Warum werden die Fotoaparate immer teurer obwohl die Handys immer besser werden und Konkurenz machen?
In meinem Verwandtenkreis fotografieren und filmen die Leute nur noch mit Handys. Sie kämen niemals auf den Gedanken 1.000€ und mehr für eine Fotokamera aus zu geben. Wenn die Kameras günstiger wären würde sich der eine oder andere das schon überlegen, aber die werden immer teurer. Meine Fuji X-H2 hat auch 2.000€ ohne Objektiv gekostet. Damals habe ich für eine gescheite Spiegelreflex gerade mal 1.000 € Canon EOS 60D bezahlt und nochmals früher sogar nur 1.000 DM die Canon 50E. Wenn das soweite geht werden die bestimmt keine Fotoaparate mehr an den Mann bringen, finde ich. Da ist ein Umdenken angesagt!
(2 votes)
Loading...
You want to seriously compare the 60D that was launched in 2010 with today’s cameras in terms of technical possibilities? Do you want to go with a Gold 4 this year?
Maybe, probably not. In the flowering period of compacts etc., very many people bought a camera because there was no alternative and they just wanted to cnip (without appreciation!!). It was about the typical pictures of memories and less about the demanding photographing. When the smartphones came to the market and their photo features were getting better, this group turned around. She won’t return, either, because she doesn’t want to carry a 400-footed tele with her or want a fantastic bokeh.
That’s what the guy who owns more cameras than a dog has fleas? 😉
Quark with a lot of sauce. The nature photographers appreciate the modern technology with IBIS and a good eye focus. You don’t get them for free. Highly specialized technology can also be produced in this area only with comparatively small numbers of pieces, because it also requires a lot of competence from the operator in contrast to the smartphone.
Do you seriously want to say that with bird in fly a modern full format DSLM with around the 40 MP and a serial image speed of 20 frames per second can be smoothly overwhelmed by a smartphone while retaining all other features? Anyone who doesn’t need it will be very happy with a SM, but not the one who is walking in the areas where a smartphone can’t keep up because ergonomics does not allow it or its optics.
You continue to ignore the fact that the smartphones appear favorable because you pay the lion share of the apps and also the operating system with your data as a user. In addition, one should not forget that about 1.1 billion smartphones are put down each year.
But just take a picture of your handball games with a smartphone. Report us and show the photos taken.
For special applications, an expensive camera makes sense. For 90% of all other cases, a phone is enough!
Inflation, supply and demand.
In addition:
(1) Previously, it was much less installed in a mirror reflex, while today a half computer is in it.
2) Compare apples with pears
The enthusiasm model EOS 60D at the time in 2013 1099€ cost, that was then the purchase value as today 1399€.
Calculate inflation and purchasing power (financial-computer.net)
For this money today you will get the also enthusiast model EOS R10 (currently 888€, but entry price was 1369€, huch). You can’t really talk about “more expensive.”
Dear Uneternal, You are of course right, no question!
But if one has a hobby – and a bit of money on it – then he will also spend it for the respectively announced equipment. No matter what hobby! What the one his cam is to the other his model railway or his boat or sailplane! (And at the latest, the expensive camera is quite inexpensive.)
Don’t you think?
Well, no one says that. It is just as expensive today with inflation as it was then.
That’s true, of course! My Icarex 35 BM at the time (1975) cost 800 DM. About as much as today a Sony full format.
(Apparently even more, but at that time – to my confirmation – the camera dealer pulled my family coolly over the table, and who already asks a company who would rather have had the Canon AE1)
In the quality of the cell phone cameras, there is no need for cheap cameras anymore. There is no added value for the average hobby bar.
In the end, only professional photographers and very ambitious hobby photographers are still buying a “right” camera and the manufacturers have adapted to the demand and therefore offer for the most part only very high-quality cameras that also have their price.
That’s what I thought.
inflation, more expensive technology and of course just because handies have such good cameras is a photo camera now more what profies. Previously you have bought as normal citizen cameras for vacation and co. who buys a real camera today has an at least semi-professional incentive.
correct photo cameras make neutral images. the handie cameras work with a lot of software to make the images artificially better. but who wants to edit photos afterwards it needs as neutral as possible.
you also have RAW format what the least can handle and also here comes the problem of camera software.
you can change objectively and build real zoom.
and the most important: you can set dazzle, exposure and iso free to shoot the photo as you want.
a knife from ikea also cuts. but a chirug will still use a professional scalpel
I think a lot of those who didn’t get well 20 years ago have also bought clever photoaparate and only photographed with automatic. This should have changed, and these buyers have disappeared and just go to mobile phones. Even I wouldn’t buy a new photoaparat if I didn’t photograph handball. My old Canon EOS 60D would be enough for me.
That’s what I mean. everyone had a camera and they could afford a better one.
I wouldn’t get a new one. the 60d is enough for me.
I bought some Fujis after the Canon 60D because I was fascinated. I guess I’ve been exaggerating. What the…
As with food, it’s here too. The more powerful are pushing the other out of the market. The free market economy has neither heart nor compassion.
They’re not photographers, they’re hobbies.
The opposite is the case!
Why don’t you tell yourself (and you’re acquiring cameras): if I offer you a camera: But sweaty sensitivity – without getting out! Autofocus – safe and faster than you can watch!
For this purpose, a lens: f2,8/18-300mm without optical errors, no edge blurring and no aberrations even in the case of open diaphragm.
And then I tell you: 8,000,- €!
I’m sure you’d start saving right away! (If you need to save at all!)
