Need camera that takes super close shots. - Page 8

Hydrant · 12-07-2010, 09:48 PM

On yahoo's front page.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/In-Sma...49571.html?x=0

In Smartphone Era, Point-and-Shoots Stay Home
nytimes

SAM GROBART, On Saturday December 4, 2010, 2:53 am EST

Ariel Dunitz-Johnson, a 30-year-old illustrator in San Francisco, bought a point-and-shoot camera in May. But in July, she bought a smartphone, with a camera built in.

Soon, whenever she wanted to take a picture, she found herself reaching for the smartphone, a Droid Incredible. She barely uses her point-and-shoot, a Panasonic DMC-LX3.

“It’s much easier to share those pictures with my friends,” she explained, through social networks or e-mail. “With my point-and-shoot, I have to plug it into my computer and upload the photos. It’s just a few more steps than I want to take.”

The point-and-shoot camera, which has been a part of American households since 1900, when George Eastman introduced the Kodak Brownie, is endangered. Like other single-use devices — the answering machine, the desktop calculator, the Rolodex — it is being shoved aside by a multipurpose device: the smartphone and its camera, which takes better snapshots with each new model.

Cameras, mostly point-and-shoots, are still found in 82 percent of American households, according to the Consumer Electronics Association. But for many consumers, the point-and-shoot they have now may be the last they ever own as they favor the camera in their smartphone. It’s close at hand whenever a photo opportunity arises, and can be used to instantly e-mail and share pictures. And it has an expanding menu of photo apps, well beyond the landscape and panoramic settings on a point-and-shoot, that can be used to easily manipulate the images.

Point-and-shoots do have certain advantages over smartphone cameras, including features like image stabilization and larger lenses and sensors. That does not matter to consumers like Emily Peterson, a 28-year-old graphic designer who lives in Brooklyn and who bought an iPhone 4 in July. “One day I just thought, ‘Wow, I never have my camera with me, when I used to carry it around all the time,’ ” she said. “It’s just one less thing for me to remember, one less thing to carry.”

Geoffe Haney, a 44-year-old collections manager at a museum in Bay City, Mich., who also owns an iPhone 4, said the device was “my camera first, my phone second.” He added, “I have 40 photo apps on my iPhone — it’s like having 40 different cameras with you all the time.”

The sales figures tell the story. While smartphone sales in the United States continue to skyrocket, unit sales of point-and-shoot cameras fell nearly 16 percent from 2008, according to the market research firm NPD Group. That corresponds to a decline of 24 percent in dollars, to $1.9 billion, from $2.4 billion.

Even when the recession eased over the last year, sales of point-and-shoots fell. At the same time, sales of more powerful cameras like S.L.R.’s, with advanced features like interchangeable lenses and manual settings, have increased, by nearly 29 percent in dollars since 2009, according to NPD.

Analysts say this suggests a split in the market, as casual shooters remain happy with the convenience of their smartphones, and dedicated enthusiasts seek out the more advanced cameras. And they predict that the point-and-shoot market will drop further over all.

“The compact camera market is pretty stagnant,” said Christopher Chute, an analyst at the market researcher IDC. “The ubiquity of a 5- or 10-megapixel camera phone in your pocket is hard to overcome.”

David C. Lee, the senior vice president at Nikon, acknowledged, “The market’s peaked a little.” Still, he said he was not worried. “It’s going to go up and down, but it will stay solid,” he said. Echoing other camera makers, he said the smartphone camera would encourage more picture-taking generally, leading to more demand for traditional cameras.

But the smartphone has proved irresistibly easy to use, especially for people who exchange vast numbers of photos online.

Facebook says that since the site was founded in 2004, its users have uploaded more than 50 billion photos, making that feature one of its most popular. Flickr, the photo-sharing site, says users add more than three million photos to its inventory every day. Yet Flickr’s data shows that the most popular camera among its 55 million users is a smartphone, Apple’s iPhone 3G. Not a single point-and-shoot makes it into its top five. The remaining spots are occupied by S.L.R.’s from Canon and Nikon.

