The DEATH of the Consumer Camera

[@TonyAndChelsea]

📚 Buy Our Books on Amazon! 📚 📕Stunning Digital Photography: help.tc/s 📘Lightroom 6 Book: help.tc/l 📙Photoshop Book: help.tc/p 📗Buying Guide: help.tc/b

[@davidalexander4398]

Tony & Chelsea Northrup affinity

[@catllionare]

I bought your photography book. It's awesome

[@stromtrooper966]

Tony & Chelsea Northrup bluray

[@108Funality]

it's hard for cellphone camera to takover DSLR Camera because cellphone camera has so less options , limited ISO, shatter speed and shitty aperture. And it's size is hard for their focus point. It's possible for a cellphone become a DSLR body but with it's own lens? I would say no.

[@stevenquinn111]

Tony & Chelsea Northrup .

[@williamlongyard3276]

Tony, I've watched a bunch of your videos, but this one was the best (in a bittersweet way). I'm old enough to miss the smells and mysteries of the darkroom, but the death of consumer cameras is also sad. Keep up the good work, you and Chelsea. Much appreciated.

[@josephmcatanese4444]

As a 83 year old, thanks for showing me my life in photography. Looking forward to the future.

[@bartosziccool34]

I am 17 years old and I've started off using a phone but last year I bought a dslr and now I even started doing photography with film

[@NRecob]

Good for you! ENJOY! It's about SEEING--the cameras are just the tools--you pick what tools work best for you.

[@Jim1971a]

Awesome! Have fun!

[@mk2escortvan]

Good man. So much more flexibility and control with a real camera than a smartphone.

[@Lauren_C]

@@mk2escortvan Picked up a Canon G7X Mark 2 recently too (my first serious camera), chosen for it's quality, control and the ease of which I can take it everywhere. I love it, and nfc makes it easy to bring pictures over to my phone for editing and sharing. I've been taking pictures for quite a long time, starting with a toy camera that took 110 film. Finally having full control of my camera after 20 years is a wonderful thing.

[@DaveHaynie]

Excellent! My neice did just that... she started doing photography with an iPhone, and got serious about it. I helped my sister buy her a Canon DSLR, some years back, bolstered by the fact that Uncle Dave was dropping his Canon APS-C gear and she'd have some accessory donations from me. And if you did go back to the 1960s and 1970s, you'd find that SLR sales were driven by people -- often kids -- who had learned on Instamatics, Brownies, old rangefinders, anything they could get, and at some point, got the funds together to buy an SLR. That was actually a big part of the market. Cameras didn't sell in 100 million quantiies. The famous Nikon F1 sold for 14 years or so and never sold 1 million units. Today's market for great cameras, even great consumer-friendly cameras, isn't gone. It's gone back to where it was before the digital bubble. Companies that understand that will survive, those that don't, won't. Same idea with film manufacturing. The big film companies, like Kodak, Fujifilm, Agfa, they had to move on to other things or shiink. There was no way a company like Kodak that grew into the age of 1 billion rolls of film sold in a year could survive in the years in which 20 million rolls of film sold. That doesn't mean that no one could make a living on those 20 million rolls of film. So Kodak fell apart, Fujifilm switched to other businesses, Agfa failed, etc. But the tiny companies that grew up from the ashes of Kodak, Ilford, and others are making a business of film. Cameras won't be any different in the long run.

[@AmusementForce]

I knew 10 years ago when phones started to have cameras that consumer cameras will disappear. And now I am telling GoPro that I need a super 35 sensor in a small action cam with good glass make it as small as possible.... and they keep coming out with consumer cameras every year wondering why their stock is going down...

[@RichardKingADI]

Digital cameras have also become good enough that we no longer feel the need to keep buying something newer and better..

[@andrew30762]

Spot on Richard, people are swept on the hype exactly same as the phone market. They could try drawing in more people by making decent lenses you don't have to re mortgage the house to buy for a start...

[@markkasick]

Yup!

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Have you seen the hype around the iPhone 7+ camera system? People are PUMPED about it. That's the modern digital camera. I think people would still be excited if there were a new (traditional) digital camera with real innovation... but their isn't. Each new generation of traditional digital cameras adds a couple of megapixels. I agree that few really care about that. The point of this comment, and the entire video is that there is plenty of room for camera manufacturers to innovate and create cameras people are excited about... but they're not doing it.

[@wilkgr]

I disagree. I started out a couple years ago shooting on an E-PL2. I loved that camera, took it everywhere, and made lots of photos with it (around 300GB of RAW+JPG in a ~1 year span). End of last year I upgraded on an E-M10 III. Still a beginner's camera but image quality is vastly improved. While crop sensors like the MFT format do have an extra hurdle, the sensor has far less noise, the camera supports lower ISO, stabilisation has improved and the software is better too. While camera companies *do* drop support too quickly for older cameras imo, some of the features (such as live time) wouldn't be possible in real time on the slower mcus. Some features, such as silent shooting (which actually is silent on Oly cameras), could have been implemented on the older camera but the manufacturer decided not to. Maybe the mcu is too slow to take a full-res image without significant rolling shutter.

[@barbarannie]

I disagree Richard. AS we grow as photogaphers we want more megapixels so our lives like our photos can be enlarged and we can get excited over that. I remember when I bought my Canon 5D Mark II at 21 MP that now is nothing much. I do not want to stop growing and risk becoming obsolete as a photographer.

[@bensslightnature]

i hope someone is listening to this.

[@bensslightnature]

***** ..

[@NicConnerImages]

Exactly!

[@crackmaster88]

hear and understand

[@thestig007]

Well that's the whole problem. They aren't listening. They are dinosaurs thrashing in a tar pit!

[@MrGilRoland]

I can't tell if this guy is 25 or 60 years old.

[@hitty9]

Well let's take a look. He's smart and organized and well spoken, so we know he can't be a millennial.

[@MrGilRoland]

Ginger, get the popcorn!

[@hitty9]

***** .....Do you stumble like Hillary too? When I went to school they taught us.

[@Dheorl]

He's negative, grumpy and a bit stuck up, he must be an older fella.

[@alfredsmith6039]

You're right and we built all the roads, dams, power stations, hospitals, schools, telecomms, bridges, ports, airports & etc etc etc that you're quite happy to use. We invented the internet. Google "ungrateful", and your photo comes up. LOL

[@Benbenforever]

The entire issue is not about photography it’s about social media. Serious photography has always been separate from snapping and sharing, will always be so. I am a film photographer and I can see many young people who are really interested in photography rather than just snapping are now coming back to film. Colleges are teaching photography based on film and enabling young people to really understand the art. Usage of smart phones as image collectors is just the same as taking the film to snappy snaps it’s just a different format. You can buy a proper high end film camera and a set of fantastic lenses for less than a cheap smartphone. So go and make something beautiful for yourself and if you wBt to share a photo of your cat use your phone, it is not the same thing, never was.

[@kamendimitrov3884]

The truth has been told...

[@szeeck]

This comment hasn't aged well.... Some smartphones nowadays have significantly better resolution and better image quality than cameras of yore and even some lower tier DSLR cameras right now. They also have built-in editing software. And have the ability to back-up photos instantly to the cloud. People already buy smartphones. It's just a bonus to get one with incredible abilities. Some pro photographers are even taking the challenge to take pro shots with smartphones and succeeding. As with everything, it's about knowing your equipment, its capabilities, and being skilled as a photographer. The most expensive smartphones with exceptional cameras are still cheaper than pro cameras and lenses while providing infinitely more functions. Tony is right, standalone cameras need to start adopting the things smartphones do, or they'll certainly be left behind as technology progresses.

[@speedbird1598]

@@szeeck You must be new to photography if you think resolution is large factor in image quality. A 10mp DSLR is generally going to take better pictures than a 100 mp smartphone because no amount of software is going to change the fact that smartphone sensors and lenses are tiny, and cannot gather the same information a DSLR does. My camera is a ten year old Rebel T2i, it takes sharper photos, higher dynamics range, and captures more detail than I can ever get with my S10e. My s10e camera is good, but not when I need the maximum amount of detail

[@szeeck]

@@speedbird1598 I like how you said the word "generally" as if it negates anything I said. Also your phone has 12Mp, not 100 (yeah yeah hyperbole and crap), but your dslr also has the better card and in camera software to capture a better image. That doesn't mean they all do. Plus your phone still has better editing software built in than your dslr. The regular person only needs their phone and their built in editing to be a mile ahead of you on social media with your dslr and computer based editing software. Its the way things are now. Luckily some companies are adapting some phone tech into their high end cameras to keep ahead of the phone.

[@speedbird1598]

@@szeeck MY phone has a 12mp sensor but quite a few smartphones have 100MP sensors as a gimickj. S20 Ultra and S21 Ultra come to mind. I used the statement "generally" to account for the fact that there might be a camera from 1999 that I have not used that does indeed take worse pictures than a smartphone

[@Alorand]

Why is this not a presentation to the Board of Directors of every camera company?

[@scrapbookbunny2897]

I think it is... this guy is widely published and loves photography. Bound to resonate with board members. More importantly, it is great info for me and consumers like me. Why not take the leap to a MUCH better camera instead of the next better one!?

[@joacorodriguez3420]

I disagree on the firmware update frequency... As a software developer I must say although you can get a lot of *features* in each firmware update... you can also get unstable... I will always prefer software tested heavily over a year than an update every month that will eventually hang my camera in during a trip... IMHO Thanks for the video

[@jitters083]

Watching this in 2017. I think the portability of the smartphone is also an advantage. It's small, does a whole lot of stuff, and you can even put it in waterproof containers for your outings. Case in point. My friends and I go on beach trips or hiking and they just take their smartphones or their go pros with them to take pictures. They even use the go pro for non-underwater photos, which is kinda weird, but makes sense because it's portable and flexible. I'm stubborn so I usually still bring my clunky DSLR because I don't want to waste the holiday taking low quality photos using my iphone 6. I mean yeah it looks good on your phone screen and on Instagram or Facebook but it's definitely not print-quality. It's good now that cameras have wifi/ NFC capabilities so you can use your mirrorless/ DSLR to post photos on social media. I think that's a start.

[@luckynever8208]

buy pixel 2 and ditch your cameras

[@teresashinkansen9402]

Photos taken by small sensor/aperture look like shit.

[@nareshwildbones]

Teresa Shinkansen : the last time i printed a photo was at least 10 years ago. and for people like me phone camera is more than enough. i dont even need a extra bag to carry them. just my pocket

[@teresashinkansen9402]

I do scientific digital photography as hobby which involves lots of disciplines like macro photography, high speed photography, infrared photography, UV photography, photogrammetry, micrography etc. Try to do all that with a phone, sure is doable but is just way too hard and the results look like crap, all look like party photos you cant teak many of the camera settings no long exposure images of more than one minute and other problems, macro images look horrible with a phone camera and there isn't many good lenses at good prices even thought its just a glorified magnifying glass embedded on a clothespin, also not many phones can take photos in RAW so you can harness all the information captured on your photo and make it more visible. The last time i printed a photo was about a week ago its a lot of fun to make your own photo paper with silver nitrate and salt then get a nice old looking image of something modern or unusual. I don't care if i have to carry a bag, its a bag of fun and experiences and for me that's what is about photography, capturing the moment and enjoying doing so.

