Has The Day Come? (Bye bye SLR)

[K12beano]

Well, I didn't think this would come around, but watching the Apple Event yesterday and what the new 12 Pros will now do, both for hardware and software advances....


I actually had the thought that my dSLR and bundle of very nice lenses are just going to gather dust if I upgrade the 'phone.

Now I really, really enjoy using my Nikon kit - wouldn't give it up for another brand, despite the fact ALL the manufacturers produce pretty wonderful kit these days - well certainly since I first got a SLR which was a second-hand Pentax S1a that replaced my Kiev 4 when technology all seemed a lot simpler..... I mean, we're talking about 45 years of using SLR!!


Am I now at the tipping point?

Anyone else there now?

Is there even going to be a market for secondhand dSLR and lenses soon? - there! you see? It's in my head now!!!!

[Simpo Two]

K12beano said:

Is there even going to be a market for secondhand dSLR and lenses soon? - there! you see? It's in my head now!!!!

Cost of '12 Pro' vs used DSLR?

[Vintage Racer]

Depends on what you photograph.............I only shoot wildlife, so nothing even comes close to my DSLR!

[reapercushions]

I don't think anything will replace the control and flexibility you have with a dedicated SLR... however... I haven't picked up my SLR in 2 years since getting the 11 Pro Max..

[Mr.Grooler]

We’ve recently got an iPhone 11 and the camera’s ability and software is really impressive on that, let alone (presumably) the fancier models.

I agree there’s no substitute still for an SLR when you want to be genuinely creative or are in more challenging conditions, but I think good phone cameras have certainly taken away the need for any camera in the middle - compacts etc - and for things like family gatherings I’m more than happy with just the phone now, and for days out where the SLR is a bit bulky the phone is now an acceptable compromise.

I know that if we’re away somewhere or at a significant event I will want the SLR still, and will enjoy the process of using it too. I don’t see that changing for a good while yet.

[Simpo Two]

Well if you're charging £1,000+ to do a wedding and turn up with a phone you'll get some funny looks (that said, some arty knob like Banksy could probably get away with it and charge £100,000)

Not being a phone person I use a tiny Lumix for snaps and a D500 for the more difficult stuff. And a D200 if I need to shoot RAW... it's a long story...

[steveatesh]

I thought another nail in the coffin of good quality SLR and Mirrorless cameras when I saw that, plus the advances in software such as LuminarAI . It all brings excellent photos into the hands of more people.

I dare say a lot of camera owners will move to the new technology, but personally I enjoy packing the Sony up, deciding what lens to carry and where I’m going then setting off for a few hours solitude, then seeing what I can make if the photos when I get back in Affinity and Capture one.

Packing a phone just doesn’t seem to have the same challenge factor, especially when it does everything for you!

[Narcisus]

The day I can take pictures like this on my phone is the day I give up my camera .... And these weren't even taken on a DSLR but a humble bridge cam .... Both taken at 176mm and cropped ...

Edited by Narcisus on Thursday 15th October 20:46

[pastrana72]

Nope.

I have a 11 Pro, ok for quick snaps but replace a camera.

Not for me.

[Rogue86]

I really enjoy using my P20 Pro - it's brilliant in good light and for the 90% of images I'll take of my personal life it's difficult to justify breaking out an SLR. But for anything I really want a good image of, it's not even close to competing. I did a cheap camera test the other week where I bought a used D300 and a 50mm prime for £100 from facebook marketplace, then shot a GT40 with it. Not strictly as part of the test, at the same time I took the same image on my smartphone - which I paid 7x the price for.

Even on a battered, 10yr old + DSLR the clarity of the image and the amount of data I have to play with is leaps and bounds ahead of the phone, despite the age gap of both pieces of technology. It's certainly good enough to print from too.



However the great thing about the phone shot (depending on how you look at it) is that I dont need to combine frames thanks to the light-painting mode, plus I can edit it as soon as the image is shot. Phones are definitely at a level where you can be creative and make photography fun.

[K12beano]

See - this is the sort of thing I am talking about:

https://youtu.be/3Itmd_YoHoY

(Make sure you switch the You Tube resolution up to 4K!)

[Evolved]

Hmmm. I don’t yet subscribe to this way of thinking. A dedicated SLR with lens choice is still the way I’d feel comfortable.

[jjones]

No, for me composing and taking the photograph and interacting with the camera and manually adjusting settings is a large part of my enjoyment, if I get a decent end result then this is a bonus.

