Jump to content
Ed Rooney

Have We Arrived at the Final Destination with Digital Cameras?

Recommended Posts

The last few updates with my Sony cameras having been minor and meaningless for me. The newest RX10 is impressive . . . but I see no need to carry a 600 mm lens with me routinely. The main change in the RX100-3 and 4 is in video.

 

What do you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't imagine that camera manufacturers would ever tolerate a final destination. They will always be trying to peddle the next new and amazing features, even if they do appear to be fairly meaningless to most users. My guess is that cameras will continue to look and function more like smart phones (now that phones look and function more like cameras).

 

But if I may quote T.S. Elliot:

 

"We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They didn't reach the end of development with film cameras, and film itself continued to evolve even if rather slowly. So, I agree with John.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There will be no final destination for cameras.

 
As long as computing continues to advance, then digital cameras (Also Known As computers) will continue to advance.
 
Cameras will evolve beyond our wildest dreams. Think of your mind as a camera, and your camera as your mind. Your camera a tool for a Vulcan mind meld, sharing your brain with another being.
 
Wait not for arrival because there is none, but enjoy the endless journey instead.
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cameras as a tool for Vulcan mind meld? Sony will no doubt be the first to jump on that bandwagon.

 

Whatever is Bill smoking these days... B)

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I can see in the future is that noise will almost be a thing of the past. Nobody will need fast lenses for ordinary stock shooting because very high ISO in new cameras won't be penalized. People might only own one fast lens for portraits for the bokeh...and possibly macro. As a result, lenses can be made much lighter.

 

And yes, I'm aware some use macro for portraits, but I didn't have the studio space indoors to get far enough away with my Nikon 105. Outdoors, I used it often for portraits.

So the new cameras will go hand in hand with new lenses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about no cameras at all?

 

Sounds totally awesome. Nonetheless, I'm kind of glad that I won't be around for Vulcan mind meld. It all seems a bit too Orwellian to me.

Edited by John Mitchell
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Whatever is Bill smoking these days... B)

 

 

Only take the odd vitamin, nothing else. But I do get naturally high on all the great things going on with photography, which helps me to muddle through.

 
Fantastic link John. Not far from a Vulcan mind meld. Any creative work is all about one mind meeting another over distance or time. Its all about communication, and the less a future camera tool gets in the way of that, the better.
 
Prepare for the future. Communication over description.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm. I'd never have guessed how much people would wax poetic on this subject.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nirvana for me would be no degradation of IQ regardless of ISO or aperture and super-telephoto prime lenses that you don't need to mortgage the house for. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sooner or later, they will produce 3D images.. and we'll all wear special glasses to look at our photos :-) ... we're not there yet!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not gonna happen, Matt. 3D has been around forever -- after each surge in that direction, it's been abandoned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not gonna happen, Matt. 3D has been around forever -- after each surge in that direction, it's been abandoned.

 

I think I agree, at least while it needs glasses or special viewers. However, if they actually crack holographic projection ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The next generation of cameras will not use lenses.

 

Allan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The next generation of cameras will not use lenses.

 

Allan

Or photographers.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The image quality attained by the 1" sensors of Sony RX100 & RX10 cameras is yet unattained for any sensors smaller than the routine crop sensors (1.3x to 1.6x or DX). There are two possible routes for further advancement from here onwards, (1) further reduction in sensor size while maintaining IQ, (2) further improving IQ and/or image-size (megapixels) in 1" sensor itself, (3) make real-time slow-motion available either at a faster fps for 1080p or, develop a decent slow-motion towards 4K resolutions. 

 

We have seen a 600/2.8 equivalent lens (the fastest 600mm equivalent yet) for a much smaller sensor (Panasonic FZ200), it was a fairly effective reach at least for videos, as core 2 MP was used for the purpose. Sony has done creditably well in getting 600/4 for its RX10_iii. It may well attempt a faster/longer lens ... just as 200mm/2.8 of RX10_i has been enhanced to 600/4 of RX_iii.