[@alexxx4434]

It's 2019 and smartphones are only getting bigger and bigger. They got to the point when they lost their size advantage. It's like manufacturers are in a contest who can push a larger screen. But in this process they "shoot themselves in the leg". I personally got 5.5” screen smartphone and already feel uncomfortable with its size. I thought I'd use it for photography, but instead I reverted to using a compact p&s camera: it's smaller, faster, much better controls and picture quality.

[@richardkemp4144]

I was a photographic shop manager for a while back in the 80's. A huge part of the shop's business was film sales, developing and printing, reprints and enlargements etc. Regular film had a massive mark-up. Digital wiped that out practically overnight and it was almost completely unforeseen by retailers. Slide projectors, frames, albums plus all the amateur darkroom hobbyists, all gone pretty much.

[@CinematographyDatabase]

I damn, you straight killed it with this video and I'm only 11 minutes in, my goodness how have I never seen your channel before?!!!11111111

[@rexxxar24]

Matt, that's because this is mostly a stills photography channel. We go to you for cine.

[@CinematographyDatabase]

werd, but this video right here... this is real

[@rexxxar24]

Very true. If someone doesn't create an Instagram contender soon for those who use high-end cameras, I'll find a way to fund that project myself. Or at least draw it in paper.

[@nobsoul2179]

Damn Matt Workman

[@gooseknack]

+Paul Douglas it's a photo sharing website.. google it!

[@captureschool]

Tony this was great, I said this a few years back that the camera market doesn’t adapt quickly enough for this fast paced society. It was a good watch thank you Nick

[@markcomputertech7997]

The Economy affected the industry way more than the cell phone cameras. The manufacturers, particularly Nikon and Canon, did not keep up with technology. They shot themselves in the foot. Also there prices became ridiculous!

[@ryanthomas9306]

Pretty much.

[@LashkarAShivba]

iwill agree with ou

[@okaro6595]

I disagree. The drop has affected mostly compact cameras. They have dropped 80 % from the peak, DSRL has dropped 40 % and mirrorless 15 %. There has been much talk of collapse of the PC markets. Well the total drop from the peak has been only 11 %. The peak in compact cameras was in 2010. Since then smartphone shipments have increased 380 %. (These are all in units shipped, not in value. Clearly the economy is not the underlying cause but a change in the technology is. However, interchangeable lens cameras have not dropped so much. There probably was an abnormal peak in 2012 during which many bought their first one. I think there will still be demand for interchangeable lens cameras. Nikon 1 specifically had problems that are not related to smart phones. It was between mirrorless cameras with larger sensor and compact cameras with same sensor that were smaller and had larger aperture. Basically it ´has the worst of both. Interestingly the average price of compact cameras has increased from 9170 yen in 2012 to 13750 yen in 2012 (1 yen is about 1 cent). Same has happened to IL-cameras and in total the average price has doubled to 25000.

[@kiblerjuergen5247]

The disposable income of the middle class is shrinking. The parents of the Millennials were able to afford a TV, a VCR, a HiFi stereo, an SLR camera, a camcorder and a PC. Most of their kids can only afford an iPhone. Yet some call it "progress". This is why I only use my phone for all functions the older decided mentioned above. If I could I would love to be able to buy a dedicated high end stereo or a

[@okaro6595]

Kibler Juergen Nonsense, people have more stuff than ever. Also very few bought SLR cameras. There were 1.3 billion smart phones shipped last year. 20 years ago 3.7 million SLRs were shipped. (note b vs. m). In fact more DSLRs were shipped last year than ever in a single year during the film era. Sure among young there is a switch towards service use: Netflix, Spotify etc. instead of buying movies or records.

[@hazelvee2527]

Why do you want a camera that is always connected to the internet and get rid of external memory? I am not a friend of constant connectivity. When it comes to safety, battery life or permanent tracking through GPS etc. I get quite cautious. With all my photos instantly uploaded to a cloud I have no control about my content anymore. And what if there is no internet connection? Then I won't be able to take any picture anymore. In fact I appreciate the SD cards. They are reliable, safe and I have my data in my own hands.

[@DesertOryx]

#2

[@matsfotografi]

Thank you for those words! It makes me feel a little less paranoid:) Being of "the grid" is one of the many things I like about photography. Sitting with my disconnected camera, my silent phone and lots of coffe just waiting for the light to become perfect:)

[@TonyAndChelsea]

It would just be an option... you don't HAVE TO use it. Your smartphone can still take pictures in Airplane mode.

[@jollyrajer]

I have to say... 80% of my instagram photos are taken on my dslr and then upload to my computer, edited, moved to my phone and then posted on instagram.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Yeah, same here... but I'm old school :)

[@ThompterSHunson]

You can use 'Bluestacks'. It's a program that acts as a smartphone on your pc. You can install and run all Android apps there. So you post at Instagram straight from your hard drive :)

[@Wydo1]

The problem with built in memory is that the manufacture charges the hell out of you for it. Just look at Apple and its iPhones. I like the SD cards but that means slow write speeds and delays for the next photo. Give me speed at a consumer price level, thank you. Yes, faster uploads from the camera.

[@josephdesantis7494]

A regular SD card can now transfer at over a 100MB/s which is faster than most hardrives (non ssd) Some SD cards will go over 150MB/s . It should be more than fast enough for even the largest raw pictures

[@danielbaroulette7036]

FYI Raj - You can use Uploader HD. I use it on my MacBook Pro not sure if there is a Windows version.

[@danieljones8706]

I don't think SD Cards need to go away, but better USB transfer and charging would be great. I'm kind of surprised that more mirrorless cameras haven't taken the vintage look like the Nikon Df. Something like that with an instagram app would be good.

[@brooniesirena]

Yeah, SD isn't the issue itself and it's really nice being able to just replace the SD card if bigger/faster ones come out. For me I never actually pop the SD card out it my normal workflow - it's sitting in the camera but the photos are transferred off with USB or (occasionally - Canon user) WiFi. Getting better cloud and wireless integration would totally rock but SD's really not getting in the way of that.

[@thewoodys_surf_instrumental]

It's getting kind of ridiculous that people are now documenting every minute of their life on their smart phone only to share with everyone else doing the exact same thing.

[@floridahummer]

yep sheep doing what other sheep do.

[@PHANPHOTO1]

What's wrong with that? It's simply another form of social interaction. It's an amazing way to stay up-to-date with what is going on with other people in your life (past and present) whom you might otherwise lose contact with.

[@PHANPHOTO1]

Some people are just more socially-oriented than others. It's just another way of keeping up with what people are doing. It allows me to keep contact with friends, family and acquaintances literally in every corner of the world. Some people just have small worlds, and want to keep their worlds small.

[@rdecredico]

Everyone sending, no one receiving. That is what is wrong.

[@melynadantis]

Its not always the case. If you have random people in your instagram etc. then yes. But if your friend is your follower he might be interested in what you post. IMO this can go both ways.

[@MrBudgetOrientedMan]

I will never forget what my Economics teacher used to say...."That a camera will always be going to deliver what a camera should deliver....But a mobile phone camera will never be going to deliver the results what an actual Camera delivers"...It means Mobile phones camera will never going to replace a fully fledged camera... I will always prefer DSLR or even a Digital point and shoot Camera over mobile phone camera....

[@nareshwildbones]

mobile cameras cant replace dslrs at the moment, but point and shoot are already replaced. most of point and shoot users use it just to capture the moment and easiness and quickness is what matters in these cases and phone cameras are the most practical choice of the majority

[@MrBudgetOrientedMan]

Naresh Kuppuswamy yeah it's true because mobile phone cameras are improving....And it is as better as point and shoot cameras...

[@teatowel11]

This is silly, if you were to take a smart phone with the best camera today you would not have to go back very far in time for it to be better than consumer cameras for the majority of purposes.

[@justintime5021]

I think I heard something similar to this when digital cameras were starting to emerge... digital cameras are cool but they will never replace a high end film camera... they said

[@kbarrett1844]

Justin Time Automobiles haven’t replaced horses. We can still get horses.

[@Martin_Moore]

I think there is major potentional in hi end point and shoots still like the Canon S120 and Nikon P340. Photographers like me who don't always want to lug around our DSLRs but are unhappy with the low light capabilities smartphones will always have, WANT that middle camera and shelling out $400-$500 for a point and shoot with a f/1.8 lens that shoots raw and has MSAP is an area I think still has potential. But I do agree $200 point and shoots are dead. Cheap interchangeable lens cameras are dead. I think what we currently classify as a consumer camera is in a new transition period and we are going to see a lot more goes at it like the Nikon Coolpix A or Nikon A900, Sony RX100, Canon G7X. That's the future for the middle ground.

[@okaro6595]

Canon PowerShot S120 no more in production. It was replaced by G9 X which has less zoom (3x instead of 5x) but larger sensor. Yes, those kind of high end compacts still have some room. There also is some demand for super zooms. There is demand for cheap interchange lens cameras as nobody will start with a professional camera.

[@Strideo1]

Martin Moore I got my Sony RX 100 mk2 because my cellphone camera just wasn't powerful enough. Even if it's good for a phone there's only so much that can be done with tiny lenses, tiny sensors, and tiny apertures on these phones. As i used the RX 100 and improved my skills and learned how to use it manually I started getting better and better pictures. Now I'm upgrading to a more powerful interchangeable lens camera and I can't wait to go out and use it. The RX 100 will probably have a spot in my jacket pocket though because it's just so much more capable than a cellphone camera and it's still easy to carry around.

[@Strideo1]

Alex DSL Yeah, a 6mm phone sensor will never be able to compete with a 1 inch or four thirds sensor. The consumer market is shrinking but there will be a market for people who want something better than a cellphone camera that they can still comfortably carry in a jacket or pants pocket.

[@Traumglanz]

You can do this just fine with micro 4/3 and still include interchangeable lenses. The Olympus OM-D E-M-10 Mark II for example seems to be super popular as travel camera. Ok. it is a little over your $400 to $500 mark, but if you look at the LX100 you are down a little in price and lose basically just the the interchangeable lenses. Both imho are the new consumer-grade cameras, either with or without interchangeable lenses. They fit as well the price bracket when you adjust for inflation from the last 25 years.

[@dungareesareforfools]

Besides issues of image quality, the fact is that using a smartphone as a camera is just an unpleasant experience compared to using a DSLR or micro 4/3.

[@ngbowenng]

Dear Sony , add a touch screen to your Axxxx line please

[@ngbowenng]

and what did you lend your daughter

[@ngbowenng]

+Ng Bo Wen and I'm 12

[@IpMan747]

Actually they did, the a5100 has a touch screen. But without a proper OS, it isn't gonna work well.

[@ngbowenng]

+IpMan747 ah yes I should say a6000 and 6300 . Sorry

[@eLJaybud]

I'd rather be able to shoot more pictures than have the power drain of a screen.

[@VenomIIID]

2018 still they don't get it. They should hire Tony as a product advisor.

