4 ms·

For most people carrying DSLRs (e.g., Canon Rebels), an iPhone would yield better results. Most won't make use of post-processing, focal lengths, apertures that

For most people carrying DSLRs (e.g., Canon Rebels), an iPhone would yield better results. Most won't make use of post-processing, focal lengths, apertures that an interchangeable lens camera with high dynamic range provides. Phones have better in-camera image processing than a stock Rebel. I've stopped using my full-frame because it's heavy and good photography is a commodity and so easy. Maybe if I posted pictures on social media, I'd use it.

22c 5y ago
I've looked a few times into what it would cost for a "decent" camera that beats my smartphone, across a range of compacts through to entry level mirror-less, or even looking into what it would cost me to get some more lenses for an old 500D I have lying around. I've come to the same conclusions each time, that I'm better off sticking with the smart phone camera in terms of value for money, there's simply not enough to pull me back to the dedicated camera world, despite part of me really wanting to go back.
bscphil 5y ago
> Most won't make use of post-processing, focal lengths, apertures that an interchangeable lens camera with high dynamic range provides. On the other hand, as someone who does do extensive post-processing, I've moved to capturing raw images even on my phone. There are frequent occasions when I've found that this allowed me to get a much higher quality capture. I'm using a several years old Android, though, so YMMV. > I've stopped using my full-frame On some level it's really depressing to me to think about how much high quality equipment is just sitting in closets thanks to smartphones. I know I'll likely never be able to afford a full frame DSLR on my plausible future salaries (I'm not in the tech industry).
- ngokevin 5y ago
  RAW on phone is great. My reason for not using my full-frame less often is that posting photos on social media made me feel like a narcissist so I stopped. I didn't really have the passion to take and process photos just for the joy of it, I mostly was carrying it around during trips and outings.
hakfoo 5y ago
I suspect "good phone camera" is still quite unevenly distributed. My current phone (Umidigi F1) is decidedly mediocre; I suspect that, as much if not more than CPU, is a big place manufacturers show daylight between the $200 phone and the $1000 one. I tend to be suspicious how much that software and MIPS can compensate for optics and sensor size. I know a lot of the premium phones will augment the main sensor with, say, 5MP "macro" and "wide angle" sensors with more appropriate optics, but that feels like an admission they're not going to produce great results in those sections of their range. I'd sort of love to see a phone with a single uber-sensor (like the old Nokia 808 or Lumia 1020) and several lenses on some sort of steampunk-looking rotary assembly, or better, a screw mount of some sort, so you could approach the flexibility of an interchangeable-lens camera. I've seen the little aftermarket macro lenses you can clip onto a cameraphone, and the idea is right but the execution seems doomed to terrible results. I guess I'm weird-- I mostly want to take macro photos of models and invertebrates, rather than photos of humans, so what I want in a camera device is probably not what Joe Instagram wants.
- ngokevin 5y ago
  Yeah, my point is that most people that have do have high-end phones are better off with a smartphone than an entry-level camera with kit lens. But if you're doing macro or telephoto or anything else, yeah, a bigger sensor camera with lenses is 10x better for the capabilities.

22c 5y ago

I've looked a few times into what it would cost for a "decent" camera that beats my smartphone, across a range of compacts through to entry level mirror-less, or even looking into what it would cost me to get some more lenses for an old 500D I have lying around. I've come to the same conclusions each time, that I'm better off sticking with the smart phone camera in terms of value for money, there's simply not enough to pull me back to the dedicated camera world, despite part of me really wanting to go back.

bscphil 5y ago

> Most won't make use of post-processing, focal lengths, apertures that an interchangeable lens camera with high dynamic range provides. On the other hand, as someone who does do extensive post-processing, I've moved to capturing raw images even on my phone. There are frequent occasions when I've found that this allowed me to get a much higher quality capture. I'm using a several years old Android, though, so YMMV. > I've stopped using my full-frame On some level it's really depressing to me to think about how much high quality equipment is just sitting in closets thanks to smartphones. I know I'll likely never be able to afford a full frame DSLR on my plausible future salaries (I'm not in the tech industry).

ngokevin 5y ago
RAW on phone is great. My reason for not using my full-frame less often is that posting photos on social media made me feel like a narcissist so I stopped. I didn't really have the passion to take and process photos just for the joy of it, I mostly was carrying it around during trips and outings.

hakfoo 5y ago

I suspect "good phone camera" is still quite unevenly distributed. My current phone (Umidigi F1) is decidedly mediocre; I suspect that, as much if not more than CPU, is a big place manufacturers show daylight between the $200 phone and the $1000 one. I tend to be suspicious how much that software and MIPS can compensate for optics and sensor size. I know a lot of the premium phones will augment the main sensor with, say, 5MP "macro" and "wide angle" sensors with more appropriate optics, but that feels like an admission they're not going to produce great results in those sections of their range. I'd sort of love to see a phone with a single uber-sensor (like the old Nokia 808 or Lumia 1020) and several lenses on some sort of steampunk-looking rotary assembly, or better, a screw mount of some sort, so you could approach the flexibility of an interchangeable-lens camera. I've seen the little aftermarket macro lenses you can clip onto a cameraphone, and the idea is right but the execution seems doomed to terrible results. I guess I'm weird-- I mostly want to take macro photos of models and invertebrates, rather than photos of humans, so what I want in a camera device is probably not what Joe Instagram wants.

ngokevin 5y ago
Yeah, my point is that most people that have do have high-end phones are better off with a smartphone than an entry-level camera with kit lens. But if you're doing macro or telephoto or anything else, yeah, a bigger sensor camera with lenses is 10x better for the capabilities.