Have Phones Killed The Genuinely Compact Camera Market ?

121+100+80+65+55+40+30+20+10+8
Imagine that as the real numbers for a total of nearly 551.000.000 cameras sold between ten years 2010 to 2020 - Add the same sum for the previous decade.
You get around 1,1 billion cameras - less than 20 years old - still working around the planet. Over an 8 billion population.

I call that saturation.

Add:

you have another electronic device on you - as an aside it can do the same things, better or not - It's as well connecting you.

And in the last ten years, you are online in most parts of the planet: Easy isn't it ?

You rise and shoot - 30 seconds later people at home are participating - see what you are seeing from the top of Mount Everest or in Capri Faragliones, or Ayers Rock and you can voice chat with them in real-time.
Ditch the Gran Canyon - everybody goes there - not any more interesting.

And don't forget
THAT >>>>>> My 1.000$ NIKON Z30

• is not able to draw power from a USB C when turned on
• has no WIFI capability to connect to an existing LAN

• no OTG capability ( !! What's that !!!) No OTA as well

• main BACK & OLD technology from the top quality camera Brand.

That's is what a modern buyer will NEVER expect for 1,000$ - boomers excluded

Next time somebody speaks about dropping sales I will spit in his eyes!

(I'm not a Boomer - 1956 was excluded in that count)

When your unit sales drop to less than 2% of what they were 12 years earlier (digital compact cameras) or to less than 7% during the same time period (all types of digital cameras), you can call it a buggy whip or a black rhino and it won't affect the situation. So, it won't matter to me.

Do whatever you think is right, but I'm not posting bail.

Over the course of 10 to 20 years, a lot of digital cameras will end up in electronics recycling bins with working models forming an ever shrinking percentage of those circulating and in use.

I hope nobody will feel offended...
...it's just a way to demonstrate a point of view using "absurd reasoning" instead of maths !!

I agree some will stop to work, one reason or the other.
But 90% are still in a drawer in working or even near mint condition: A psychological brake to any buying impulse on the owner.

Now suppose everybody under 40 may have seen or tested one in his own house hold when a kid.
What important feature that devices were missing??

What one of the most modern device from the highest Brand in the market is missing even today

Sorry if I've reiterated this point.

I think there resides the true problem nowadays

( a 1000€ phone will have them all - that is an everyday important use )

Yes. After working professionally and using canon dSLRs for 20-years with pro glass, a Leica M9, an Olympus Pen, and several fujis, my “excuse” is that I like my smartphone as a camera. I think that it’s great for me. Calling folks a “Phonetard” because they are using a tool that they wish to use displays a level of emotional intelligence that speaks volumes. Enjoy your stew. i’ll enjoy the lovely 48mp images that I create with my iPhone.

I was offended by the term too, but was hoping ignoring it would make it go away. At any rate, they couldn’t have been addressing you or me. We are comfortably amongst the “not” in terms of “crap images”. ;)

Don’t get me wrong. I make crap with my phone too. But proportionally no more so than I did (historically) with my Canons, Nikons and Leicas. Or do today with my Fujis. It’s not the camera that is responsible for the crappiness.

The idea that the preference to use a phone as a camera, full or part-time, is based on laziness or a lack of skill or knowledge is laughable. Ha.

Use the tool you’re comfortable with to make the pictures you want to make.

Like I said, here comes the excuses...sigh!

You are proving my point- Phonetards will make up every excuse in the book to justify using one over a regular camera.

jaizan wrote: Have Phones Killed The Genuinely Compact Camera Market ?

You tell me.

22:01 www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtGTFACFaHY

No they haven't. Panasonic still makes cameras like the GX850 and G100, they've said they're bringing out a new compact yet capable m4/3 body in the near future, so there's still a bit of life left in the small camera yet

I guess if you don't interact with the rest of the world, you could get away without one. However, in the functioning world, they are required for buying/going to most MLB games, sporting events, many concerts... Most confirmations, verifications, mobile activity of ALL types require a smart-phone. Consequently, for most people, since they have to have a smart-phone for work, pleasure, recreation - they might as well use it for their photography. I still have a land-line but increasingly, almost exclusively, it receives robo-calls and unsolicited incoming calls. However, not having a smart-phone is not an option for most.

a smart-phone.