Cameras began showing up in phones almost a decade ago. For much of that time, image quality was akin to grainy shots of U.F.O.’s or Sasquatch. In the last few years, though, more powerful processors and better sensors have improved image quality to levels many consumers find acceptable.

According to a February report from the camera industry group PMA, film cameras were not quite extinct until 2004, when most digital models took pictures with resolutions greater than four megapixels — allowing users to print high-quality images in conventional sizes. The report predicted that camera-phone use would “increase significantly” once those devices achieved a similar resolution.

The iPhone, various Android models and phones on Microsoft’s new Windows Phone 7 operating system have already crossed that threshold.

Even some professionals are advocates of picture-taking with smartphones.

And while dedicated cameras have long had settings and modes to adjust the quality of the picture taken, smartphones have apps like Hipstamatic, Camera Bag and OldCamera that allow users to apply filters — black and white, sepia, vintage — to images, often just by poking a finger.

“The apps make things look so professional,” said Ms. Peterson, the graphic designer. “I just came back from a trip and my pictures of the Golden Gate Bridge look like a postcard. I don’t think my old camera could even have done something like that.”

Glyn Evans, 42, from Yeovil, England, said, “The apps were a turning point for me.” Mr. Evans, who works in information technology and founded the Web site Iphoneography.com, dedicated to photography taken with Apple’s iPhone, added, “I have a camera, but it’s gathering dust.”

Mark Romanek, director of the coming film “Never Let Me Go” and an avid photographer, has also abandoned his point-and-shoot.

His Web site, markromanek.posterous.com, features his photography, all of which was taken with an iPhone and using camera apps like OldCamera. He likes the “lo-fi” quality to the images, but also likes always having his camera at hand.

“When a camera of this type is always in your pocket,” he wrote via e-mail, “every moment seems like a potential photo-op.”

Follow Yahoo! Finance on Twitter; become a fan on Facebook.

Homeslice · 12-08-2010, 05:21 PM

Hmm, nice. I like the rounded corners. Looks slimmer than the Panasonics.

Rangerscott · 12-08-2010, 06:40 PM

I ordered a camera. Should be in next week.

EpyonXero · 12-08-2010, 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rangerscott

I ordered a camera. Should be in next week.

What did you get?

Rangerscott · 12-08-2010, 11:54 PM

Youll see next week. I'm sure its a piece of shit by TWF standards.

Amber Lamps · 12-09-2010, 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rangerscott

Youll see next week. I'm sure its a piece of shit by TWF standards.

Aw don't feel bad, I'm guessing that my gf got me a p&s for Christmas to replace the one she lost at the Gap. Most likely a Samsung dual screen job... I'll never use it, just like the Sony that was lost.

Mudpuppy · 12-10-2010, 11:40 AM

very nice rig... that 75-300mm is a big plus especially like say at the track when you want to get some close up shots but you can't get close up.. i get decent shots with the 55-200mm but i would definitely like to extend it to 300mm.. and I apologize I was confused - I posted the world's best P&S and you were saying a230 which I assumed was the same thing as I didn't memorize the p&s model.. two totally different things..

Amber Lamps · 12-10-2010, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mudpuppy

very nice rig... that 75-300mm is a big plus especially like say at the track when you want to get some close up shots but you can't get close up.. i get decent shots with the 55-200mm but i would definitely like to extend it to 300mm.. and I apologize I was confused - I posted the world's best P&S and you were saying a230 which I assumed was the same thing as I didn't memorize the p&s model.. two totally different things..

No problem Bro! Yea I like the 75-300mm but I want a 55-200mm!

I think the versatility would come in handy...

I screwed up and bought this bag...
http://www.caselogic.com/slr_camera_...modelid=136691
So now I feel like I need to fill it with STUFF!!!

Mudpuppy · 12-14-2010, 03:17 PM

Yeah I was totally confused.. That is awesome that you picked that Sony A230 up for less than $390.. great deal.. Post up some pictures from it.. I really don't know Sony or Canon too much.. I am heavy into Nikon and really my knowledge is very limited at that.. That backpack is sweet..

