Compare 16 mp micro four thirds with latest smart phone camera

How much better is 16 mp micro four thirds cmos sensor better than the latest smartphone camera quality?

Will Upgrade from best smart phone camera to micro four thirds be a disappointment?

depends. what sort of photography do you do? do you do any night or low light photography? what do you do with your photographs (share online, print big, crop heavily)? do you ever need to have long telephoto reach? what m4/3 gear would you get?

my wife gets by just fine with her iPhone camera vis-à-vis her Sony 5000 with kit zoom. my iPhone would fail me in more than 80% of the photography I do when compared to what I have been able to get out of my m4/3 gear (decent to top of line body, PRO lenses or sharp primes).

sensors is in my view the wrong comparison point. image quality.

I can't really answer your question since I don't have a smartphone, but I can tell you I switched from APS-C to MFT and have not been disappointed. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Dhojraish said:

How much better is 16 mp micro four thirds cmos sensor better than the latest smartphone camera quality?

Will Upgrade from best smart phone camera to micro four thirds be a disappointment?

Click to expand...

I think you have to be more specific about which smart phone you are talking about, since the sensors and lenses vary, as well as the resolution. For example, the Panasonic CM1 with 20MP 1-inch sensor and f/2.8 lens, or the Nokia 1020 with 41MP 2/3" sensor f/2.2 lens is going to be a whole lot different than most smart phone cameras.

However, in my experience M43 is a huge step up from point and shoot cameras and the smart phones I have seen.

Also keep in mind that with M43 you can swap lenses. If you shoot with a sharp prime, there are practically no smartphone cameras that can match. It depends on if you are only asking about the kit zooms, or if you ever intend to buy a prime or one of the higher quality zooms. For kit zooms, there will be phones that can get quite close.

Dhojraish said:

How much better is 16 mp micro four thirds cmos sensor better than the latest smartphone camera quality?

Will Upgrade from best smart phone camera to micro four thirds be a disappointment?

Click to expand...

You can see right here on DPReview's comparison page.

The results range from "much more detail in daylight" to "unbelievably better in low light."

See here:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/im...&x=-0.8794895591647331&y=-0.16805315096952908

And here:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/im...&x=-0.8794895591647331&y=-0.16805315096952908

It's really no contest.

People like to compare M4/3 quality to smartphones, but it's a farce.

If you aren't pixel peeping, smartphones can definitely be "good enough" but in any direct, detailed comparison, the difference is vast. Especially when you consider that these are best smartphone cameras currently on the market, with the possible exception of the brand new Samsung GS9.

Dhojraish said:

How much better is 16 mp micro four thirds cmos sensor better than the latest smartphone camera quality?

Will Upgrade from best smart phone camera to micro four thirds be a disappointment?

Click to expand...

Smart phone cameras are much better PHD (point here dummy) devices. If your images with a micro four-thirds camera are not better, you need to work on the way you are using them. They are not PHD devices. If PHD is what you want, you might just be better off sticking with cell phones.

--
"There's shadows in life, baby.." Jack Horner- Boogie Nights

Even though I prefer the output from my EM-10, In bright light I find that my Samsung S8 takes shockingly good pictures, particularly when it comes to landscapes. I think it is in good part due to jpeg treatment by Samsung that I just find very pleasing.

In low light, it's a different story.

But most importantly, even if quality-wise they were similar, ergonomically speaking there is no way I could just rely on my S8 for photography. The knobs, buttons and EVF of my EM-10 is just too valuable for me, let alone the ability to swap lenses based on purpose.

Dhojraish said:

How much better is 16 mp micro four thirds cmos sensor better than the latest smartphone camera quality?

Will Upgrade from best smart phone camera to micro four thirds be a disappointment?

Click to expand...

Here is a chart from PhotonsToPhotos.net -http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Apple%20iPhone%207,Nikon%20D5500,Olympus%20OM-D%20E-M10%20Mark%20II

I have selected the iPhone 7 (in blue), the EM-10ii, as well as the Nikon 5500 that you mentioned in another post a few days ago.



--
Marie

Sure, noise appears more quickly with smaller sensors, details often smeared by camera software to compensate and all.

But on a bright day, under good conditions, I find the lens can make a bigger difference in overall picture quality. Most smartphone lenses are limited, often scratched up or dirty on top of that, all negatively affecting the final image.

I just got a new cell phone that I haven't even used yet, but I was curious about the "score" that DPR gave it. It's rated pretty high here (the model doesn't really matter) at 85% and sure enough when I look at smaller versions of the images they look very, very good. Still, when I blow up the sample images from this phone (or pretty much any one that I've checked out in the reviews here) there's a lot of smearing of detail and a kind of non-photographic, "Impressionist painting" type of look to the images.