I also have a smartphone. Once again, I'm tapping this post out right now on one. But like I wrote previously, I'm at work, eating brekky, I don't care who knows that. But I do care who knows where I am in the middle of a lockdown, where I'm riding my bicycle and motorcycles and at what speed, where I'm going shopping, where I'm eating, what I'm buying etc etc etc.
I control my phone. It doesn't control me. That's all I'm saying. Yet people get upset when I mention a few cons in regards to the favourite little electronic tracking device. I really can't see why

I think the camera industry helped shoot itself in the foot when they decided to make lcd only compacts. Someone had a great idea to make a phone camera without the phone. Brilliant! I have never used a phone for a camera. I don't have a smart phone and don't want or need one. I have a room dedicated to a several computers and a flip phone for emergencies and communicating. I don't believe I am missing anything not having a phone glued to my head 24/7 . Phone addiction is a reality and separating one from their phone to use a camera might be difficult for the abuser.

I think you may be confusing a few counter-points to your snarky statement (hopefully tongue-in-cheek) of, "or even not owning one", as being upset. I'm fine if you don't have one, don't want one, don't use one.... You couldn't upset me in the least if you never had a mobile device of any kind. But, to state that one might "not even have one", while you're typing away on yours is hilarious - and hypocritical. Thanks for the morning laugh. 🤗 Luckily for me, you're far more important than I, typing this on my smart-phone, in Yamagata City, Japan while I'm waiting for the rain to stop so I can get back to work, if you are concerned with someone "watching" you while you ride your bicycle. I, fortunately, don't have the least concern of anyone wanting to watch me do anything. I would be far more concerned about credit bureaus, credit cards, and other non-governmental entities letting my information out in a breach of cyber-security. However, I bet you won't be upset when you crash your bicycle in the wilderness and incopacitate yourself - while the rescue team hones in your cellular signal to save you. 🙇🏼‍♀️

Correct. Proper composition, exposure, depth of field, even post-processing have nothing to do with what you captured the image(s) on. When I was teaching university photography, prior to digital, one of my semester assignments was for every student to purchase an Holga camera (pretty much junk 120 film camera) and produce a portfolio of artistic, quality images with only that camera. Every one had distorted plastic lens and horrible light sealing but "the photographer" had to test, evaluate and sometimes even tape up the camera to determine where the exposure was, distortion in the lenses was, light-leaks were and make great images. If you have to rely solely on your ability, knowledge and skill - that's where photography is made - not in the camera. It's all in your head (knowledge and ability). No amount of 10-20 frames per second, no auto any, and everything, will make one a photographer if they don't/can't make one image perfect, over and over again.

Anyone complaining about an inanimate technical mobile-device, disturbing their peace, quiet, walking about, dinner with someone who wants to hear them speak.... or controlling their life in ANY way, must be too dense to turn off the device and rest. Certainly they have nothing to say that I want to hear if they aren't polite, smart, or sensible enough to TURN OFF THE sound, or the entire device, like I do when cycling, hiking, at the theatre, at a ball game, at dinner, sleeping............... At least back in the day, when a pager went off in the theatre, or other quiet event, you knew it was a doctor getting a page or some type of emergency. Thankfully, they couldn't just whip it out and start a conversation right there. My outgoing smart-phone message is no different than my old home answering machine - leave a message and I'll call you when I can.

You certainly can't blame cell-phone companies for any demise in cameras. Any intelligent camera company seeing and knowing that camera sales would, or were, going down as a result of mobile phones - SHOULD HAVE INVESTED IN MOBILE PHONE COMPANIES. Business diversification is what keeps companies alive in changing times - not complaining about the situation. Similarly, if you find, or have, a compact camera you like - buy another before they stop making it.

Ha ha ha ha. The thing that's hilarious, is your complete and utter inability to grasp a very simple concept. I'd say more, but that would give admin more work to tidy up.

Yes, I need not say any more ha ha ha. Is reading what I wrote previously also beyond you?

No. Quite the opposite. Your comments are generally so infantile, and beneath me, that I don't even comment on the vast majority of the nonsense.