Now you say you want 55-200mm instead of 75-300? I have to ask why? If you have a kit lens like 18-55mm (which is pretty standard) you can cover the low range. If you want macro you can get a 10-24mm. In terms of the difference between 55-200 and 75-300 I would say stick with the 75-300. If you have 18-55 you aren't missing that much of a range - 60-70 is not worth losing 100mm of zoom. But now if you say you want 55-200mm f/2.8 then I understand wanting to change from 70-300mm f/4-5.6 to get better low light action shots like sports and the 55-200mm f/2.8 is probably the most common zoom lens.. But if you just switch to 55-200mm f/4-5.6 like I have then you are wasting your time and money as well as losing out on 100mm of zoom that is way better than getting an extra 20mm on the low end.. just my opinion..

check out this new shot i got with my 35mm prime lens - that is what you need to invest in - a 35mm or 50mm prime lens f/1.8 - inexpensive and super sharp and deadly in terms of pictures in any light.. only downfall is you have to manually frame the picture (meaning move your feet):

That and invest in a good shoe flash - which is what I used for that picture - I bounced it off the ceiling.. way more effective than any built in or pop up flash..

Amber Lamps · 12-14-2010, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mudpuppy

Yeah I was totally confused.. That is awesome that you picked that Sony A230 up for less than $390.. great deal.. Post up some pictures from it.. I really don't know Sony or Canon too much.. I am heavy into Nikon and really my knowledge is very limited at that.. That backpack is sweet..

Now you say you want 55-200mm instead of 75-300? I have to ask why? If you have a kit lens like 18-55mm (which is pretty standard) you can cover the low range. If you want macro you can get a 10-24mm. In terms of the difference between 55-200 and 75-300 I would say stick with the 75-300. If you have 18-55 you aren't missing that much of a range - 60-70 is not worth losing 100mm of zoom. But now if you say you want 55-200mm f/2.8 then I understand wanting to change from 70-300mm f/4-5.6 to get better low light action shots like sports and the 55-200mm f/2.8 is probably the most common zoom lens.. But if you just switch to 55-200mm f/4-5.6 like I have then you are wasting your time and money as well as losing out on 100mm of zoom that is way better than getting an extra 20mm on the low end.. just my opinion..

check out this new shot i got with my 35mm prime lens - that is what you need to invest in - a 35mm or 50mm prime lens f/1.8 - inexpensive and super sharp and deadly in terms of pictures in any light.. only downfall is you have to manually frame the picture (meaning move your feet):

That and invest in a good shoe flash - which is what I used for that picture - I bounced it off the ceiling.. way more effective than any built in or pop up flash..

I had a flash in my hand a few days ago...next on the list for sure. You may be right about the lens, my thinking revolves around not having to change lens. I'll get some pics soon...

