HTC Asks If You Can Tell Which Image Was Shot With a Smartphone

I got 4/10, not good lol

It's really hard to tell when the comparison pictures are completely different. I got 6/10 right.

They really should compare the same image taken with a phone and the equivalent focal length SLR. This is not a true comparison. How hard would it be to hire someone to do just that?

BTW 7/10

Unless you got 10/10 then it wasn't "easy" to tell them apart. And even then it may still have been a challenge. Some of you gloating about 7-8/10 are acting like you're some web image connoisseur. Sorry, but if was a cakewalk you'd be sitting on a perfect score. If you missed even one then the camera phone is doing quite well in the comparo.

That said, the test is bogus in just about every respect.

got 6/10 but as others have stated, the photos should be same, so that we can see the difference.

9 out of 10. I figured that all the cellphone shots would be up close shots due to the phone's camera lacking high resolution.

Indecent Exposure wrote in post #14647901
Unless you got 10/10 then it wasn't "easy" to tell them apart. And even then it may still have been a challenge. Some of you gloating about 7-8/10 are acting like you're some web image connoisseur. Sorry, but if was a cakewalk you'd be sitting on a perfect score. If you missed even one then the camera phone is doing quite well in the comparo.

That said, the test is bogus in just about every respect.

Wait...so you go through this whole thing...to say that the phone is doing quite well but in the end say the whole comparison is bogus? Doesn't this dismiss your notion that the phone is doing well?

I got 10 out of 10 right but it scored me 7 of 10. They cheat! Not that hard to do if you just look for distortion and DSLR depth of field.

I got 6/10. Rather than looking at the pictures, I just thought "If I were a marketing hack, how would I set up the comparisons to make the phone look good?" Worked well enough...

Just to play devil's advocate, if something like this was set up more appropriately (as in, not completely rigged and/or bogus) it would make an effective exercise in teaching folks that getting a DSLR is not straight up "upgrade" to a P&S or cameraphone. That in good light you can get really nice looking photos. Or that small-sensor devices can be handy for macro work without a lot of specialized equipment. And that the strength of a DSLR is in its specialization, such as advantages in low light or the separation of a shallow depth of field.

Of course, this would have to come from someone actually interested in being educational, and not some shill marketing ploy.

I got 4/10 so i can't tell

I have every confidence my phone is capable of producing great shots (at least for a small jpg), it is just much much harder to get what you want than with a DLSR.

Still, it was interesting thanks for posting.

7/10

Btw my nokia N95 beats the crap out of all the compact cameras i had ever owned.

8/10.

The whole marketing gimic of "this cell phone will replace your actual camera" mindset is becoming annoying. The only thing that sucks about it is unless you're in the know, most people believe it.

92GreenGT wrote in post #14739625
The whole marketing gimic of "this cell phone will replace your actual camera" mindset is becoming annoying. The only thing that sucks about it is unless you're in the know, most people believe it.

Cell phone cameras will almost certainly replace most P&S cameras as we know of them in the coming years. The people who will want "better" cameras will probably start to drive more sales in the MILC categories, with pros sticking with DSLRs, and I figure the superzoom bridge cameras will be safe for those that like that kind of thing.

But I don't see a lot of people going out to buy the cheaper compact P&S's like the Elph series when their cell can do the job just as well in most cases.