So... I'd say that if you're mostly shooting in good light, are OK with the wide angle lens that's on cell phones, OK with the interface (I like physical controls) and most importantly aren't blowing up the photos very large, much less printing them, then there's no reason not to use a cell phone. If you're talking pure IQ though, cell phones have a way to go compared with m43 gear or even 1" sensor cameras, from what I can see. Don't be fooled by the megapixel counts either as that doesn't seem to have much bearing on the overall quality of the images... and some cell phones have surprisingly big megapixel counts.

Not putting down cell phones either, as I've seen some decent artistic work done with them, not to mention decent snapshots. If you demand really great IQ though (which I would argue isn't even necessary for lots of things) I'd say that a dedicated camera is still your best bet.

--
my flickr:
www.flickr.com/photos/128435329@N08/

I should have added:

What has changed when I moved from a Nexus 5 to a Samsung S8 is that I can now rely on my cell phone to take on-the-fly pictures when I (unfortunately) left my EM-10 is at home, and still feel ok including them in my photo collection. I'm not terribly ashamed of my cell phone pics anymore.

The result: I use my EM-10 as much as before, but I don't reach for my Sony RX100 II as often as I used to.

My Nikon FF friend laugh at my tiny M4/3 all the time, and praises how beautiful his iPhone pictures look. I mean they do render colors really nicely. I suppose...

Dhojraish said:

How much better is 16 mp micro four thirds cmos sensor better than the latest smartphone camera quality?

Will Upgrade from best smart phone camera to micro four thirds be a disappointment?

Click to expand...

I have an iPhone X with dual cameras. Called the best smart phone camera on the market. I shoot a ton of photos with it for sure. Results are amazing. But I am stuck with the two focal lengths built in to the camera (28mm and 55mm approx) so it is a bit limiting when I want to shoot telephoto or wider.



I like the features of the iPhone X camera, and I can shoot a DNG with Adobe Lightroom, but getting that DNG in to my iCloud Photos album is not easy, so I don't shoot that way (why Adobe??).

In many ways the results from my iPhone X are better than from my Panasonic GX85 but I prefer the Panasonic for more serious photography. It can shoot a true RAW, it has a great built in flash, and I can slap a telephoto lens on it and shoot the moon. But the Panasonic doesn't have built in automatic HDR or Live Photos.

Ultimately my iPhone X has replaced the Panasonic in most situations. And I am OK with that as I shoot with my Nikon Df and D750 when I need really great photos.

try this with your smart phone













--
Olympus EM5, EM5mk2 my toys.
past toys. k100d, k10d,k7,fz5,fz150,500uz,canon G9, Olympus xz1

Same here. The S8--which I didn't even evaluate beforehand from a camera standpoint as I had a dying, swollen phone that needed replacing, pronto--has the first phonce camera I can actually use, and also use the photos it produces. Now the S9 has two cameras--no more e-zooming--and I'm sure an even faster interface.

No, they're not ILCs but as snapshot cameras they've gone from barely tolerable to quite good. Fast forward three or four years and watch out.

Cheers,

Rick

"Will Upgrade from best smart phone camera to micro four thirds be a disappointment?"

I guess it depends on what you need. You may be disappointed by the size, the likely accessories, etc. But when it comes to image quality and versatility, there is NO comparison. And then again we return to, "is it good enough", the same thing that applies to music as well.

Are your phone photos good enough for your purposes? If yes, then you might be disappointed.

Thank you marie

Smartphone cameras have improved a lot, but there are two things that still take the enjoyment out of smartphone photography:

1) No viewfinder. Smartphone screen is difficult to use in bright sun. It's even worse when trying to shoot video.

2) No zoom lens. You can't compose the pictures like you want with the fixed lens on a smartphone.

Dhojraish said:

How much better is 16 mp micro four thirds cmos sensor better than the latest smartphone camera quality?

Click to expand...

An M43 16mp camera can produce results much better than a smartphone or be just the same. It's the person behind the camera that makes the difference.

Dhojraish said:

Will Upgrade from best smart phone camera to micro four thirds be a disappointment?

Click to expand...

If you upgrade to a 16mp M43 you have the opportunity to take better pictures. Any camera will be a disappointment if superior results are expected immediately by just picking up the camera and pressing the shutter button the same as with the phone. This the case whether spending $6000 for the latest Sony A9 and quality lens or spending or $500 for an EM10ii with kit lens.

From my use, m43 way much better.. no comparison at all..

if results are the same, the issue may be from the shooter, not equipment capability..