iPhone vs point and shoot

Hi,
My son is going on a work trip to Italy and Spain for several weeks
this summer, and I was encouraging him to get a camera since he should
have some goOd photo ops. He has done some photography in the past,
but not in some years, and he does not want to carry a big camera, or
spend a lot of time learning about one. He says he'll just use his
iPhone(4) for his pics.

Here's my question - what kind of quality can you get using an iphone,
and how does it compare to a compact point and shoot camerA? He wants
something very compact, so I don't think the nikon j1 or v1 would be
ideal. Any thoughts?

thanks!

You have to remember that anIphone is a phone. The camera is an add on and as such it cannot compete with a dedicated camera. I have an IPad and the camera on it is fun to use and can produce some reasonably good results, but it will never replace either my DSLR or my Nikocacao pact, which as a specialist piece of kit is superb.

Well, I doubt any of our opinions are going to matter! He will end up using the iPhone regardless. The good news is that the when the light is good, the iPhone will capture good image. When the light is bad, it will capture a bad image... just like any other camera. The drawback to cell phone cameras is the lack of control. However, if one isn't interested in learning to control the exposure then it won't matter a whole lot anyway!

If your goal is to put photos on facebook (or similar) then the iPhone is the most quality that one needs in nearly any circumstance. But you can buy something like a Canon a1000 on ebay for $10 and it will take better photos than an iPhone in any situation. Even in full sun, the iPhone is gritty. It gets blown out highlights, bad noise, and wicked compression.




You can use those things to your advantage is you want to make a dark, gritty, 70's print-look.

My brother thought in a very similar fashion: "Oh, my iPhone will let me easily take photos. I'll just use that."

I CONVINCED him to take our father's DSLR and handed him a short photography book that he read through.

He came back from the summer with STUNNING photos. He now owns a DSLR himself.

My point is that an iPhone will capture a picture, sure. But the quality will be what you get from a phone: pretty bad. A DSLR will capture a picture, sure. But the quality is incomparable. Especially, since his trip may be one of a lifetime you need to do everything you can to convince him that he needs to take the DSLR for shooting.

Tell him he could use his iPhone after dark, in bars and whatnot. The DSLR will be a hassle if he wants to go out at night.

hnease said:

hnease wrote:

Hi,
My son is going on a work trip to Italy and Spain for several weeks
this summer, and I was encouraging him to get a camera since he should
have some goOd photo ops. He has done some photography in the past,
but not in some years, and he does not want to carry a big camera, or
spend a lot of time learning about one. He says he'll just use his
iPhone(4) for his pics.

Here's my question - what kind of quality can you get using an iphone,
and how does it compare to a compact point and shoot camerA? He wants
something very compact, so I don't think the nikon j1 or v1 would be
ideal. Any thoughts?

thanks!

Click to expand...

An iPhone can take perfectly adequate pictures in many situations. But using it as his only phone will dramatically cut down his possibilities. Low light? He can try, but results will be poor. Detail shot? Well, I guess there might be a gargoyle way up there somewhere. For me, when traveling, I want a decent zoom. There are interesting things everywhere that you can't get closed to (or don't have the time.) The iPhone is fine for social pictures of your son and people he meets. It's good for capturing the general look of the streets and the life on them. If hanging out, meeting people, eating tasty food, and wandering the streets are his priorities, his phone may do just fine. If he expects to do more serious sightseeing (as I would), it may not.

The good news is he doesn't need a big, expensive camera to take decent travel photos. A 'travel zoom', like the Canon SX260 is good enough. It won't take great low light photos, but it will ideal for sightseeing. He doesn't need to carry it everywhere. But he'd find the 20x zoom handy at capturing the details of places he visits. It's small enough to carry everywhere if he wants to.

Of course there is also the possibility your son has decided he really doesn't like photography and intends to do very little. His phone may well be good enough. I'm sure you'd love to share in his adventure through his pictures, but he needs to be taking them for himself primarily. If he has decided it is too much bother, you may have to settle for him handing you his phone.

And not great. Still, if he is unwilling to put in the effort there's no need to invest in a camera - and I mean that in the nicest possible way, he might just want to enjoy his trip which doesn't involve taking shots...

I'm not a pro, i enjoy myself with a good compact and i give you my advice.

As somebody already said here, it depends if your son has the will to learn something about photography. I mean, pay 400 usd and then taking always photos in auto mode, is a pity....

If he could spend some time in learning photography, it could worth to have something better than iphone.

I'm in europe, he will find wonderful landscapes, museums and lot more everywhere. If he wants good photos and he does't have a quite good camera, he will regret it.

It depends on him i guess.

Bye.

Thanks for all the responses. I think we've convinced him to take a compact point and shoot. He's not a complete novice, but just didn't want to put in a lot of time learning use a new dslr. I think he was thinking the iPhone could give him fairly high quality images (which I'm sure it can under perfect conditions ), but he does want to get some good pics. Thanks for the help!

I agree with MarkinSF that a travel zoom would be a good choice for him. A travel zoom is a compact camera that has a zoom lens that goes from wide-angle to long telephoto yet can fit in a pocket. It can be set to full auto or you can take more control. Even on auto they are capable of taking beautiful photos, far better than what a phone can produce.



All of the major camera makers make them. I use a Panasonic Lumix ZS15 that I like very much. You can go to B&H's websit to see what's available from all of the major brands.

hnease said:

hnease wrote:

Thanks for all the responses. I think we've convinced him to take a compact point and shoot. He's not a complete novice, but just didn't want to put in a lot of time learning use a new dslr. I think he was thinking the iPhone could give him fairly high quality images (which I'm sure it can under perfect conditions ), but he does want to get some good pics. Thanks for the help!

