6 ms·

As a long-time hobbyist photographer, I've had a lot of the same thoughts. Cell phone cameras are getting really good for the 90% use case. My new Samsung S20 U

As a long-time hobbyist photographer, I've had a lot of the same thoughts. Cell phone cameras are getting really good for the 90% use case. My new Samsung S20 Ultra almost feels like a 'real' camera in some situations and it's really cool to have that available in my pocket all the time. But its limitations are also constantly frustrating because there's a lot it can't do just because of physics. But one point I'd add - I also find it very frustrating how having an 'almost good enough' phone camera it makes it harder to justify bringing a real camera along to regular day-to-day activities. If your phone is good enough most of the time, you don't want to lug around an extra device unless you are specifically doing a photo shoot. But then when something interesting happens and you can't capture the photo you envision on your phone, it drives me crazy.

WalterBright 6y ago
> makes it harder to justify bringing a real camera along to regular day-to-day activities. Back in the film days, pretty much nobody lugged around a camera to regular activities, it was only brought out for special events and the trip to Disneyland. This persisted even with digital cameras. But the phone camera changed everything. The worst photos are the ones you never took because you didn't bring the camera.
- ponker 6y ago
  I kept my Olympus XA in my baggy jeans pocket almost all the time.
  - ghaff 6y ago
    I tended to have a camera with me for years too--though I really slowed down after I no longer had easy access to a B&W darkroom. But that wasn't the mainstream case. To Americans, the Japanese taking snapshots at every opportunity (including business meetings--OK we mostly don't do that) was notably odd behavior. Today, I'm sure just about any random nationality takes far more. I have lots of dedicated camera equipment but most of that is for event, travel, or dedicated photography of some sort. If I know I'm going to be on a trip where I'm going to just be taking random memory pictures, I mostly just bring my phone.
  - btrettel 6y ago
    What's the closest to a digital equivalent of the Olympus XA, i.e., a compact rangefinger, maybe with the same sort of clamshell design?
    - parshua 6y ago
      For a rangefinder style, there's the Fuji X100 series (the latest being X100V). They are not really pocketable though. But for a big sensor compact that is truly pocketable, nothing beats the Ricoh GR series with its APS-C sensor (the latest being the Ricoh GR III). The older model (GR II) can still be had for under $400, which is a screaming value.
      - frostburg 6y ago
        The Sony RX1R II and Leica Q2 are better, but rather expensive.
    - ghaff 6y ago
      Nothing that's a rangefinder AFAIK. There's something like a Fujifilm X-E3 with the pancake lens. So more like a Leica form factor than an Olympus XA. There are also the high-end P&Ss. But I haven't run across anything that gives you both the control and the pocketability of an Olympus XA. The FUJIFILM X100 probably comes closest to rangefinder translated to digital with a fixed lens. But a bit bigger again. And it's IMO a whole lot of money for a specialized camera.
    - rrrrrrrrrrrryan 6y ago
      Probably an Olympus XZ? I'm not sure if they ever made a successor to it, but still it's a great camera if you're cool not having a touchscreen.
    - ponker 6y ago
      Well any kind of random consumer point and shoot like a PowerShot will give you equivalent image quality to the XA in an even smaller package. But the design elegance and "coolness" of the XA you will not find in digital. The self-timer lever acts as a little "foot" that stabilizes the camera when you're resting it somewhere for a self-timer picture!
