TG-5 vs Smartphone photo quality?

Even though we usually see camera reviews in the same category, is also makes sense to compare across different categories...

Given that the sensor of the TG5 is same size as that of a modern smartphone (e.g. Samsung S7, S8), and the smartphone employs better processing, how would the photo quality compare?

Of course the TG5 in-addition has optical zoom, waterproofness, etc, but does it make sense to carry such a camera if you already carry one of the latest smartphones?

Aquanaut said:

Even though we usually see camera reviews in the same category, is also makes sense to compare across different categories...

Given that the sensor of the TG5 is same size as that of a modern smartphone (e.g. Samsung S7, S8), and the smartphone employs better processing, how would the photo quality compare?

Click to expand...

I'm positive the Galaxy S8 uses 1/2.55" sensor, so it's somewhat smaller.

When it comes to any small sensor camera, it requires a photographer who understands the inherent limitations in order to produce good quality images. Even though smartphones may have some clever processing, it doesn't seem to help overcome the incompetence of some shooters. Every week I receive dozens of images taken with phones that are unmitigated disasters. People with a bit of skill can get good pictures from either camera.

The folded optics lens of the TG series is probably the biggest factor in limiting IQ. Not the sensor or JPEG processing. It's the price you pay for a ruggedized design.

Aquanaut said:

Of course the TG5 in-addition has optical zoom, waterproofness, etc, but does it make sense to carry such a camera if you already carry one of the latest smartphones?

Click to expand...

Depends on what and where you plan to shoot. My TG-3 has repeatedly handled environments that would have destroyed my phone. I'm not much of a macro shooter, but my phone is pretty much worthless for that sort of work. I take a fair number of pictures with my phone. I often feel limited that the lens doesn't have enough reach or isn't wide enough. But my phone is with me more often and takes more casual snapshot type of pictures.

It also depends on who your target audience is. If you're only posting to Instagram or Facebook either will do. If your standards are higher and need to shoot over a wide variety of conditions, you probably wouldn't be using any small sensor camera.

--
Phil

Aquanaut said:

Even though we usually see camera reviews in the same category, is also makes sense to compare across different categories...

Given that the sensor of the TG5 is same size as that of a modern smartphone (e.g. Samsung S7, S8), and the smartphone employs better processing, how would the photo quality compare?

Of course the TG5 in-addition has optical zoom, waterproofness, etc, but does it make sense to carry such a camera if you already carry one of the latest smartphones?

Click to expand...

Yes. The IQ is rather worse than the modern smartphone's camera.

These pictures are the proof.


Not crisp. Lack of detail. Lot of color fringe.


So much vignette


Lost of detail in shadow


Overt jpg artefacts. See the rainbow color fringe at both the lower left and right? No Samsung or iPhone camera has it!


But too bad that it's one side proof. Have no modern smartphone to be carried with at that time, despite spending a lot of effort finding one.

...

Fish is so bad in any tree climbing competition. Even baby monkey is better than the strongest fish.

It's also always be the worst loser in every flying contest with any bird too.

--
Flashes of my Memory.

I've been testing out my TG-5, and sometimes taking the same photo with both the TG-5 and the smartphone. The more I test, the more I'd say they're different tools for different situations.

In good light, they'll come out with very similar quality photos (other than the fact I can control settings better on the TG-5).

The rainbow fringing that khunpapa mentioned can be fixed in OV3 (the free photo editing software), if it happens at all.

Smartphone relative strengths (tied to better processing):

• Panoramic photos
• Integral HDR (not relying on a photo editor)
• Vivid colors
• Ease of use
• Edits, sends and/or posts photos with fewer steps

TG-5 relative strengths (tied to everything else):

• Optical zoom and optional teleconverter
• Option for wide-angle or fish-eye lens
• Underwater
• RAW + jpeg
• Control over settings (ISO, aperture, white balance)
• Portraits
• Low-light
• Macro photos (1 cm + f/8 + Focus Stacking/Bracketing)
• Colors true to reality
• Option for filters (especially CPL and graduated ND)
• Easier to swap out batteries and SD cards
• Durability
• Remote control through app

The lack of an optical zoom is an enormous impediment to the smartphone. Even something as simple as a sunset photo doesn't look right unless you can zoom to at least a 50mm equivalent. Portraits optimally should have close to 100mm equivalent.

What kind of photos are you expecting to take?

I need a camera for toy photography that is durable and waterproof. I currently use my cell phone but I want higher quality photos.. my friends say I shld just get the canon t6i but they are so big and bulky and aren’t water resistant

what kind of pros and cons are there and how is the quality of the pics taken by an Olympus?

BeautyntheBeast said:

I need a camera for toy photography that is durable and waterproof.

Click to expand...

Underwater toys?

BeautyntheBeast said:

I currently use my cell phone but I want higher quality photos.. my friends say I shld just get the canon t6i but they are so big and bulky and aren’t water resistant

what kind of pros and cons are there and how is the quality of the pics taken by an Olympus?

Click to expand...

