Why use a proper camera when you can do this with an iPhone

This is getting tricky now.

The above is a magnificent shot but it isn't taken with a Pentax. I initially criticised mobile/tablet image making machines and then conceded their advantages and I added to that by using a Samsung mobile phone to capture a beermat image (see "another pointless thread") because it was a far faster means of getting an image published than picking up a DSLR (or compact for that matter).

I could easily argue that all of the forgoing is illegal (i.e. not Pentax produced) and should be expunged but this is a genuine debate that all camera manufacturers should be examining. It doesn't require major research or development - it's already been done and is available. So why hasn't Pentax, Nikon, Canon et al produced a credit card sized convenience camera?

I suspect because very few of us would buy one. Why purchase something you already have embedded in your smartphone? To my knowledge the only major camera maker in the phone market is Sony and over the past few years they seem yo have been losing ground to the likes of Samsung.
I rarely use the camera on my Samsung smartphone, for me it feels an awkward way to capture images - but my young granddaughters are perfectly at ease with using a phone and find a camera difficult to use.

There's history here. Many years ago, before camera phones took over the world, lots of people were asking Pentax to produce a digital version of the Auto 110, a very small, pocketable, interchangeable lens film camera. They did. It was called the Pentax Q. And when it hit the market it was heavily criticized - sensor only 'compact camera' quality, no viewfinder, overpriced etc. etc.. Sales were not very good, except possibly in Japan. Development stopped after a few years, it wasn't a commercial success (although there are still people, me included, who like it a lot in spite of its limitations). Was it a profitable venture? Probably not. Money for product development is even tighter now than then. Spending it on something which would essentially be a pared-down, less functional version of something that most people already have in their pocket sounds like a loss-making, commercial flop to me and no doubt would to Ricoh/Pentax.

Same with my grandkids. But when my young grandson did take some photos with my K3iii (under close supervision!) he was amazed at how good they were compared with phone pictures. Does that mean he then thought that a DSLR was the way to go? Nope. Convenience always wins in the end.

Steve

The legality of this thread is unknown to me as a newbie, and if I’ve broken any forum rules I’ll concede to its deletion. However, for those in the know, they will always own an SLR or medium-format camera for serious work. That said, most of us also have modern mobile phones with half-decent cameras and technology for capturing those moments.

Those who only have a mobile phone will accept the image quality, often without realising how fantastic the same image could have been with a half-decent lens. As we all know, image quality ultimately comes down to the quality of the glass.

Having formerly owned a Pentax MX 35mm, as well as several Canon digital SLR bodies and numerous red-ring lenses, I’ve returned to Pentax with a K-3 Mark III for various reasons.

The idea of this thread is to generate conversation about how technology and miniature photography have progressed so dramatically. The major camera manufacturers won’t enter that market unless they can make mobile phones taboo and be guaranteed the ability to take over from Apple and Samsung—who themselves once displaced Nokia, Motorola, and BlackBerry.

Incidentally, this was taken with an iPhone (other brands are available). I’ve had it printed, framed and is hanging on my wall at home.




I’m the ugly one!

^^^^^ i can tell

Right.... for me.... a camera is a camera. Irrespective of what it is attached to. Doesn't matter if its a phone, a compact, a bridge, a box with a hole innit, a DSLR, mirrorless, full format, a fecking go pro!!!

They all do the same thing.... capture a moment in time.

But the crucial part is not the tool.... it's the person wielding that tool. You can have all the gear but if you do not have that creative spark.... the so called eye for it. Then the outcome will be what it is....

How true, but I may have broken the forum rules by quoting another device, however having been a semi professional photographer with two of those “fecking go pro!!!’s” bodies I can confirm it isn’t the camera but the photographer.

No you haven't....

I've talked about and posted images I have shot with a Canon, and also deep sky images shot with highly specialised astrophotography cameras. Altho I normally shove them in the general photography thread.

Under the forum category heading 'Your Photos': "Share pictures taken within the forum using Pentax cameras or lenses." By common consent, that includes the old Samsung clones of Pentax cameras and, since the Ricoh purchase of Pentax, Ricoh cameras.

There is a partner forum www.camerauser.online for all brands, run by the same folk who run this forum. Not surprisingly it even looks like this forum. I expect they would be delighted to have contributions from non-Pentax cameras/lenses . (Note to rick: do I get a late Xmas pressie for that blatant plug?? )

Steve

Don't worry in the least about my comment over 'legaility' - while valid (non Pentax) it is somewhat irrelevant in the face of the excellent debate that has been created. You have now proved convincingly that the camera is of little real consequence. It's what the user does with it that matters.

I expect/hope that the forum's moderator would use common sense and not be heavy handed as we dance on a Pentax pin head.

Cheers to all and the here's to 2026 may it bring you happiness!

It's fine to talk about other brands, it's not 2014 any more. If someone wants to talk Pentax... that's even better.