usefullness of phone camera

Thank you!

I don't look at sensor size, unless I am thinking about making large prints. I look at results. I shoot with everything from my cellphone to my point and shoot with 1/2.3 in. sensor to DSLR depending on how the photo will be used. Comparing a photo on a cellphone screen that used computational photography against a picture that came from a "real" camera before any PP is not a valid comparison.




Canon 500 HS w/1.23 in. sensor




Cheap cellphone




Film camera

On vacation, I try to take some stunning photos but also some basic documentary, snapshot stuff like hotel rooms and restaurants and friends. My Huawei P30 works well for that (and it has a nice macro mode, something even the iPhone doesn't have.) If the scene is interesting enough, I may switch between cell (for social media) and FF (for quality and post processing.) It just depends on what you want.



















--
no, I won't return to read your witty reply!
professional cynic and contrarian: don't take it personally

Thanks for sharing. Nice pictures.

Without pixel peeping. all of the formats I listed. If not directly out of camera, than PP to an equivalent.

curiosifly said:

curiosifly said:

Night mode. Useless. It is just a gimmick. Who takes night photo snapshot? Anyone wants to take night photos, get a 4 inch tripod. Either phone or camera on small tripod will be way better than night mode.

Click to expand...

Thank you very much! Regarding the note above, I thought that night mode enables you to take long exposures (kind of) without tripod because the software helps you to realign the pixels even if there is slight movement or hand shake?

Click to expand...

Ok, I might be a bit dramatic when I said Night mode is useless. If you need a snapshot, Night mode will result in better photo than without the feature. But it is no comparison vs camera.

Below is an example. Left photo is iPhone 11 night mode hand held. Right photo is Sony A6400 on tripod. You can clearly see difference in sharpness when zoomed in.

I believe issue is phone image sensor itself. It has too much noise in low light. I suspect noise reduction simply reduces the sharpness. Night mode helps, but result is not even close to APS-C camera.

Avila, Spain:


66%: iPhone 11 (left), Sony a6400 (right)


100%: iPhone 11 (left), Sony a6400 (right)

Ok, now that the night mode bashing is over. Earlier that evening, my family was on a walk and the color of twilight/dusk was gorgeous. I didn't have time to setup or play with my camera, unless I split from my family. So I took a snapshot with my iPhone 11. I don't know if iPhone used the Night mode or not; I believe it did.

If I played with my Sony a6400 camera, I'm sure I can get a better image. But then I lose family time. So in this case, iPhone worked great. It's all relative.


This color was very close to original. Phone color is already saturated. I boosted the saturation just a tad for the blue sky.

--
Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/jimmyk-photo/

curiosifly said:

These are really nice. Thank you very much for sharing. By the way, do you feel the difference between P30's and iphone's different sensor resolution?

Click to expand...

It’s the telephoto reach of the P30pro that has the 11 beat .
I don’t notice the actual resolution difference image quality wise as I stopped pixel peeping years ago.

To give you an idea of the P30pro reach ...

Both taken from the same spot...


Wide angle



even tried handheld shot of the moon lol












--
He worships me so much he even took my name. How awesome is that!

Thank you again for sharing the samples. It's good to be able to see the difference side by side.

Thank you. I've never tried a moon shot before. Didn't know now even phone camera can do that

Here is one that I took with my POCO F2; I upload the full rez in case you want to pixel peep



View attachment c43c7970fc474f229804d02fefc0b483.jpg

Thanks.

I recently got a company new phone, the lowly Nokia 7.2 (compared to an Iphone 12) .

It has three camera, one wide angle.

My takeaways:

Zooming in or printing large, IQ of phones still quickly falls apart. What looks good on instagram doesn't on a 27" screen anymore.

The Ultrawideangle has much lower quality, don't know if that applies to the I12. I usually stitch with my A6600 and 1655 or 18105 zoom and most of the times don't carry my 1918 anymore. So with such a lens you don't really need Ultrawideangle.

I also stitched with my phone when I SUPped into the Benagil cave and nothing but my neopren suit with me. The shots still look good after doing PP with the DNG files from the phone. But it is a lot worse than if I had taken my secondary A6000 with kit lens with me, dynamic range is very limited. HDR in phone helps many times but only yields JPG that have not much freedom left to PP.

Weddings/Portraits: There is no comparison between APSC & 56/f1.4 prime versus a fake portrait mode. Again, sufficient for Instagram but not for more for me at least.

Speed: Using default settings even shots with an APSC camera setup can be fuzzy for quick action. With phones even worse.

Summary, I use the new phone more often but the IQ still leaves me frustrated often afterwards. For quick documentation, ok. Many topics in life don't warrant pulling out the big camera.