[@azawal498]

watching in 2019, still no change, huawei released P30 pro which has a 40megapixel camera with leica lens and costs roughly $1300, meanwhile olympus released their newest flagship professional camera the EM1-X which is still produces only 20 megapixels and costs $4500 just for the body. like yes i get that there is ALOT of things that only a dedicated SLR camera can do that phone cameras cannot, but you get my point. like it just doesnt make sense that these camera companies refuse to see their pending demise in the market like Nokia refused to see their fall when iphones came out

[@tathuen]

2020 no change. Nikon Snapbridge still does nothing.

[@RideWithRahulOfficial]

I have a Panasonic Fz1000 and it transfers over WiFi, I have to select the photo and make the transfer but it works 100% perfect, no fails, no issues ever, and it gets the quality. Also I got a third party USB charger for the camera so that I can get it Charged over the Powebank.

[@THEPROUDNOOB23]

Nobody is learning photography from sepia filtered food pictures on Instagram or from dog filters on Snapchat

[@sarahthomson8183]

Yeah, but this is where it's all heading..

[@jorismaasvisuals]

Maybe for kids yes, but pro's and adults just want quality above everything else, whether it's photography or film. You are simply limited with Instagram or Snapchat based systems if you don't have full control in post with Lightroom or something.

[@5oulPower]

If you think you can't learn serious photography from Instagram then it's really your own loss. I've been introduced to countless great photographers and learned from their work because of Instagram.

[@paulm.gilbert1096]

Actually Not Nick you may have been introduced to countless great photographers but you're not going to be one of them. I know that sounds insulting but manipulating an image on a computer is not photography. It's a case of using your brain and eyes, not a key board to Photoshop the hell out out of an image that doesn't do what you wanted it to. You need to see whats there before you take the picture not after. If all you want to do is take selfies for Facebook or Instagram you are on the right track. If you want to be the next Ansel Adams, get something for serious people and make an effort, that's the only way. I know you won't believe me so I know I won't be seeing your name listed among the greats. Now go and make A liar out of me. You'll make me happy.

[@5oulPower]

Never said they ever did any of those things on Instagram but ok... you seem to know them and me very well, I'm sure you've done your homework and checked out who they were and how their photos are like. You definitely know what you're talking about. I don't recall claiming to be among any greats. You're such a nice, pleasant fellow you must be such a joy to work with.

[@jasonfry5846]

I'm still using film in my Nikon FE, and waiting a week for it to get back from the developer.

[@markvmmm]

same here

[@gerardcollins1767]

try black and white easy to develop very cheap enlargers around since lot people went digital tough camera fe and fm good luck.

[@stinkybritches4540]

gerard collins color is easy to self process as well

[@rogerb5615]

Do you use thedarkroom dot com for your processing? Try 'em if you haven't. Topnotch, fast, and relatively inexpensive.

[@rogerb5615]

Also Nikkormat FT2, nearly bulletproof and cheap cheap cheap.

[@tortugabob]

This is a great video. It touched on issues that make absolute sense for even old guys like me. The idea of charging a camera with a USB port makes so much more sense than trying to out pixel each other.

[@OlegKorsak]

all you say about future - as I remember Samsung had a consumer camera with an OS (android?) but failed. Cameras should not depend on a smartphone. Let them be independent and upload directly.

[@IDIturboDiesel]

Oleg Korsak I agree, and I prefer swapping batteries instead of USB charging.

[@cosawanty]

My grand niece (3 years old) picked up my camera, touched the screen and declared it broken because nothing happened. I explained you had to turn wheels and press buttons to change things. You're crazy was her response. We live in a different world, but camera manufacturers refuse to join it.

[@ianrazey8412]

Unless you only shot in program mode with auto iso/white balance and only have one (a kit) lens you do need to change settings on a DSLR, at the very least the Off/On switch.. A 3 year old would not understand why. I have meet a lot of adults who don't understand this either, including a colleague of mine who has a Canon 7D! (I have a Canon RebelT5i/EOS 700D with 18-55 mm and 55-250 mm Canon IS STM lenses)

[@cosawanty]

You're not getting the point. Kids nowdays don't use computers, they use tablets and smartphones. A mouse or a trackpad is ancient to them, they do everything by touch without another interface. So a camera menu is like having to read an instruction manual just to get a photo. The fact I use my front wheel for shutter speed, the back one for aperture, then turn the lens to zoom is just ridiculous to them. Press the app, take the shot, post it online is the way for them.

[@johnclonier45]

That argument stands on nothing. My daughter is 2 years and a half. She can operate a tablet but can also create havoc in it with random touches. But she can also use the various camera in the house, none of them having a touch screen. She identifies clearly on off button, shutter and zoom. Kids are sponges an d learn to do what their parents or other grown ups are doing. If your kid sees you touch screens all day long then it's going to do the same...touch ui is not an in-born skill.

[@ianrazey8412]

If children are only using tablets and smartphones all they need is a 5 - 6 megapixel camera: not 18 - 24 megapixel camera.

[@linusfotograf]

Should we dumb down everything now so kids can use them?

[@ropersix]

Instagram may originally have been mostly for and full of photos taken with smartphones. But that's no longer the case. First of all, sponsored posts are full of photos from professional, produced photo shoots. And by now, Instagram is also even full of photos taken with film cameras! So I think it's more accurate (and honest) to say, Instagram TRIED to shut out cameras in favor of smart phone, but it didn't work. It's more just a digital platform. But I agree, it's all about the software going forward. That's what happened to Silicon Valley in general, and will happen to the camera industry as well. And ironically, it looks like that X1D from Hasselblad is going to have the most modern touch UI out there.

[@lukasgraesslin]

True, I see a lot of professional photographers (for example landscape) who also share their photos on instagram. You're also able to upload pictures through your computer with gramblr.

[@ropersix]

ivan petrov I agree with you on that. When people ask me for advice on a "better" camera to get, my first question to them is always, what's wrong with your iPhone? And when and if they do buy a more advanced camera, they often complain that it's too complicated and they haven't spent time figuring it out yet. Most just want the easiest, hassle free camera. And I can fully understand that. Even I get very frustrated with complicated menus and buttons and setting sometimes (mostly with video though) . That's why I think better software is key going forward--for all types of camera.

[@Haldered]

It's a slower workflow, which greatly increases the barrier to entry for professional photographers.

[@floriannachbar6221]

+Timothy Roper: While it is true that many photos on Instagram are professionally taken with DSLRs, I still think it's a shame that Instagram doesn't allow image resolutions beyond 1080px in width by 1350px in height, which makes it more difficult for passionate hobby photographers who want to share their work with a big community to shine with their photos compared to some IPhone shots (nothing wrong with the IPhone camera). Of course there is a lot more to a good photo than a high resolution, but 1080x1080 (for a regular square photo) really doesn't leave much room for details of let's say a city skyline shot. I definitely agree with you on the software part though!

[@UchennaKema]

export photos: upload to iCloud. use iPhone. did i just blow your mind?

[@daffidavit]

I remember when Olympus first came out with the OM-1 in the late 1970's. It was a revolution in 35 mm cameras because the camera body was so small. I still have it locked up today as a part of my memories. Of course I don't use it anymore, but it was similar in it's introduction to the Nikon D-70. A new brand form of a smaller camera for it's day which took great pictures, despite its 6mp limit. The lens made up for the lack of CMOS space. I like my Iphone 6 camera, but I'd rather bring along my Lumix FZ70 which has a lens range from 20mm-1200mm. I bought it at Best Buy brand new (it was a giveaway and last one on he shelf) for $150 because they thought nobody would be interested in "bridge cameras" until the Nikon D900 came out. All of a sudden the value of my Lumix FZ70 started to sell for around $400 again. So, I'll keep my Lumix and my Iphone 6 and be satisfied. BTW, I have my dad's old Rolicord 4x4 that is a high def film camera made in the early 50s. It has a Schneider lens which can produce pictures similar in quality to the Hasselblads used in the Apollo missions. It's considered a high def camera, as far a film goes, but I keep it as a museum piece. The Lumix and the Iphone are enough for me these days. And yes, I used to develop my own 35 mm negative and 8x10 photos in my basement darkroom as a young man. But those days are gone. To me, the Iphone 6 and the Lumix is enough, although the Nikon D900 is amazing for the price. It's not a professional camera, but lots of pros use it for its 2000mm long lens.

[@Halfpint71]

I would rather be high-fived in the face with a shovel than have snapshat. But then, i'm 44 and not a 14 yr old girl. And i'm nowhere near as chill as Tony.

[@rickodato369]

Thank you for such a great video. You have an excellent vocabulary and your presentation skills are subperb. I certainly agree with your take on the camera industry. I recently developed an interest in HDR and getting my Nikon D300S to do bracketed exposures was unbelievably complex requiring hours of research. I can now get better results with my DJI drone 4K camera with just a few swipes of the screen and (even better), my Samsung phone has an app that produces fine HDRs instantly. Since Android is a free & open-source operating system, I find it baffling that no camera manufacturer is producing an Android camera. I think you're right, if they don't gear up to the 21st century tech, they will go extinct.

[@PreveenRodrigo]

Nikon did. And there is the Samsung Galaxy Camera mentioned in the video, but you said "camera manufacturer" so...

[@babybirdhome]

The camera manufacturers aren't accustomed to the Silicon Valley model. They're accustomed to running the market by stringing consumers along and getting them to pay another $100 for a feature that the camera they already bought was fully capable of doing a year ago, but didn't, because then they'd have nothing to sell for $100 more the next year. That was fine when no other competition existed, but now there are new entrants, and they've managed to reach critical mass, which puts the camera manufacturers in quite a pickle. They have to learn how to run a business when there are really serious competitors who've already stolen their customer base from them, and that's not easy to do, especially when you're used to moving very slowly. They are in real trouble. Once the Silicon Valley people come in to take over a market, you get to choose your fate. Adapt, get acquired by them, or dig your grave and take an early retirement.

[@tungstenwhizard4361]

Rick Odato I believe Samsung produces cameras.

[@eggaweb]

Fully agree. Android can be fully customised.

[@andrewguttry6886]

@Rick Odato. I find DSLR cameras ridiculously over complex to the point of, 'we're going to cram as much pointless stuff in your camera as we can, because we can'. Do we really need histograms? If I want to bracket with my Nikon FE, Canon A1 or Pentax MX, it's a simple matter of turning my aperture ring or my shutter speed dial. I don't need a 400 page manual and days of research to figure it out! Oh, and my camera batteries last over a year without having to recharge the things, and to this day, no matter how hard they try, nothing digital comes close to film as a photographic medium. Furthermore, what is this obsession with 'bokeh'? When did an out of focus background become more important than the subject-or has 'bokeh' now become the subject? Browsing magazines and photo sites you would be forgiven for believing that. Telephone 'cameras' are cheap, appalling shite and should never be mentioned in the same sentence as 'photography'. Rant over.

[@MaxArceus]

I'm 21, and I personally hate smartphones, and even more so the apps that are killing photography. I love my workflow with lightroom, and for a while even used some traditional filters, which I'm hoping to get back into soon.

[@dchait6797]

cant say i ditched but started 35 mill this month and now are love it!

[@dchait6797]

I am 21 too...

[@z352kdaf8324]

No one cares about your workflow in lightroom. No one is killing your photography either.

[@BomJimmy]

come out of Lightroom. Usecapture One pro11 and find what you are missing. which brings true colors which LR could never produce.