It’s like a “hobby.” A person known to me has a motor yacht, in it a bronze sign with the words: “Our boat is a big hole in the water, into which we throw all our money”. And I think that’s a lot to say!
I wouldn’t want to spend more than 2,000€…I’ve done with the Fuji X-H2 now, and that’ll be my last investment in the next 20 years. After all, I am still photographing the Canon EOS 7 DMark II, which came on the market 10 years ago…and it is still being used.
Fine. And because I think you know a little by your questions, “I don’t believe you.”
If you’re offering the “Super Duper Handball Cam” you’re sleeping! 100%!
I’m just a hobby photographer and have been photographing handball for more than 30 years, yet only since 2009. The first photos were mega bad. Made with the Canon EOS 350D and a moderate lens. Then I bought an F2,8 aperture lens and they got a little better, but I didn’t have the eye to the photo yet. Until 2012 the photos were not much better, only then I bought the Canon EOS 60D, with which it was already much better and my timing to the photo also improved and I did not take photos with the automatic. that was a big jump forward. In 2016, I bought the Canon EOS 7 DMark II and the photos were significantly better again, especially with 10 pictures / second, but since then they have not really improved, but are satisfied with the result.
I’m not about the cam. I’m talking about my eye and better control of the cam. If I have an image I think of myself “Wow”, then I have been lucky and happy. Sometimes I succeed.
But I’m just an amateur and not a professional! In German: I don’t have to sell my pictures and can’t put the cam off the wheel.
Even better they can always become, yet you will hardly notice it with the eye. The other day, I took a birthday party with my Canon EOS 60D. The photos have become super sharp. My newer Fuji X-T2 wouldn’t have done that much better.
Hach, that’s nice. My pictures can get even better. Many are even simply “bad” and I simply delete them! But I’m practicing and I’m still bloody. Maybe I’ll be there someday.
My photos are no longer better. Better than 100%, they can’t be. …well, if you could get to shoot photos under ISO 1600 in the badly exposed hall, I would like to look at the new camera…that would be an option. I’m currently at ISO 6,400 to 8,000.
First of all, everything becomes more expensive!
Higher wages, high energy costs – the customer pays.
You can’t compare the tiny smartphone lens with the look of a mirror reflex camera.
Good and especially professional products are always expensive. But there is also a lot of engineering knowledge and filigree technology in it.
The megapixels are also just a number. However, the question is how many of these pixels still function properly after years or lead to image disturbances (pixel errors).
And then digital cameras still have the picture noise. With a good camera you can photograph in the sky at night and have a deep black image with the stars and planets. On the other hand, a smartphone photo only brings a mix of pixels of different grey tones and never a clear image of a sky body.
It starts with the moon – the largest object in the sky, that you can photograph without further protective measures. With an expensive camera and a real lens you get clear and detailed pictures. On the other hand, with the built-in digital zoom, it is at best possible that the moon 1/8 assumes the image surface and offers a color-match that reminds of a pancake rather than a celestial body.
You don’t seem to know that the least of you are interested in taking the moon or the star sky on your phone. Usually you do selfies or photograph people in a well-lit room or outdoor. For this, an expensive camera from €1,000 is no longer necessary, because this also creates a mid-range mobile phone for €300. It is clear to me that it is not suitable for all purposes, yet 90% of a mobile phone is completely enough.
You should become a seller in the China shop if you care about the quality and customer requirements.
Your question was where the different prices come from.
Then also accept a qualified answer!
I find the prices over 2,000€ totally exaggerated. Such cameras hardly find buyers… or become less and less. I’ve bought the Fuji X-H2 and I’m not going to buy it in the next 20 years.
In short, because the market is becoming increasingly smaller and the cost of development must be reduced again
In addition, you need to remember what the devices can do today
A motif recognition Ki or movies in 4K 60 that was unthinkable with a Sony Alpha 6400 that has 6700 and can
In addition, it has zb a rear exposed sensor that was previously reserved for sony’s full format cameras
And something like that
Never filmed with my camera and don’t need this pussy. I just want to take pictures and for that, the camera will be too expensive.
I fillme very often, by the way you don’t need 10 cameras to photograph
There are only 8,,,,
3 sold and one for sale on offer.
There are fewer cameras. The mass market and also the amateur entry class have broken away. The cameras that today represent the entry class were previously cameras for the upscale amateur and semi-professional. In addition, development costs must be distributed to less and less sold copies.
when I started, a simple analog slr (without AF, purely manual) cost almost a month’s income. In contrast, in comparison with today’s “foto machines” they act like a coal stove compared to a modern induction heart.
who puts high demands on his hobby, he also gives so much money that other people (with others or no hobby) shake over the head.
and who is pragmatic and knows that good cameras can hold decades, he buys for half a price a model that has just been replaced by an even better one.
and one more thing: even a 3000 € expensive camera is not a guarantee for good photos, but only for technically perfectly exposed. for good photos is still the person behind the searcher responsible.
I bet they don’t take pictures, but just stick somewhere on it and press. This is not a photograph, even if the final result is a photo. For such people, a camera is nothing, whether 2000 or 200. And the seriously photographing are buying such cameras that cost a little something. That’s why you have something sensible in your hands.
Demand decreases and consequently production at higher prices for the exotics of photography.
I think I’ll stop my purchases. I’m not ready to spend more than 2,000€. The Fuji X-H2 was the last. It has to last 20 years.
Because you can work with a reasonable camera quite differently than with a mobile camera.
They only take pictures, and I almost don’t see any difference.
Okay.