Stitched from 6 or more shots from phone.




Same




Sharp and nice bokeh highlights. Zoom on APSC




Stitch from 3 shots with A6000 and 18105 wide. Print size 2m x 1.2 m. You can see the surfers in the surf when you stand close. Had to postprocess till colors, highlight recovery and stitching were perfect. I claim not possible today with a phone.





--
German/English Nex/A6000-Blog: http://luxorphotoart.blogspot.de/

cxsparc said:

Stitch from 3 shots with A6000 and 18105 wide. Print size 2m x 1.2 m. You can see the surfers in the surf when you stand close. Had to postprocess till colors, highlight recovery and stitching were perfect. I claim not possible today with a phone.

Click to expand...

Thank you. Wonderful shot above. Did you also use bracketing for the high dynamic range? I have not tried bracketing and stitching together before. What is the work flow on that?

--
ciao

curiosifly said:

Well, not sure why I start this thread and not sure why I am tempted by the iphone 12. Maybe just because my iphone 6 plus is already 5 years old and I'm tired of its 16G memory.

Just trying to see what people (especially people here take camera/photography as a hobby) feel how useful their iphone (or any phone) camera is.

Click to expand...

I have an iPhone 7 Plus, and I think it's pretty decent, for a small-sensor camera. I use it a lot. Mostly because I have it with me, and I don't have to prepare it like a normal camera -- make sure the battery is charged, carry it, etc. I find it about as good as small P&S camera, and sometimes better.

However, I still try to carry a P&S camera at times. Why? The P&S camera has an actual shutter button (although on the iPhone, you can now use the on/off button when the photo app is loaded). You have a real optical zoom that is more flexible. You have more options that are easier to access with buttons. But my P&S camera doesn't have RAW mode, and my phone does. And the native image format on the iPhone is now a 10-bit file not 8-bit, so that gives you more to work with right there. It's kind of a tough call to say what's better, but this is a real shame that the camera manufacturers limit their P&S cameras so severely, as if they don't even want to compete with the phone.

curiosifly said:

I quit using my iphone 6 camera after one year mainly because my phone storage space has been full since then and I'm too lazy to clear my pictures on the phone. Also, the images taken by my phone do not look too good when viewed on my computer screen (even though I am the only one who would do so while everyone else just enjoy viewing them on their phone screen). Things are much uglier if the light is low when the picture is taken, especially if my subject is moving (which is the case most of the time). Many times the view angle of the wide lens is also a problem that I wish I could have a different perspective. It also does not feel very comfortable when use the phone as a camera for a long time and sometimes without EVF it could be hard to see your subject while composing.

Click to expand...

Not sure that I take photos with motion in low light, but with reasonably stable motion, I take a lot of low light photos -- indoors, generally. I used to have lots of problems with P&S cameras, and newer P&S cameras and phones do much better.

Now, with any small-sensor camera, pixel-peeping is going to look bad, particularly if light is low. Noise Reduction can make things a muddy mess. Even so, I find the iPhone is oddly pretty good with the NR. Is this part of "night mode"?

A VF is better, but using the screen is not often a problem. Mostly a problem for me in bright sunlight, so sometimes you gotta guestimate the target.

curiosifly said:

So what has changed since iphone 6? I have an RX100, a retired A6000 and a newly acquired A6600 with 30f1.4, 501.8, 18-135 and 12 f2. In what situations I would need the iphone camera instead of my other equipment (other than when I choose not to bring the camera)?

A 13 mm wide angle lens. That's nice and something I always want in many occasions. No matter if I pick my RX100 to be as light as possible, or travel with A6600 and one or two lens, I usually could not get that focal length (the 12 mm f2 lens stays at home most of the time). When I need this angle of view, I'm most likely dealing with static subject so the night mode would be helpful too.

A 52 mm or 65 mm normal lens. That's nice too but maybe not as useful as if it is a 100 mm lens. And I guess my RX100 can beat it if I am willing to also take some long exposures or multiframe stacking for low light situations.

Click to expand...

There are multiple phone apps that will do stacking as well, but you need to not have any motion. The ones I've used don't do a good job of dealing with motion, while Sony seems to do OK sometimes (and sometimes not).

curiosifly said:

The catch is do you feel the iphone provide you the level of convenience (like you do not need to do post processing, you do not need to bring tripod, you do not even need to remember to bring your camera) that you think is really worth it and could deliver some end result that you'll not regret that you did not use your dedicated camera?

Click to expand...

In odd light or low light, you probably can benefit from post-processing. In daylight, results usually look good.

curiosifly said:

Water proof. That may be really useful? I am not going to bring my phone to the pool or taking pictures when it's pouring. I also don't want to invest on a very clumsy underwater case. Will I (you) do that with the iphone? Anyone enjoyed using their phone as their main water activity camera?