[@ediangeles5471]

Well thought out and interesting video! I am an "enthusiast" and got my wife a very nice DSLR for Christmas. She refuses to touch it, even when it comes to those "archivist" moments that used to have mom's and grandma's going to the cameras and posing everyone for the birthday or the little league banquet. She want's nothing but her iPhone primarily because it fits in her purse. As an enthusiast, my beef with modern cameras is that they completely neglect the software side of things. 15 years ago I got my first Fuji digital camera and it came with some pretty functional Windows software that would clean up my photos. When Windows took a dump on it's customers in 2010-ish with their vision of capturing hardware dollars with the touchscreen surface, I went to Linux. Now every touch up requires me to do a fairly manual intensive process with Gimp to get my simple family photos touched up. This is part of the bigger story that I think nearly everyone who is producing visual media is doing so on a Mac. If you are now in the Mac hardware world, you are prone to be sucked into their "simple-sphere" and reach for the iPhone before you reach for your DSLR. Even as an enthusiast. Kids are a different story completely. Teenagers have been obsessed with their image since Narcissus looked in the reflecting pool. But with snapchat, they sit there wonking out pictures of themselves (and their friends, enemies, and frenemies -- what better thing to do to a frenemy than send them a pic with a goofy uni-brow that everyone will laugh at!) to give themselves freckles, or goofy glasses, or anime eyes. This is a completely new form of art. In photography you might have applied a light or focus or lens technique to accentuate or diminish or distort -- they want to draw with their finger, or browse through 3rd party mod's the same way they like to try on clothes at the mall. You could possibly get some of those kids interested in cameras over phones if the cameras had the kind of apps you are mentioning, but honestly, it's not because digital cameras can't be used in this way -- it's because they honestly are computer illiterate and have only the remotest concept of what a file is, what a program is, and how "the cloud" works. They have no curiosity about those things because they are too busy thinking about what they will look like with anime eyes, or a square minecrafty head.

[@dethmerc]

If you get rid of memory cards doesn't that mean that it will have a non expandable storage?

[@dethmerc]

Like Apple is, if you want more memory pay an extra premium and upgrade for the same thing

[@danieljones8706]

You think a DSLR is expensive now, just see the price once they have to include built-in storage. not to mention an improved CPU chip to handle the data transfer adequately. What you pay for a Canon 80D now would get you a T6i.

[@freibier]

You do not need to get rid of memory cards, you just need to add the possibility to directly upload pictures to your cloud account/send them to your phone etc., too. Many cameras already have wireless connectivity, so why not use that (and the wireless hotspot capability of your phone)? Think of the memory card as a "backup", or as the way to transfer pictures for those who do not have a wireless connectivity available (you would need that anyway for any pro working somewhere in a jungle/war zone).

[@AntsAasma]

I think he meant that we need to get rid of the memory card as a way to get pictures off of the camera. The problem is not that we can take the card out, but rather that it's the only sane way to get at the pictures.

[@ChristianKoehler77]

So many cameras can transfer pictures wirelessly to a smartphone. The relatively inexpensive Olympus EM-10 can do it. If your camera can't, maybe something like EyeFi is the solution?

[@hbrookes]

no one will ever photograph a wedding with a cell ph..no creative control..

[@TonyAndChelsea]

I agree...

[@carpenter22101]

There ARE photographers who photograph weddings on an iPhone.

[@hbrookes]

That's a waste of time and money!!

[@ricdonato4328]

Hbrookes: Google is your friend, you may be surprised the number of weddings shot with cellphones. Yes, you can have creative control with cellphones, it is the photographer not the equipment. Okay, the kit makes doing some things easier than with other kit. Do a search for Burberry, they photographed one of their runway fashion shows using iPhone 5S. A number of newspapers that fired their entire photo department then outfitted their field news folks with cellphones, why immediate uploading to the newspaper, excellent image quality, and much lower overall cost. Again, Google is your friend. Do have a open mind.

[@hbrookes]

Just the shutter lag alone is a drawback..Yes it can be done..but..Would you record a live symphony with a cell ph for a major record label? well, some would..don't fall into the modern CRAP TRAP!!

[@jamescrowl4289]

Tony & Chelsea, this was a fun and quite interesting video to watch. However its 2019 at the time I'm watching this and I do see items such as manufacturer having apps & wifi connectivity however these are small changes. Important, but not game changers. It would be really fun to see a 2019/2020 update to this video. 👍

[@Mariogutcha]

It’s 2021 now! Can’t wait for an update. Seen this video now seems so distant re. How mirrorless have taken over.

[@JohnCarleo]

Tony this video was brilliant. I just purchased a Canon XA11 Camcorder because of the limited video capability of my Canon EOS Mark II cameras (5D, 7D). The video quality is good but having to deal with stopping before the camera shuts off because of the file size limit is annoying and most times impractical. And the wifi connection to control the camera (I use CamFi) is just OK. Losing connection and having the camera stop filming isn't OK. I saw someone the other day filming a band with a DSLR and they told me they downloaded software that prevents their camera from stopping when it reaches the file size limit. This video is on point about Camera manufacturers having to start paying much more attention to software capability. Thank you for taking the time to make this video! I'm filming a Choir performance tomorrow at one of the local colleges and I can't wait to use my new Canon XA11. I've been studying and practicing with it. Unfortunately, it's new and there isn't much advice out there for this specific camera. Love you and Chelsea.

[@tonalli92]

You forgot that GoPro's are also a consumer cameras and they're still a big hit

[@TonyAndChelsea]

GoPro might be going bankrupt soon... www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=gopro%20stock

[@tonalli92]

Didn't know that, Thanks. & great video BTW

[@TheAndrewBen]

GoPro is more of a video recorder. Only the newest models has decent photo-capturing capabilities.

[@Brianuyahoo]

+Tony & Chelsea Northrup .. And there's huge competition in that consumer video market. Tons of clones and Sony's Actioncam.

[@StargateMax]

That's sad news if it happens. Would be nicer if Shitsung pulled back with their crap they spread all over the world.

[@thejudgehasjudged]

Good video of your thoughts and I agree to the most part. What I find depressing is that people have no concept of what a good picture is and I've just come from an Air Show with a sea of mobiles pointing up at the planes. Good luck with that!

[@babybirdhome]

People never have. If they had, then what would make a good picture would be different. To be good, it must stand out, apart from the majority. By definition, then, it is impossible for "people" to have a concept of what makes a good photo.

[@tryagain.k1821]

A box Brownie aka iPhone takes snaps.

[@morganahoff2242]

"The best camera in the world is the one you have with you."

[@paulbroderick8438]

Well said. Too many people are into 'if only I had this or that' piece of equipment I would be so much 'better' at capturing images. At photo school we were taught to express and not to just record.

[@csabapapp8481]

So for an airshow it's better you have a fast camera + long lens with you, or you'll make hundred shots with black dots on the bright sky. Phones are great, but if you want to level up from avarage quality in any of those functions (exept making a phone call), then you'll need to buy that specific hardware, like a real camera, TV, computer, or audio system. I understand, that for most of the people avarage is more than enough.

[@Neopulse00]

Had the camera where you recorded images onto a floppy.

[@VanAllenVlogs]

It still sits in my closet. No floppy discs.

[@dracphelan]

I had one too. That was what my wedding was shot on.

[@sakadabara]

I had Sony Mavica with floppy disc back in late 1990's it was great fun !

[@jonesey65244]

My Sony Mavica was a GIANT step up from my 1st digital camera; a tiny Casio, which did NOT shoot jpg, and is now nigh to impossible to view those files.

[@jimp7181]

+jonesey65244 we had a Mavica at work some time ago. I loved it because it was so much easier to access the photos. Back then, the camera to pc connections left a lot to be desired.

[@timbradbury9734]

Great video Tony. And I couldn't agree more with your insights. As an older codger and an enthusiast, I have said for a long time that cameras were missing the boat, and quoted the same sales stats you did a few months ago on my blog. The constant cloud idea is excellent - kind of a Google Docs for pictures, that you can open on anything and send however you like. However, like horses and cars, and radio and TV, we may have come to a parting of the ways. Radios and horses are still with us, but not like thy used to be. Watching the endless selfies young people take is certainly a clue - they don't just use different equipment, they use it for different things. As they get older and their focus naturally starts to turn outward rather than inward, some of them will join the ranks of 'real' camera users. Let's just hope by then that cameras have moved to a stage where they have incorporated some of the great suggestions you put forward.

[@hamishsutherland3926]

Not dead. Couldn't agree less. Saturated and shrinking market and I don't care. The world has enough cameras and that's not a problem unless you're invested in making massive numbers of cameras. As for Instachat- never used it, never will, never visited Snapface, never will. Not interested in what everybody had for dinner or how much anyone's face has changed since yesterday. And stay away from my memory card. My files are for my computer and or my printer. Occasionally I might share a favourite to a site. I have no use for the cloud and never will. My photography, my lifestyle, consumption, connections are not the property of Google, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft etc and never will be. And btw EOS-M may not be dead, there's a new one expected next week.). I certainly won't be buying the Northrup model 1 enthusiast camera.

[@bennylofgren3208]

+Hamish Sutherland Amazing, I really thought dinosaurs went extinct 65 million year ago. Apparently some have survived! :-) (Sorry for that. Couldn't resist...) The thing is, while you are certainly entitled to your opinions, they are not well aligned with what happens in the world of information technology. And yes, cameras and images are a part of that. The new generations growing up now, as Tony very rightly points out, are in a sense quite like you, just the other way around - they can't imagine a world WITHOUT being connected, without being able to share images with friends and family at the touch of a button (on a screen) and without the ease of use of modern information management devices (which is what I call everything from your smart watch to your modern car, with your DSLR camera and computer tucked in there in the middle somewhere). I don't think the camera industry as a whole is dead, far from it. But Canon, Nikon et al can't rely on the cash flow from huge numbers of consumer point-and-shoots anymore to fund development of their higher-end gear. Which, unfortunately for you and me and other photography enthusiasts and professionals, will result in higher prices for future pro cameras. There is simply going to be less of a market base to share R&D costs with. UNLESS! Unless the manufacturers wake up and get with the program - start innovating around internet connectivity, media sharing and draw inspiration from small, compact user friendly devices like your smartphone. Nikon seems to have started to think along these lines with their Snapbridge, but I don't know anything about it really more than was described in this video. That is exactly the kind of thing that is needed to keep more advanced cameras in the field of view of regular consumers - that will be the only way for future high-end cameras to remain within financial reach of people that are not pro photographers. In a sense I'm like you. I am an amateur photographer (not a very good one, but happily clicking away regardless), but I like my DSLR, I know it intimately and I have become set in my ways when it comes to workflow and such. It is familiar and it is comfortable. But, I'm also a senior IT consultant and I know very well how modern devices like smartphones work - and they are truly amazing small wonders. I would love for my next DSLR to include an open operating system (Android, I'm looking at you) in addition to, and integrated with, the regular camera OS and hardware, just to be able to add apps to the mix and to get the internet and online connectivity that people actually are taking for granted today. No, in my mind, Tony is absolutely spot on with this video. I hope people listen to him, because he is smart, he is knowledgeable, he is well spoken, and... he is right.