Like a your phone, the TG-5 has a pretty small sensor. If you want good image quality, you'll need to provide enough light to keep it at base ISO. Today's flagship phones use clever processing to turn out better than expected shots. A friend prefers his Pixel 2 over his TG-5 in terms of overall image quality.

Where the TG series really shines is where you need a ruggedized waterproof camera. My TG-3 has survived environments that would have quickly destroyed most cameras. It also has a somewhat unique macro mode that can produce amazing results. But it still is a small sensor camera and it can't compete against today's 1" or larger format models. But if you require a waterproof design, then it gets complicated. If your priority is improved IQ, a larger camera and housing would be a logical move. If you prefer the smaller size and convenience of a TG-5, you'll likely sacrifice IQ gains.

Only you can decide what's acceptable IQ. There are many full resolution images posted here on DPR and other sites. You really should spend some time reviewing those images. After doing that, you can post more specific questions.

--
Phil

I have the TG-4 and find that it is much easier to take pictures with the camera than my smartphone, I always feel I may drop my phone while trying to take a picture. As far as image quality in good light my phone (Moto G4) is great but it can't match the controls I can use with the camera.

Aquanaut said:

does it make sense to carry such a camera if you already carry one of the latest smartphones?

Click to expand...

You could extend this same question to be about a DSLR (or mirrorless) vs a smartphone, and truly the answer will be: in most cases, your smartphone will be sufficient. This is just the nature of photography - the majority of the time, you'll have your smallest cheapest camera with you (your phone), and it will be sufficient for your needs.

So there are some things the TG-5 give me that I can't get on my phone.

- Manual control - aperture, ISO, exposure comp

- Picture profiles, ability to change sharpening and noise reduction

- Zoom to 4x optically when I need it

- RAW

- Much lower shutter lag

- Lower startup time (turning the camera on is quicker than starting camera app on my phone)

- Much more reliable autofocus

- Image stabilization (some phones have this too)

- Ability to record video at frame rates other than 30fps (including 120fps)

There are probably others I'm forgetting, but the main theme is it's the sort of things you expect to be able to do with an actual camera, as opposed to a camera app on a phone.

That said I don't carry it all the time. Sometimes my phone is the best camera I have on me.

My iPhone X takes better images, but the point of the TG5 is you can use it in situations where you wouldn’t use your phone. Under water, out in the freezing cold snow with gloves on, etc. RAW support helps immensely.

khunpapa said:

Aquanaut said:

Even though we usually see camera reviews in the same category, is also makes sense to compare across different categories...

Given that the sensor of the TG5 is same size as that of a modern smartphone (e.g. Samsung S7, S8), and the smartphone employs better processing, how would the photo quality compare?

Of course the TG5 in-addition has optical zoom, waterproofness, etc, but does it make sense to carry such a camera if you already carry one of the latest smartphones?

Click to expand...

Yes. The IQ is rather worse than the modern smartphone's camera.

These pictures are the proof.


Not crisp. Lack of detail. Lot of color fringe.


So much vignette


Lost of detail in shadow


Overt jpg artefacts. See the rainbow color fringe at both the lower left and right? No Samsung or iPhone camera has it!

But too bad that it's one side proof. Have no modern smartphone to be carried with at that time, despite spending a lot of effort finding one.

...

Fish is so bad in any tree climbing competition. Even baby monkey is better than the strongest fish.

It's also always be the worst loser in every flying contest with any bird too.

Click to expand...

That color fringing may be due to the fact that those are underwater photos and the TG-5 has a flat port in front rather than a domed one. Water refraction

Compared to your average P&S,,,the Smartphone IQ is equal or better, generally....

Olympus should have put a 1 inch sensor in the TG-5.

Problem solved.

Using a 1" sensor would force changing many characteristics that make the TG series so useful.

I don't believe the folded optics design would effectively scale up with a larger sensor. If it could be done, the camera would be much larger. To keep the camera smaller and not have a large protruding lens, it would have to use a fixed focal length design. I would have little use for a ruggedized P&S camera without a zoom lens. The focal length would probably be in the range of 28-35mm, making it less useful for underwater photography.

Many seem to believe a larger sensor can simply be dropped in the camera. Don't hold your breath waiting for it to happen.

My Samsung Note 8 has significantly better IQ than my TG5, and it's waterproof too.

TG 5 more waterproof and rugged, but considering the size of the lens and its single purpose, I think it really should be better thsn a phone.

Fujijitsu said:

My Samsung Note 8 has significantly better IQ than my TG5, and it's waterproof too.

TG 5 more waterproof and rugged, but considering the size of the lens and its single purpose, I think it really should be better thsn a phone.

Click to expand...

Surely the fixed lens module in the camera is very single purpose and it has a ready made operating/programming environment to write the firmware in. Olympus have to do it themselves.

These phones also have a massive turnover in sales supporting development which cameras do not.

Can you explain why you think this product with relatively low sales and which has to be built and programmed in its entirety from scratch and with a zoom lens should be better than a prime lens mass turnover phone.

Do not forget also that Samsung were also unable to compete in the camera world when they had to do this themselves and ignominiously slunk off with nary a word of explanation and actually phones are a relatively easy fall back option for them.

