If you haven’t noticed, camera sales are down. I mean, they’re way down. Unsurprisingly, everyone’s scrambling to find a reason why. There’s a video floating around from Mayflower Concepts that, at the very least, explains what is not the cause for the camera sales drop. If you don’t have 50 minutes to watch it for yourself, here’s the “TL;DR” version: It’s not due to the rise of phones with cameras – at least, not in the way you think. It’s not because the economy is in the tank, as most camera manufacturers claim on their financial reports. There’s simply no strong correlation between any of the global financial crises, or the simple existence of cameras on phones, to have any reason to believe either is the cause for a huge drop in sales.
Mayflower points out a number of bone-headed moves camera manufacturers are guilty of, but one thing mentioned that I think is the biggest hurdle for most new or existing customers is this:
And this:
As well as this:
Modern cameras, in essence, are way too complicated. In an age of simplified and accessible technology, cameras are going in the opposite direction.
Before we go further, I must make the following clear: I am not a professional photographer. I don’t sell my middling skills for money, and my interest in photography is purely for my own enjoyment and, occasionally, for other people’s benefit. I am, however, someone who has spent the last 15 years professionally analyzing and explaining technology trends in some fashion or another.
I also have a mother, a sister, a brother-in-law, a girlfriend, and numerous other friends and colleagues, who all love photography. Almost none of them would ever be bothered to pick up any of the cameras above. Ever. I know this because I’ve shown them pictures of the above cameras, and just about every one of them balked. Direct quotes: “What’s with all the dials/buttons?” “Who really needs all of that?” “Who buys these cameras?” (Well, I know of one person who bought the Nikon Df, but that person openly admitted it was more for appearances than functionality).
As further anecdotal evidence: My girlfriend thinks my full-frame DSLR is ‘intimidating’ to use, and she vastly prefers her simple mirrorless camera with its touch screen. My mother, who’s had film cameras available to her for most of her life, turned her nose up at a basic DSLR I offered for her use when she decided to learn digital photography – “Too many buttons, too complicated,” she said. Eventually, she begrudgingly accepted that camera for the purposes of learning, but I know she never used it again after her 10-week class was over. (I also got weekly phone calls where she told me how overly complicated the thing was. Mind you, this woman has worked in the IT sector since the 1960’s. She has machine programming and COBOL as a means of comparison.) I’m sure my sister and brother-in-law could be convinced one day to buy into something a little more capable than the cameras on their phones and the Fujifilm Instax they own, but I’m not pushing my luck.
This all drives home my point: Camera sales are probably down because of their needless complexity.
Apple recently deployed a website dedicated to the surprisingly incredible photos taken with iPhones, and they’re hardly the first to boast how great photos can be taken with a mere phone. While it’s reasonably certain that the advent of phones with cameras may not have been directly responsible for a drop in dedicated camera sales, I would imagine the rapidly improving user experience of smartphones might have. Even with a bog standard camera app for your smartphone, along with the intelligence available via the silicon inside that phone, it’s rather easy to make fantastic images. Mind you, what most people have available to them on their phone are a few UI controls on a touchscreen for adjustments and a way of activating the shutter. That’s it.
No dials. No buttons. No complex menus. No fuss.
…And no modern dedicated camera can match that simplicity.
Sure, not all smartphone photos are great, but the same could be said about photos from dedicated cameras. It’s a moot point. Consumers have an intuitive, simple way to take photos that yield reasonable results. Nobody ever had to go to a class or spend hours scouring the internet to learn how to make their camera phone work. Modern dedicated cameras are the exact opposite of this experience.
Professional photographers and advanced enthusiasts tend to go out of their way to learn how their cameras function. They learn how to control exposure to get the exact image they want. The vast majority of consumers – much like my family and friends – couldn’t be bothered to learn all of the subtleties that go into photography. They want to capture moments as best as they can with as little fuss possible. They’re not professionals, they’re not enthusiasts, and they have no intention on becoming either.