[DailyHack]

For most people they could give up their DSLR, but for hobby'ists and certainly professionals (i.e make money/living) a DSLR and selection of lenses for your clients demanding brief is still the only setup capable for the job at hand - try going on a shoot for 12+ hours using a phone, in the rain, syncing up flashes, and not worrying about the equipment getting soaked let alone getting the IQ needed - i.e me a few weeks back in the middle of wales, you get the idea.

Edited by DailyHack on Friday 23 October 08:56

[ch37]

DSLRs, specifically, may start to bottom out on the used market, particularly entry level ones. Demand for cameras like the D750 etc is still pretty reasonable, but many pros are working their way over to mirrorless (I don't know any wedding photographers still using DSLRs) and most manufacturers have made the leap now.

For weddings, motorsport (or indeed any sport), wildlife and a whole load of other professional applications, phone cameras as we know them now are never likely to replace them. Phones themselves way well do so as that's where all the development work is going and they could effectively replace camera bodies, but one way or another you're likely to need to attach a fairly sizeable lens to it, much much bigger than even the largest humps on a phone.

Camera phones have killed the compact market dead and for general use and travel a phone will absolutely do the job for 95% of people, but there will always be demand for high-end interchangeable lens cameras because simple physics means a phone camera will never compete.

Take this one for example:

76MM by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

Requires something like this below, yes there are options less than half the size such as superzoom bridge camera, but quality drops off quite dramatically and we're still talking about something many, many, many times larger than a phone.



In theory, we could get to a point where digital zoom on a phone will get there AND the software side is clever enough to make it vaguely acceptable, but as far as I'm aware there is currently no way to replicate the compression inherent in a long lens. Wedding photographers for example, could use two different lenses (say, 35mm and 85mm) to shoot a portrait, even if they get closer with the 35mm lens to fill the frame similarly to the photo taken at 85mm, you'd still end up with two very different photos.

So in short, there is a reason my camera bag looks like this (and that's a very, very compact selection of lenses considering the range of subjects I cover!), rather than a phone, and as somebody who uses camera gear to make a living, I'd more than happily accept a way of massively reducing the size and cost of that, if it existed!

Fuji Gear by Chris Harrison, on Flickr

Edited by ch37 on Friday 23 October 12:12

[Lord Flashheart]

I own a Nikon D700 and a Lumix, both rarely see the light of day now. My phone is a Google Pixel 3 which of course is with me wherever I go. Generally, just for a record of things the phone does well, but I can't imagine I'd be happy with a large print from a phone camera. But when did I last get a pic printed anyway??
What I'd like is a camera with great quality lenses that I believe you can only get from a large piece of glass not a microscopic phone lense, BUT with the creativity of the phone apps built in e.g Snapseed etc. Both of my cameras have some editing software built in but it's all a faff to use.
Just for the record, I took these pics of my car with my phone a couple of weeks ago when the car had been rained on. No fancy lighting, just my garage fluorescent tubes over the wet car.

Edited by Lord Flashheart on Sunday 25th October 10:24

[Lord Flashheart]

[Lord Flashheart]

[Derek Smith]

I have a compact, bridge and mirrorless as well as a cameraphone. My bridge is loaned to one of my kids.

The compact might be seen as superfluous as, mathematically at least, the quality of image is only fractionally higher than the phone, but that doesn’t explain why the images are so much better with the camera.

It’s down to flexibility, allied to convenience I think. I’ve got dials and buttons on the camera that can change basic settings quickly to give great results. It’s easier to frame, and handle.

The comparison between phone and my mirrorless is the same but much more so. I’ve got accessories for my G7 that extend its abilities, from a 300 max (that’s 600 in old money) zoom, close up tubes, a couple of extra flashguns and other stuff I won’t list in case my wife reads this.

I do use my camera phone but only when the quality of image, either/both in pixels and composition, is less important than the image itself.

I’ve got four cameras. I use them all for different things.

Slightly O/T; I used to have a 6x6 when 35mm was all the rage. If I discarded more than one negative from a roll of 20 I would be irritated. Everyone counted. Times have changed.

[Simpo Two]

I can't fault the performance of phone cameras for the size - but the ergonomics are utterly wrong. A slippery bit of plastic and glass you have to hold up on its side like a chocolate bar, and then poke a glass screen to do things... hate it!