2 ms·
>image quality is as low as it gets I'm going to dispute that. Given some constraints in both the subject and the use of the image, certain cell phones can rea
by ghaff 2y ago
>image quality is as low as it gets
I'm going to dispute that. Given some constraints in both the subject and the use of the image, certain cell phones can really take pretty good pictures. I have a bunch of bigger gear and I mostly don't find it worth taking on trips any longer. Yes, it's older gear but I doubt I'd find it worth spending thousands of dollars to upgrade. I know other serious photographers who feel similarly.
- Etheryte 2y agoI agree with you only so long as you want to look at those images on those same small devices. The moment you want to print something, the difference is night and day. That being said, I'm a very big believer of the best camera being the one you have with you, so.
- ghaff 2y agoI'm not sure I completely agree with respect to small prints. I probably do for 11x14s and beyond. (Which I basically never do any longer as I'm well out of wall space.) But, yeah, it's almost always display on computer and I just don't have a lot of interest in lugging a medium/large camera everywhere like I used to.
- ekianjo 2y ago> certain cell phones can really take pretty good pictures. They look pretty on LCD screens but once you print them they look awful compared to professional gear. Like light and day.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]