4 ms·
Because landscape photos are easy. No bokeh, no depth of field (everything at infinity), good lighting, no need for fast shutter speed or a big sensor. Your ima
by xdfgh1112 4y ago
Because landscape photos are easy. No bokeh, no depth of field (everything at infinity), good lighting, no need for fast shutter speed or a big sensor. Your images will be sharper I guess, but that's not worth $2k in most cases.
- astrange 4y agoIf you take a lot of landscapes I think that's actually when you do want the big sensor. Which, remember, is not a 35mm full-frame DSLR either! Instead it might be a 4x5 large format camera like Ansel Adams used. (Which requires a lot of patience, but an old one would be cheaper than a new camera. Though renting is always an option.)
- shrx 4y agoThe ratio of sensor areas between full frame (864 mm²) and for example iphone 13 pro max "wide" (main) camera sensor (44 mm²) is actually larger than the ratio between a 4x5 large format film plate (12903 mm²) and a full frame sensor. edit: changed "sensor sizes" to "sensor areas" for clarity.
- nihilius 4y agoLooks like you never took a lanscape photo where you had to use a (Gradiant) ND, Polarisation Filter, Multiple Exposures, Long Exposures for smooth Water or anything where you had to hink about how to take the perfect shot. So yes for a quick snapshot a phone is good enough. For a photograph a bigger camera is much more benefical than "just" for sharper images.
- xdfgh1112 4y agoI have done all of those when I owned a DSLR. Phones have been able to do smooth water and multiple exposures for years though...