Hacker News Reader

Comment by jug | Hacker News Reader

I feel for the compact camera manufacturers.

Smartphones killed the 2/3" sensor market. Now they've killed the 1" sensor market too. Micro 4/3 is stale with no major sensor advancements for years now. What's left, APS-C and up?

View on HN

I feel for all camera manufacturers. Why isn't there a Canon or Nikon or Sony cloud service where photos are sent to? Why haven't the big camera companies embraced computation in their cameras? Do DSLR bodies even have GPS capabilities for tagging photos?

It feels like there's no innovation in the camera space outside of Apple and Google.

I have an app on my mobile, where I can upload my pictures from the cam via Wifi and then share them if I feel the need. I'm fine with that and syncthing just get's away with the stuff.

And yeah, DSLR bodies do have GPS but since they have a kind of "real" GPS it's more expensive and more power hungry, hence it's not really mainstream. (and about your phone's GPS: just enable flight mode and try to use it. Enjoy!)

What makes you think they haven't embraced computation in their cameras?

https://www.sony-asia.com/microsite/assets/cyber-shot/2012h1...

Sony has the best chance of surviving IMHO. My #1 complaint about Sony is how awful they are at naming their stuff.

Leica will survive too, but mostly because they are beautiful things.

I posted about this in another thread here but I think it's basically about the larger sensor sizes causes ridiculous CPU demands. Consider how even on an iPhone 11 with a tiny sensor, you need a 7 nm CPU with dedicated AI circuitry to do it seamlessly and with maintained battery life. That feels like a mountain to climb for them, and then their sensor problem isn't even solved.

The iPhone 11 Pro can simultaneously record streams from all four cameras.

Those larger sensors have larger pixels and the CPU demands aren't going to be all that great.

My SonyAlpha can do all of that. Except for the gps, but the photos are tagged by the phone, so it's not an issue.

Do they do anything like Apple does with portrait mode where they black out all of the background?

Very few DSLR bodies have GPS capability built in. This is kind of stupid because integrating a modern GNSS receiver would have only a trivial impact on size, weight, cost, and battery life. The odd thing is that GPS is somewhat common on much cheaper compact cameras.

Some of DSLR manufacturers do offer fragile, awkward GPS accessories that you can plug in externally. And they generally provide some sort of geo-tagging feature in the software included with cameras.

GPS does have some limitations for photography because it takes a while to lock on and doesn't work indoors. Modern smartphones can achieve much better location accuracy due to using multiple means. So the ideal solution would probably be for the camera to obtain location data from the phone via Bluetooth.

> So the ideal solution would probably be for the camera to obtain location data from the phone via Bluetooth.

Which at least Nikon offers. But you have to have the paired device with you, leave the camera in the right mode, etc, etc.

It's the one thing I miss having upgraded from a D5300 to a D500. I loved the GPS and not having to rely on SnapBridge.

> So the ideal solution would probably be for the camera to obtain location data from the phone via Bluetooth.

My Olympus E-M10 (bought in 2014, and still going strong) does this with a companion phone app, and it's incredibly useful.

> GPS does have some limitations for photography because it takes a while to lock on

My Canon offers multiple GPS modes, including periodic sampling even in standby mode, and "always on", for this reason.

The problem is the older camera companies are camera hardware companies first. Software has eaten the world, and the old guard companies struggle in the software department. Sony is probably the best in this regard right now, but it's really a tallest person in the land of midgets. The Nikon software is atrociously bad, and the Sony's is just bad (I've only used Nikon and Sony).

I dream of Apple putting an A13 processor in a Nikon mirrorless body running iOS. Or, somehow attaching my Nikon glass to the end of my iPhone.

I haven't seen any innovation from Apple or Google because all they're doing is catching up to DSLRs which are still hundreds of miles ahead in picture quality. For amateur use, the iphone can certainly satisfy, or so can pretty much any camera made within the last 10 years.

Amateurs rarely benefit from pro grade equipment. Atleast photography is somewhat cheap as a hobby. I see friends buying expensive amps or guitars because so and so uses them and they end up still sounding the same. People who were buying all these cameras, were never photographers to begin with, they jsut wanted something to record their memories with, and a smartphone is amazing for that.

If you compare like to like, same sensor tech, same quality glass .. there is absolutely no way a tiny sensor can out-resolve or out-perform a larger sensor when it comes to image quality. There are other metrics where it can - for e.g. power consumption/heat output, ability to stabilize the sensor (smaller = easier), faster readout (generally easier on smaller sensors), etc.

> Amateurs rarely benefit from pro grade equipment. Atleast photography is somewhat cheap as a hobby. I see friends buying expensive amps or guitars because so and so uses them and they end up still sounding the same.

This doesn't follow. Photography can be astoundingly expensive as a hobby or otherwise. Lenses into the five digit reason, many in the thousands. You can buy expensive lenses, bodies, flashes, tripods etc. I don't think most people see photography as a cheap hobby, once you get beyond the bottom tier Point n Shoot, or entry level APS-C DSLR with kit lens.

I have those cameras and lenses you're referring to. I've sunk in over 20K over the past many years. I still think its inexpensive compared to what I see others doing. For e.g. Cars :) :)

Yeah, it's gotta be rough right now.

I hiked a mountain about a year ago with my fiance, and she begged me to lug her Nikon DSLR up so we could get some good photos.

The only one we printed? An 18x60" shot I got on my iPhone 6s in panorama mode. We could have (and would have liked to) go even larger but framing started becoming an issue.

The big advancement for micro 4/3 in the last two years has been image stabilization using lens and sensor working in tandem.

A more recent sensor advancement is dual native ISO in GH5s, which make the system's long downside -- low light performance, a much better proposition. I'm hoping this technology will find its way to cheaper offerings.

There are a few fast new lenses that have come out. I particularly like 25mm f/1.7 that's under $200, there are also a few ones on the higher end.

Another selling point for micro 4/3 that they can use virtually any vintage lens with a simple adapter.

Mirrorless cameras seem to be fleeing uphill towards larger sensors, with the Sony A7s and Fuji medium formats.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com