Reading mode: Light Dark

Smartphones are better than expensive cameras for street photos- so says the BBC

Go to last post
V

vanfred

Well-known member
Messages
138
Reaction score
22
Well not really the BBC. One of their short weekly travel shows looked at a half day photography course in the East End of London.

The people running the course tried to train people to get the best out of their smartphone cameras.

During the programme one of the trainers said that for street photography, smartphones were better than "expensive cameras" because smartphones are very commonly used in most locations. So using one does not draw as much attention as a camera.

Not sure I agree, but I thought it was an interesting idea.
 
Instead of a phone go with something like a Ricoh GR which is a small innocent P&S looking camera but is really setup for great photos with an excellent lens and APS-C sensor.
 
This is exactly what I would like to do, except I don't like the focal length of the GR lens. A similar camera with a 35 or 40mm FOV would be my own personal street machine.

I actually do a lot of my own street and casual shooting with my phone- and loathe it. Horrible ergonomics and no wrist strap!
 
yardcoyote said:
This is exactly what I would like to do, except I don't like the focal length of the GR lens. A similar camera with a 35 or 40mm FOV would be my own personal street machine.

I actually do a lot of my own street and casual shooting with my phone- and loathe it. Horrible ergonomics and no wrist strap!
Click to expand...
The fl is a personal thing though the Ricoh would be too wide for me also but very nice camera.

My Fuji is a nice travel and street camera,35eq suits me well. Cameras the size of a compact will get you shots you otherwise wouldn't get with a dslr or even smartphone. Try the metro or rushhour in the winter, you'd get a picture with a smartphone but once viewed big the fun would wear off very quickly unless lomo is your thing.

--
Cheers Mike
 
Last edited:
Yes, if you're trying to sneak a picture of someone who doesn't want their picture taken and plastered all over the internet, a smart phone would be ideal.
 
yardcoyote said:
This is exactly what I would like to do, except I don't like the focal length of the GR lens. A similar camera with a 35 or 40mm FOV would be my own personal street machine.

I actually do a lot of my own street and casual shooting with my phone- and loathe it. Horrible ergonomics and no wrist strap!
Click to expand...
A GM1 with a 20mm 1.7(40mm FOV) might be better.

There might be some truth to the claims on the BBC but really I'd argue its most another vapid celebration of phone/social media just like all the mediocre work that gets featured on various media outlets purely because it was shot on a phone or featured on facebook.
 
Reilly Diefenbach said:
Yes, if you're trying to sneak a picture of someone who doesn't want their picture taken and plastered all over the internet, a smart phone would be ideal.
Click to expand...
There is a difference between taking a picture of somebody that is unaware (candid) or does not want to be photographed.

I also believe that you only should take pictures of people (recognizable) that they would have no problem with looking at.

--
Cheers Mike
 
Last edited:
I agree, but not fully. Smartphones are better in one or more aspects of photography than any other real camera or bigger devices. But there are other apsects than size, weight or look of camera. I would prefer an RX100 as I don't like to be fully sneaky and want good control and image quality.

You could take it further. Are spy cameras better than smartphones for street photography?
 
Yes. I think the same. Respect your subject, if you want to be respected as a photographer.
--
· http://www.flickr.com/photos/blackhole_eater/
· (All photos are creative common licensed. Check them out.)
· English is not my native language.
 
vanfred said:
Well not really the BBC. One of their short weekly travel shows looked at a half day photography course in the East End of London.

The people running the course tried to train people to get the best out of their smartphone cameras.

During the programme one of the trainers said that for street photography, smartphones were better than "expensive cameras" because smartphones are very commonly used in most locations. So using one does not draw as much attention as a camera.

Not sure I agree, but I thought it was an interesting idea.
Click to expand...
There is nothing wrong w training people to get the most out of their smart phone cameras. IIt is also probably true that using a smart phone does not attract as much attention as a real camera.

However, the quality of the smart phone pictures will always be inferior to a real camera picture.

How about a camera w a waste level viewfinder such as a Praktica (https://sites.google.com/site/fromthefocalplanetoinfinity/prakticafx) or a twin lens reflex where you can look down at the viewfinder.

Also, you can always use Google glasses.

--
Don
 
Last edited:
vanfred said:
Well not really the BBC. One of their short weekly travel shows looked at a half day photography course in the East End of London.

