>>4378326Glass doesn't work for the crazy optical designs used in phones. Using plastic to make aspherics is common even in regular camera lenses to keep the size and weight down but mainly size for all the normies who can't stand their phone being over a third of an inch thick. 2030s will likely have a way more exotic technology. Metamaterials, tunable lenses, who knows. Even with a metalens, I'm sure having a bit more room to design with will always allow for a one inch thick point and shoot to do things a super thin smartphone can never do. On the other hand, camera manufacturers usually lagged behind the smartphone market for a lot of advanced features.
Still no 4k60 point and shoot, still no handheld stacking for low light or DR improvements, crappier stabilization, crappier displays, generally worse autofocus, no ultrawide (ZV-1 II sort of an exception although that camera has a lot of the same downsides as a smartphone). And although the smartphone interface fails in the rain as
>>4378324 said, you can pretty much use every smartphone in wet conditions whereas weatherproof point and shoots are the exception.
>>4378322Consumers whose needs were met by point and shoots switched over to phones a long time ago. Point and shoots do telephoto and flash better but that capability isn't worth it for most people.