Click to expand...

In my experience the long zoom of travel zooms is rarely used, unless a person is on a safari. Most of my images are taken at wide angle, 28 to 35 mm, and a few at 85 or 112 for variety and for details on buildings. Instead of a long zoom travel zoom, I suggest a Canon G1X, which is what I use, it has superb image quality, or a Sony RX100 which has very good to excellent image quality in a remarkably small pocketable camera. Very pleasant to use is the Fuji X10 or even better, the X20 which is just becoming available; image quality from these will be quite good. Any of these would be far better than a cell phone. Avoid a DSLR for travel, they are bulky, heavy and obtrusive.

Krugman

hnease said:

hnease wrote:

Thanks for all the responses. I think we've convinced him to take a compact point and shoot. He's not a complete novice, but just didn't want to put in a lot of time learning use a new dslr. I think he was thinking the iPhone could give him fairly high quality images (which I'm sure it can under perfect conditions ), but he does want to get some good pics. Thanks for the help!

Click to expand...

It depends what one's standards are. I'd say take the iphone outside on a sunny day, take a photo and get an 8x10 print made at Wallgreens. If it's good enough then it's good enough, but it probably won't be. Especially if one uses the "zoom" function.

krugman said:

krugman wrote:

krugman said:

hnease wrote:

Thanks for all the responses. I think we've convinced him to take a compact point and shoot. He's not a complete novice, but just didn't want to put in a lot of time learning use a new dslr. I think he was thinking the iPhone could give him fairly high quality images (which I'm sure it can under perfect conditions ), but he does want to get some good pics. Thanks for the help!

Click to expand...

In my experience the long zoom of travel zooms is rarely used, unless a person is on a safari. Most of my images are taken at wide angle, 28 to 35 mm, and a few at 85 or 112 for variety and for details on buildings. Instead of a long zoom travel zoom, I suggest a Canon G1X, which is what I use, it has superb image quality, or a Sony RX100 which has very good to excellent image quality in a remarkably small pocketable camera. Very pleasant to use is the Fuji X10 or even better, the X20 which is just becoming available; image quality from these will be quite good. Any of these would be far better than a cell phone. Avoid a DSLR for travel, they are bulky, heavy and obtrusive.

Krugman

Click to expand...

While traveling I often use the medium to long focal lengths. My current gear takes me up to about the equivalent of 300mm and I use all of it. Not so much around town, but when touring there are often interesting sights you can't get close to or don't have the time. I think that's why so many people travel with superzooms, even when there is no wildlife around. Travel zooms are a decent compromise for people who want a small, light camera and some zoom length. Without the zoom the OP's son wouldn't even carry it - he'd just whip out his phone.

Now if it were me looking for a new travel camera, it's exactly those models you name I'd consider, if my budget was modest, but not too modest. Because those cameras all do cost more than a basic travel zoom, too (not at clearance prices.) I've debated internally over which I'd get. Probably the Sony if I could afford it, (the GX1 is too bulky and doesn't focus close enough), or possibly the Fuji for the nice vf. The Nikon is also attractive for its longer zoom range. I often recommend these cameras, but mostly to budding enthusiasts, not to a kid who thinks his phone pics are good enough.

hnease said:

hnease wrote:

Hi,
My son is going on a work trip to Italy and Spain for several weeks
this summer, and I was encouraging him to get a camera since he should
have some goOd photo ops. He has done some photography in the past,
but not in some years, and he does not want to carry a big camera, or
spend a lot of time learning about one. He says he'll just use his
iPhone(4) for his pics.

Here's my question - what kind of quality can you get using an iphone,
and how does it compare to a compact point and shoot camerA? He wants
something very compact, so I don't think the nikon j1 or v1 would be
ideal. Any thoughts?

thanks!

Click to expand...

It's been my experience that the standard 1/2.3" sensor of compacts produces much better results for still images than the standard 1/3.2" sensor of phone cameras, which is actually half the sensor area. IOW, I believe that a 1/2.3" sensor is the minimum required to produce an objectively crisp still image, and I believe it was chosen for a reason by camera manufacturers many years ago.




I'll explain why I believe this to be the case. If you read up on equivalence online, you would expect both of these sensors to be able to produce the same results provided you give the 1/3.2" sensor a larger aperture (lower F-number) to compensate for the smaller sensor size. IOW, based on the theory of equivalence, two cameras produce eqiuvalent images if they have the same entrance pupil and the same 35mm equivalent focal length, assuming equally performing sensors.




Based on my experience, it doesn't matter what F-number you use on a 1/3.2" sensor or how many pixels you pack on it, it just doesn't have the same look or the same crispness of the larger sensor. I think the reason is that you're running into lens sharpness issues at this sensor size. A lens for a 12MP 1/3.2" sensor has to be much sharper than a 12MP 1/2.3" sensor to resolve all of those pixels, and I believe this is the bottleneck. That's not to say that a 1/3.2" sensor couldn't do better in the future, but I wouldn't use one.




There are some larger sensors on phone cameras, but they generally have an elevation for the lens to accommodate the longer focal length (e.g. Nokia 808).




Also, with phones, you have to deal with the lack of zoom and poor image stabilization. Seriously, just buy any mainstream camera, and it'll outperform a typical camera phone. I personally like the Sony rugged, flat profile compacts. They generally begin with TX.., such as the DSC-TX66 or DSC-TX200V. These are pretty much the best you can do for the form factor IMO.