[@bennylofgren3208]

***** Thank you for your kind words! I do agree with you in that camera phones and higher end pure cameras occupy different realms. At least they have until now. But their developments are converging, and while that will benefit the vast majority of consumers - who really are only interested in sharing their everyday and grabbing mementos (although I shouldn't say "only", because it's basically what most photographers are doing after all, in one sense or another) - as I wrote earlier, I do fear that the prosumer/professional will suffer in the end. Photographers have always been a conservative bunch, and while there is a small community of photographers still using regular film, no one can say that that is where real *development* *and* *innovation* happens anymore. The absolutely remarkable development in for example sensor, processor and memory technologies have been brought about by those technologies finally becoming usable and affordable and *wanted* by consumers. I bought my first digital camera in 1996. It was a toy. it took small, grainy pictures in daylight only, but of course I wanted one because... well, because. :-) By then I had practically given up on film photography. Too much hassle developing film, too expensive to develop and too long between me shooting the images and seeing the results. Then in 2001 Canon released its, and the world's, first DSLR aimed at the consumer market, the EOS D30. (They had the letter and numbers backwards back then. :-) ) It was still seriously expensive, so not all consumers could get one then, but I had the means and the want, so I bought one. That's where my photography took off again, and I am now on my fourth or fifth DSLR since then. My point is, if Canon (or someone else, they just happened to be first out of the starting blocks) hadn't started to sell tons and tons of these somewhat affordable cameras to digitally starved photographers the world over, and the rest of the camera industry hadn't taken notice of the huge market opportunity that suddenly opened up, we would likely not have had the marvels of technology and engineering that cameras of today are, at the prices they are. And that disconnect between mass market and professionals might happen again, if the camera producers and pro photographers refuse to get off their high horses and acknowledge that there is a huge mass market of amateurs out there, and that they are actually the ones that have financed much of the technical development up until today. They may not be "real" photographers in some people's eyes, but they have earned the right to have their needs met too, even if they only want to streamline how to share their lunch choices with their friends. That's really why I decided to comment on Hamish's reply in the first place, because he says the world has enough cameras and basically implies that it isn't a problem if they become rare, expensive instruments for professionals only once again. I for one am very, very happy that I can buy seriously awesome pieces of camera equipment that are capable of delivering way better images than I will ever be able to compose and shoot, enabling people like me who doesn't do this for a living but love it anyway to take pictures that are so good that we won't get tired of this hobby anytime soon. :-) I think many professional photographers of today are afraid. They are afraid that their hard work in learning their profession, tenacity in acquiring the skills to stand out and courage to cast off into an uncertain profession and make a living off of their passion will devalue as more and more "mere amateurs" start publishing pictures, often good ones at that, causing people to question what it is a pro photographer charges their high fees for, anyway... I have no doubt that there will always be room for professional photographers (I know first-hand how hard it is to take great pictures :-) ), but I also think that they too have to re-evaulate their business models with an open and progressive mind, because there is indeed a risk that the traditional profession may disappear or morph into something completely different. The radio, movie, TV, magazine, book and news media industries have already felt the full brunt of this change. Some have adapted and survived, others have perished. That's the nature of a market economy. People who shy away from change rather than embracing it will always have trouble making it through times of transitions, as will those who are tone deaf enough not to see that the train is approaching the station, whether we want it to or not. The question is just, who will get on it and who will be left behind at the station when it leaves for the future. :-)

[@hamishsutherland3926]

Boy, that was a big reply. I think basically what everybody is thinking but nobody wants to say is that it might not be the consumer camera that is dead, it might be photography. We may be close to the point where technology is so good that photography is no longer a thing. Aside from that my main points were that sufficiency is not a crisis. That's true of the camera market and of the economy in general. Canon and Sony et al will sell fewer cameras and Tony Northrop will sell fewer camera guide books. That's just the nature of a market. My other point was that not only is the sufficiency of cameras not a crisis but the solution to the imaginary crisis of phones becoming cameras is not to turn cameras into phones. I wouldn't buy the cloud camera Tony is describing. I wouldn't take it for free. I'm one of the 75% of smartphone owners who is not on Instagram. The internet already has a carbon footprint equal to that of the airline industry. We don't need another couple of billion photographers trying to upload what would have filled their 64GB memory cards, through unlimited roaming data plans, to server farms which may disappear at any time. Remember Megaupload? The only cloud servers safe from being summarily shut down by the FBI over copyright issues are those listed on US stock exchanges, and I also don't want to facilitate those 4 or 5 companies controlling all the world's data. I'd go back to film before I'd use the Northrup model 1 enthusiast cloud camera.

[@midnightsnack1306]

The new way of photography is not for you Hamish and certainly not for me either. However, I do understand Tony's point. If we want the enthusiast market to thrive and not die off in the future, camera manufacturers must learn to adapt to the taste and habits of the new generation to expand its market. If adding a touch screen and apps on my Fujifilm Xpro5 will make the dedicated camera market thrive then so be it. Last thing I want is a bleak future where the latest camera you could only buy is a smart phone.

[@bobm2410]

+Benny Lofgren +Poet Guide Agree completely. Tony's message was not that WE of this generation of enthusiast photographers need to change our ways (I still love my Canon 50D). No, rather, it is a wake-up call to Canon, Nike, etc. that THEY need to change the way they build cameras and get with the program of open architectures so that they will appeal to the generation that comes after us. As he said, there will always be pro DSLRs and big glass, but if the the big companies can't appeal to the mass market of the 18-20-somethings that's coming, they won't be able to support the R&D necessary to keep the pros or the prosumers adequately equipped.

[@CoolDudeClem]

This is another reason I HATE smartphones. Everybody's taking pictures and shooting video with their phones and their blocky, pixelated digital zoom. The world I grew up in is gone and I hate that everything has been replaced with a dam phone!

[@HiyuMarten]

I adore how everyone can share their lives and learn photography with the technology they already have. Consumer cameras sucked and now there are more photographers (and more people who are upgrading to interchangeable lens cameras) than ever.

[@alexxx4434]

Proves the fact that most people don't really give a shit about quality, and never did.

[@MultiNemesis101]

Damn not dam lol . But I agree with your point!

[@fotochuck]

The Pro camera may not be dead, but it is dying. We may see Big Whites on the sidelines at the World Cup, Super Bowl, etc, but soon they will be mounted on REDs and other high speed cameras. Imagine a camera shooting 100 fps, at 1/500, 1/1000, whatever-never a missed shot, because of 100 decisive moments a seconds. World Press Awards have been won with smartPhones. Sports Illustrated has used iPhone photos. How soon until a Vogue cover is shot by some kid who learned photography on a 'phone?? Lots of Mobile Journalist are starting to replace news crews. Will Tony's 12 y.o. daughter hire a Wedding Photographer 10-15 years from now-or will her friends shot the wedding with their 8K 'phones.

[@polievets1]

I agree, to say that pro camera will stay for sure I would have my doubts here, Now we already start seeing double lens phone cameras in couple of years I am almost sure it will be a quad lens camera unit one for Red one for Blue and one green specter of light, and one for black and white, so it will be norm then next step software company most likely will figure it out how to use digital zoom without any lost of quality at all ,these all potentially could kill pro camera segment completely

[@tremeloco]

Just to add to your scenario, why have fifty photographers shooting the same thing from the same angle? Why even pay to send a photographer halfway around the world when you can just pay a licensing fee for the same image from strategically placed, remote controlled high speed video cameras. Soon (and by soon I mean now), we'll have to explain to our kids how there used to be real people doing all these jobs. Nothing new but without people in the equation, art becomes soulless (Metropolis). Just look at what's happened to music. Sorry for the rant, I guess you just have to embrace it... bring on the robots. ; )

[@primefotoNL]

I think it will take to much time and costs to shift through all these 100 pictures per second. Not realistic i guess. Consumers will largely use the phone camera but there will always be people whom want to make and create a picture the old school way. Look at the amateurs now. They shoot 35mm and large format negatives still. The photo camera will stay even for the consumer. A other problem is flash. Can't do that with a phone. Neither can you do strobist style. So there will always be a group of people needing a photo camera. Then again, try to do a very shallow DOF or hyper focal. Then there is low light high ISO. Not on your phone. My conclusion is that there will always be specialized photo camera's for consumers just lijke for the amateur and the pro.

[@PascalSommerMovies]

I don't think that ISO will be a problem for much longer, smartphone manufacturers will finally get that ISO is more important than high megapixel counts. And also, the whole machine learning magic that is going on right now might actually be a good enough way of simulating shallow DOF that looks convincing to the untrained eye. The problem lies with the user interface I think. A person that doesn't understand aperture and shutter speed is gonna take a long time to produce good photos. We need the smartphone companies to give control back to the users, and not on a laggy "material design" interface, but one that is actually responsive within fractions of a second.

[@fotochuck]

Selection using High Speed Video-Ever hear of instant replay? It's Old Tech. having been around since 1967. With New Tech grabbing the right frames will be easy-they have an algorithm that. BTW In 2009, Esquire shot their June issue cover of Megan Fox in video. They used a 4K RED. Now RED has an 6K. Nothing new here. Why is Flash a problem?? They have been triggering flash with Radio Triggers for many years. This should be a no-brainer, because an iPhone is a type of radio. BTW what is Strobist Style?? Back in the old, old days of using Flash Powder, the Flash Tray was off-camera. Paper-Thin DOF? There are apps for that already. And Computational Photography keeps getting better. Technology does not stand still.

[@jamesolbrisch2582]

My dad had an AE-1 I was always so enamored by the the thing with interchangeable lenses. I was never allowed to play with it as a kid and it only made me more curious about. Looking back it's what drove me to picking up a DSLR and becoming a photographer.

[@Daniel_Zalman]

Can you guys bump up the contrast/boominess to make your weedeos Poppy McPoperson?

[@Daniel_Zalman]

MrKdr500 I'm guessing sarcasm isn't your thing, right?

[@kingalias]

LMAO! Nice!

[@AntsAasma]

sdp.io/toptip

[@frederickpfeiffer9276]

Very good explain, I hope the camera companies listen.

[@kcb73mgb1]

the Soney a6000 I just got will send photos to your smartphone and send to your PC when on wifi.

[@mannypvd2296]

4 years later... SONY just brought out a $6500 camera body. Everything is moving to Prosumer and above now. Beginners have to shell out quite the amount of money these days.

[@brittanybutlermusic]

To me, it's weird that you say this though, because I was going to say I've seen an overflow of DSLR cameras lately. Ever since 2009-ish. Everywhere I go, I see people (usually young people who think they're ~cool~) with some sort of Canon EOS Digital camera strap around their necks, carrying around their rebels with the kit lens attached/set to auto using them the way you'd use a P&S camera! It's so crazy to me. But, other than that... This whole Apple iPhone cameras being able to compete with DSLRs thing makes me sad, actually :( No one's going to need us photographers anymore eventually because everyone will be able to take an above-decent photo with their phone. EDIT: I didn't mean for this to sound hostile towards the younger generation. And, I know that there will always be a need for good quality photographs and photographers. It's just that eventually (yeaaaars down the line), phones will probably be more advanced than we can even imagine right now. Advanced focusing, ridiculous megapixels, the lot! So, the average person out there will be able to take a fine looking photo, and if they don't care/can't tell the difference they'll think "Wow! We don't even need an actual camera/photographer!"

