4 ms·

I forget which photographer/camera blogger/reviewer wrote this many years ago, but it has stuck with me: "the best camera is the one you have with you" His poi

by RayVR 4y ago

I forget which photographer/camera blogger/reviewer wrote this many years ago, but it has stuck with me: "the best camera is the one you have with you" His point being that carrying around a bunch of heavy gear is not pleasant. A lot of camera and lens sales were driven by progress at the margins without any serious benefit to the average user. Until the smartphone. Now, the number of people with surprisingly good cameras which they have with them almost constantly is absolutely astounding. Yes, I can still roughly tell the processed shots from portrait mode on my phone from a much better camera but the differences aren't as drastic as you'd imagine. Most importantly, I have the camera with me.

anotherboffin 4y ago
That was Chase Jarvis if memory serves. Even published a book about it.
MezzoDelCammin 4y ago
This is true for exactly one kind of photography - the one where we use pictures to capture memories and moments in time. And while I agree that that's a majority for most of us ("99% of us 99% of time", to quote somewhat exaggerating Hugh Brownstone), that's by no means all of it. The smartphone camera can never "fully" replace an actual camera gear simply because of the choice of lenses and therefore the fields of view that the camera gives us. Optics is somewhat heartless in this respect. AI and image processing can to a point simulate the feeling that the fixed focal length lenses of these cameras give us, but currently (and for the foreseeable future of at least a decade) they have a tough time going beyond that. What we see now is the camera market shifting from mass use to a niche. "Prosumers", videographers, YouTubers and such.
- ericmay 4y ago
  We bought a dSLR and a specific lens geared toward “point and click” of landscape and travel photos because after traveling to a few places pictures that looked great on a phone did not scale to any large prints or screens. That camera along has produced fantastic photos and I consider it money well spent.
t0bia_s 4y ago
If quality matter for you, smartphone is not answer. It won't replace camera designed for taking photographs with much higher dynamic range. Sure, heavy DSLR's are annoying to care on trip but again... If you are casual snapshot taker, then smartphone is enough. Or there are compact professional cameras like Fujifilm x100 series.
- astrange 4y ago
  Smartphones have better dynamic range than dedicated cameras because they have better software and exposure stacking. If your subject stands still, that is. That’s why iPhones can save HDR photos you can actually view in HDR. People editing camera raws in Lightroom still export them to sRGB JPEG at the end of the day. The main thing they’re doing with the dynamic range in those sensors is getting rid of it because there’s no ecosystem to view it. (Oddly, there is an ecosystem for HDR video, just not stills.)
  - sudosysgen 4y ago
    Plenty of monitors with higher dynamic range than sRGB, and plenty of people take pictures to print them, and there's also plenty of times you need the dynamic range to get something out of the shadows and highlights. And if you have a still subject, any serious camera will allow you to do bracketing so you can combine shots.
    - astrange 4y ago
      > Plenty of monitors with higher dynamic range than sRGB Being P3 (WCG) doesn't mean it's also HDR or that it's calibrated well or that the display software is handling it. > And if you have a still subject, any serious camera will allow you to do bracketing so you can combine shots. So you can combine them how into what? There's no good software for it. HDR combining software typically creates SDR images, not eg EXR files, and it usually looks bad doing it. > and plenty of people take pictures to print them What's that got to do with HDR?? Surely reflective media has less dynamic range than transmissive media…
dizhn 4y ago
"the best camera is the one you have with you" Or for beginner film makers. "Start with the camera you already have" (i.e. your phone)
- dbspin 4y ago
  Or don't. This is common advice layman / cloud level famous director advice that is in practice utterly misplaced. There are tonnes of fun little phone film festivals. No influential independent film festivals accept phone films. There are 2 - 3 films shot on phones that have ever been give a major (independent) release / distribution. Only one of those was not from an established director, Sean Baker's 'Tangerine'. They used dozens of phones, a full crew and specialised lenses custom made for the production. Shooting narrative with a phone is a gimmick - with very few and specific hidden camera doc exceptions. Phones don't teach you anything about the mechanics of camera work or post, from how different lenses change the feeling of a shot to pulling focus ISO, t-stop, color spaces, data rangling etc. They teach bad habits like relying on autofocus and IBIS. They may be the best camera that isn't a camera, but in terms of starting as a beginner filmmaker - you'd be much better off learning with even very outdated DSLR.
  - skinnymuch 4y ago
    I was going to say Tangerine! I was excited to know such a random factoid. I didn’t realize it’s the only film from non-famous directors, writers, and actors.
  - krisoft 4y ago
    Film festivals? I think you and I have very different ideas what a "beginner film maker" means. If you have never told a story using the medium of moving pictures you should not worry about film festivals, or ISO, or t-stop, or colour spaces, or major releases / distribution, or anything like that. Go grab the stuff you already have. Try to tell a story with that gear. Show it to your friends. Did they like it? Awesome, keep at it. Did they not like it? Get better friends, or tell better stories. Improve your art and craft as you progress one step at a time. People who worry about film festivals, but haven't ever put two frames after each other are delusional. There is a tendency in a lot of people to think that they should not try to do things until they are somehow anointed by someone or something. They think they could make a film, only if they would have a professional camera. Or they think they could do it only if they get into a school where they become something they are not yet. This advice is for those people. Instead of waiting around to do something some day they should start now and start getting better with what they have today.
ipython 4y ago
> Yes, I can still roughly tell the processed shots from portrait mode on my phone from a much better camera but the differences aren't as drastic as you'd imagine. This. I have my Apple TV set up to cycle through my favorite shots in my photo stream and I can tell immediately the quality difference between my slr shots and ones taken on my iPhone. The colors are more accurate, the bokeh more subtle, and excellent sharpness. Even when comparing shots from 7 years ago to todays iPhone 14. Unfortunately my slr sits collecting dust because, well, the phone is “good enough”.
lm28469 4y ago
> the differences aren't as drastic as you'd imagine And a honda accord driver won't be able to drive a formula one faster than a formula four around the track, give it to someone who knows how to drive and the difference will be drastic

by RayVR 4y ago

anotherboffin 4y ago

That was Chase Jarvis if memory serves. Even published a book about it.

