4 ms·
Cameras And Other Electronic Devices Succumb to Smartphone Juggernaut
- r0h1n 13y agoAll perfectly valid points, but this feels like an iPhone 5s camera review masquerading as something newsworthy. The trend of cameras getting "disrupted" by smart phones has been going on for 3-4 years now, hasn't it?
- voltagex_ 13y agoHistorians are going to hate us. So much history recorded in such low quality.
- 001sky 13y agotrue to some extent, but also think of the selfies! the history of the common man/woman will be documented in never seen before levels of detail and comprehensiveness. so many cups of cafe or plates of brunch!
- voltagex_ 13y agoNot so interesting to us now, but maybe to people in 100+ years.
- potatolicious 13y agoI actually think the opposite - historians are going to hate us. Such a vast amount of history being recorded by the everyman, but all of it gone. Unlike photographs in an attic, or negatives in a filing cabinet, the odds of 99.99999% of the photographs being taken by the everyman surviving for future historians is exceedingly low. Future historians will get an even more cherry-picked set of images than we have of our past, because the only photographs that will be archived in the decades-centuries time frame will have been done so deliberately. There will be no discoveries of photo albums tucked in an attic.
- voltagex_ 13y agoSD cards found somewhere?
- adventured 13y ago"But nobody believed smartphones would run cameras out of town, either." I very much disagree with this. Despite the low quality of the first generation iPhone camera, I recall it being nearly universally regarded as a digital camera killer. With the sole question being a matter of time. Any doubts that lingered, were quickly wiped away with the next version or two of the iPhone (the 3GS specifically had a huge leap in camera quality). I think an awful lot of people saw that the quality would only keep getting better, the pixel war was already nearing an end for digital cameras as far as consumer benefit was concerned, and the convenience factor was absolutely huge.
- ZeroGravitas 13y agoI'm old enough to remember when it was digital cameras that were crap but obviously going to supersede non-digital. I also remember that this was obvious for phones (not even smartphones), long before the iPhone. The first two generations of iPhone were a step back in quality compared with rivals and a common complaint was the lack of MMS which feature phone used to share images.
- hnriot 13y agothe iPhone camera has for a while been good enough. in good light the 4s on has been plenty good enough when used correctly. It's not that smartphone cameras have been getting better (although they have), but rather than people's standards have been eroded. It's good enough for a 612x612 instagram, very few print their photos and when they do the resampling the labs do is very competent and people have just become accustom to how photos look today. It's like Polaroid, it was never as sharp or accurate as "real cameras" but that didn't hurt their popularity because convenience wins out every time, be in photography or computer security. Humans are a lazy bunch.
- ajtaylor 13y agoWhile I would agree that smartphone cameras are "good enough" in most cases, they still pale in comparison to a DSLR. But then you can't put a DSLR in your pants pocket either... I think his closing argument that laptops are doomed is a little off. Tablets right now are great for consuming content, but not so good for creating content (at least in volume).