[@q5sys]

Agreed. I think there's a sort of hipster backlash against using 'just a phone'. I was in DC the other weekend and I'd venture a guess that around 75% of those in their early 20s that were there sightseeing had their entry level DSLR hanging around their neck. Granted that's a rather small slice of society, but in a world where people will drop $600+ on a phone every 18 months or so spending $600 on their "pro camera" (as a status symbol or fashion statement) isnt a big deal

[@DanielleGaither]

I don't think DSLRs are going anywhere (and it doesn't seem Tony does either). There's always going to be a need for professional-quality cameras. I think he's talking about the cheap point-and-shoot market, and some low-end interchangeable lens cameras like the ones he mentions. There's always going to be a limit to the quality you can get with a smartphone unless they find a way to cram significantly larger sensors into phones.

[@q5sys]

Danielle Gaither What I am noticing and I think Brittany was commenting on, is that people that once bought Point and Shoot cameras are now just buying entry level DSLRs instead. Why buy a quality P&S camera for ~$450 when a entry level DSLR is ~$650 and then people get the 'look' of a pro camera.

[@DanielleGaither]

+q5sys that makes sense and I'm inclined to agree. In fact, you could make the case that I was one of those people when I got my first DSLR! But my natural curiosity (and desire to get my money's worth!) motivated me to learn how to use my camera for real.

[@q5sys]

Danielle Gaither What worries me, is that it seems like the transition from a phone to a DSLR is going to be so much harder for people in the future. Going from a P&S to a DLSR is a simple step for many, and then they can enjoy the adventure of learning a DSLR and getting better at Photography. Phone cameras these days are 'good enough' for most people and they effectively see it as coming 'free with their phone'. Due to this I wonder if the same 'curiosity' element will encourage people to then spend a whole chunk of money on a DSLR. In the past it was 'I have to buy a camera' so the cost of a DSLR was only few hundred dollars more; now though with 'free cameras' on our phones... the cost of a DSLR isnt just seen as a 'few hundred dollars more'. For the crowd that buys a new phone every year, that's not an issue, however for those that dont, I think them justifying the cost of a DSLR when they could buy a new phone is a loosing battle since phones are more useful in todays society.

[@ruffthecrimedog]

@18:45 You say transferring photos is slow. Well, my Canon 6D uses built-in wifi to transfer full-size photos to my phone and computer in only a few seconds. I get your point that this functionality should be added to Canon's lower-end models too.

[@daimonion13]

Rufus McDonald it's not instant while shooting like Nikon's

[@mbr5742]

Even the entry level Canon DSLR can do WiFi these days

[@raymondlaniel5407]

Just wondering why you would want hi-quality images placed on a rinky-dink cellphone? Even a 14" tablet does not do justice to high quality images. Gine me at least a 60" TV!

[@stevematsukawa6342]

I know that digital is in but I am a dinosaur. I still shoot film and just now considering getting a digital P & S, I do not feel I need a 'smart phone'. I do have a cell phone, but it is a flip phone that does have a camera and web access. But I don't feel the need to have the latest gadget. I don't care about $400 'smart phones'. I love my film Canons, that's the way it is for me.

[@mk2escortvan]

Good on you. Don't get a smartphone. Just encourages you to waste time. But get a digital point and shoot. They can be pretty handy.

[@PaulStregevsky]

Bridge cameras don't have interchangeable lenses. They're simply all-in-one cameras with larger ergonomics, more or mire-convenient controls, and (typically) wider zoom ranges.

[@nicodimus2222]

I must be the only person left on Earth that has zero interest in a cell phone.

[@slimphotog]

Make that two of us. I don't have a cell phone either. If you want to talk about our shared viewpoint, we can talk via our landlines. :)

[@crxracer805]

You guys are weird

[@nicodimus2222]

Well, we don't walk around constantly distracted by a little box in our hands.

[@slackleashdogtraining3598]

Yes you are the last person (or generation) left on earth w/o a smart phone which really is the point. Your fine being an only, I admire eccentrics and am one. Tony is telling us where the tsunami of cash for r&d is going to go... into the space where everyone has gone. You and I don't mind being alone but make no mistake thats what we will be. And big companies may not cater to our needs, or desires and may not have that much to offer us those of us with both feet in the past. I've been a paid professional for 50 years, I shoot studio gear every other day. For 30 years I shot studio cameras every work day. AND STILL HALF THE PHOTOS I TAKE ARE WITH MY iPhone. Save me.

[@MrKikoboy]

I don't have a cellphone either and if you want to discuss you can write me a letter...

[@jacobschouten9980]

Wait, but why take out the SD card? What is so hard about plugging your camera in with a USB cable and opening up the software that came with it to get your photos? Why is there something wrong with the process? Does that mean cameras should have built-in storage, and for a higher GB model you have to pay more?

[@micamarayvos]

i was thinking the same. why he is still using a SD adapter? the only time i take my SD out is because is full and the event is not over.

[@WildBikerBill]

+ Matias Mendez Parisi In many/most cases using an SD card reader transfers the footage to the computer far faster than using the cameras builtin USB interface.

[@micamarayvos]

Wild Biker Bill wow i didn't nkew that. Thanks for replying.

[@WildBikerBill]

I think it is the difference between a feature included to fulfill a marketing bullet point + convenience (the camera) and a product where the 'feature' is it's sole reason for being (the card reader). Printers are the same way. I have a printer that you can stick a flash card directly into and talk to it via USB. But it is the slowest computer-to-flash card interface known to man.

[@WildBikerBill]

Here's a short video that illustrates the difference: kzbin.info/www/bejne/iqLGnHapltGWpMk

[@simprodigy]

For Snapchat: Take a screenshot > Add it to Snapchat Album > Import memories in Snapchat settings > Post!

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Good suggestion. FWIW that feature didn't exist when I made this.

[@ninobien]

Very well done, Tony! I hope you send this video to all camera manufacturers. No matter how grim their faces are looking at this video, that is still way better than closing the whole consumer camera departments down. Well done, Tony! :)

[@PostColorGear]

I disagree with the SD card discussion but only because of one point. If we can stream it to the computer somehow, great. I know with my sony a6300 I can use wifi and NFC if I want to. BUT....I would love SD cards to stick around if there are any issues. It would almost be great as a backup in case either communication was down, or if the files get deleted. Think of the sd card as a computer backup.

[@PostColorGear]

the other thing I find amusing is that Canon didnt cooperate with Magic Lantern but they never really said too much outright and just allowed it to exist. But what do they have in their new Mark 4 camera? HDR video. What did Magic Lantern add to the firmware years ago......? HDR video :)

[@MyMomSaysImSmart]

What's the last time you took a picture on your iPhone and then couldn't read it because it was corrupted? I'll answer on my behalf: it's never happened to me. Thousands of pictures, not one file corruption. If the camera bodies at least had their own built in SSD to buffer the images, then the writes would be faster, and a great deal more reliable than writing to cards. Then maybe have it set up to automatically transfer to the cloud or your computer via wifi or LTe.

[@yourcelebrant]

Yes it's like nobody on this thread has stumbled across Sony. I predict the A7T is not too far away (T for touch screen) When they finally combine the A7 range into one mega camera... IBS, Full frame, backlit sensor, hundreds of focal points, C.Z. glass, Wi-Fi, NFC, develop a better app etc. etc. they will be hard to catch.

[@QuietOC]

I can't see any reason for removable memory cards. It has always been a bad idea that was sold to consumers with an analogy to film.

[@lauchlantoal]

Never had an image corrupt, but have run out of space and been unable to simply swap cards. Even if you're at home it's a pain to run out of space on a phone - you can't simply stick the card in the computer, download the files, and format the card. You have to try to select all the images on your phone, upload them to the cloud, then download them to your computer. And then select them all again to delete them. This takes about 50 times longer than a physical interface and requires a cloud storage subscription that can handle the images. Additionally, if you drop your camera and break it you can just pop the cards out and download the files immediately. If your phone breaks you have to completely dismantle the phone and find an expert who can wire things up to recover the photos. So yes, it would be nice to simplify things by removing memory cards. But for photographers who value their images, or value the ability to get the shot when they need it, memory cards are absolutely vital. Adding an additional option to upload to the cloud, or otherwise making it even easier to use the camera without compromising the security and versatility that cards offer is the way to go.

[@YannickKhong]

The industry is pushing hardware towards the user without post-education. That's probably why the consumer camera is "dead".

[@coolkidd329]

elaborate please

[@YannickKhong]

coolkidd329 Consumer camera Vs iPhone iPhone 1- Person buys iPhone from Apple Store 2- Apple offers free workshops to teach how to use. Consumer camera 1- Person buys "consumer" camera 2- manufacturer spends no time offering exciting post-purchase experience like workshops and education.

[@ChristianKoehler77]

Who cares? Its never been as easy as today. Go to youtube. Tutorials and tips for everything. Every question answered. For free.

[@YannickKhong]

Xander Baggins if you knew how to use a cheapass consumer 250$ sony rx100 well, you wouldn't take the exact same picture quality ;)

[@YannickKhong]

Xander Baggins goes back to post-education point ^_^

[@jordan116327]

Canon knew that they'd get hit hard when Apple came out with the iPhone with a camera built in. That's why they started making the rebel line which is affordable and a lot better quality pictures than any smart phone. My t4i with magic lanter is a beast. My 80D with 70-200 f2.8 IS ii gets me really close to sports photography action. Good luck zooming in with your smart phone 😂 not to mention the sensor size between a dslr and a tiny smart phone one 😂

[@okaro6595]

IPhone was really not a threat to cameras until iPhone 4. The early ones just sucked.

[@julius4858]

You‘re making some great points. I guess so far nobody listened.

[@terrythomas5305]

Excellent. More analysis vids, please.

[@jonfletcher147]

Cameras will never die....my iPhone cannot compete with my cameras. There will ALWAYS be a need for cameras....don't think you'll ever see the press at major sporting events using phones! Don't think National Geographic photographers will be dumping their cameras for phones ;)

[@ericlowenbach5151]

That's what he said in the video a few times.

[@jonfletcher147]

+Eric Lowenbach I only watched the first 5 minutes to be fair

[@ElijsDima]

yet.

[@Equinox68]

He acknowledges that in the video. What he's suggesting it to make cameras more user friendly for the younger generation that are learning on phones in order to get consumers/enthusiasts wanting to step up to a more serious piece of equipment without all the antiquated menus and file transfers compared to a smartphone.

[@ericlowenbach5151]

+Jonathan Fletcher it's also in the title of the video itself, so you didn't have to actually watch it to know he was talking about consumer cameras. I mean, to be fair.

[@minecrusher6587]

Absolutely right. I thought about buying a better camera, but the 'new' ones are same as the one I bought a couple years back. Your advice is great. There needs to be a bit innovation too though, why doesn't a DSLR have a stabilisation for video? Why doesn't it do video in 4k? That's something a small iPhone cannot do at the moment (but they soon will). Why is the layout the same as 1980? I would buy a camera that does better fotos and better video with a nice DSLR effect. If you do video at the moment on a phone it's shaky and it has a bad handling. For family videos or for the next trip where you climb a mountain such a camera is easy to grab but the features are not worth the price - you can buy the camera of dji, which exists since a few years and is already better than anything Canon or Nikon have done in the past. How can a young company come that close to the biggest companies on the market. This still doesn't help. Even if they see it, the next model comes out at 2020 and who needs 4k and a stabiliser in a dslr? Every phone will have that.