 

Image stabilization may still be made far more effective. Of course minor advances in these Sony models may include fully-rotable hinged screens and incorporation of intervalometer etc. Shutterlag may me further reduced as higher focusing speed is attained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The next generation of cameras will not use lenses.

 

Allan

 

That's good, because the next generation of photographers probably won't be able to afford lenses. B)

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The image quality attained by the 1" sensors of Sony RX100 & RX10 cameras is yet unattained for any sensors smaller than the routine crop sensors (1.3x to 1.6x or DX). There are two possible routes for further advancement from here onwards, (1) further reduction in sensor size while maintaining IQ, (2) further improving IQ and/or image-size (megapixels) in 1" sensor itself, (3) make real-time slow-motion available either at a faster fps for 1080p or, develop a decent slow-motion towards 4K resolutions. 
 
We have seen a 600/2.8 equivalent lens (the fastest 600mm equivalent yet) for a much smaller sensor (Panasonic FZ200), it was a fairly effective reach at least for videos, as core 2 MP was used for the purpose. Sony has done creditably well in getting 600/4 for its RX10_iii. It may well attempt a faster/longer lens ... just as 200mm/2.8 of RX10_i has been enhanced to 600/4 of RX_iii.
 
Image stabilization may still be made far more effective. Of course minor advances in these Sony models may include fully-rotable hinged screens and incorporation of intervalometer etc. Shutterlag may me further reduced as higher focusing speed is attained.

 

 

I'm not very technical, but those sound like good predictions to me. Again, the emphasis seems to be on improving video rather than still shooting. That seems to be the direction in which things are heading at the moment.

Edited by John Mitchell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi again,

 

Don't know if somebody's said this already...  I reckon digital cameras and most other technology will not stop evolving, particularly in this 'computer age', which is relatively new, because of the capitalist consumer society we live in, where we live to be peddled products to, unfortuanately.  (Socialist here!)

 

By the way,  I had to return the Nex camera because it had been sold without the original lens (why so cheap!), but i was really lucky on ebay and got an rx100.  Am so happy about this. Came with load of accessories.  No scratches.  Way lighter than the Nex.  I love it already.  More like £200.00 than £100.00, but the best choice.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Best of luck with your new RX100, young lady.

 

I may have tripped over a future event with this post. I think in fact we have nearly arrived at the endgame with our present digital cameras. Small changes and gains in specific areas is not going to get enough buyers to up grande -- a little bit better this, a touch better that? I'll stand pat, thanks. But . . . but perhaps something totally new is about to appear.

 
Two years ago, when I started selling off my Nikon gear at Adorama, they were offering me fair prices. Even last year they were doing so.  A month ago they offered me $50 for my NEX-7 body. That's the same body I'd paid $900 for 4 years ago. I'm thinking they know something big is about to happen.  :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Best of luck with your new RX100, young lady.

 

I may have tripped over a future event with this post. I think in fact we have nearly arrived at the endgame with our present digital cameras. Small changes and gains in specific areas is not going to get enough buyers to up grande -- a little bit better this, a touch better that? I'll stand pat, thanks. But . . . but perhaps something totally new is about to appear.

 
Two years ago, when I started selling off my Nikon gear at Adorama, they were offering me fair prices. Even last year they were doing so.  A month ago they offered me $50 for my NEX-7 body. That's the same body I'd paid $900 for 4 years ago. I'm thinking they know something big is about to happen.  :huh:

 

 

Thanks.  (Yeah I'm 40 years young!).

 

Sorry, don't mean to hiiack your thread...

 

Off to stroke camera...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, couldn't remember your name. And 40 is young to me.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You only have to look at the reaction to the announcement of the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV a few days ago: better than the Mark III in many respects, but howls of derision/protest/disappointment with its shortcomings (and price). Nirvana will never be reached.

 

Graham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be happy with a digital camera which had a dynamic range which avoided highlights being blown out while retaining shadow detail (instant in-camera HDR which looked natural and authentic?).  Also an autofocus which recognised what I really want to focus on rather than focusing on everything but my intended subject (yes, I know I can select my focus point, but we re talking about evolving intelligent cameras here.). All this, and good quality glass at a price I can truly afford.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.