Also worth pointing out is the fact that professional photographers and advanced enthusiasts are not the majority of the market. They are a small but vocal minority who spend lots of money. Camera companies are spending too much time, R&D, and marketing effort, to ensure these users remain in the fold, while they simultaneously forego the rest of their potential customer base. Manufacturers may not be consciously doing it, but that’s what’s happening. The industry’s sales deficit is rooted in the fact that the mass market is where they previously made most of their profits.
What I’m suggesting is that every mid- to high-end camera that is cranked out today by a major manufacturer is, essentially, a complicated evolution of the film camera, with a mess of controls to match. You’ve got modes and dials and buttons, settings for ISO and apertures to worry about. Pros and advanced amateurs might groan and say, “Well, all anyone needs to do is learn how their camera works, and they’ll get the photos they want.” Yes, but, again, the people who do go out of their way to learn how to shoot in manual mode are a small subset of the potential market, just as people who learn to build and fix cars or computers are the minority of drivers and computer users. Shooting in manual mode is not an enjoyable experience for most people. It’s about as much fun as carrying around a load of camera gear.
There are a number of advanced compacts and mirrorless cameras which are almost the size of a basic compact camera and not far off from the size of a smartphone. A lot of these cameras have very nice sensors inside, and they’re more than capable for the majority of photographers out there. I’ve shown a number of these devices to friends and family, and they have indicated that such cameras are far more approachable. In my opinion, these cameras should be the new, cheap, easy-to-use compact cameras of our time… but they aren’t.
First, most of the cameras I’m referring to are just flat-out expensive. There are few people who could be convinced that a Panasonic GM5 and LX100 are worth $900 each, unless those people are advanced enthusiasts who are already predisposed to liking such cameras. The Fujifilm X30 and Sony RX100 Mark II are a bit better at $600, but, again, not exactly in ‘impulse buy’ territory.
These cameras should be sold for $300-400. Tops. I’m not suggesting a race to the bottom, similar to what is already happening now in the entry-level DSLR category or with compact cameras before that. I’m also not suggesting that it doesn’t cost a bit of money to manufacture larger sensors and the accompanying lenses for each device. I’m saying small, decent quality cameras should not be premium products.
More importantly, the aforementioned cameras are still far more complex and unintuitive than they need be, putting a steep learning curve in the way between customers and their goal of capturing moments. People want the ‘point-and-shoot’ mentality of their phone with better results. Again, I don’t think you could convince the average consumer that they need to know everything about focal lengths, apertures, ISO values, and shutter speeds. I do think you can teach them, “Portrait mode maximizes the focus on your subject while blurring out the background,” as the camera intelligently opens up the aperture, drops down the ISO as low as it can go, chooses an appropriate shutter speed for the focal length, all while the metering system finds the face of the subject. “Action mode freezes motion and ensures your subject is completely in focus,” as the camera bumps up the ISO and shutter speed. Heck, an interchangeable lens camera should be able to suggest, “Use [x] lens(es) for best results.” No camera available today does this, even those with the currently available ‘scene’ modes built in (I’ve tried a number of them, and they all suck).
I mean, really, why does any camera manufactured in 2015 not do this with aplomb? If the majority of people want somewhat pleasing photos without going through all the work, manufacturers should learn to at least get them most of the way there. I’m sure it’s only a matter of time before smartphones get to the point where they’re programmed well enough to achieve complex ‘scene’ modes that take most of the guess-work out of photography, so there’s no reason not to do this for dedicated cameras. If customers want to learn how the decisions of automated modes are made, they will seek out that information – and they will have better photos because they did. If they don’t, they should at least be left with reasonably satisfying results.