MezzoDelCammin 4y ago

This is true for exactly one kind of photography - the one where we use pictures to capture memories and moments in time. And while I agree that that's a majority for most of us ("99% of us 99% of time", to quote somewhat exaggerating Hugh Brownstone), that's by no means all of it. The smartphone camera can never "fully" replace an actual camera gear simply because of the choice of lenses and therefore the fields of view that the camera gives us. Optics is somewhat heartless in this respect. AI and image processing can to a point simulate the feeling that the fixed focal length lenses of these cameras give us, but currently (and for the foreseeable future of at least a decade) they have a tough time going beyond that. What we see now is the camera market shifting from mass use to a niche. "Prosumers", videographers, YouTubers and such.

ericmay 4y ago
We bought a dSLR and a specific lens geared toward “point and click” of landscape and travel photos because after traveling to a few places pictures that looked great on a phone did not scale to any large prints or screens. That camera along has produced fantastic photos and I consider it money well spent.

t0bia_s 4y ago

If quality matter for you, smartphone is not answer. It won't replace camera designed for taking photographs with much higher dynamic range. Sure, heavy DSLR's are annoying to care on trip but again... If you are casual snapshot taker, then smartphone is enough. Or there are compact professional cameras like Fujifilm x100 series.

astrange 4y ago
Smartphones have better dynamic range than dedicated cameras because they have better software and exposure stacking. If your subject stands still, that is. That’s why iPhones can save HDR photos you can actually view in HDR. People editing camera raws in Lightroom still export them to sRGB JPEG at the end of the day. The main thing they’re doing with the dynamic range in those sensors is getting rid of it because there’s no ecosystem to view it. (Oddly, there is an ecosystem for HDR video, just not stills.)
- sudosysgen 4y ago
  Plenty of monitors with higher dynamic range than sRGB, and plenty of people take pictures to print them, and there's also plenty of times you need the dynamic range to get something out of the shadows and highlights. And if you have a still subject, any serious camera will allow you to do bracketing so you can combine shots.
  - astrange 4y ago
    > Plenty of monitors with higher dynamic range than sRGB Being P3 (WCG) doesn't mean it's also HDR or that it's calibrated well or that the display software is handling it. > And if you have a still subject, any serious camera will allow you to do bracketing so you can combine shots. So you can combine them how into what? There's no good software for it. HDR combining software typically creates SDR images, not eg EXR files, and it usually looks bad doing it. > and plenty of people take pictures to print them What's that got to do with HDR?? Surely reflective media has less dynamic range than transmissive media…

dizhn 4y ago

"the best camera is the one you have with you" Or for beginner film makers. "Start with the camera you already have" (i.e. your phone)

dbspin 4y ago
Or don't. This is common advice layman / cloud level famous director advice that is in practice utterly misplaced. There are tonnes of fun little phone film festivals. No influential independent film festivals accept phone films. There are 2 - 3 films shot on phones that have ever been give a major (independent) release / distribution. Only one of those was not from an established director, Sean Baker's 'Tangerine'. They used dozens of phones, a full crew and specialised lenses custom made for the production. Shooting narrative with a phone is a gimmick - with very few and specific hidden camera doc exceptions. Phones don't teach you anything about the mechanics of camera work or post, from how different lenses change the feeling of a shot to pulling focus ISO, t-stop, color spaces, data rangling etc. They teach bad habits like relying on autofocus and IBIS. They may be the best camera that isn't a camera, but in terms of starting as a beginner filmmaker - you'd be much better off learning with even very outdated DSLR.
- skinnymuch 4y ago
  I was going to say Tangerine! I was excited to know such a random factoid. I didn’t realize it’s the only film from non-famous directors, writers, and actors.
- krisoft 4y ago
  Film festivals? I think you and I have very different ideas what a "beginner film maker" means. If you have never told a story using the medium of moving pictures you should not worry about film festivals, or ISO, or t-stop, or colour spaces, or major releases / distribution, or anything like that. Go grab the stuff you already have. Try to tell a story with that gear. Show it to your friends. Did they like it? Awesome, keep at it. Did they not like it? Get better friends, or tell better stories. Improve your art and craft as you progress one step at a time. People who worry about film festivals, but haven't ever put two frames after each other are delusional. There is a tendency in a lot of people to think that they should not try to do things until they are somehow anointed by someone or something. They think they could make a film, only if they would have a professional camera. Or they think they could do it only if they get into a school where they become something they are not yet. This advice is for those people. Instead of waiting around to do something some day they should start now and start getting better with what they have today.

ipython 4y ago

> Yes, I can still roughly tell the processed shots from portrait mode on my phone from a much better camera but the differences aren't as drastic as you'd imagine. This. I have my Apple TV set up to cycle through my favorite shots in my photo stream and I can tell immediately the quality difference between my slr shots and ones taken on my iPhone. The colors are more accurate, the bokeh more subtle, and excellent sharpness. Even when comparing shots from 7 years ago to todays iPhone 14. Unfortunately my slr sits collecting dust because, well, the phone is “good enough”.

lm28469 4y ago

> the differences aren't as drastic as you'd imagine And a honda accord driver won't be able to drive a formula one faster than a formula four around the track, give it to someone who knows how to drive and the difference will be drastic