# Future Who needs a 1dxii or 7diii?, Why Photo Cameras could become obsolete



## Apop (Nov 5, 2013)

So a bit dreamy today and thinking about the future
Not in the near future, but it could be closer then I think ( the point where it might be worth switching(for me) has just arrived) Btw (It's meant for sports/wildlife rather than portrait shooters!!!!)

When blackmagic announced the 4k production camera I got a feeling this could be the beginning of the end.

A 1dx is one of the best sports cameras around , giving 18mpix images.
The still images of the blackmagic 4k are 8mpix, RAW, now when you keep in mind that it has a 1.7 crop factor and apply this to the original image of the 1dx you are left with a 6.2mp image.
No doubt the raw file from the 1dx will look a lot better (but we're dreaming, and not thinking about iso etc)

The black magic shoots 24 fps, 8mp RAW photos without filling the buffer.
It does not have the auto focus system, but still I have read many photographers say 8mp is more than enough for them! 

Sure with increasing processing power and cheaper memory etc, one could argue that photo cameras will always have an edge in resolution over the video cameras.
But to what point will it be useful?

When we arrive at a point where the resolution will be so great that the glass cannot cope with it, or that the ''need'' is no longer there ( Imagine in 10 years, 200-300 MP photos, it's great off course, but 8k (7680×4320 = 33,177,600 pixels) @ 120 FPS ( 8.4 gigabyte/second uncompressed )
I can also live with 24 fps, which should be around 1.6-1.7 gigabyte/second
Currently read speed max out @ 500MB/s for ssd disks?

Will be much more useful to me than a 300mp camera which can do 10fps with mirror box.
(750mb/photo @ 10fps = 7.5 gigabyte/second)
Not sure how they are going to keep the cf format alive


Btw if Computer speed or storage is an issues, you can always delete 99.99999% of the footage and keep the 1 second with 24 frames which has the picture/moment located that you need 

Impractical atm? yes, but in 5-10-15 years? who knows .... DSLR's need to reinvent the CF card, and Maybe lose that mirror 

So why not film everything in raw ? and enjoy the photos it also takes while doing so 

What do you think?


----------



## BozillaNZ (Nov 6, 2013)

Same reason as why don't everyone living in a big temple and drive tank to work, money aside it is wasteful.


----------



## kaihp (Nov 6, 2013)

Apop said:


> DSLR's need to reinvent the CF card


The CF card has already been reinvented. It's called CFast and is based on the SATA standards (instead of the PATA/ATAPI/IDE interface).


----------



## duydaniel (Nov 6, 2013)

You know what the future is like?
You go anywhere with google map in real time and take screenshot

future resolution will be as high as D800 and you can pause, rotate, zoom in/out right at your computer.
Bye Canon/Nikon


----------



## Grumbaki (Nov 6, 2013)

Apop said:


> So why not film everything in raw ? and enjoy the photos it also takes while doing so



Because the quest for the moment is part of the pleasure of photography as a hobby.

Your hypothesis is like saying "why film something, just ask the footage of the local CCTV"


----------



## Niki (Nov 6, 2013)

future is the past…shoot on film...


----------



## ScottyP (Nov 6, 2013)

A movie camera would be a little pointless for non-moving subjects, don't you think? Unless you want 100 shot HDR for your landscapes, architecture, travel shots. 

You would still want great glass. How many affordable cinema cameras are out there, and do you find their size and form factor convenient?


----------



## danski0224 (Nov 6, 2013)

One thing I have noticed about video is that it takes up a $hitload of memory space.

The other is that processing it takes a lot of time.

But, no one knows what the future holds. I remember acoustic modems and tales of spending all night to download files from a message board.


----------



## docsmith (Nov 6, 2013)

I imagine a camera such as you describe will be available someday. In fact, I suspect it will be named the Canon 1DCIII or 1DCIV. 

But it will be part of the market and not the entire market. Still cameras will be in that market as well. My guess is that there are some extreme high MP bodies, but for most people, they max out at 28-30 MP. Then, they get less expensive.