[@minecrusher6587]

Well done, Tony. You again did a good job with this video :)

[@Everest314]

I don't know what you've been looking at, but DSLRs have had stabilisers for way longer than they've been able to shoot videos (since 1995). They're just in the lens, not the camera body in most cases. (And in the other cases, the camera bodies do have stabilisers.) 4k is a completely different issue. There are cameras who can do that and it's on the rise in new models, but how many people really make use of 4k at the moment? And why would you even want that on a phone before the displays are available in 4k resolution?

[@Lionheart2323]

+Kyle Medina it makes sense

[@Lionheart2323]

+Kyle Medina i dont think he meant it so literally. all the poster was saying was a replacement for a specific camera isnt much of an improvement over the camera is replaces. thats why you get so many people being like i will wait for the new camera to come out so i can but the old camera it replaced because it will be cheaper.

[@minecrusher6587]

DracariaEntertainment They are more or less the same. They just bump up a few stats. Have you seen any major improvements?

[@fishfuxors]

On the bright side, I just picked up a used Canon T1i for $105 at a pawn shop. It's my first DSLR. I am currently learning as much as I can from channels like yours. So a huge thanks to you guys!

[@TractorTrailerWorld]

It's really an embarrassment that these high dollar cameras don't have touch screen LCD's. I have a $130 dashcam that has one.

[@josephdesantis7494]

Its because touch screens suck outside. I rather a view finder and knobs and dials when outside trying to take pictures. I also rather the cost of a touch screen going into better optics and glass

[@JGott0001]

Building in a touchscreen isn't costly and doesn't exclude viewfinders and knobs. Look at any review of the 5dmk4 and you'll hear some pro praising the effectiveness of the "innovative" touchscreen. Even if it "sucks" outside, it's a net gain for any camera (when it's implemented in a way that's useful) and there are no real cons to it being there.

[@fauxltystower]

Fantastic. So you can sit in the corner rubbing your sticks together to get fire while throwing rocks at the people just doing what they want to do: take AND USE pictures, fast.

[@Mirai4520]

Having a screen being "touch sensitive" doesn't make it magically "suck outside". The same screen with or without touch would technically just have few dollars difference. The reason why Canon and al don't want a touch screen is because it forces them rethinking the whole software and UI/UX, plus requiring a better CPU to act as a GPU ... It's not their specialty, that's why you have those in standard on Sony, Panasonic, Samsung, etc for a decade already.

[@robertkorn]

A touch screen does nothing for me to take pictures fast. As a matter of fact they could do away with the rear LCD and I wouldn't miss it.

[@martinhommel9967]

I prefer my DSLR to my iphone camera any day.

[@danieldougan269]

Martin Hommel But which one do you have with you all the time?

[@jorismaasvisuals]

Most photographers bring their camera with them anyway (next to their smartphone) mostly. Even if I don't have a shoot I carry my GH4 with me the most of the time (it's light so you won't even notice it really).

[@larkenfernandez3878]

I’m guessing you’re not part of the masses this video was referring to and definitely not the typical teenager.

[@larkenfernandez3878]

Pls don’t tell me you’re still carrying your bank passbook as opposed to doing transactions online or with an atm card. Change is good especially if it’s very innovative. Camera companies need to improve on their game especially the user interface and software capabilities of their products to keep up with the mass consumers’ demands.

[@danmunro01]

Same here. But normally my DSLR is sitting at home in its bag. But my iPhone is in my pocket. The 7plus with the twin lenses does a bloody fantastic job for a phone.

[@TomReichner]

A photograph is not just something so unimportant that we just snap it and share it. A photograph is supposed to be a work of art - something that we spend a great amount of time envisioning, creating and perfecting. These new modern cell phone based apps don't teach people to see a photograph as a piece of fine art. They teach people to see a photograph as nothing more than a silly snapshot. That is sad.

[@b.syngkrem6925]

Agree with you

[@mk2escortvan]

But we are talking about the non-enthusiast consumers. I don't have any experience of earlier decades, but in the 90s, most people weren't taking photos as art. But I agree that the ubiquity of basic 'photography' these days really is cheapening it. However, there are still plenty of people who do treat it as art.

[@patjackson1657]

I'm one of the "old codgers" you mentioned. My Great Uncle Wilfrid started with glass plates, and I still have his 1905 Kodak camera on display. He moved on to 35 mm when I was quite young, and my first real camera was a Nikkormat SLR. I moved to digital over 30 years ago, and still struggle to keep up. The Nikkormat had a depth of field preview button that I miss. My current "real" camera is a Nikon D3300, and sites such as your have inspired me to up my game. However, you have given me "permission" to admit that my Google Pixel 3XL takes the vast bulk of my pictures. I would love a replacement camera that has the capability of great pictures, with as friendly an interface as the phone. Being able to remotely control the camera with the phone would be a huge bonus!

[@DeadGlassEyes]

My Canon 650D has a touchscreen and I got that in 2013 I think? So Canon has already done that a while ago.

[@PreveenRodrigo]

Ditto the 70D.

[@alexgates7475]

He's taking about pro cameras with touch screens.

[@PreveenRodrigo]

There are plenty of people in the wedding industry shooting with the 70D specially for 2nd shooters. Poor country, not all rich like some places. Give it good glass and light, and its fine. And plenty of video guys in particular.

[@joez9839]

I recently sold a lens to a pro photog, a young pro, who shoots with a 6D. She drives a BMW, so she must be making money at it.

[@EgoShredder]

I hate things with touch screens as I like to be able to handle something, without accidentally launching apps and functions which drives me up the wall! My camera lacks a touch screen and I like it that way.

[@EpicKeyboardGuy]

Wireless and frequent updates are good on paper, but I'm really afraid of this because eventually it WILL be a thing and when this day comes, every camera is gonna be a time-bomb of planned obsolescence... Just like apple phones are now... Older model that are still working really good will get updates that makes them run like crap just to get users to buy newer models... because capitalism...

[@BlackEagle352]

What if they put OS systems in dslr's that can use the apps like IOS and Android, then there will be smart dslr's with gps, wi-fi, gyroscope etc.

[@therealmccoy6817]

I agree a smart dslr, with built in gps, gyroscopes, wi-if, apps, touch screens, etc. Basically take all of the tech that goes into a smart phone and put it on the back of my dslr. Cost would be a problem though

[@MrBreambeem]

Good idea, but I don't think camera with OS like smartphone will last long enough like DSLR or mirrorless available at the moment or we will need a very huge battery to carry around. limited by current battery technology.

[@wongjefx980]

Something close to iOS or Android lite... something that developers can write for, but something that does not drain the battery or get viruses. Like a firmware layer that can run apps.

[@earlyblue221]

BlackEagle352 there is wifi built in to canon g7x mark ii.

[@z352kdaf8324]

they already did that and it failed.

[@janneroz-photographyonabudget]

A number of people have asked me recently, can I do some pet portraits for them. Every single person has a camera in their pocket, in the form of a phone. They are great for that moment when you don't have a camera to hand. Otherwise, with all their talk of pixels this, super duper carlos fandango that, these phones do not capture great images. These super slim wedges do not have the sensor, the glass etc to cope. Hence why I'm being asked more and more whether I can accommodate people with their photographic needs. Rather than killing off cameras, I feel it's the other way around. It's highlighting a need for photographers with "proper" cameras. A great video Tony, I think it's the best one I've watched.

[@woollyclouds2677]

I'm as you call the younger generation and a lot of stuff still pisses me off when it comes to cameras, like the lack of GPS and NFC in nearly every camera, internal stabilisation is another thing hardly any manufacturer bakes in and it just doesn't make sense! Fuji's new XT-2 lacks nearly all of these things. Why don't they learn I wonder?

[@Mirai4520]

I'm in my early thirties, so unsure if I fit in the "younger" or older generation, but definitely a DSLR user and phones cameras hater (I refuse using my iphone for photos even when I don't have my camera on me ... Just use it to grab some videos when I need to share the siuation quickly). Like you, what I hate the most is the lack of any trivial and basic function in "pros" or even enthusiasts cameras. Canon had WiFi on their lowest end cameras for years, yet they refuse to put it even on the 7 grands 1DX MKII. I have to use a WiFi SD card to share some pictures with friends after a party, and need to reach home to transfer my pictures and finally be able to cull them while I could've done that on the long train trip if I could access them on my iPad. Taking photos with the DSLRs is more and more painful with time ... especially when people around using dumb phones already applied filters, shared the pictures, commented, etc

[@kvmtours8345]

For stabilization, they probably expect you to use a tripod and a dongle to take the shot. Doing it internally makes your camera much more delicate and prone to failure; unless you take care of your equipment like a pro. Also more expensive so it won't fit in the lowest cost segments.

[@snowylucky2000]

2019, looks like the executives at camera companies are still holding board meetings in a nuclear bunker...

[@Tatiacha]

I would like to see the camera software worked into an android system that then could allow you to install android apps right onto the camera. It would be a familiar interface. My fake go pro can talk to my phone through wifi between the two units directly, The Instagram/phone thing is why i have almost nothing on instagram. It is not worth it to me to have to choose my favorite pics post production and load them onto my phone. I don't want a cloud solution I want my pics safe on my SD card where i can make sure they are properly backed up. While I hear the overall intent of what you are saying about the young kids I don't think we should be dumbing them down to make it all easier for them, If they find they have a passion for photography they can stop being intellectually lazy and learn to use a camera and photo software in a computer. The next Ansel Adams will not be taking a photo straight to instagram, Ansel most certainly would be shooting raw, the idea that a raw file can be processed effectively on a tiny phone screen, even with the great vision of a 20 something, is ridiculous. I really think the obsession with instant social media is what will fade, I already see groups of people of all ages feeling that social media is owning their lives and cutting back their time. I don't think social media should be ignored but it shouldn't be calling the shots for the future of photography. My space came, my space went, facebook is headed the same direction. The rest will follow as more and ore people find they are fatigued and stressed from social media notifying them of a million superfluous thing in real time. It is a weird balance to find as I love tech and new tech toys, but I don't like the world thinking they should get an instant response from me 24/7/365, and more people are feeling the same every day.

[@satorphoto4416]

But camera makers would never do that because it would make sense...and, worse still, help sell cameras to a new generation of photographers. They old makers want to go the way of the dinosaur and they will get their death wish.

[@Sofaklecks]

Samsung offers such Android-Cameras: www.dpreview.com/reviews/samsung-galaxy-camera-2

[@Tatiacha]

No, a real camera not a point and shoot pocket camera :-)

[@ZacharyHeilman]

Thank you for making this video. It's amazing how little effort the major camera companies are putting into their software and trying to modernize (or open source) their products. It takes someone with a voice as loud as yours to make them listen up.

[@ic.84]

The kind of photos and optical zoom i get from a DSLR i could never get with an iPhone.

[@BA51M]

Optical zoom requires a decent size of body and lens. While phones are shrinking and becoming smaller every year in addition to the small sensor they wont have good zoom anytime soon.