- ekianjo 6y ago
  There's also a category called pocket cameras these days.
  - slantyyz 6y ago
    The good ones are still somewhat expensive (i.e, Sony RX100 series) and they are chunky enough that you want or need bigger pockets.
    - frosted-flakes 6y ago
      I have the RX100 M5, and I love it[1]. I can fit it in my pocket if I'm wearing loose pants, but the lens sticks out 1 cm from the body and it's just a little bit too bulky to be comfortable, even in a jacket pocket. But I got a neck strap for it, and the camera is light enough that I can barely tell it's there. That's how I'll use it on a hiking trip, and sometimes I'll even take photos by looking down at the flip-up screen. [1] I don't love the menu-driven UI though, or the digital lens ring control. But however much of a compromise the pop-up digital viewfinder is, it works great in bright sunlight when the screen gets washed out, or when I need to hold the camera close to me for a steady shot.
      - slantyyz 6y ago
        I used to be big on viewfinders... until I had to get reading glasses. Even though my cameras with VFs have diopters, I find myself just looking over my regular glasses and touching the screen to focus and shoot.
    - ekianjo 6y ago
      > (i.e, Sony RX100 series) they have been around long time enough that you can easily buy used ones in good condition for 200 USD or less. (up to the 3rd version)
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - WalterBright 6y ago
bebna 6y ago
I had to buy a new phone this year to replace one. Because it was one of the smallest packages for what I wanted, I got myself a Samsung Note 10. (Srsly, why must phones now be that big, that the regular note series looks small?) Also I did had some small travel plans this year for every second weekend, where I wanted take my Pentax SLR out or buy myself a Sony Rx100 if space in the backbag runs out. (Moved to next year.) But now? I'm not sure. Yes, the dslr with its bigger sensor would be better suited to get more details in each pic and would be a much easier tool to use. But, there aren't really visible on your averaged sized print. And as long my trip isn't focused on getting pictures of animals, I don't need more reach than the short-/portrait- tele lens from the phone already provides. But I save myself massively on packing space, weight, theft prevention and stress. And the last point I think is the biggest deal in the end. If I travel to relax, I don't want to focus on getting the best out of my equipment to justify bringing it. (Or worse have to listen to others unasked opinion about my equipment choices.) A phone does the job and gets out of the way. Sending pics home from a dslr? I hope you got your notebook with you and 1-2 hours in your hotelroom. I'm already done on the phone...
- fock 6y ago
  > Sending pics home from a dslr? I hope you got your notebook with you and 1-2 hours in your hotelroom. I'm already done on the phone... not sure if you ever had a modern camera (e.g. <5 y.o.), but with my Canons the hotel room is still nice (because somehow most cams don't spit out 2MB 24megapixel images strangely), yet sharing is supereasy with an android phone. start the app, hit the transfee button on the cam, do a NFC-bump, download. Granted this is not suuper fast (mainly because the images are large and getting 20MB+ transfer on portable device Wifi is a quite recent thing), but it works as convenient as 2 devices not mandatorily linked will work togetherm
  - gen3 6y ago
    The workflow to download photos is exactly the same on my Sony A6000 on iOS. You have the ability to send individual photos, or a group (like all the photos from a particular day). Moving them on the phone is nice because you can then open them up in something like Lightroom mobile, along with being able to see everything on a nice high resolution screen.

