This may change that:Pi said:11. The DR of Canon will reach that of Nikon today.
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr4-hasselblad-and-sony-to-make-a-joint-sensor-announcement/
Upvote
0
TEN YEARS FROM NOW.
- Thread starter sanj
- Start date
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr4-hasselblad-and-sony-to-make-a-joint-sensor-announcement/
A couple of stops more dynamic range and better high iso…. Nice to have but a bit boring.
Why don’t we aim higher technology wise? Something like Artificial or Synthetic Biological Image Sensors combined with a liquid optical construction? Or maybe something like print on demand optics (3D printing), buy just the design and print it at your local 3D print shop, or design your own lens and print it.
Technology is great, but once we can shoot 4k, 8k or higher video at 30, 60 or more frames per second with all the dynamic range you need and nearly perfect intelligent autofocus capabilities, the stills photographer might become obsolete. Just grab the best frame and print it as big as you want or need.
Remember the Buggles? 1979… Video killed the radio star
http://youtu.be/Iwuy4hHO3YQ
A guilty pleasure, I know, but to some extent we are like the old radio stars and the times they are a-changin'
On the bright side, radio is still here, so there is hope for us ;-)
Why don’t we aim higher technology wise? Something like Artificial or Synthetic Biological Image Sensors combined with a liquid optical construction? Or maybe something like print on demand optics (3D printing), buy just the design and print it at your local 3D print shop, or design your own lens and print it.
Technology is great, but once we can shoot 4k, 8k or higher video at 30, 60 or more frames per second with all the dynamic range you need and nearly perfect intelligent autofocus capabilities, the stills photographer might become obsolete. Just grab the best frame and print it as big as you want or need.
Remember the Buggles? 1979… Video killed the radio star
http://youtu.be/Iwuy4hHO3YQ
A guilty pleasure, I know, but to some extent we are like the old radio stars and the times they are a-changin'
On the bright side, radio is still here, so there is hope for us ;-)
Upvote
0
Pi said:
Long exposure (night) shots is a bit of a niche market. Video won't replace macro stacks either and if you look hard enough there will be more fields of stills photography where you can't do the same with high resolution video. Large format photography is still mostly analogue these days for instance. But 80 or 90% of today’s photos will be possible with tomorrow’s video equipment.
Upvote
0
Pi said:
10 seconds! I've done 3 hour long star trails.... that's a LOT of frames.... There is also image stacking, where we already shoot video of an astronomical object, extract a few thousand frames, and then process them.. A time and a place for both techniques.
Upvote
0
1. Metering sensor and processing technology that takes in a scene, determines likely subjects and desired photo style, and gets exposure perfect 99% of the time. True evaluative metering.
2. Switchable optical and electronic viewfinder modes.
3. 50 MP output becomes the norm.
4. Removable media becomes optional as cameras have ample internal storage and transfers are accomplished via wireless.
2. Switchable optical and electronic viewfinder modes.
3. 50 MP output becomes the norm.
4. Removable media becomes optional as cameras have ample internal storage and transfers are accomplished via wireless.
Upvote
0
AmbientLight said:Now that's a good idea.
Here's Sanj's list adapted to what I would expect:
1. DSLRs will continue to be used by professionals and amateurs alike.
2. Mirrorless will follow point and shoot cameras into the abyss of consumer cameras being replaced by camera phones.
3. Point and shoot would be dead.
4. Canon cameras will have 2 stops better ISO.
Don't you think in ten years they will do better than just two stops?
5. There will be lenses with 6 stop IS.
6. Nikon will continue to suffer economically until they are reduced to be merely a niche vendor catering to a select clientele of retro-camera fans (Nikon Df for anyone?).
7. Sony will replace Nikon as the DSLR vendor competing with Canon.
8. Canon will likely deliver something in the range of 80-120 MP sensors, making medium format obsolete for commercial purposes.
Noooo. That is wayyy too much.
9. DR will be around 16 stops.
10. 1D form factor will stay.
