The transition the guy's talking about already has taken place. Take a look at the back pages of a magazine like Popular Photography. The number of ads in Pop Photo keeps diminishing and the mag is thinner every issue. And if you look at the lineup in one of the big camera equipment purveyors, say B&H, you see that point-and-shoots have nearly disappeared. Cell phones have taken over the point-and-shoot crowd almost completely.
But pro and semi-pro equipment is still going strong. Check the listing of full-frame bodies from Nikon, for instance. In short, the market is closing in toward where it used to be in, say, the sixties, when if you wanted to point and shoot you could buy a Kodak at the drugstore and then get your film developed and printed at the same drugstore. But if you wanted to do serious photography you went to the camera shop and bought a Leica or a 4 x 5 view camera, lenses, enlarger, developing tanks, trays, dryer, etc., etc.
Photography as an art form was an expensive proposition in the sixties and it still is and still will be for the foreseeable future. The difference is that nowadays most of the expense is in the rapid evolution of digital bodies and lenses instead of in post-processing and printing.
Yesterday I shot a portrait of a lady on her 103rd birthday. I seated her with a window slightly above and behind her to camera right and got a bystander to hold a Tri Grip reflector slightly low and camera left. I shot with a D800 and an 85mm f/1.4 lens. This kind of picture ain't gonna come from a cell phone any time soon, so relax, the still camera isn't going away in the lifetime of anybody on LuLa today.