[@jaysanchez4407]

Basem Saleh but in do time something will come

[@xdalic]

J. Sanchez just not in your life time.

[@smaakjeks]

I Thailand this video. I mean, I like this Thailand. I mean, Thailand Thailand I'm going to Thailand. Hm. I'mm'a get back to you when my brain has rebooted.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Oh awesome did you actually sign up?? Goodtimes!

[@smaakjeks]

Tony & Chelsea Northrup I sure did! Though I later discovered that I had also accidentally signed up for some weird photography workshop-? It's apparently being orchestrated by two people -- I forget their names. The Westrups, or something. Anyway, looks like a total scam and waste of money. So, let that be a cautionary tale to others who sign up for this! Read the fine print! Don't get taken for a ride like I did.

[@Yahgiggle]

Most likely is a scam oO i was told the wife is crazy too so best to keep away.

[@josephinedgalbo]

+Smaakjeks K shooo!

[@OmriDavidson]

OMG , now i have to sign up . damn i hate university , i hate my life :(

[@NIKONOVICH1990]

Darn it! Whats up with the laziness? DLSR`s work perfectly as they are, no need to add instashit or something like that to them... Updates, Android....

[@gamerN77]

You can still use your cameras just as you want them. But as you can undoubtably see in the camera sales, your views are in the vast minority of photography lovers who we all want to get fascinated with our so dearly beloved hobby.

[@drouel856]

direct, secure cloud uploading, instantly, from anywhere. buy a DSLR, enter your cloud account info, setup your pre/post processing folders, carry your imaging processing lab with you in a laptop tablet-

[@hughnorth7547]

Tony, the insight and perspective you have of the industry is staggering. Love the show, and am enjoying the book and videos!

[@rabeekhalil4391]

They could lower the prices!!

[@kh.g4049]

I tend to think attractiveness plays a role. The 1976 canon that you showed still looks the same like most modern cameras. Even cars are having huge facelifts and such. Looks are playing a big role and that is why you find most photographers are old people who are not ready to adjust to change and face competition from today's youth.

[@brentdrafts2290]

I think medium format sensors are the next thing.

[@frankwilliamson6558]

If you're knowledgeable about this sort of thing, can I ask how practical the manufacture of MF sensors is? They're so uncommon, but I don't know if it's because 35mm was always the standard, or the cost of a 6x6 or whatever sensor is prohibitive. Any insights?

[@brentdrafts2290]

+frank williamson Not an expert here. I have been shooting 645 and 67/69 for about 5 years. I just bought a FF Canon D5. old I know, and I use a lens adapter for my medium format lenses. Like a .62xxxx crop factor. Anyways digital back are like 5-15000.00. I still enjoy the darkroom and film development and print. Anyways it jusr seems like the way to go. though not for everyone.

[@brentdrafts2290]

+Brent Drafts My 100-220 is like a 60-135 +/-mm. I was pleased with my results for a small photo shoot I did.

[@danieljones8706]

I'm still wondering why the older Full Frame Sensor haven't made their way into entry-level DSLR's yet. I mean, eventually the 5D mark 3 is going to be as old as the original 5D. Do you really think people would buy a Canon T-whatever over it in the future? Its still going to be making high-res images with great auto-focus.

[@stevenrix7277]

lol we hang out in the same channels obviously.

[@stevenperkinsfrugalphotogr412]

So, I am a stay at home dad, and I guess I consider myself a pretty experienced photographer at this point... maybe. man, Other vloggers hate you, and man, I really think they turn people off to photography. You are so opened minded and aware of what is going on.

[@jamaicankolourz]

Wonder what would happen if Nikon and Canon make phones?...

[@JGott0001]

And sell about as well... and be 2-4 years behind everything else in the market... and they'd try to use Ashton Kutcher to sell it to you.

[@JohnMarler]

I think Sony is using a "faster Bluetooth" via wifi direct. I transfer full quality pics wirelessly to my phone in seconds

[@PMRTV]

it's called NFC: near field communication and Apple will not allow it in their phones but Droids have it. It's an awesome way to move "real" images into the phone.

[@AxelCalvet]

@@PMRTV NFC only makes it’s easy to use. You still can use direct wifi witthout.

[@fisherxc]

My iPhone 6+ doesn't have it, but they say the 7 and up will work with NFC. That was implemented to allow Apple Pay to function. And btw It doesn't take more than a second to transfer a photo when the iPhone is connected to the Sony a6000's network. The pain is going into settings and joining the network.

[@swinde]

9:24 I would say "The younger generation has learned they can take pretty good pictures with their phones". The HAVE NOT learned photography. Most do not understand how to take a "landscape" shot, so we are cursed with all of those videos that are shot in portrait and look horrible with the picture also running in the "black bars" surrounding the image.

[@CologneCarter]

There is a little difference between a picture and a moving picture (video) and even though I hate those videos too, I can understand how it happens with a smartphone, especially those taken in a surprise moment where there is little time to think and plan. It's the same reason why too many people pictures that ought to be portraits on cameras are taken in landscape mode. It feels natural to hold a smartphone in portrait mode and it feels the same holding a camera in landscape mode. So unless people plan and take the time to compose, they may hold the device wrong for the occasion.

[@swinde]

Yes, you are correct for the reason it happens, but it would seem that once you take a shot in the wrong mode and review it you would then orient the camera correctly.

[@shaggnar2014]

Sure, but not many people took good pictures with disposable cameras back in the day. There are plenty of people who are doing great work with smart phones, especially in street photography. Just because a lot of people are clueless doesn't mean other are too, 50% of people will always be below average

[@enb3810]

Get off your high horse. He didn't say that every 3 year old is ansel adams. He's saying that they were first exposed to photography through it, and can get better and grow if they choose.

[@CasaDelMesa]

The point was the younger generation has learned to "take pretty good pictures" which is completely true. No one said they have "learned photography" by using smartphones. The average person produces better pictures now, using a smartphone, than the average person did with an Instamatic camera in the seventies. Many many reasons behind that, but the point is that people are using cameras to capture moments and make a personal statement more than years ago when the average consumer used cameras for more formal occasions.

[@artiombeknazaryan7542]

As an enthusiast i would like to see a MFT or APS-C interchangeable lens camera with smartphone bells and whistles like computational modes (HDR+ and Night Mode) but also able to give full manual pure photo experience. And it had to be at a price affordable for people who are not pros and do it for fun. The closest thing is A6500 and it starts from 1500$ for the kit... Thats crazy, no wonder the market is going down.

[@rancosteel]

I think using a cellphone as a camera for the sake of convenience is stupid. The average cellphone bill is $95 a month. That adds up to $1145 a year. You can buy a really nice digital camera and laptop for that amount. It's just laziness and not willing to willing to learn how to extract data from a cameras SD card. Also, cellphone cameras look terrible. The lens distortion is annoying.

[@JimSwindle]

People who aren't heavily into photography ask me what equipment I use for my striking photos. For most of them, I use a Samsung smartphone that cost about $100 with no contract. My monthly phone bill, including tax, is about $35.

[@CoalescentDream]

Yeah, it is laziness. And cars were created for people to lazy to walk, planes for people too lazy to take a boat etc. The entire point of technology is to make life easier. That's the definition of innovation. So why every other industry except the camera industry...

[@00Fugitive00]

who is the stupid photographer that uses instagram?!!!

[@UchennaKema]

? most modern ones old timer

[@jiafoto2046]

How old are you btw? 110 yo?

[@ToreHansen]

Several of those who makes money. How you doing ?

[@jhellier]

Instagram sucks for viewing photos. The previews are all square format, and when you click on a photo it is low res. Flickr and twitter are much better.

[@jhellier]

+Kyle Medina you clearly have no clue about UIs.

[@jiridvorak]

i dont carry my compact almost for last two years.S6 / I6 make about 2 levels better photos... Compacts are dead.....

[@shadow7037932]

Pretty much. You basically need either something like an RX100 or a DSLR to really see a difference. Also, some of the post processing that's built in to phone apps and cameras (ie. HDR Plus) allow them to take some very nice pictures esp. in good light.

[@peterbucek2136]

+Isogen That's right guys, I use my compact only as an underwater camera cause I don't have a gopro and it is waterproof. My iPhone takes way better pictures however!

[@shadow7037932]

+Kyle Medina Stephen Wilkies takes a lot of his IG pics with an iPhone and partly markets himself as such. Do you consider him to not be a "photographer"?

[@kh.g4049]

+Kyle Medina the thing is desktops aren't common anymore too..if it is crisp on the phone, why go to the old-method desktop view

[@shadow7037932]

Jpk Channel Even on a desktop, Facebook shrinks/compresses the images so there's little resolution difference between phones and desktops.

[@5oulPower]

Wow the point on elegant UIs is on point. You perfectly described what I felt when I tried using my friends' Cannon/Nikon DSLRs - the menu was just impenetrable. That was what pushed me towards Fuji mirrorless cameras. They felt more intuitive to me (who was an absolute newbie at the time) with the important dials positioned *on the body* of the camera much like a film camera. It's funny how old is sometimes still best - modern day menus are just so clunky. Cameras styled in the old way with dials (film or digital) actually feel way easier to use. Do I want a one-button interface like the smartphones? For the love of god PLEASE NO. There's a fine line between elegant while preserving functionality, and straight dumbed-down.

[@hoffmantnt]

How about a pro camera that runs Android?

[@dchait6797]

they tried the os sucked

[@haroldland4620]

pretty much that... I would setup the interface how I wanted

[@z352kdaf8324]

dumbest idea ever

[@suzesiviter6083]

Think Sony will do that pretty soon, Cannon and Nikon still living in the clouds thinking they are unbeatable.

[@grady60]

Samsung already did this with Samsung Galaxy NX camera and it tanked. They actually inovated a lot with their NX line but smartphones are just killing the market

[@E39M5SPEED]

Good Luck using your iPhone to take a photo on the same level of quality as you can with a full frame & 85mm F1.4/F1.2.

[@shadowVSme]

phones suck at photography ... dslr feel way more professional in hands than a stupid rectangle thin shit lol

[@millsathn]

Not what I would call a consumer camera. But I get you

[@projectgoatse]

Millennials don't give a shit about aperture and image quality. They just want to throw a detail destroying filter on their photos and share away on social media.

[@smokey267]

Good luck using your full frame camera to take a photo on the same level of quality as you can with a full frame medium format 100mp Hassy with a 150mm f3.2 N. :P

[@matthewcswhite]

Did you even watch the video?

[@TheMarried123]

With a sensor the size of a gnat's ass a smart phone can't compete.

[@HiyuMarten]

The charts don't lie

[@Jin-Ro]

And yet they do, and they're winning, because they're so easy to use and convenient.

[@cosmichasm]

With a small sensor, you just need a little more light.

[@senseofstile]

Great video. I bought a basic Olympus digital camera back around 2003. It was great camera for the day. Eventually that camera was limited and I bought a pocket Casio digital camera in 2007. I finally upgraded to a Canon G7x mark II in 2017. Love it. I use it just about everyday. I do a lot of videos on my facebook channel. It has a touchscreen and I can load directly to a computer without taking the card out. Yes, I use a phone for photos sometimes but, my preference is an actual camera.