation. This seems to parallel the rise in vinyl records. He even suggested an upturn in the use of typewriters!
    For a small section of the market, tactility & mechanical ingenuity still has value.
    For the rest of the market, ease of use will win out.

14. Drives me nuts everyone taking crummy photos during the holidays with those things including my wife!!!

15. As ever, I largely agree depending how far into the future we look. In a previous video you effectively said that a rubbish lens gives poor input to the sensor and thus poor output, but with sensor shift, computational techniques, knowledge of the lens shortcomings and AI, there is every chance poor input can lead to good output in future. So, small will win. There again, AI will be producing photorealistic scenes off its own back anyway, so recording reality may be less relevant.

16. Amen Robin!

17. Not in my home and not in my life time because they still look crappy in print

18. One cannot simply use a phone even on a 1 day trip. Having it control the music in your car via bluetooth, navigate via maps, search for places to go, all leave you with dead battery in a few hours before even taking a single photo of the nice destination you just arrived at.

19. I think smartphones are pricing themselves out of competition. A US$1,000 iPhone is simply ridiculous.

20. I wouldn't mind the camera syncing photos to my phone and let the phone do the cloud syncing. My MotoG7 has a 5000mAh battery and I bought a 128 SD Card so no issue with power and storage.
    However I used the share button in the playback and in between locations on Vacation I would have my phone connect to my camera and it worked very good. I don't like sharing my photos immediately because I want to enjoy my vacation and the scenery. Then when I grab something to eat or in between doing something, all my pictures are on my phone ready to share.

21. There's so, so many great used digital ILC's out there at reasonable prices, there's no reason to by a new crappy budget one… Plus, I see people spend over $1,000 on a smartphone and don't even blink an eye. That's over 3 times more than what I spent on a used Lumix and zoom lens (which takes great pictures still). I think the camera companies will still be around for enthusiasts/Pros – each will just "specialize" on one mount/format (Sony:E, Olympus:M43, Canon:R, Nikon:Z, Panasonic:L, Fuji:X)

22. OLYMPUS is very good camera but they should make OIS instead of IBIS.

23. Verizon charges me ten dollars a month to put my iPad on the cellular network. I would happily pay that to have my camera on the Verizon network. If all that cellular and wifi technology fits into an iPhone, it could certainly fit into a camera. A long, long time ago in a galaxy far, far away I used a half-frame Olympus Pen camera with 72 exposures on a roll of film. The camera and lenses were tiny. Imagine that camera with a one inch sensor and cell phone technology.

24. No, I have to look through a viewfinder or it just isn't photography for me.

25. Your mp3 comparison was SPOT ON! People just need good enough.. Cameras will be basically for professionals and prosumers pretty soon if not already. Most companies will survive the change. One correction, spotify defaults to 160kps which is certainly good enough. In the early days of mp3 128kps was fine and considered to be CD quality like (not true really but you didn't hear compression artifacts like 96kps).. However, if you do have spotify premium turn on the hi-quality setting which you'll get 320kps which is VERY good quality. 256kps is excellent as well. (I have a background in audio engineering BTW).

26. It may replace DSLR and Mirrorless Cameras for those that are only snapshot photographers who want images mostly for social media & quick sharing with others. Digital cell phone cameras are very capable of producing very nice wall hanging sized images, however they will not provide the level of detail or tonality available in larger sensor cameras. I was at a photo meeting where the guest speaker owns a digital printing lab & was demonstrating the image capabilities of cell phones. He had various size crops from a cell phone image & I was blown away with the images. I would never have believed the image quality that is obtainable from a cell phone printed at very large sizes. Remember, that very large images are expected to be viewed from larger distances. With this said, I'm not about to give up my current camera setup (Pen F & myriad of lenses) in favor of my cell phone.

27. …..smart phones rely on tech / dev that emanates from imaging companies. These imaging companies will keep core tech before sharing with smart phones. Samsung is even considering moving out of smart phones and rather develop tech for the Chinese smart phone companies that will dominate the global market

    What may happen is a few camera houses will fade away …Pentax comes to mind, it may be bought out by a Chinese firm

28. smart phone ,dslr, mirrorless .
    Those are just tool.
    anyway,
    sensor size matters in many areas today.(medium format/full frame/apsc/mft …)
    but in the future not sure.
    So.
    Keep shooting and having fun.

29. Thorough explanations. Nice ?

30. My guess is that the smart phone will see its own demise as more people seek privacy, they will cease using the phone as much as it is today, social media will also die. You forget something else that no manufacture can procure! Skill and the craft of producing images that people and industry will buy. Lastly China will also cease to hold its position in a global market.

31. Phone or DSLR. A skilled photographer can take a good picture with either. It's knowledge that takes photographs not equipment.

32. The convenience factor is definitely a deciding factor for most people. Like you say, automatic uploading of photos as they’re shot is the future. This capability will be embraced by the entire spectrum of photography at any skill level.

33. I'm less optimistic than you. That hyper-convenient camera already exist and it's the smartphone. Pros and enthusiasts, sure, but for the general consumer no camera, no matter how small, will be as convenient as not having to carry any camera because you already carry one in your phone. The parallel with audio and streaming is quite apt. The home stereo for "general consumers" that boomed in the 70s and 80s is quite dead. Many of those Japanese audio brands, like Pioneer, JVC, Akai, Sanyo, Sansui, etc. are gone or are zombie brands owned by shady companies. Those that survive, like Sony, Marantz or Yamaha, diversified and/or targeted a more enthusiast market. But the home stereo for average people is gone, and the same will happen / is happening withe cameras.

34. I think that photographers will separate into two groups. The ones who focus on content and convenience. And the ones who also focus on image quality and control. (a much smaller group) Smartphones are just not suitable for dedicated, high-quality photo work. The entry-level cameras will disappear and cameras will become more specialized. But cameras will still be sold. Probably at the same level as in the old film days (minus the compacts).

35. Size matters!! When future proofing is concerned. Smart phones will never compete with mirrorless cameras on quality of images because smart phones cannot incorporate a large sensor in them,smart phones megapixels are getting bigger but theyre sensor size is still tiny, smartphones are made for convenience junkies for social media platforms, fujifilms gfx medium format is made for serious proffessionals and hobbyists where its medium format sensor is large enough for it to cater for 200 megapixels where as micro fourthirds sensors and smartphone sensors are limited to increase the megapixels without problems with image quality. So medium format is fully future proof.

36. One if the many things I like about my Olympus..you can send jpg images directly to.my phone wifi

37. Go Robin go

38. The answer is simple….no, smartphones will never replace purpose made cameras. Whatever technology comes to smartphones can be applied to proper cameras anyway. The proper cameras have the much larger sensors and all the full functionality to control the way the image is taken. Smartphones will never have lenses which match the quality of detachable lens' for mirrorless going forward. I agree that entry level cameras will drop in sales hugely with companies having to aim their products at professionals and experienced enthusiasts only. With the exception of basic auto, point and shoot film cameras back in the 60's and 70's, SLRs were only really sold to pro's and advanced hobbyists. We are basically returning to that market as we go forward. ?

39. No, phones does not have good camera only good software.
    It's not possible to put a good camera as in good optics in a phone, too little space.

    Sales not going down because phones but because more and more people are getting smarter and keeps their cameras for longer.

40. Agree with you bro, so many smartphone photographers keep ranting on digital camera users when they're both totally different things

Comments are closed.