WalterBright 6y ago

> makes it harder to justify bringing a real camera along to regular day-to-day activities. Back in the film days, pretty much nobody lugged around a camera to regular activities, it was only brought out for special events and the trip to Disneyland. This persisted even with digital cameras. But the phone camera changed everything. The worst photos are the ones you never took because you didn't bring the camera.

ponker 6y ago
I kept my Olympus XA in my baggy jeans pocket almost all the time.
- ghaff 6y ago
  I tended to have a camera with me for years too--though I really slowed down after I no longer had easy access to a B&W darkroom. But that wasn't the mainstream case. To Americans, the Japanese taking snapshots at every opportunity (including business meetings--OK we mostly don't do that) was notably odd behavior. Today, I'm sure just about any random nationality takes far more. I have lots of dedicated camera equipment but most of that is for event, travel, or dedicated photography of some sort. If I know I'm going to be on a trip where I'm going to just be taking random memory pictures, I mostly just bring my phone.
- btrettel 6y ago
  What's the closest to a digital equivalent of the Olympus XA, i.e., a compact rangefinger, maybe with the same sort of clamshell design?
  - parshua 6y ago
    For a rangefinder style, there's the Fuji X100 series (the latest being X100V). They are not really pocketable though. But for a big sensor compact that is truly pocketable, nothing beats the Ricoh GR series with its APS-C sensor (the latest being the Ricoh GR III). The older model (GR II) can still be had for under $400, which is a screaming value.
    - frostburg 6y ago
      The Sony RX1R II and Leica Q2 are better, but rather expensive.
  - ghaff 6y ago
    Nothing that's a rangefinder AFAIK. There's something like a Fujifilm X-E3 with the pancake lens. So more like a Leica form factor than an Olympus XA. There are also the high-end P&Ss. But I haven't run across anything that gives you both the control and the pocketability of an Olympus XA. The FUJIFILM X100 probably comes closest to rangefinder translated to digital with a fixed lens. But a bit bigger again. And it's IMO a whole lot of money for a specialized camera.
  - rrrrrrrrrrrryan 6y ago
    Probably an Olympus XZ? I'm not sure if they ever made a successor to it, but still it's a great camera if you're cool not having a touchscreen.
  - ponker 6y ago
    Well any kind of random consumer point and shoot like a PowerShot will give you equivalent image quality to the XA in an even smaller package. But the design elegance and "coolness" of the XA you will not find in digital. The self-timer lever acts as a little "foot" that stabilizes the camera when you're resting it somewhere for a self-timer picture!
ekianjo 6y ago
There's also a category called pocket cameras these days.
- slantyyz 6y ago
  The good ones are still somewhat expensive (i.e, Sony RX100 series) and they are chunky enough that you want or need bigger pockets.
  - frosted-flakes 6y ago
    I have the RX100 M5, and I love it[1]. I can fit it in my pocket if I'm wearing loose pants, but the lens sticks out 1 cm from the body and it's just a little bit too bulky to be comfortable, even in a jacket pocket. But I got a neck strap for it, and the camera is light enough that I can barely tell it's there. That's how I'll use it on a hiking trip, and sometimes I'll even take photos by looking down at the flip-up screen. [1] I don't love the menu-driven UI though, or the digital lens ring control. But however much of a compromise the pop-up digital viewfinder is, it works great in bright sunlight when the screen gets washed out, or when I need to hold the camera close to me for a steady shot.
    - slantyyz 6y ago
      I used to be big on viewfinders... until I had to get reading glasses. Even though my cameras with VFs have diopters, I find myself just looking over my regular glasses and touching the screen to focus and shoot.
  - ekianjo 6y ago
    > (i.e, Sony RX100 series) they have been around long time enough that you can easily buy used ones in good condition for 200 USD or less. (up to the 3rd version)
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- WalterBright 6y ago

bebna 6y ago

I had to buy a new phone this year to replace one. Because it was one of the smallest packages for what I wanted, I got myself a Samsung Note 10. (Srsly, why must phones now be that big, that the regular note series looks small?) Also I did had some small travel plans this year for every second weekend, where I wanted take my Pentax SLR out or buy myself a Sony Rx100 if space in the backbag runs out. (Moved to next year.) But now? I'm not sure. Yes, the dslr with its bigger sensor would be better suited to get more details in each pic and would be a much easier tool to use. But, there aren't really visible on your averaged sized print. And as long my trip isn't focused on getting pictures of animals, I don't need more reach than the short-/portrait- tele lens from the phone already provides. But I save myself massively on packing space, weight, theft prevention and stress. And the last point I think is the biggest deal in the end. If I travel to relax, I don't want to focus on getting the best out of my equipment to justify bringing it. (Or worse have to listen to others unasked opinion about my equipment choices.) A phone does the job and gets out of the way. Sending pics home from a dslr? I hope you got your notebook with you and 1-2 hours in your hotelroom. I'm already done on the phone...

fock 6y ago
> Sending pics home from a dslr? I hope you got your notebook with you and 1-2 hours in your hotelroom. I'm already done on the phone... not sure if you ever had a modern camera (e.g. <5 y.o.), but with my Canons the hotel room is still nice (because somehow most cams don't spit out 2MB 24megapixel images strangely), yet sharing is supereasy with an android phone. start the app, hit the transfee button on the cam, do a NFC-bump, download. Granted this is not suuper fast (mainly because the images are large and getting 20MB+ transfer on portable device Wifi is a quite recent thing), but it works as convenient as 2 devices not mandatorily linked will work togetherm
- gen3 6y ago
  The workflow to download photos is exactly the same on my Sony A6000 on iOS. You have the ability to send individual photos, or a group (like all the photos from a particular day). Moving them on the phone is nice because you can then open them up in something like Lightroom mobile, along with being able to see everything on a nice high resolution screen.