3 ms·

> I guess if we repeated that experiment nowadays it would be the other way round. As somebody with a long unused DSLR packed away… I’d say it depends on the

> I guess if we repeated that experiment nowadays it would be the other way round. As somebody with a long unused DSLR packed away… I’d say it depends on the lens. Maybe. One thing that iPhones still can’t do as good as a DSLR is very low light (eg starfield), however the current crop of phones are getting pretty good at even this. Those DSLR’s are huge and quite frankly their workflows aren’t as smooth as on phones. If a DSLR could automagically upload all images to my repository (ie icloud) then I’d probably use them more. But as they say, the best camera is the one you have on you and the camera I have on me is almost always found in my phone.

luqtas 3y ago
also don't forget precise F-control and shutter speed, which are worlds of exploration for artistic outcomes, as well, better looking photos that the non-knowledgeable eye won't notice but the overall feeling is just better than a freaking constrained 700 mega-pixel iPhone camera... now, if one travels to rural Kazakhstan and register a touching moment, i think we can get along even with a Nokia pre-2010 camera
graphe 3y ago
The lidar on iPhones makes low light way better than cameras. If you don't do astronomy it will usually be better. The Samsung NX had wifi and upload to fb.
- vladvasiliu 3y ago
  > The lidar on iPhones makes low light way better than cameras How so? My iphone 14 pro looks like a cartoon if I shoot people or animals in low light. Never had any "actual camera" look that bad, and my newest is an 8 year-old micro 4/3 model.
  - graphe 3y ago
    Mine look great, my camera looks even better if I set it up. I'm not going to go technical for most photos though because it isn't fun.
- Arainach 3y ago
  Static pictures of a building in low light, phones can do decent. Anything moving and all the AI-assisted long exposures in the world can't help you. It's important to consider similar generations - yes, the iPhone 14 or Pixel 8 does better in static low light than my 2004-era crop sensor DSLR, but not better than a 2017-era full frame DSLR and dramatically worse than a current-gen mirrorless setup.

luqtas 3y ago

also don't forget precise F-control and shutter speed, which are worlds of exploration for artistic outcomes, as well, better looking photos that the non-knowledgeable eye won't notice but the overall feeling is just better than a freaking constrained 700 mega-pixel iPhone camera... now, if one travels to rural Kazakhstan and register a touching moment, i think we can get along even with a Nokia pre-2010 camera

graphe 3y ago

The lidar on iPhones makes low light way better than cameras. If you don't do astronomy it will usually be better. The Samsung NX had wifi and upload to fb.

vladvasiliu 3y ago
> The lidar on iPhones makes low light way better than cameras How so? My iphone 14 pro looks like a cartoon if I shoot people or animals in low light. Never had any "actual camera" look that bad, and my newest is an 8 year-old micro 4/3 model.
- graphe 3y ago
  Mine look great, my camera looks even better if I set it up. I'm not going to go technical for most photos though because it isn't fun.
Arainach 3y ago
Static pictures of a building in low light, phones can do decent. Anything moving and all the AI-assisted long exposures in the world can't help you. It's important to consider similar generations - yes, the iPhone 14 or Pixel 8 does better in static low light than my 2004-era crop sensor DSLR, but not better than a 2017-era full frame DSLR and dramatically worse than a current-gen mirrorless setup.