That's what I'm hearing the iPhone 7 (which was just announced this week) might be able to do with its new dual-lens camera and a lot of processing power behind it: http://www.techradar.com/news/photo...e-dual-iphone-7-plus-camera-explained-1328133
GH4 Panasonic GH5 coming in 2017
- Thread starter Dan Keeble
- Start date
Just because Apple has dumbed down the consumer, doesn't mean that all hope is lost.
Everybody has friends, family and need to take higher better quality pictures and video.
Physically the larger optics of a real camera will always be much superior to the flat optics of an iPhone.
Quality of smartphone cameras do improve, but so does quality in proper camera. The larger camera optics will always be way ahead and it will always be much better than in a flat smartphone, that's just physics, progress in for example Panasonic and Canon, is spectacular. People can film stuff that might be considered 4K cinema quality and photographic quality of a high end $5000 photo camera of 5-years ago in a current $500 Panasonic. You can consider flat smartphones might improve in the next 5 years, but within the next 5 years, your $500 Panasonic will be able to shoot IMAX quality 8K video and the photography in these will be something that previously was exclusive to the NASA.
In fact, only the iPhone is the overpriced product that people buy even though they don't actually need to give $550 of pure profits to this Apple company to get decent functionality of a smartphone!
The only risk to the consumer electronics industry, is that the marketing people in these companies believe the marketing BS that Apple is spewing, they buy iPhones themselves and they actually believe iPhones are great. But they truely are not. 3x to 4x cheaper Android phones provide more and better value than any newest iPhone.
Everybody needs to take super high 4K video of their babies, friends and family. They need super high quality audio, multiple wireless microphones, they need to be able to livestream as everybody wants to live broadcast their parties to friends and family who can't attend, and everybody is inspired to film more 4K video and to take absolutely goergous quality photography, especially of their friends and family.
So no, those features are not niche market, they are for everybody. Everybody must take better quality pictures and video. A smartphone cannot ever be considered good enough. It's a crime. It's marketing BS that Apple has convinced consumers into and they even convince the marketing teams at their competitors, which is a shame. But not all hope is lost.
Last edited:
For taking pictures of stuff you just need to remember, for that a smartphone is ok. But for friends, family, for anything and anyone that are precious to you, you cannot suggest that an iPhone is good enough.
My father was taking higher quality pictures in the 1960ies with his Leica. Suggesting that the flat optics and tiny sensors on an iPhone is good enough is just wrong. People must respect their babies, respect their families, respect their girlfriends, wives, boyfriends, husbands, and people must respect their friends, and never use a smartphone to take pictures of them, unless they truly think that those pictures have no value.
joe1946
Veteran
I use my S6 Edge Plus for shooting the kids at the park etc when I don't bring a camera but when I want a quality image I use a quality camera and lens.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5598/15360260540_65e2eb0d11_o.jpg
https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5598/15360260540_65e2eb0d11_o.jpg
NorBro
Major Contributor
I hear you, but it's you against millions, and that won't change. The phones are good enough (IMO) and will only keep getting better.
Nah, It's me, or whoever is the guy or girl in charge of marketing at Panasonic, against one guy only, against Tim Cook.
Apple is not public opinion, they spread marketing lies to make money.
Every time one consumer spends $2500 on an iPhone with a 2-year contract, it's Panasonic or whoever else is left in the consumer camera market who looses one sale. Apple is the camera industry's direct competitor.
Apple dares thread in their market? Why doesn't Panasonic/Sony/Canon/Nikon/Fuji/Olympus/Leica just hit them back in the face? What's all this giving up against Apple's marketing machine? With a better marketing manager in charge, Panasonic could easily sell a much better Smartphone + larger consumer camera (such as upcoming G8X (G7 successor)), with contract, with dual-sim LTE (both in phone and in camera) all together well below the price of only one scratchy shattery iphone7. Panasonic could easily sell 10 Million packages like that and make a ton of profit, enough to fund all their most advanced camera R&D to continue to stay on top.
Hey Joe, if I were so lucky to have beautiful kids as yours, I would never take one picture of them with a flat smartphone.
Imagine what they will tell you in 20-30 years: "hey papa, why didn't you care about us enough to bring your better camera that day in the park?"
It's a nightmare scenario.
Last edited:
roxics
Veteran
I don't know what to say, you seem to have some kind of irrational beef against Apple and think the rest of the world needs to think the way you do about photo quality. But they don't. If anything the smartphone has made people take more photos that would not have otherwise existed. I clearly remember the world before camera phones. Most people didn't roll around with cameras. There are a lot more people taking pictures today than ever before thanks to the ease of use of the camera phone. I knew people who grew up with barely any photos from their childhood. Now their kids are going to suffer a huge glut of images. Most of which will probably disappear due to hard drive and computer failures or lost account information for sites like Instagram as people die off and the next generation doesn't even know those accounts exist.
The way you want the world to be and the way it actually is seem to be two different things. The only thing you can control is what you do.
You equal Apple's marketing message to consumer's opinion, those two are not the same thing.
Apple has taken $200 Billion + in profits away from other consumer electronics companies, the consumer camera makers included.
It's not because consumers want to give Apple their money, it's because the marketing leaders in all of Apple's competitors have been too lazy.
