• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

The Death of Digital Photography as We Know It

farmersteve said:
You should see the equipment I see 20 somethings buying on the Facebook page... I can't even afford that stuff.
Click to expand...

Excellent, that makes more old camera for us the 30 somethings.
 
Kino said:
I would think a new, pro-grade film camera system, the equal to the Nikon F or similar system, would be amazingly expensive and out of the reach of most of us.
Click to expand...

Where does almost all "used", unused, beautiful photographic equipment come from and always have. Why rich people, of course. People who bought equipment, lost interest and dumped it on the market. That is where it has always come from, even 50 years ago. And even now I see people buying used equipment for prices that I can't/won't touch here on APUG. That is why almost all of my equipment is used. So I buy the best that I can afford with the idea of keeping it until I die. As a result over the years I have accumulated a photo estate that I am proud of. It takes time and I always remember that there are people, lots of people, who have far more money than I and for that, I am thankful, and they, hopefully, would be interested in new expensive equipment, whatever the price.....Regards!
 
leave me your estate!! on second thought I have enough cameras already
 
I think people are more interested in the experience these days. That is why vinyl is coming back, books still exist and old cameras get used. I don't know if a new film camera would sell enough to make it justifiable due to the complexity of designing and making it. There have been new large format cameras over the past decade. Some of those have done well (Chamonix comes to mind). Those are relatively simple though.

The problem these days is that digital cameras have matured. I don't know where they are going to go from here, but no one except a select few need hundreds of megapixels of resolution. We can see the same thing with computers too. Fast enough is fast enough. Resolution on digital cameras already arrived at a point that people are happy with. Most new "features" are just gimmicks these days. Getting back to the experience aspect, digital cameras aren't all that much fun to use since everything is virtual, and the post work isn't all that much fun. There is something really crappy about sitting at a computer working on images. Mind numbing.

I do think more people will become involved with film in various ways. It will be a slow process. The Instax is a perfect product for our current world. Instant, small, fun. No wonder so many people embraced it.
 
Nikon and Canon and Olympus et al might make more money if they got back into the business of repairing and refurbishing (and maybe upgrading) their own old film cameras.
 
Darko Pozar said:
From PetaPixel 3/3/2017
Click to expand...

This was interesting -- somewhat skewed by the very fast upgrade cycle of smartphones. They have an average lifespan of what - maybe 2 years? Compared to probably 5+ for DSLRs and similar. Still, they are the beating heart of photography nowadays, and whether certain APUGgers consider that "real photography" or not is of not the tiniest relevance.

I also worry about the aging and deteriorating state of used analog equipment. I have been vaguely looking to replace my old OM-1 that was stolen in the 90s, and while there are plenty in the used market, basically none seem to be in the condition that mine was in 20 years ago. This is not a surprise, just a fact of life and time. These tools will not last forever, and I sincerely hope that some manufacturing capacity remains (or can be built again) when the inevitable operation of thermodynamics diminishes the pool of usable used film cameras.
 


I remember when I photographed weddings in the 80's and 90's and was the one of only a handful of photographers at the events. I was the commissioned operator and the others were family and friends who used 110 and automatic 35mm cameras. Today, the majority of the guests at those events would be using their smart phones for their own records and applying them electronically compared to the hassle of getting them manually processed...Convenience, access and ease is the call of course.

We can ramble on the obvious but digital IMO is the mainstay for a long time...
 
Personally I would argue that much of the slow down is less about the desire to upgrade to the latest and greatest in digital, and far more an acceptance of economic reality. Global economy is not in the greatest shape, and I personally know a number of photographers who are held on the fence over the idea of buying digital upgrades.

Consumers are still a little shy over the last several global stumbling blocks, and are clearly placing other things as priorities over upgrading from a "Good enough" digital camera to an "Even better" one.
- A personal example: I own multiple 7D bodies. I Want to upgrade those to mk II bodies, but that $3k+ would do far more for me spent on glass, or my analog projects. The 7D bodies let me photograph the majority of what I want, the way I want. I would like to have newer and better cameras that make getting the kinds of photos I want easier and more reliable to do (The original 7D is not as happy of a camper as I would like it to be in those 'last few minutes' before sunset, and I've walked away from more than a few photos at dusk because it can't push the ISO as high as I would like), but economically it just isn't easy to justify bothering. I can easily afford the upgrades, but it means giving up room in the budget for things that are more important than those few minutes of dusk photography.

I expect that we'll see renewed digital sales strength once ISO levels get an exceptionally strong push forward, and maybe more cameras with in body low ISO ratings.

I would love a 50mpx 5DS for some of the work I do, but the 16-20ish range is more than enough for the majority of it. What would be far more beneficial is an ISO 102400 that looks as smooth and clean as what I can currently do with ISO 100, with far more headroom to push things well beyond even that. And I sure wouldn't complain about being able to dial in an ISO sub-50...

When cameras such as that enter the market then I expect we'll see another surge in sales simply on the basis that the equipment would allow photographers to do something that is noticeably different from what the current (and previous several) generations of cameras can't do.



And I feel that "Doing something different that the others can't" is also kind of the driving force behind people embracing film. I don't find it better than my digital gear, I find it different.
 

