RX100 III vs Samsung S9+

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
Digital Nigel Forum Pro • Posts: 12,225
Re: You answered your own question
2

jackal14 wrote:

Rambow wrote:

jackal14 wrote:

I’m not a very serious photographer. Portability is more important to me.

Smartphone it is, then.

Don't matter if you buy the world's best pocket camera if you don't plan on using it, is there?

I am not a serious photographer, but I would gladly use a small compact camera better than my smartphone on my travels

I just don't want to buy a camera that doesn't take better photos from my smartphone.

PS: The price of the 2nd hand rx100 m3 camera is half the price of my smartphone.

I welcome any suggestions.

I think Labe has given you some good insights. Basically, the camera is less automated than the phone, as it's expected that camera owners will want to take more control. If you take advantage of the extra controls and options, and shoot RAW, you will certainly be able to achieve better results with the camera.

But if you use it like most people use phone cameras (ie, completely automatic mode), then you'll likely be disappointed. Just because the camera is capable of more, doesn't mean you'll necessarily get more from it unless you work at it. So it means learning about apertures, shutter speeds, depth of field, ISO, the autofocus system, using the viewfinder, etc. You'll probably also want to learn about post-processing — some people really enjoy that, others find it a tedious waste of time.

So, the simple answer is that, no the camera won't take better pictures than the smartphone, without some help from you. In completely automatic mode, I think it will probably take worse pictures than the phone.

 Digital Nigel's gear list:Digital Nigel's gear list
Panasonic FZ1000 Canon PowerShot G7 X Nikon Coolpix P900 Panasonic ZS100 Sony RX10 III +18 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow