Mobile photography is becoming increasingly important in the professional world. It is a tool that provides versatility and a different view of the reality we capture. However, there is something that makes it a bit annoying: the useful life of the mobile.
Fixed and variable investments
We photographers have several investments around our professional development. In the past we have talked about how thinking when buying new equipment must have a strong time component during which it will be useful. Among these investments is the camera, accessories, computer, lenses and other elements that allow us to do our work.
In my opinion, the smartest investments are in lighting and lenses. Usually our lenses accompany us between camera generations (since we usually marry a brand) and while lights make big leaps between generations, their usefulness transcends decades of work.
Below these, cameras can last for years (I still use my 7D for some work) but there are times when we will need other equipment depending on the work we do. And the computer has the ability to live for several years, but needs intermediate updates.
Now the mobile has become a special tool for the entire photographic workflow. On the one hand, it is a production and time management tool due to the productive apps that are in it. On the other hand, the device has built-in cameras that produce great image quality; and these can be useful for covering professional jobs if they will not output beyond the screen or smaller-scale print formats.
Nevertheless, mobiles are not designed to live long, so the investment is not so profitable.
Designed to die
On average, high-end mobiles have an optimal life of 2 years. Starting in the third year, updates to the operating system and software reduce performance (as they are optimized for newer components). In the fifth or sixth year the mobile is no longer useful.
This inconvenience makes the purchase of a mobile dependent on being able to get a cheaper one that can be updated or on buying an expensive one that lasts a little more years. However, when the purchase decision is influenced by the smartphone’s photographic system, this investment is balanced by photographic quality.
For a safe investment, a high-end mobile like Apple or Samsung would be intuitive. Nevertheless, there are mid-range and low-end mobiles that have main systems with good configurations. Xiaomi, Oppo and Vivo have shown to have strong contenders in mobile photography at a more affordable price. But the mid-range are mobiles that have a much shorter life, so you have to update them more often.
This uncertainty of how long this investment will serve makes mobile photography is not so attractive from an economic point of view. Technological changes and the ease of becoming obsolete in a short time make it difficult to fully immerse yourself in practicing in these systems.
You all, What do you like or hate the most about mobile photography?