What makes me nervous is the notion of voice controls for cameras. Makes me think of a bunch of sports photographers having to make silly "click", "click" noises to shoot their cameras.
Hilarious!!
Upvote
0
All interesting answers and thoughts.
I have no idea right now what else to add. Except for one thing:
I am missing any thought of the role SAMSUNG will be playing.
They have entered the system camera market.
And if they go forward with that as they did in other markets (TV, LED, of course not to forget smart phones and tablets), I think they will take over a big part of the consumer market and maybe then also aim for the pros.
The last thing I believe is that they will draw back.
I have no idea right now what else to add. Except for one thing:
I am missing any thought of the role SAMSUNG will be playing.
They have entered the system camera market.
And if they go forward with that as they did in other markets (TV, LED, of course not to forget smart phones and tablets), I think they will take over a big part of the consumer market and maybe then also aim for the pros.
The last thing I believe is that they will draw back.
Upvote
0
Maximilian said:
I don't know where this notion of wondrous change in Samsung comes from. They have been an excellent vendor for computer monitors like 15 years ago, so how come anyone should be surprised that they become a top TV vendor? I don't get how people should be surprised by that. Samsung has also been busy in other areas for quite a long time and they have been at this since 1938. Just read their corporate history.
Nevertheless Samsung is nowhere near being a serious player in the DSLR market. They are not even a big player in mirrorless yet, although they have entered this market. As I see it they just try their hand at producing point-and-shoot cameras to gain some valuable R&D experience to provide some fringe benefits for their smart phone business. You can turn that argument around and stand it on its head as well: Samsung is willing to invest in this area as an offshoot of their smart phone development. You shouldn't expect Samsung not to be aware that the point-and-shoot market is shrinking rapidly.
Nevertheless there is a vast difference between being for example Nikon and being Samsung. Just think about being able to produce high quality lenses. Are you seriously expecting Samsung to be able to do so on the next 10 or even 20 years without having to purchase some other corporation?
You can look at Sony's acquisitions and collaboration with Zeiss for what a corporation must do to become a serious player and even Sony is not replacing Nikon yet, although Sony appears to be doing perhaps not all the right things but at least quite many of those. There is still an awful lot of learning curve ahead of them, before they can replace one of the top two. Just bringing out interesting products is not enough. They must be willing to somehow keep their related system products valid for decades as well.
It should be no surprise that a well established vendor such as Fuji is still doing well. The bottom line is: You either have experience and make it work or you don't.
Upvote
0
Hello AmbientLight!
Maybe there is some misunderstanding of my post.
More I am fully aware, that when they do things, they do it with consequence and with a lot of resources.
They won't go into "old" tec but maybe trying to overrun the market with something new as they did when they got familiar with smart phones and tablets.
Do you think Canon or Nikon or even the struggling Olympus can do what they could?
Samsung has a much better and positive standing in the eyes of a lot of consumers.
Especially the ones they gathered throughout the last years.
If Samsung is not just playing around, which I can not see from their corporate history, they are willing to learn. And they have the power to learn.
But maybe you are right and they lose interest in the new toy. And so this is a question for "TEN YEARS FROM NOW", isn't it?
Your thoughts?
Maybe there is some misunderstanding of my post.
For me Samsung is nothing new and I have read several articles about them to understand them better. So I was not groping about in the dark with my comment.AmbientLight said:
More I am fully aware, that when they do things, they do it with consequence and with a lot of resources.
Nobody was saying this thread was just about DSLRs. And here I agree with you.
They won't go into "old" tec but maybe trying to overrun the market with something new as they did when they got familiar with smart phones and tablets.
But they have the power to do so. And they have a lot.
Do you think Canon or Nikon or even the struggling Olympus can do what they could?
Sony is Sony. And IMHO it is not the best, what they did to Minolta. (to be polite).
Samsung has a much better and positive standing in the eyes of a lot of consumers.
Especially the ones they gathered throughout the last years.
And my bottom line is:
If Samsung is not just playing around, which I can not see from their corporate history, they are willing to learn. And they have the power to learn.
