Max Power wrote:
I guess I dont understand what about smart phones would prevent people from upgrading DSLRs? What do they provide that would limit upgrades? I think a fair case could be made in your daughters cases that if they put away their DSLRs and favor their smart phones, they never would have, or needed to upgrade their DSLRs anyway.
Because 99% of the people wanting to take photos don't care about "good" photography; they just want to take pictures.
For example, my own brother and his family planned a trip to Europe last year. They all see me bringing my gear over to our folks' house when we have get-togethers. They all like the images I capture, take the time to process, touch-up, re-size, and then upload into Facebook, or send to my phone and text to them, personally.
So, before they left for Europe, I stressed to them they should really consider buying an actual camera, and at least a wide + standard (or maybe 1 zoom) just to preserve their memories as best they could.
They shopped and shopped ... but at the end of the day 1) my brother didn't want to spend another $1,000 -$2000 ... when he, his wife, and their 21 year old daughter already have $700 Galaxy smartphones, 2) they didn't want to have to learn how to use processing software, 3) NO ONE wanted to carry the extra weight around their neck, and 4) even pocket cameras canNOT share the images immediately to friends and family, as can their cell phones.
So, despite how much they like my images of the family and such, they don't want to go through all that trouble (and expense) themselves. As such, they didn't buy a single extra component ... and had a marvelous time taking photos with their cell phones, sharing to FB, and texting to their friends as they went along ... no "extra camera" required.
This exact same scenario is playing in the marketplace all over the world.
A camera is nothing but an extra expense, and an extra hassle, for the average consumer who is already equipped to take photos with their cell phones.
Max Power wrote:
I guess I dont understand what about smart phones would prevent people from upgrading DSLRs? What do they provide that would limit upgrades? I think a fair case could be made in your daughters cases that if they put away their DSLRs and favor their smart phones, they never would have, or needed to upgrade their DSLRs anyway.
Because 99% of the people wanting to take photos don't care about "good" photography; they just want to take pictures.
For example, my own brother and his family planned a trip to Europe last year. They all see me bringing my gear over to our folks' house when we have get-togethers. They all like the images I take the time to process, touch-up, re-size, and then upload into Facebook, or send to my phone and text to them, personally.
So, before they left for Europe, I stressed to them they should really consider buying an actual camera, and at least a wide + standard (or maybe 1 zoom) just to preserve their memories as best they could.
They shopped and shopped ... but at the end of the day 1) my brother didn't want to spend another $1,000 -$2000 ... when he, his wife, and their 21 year old daughter already have $700 Galaxy smartphones, 2) they didn't want to have to learn how to use processing software, 3) NO ONE wanted to carry the extra weight around their neck, and 4) even pocket cameras canNOT share the images immediately to friends and family, as can their cell phones.
So they didn't buy a single extra component ... and had a marvelous time taking photos with their cell phones, sharing to FB, and texting to their friends as they went along ... no "extra camera" required.
This exact same scenario is playing in the marketplace all over the world.
A camera is nothing but an extra expense, and an extra hassle, for the average consumer who is already equipped to take photos with their cell phones.
Max Power wrote:
I guess I dont understand what about smart phones would prevent people from upgrading DSLRs? What do they provide that would limit upgrades? I think a fair case could be made in your daughters cases that if they put away their DSLRs and favor their smart phones, they never would have, or needed to upgrade their DSLRs anyway.
Because 99% of the people wanting to take photos don't care about "good" photography; they just want to take pictures.
For example, my own brother and his family planned a trip to Europe last year. They all see me bringing my gear over to folks' house when we have get-togethers. They all like the images I take the time to process, touch-up, re-size, and then upload into Facebook, or send to my phone and text to them, personally.
So, before they left for Europe, I stressed to them they should really consider buying an actual camera, and at least a wide + standard (or maybe 1 zoom) just to preserve their memories as best they could.
They shopped and shopped ... but at the end of the day 1) my brother didn't want to spend another $1,000 -$2000 ... when he, his wife, and their 21 year old daughter already have $700 Galaxy smartphones, 2) they didn't want to have to learn how to use processing software, 3) NO ONE wanted to carry the extra weight around their neck, and 4) even pocket cameras canNOT share the images immediately to friends and family, as can their cell phones.
So they didn't buy a single extra component ... and had a marvelous time taking photos with their cell phones, sharing to FB, and texting to their friends as they went along ... no "extra camera" required.
This exact same scenario is playing in the marketplace all over the world.
A camera is nothing but an extra expense, and an extra hassle, for the average consumer who is already equipped to take photos with their cell phones.
Mar 01, 2017 at 11:04 PM
Previous versions of JohnK007's message #13943710 « Nikon's new strategy....sounds good to me... »