The people running the course tried to train people to get the best out of their smartphone cameras.

During the programme one of the trainers said that for street photography, smartphones were better than "expensive cameras" because smartphones are very commonly used in most locations. So using one does not draw as much attention as a camera.

Not sure I agree, but I thought it was an interesting idea
Click to expand...
It would be interesting to see what response you get by posting this on the Documentary and Street Forum.

Charlie
 
Reilly Diefenbach said:
Yes, if you're trying to sneak a picture of someone who doesn't want their picture taken and plastered all over the internet, a smart phone would be ideal.
Click to expand...
I agree.

If you're a sneaky photographer ( known as "bottom feeders" in the world of photography) a cell phone is a good choice.

Naturally, the bottom feeder comment was only a joke. I didn't mean to insult or upset anyone who knows their rights. :-)
 
vanfred said:
Well not really the BBC. One of their short weekly travel shows looked at a half day photography course in the East End of London.

The people running the course tried to train people to get the best out of their smartphone cameras.

During the programme one of the trainers said that for street photography, smartphones were better than "expensive cameras" because smartphones are very commonly used in most locations. So using one does not draw as much attention as a camera.

Not sure I agree, but I thought it was an interesting idea.
Click to expand...
For street photography, stealth, comfort, and bravery are often a lot more important than what camera you're using. If you're carrying around a larger camera that you feel very uncomfortable pointing at people or scenes, you're going to miss shots. Because often times, the very act of lifting up a camera to your face can draw attention to yourself. But lifting up a smartphone usually goes unnoticed or ignored because it's so common.
 
I'm going to be looking seriously at an X100S when the much anticipated new model comes out and prices drop.
 
Last edited:
A real camera allows control and have a ergonomic body and have a bigger sensor. Someone others definition of "real camera" must not meet my definition. I would fully understand if you don't agree with me.
--
· http://www.flickr.com/photos/blackhole_eater/
· (All photos are creative common licensed. Check them out.)
· English is not my native language.
 
Well, pretty well everyone has one, particularly anyone in the journalism business, they may not be technically inclined and not understand f/stops, shutter speed, ISO etc. and since they already have the smart phone, there is no extra cost in equipping staff and training them in the use of a camera. Furthermore, no extra or optional equipment is required to send images back to the office.

Might makes perfectly good sense from that point of view.
 
yardcoyote said:
I'm going to be looking seriously at an X100S when the much anticipated new model comes out and prices drop.
Click to expand...
The X100S looks like a really nice camera. I'm becoming addicted to the small wide angle GR. The X100S is bit more price than the GR, but has 35mm if you like that focal length better and an EVF. The only potential issue with it is the different raw format that isn't always supported by raw converters. Maybe that is no longer a big issue, but it was when I was considering the camera.
 
vanfred said:
The people running the course tried to train people to get the best out of their smartphone cameras.

During the programme one of the trainers said that for street photography, smartphones were better than "expensive cameras" because smartphones are very commonly used in most locations
Click to expand...
The people running the course are selling a course on how to get the best from a smart phone for travel photography. It's unlikely they're going to say something like "smart phones are bad for street photography", as the people on the course are not paying to hear that.

Put another way, how many people would recommend the course to other people if they found the "teacher" saying things like "Actually an RX100 or an FZ1000 would beat the heck out of your smartphone." ?

People need to be a lot more cynical about these things.
 
If you are a huge news agency that hates paying good money for photos, having every person on the planet equipped with a 5mp phone camera is great. Few people know what a photo is worth (or, more accurately, should be worth), and will likely GIVE you the photo, just to hear their name on TV or see it in print.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Inspire me: where to go next weekend from Brussels
Replies
10
Views
41
Lan
L
AidanofVT
$300 Pocketable Camera To Go With My $100 Phone?
Replies
15
Views
180
Jacques Cornell
Jacques Cornell
verybiglebowski
To be the photo or not to be? That’s the challenge!
Replies
1
Views
400
Cherry_F
Cherry_F
J
Seeking advice for a small second camera body: climbing + street
Replies
17
Views
154
Phaser
P
O
Photography versus mobile story telling
Replies
6
Views
1K
Ferenc MOGOR
Ferenc MOGOR

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top