3 ms·
This is already the case. I rarely have a need to take out my SLR - it's just too bulky to have a reason for it, unless I'm going on an adventure where photogra
by t-writescode 6y ago
This is already the case. I rarely have a need to take out my SLR - it's just too bulky to have a reason for it, unless I'm going on an adventure where photography is one of the or the main purpose.
I've gone on hiking trips where my "challenge" was to only use my phone camera. It wasn't much of a challenge for landscapes.
- HenryBemis 6y agoMost people are like that. But when I go for a 'photowalk' I cannot imagine not using my (#1) DSLR (or my (#2) super-duper zoom point-and-shoot camera). Phone (imho) is for quick and dirty, not for a 'it's time to do proper photography'.
- dingaling 6y ago> It wasn't much of a challenge for landscapes. Well if you collapse the problem space to a single point that corresponds to a phone's standard field of view, then it won't be a problem... But what if you wanted to catch a photo of a rare bird in flight at 500mm equivalent, or a surfer caught at 1/4000th of a second?
- t-writescode 6y agoBird-watching and action photography are both niche activities, I think, yes? :)