Why cameras like the M are still worth carrying everywhere

Started 1 month ago | Discussions thread
Wayne Larmon Forum Pro • Posts: 10,319
Better example

Alastair Norcross wrote:

Veducci wrote:

The phone image was not particularly good . My phone would have done much better.

Of course your Canon camera would beat out most phones but the bottom line remains that dedicated cameras are on their way out but for the few that actually have a compelling need for better.

It was actually a really good example. I didn't deny that some phones can do better (but none can do as well as real camera in that situation). The phone photo I posted was actually far more like most phone photos I am shown than a much better one would be.

I've been using Ms for a few years. And a Pixel 2 since mid Feb. 2018. I often carry them both. I've found that the Pixel usually gives image quality equal to a custom hand tweaked M raw file. I don't have many duplicate M/Pixel 2 shots because I usually don't want to turn every photo shoot into a camera testing exercise. But here are two images from a recent trip to the Kennedy Space Center:

Out of the camera Pixel 2 (with Moment wide lens)

EOS M50 raw converted with ACR "As shot"

After I realized that my 15-45mm lens wasn't wide enough to get the Saturn V rockets in the frame, I then got out my Pixel 2 and put my Moment wide lens on. Which makes the image quality of the Pixel 2 is a little softer than normal because of the Moment wide lens. (I didn't have my EF-S 10-22 lens with me.)

When I shoot with Ms (M50, M6) and my Pixel I usually do a lot of contortions with tone mapping in ACR to make the M image look as good as the Pixel 2. This time I didn't. I set ACR to Adobe Standard and used the default settings for everything else. Auto against auto.

My Ms win on ultimate resolution (I downsized the M50 shot to be 3024 pixels high to match the Pixel) but the Pixel usually wins on everything else (before raw contortions) so I always go with a Pixel shot if I can get it. I only use the Ms when I can't get a shot with the Pixel 2. Usually because of focal length reasons. And/or because of needing an EVF in the bright sunlight (which is a lack of technique on my part.)

My Pixel 2 provides all the image quality I can see on my 4K 14" laptop screen, which is 320 PPI. None of my larger cameras are better when viewed at ~300 PPI. (Except my 6D is better at high ISO low light.)

DPReview says that the Pixel 2 "sensor can often behave like one nine times its size (approaching Micro 4/3)", which I find is the norm. Canon sensors generally perform worse than the competition so an M 4/3 comparison is apt.

Please don't compare long obsolete smart phone cameras against Canon mature technology. Canon technology has barely improved over the past decade. Smartphone technology progresses by leaps and bounds every year. My Pixel 2 is one generation back. There are several current generation smartphones that can whup its behind.


Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow