Why don't digital reflex camera's come with a mobile phone function?

Question

Surely this way Minolta and Olympus could beat Nokia and others out of the market, rather than be victimised? Isn't adding a phone function easier than making a proper camera?

true, but it that a bad thing?

Answer 1

Question> would not be easier to glue your phone to the camera?

The topic here is marketing. Samsung is the only real mobile phone producer wich experiments all this. For example, its new B600 phone has a 10 megapixel camera. Nokia is well behind with its N95 phone at 5 mpix as its top of the line.

AT the lattest CES there was one unknown Taiwan phone producer with a SLR GSM phone... but only one. but as you can imagine form the direction of all manufacturers, SLR phones are not even a remote priority.

Each year 600+ camera models reach the market, and only /at l;east this year/ 196 are SLRs. People like more the Point and Shoot or subcompacts under $300 than a real SLR with manual modes.

Mobiles in the other hand, are at its best now. In 2006 a BILLION cell phones were shipped. Growing at 28% yearly, why would you care to have a fine camera attached when all that most people do is take a picture at a party or concert_?

Even more, the US is not even current in its phone characteristics... just google DOMOCO, and you will see that phones are no brainers in America. *after more than 4 years finally a US co plans to intriduce it here( You dont buy a Coke, find a sex partner, bet at the horses, check your crops or watch the TV soap in your phone.. you make phone calls, do prehistoric number work, read some alphanumeric news readin, and watch almost frozen video on most mobiles. Smart for US is dumb for them in Asia and Orient. Try just Korea or Japan.. and you will see real communication.

Just try to imagine Olympus (not Konica/Minolta since it went out of photo business and Sony bought it and already has its Alpha DSLR/A100 incorporating its advantages) building facilities, expending in workforce and advertisement, and creating a culture of phones in its organigram.... billions to put at stake, current biz to set aside, and danger.... lots of it.... consumers to be convinced.. mmmm ... hard stuff in this era where firing thousands is the most common corporate new....,


Still... I like your idea... Ha!

Answer 2

Well, I have had a phone since I was 12 (15 now). I got a digital camera not long ago and I love it. I don't know about camera phones. Never had one but if you already have a cell phone and it works then why not get a digital camera? My vote is on the Digital camera!

Answer 3

The whole camera/phone thing is a marketing ploy. A camera is a camera, an phone a phone. The idea to mix 'n match the two was an idea dreamed up by marketing guys to get yet more money from kids who know no better - they had a perfectly serviceable mobile/cell phone but just had to get another with a camera/video function to look cool - and to invent 'happy slapping'. In the course of this yet more of the world's resources were used and more tat made available for landfill.

Answer 4

If I were shooting for a client, the last thing I would need is my camera to start ringing and vibrating in the middle of the shoot. Also, it would be awkward holding an SLR up to my ear not to mention looking like a dick. And I cant fit a slr in my pocket. Nothing to do with marketing etc. Just the stupidity of it.

Answer 5

I think it's just because mobile phones have a digital reflex camera function.