Fujijitsu said:

My Samsung Note 8 has significantly better IQ than my TG5, and it's waterproof too.

TG 5 more waterproof and rugged, but considering the size of the lens and its single purpose, I think it really should be better thsn a phone.

Click to expand...

Yes, I bought a Seafrogs housing for the Sony RX100 (i have the M3) and it is magnitudes better than the TG-5. TG-5 is ok in good light but still photos are not so much better than my Hawkeye Firefly 8S action cam and I imagine a Go Pro. But at least it zooms optically and also shoots RAW and writes it quickly which is necessary for underwater shots.

I do not have an iphone (I have a Moto X4 whose camera is so so) but there is this housing for iPhone 7 (or maybe 6) that I wonder if that would be money better spent than for a TG 5. Seals of the phone housing probably are better than the battery doors of the TG-5. Also iPhone being slightly water resistant would not die with a small leak in the housing (also maybe the charging / connector port could be taped with some water resistant electrical tape.

check this review.

KeepCalm said:

Fujijitsu said:

My Samsung Note 8 has significantly better IQ than my TG5, and it's waterproof too.

TG 5 more waterproof and rugged, but considering the size of the lens and its single purpose, I think it really should be better thsn a phone.

Click to expand...

Surely the fixed lens module in the camera is very single purpose and it has a ready made operating/programming environment to write the firmware in. Olympus have to do it themselves.

These phones also have a massive turnover in sales supporting development which cameras do not.

Can you explain why you think this product with relatively low sales and which has to be built and programmed in its entirety from scratch and with a zoom lens should be better than a prime lens mass turnover phone.

Do not forget also that Samsung were also unable to compete in the camera world when they had to do this themselves and ignominiously slunk off with nary a word of explanation and actually phones are a relatively easy fall back option for them.

Click to expand...

Olympus are not new to the camera sector, they have many years of digital, film and lens manufacture experience, and their cameras do not have to make calls or access the internet.

I'm sure they could do better if they prioritized image quality over features.

Fujijitsu said:

Fujijitsu wrote

Click to expand...

Fujijitsu said:

Olympus are not new to the camera sector, they have many years of digital, film and lens manufacture experience, and their cameras do not have to make calls or access the internet.

I'm sure they could do better if they prioritized image quality over features.

Click to expand...

Probably Oly TG-5 would be great for $250. it can take decent photos, its advantage is that is small and shoots RAW. On backscatter.com they have nice tutorials / reviews. Maybe it is better for video than for still photos. It allows better photos than the action cams even if sensor is not so different. because of RAW and zoom. Yet it is only 12 megapixels that does not allow much room for cropping with the limited zoom.

Fujijitsu said:

KeepCalm said:

Fujijitsu said:

My Samsung Note 8 has significantly better IQ than my TG5, and it's waterproof too.

TG 5 more waterproof and rugged, but considering the size of the lens and its single purpose, I think it really should be better thsn a phone.

Click to expand...

Surely the fixed lens module in the camera is very single purpose and it has a ready made operating/programming environment to write the firmware in. Olympus have to do it themselves.

These phones also have a massive turnover in sales supporting development which cameras do not.

Can you explain why you think this product with relatively low sales and which has to be built and programmed in its entirety from scratch and with a zoom lens should be better than a prime lens mass turnover phone.

Do not forget also that Samsung were also unable to compete in the camera world when they had to do this themselves and ignominiously slunk off with nary a word of explanation and actually phones are a relatively easy fall back option for them.

Click to expand...

Olympus are not new to the camera sector, they have many years of digital, film and lens manufacture experience, and their cameras do not have to make calls or access the internet.

I'm sure they could do better if they prioritized image quality over features.

Click to expand...

Whatever you say. Fine.

KeepCalm said:

Fujijitsu said:

KeepCalm said:

Fujijitsu said:

My Samsung Note 8 has significantly better IQ than my TG5, and it's waterproof too.

TG 5 more waterproof and rugged, but considering the size of the lens and its single purpose, I think it really should be better thsn a phone.

Click to expand...

Surely the fixed lens module in the camera is very single purpose and it has a ready made operating/programming environment to write the firmware in. Olympus have to do it themselves.

These phones also have a massive turnover in sales supporting development which cameras do not.

Can you explain why you think this product with relatively low sales and which has to be built and programmed in its entirety from scratch and with a zoom lens should be better than a prime lens mass turnover phone.

Do not forget also that Samsung were also unable to compete in the camera world when they had to do this themselves and ignominiously slunk off with nary a word of explanation and actually phones are a relatively easy fall back option for them.

Click to expand...

Olympus are not new to the camera sector, they have many years of digital, film and lens manufacture experience, and their cameras do not have to make calls or access the internet.

I'm sure they could do better if they prioritized image quality over features.

Click to expand...

Whatever you say. Fine.

Click to expand...

Ironic comment when another member of the Olympus group was just saying what a nice polite group this is.

The TG 5 is very good at some uses, its' macro features ate excellent, but it should really be able to match a top end mobile phone, and unfortunately it cannot.

The DP Review curse of fans defending a brand no matter what, stifles constructive drbate.