If manufacturers want to sell cameras, they should realize customers will see value in a product if it delivers significantly better image quality than their phone and comes in an intelligent, easily managed package and is reasonably priced. However, based on the public rumination of your typical camera CEO, I don’t think this will happen until it’s far too late. Fuji is chasing a niche market. Sony is throwing every feature they can at the wall to see what sticks, but usability improvements still sit on the table. Canon and Nikon seem to think the DSLR will last forever in its current state, so long as they keep adding small improvements. Samsung made a few steps towards introducing an intelligent camera, but most of the features they push are of the ‘gee-wiz’ variety rather than useful additions for the uninitiated. Panasonic and Olympus get the portability bit right, but their cameras suffer from the same ‘gee-wiz’ gimmicks as Samsung instead of making of honest-to-goodness usability improvements.
As I see it, the photo industry is at the precipice of permanent contraction, and I don’t know if anyone has the guts to turn it around in a meaningful way. I don’t think making an intelligent, quality camera that does 90% of the work is going to dissuade people from learning to handle cameras in the traditional way, driving them towards more expensive and capable equipment. I do think that not making an intelligent, quality camera will lead to further declining sales as fewer people come up with reasons to buy a camera that isn’t already included with another device they already own.
This guest post was contributed by Michael Heath, a senior IT staff member and an IT product analyst for the University of Pennsylvania since 2001.
Thank you so much for this kind of informative post. Photography is one kind of art. Your art gets more animated if your camera gets more updated features. I was watching your writing. Though it has some important and unique features it is also missing some features. I you tel me to rate this camera I will give 3 star on five. I have a video doorbell which has good qualities of camera and the doorbell is wireless. So it works as a security system.
Thank you for the interesting read.
I see on that iPhone 6 gallery website, many of the photos, although shot on iPhones, have been made using VSCO, Snapseed, Olloclip lenses, etc. Have a look at those apps… You will see they emulate in software all of the controls an “advanced” camera has. Not exactly getting away from the complexity.
Whether cell phone cameras have made an impact on point-and-shoots and DSLRs I don’t know. I do still think that you need some element of manual control to capture good images in less than ideal scenarios.
When you don’t have time for that, there’s always auto mode.
And as for “Portrait” mode and a blurry background… very hard to do on a cell phone camera due to the size of the sensor and the physics involved.
I personally am moving away from my 5D Mk2 to a Sony A6000 (and A7 in future). The Sony has excellent auto modes, a large (APS-C) sensor and an acceptable range of lens choices. Add to that 11 fps shooting, face detection, a compact and light body, ability to control external flashes, phone/tablet remote control and wifi, and I think it is the camera the author is wishing for. Use it in auto or dive deeper as the abovementioned iPhone users have done via software.
I don’t think easy interface is going to change anything. Almost every camera has full auto mode and people who use this mode usually get fairly mediocre results (even out of expensive equipment). There is not that much room for improvement in full auto mode over Iphone. Surely, the bigger sensor on dedicated camera will have less noise but is it worth 500 dollars to people who don’t care about learning what aperture is. And my guess is that for average user spending lots of money to have a privilege of carrying extra weight and getting marginally better pictures is just not worth it. DSLRs are great for professionals and there is no replacement for DSLR in ultrawide or sports photography applications. But for most of consumers even mirrorless interchangeable lens system might be an overkill (not to mention the ridiculous prices).
I am an enthusiast that grew up with a film rangefinder, transitioned to DSLR and now use Iphone for 99 percent of my pictures. Iphone/ Smartphone is the modern day rangefinder, it is an easy to use, simple, fun, fixed lens camera, I don’t think most of people really need more than that. Surely, there is sharpness and low light performance but in most cases good pictures come from photographers skill and good light. Also, for last decade I had the misfortune of seeing too many people who know nothing of photography with DSLRs, they blind each other with pop up flash and use high burst rate to take 100 pictures of a trashcan. Maybe we could all be happy that these days are almost behind us (and welcome the era of “vintage rangefinder” equipped hipster ).
signed.
i am a professional photographer who also does tech support for other photographers. i build remote controlled camera rigs. i can explain the usage of most cameras i have never laid hands on before to their owners faster than they can find their manual.
and as my private camera? i use my phone. or a Panasonic mirrorless (GF5) with a single focal length on P with auto-ISO and always -2/3 EV dialed in. i switch it on and hit the shutter button. and despite one of the best touchscreen interfaces i think that camera is way too complicated if i need to change something not overly obvious.
it’s way overdue that a manufacturer sits down and builds a modern camera interface without doing a gimmick laden monstrosity. Panasonic isnt too far from that. but i still have more hopes that phones will reduce their lag during activation, focus and capture of images.
