Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 02 Mar 2015 (Monday) 05:16
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Smartphone cameras already better than low end DSLR's

 
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,612 posts
Gallery: 146 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3793
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Mar 02, 2015 13:10 |  #31

es1 wrote in post #17456626 (external link)
Lollipop update gave RAW images to Android phones. Also full manual control is now on most good smartphones. So interchangeable lenses are basicly the only missing thing.

Really?

What about AI servo focus that is able to track focus on moving subjects?

What about the ability to zoom in to fill the frame with a far-away subject (optically, not digitally)?

What about the ability to manually select any of a number of focus points from different parts of the frame?

What about having an image be taken the instant you press the shutter button? I mean that the photo is captured with no perceptible lag time whatsoever.

What about the ability to fire off 10 RAW frames per second?

What about the ability to look thru an optical viewfinder?

All of the things I just asked about are absolutely essential parts of my photography, with the possible exception of the optical viewfinder. If all of these things can be done with a cell phone camera, then great - I will hop aboard the bandwagon! But I would be surprised if what you said - that the only thing missing are interchangeable lenses - is even close to being true. Then again, I don't know much of anything about cell phone cameras......perhaps they are far more advanced than I realize. But to me, they seem as crippling and limited as the current crop of mirrorless cameras, which are close to worthless for what I shoot and the way I shoot it.

So, my question is:
If I can't get the images you want with an advanced, top-of-the-line mirrorless camera system, then how in heck am I going to be able to get the images I want with a cell phone camera?


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Luckless
Goldmember
3,064 posts
Likes: 187
Joined Mar 2012
Location: PEI, Canada
     
Mar 02, 2015 13:12 |  #32

Wilt wrote in post #17456988 (external link)
Yahbut...here is a review, "Cumbersome though and you can't use it with a case on your phone."

I can see a few easily corrected design flaws in it, and it could easily be expanded to simply ship with its own case. (For starters I would have paid a little more for a lower profile connector, as it looks like they've just reused a standard length connector piece. That could be shaved down to a few mm rather than having to go that far out from the bottom edge of the phone.)


Canon EOS 7D | EF 28 f/1.8 | EF 85 f/1.8 | EF 70-200 f/4L | EF-S 17-55 | Sigma 150-500
Flickr: Real-Luckless (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sparky98
Goldmember
1,129 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 8
Joined Dec 2005
Location: East Texas
     
Mar 02, 2015 13:59 |  #33

I would say that smartphone cameras are better than DSLRs for social media for the majority of the population. How easy is it to take a picture, post it on the social media of one's choice, and then view the posting without ever putting the phone down? Most of the people that post to social media get adequate pictures from their phones so why would they need a dedicated camera? I have 3 daughters that are typical of young people these days. One has a Nikon bridge camera but rarely uses it to take pictures to post online. Another wanted to learn more about lighting so she could take better pictures of her daughter but when I gave her my old DSLR she never used it because it was just too big and not convenient. The other daughter has had a P&S at one time or another but kept losing or breaking them and now just uses her phone.

Today's smartphone cameras do an excellent job taking pictures for online postings and in the hands of the right photographer can rival a DSLR if the pictures are viewed online. I have never seen any prints from phone cameras so I can't make a comparison between them and DSLRs on print quality. However, for me, a phone camera or a P&S just can't do what a DSLR does so I will stick with the DSLR.


Joe
5DIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nathancarter
Cream of the Crop
5,474 posts
Gallery: 32 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 594
Joined Dec 2010
     
Mar 02, 2015 14:16 |  #34

Sparky98 wrote in post #17457069 (external link)
Today's smartphone cameras do an excellent job taking pictures for online postings and in the hands of the right photographer can rival a DSLR if the pictures are viewed online. I have never seen any prints from phone cameras so I can't make a comparison between them and DSLRs on print quality. However, for me, a phone camera or a P&S just can't do what a DSLR does so I will stick with the DSLR.


