this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2026
372 points (99.5% liked)
Technology
87612 readers
4464 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I can see a promising market for 'dumb' point-and-shoot digital cameras reemerging.
Doesn't automatically upload your pictures to train AI on, no internet-based privacy risks whatsoever
No AI nanny telling you that your pictures are too naughty
Never needs updates, can never be enshittified by new updates
No risk of the government getting their hands on your pictures, unless they physically confiscate the device
Can never be hacked without physical access to the camera
Doesn't listen to you or watch you or otherwise spy on you
Most models have easy to change user-replaceable batteries
Most models are compatible with SD cards for easily upgradeable storage
Can take advantage of a larger lens and more adjustable focus/zoom to take better pictures (Even a relatively cheap digital camera could potentially take better pictures than the ultimate flagship phones that cost 4-figures.)
Those kinds of cameras didnt disappear.
But Canon already enshittifies their bodies some, with links to the canon.cloud subscriptions in-camera (which is a front for RAW training if you read the ToS), a subscription for linked editing software, and some feature crippling to push them.
There is actually healthy competition in the space, though.
It has already reemerged as part of the retro trend among young people.
Instant photo cameras are pretty popular
I still use my Canon SD1000. 20 years and it's still going! The resolution is lower (only 7.1MP), but the photos still look really nice. And that was a relatively cheap camera for the time.
It has a resolution advantage with a long zoom, or going very wide.
I went on vacation with an ancient Rebel XS and a 50-250 lens, and 250mm shots are still better than the iPhone 17 Pro.
Or you could use an open camera app
For now. Until Google says those apps aren't "verified" or whatever and blacklists them. Until the next Android update makes it scan and upload every photo file anywhere on the device, not just ones used or made in particular apps.
We should consider divorcing Goggle from Android via something like GrapheneOS or /e/OS.
Yeah, I can tell that since I do tests for Amazon (Amazon Vine).
There is more and more camera being put to test, ranging for cheap bellow €100 ones to miniaturized keyring sized ones (with tiny screens).
I tested some of them (and have another one coming next week), the quality of the pictures are good, but the build quality of sub-100 ones are kinda bad (cheap plastics, no optic zoom, no hardpoints for better lenses, sd cards smaller than their advertised size)
Eh, they are alright. Issue is they dont get better than smartphones until the cameras are expensive.
Anyone who has paid over $500 for a phone, if they did it for the camera, they wasted money. For the same amount of money one can get an old second hand pro camera and a more basic phone.
The camera will be infinitely better and the smartphone will still smartphone just fine.
Old "pro" cameras like full-frame SLRs are bulky though. That's not always ergonomic to have.
And honestly, modern phones/gadgets with a lofic sensor (like Xiaomi or Hisense now, Apple soon) are absolutely crazy. They blow the dynamic range and shadow noise of old full frame sensors out of the water, and give new ones a run for their money:
https://www.cined.com/dji-osmo-pocket-4p-lab-test-rolling-shutter-dynamic-range-and-exposure-latitude/
Don't get me wrong; you are preaching to the choir here. I love cameras. I am trading in my Canon and buying a Fuji or Panasonic ILC soon.
But I think its a mistake to underestimate modern smartphones based on how bad older phones were. The sensors have gotten big, their sensor tech is a few years ahead of dedicated cameras, and you can bypass the overprocessed look with 3rd party apps. That, and lofic is the biggest jump in sensor tech in a decade+, and its only coming to small sensor cameras for now.
Ricoh, Leica, Olympus. There are pro level compact alternatives. Ricoh's are almost as small than a smartphone while being more ergonomic to use and better featured. The reason there needs to be such technologies as LOFIC for tiny sensors is precisely to compensate the size and achieve what larger sensors already achieved decades ago by shear force of being larger. But you don't need to go that much larger, just a micro four thirds camera with mediocre glass from a decade ago already blows away anything that big tech put last year on flagship phone cameras.
Well each has its quirks. Leica is hilariously expensive. Ricoh is fixed lens, fixed focal length. I nearly got an OM-3 myself, but honestly it is big, and M43 lenses and sensors are starting to show their age.
I'd probably point the average person to an L10, an X-E5, an S9, or the A6700 with a pancake lens if they can swallow the price.
I think the S9 in particular is a glorious "smartphone replacement." Its a full frame ILC, its connectivity app is fantastic, yet with a pancake lens it is no bigger than an OM or Leica.
MFT is far from dead though. Their glass is top tier even in the plastic bodies. And the point of buying a second hand old cameras is to not have to swallow the price. For most people just trying to replace a smartphone camera, even a fixed lens is a massive improvement. There's a reason dedicated point and shoot like the PowerShot are coming back en force. I recently kit up with an old EM-1 and a pancake lens, and the thing is not only pro level features with good quality glass. All in all, it cost me less than $500 including postage. And though it won't fit in my pocket, it weighs almost nothing and is absolutely tiny for the power it packs.
I dunno. The flood of cheap 3rd party lenses (Viltrox airs, Sirui snipers, Thypoch 24-50, Tamron...) kinda put old M43 lenses to shame, for less money, while being smaller and built for bigger sensors.
Native OM lenses are expensive. Sync IS doesn't work with Panasonic.
I'm not sayings its a terrible mount like RF, but they are starting to lose the value and size advantage because there is so little R&D done for M43. You could get a much sharper image out of an old sony/nikon/fuji body + a $150 Viltrox Air.
Yeah, then do that. My point is that it doesn't take a lot of money to surpass flagship smartphone cameras anymore. Plus Google is not obsessively looking at your dick pics that way.
...It will soon though. Thats what Im saying.
Current Xiaomis and Hisense, and the next iPhone, are gonna be straight up better than a $1800 OM-3, hand down. At least outside of the supertelephoto range. Loifc is a HUGE deal, it is coming to most smartphones, and OM's processing is stuck in 2015.
That's where my doubt lies. Is it really gonna be better than a pro doing exposure bracketing? Because my point is that you don't have to buy a brand new $1800 camera from last year. When a camera from a decade ago will excel that performance with only a tiny bit of practice and skill for a third of the price of a new phone. Phone cameras have gone a long way, but they are physically limited in ways that no new sensor can overcome. New material tech is not going to surpass basic light geometry.
Are 8 extra stops of performance going to justify a new AI riddled, surveillance and privacy nightmare device? When you can get 24, 30 or more stops of performance with a decade old tech. I don't think so. The average hobbyist who wants better technical specs for photography would be misled if they looked at new smartphones and not into the recent past of digital cameras. And stop obsessing over OM, that's a tangent on my comment and just my personal preference. A Sony, Canon or Fuji would fit just as well into the argument if that's the buyer's preference.
And that market will destroy itself because “investors” want MRR and so you’ll have to plug your camera into your computer so proprietary software can send the images to the cloud to get “processed” so you can actually view them. You’ll be thankful for the opportunity to pay $9.99USD for that.
You may come off as hyperbolic, but this is exactly what Canon is trying to do.
They already try to funnel users into a canon.cloud subscription with cloud editing features, and a DPP editing software subscription. Their HDR mode uses a weird curve that makes using anything but their software annoying. They made their crappy free webcam app subscription only, and neutered many cameras so that's the only option to use.
Not to speak of locking the RF mount out of third parties...
But to be fair, Canon is only doing that because they are #1 in marketshare, though. Panasonic, Fuji, OM aren't behaving so badly. And the Chinese pocket cam makers are rapidly catching up (though obviously they have their own enshittification issues).