Nice article
In the 50’s through 70’s before autofocus 35mm cameras were introduced, good cameras required focusing, setting the aperture and shutter speed, learning how to load and unload film. Not for everybody. This complexity is why the Kodak Instamatic sold so well.
Most digital cameras today have a green “easy” mode or Fully Auto mode, but it’s the rest of the features that scare the average consumer away.
A few manufacturers have tried an easy high quality camera (panasonic g6 (?), but their sales were poor.
We need a digital camera version of the Nikon EM film camera.
I am surprised.
I read more than half of the comments. I agree with some of the arguments of both parties (simplifying that there are two well divided camps).
But I am surprised that, except the mention of the Leica X2, there is no mention/description of the idea the author is in my opinion shaping the contours:
Would it be possible for DSLR/mirrorless manufacturers to DESIGN and MARKET for the masses an affordable camera with a “BIG” sensor, but without intimidating buttons and/or menu ?
I mean, to basically merge smartphone “advantages” with such a sensor/optics. Maybe to change the paradigm of how settings are changed, too. Like the author pointed.
In a way, a simplified and less expensive LX100, RX1R, or Fugi monofocal, or with a zoom, etc.
Now, would it work ?
Honestly I’m not sure. (Personnaly no way, I wanted the “full” and ergonomic physical control :)
I know several people who bought a entry-level DSLR without knowing what aperture means. Why then ?
Well: it’s affordable and it looks professional. Plus they easily get better pics (definition, zoom, light…), so they are mostly happy.
Now a word about a point I didn’t see either. Why targeting the photographer and enthusiast / amateur ? (So add features)
I think manufacturers partly count on the fact that we are the early adopters, who advise and convince our acquaintances to purchase a product. Maybe not even a DSLR nor a mirrorless, but for instance a Sony RX100 or an Oly Stylus 1, rather than a mediocre point and shoot.
Anyway, as usuall, what I find most interesting is not the article itself but the comments (and thinking, for those able) it generates. :)
Most DSLRs and Mirorless cameras already have those simple functions, like “night portrait” “snow” “beach” “sport” “fireworks” “children’ “high key” “low key” you name it. I don’t understand what author is complaining about?
For me all this stuff is a ballast. I’ve never used it and it simply clogs up the interface. If you are lazy to learn something then go and buy iphone.
I think the camera market is oversaturatred personally. And i think it is over priced. People now have to spend $300-$400 every year or 2 on a new phone, plus all the accessories you need for said phone. Add to that the need for a new laptop every 3-4 years. Most tech these days is not durable. You used to buy a camera and use it for 10-20 years. I have had 4 Sony point and shoots, and after 2 years they pretty much sucked. So I stopped buying camera’s. I was tired of feeling like i had to get a new one because of electronic and software failures. It took me 3 months to decide to buy my Sony A6000 because there are too many options and too many variables. You walk into Sam’s Club, Wal-Mart, or Best Buy and there is a huge table of camera’s that all look the same. Sure, the sales person says this Nikon is good, but how many times has something you expected to be good turned out to be a piece of shit? Or how many times have you bought something only for it to be outdated in just a couple years? It is a risk people don’t want to take, because they don’t have to anymore. Their phone is a security blanket.