The bold part should be amended to say "in the hands of the right photographer, in good light, with stationary nearby subjects".


http://www.avidchick.c​om (external link) for business stuff
http://www.facebook.co​m/VictorVoyeur (external link) for fun stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,996 posts
Gallery: 542 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1613
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Mar 02, 2015 19:47 |  #35

Tom most of the current smart phones, will focus just about anywhere in the image you want. My current Note 3 and my previous Note, both had that feature. Of course the contrast detect focus was/is glacially slow, to actually do anything. No Ai Servo either. Considering it is a 4mm lens with a 35mm eqv of 31mm (crop factor 7.75) and the fact that it only ever seems to shoot at f/2/2 according to the exif data, it surprises me that it really needs to do much focusing at all.

I have to say though that the camera in my last three phones, an old Nokia N8, a Galaxy Note and a Note 3, all are hugely hugely superior to the results that I got from my Kodak Instamatic using 126 carts as a kid. Compared to 110 or even that horrid film disc system there is probably no comparison. The phone camera results are far better.

I have to say that I have just recentlydug out my old Olympus XA2, with A11 flash unit, and put batteries in, and it seems to work. I think I will run a roll of B&W film through it and try my hand at some street type photography. Zone focus 35mm f/3.5 D Zuiko lens should give good results for that type of shooting. One reason I bought that camera was that it is 35mm but is still pretty much the same size as a 20 pack of cigarettes. Which meant I could slip it unnoticed in my pocket when I was in the RAF. I have to say that the phone cams seem to offer results that are better than what I remember getting with that old XA2.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,545 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 3670
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Mar 02, 2015 20:21 |  #36

What a biased comparison. Why would they shoot it in RAW and do a straight conversion and not use the standard JPEG engine in camera, that alone would make it much more in line with the phones. Then they didn't at all take into account the far narrower DOF of the 650D, they kept cropping seemingly random areas of the frame, in a couple of them it was very clearly not where the focus was on the 650D.

Smart phone cameras have gotten great, there's no doubt about it, but they can't trump physics. A larger sensor is going to give you the better images almost without a doubt if the cameras are the same age.

As for a small camera to go everywhere with... I'd much rather take a small mirrorless body with me than rely on my smartphone's camera. My a7S goes with me nearly everywhere, and whenever I don't take it I take my EOS M instead.


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T // XF 18mm f2 // XF 35mm f1.4 // XF 60mm f2.4 // Rokinon 12mm f2 // Rokinon 21mm f1.4 // XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 // XF 55-200mm f3.5-4.8 // Rokinon 85mm f1.4 // Zhonghi Lensturbo ii // Various adapted MF lenses
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RDKirk
Adorama says I'm "packed."
Avatar
13,019 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 556
Joined May 2004
Location: USA
     
Mar 02, 2015 20:25 |  #37

For some reason, my own operation of a DSLR is much less error-prone than handling my Note 4 camera. I suspect it's because I don't have video-game trained digits.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Full ­ Auto ­ Shooter
Member
33 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 21
Joined Aug 2014
     
Mar 07, 2015 04:58 |  #38

I have a dslr and an iphone. I occasionally use the iphone to take photos but when I engage in my hobby of photography I take my trusty DSLR.

That's because it's better. A lot better for that matter and I like twiddling knobs and changing my auto-focus points. I might even change it from one-shot to ai servo who knows?

Technology is moving fast and yes smartphones are getting better and better but there is one thing you you'll never get with your latest iphone or Samsung galaxy.

A photographer!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Full ­ Auto ­ Shooter
Member
33 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 21
Joined Aug 2014
Post edited over 4 years ago by Full Auto Shooter.
     
Mar 07, 2015 05:03 |  #39

And canon 5d mark 3s don't slip out of your pocket and fall down the back of your settee either!

Plus you'd look a right knob-end with your iphone 6/7/8 hanging around your waist attached to your black rapid!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Preeb
Goldmember
Avatar
2,594 posts
Gallery: 99 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 583
Joined Sep 2011
Location: Logan County, CO
     
Mar 07, 2015 10:34 |  #40

Peoria Man wrote in post #17456667 (external link)
LOL My smartphone has glacial shutter lag, laughably bad performance in low light, and its only zoom is a digital zoom. But at least it fits in my pocket. :-|

Also, try to accurately compose a shot with the sun high and on the screen. I have to turn to shade the screen just to see my contact list, and in full sun even then it's hard to read, so properly composing a photograph becomes an exercise in futility. And I just get frustrated trying to shoot something as simple as my 4 month old puppy playing. I have some great shots of his butt.... except that when I pressed the shutter he was facing me. This with a Galaxy S5.