But maybe you are right and they lose interest in the new toy. And so this is a question for "TEN YEARS FROM NOW", isn't it?
Your thoughts?
Upvote
0
@Maximilian
I agree that Samsung is not playing around. This is exactly why I don't see them as primarily a camera vendor. They are an electronics company and as diversified as is typical for large Asian corporations. They will do anything to get into evolving markets, just as you said, but becoming a camera vendor requires specialization in lenses and you can't get there in any form just with electronics engineers and a lot of money.
Getting excellent R&D staff for lenses like for example Zeiss or Canon or Nikon currently have available is next to impossible without purchasing a company just to get their staff. You can't hire excellent R&D staff in that area coming directly from universities, because nowadays there is very little research in that area. Just go onto university webpages and try to find one with actual research in optics. The best I could find searching for such a topic have been people researching better contact lenses.
To grow organically a company must have some staff specialized in lens design to begin with and then they must grow that R&D staff over decades to get to where they want to be. There's nothing easy about that and no shortcuts available whatsoever. Purchasing a weaker, much smaller player is the thing to do and the example you make of Sony's acquisition of Minolta just serves to show how difficult it is to reap a profit shortly after such an acquisition. Minolta was not exactly a weak player on the market for SLRs.
I agree that Samsung is not playing around. This is exactly why I don't see them as primarily a camera vendor. They are an electronics company and as diversified as is typical for large Asian corporations. They will do anything to get into evolving markets, just as you said, but becoming a camera vendor requires specialization in lenses and you can't get there in any form just with electronics engineers and a lot of money.
Getting excellent R&D staff for lenses like for example Zeiss or Canon or Nikon currently have available is next to impossible without purchasing a company just to get their staff. You can't hire excellent R&D staff in that area coming directly from universities, because nowadays there is very little research in that area. Just go onto university webpages and try to find one with actual research in optics. The best I could find searching for such a topic have been people researching better contact lenses.
To grow organically a company must have some staff specialized in lens design to begin with and then they must grow that R&D staff over decades to get to where they want to be. There's nothing easy about that and no shortcuts available whatsoever. Purchasing a weaker, much smaller player is the thing to do and the example you make of Sony's acquisition of Minolta just serves to show how difficult it is to reap a profit shortly after such an acquisition. Minolta was not exactly a weak player on the market for SLRs.
Upvote
0
Here I also agree with you.AmbientLight said:
But i believe more in the model of Panasonic and Sony, that they will cooperate withe someone.
And I think that Samsung will have the advantage of a much better reputation than Sony.
I think they will copy the "Sony way" and try to make it much better with better cam body tec.
Upvote
0
The entire EOS eco system is doomed, and it is all my fault.
You see, I finally have everything I need for the foreseeable future; nothing more to buy...I've got the 17-40L, the 24-105L, the 70-300L, and the Zeiss 50/1.4 (and the 40mm pancake, but that's just for fun) to go with my 5D3.
Now I intend to spend the next 10 years perfecting my skills with my equipment.
The last time I was in this position, I purchased my Canon F-1 with the 28/2.8, 50/1.2, and 135/2.5 lenses, and spent 10 years perfecting my skills. Then I went out looking to expand my collection of lenses and accessories, and found the entire FD line gone.
History will no doubt repeat.
What comes after digital?
You see, I finally have everything I need for the foreseeable future; nothing more to buy...I've got the 17-40L, the 24-105L, the 70-300L, and the Zeiss 50/1.4 (and the 40mm pancake, but that's just for fun) to go with my 5D3.
Now I intend to spend the next 10 years perfecting my skills with my equipment.
The last time I was in this position, I purchased my Canon F-1 with the 28/2.8, 50/1.2, and 135/2.5 lenses, and spent 10 years perfecting my skills. Then I went out looking to expand my collection of lenses and accessories, and found the entire FD line gone.
History will no doubt repeat.
What comes after digital?
Upvote
0
Similar threads