12-07-2010, 09:48 PM	#1
Hydrant WERA Yellow Plate Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Cincinnati, Ohio Moto: 2003 Suzuki TL1000R, 2002 Honda CBR 600 F4i Posts: 660	On yahoo's front page. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/In-Sma...49571.html?x=0 In Smartphone Era, Point-and-Shoots Stay Home nytimes SAM GROBART, On Saturday December 4, 2010, 2:53 am EST Ariel Dunitz-Johnson, a 30-year-old illustrator in San Francisco, bought a point-and-shoot camera in May. But in July, she bought a smartphone, with a camera built in. Soon, whenever she wanted to take a picture, she found herself reaching for the smartphone, a Droid Incredible. She barely uses her point-and-shoot, a Panasonic DMC-LX3. “It’s much easier to share those pictures with my friends,” she explained, through social networks or e-mail. “With my point-and-shoot, I have to plug it into my computer and upload the photos. It’s just a few more steps than I want to take.” The point-and-shoot camera, which has been a part of American households since 1900, when George Eastman introduced the Kodak Brownie, is endangered. Like other single-use devices — the answering machine, the desktop calculator, the Rolodex — it is being shoved aside by a multipurpose device: the smartphone and its camera, which takes better snapshots with each new model. Cameras, mostly point-and-shoots, are still found in 82 percent of American households, according to the Consumer Electronics Association. But for many consumers, the point-and-shoot they have now may be the last they ever own as they favor the camera in their smartphone. It’s close at hand whenever a photo opportunity arises, and can be used to instantly e-mail and share pictures. And it has an expanding menu of photo apps, well beyond the landscape and panoramic settings on a point-and-shoot, that can be used to easily manipulate the images. Point-and-shoots do have certain advantages over smartphone cameras, including features like image stabilization and larger lenses and sensors. That does not matter to consumers like Emily Peterson, a 28-year-old graphic designer who lives in Brooklyn and who bought an iPhone 4 in July. “One day I just thought, ‘Wow, I never have my camera with me, when I used to carry it around all the time,’ ” she said. “It’s just one less thing for me to remember, one less thing to carry.” Geoffe Haney, a 44-year-old collections manager at a museum in Bay City, Mich., who also owns an iPhone 4, said the device was “my camera first, my phone second.” He added, “I have 40 photo apps on my iPhone — it’s like having 40 different cameras with you all the time.” The sales figures tell the story. While smartphone sales in the United States continue to skyrocket, unit sales of point-and-shoot cameras fell nearly 16 percent from 2008, according to the market research firm NPD Group. That corresponds to a decline of 24 percent in dollars, to $1.9 billion, from $2.4 billion. Even when the recession eased over the last year, sales of point-and-shoots fell. At the same time, sales of more powerful cameras like S.L.R.’s, with advanced features like interchangeable lenses and manual settings, have increased, by nearly 29 percent in dollars since 2009, according to NPD. Analysts say this suggests a split in the market, as casual shooters remain happy with the convenience of their smartphones, and dedicated enthusiasts seek out the more advanced cameras. And they predict that the point-and-shoot market will drop further over all. “The compact camera market is pretty stagnant,” said Christopher Chute, an analyst at the market researcher IDC. “The ubiquity of a 5- or 10-megapixel camera phone in your pocket is hard to overcome.” David C. Lee, the senior vice president at Nikon, acknowledged, “The market’s peaked a little.” Still, he said he was not worried. “It’s going to go up and down, but it will stay solid,” he said. Echoing other camera makers, he said the smartphone camera would encourage more picture-taking generally, leading to more demand for traditional cameras. But the smartphone has proved irresistibly easy to use, especially for people who exchange vast numbers of photos online. Facebook says that since the site was founded in 2004, its users have uploaded more than 50 billion photos, making that feature one of its most popular. Flickr, the photo-sharing site, says users add more than three million photos to its inventory every day. Yet Flickr’s data shows that the most popular camera among its 55 million users is a smartphone, Apple’s iPhone 3G. Not a single point-and-shoot makes it into its top five. The remaining spots are occupied by S.L.R.’s from Canon and Nikon. Cameras began showing up in phones almost a decade ago. For much of that time, image quality was akin to grainy shots of U.F.O.’s or Sasquatch. In the last few years, though, more powerful processors and better sensors have improved image quality to levels many consumers find acceptable. According to a February report from the camera industry group PMA, film cameras were not quite extinct until 2004, when most digital models took pictures with resolutions greater than four megapixels — allowing users to print high-quality images in conventional sizes. The report predicted that camera-phone use would “increase significantly” once those devices achieved a similar resolution. The iPhone, various Android models and phones on Microsoft’s new Windows Phone 7 operating system have already crossed that threshold. Even some professionals are advocates of picture-taking with smartphones. And while dedicated cameras have long had settings and modes to adjust the quality of the picture taken, smartphones have apps like Hipstamatic, Camera Bag and OldCamera that allow users to apply filters — black and white, sepia, vintage — to images, often just by poking a finger. “The apps make things look so professional,” said Ms. Peterson, the graphic designer. “I just came back from a trip and my pictures of the Golden Gate Bridge look like a postcard. I don’t think my old camera could even have done something like that.” Glyn Evans, 42, from Yeovil, England, said, “The apps were a turning point for me.” Mr. Evans, who works in information technology and founded the Web site Iphoneography.com, dedicated to photography taken with Apple’s iPhone, added, “I have a camera, but it’s gathering dust.” Mark Romanek, director of the coming film “Never Let Me Go” and an avid photographer, has also abandoned his point-and-shoot. His Web site, markromanek.posterous.com, features his photography, all of which was taken with an iPhone and using camera apps like OldCamera. He likes the “lo-fi” quality to the images, but also likes always having his camera at hand. “When a camera of this type is always in your pocket,” he wrote via e-mail, “every moment seems like a potential photo-op.” Follow Yahoo! Finance on Twitter; become a fan on Facebook. __________________