It is adequate for when I want to get quick shot to email to family or friends, or to post on Facebook, but no way I could use it as my primary photographic device. Even a good P&S like my wife's SX 50 isn't responsive enough for all of my uses.


Rick
6D Mark II - EF 17-40 f4 L -- EF 100mm f2.8 L IS Macro -- EF 70-200 f4 L IS w/1.4 II TC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Terry ­ McDaniel
Senior Member
Avatar
425 posts
Gallery: 190 photos
Likes: 912
Joined Sep 2014
Location: Lebanon, OK
     
Mar 07, 2015 11:37 |  #41

I have some excellent closeup shots of insects with my iPhone 5s that will rival any camera system. But anything farther away quality drops off in a hurry. This isn't my best iPhone closeup, but it's the only one I have on file in the phone.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,612 posts
Gallery: 146 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3793
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Mar 07, 2015 12:04 |  #42

Terry McDaniel wrote in post #17464773 (external link)
I have some excellent closeup shots of insects with my iPhone 5s that will rival any camera system.

But most of the really good work being done today with insects is being done with multiple-exposure focus stacking. In fact, focus stacking has become so prevalent that it is no longer easy to sell macro images that aren't focus-stacked. For the vast majority of true macro situations, focus-stacking results in much more marketable, compelling images. How do you produce such images with an iPhone?

I mean, you said that what you do with an iPhone rivals what can be done with any camera system. So, how in the world can you possibly rival images that have been created with extensive focus-stacking? Can iPhones be used in such a manner?

The guys producing today's best macro images are taking multiple exposures, where each exposure involves a change in focus of just a tiny fraction of a millimeter. I'm talking about the types of 30 or 40 exposure focus stacking images you see in N.G. and so forth. I would think that the extremely fine degree of focus control you need for such imagery would be next to impossible with an iPhone. Yet you say that what you do with your iPhone will rival these images.........how is that so?


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Terry ­ McDaniel
Senior Member
Avatar
425 posts
Gallery: 190 photos
Likes: 912
Joined Sep 2014
Location: Lebanon, OK
     
Mar 07, 2015 12:06 as a reply to  @ Tom Reichner's post |  #43

I reckon my brain wasn't focus stacking. :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Luckless
Goldmember
3,064 posts
Likes: 187
Joined Mar 2012
Location: PEI, Canada
     
Mar 07, 2015 12:31 |  #44

To be fair, it would be far easier to create a hand held automatic focus stacking camera out of a platform like a smart phone than it is out of a DSLR. They are far more open platforms than dedicated cameras, and have the number crunching power to do some basic on the fly motion tracking. One of the big questions is how quickly the phone could snap the next photo under custom software, and how the focus controls work.

Macro is actually one segment where I can see something like a smart phone actually giving larger 'better' cameras a real run for their money if paired with the right custom software and addons.


Canon EOS 7D | EF 28 f/1.8 | EF 85 f/1.8 | EF 70-200 f/4L | EF-S 17-55 | Sigma 150-500
Flickr: Real-Luckless (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pulsar123
Goldmember
2,139 posts
Gallery: 66 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 460
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Canada
     
Mar 09, 2015 17:42 |  #45

I think there is a simple - and fundamental - limitation to how good phone cameras can get: physical size. For the phone to be a phone, it cannot be too large. The "pocketable phone" definition has been stretched (the pun was intended) quite a bit recently, and still the gadgets are way too small to put a quality (large) sensor + a quality (large) lens, to make it on par even with crop DSLRs, leave alone FF.

You can polish all other phone camera aspects - decrease picture lag, introduce full manual controls, RAW processing, 10 fps RAW burst mode etc., but you cannot get away from the fundamental requirement that a camera system needs to be much larger than a cell phone to be comparable to DSLRs in terms of IQ under a wide range of conditions (not just in broad daylight).


6D, Tamron 24-70 f2.8 VC, 135L, 70-200 f4L, Laowa 15mm 1:1 macro, 50mm f1.8 STM, Samyang 8mm fisheye, home studio

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7,329 views & 9 likes for this thread
Smartphone cameras already better than low end DSLR's
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is CoachC
3237 guests, 326 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.