Think about calculators. They used to be specialty high end devices. But they couldn't really be made better, but were still very useful. So they got cheaper. Sadly, both in price and quality. Or computers. The first computer my family bought in ~1988 was $4,000. Now, you get a vastly more capable unit for less than $500.

I don't expect the 1D line to ever be that inexpensive, but I can see it coming down from where it is now. I hope we find a happy medium between price and quality.


----------



## Lijpzo (Nov 6, 2013)

Din't canon have a prototype of this future like camera about a year ago?


edit: http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/06/canon-wonder-camera-concept-promises-single-lens-perfection-vid/


----------



## Vossie (Nov 6, 2013)

http://www.untitledfilms.com.au/blog/tag/canon-1dc/


----------



## DaveMiko (Nov 6, 2013)

Just because, from what I understand, you can't afford to get the mighty 1DX or a decent 7D or the 5D Mark III, doesn't mean your words must be taken at face value.


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 6, 2013)

Future will be smaller, faster and better in IQ...


----------



## distant.star (Nov 6, 2013)

danski0224 said:


> But, no one knows what the future holds. I remember acoustic modems and tales of spending all night to download files from a message board.



I come from that world of acoustic coupler modems and the excitement of watching text come across the Internet one line at a time. Today, much different computers and that same basic Internet now allow me to pop The Daily Show on my screen and watch it while I eat dinner. While I shouldn't be I'm always surprised at how trapped people are by the perceived limitations of current reality.

Maybe the most important thing old Henry Ford ever said is: "Everything is possible." Not "anything," but EVERYTHING.

The OP opines about a future I've envisioned and posted about here. If we don't lose the planet to greed, it's entirely possible that 50 years from now, people with still picture cameras will be looked upon as quaint and even eccentric -- sort of how we see 35mm film photographers today. That future will see the printed picture on the wall replaced by a type of electronic screen that shows whatever image a provider or user may wish to see at the moment. Sadly, a walk down a corporate hallway may mean a trip through propaganda alley.

That perhaps distant future will see "photography" done as the OP suggests -- still selections from video. Shoot all day long and dump the files into a computer equipped with artistic-aware software that uses setting you've provided. In 10 minutes a selection of the best still images from the day are ready for review. Then you can upload the finest images to all the "screens" in your universe.

Imagine the best picture you take in a year -- and you have 100 such images every day. The world has become a Las Vegas strip of screens everywhere displaying images of that quality all the time. They're in your home, your workplace, your car, your aircraft, your wrist, perhaps (and I hope not) in the skies. Sometimes a person in that world will look back in wonder at the "pictures" we thought were so special (and that we worked so hard to create!). It will be like when I look now at an old B & W print from 1913 on the beach at Atlantic City; wonderment at the way things were and how different they are now.

Well, operators are standing by -- and a free set of steak knives with every order!!! Call now!!!!!


----------



## TexPhoto (Nov 6, 2013)

DSLRs are not needed now. Just like computers are not needed now that we have tablets. PCs/Macs Dead!

Seriously, will technology advance? Of course. Will we stop needing DSLRs? Some people will.


----------



## David_in_Seattle (Nov 6, 2013)

You're forgetting that capturing a photo vs. recording a video are two different things. From what I've read on the Black Magic's 4k camera, it can only record video. Sure, you can pull a still frame from a video clip but the shutter speed, aperture, and ISO settings will be far more limited compared to simply capturing a photo to begin with. Example, video recorded at 24 fps cannot have a shutter speed slower than 1/24, thereby eliminating the possibility of capturing a longer exposure.

DSLRs, mirrorless cameras, and many compact cameras have had the ability to capture a photo or record a video for years now. The limitation I stated above is the very reason why the two will naturally remain two distinct activities. Yes, there will be overlap such as time lapse photography converted to video or pulling a still frame from a video clip, but only working within the confines within this overlap will prove to be very limiting.


----------