12-10-2010, 11:40 AM	#7
Mudpuppy South of Heaven Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Michigan Moto: 2006 Yamaha R1 50th Anniversary Edition Posts: 1,491	very nice rig... that 75-300mm is a big plus especially like say at the track when you want to get some close up shots but you can't get close up.. i get decent shots with the 55-200mm but i would definitely like to extend it to 300mm.. and I apologize I was confused - I posted the world's best P&S and you were saying a230 which I assumed was the same thing as I didn't memorize the p&s model.. two totally different things.. __________________ Mudpuppy Redline Superbike http://www.redlinesuperbike.com/ Learn about photography: ATP Members

12-14-2010, 03:17 PM	#9
Mudpuppy South of Heaven Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Michigan Moto: 2006 Yamaha R1 50th Anniversary Edition Posts: 1,491	Yeah I was totally confused.. That is awesome that you picked that Sony A230 up for less than $390.. great deal.. Post up some pictures from it.. I really don't know Sony or Canon too much.. I am heavy into Nikon and really my knowledge is very limited at that.. That backpack is sweet.. Now you say you want 55-200mm instead of 75-300? I have to ask why? If you have a kit lens like 18-55mm (which is pretty standard) you can cover the low range. If you want macro you can get a 10-24mm. In terms of the difference between 55-200 and 75-300 I would say stick with the 75-300. If you have 18-55 you aren't missing that much of a range - 60-70 is not worth losing 100mm of zoom. But now if you say you want 55-200mm f/2.8 then I understand wanting to change from 70-300mm f/4-5.6 to get better low light action shots like sports and the 55-200mm f/2.8 is probably the most common zoom lens.. But if you just switch to 55-200mm f/4-5.6 like I have then you are wasting your time and money as well as losing out on 100mm of zoom that is way better than getting an extra 20mm on the low end.. just my opinion.. check out this new shot i got with my 35mm prime lens - that is what you need to invest in - a 35mm or 50mm prime lens f/1.8 - inexpensive and super sharp and deadly in terms of pictures in any light.. only downfall is you have to manually frame the picture (meaning move your feet): That and invest in a good shoe flash - which is what I used for that picture - I bounced it off the ceiling.. way more effective than any built in or pop up flash.. __________________ Mudpuppy Redline Superbike http://www.redlinesuperbike.com/ Learn about photography: ATP Members

12-08-2010, 05:21 PM	#2
Homeslice Elitist Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: SF Bay Area Moto: Gix 750 Posts: 11,351	Hmm, nice. I like the rounded corners. Looks slimmer than the Panasonics.

12-08-2010, 06:40 PM	#3
Rangerscott Viff6N Mutated Warrior Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Texas Moto: '01 Honda VFR 800 & '09 ER-6N Posts: 8,704	I ordered a camera. Should be in next week.

12-08-2010, 11:54 PM	#5
Rangerscott Viff6N Mutated Warrior Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Texas Moto: '01 Honda VFR 800 & '09 ER-6N Posts: 8,704	Youll see next week. I'm sure its a piece of shit by TWF standards.