3 ms·

That’s an 8 year old camera with a lens that was just ok when new. Your specific situation makes sense, but generalizing that is a bit of a stretch. My phone

That’s an 8 year old camera with a lens that was just ok when new. Your specific situation makes sense, but generalizing that is a bit of a stretch. My phone is better than my older cameras too, but not than my FF Canon. I’ve made this comment before as well: Phones have completely destroyed the P&S market for good reason. They can’t touch the FF and above market due to simple physics.

foldr 4y ago
APS-C sensors are still more than twice as big (in width/height) than the 48MP sensor on the iPhone 14 Pro Max, so if "simple physics" was all there was to it, you'd also expect APS-C cameras to deliver much better results. "Full frame" is just a marketing term.
- CobaltFire 4y ago
  You (intentionally?) missed the fact that that is an 8 year old sensor. Of course there is more to it than simple physics; the utilization of those physics matter. Is an 8 year old CPU using 200mm^2 as good as a modern CPU using 200mm^2? No. Is it as good as a modern CPU using 50mm^2? Probably not either. Edit to respond to child: No, the comment I responded to HERE on HN is an 8 year old sensor (Sony A6000).
  - foldr 4y ago
    The reddit post isn't comparing to 8 year old sensors. Also, sensors on consumer cameras haven't actually changed much in the past 8 years (marketing hype to the contrary). Low light performance is a bit better, but that's unlikely to have been a major factor in the OP's comparison given the use of an f1.8 lens. This page is useful for comparing old and new: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison You can see some improvements from newer cameras with the same resolution, but it's not a huge difference.
Hippocrates 4y ago
This is the point of the original post isn't it? An old/cheap DSLR will not beat an iPhone in most scenarios. I found that to be true, although I did expect the old camera to beat the iPhone due to "physics". It seems the advantage the iPhone has is largely in the software doing the image processing as well as ease of the UI, focusing/depth finding, bracketing etc.

foldr 4y ago

APS-C sensors are still more than twice as big (in width/height) than the 48MP sensor on the iPhone 14 Pro Max, so if "simple physics" was all there was to it, you'd also expect APS-C cameras to deliver much better results. "Full frame" is just a marketing term.

CobaltFire 4y ago
You (intentionally?) missed the fact that that is an 8 year old sensor. Of course there is more to it than simple physics; the utilization of those physics matter. Is an 8 year old CPU using 200mm^2 as good as a modern CPU using 200mm^2? No. Is it as good as a modern CPU using 50mm^2? Probably not either. Edit to respond to child: No, the comment I responded to HERE on HN is an 8 year old sensor (Sony A6000).
- foldr 4y ago
  The reddit post isn't comparing to 8 year old sensors. Also, sensors on consumer cameras haven't actually changed much in the past 8 years (marketing hype to the contrary). Low light performance is a bit better, but that's unlikely to have been a major factor in the OP's comparison given the use of an f1.8 lens. This page is useful for comparing old and new: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison You can see some improvements from newer cameras with the same resolution, but it's not a huge difference.

Hippocrates 4y ago

This is the point of the original post isn't it? An old/cheap DSLR will not beat an iPhone in most scenarios. I found that to be true, although I did expect the old camera to beat the iPhone due to "physics". It seems the advantage the iPhone has is largely in the software doing the image processing as well as ease of the UI, focusing/depth finding, bracketing etc.