A case in point. I have a Canon A-1 that I've had since they were selling them new. I've had it repaired 15 years ago from a drop. Now I wouldn't bother. I would buy another one off of eBay for less than the cost of a repair. I got a lens I wanted for it, but it came with a pristine, but non functioning body. I tried to fix it but eventually gave up and I'll keep it around for parts. There goes another camera either to the dump or a shelf queen. drip, drip, drip the film camera glut is slowly being drained. The wiring and the plastics and such of 70's-90's cameras are corroding and falling apart. So, you say, get a Leica or whatever fully manual camera. I don't particularly care for a fully manually camera and want autofocus and all the controls I have on digital cameras but with film. You say get an F6 or something like that, and I simply can't afford that camera nor would I want to carry around a beast like that anyways... All I'm saying is that the glut of film cameras is coming to an end someday and I think there is a market for a decent newly designed film camera if someone had the guts to make it.
 
farmersteve said:
A case in point. I have a Canon A-1 that I've had since they were selling them new. ....I don't particularly care for a fully manually camera and want autofocus and all the controls I have on digital cameras but with film. ...
Click to expand...

I don't mean this disrespectfully but you are not the future of film photography. The future are the young people embracing it, and they want everything that you do not. The cameras they want are the exact opposite of what you want.
 
Huss said:
I don't mean this disrespectfully but you are not the future of film photography. The future are the young people embracing it, and they want everything that you do not. The cameras they want are the exact opposite of what you want.
Click to expand...
I don't know what young film photographers want. Have any surveys been done or is all the information anecdotal?
 
Last edited:
MattKing said:
Nikon and Canon and Olympus et al might make more money if they got back into the business of repairing and refurbishing (and maybe upgrading) their own old film cameras.
Click to expand...

Except that they let the parts supplies run out because they thought that the digital market would last forever.
 
Sirius Glass said:
Except that they let the parts supplies run out because they thought that the digital market would last forever.
Click to expand...
To get back into that market, they would have to manufacture those parts again.
I might have been misunderstood. I'm saying that there may be more money to be made by them servicing/refurbishing the cameras out there than building and selling new ones. There certainly would be more margin at the retail end.
 
Most of the posters in the thread don't differentiate between "classic" digital photography and smart phone cameras.

Convenience, through smart phone use, is what's killing standalone digital cameras.
 

You missed nothing. We violently agree.
 

There are millions and millions of used EOS or Nikon autofocus SLR's out there. All still very modern by today's standards. No one can compete with the prices that these are available for. I bought a Canon 1V, their top of the line film camera in mint condition for all off $400. That is dirt cheap.
 
Although I agree that a new engagement in film camera manufacturing is not likely in the present market situation, I don't see as impossible that, in a few years, a new generation of film cameras might emerge, with the bells and whistles of modern digital cameras: fast autofocus, autofocus-based flash exposure, EXIF information including GPS localization, "bubble level" in the viewfinder, light weight (modern, robust plastic), interoperability with modern lenses and accessories such as remote controllers (IR remote commands, radio remote commands, AF "traps"), maybe different focusing screens lines projected on the focusing glass, and probably something else.
For the moment this is the "niche within the niche" but in a few years, if film recovers substantially, that might become easy to realize, because the technology is aldready there, a producer only has to "subtract" the digital part and add the film transport to make a film camera. Most of the parts would be in common with a digital "sister".

In the far future manufacturers could produce, normally, cameras in "digital version" and "film version" just like, nowadays, a car manufacturer proposes diesel engines and gasoline engines. That presumes a substantial recovery of film photography, but I am very optimist about that.
 
Hell yes now you are talking. Maybe not to far fetched. Carbon fiber, electronic shutter, laser beam rangefinders....... AND a Grafmatic type holder with modern material that you just drop in aa 10 sheet box of Kodak 4x5 sheet film. You could 3 D map your hand and make every grip to order. Instax backs....
My Crown has the light bulb in the rangefinder that allows you to focus in near darkness. Can you imagine a red and green laser rangefinder. Electronic viewfinder with perfect parallax correction. Elon Musk where are you?? Cam-X?
 
And how much would you be willing to pay for these new cameras?
 

You're right about that. Not in the same league but I got a EOS 50 for 40$ a few weeks ago, top condition not a single scratch. How do you want to compete with that?
 
Tracing back to economic theories: When prices rise due to either a increasing demand or waning supply (used cameras), at the point prices cross a certain threshold it will be an incentive for someone to manufacture a new product. Classic Market behaviour, and we'll see what happens.
As long as there are cheap excellent cameras, that might not happen. In 20-30 years? Possibly!

Nodda Duma said:
Convenience, through smart phone use, is what's killing standalone digital cameras.
Click to expand...
This is what I found out. The phone you take a picture and it can be instantly sent anywhere or anything. Heck, be roaming the streets and when it picks up WiFi it is uploading the backup so by the time I'm home they are all in the PC!

Then using film I can choose a workflow that is as convenient as digital (time-wise, but more expensive) by outsourcing to a lab. Digital has its advantages for me, like its null variable cost -- cash strapped currently so can't shoot as much film as I'd wish.
 
The bottom fell right out from beneath the digital camera market with smart phones destroying the bread and butter small family type point and shoot cameras. Nikon and Canon and the boys made most of their profit off these point and shoots and that is all but gone for them now. That and people are pretty damn satisfied with the cameras they now own. Back when the digital market was in full bloom with new cameras and higher MP counts going up almost weekly. There was a real driving force for people to buy new cameras and often. That is gone in part because 24mp and above make fantastic prints and most images get shared online now never seeing a print made. Don't need much camera to do that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register