Journalist Forecasts the Death of the Digital Point-and-Shoot

Journalist Forecasts the Death of the Digital Point-and-Shoot

There’s an interesting and somewhat heated discussion going on over at LinkedIn: Herb Greenberg, senior stocks commentator and journalist at CNBC, is predicting the “Death of the Point-and-Shoot Digital Camera.”

“If there was ever any doubt, it is now very clear that the digital still camera (at least the point-and-click) is going the way of the Polaroid,” writes Greenberg. “My take: R.I.P.”

Greenberg bases this on Molex’s recent earnings, which manufactures electronic components and cables. Molex reports that they’re expecting lower profits for its fiscal third quarter, and CEO Martin Slark said it’s in part because “digital still cameras are clearly being impacted by increased smartphone sales with built-in camera.”

The camera market is usually a strong source of revenue for Molex, so its reported decrease in sales has Greenberg questioning the demise of the point-and-shoot.

Of course, the shift from consumer camera to smartphone is hardly new news. The New York Times did a story in 2010, “In Smartphone Era, Point-and-Shoots Stay Home,” and a study one year later found that the percentage of photos taken with a smartphone grew from 17% to 27% in 2011.

Still, that same study found that point-and-shoots with optical zoom greater than 10x were up 16% that same year. Meaning, if consumers are going to buy a camera, they’re looking for something significantly better than what’s in their cellphone.

As is the case with these kinds of posts, the community was ready to lash out at Greenberg for his stance, saying that cellphone cameras will never replace the DSLR. But take note, that’s not the argument. The argument is that the everyday hobbyist – not the professional – is shifting its buying habits.

Maybe this consumer buying trend is why we’re seeing manufacturers more aggressively market their higher-end point-and-shoots, like the new Sony RX-1 and the Fujifilm X100S? (Sell more expensive cameras at lower volume, in a space that can be defended from smartphone encroachment.) That being said, plenty of pros turn to their beloved point-and-shoot for personal work or just for fun. And even there we’re seeing an increased preference for the iPhone.

So it seems to be a recurring question: what do increasingly improved smartphone cameras mean for the industry – both the manufacturers and the people who buy their cameras?

Next Post:
Previous Post:
This article was written by
There are 7 comments for this article
  1. Pingback: Why My Next Camera Will be Mirrorless: Part 1 « Harry Lim's Photography Blog
  2. Pingback: A Little Bit Of Everything | CanonWatch CanonWatch
  3. Jason C at 1:05 pm

    Looking back at past digital photos, it’s astounding how little I remember those moments. I find myself trying to remember the events surrounding those moments, as opposed to judging the quality of the shot. To me, capturing the moment is by far the most important role of a camera, and nothing hinders your ability to do so than insisting on carrying a bulky DSLR camera with a 20s lead time from taking the lens cover off to starting up the camera. Smartphone gives you clicking power in 2s or less even. DSLR will always have a place for ‘intentional’ set-up shots… for any other role, it’s too much hassle.

  4. Mike tn at 9:12 pm

    I do not agree with the commenter who said “capturing the moment is by far the most important role of a camera”. That sounds like what a security camera does. You want a journal record of the ordinary. Why? For business purposes? Scholastic reasons? History was you favorite subject. YAWN~ (nods off to sleep). A moment that looks angelic or is sweet as your first taste of homemade bread would be much better. Sometimes the extra effort of “bulk” is just the suffering it takes to adventure on life in order to keep it fresh.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.