More pictures is not better. People have been taking trillions of crappy quality pictures with their phones in the past decade, it shouldn't have happened. It's Apple's fault.
Consumer cameras have evolved just as much as smartphone cameras have. Just look at the $750 consumer camera of today vs the consumer camera at the same price of a decade ago.
Consumers have not chosen to continue taking shitty pictures in their future, it's simply up to the camera makers to make sure these consumers spend their money on proper cameras in the years to come.
Consumers spending $2500 on 2-year contracts for an iPhone, that's not something that has to continue to exist 5 years from now. Consumers can get a perfectly good $250 or $300 Smartphone + an extremely good $500 camera. The $250 smartphone unlocked with no contract can take just as good pictures and video as the $700 iPhone.
Panasonic has tried it already, to make smartphones I filmed them showing these:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFFm6Kq5tkY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wxbCxK555g
It's their mistake to just give that up. They don't even need to brand it, they can simply partner with a good chinese smartphone maker. Bundle a much cheaper smartphone that has similar camera quality and all other features to a $700 iPhone, and bundle a good Panasonic consumer camera and make people understand that it's better they buy the bundle and make the efford to bring their cloud connected Panasonic camera everywhere when they need to take high quality photos and video.
combatentropy
Veteran
The average Joe's desire for a quick and easy camera did not start with Apple.
The first camera I remember was my mom's 110, a 16mm still format, prized for its simplicity because the film came in a cartridge that you didn't have to fiddlingly wind into a camera like 35mm. The second camera I remember was a Polaroid.
Later, everyone was buying that pinnacle of optical quality, the disposable 35mm camera. At a reception in the early 2000s, the couple put these at every table, so that the guests would take each other's pictures. We all thought it was a great idea --- not disrespectful because of the inferior quality.
Still, people did not bring along these superconvenient cameras unless they knew ahead of time that there were going to be Kodak moments: a party, wedding, graduation, etc.
Now, the camera and the phone are one, so people always have them. I would have loved if my parents had smart phones when they were young. Every old photograph I find of my family is precious, no matter the quality. But if they had had smartphones instead of manual film cameras, there would have been a thousand times as many, at a hundred times the quality: more photos in focus, less grain, no scratches, no bent photos, no photos lost in a fire.
The first camera I remember was my mom's 110, a 16mm still format, prized for its simplicity because the film came in a cartridge that you didn't have to fiddlingly wind into a camera like 35mm. The second camera I remember was a Polaroid.
Later, everyone was buying that pinnacle of optical quality, the disposable 35mm camera. At a reception in the early 2000s, the couple put these at every table, so that the guests would take each other's pictures. We all thought it was a great idea --- not disrespectful because of the inferior quality.
Still, people did not bring along these superconvenient cameras unless they knew ahead of time that there were going to be Kodak moments: a party, wedding, graduation, etc.
Now, the camera and the phone are one, so people always have them. I would have loved if my parents had smart phones when they were young. Every old photograph I find of my family is precious, no matter the quality. But if they had had smartphones instead of manual film cameras, there would have been a thousand times as many, at a hundred times the quality: more photos in focus, less grain, no scratches, no bent photos, no photos lost in a fire.
stoneinapond
Veteran
And then they give it back to shareholders like me.:tongue:
I give Apple my money because they sell me a great product with an amazing eco system that works. You have to quit with the paranoia. And perhaps partake a little less of the stuff that might induce that. :happy:
Thomas Smet
Veteran
auto white balance, auto exposure and auto focus didn't kill the film industry either. Settle down people. Simplification opens up doors to a larger consumer base but it doesn't take the place of professional tools or people. Never has and never will. Talent and content are king and no camera can ever take the place of that. The Apple marketing photos are vastly superior to what 99% of the population actually shoots with their iPhones so don't worry about it. Sloppy lazy photos will always be sloppy lazy photos.
Besides apples fake wanna be DOF is for stills only right now and not for video. We are a long way off a phone processing fake DOF 30 frames per seconds from two lenses.
Besides apples fake wanna be DOF is for stills only right now and not for video. We are a long way off a phone processing fake DOF 30 frames per seconds from two lenses.
While I've enjoyed this long aside regarding the fate of consumer cameras can we please go back to discussing the imminent new GH5?
Personally, if it had internal 10-bit 4:2:2 then I'd upgrade from the GH4 in a heartbeat. Icing on the cake could include sensor stabilization and 4K 60p.
In my wildest dreams it would have better low light sensitivity and less noise, but I'm not holding my breath.
Personally, if it had internal 10-bit 4:2:2 then I'd upgrade from the GH4 in a heartbeat. Icing on the cake could include sensor stabilization and 4K 60p.
In my wildest dreams it would have better low light sensitivity and less noise, but I'm not holding my breath.
Rolf Silber
Veteran
This and please let it have a reliable and more solid HDMI port.
clifford maxwell
Member
An example of the new sensor-shift stabilization system with non-stabilized legacy glass up to 720mm equiv (apologies if already posted - it's not mine):
GX80 / GX85 IBIS Stabilization vs GX8 for 4K Video
GX80 / GX85 IBIS Stabilization vs GX8 for 4K Video
ozmorphasis
Well-known member
...and with less latency. I can't pan using an external monitor on the GH4 without bringing dramamine.
julian7879
Active member
Finally