I think the value of photos has decreased a little bit too. Simply because of the sheer number of pictures that are taken now. When you had to develop the film and scan it to share it, seeing photos held more value. Now people can post shitty pictures and still get “likes” or thumbs ups. They can add a quick filter on IG and make their photo edgy or moody. So many AMAZING pictures of a sunset have been posted in the last 10 minutes, that the sunsets are not as prized.
Smartphone’s are the main reason camera sales are down. Period. It has nothing to do with buttons and menus on cameras being complicated. Kids today can root their phone, install custom ROMs, social network on 14 different sites, add watermarks to photo’s, etc. I am pretty sure they could handle figuring out the 3 main settings on a camera…. But why should they?
How many camera sales are photographers upgrading their kit as opposed to first-time purchases? Probably 99% are upgrades. Personally, I think camera sales have been inflated for years, and the reason for this has been the megapixel race. In the same way that mobile phone, tablet and computer sales are driven by the spec sheet, we’ve all been caught up in the megapixel race, quickly feeling that our camera purchase is no longer adequate and needs to be upgraded to the latest model with higher resolution. We have all been guilty of this to a degree, whether professional, enthusiast or beginner, fuelled of course by the manufacturers. In the video market we’re seeing this with 4K capability, but how few of us own 4K TV’s yet?? For stills photography, now we thankfully see a general consensus across the industry that megapixels are not everything, and we see manufacturers finally acknowledging this fact. So perhaps now camera sales are simply migrating towards a more natural and sustainable level, and the megapixel bubble has burst.
Hello, I’m sorry to come so late to this wonderful chat. I think this is particular issue is a part of a big game, but I still do not know the name to this game. Please, let me give you some examples:
Sometimes I hear “this camera makes beautiful pictures”. And I always answer the same: “This is a nice tool, but the picture (the original idea) is in my brain and it’s seen by my eyes. My camera is only a tool to freeze and save my idea. But I take the pictures.
As far as I know better how to use my camera, my “idea” (my picture) will be better described.
No screwdriver takes the screws out by itself, you are the one how takes out the screws, and if you know very well how to use it, the screws will be out (or in) in a better way.
In the air pilots world (I’m a member) you can hear something similar. “This aircraft “flyes” very well”. And my answer is the same: This aircraft is very well designed, but I FLY the aircratf. And if I study and learn my aircraft perfectly I will fly nice, smooth and safe.
We should try not to give more prominence to machines that they already have,
We are coming to a world that is starting to think that computerized devices can do OUR JOB, or our hobbies, and that we only have to “point and shoot”.
A lot of compact cameras don’t even carry inside of it’s buying box the printed manual, because camera manufactorers have realized, that most people never read the manual. If you want to read it, please download it and print it.
Most people don’t know how to use its camera, and don’t even understand the basics of photography, like exposition, speed, ISO… They just want the camera to do everithing without even knowing the basic concepts of how to deal with the light.
Something is changing in this planet.
I think we still have time to correct our heading. Otherwise, we’ll finally have to fight against the machines. (I’ll be back! by A.S.)
On last november a Lufthansa Airbus A321 have a major incident flying from Bilbao (Spain) to Germany while climbing to cruise altitude. Two of the three stall sensors have a false indication that the aircraft was stalling, so the flight controls started to pitch down to recover from the false stall. They’ve lost more than 4.000 feet.
They were lucky because they already have reached high altitude, and have a margin to recover, otherwise they would be killed.
Of course they have disconnected autopilot and gone to manual mode (called “normal law”), but the flight control system of this machine is so “clever” that was still pitching down, without obeying pilot’s pitch up commands. So the pilots had finally disconnected some Air Data Computers (ADR) to recover from the pitch down situation.
Once they hade one ADR off, the aircraft went to what they call “alternate law” and they could fly the aircraft in “real manual”, just like in the old times.
The point is: What if they were so “young” and unexperienced to fly the aircraft like in the “old times”.
Here is a link to the news:
www.aeroinside.com/item/…f-altitude
So what is the name of the game?
Think about it. Thanks!