Click to expand...

I don't purposefully submerge the phone. That's just a bit of piece of mind to not worry about it so much, tho.

curiosifly said:

Night mode. The sample images I saw from the website look very nice, at least for the size of image they post on line. I guess it is limited to static subject so I still need my camera and fast lens when dealing with moving subject. But could be handy when you need to take a snap indoors or at night etc.. Anyone feel it is really better than even a APSC camera for low light situation (without using tripod of course).

Click to expand...

Do you have to select it, or is it automatic? I will have to look it up....

curiosifly said:

Portrait mode. Do pictures taken in this mode look realistic most of the time? DOF control is one main reason for a fast lens and large sensor and is nowadays phone camera good enough to simulate its effect in most of the cases?

Click to expand...

Good enough for small pics, but I haven't analyzed it in detail. I don't use this much.

curiosifly said:

A bright and contrasty screen that you would never have issue viewing under the sun?

Click to expand...

DR is not as good as I would like. I'm sure my Sony cameras are better in that regard. This isn't just a problem under the sun, but even indoors with strong lighting. You can end up with blown backgrounds if you choose to properly expose the subject, for example.

curiosifly said:

How many of you think the phone camera is a good supplement to your photography tools and plan to use it for certain situations other than something you only think about to use when there is really no other tools available?

Click to expand...

I use it all the time. It's the camera I always have with me, as others have said.

For "snapshots" where I'm not concerned TOO much about the quality, it's fine. When I want something that's more of a keeper, I'll try to use my APS-C camera. For making poster-sized photos, if you got a clean shot that was in good light, it might be fine. I can't say I've printed any of my phone photos large, but I should try. I have occasionally used my phone to make some "artistic" photos -- it's not a crazy idea. But limited resolution, more noise, etc., all can affect low-level detail, detail you might need for larger prints.

curiosifly said:

How many of you think it is worth it to go for the higher end camera module/feature when shopping for a phone that's originally intended as a communication tool?

Click to expand...

A lot of higher-end phones have good cameras, so not sure I'd worry about it unless I wanted to look at cheaper phones. I can't say it's the main thing I shop for, but interested in it, for sure.

curiosifly said:

cxsparc said:

Stitch from 3 shots with A6000 and 18105 wide. Print size 2m x 1.2 m. You can see the surfers in the surf when you stand close. Had to postprocess till colors, highlight recovery and stitching were perfect. I claim not possible today with a phone.

Click to expand...

Thank you. Wonderful shot above. Did you also use bracketing for the high dynamic range? I have not tried bracketing and stitching together before. What is the work flow on that?

Click to expand...

I only used RAW and PPed in Capture One. Highlight recovery, whitebalance correction selective saturation increase for the greenblue ocean.

--
German/English Nex/A6000-Blog: http://luxorphotoart.blogspot.de/

Thanks. I guess that really shows the advantage of larger sensor. I am not sure if any phone can do HDR and pano at the same time.

Also thanks to everyone who has shared opinion and photos. Some really great photos by both phone and dedicated cameras.

curiosifly said:

Well, not sure why I start this thread and not sure why I am tempted by the iphone 12. Maybe just because my iphone 6 plus is already 5 years old and I'm tired of its 16G memory.

Just trying to see what people (especially people here take camera/photography as a hobby) feel how useful their iphone (or any phone) camera is.

I quit using my iphone 6 camera after one year mainly because my phone storage space has been full since then and I'm too lazy to clear my pictures on the phone. Also, the images taken by my phone do not look too good when viewed on my computer screen (even though I am the only one who would do so while everyone else just enjoy viewing them on their phone screen). Things are much uglier if the light is low when the picture is taken, especially if my subject is moving (which is the case most of the time). Many times the view angle of the wide lens is also a problem that I wish I could have a different perspective. It also does not feel very comfortable when use the phone as a camera for a long time and sometimes without EVF it could be hard to see your subject while composing.

So what has changed since iphone 6? I have an RX100, a retired A6000 and a newly acquired A6600 with 30f1.4, 501.8, 18-135 and 12 f2. In what situations I would need the iphone camera instead of my other equipment (other than when I choose not to bring the camera)?

A 13 mm wide angle lens. That's nice and something I always want in many occasions. No matter if I pick my RX100 to be as light as possible, or travel with A6600 and one or two lens, I usually could not get that focal length (the 12 mm f2 lens stays at home most of the time). When I need this angle of view, I'm most likely dealing with static subject so the night mode would be helpful too.

A 52 mm or 65 mm normal lens. That's nice too but maybe not as useful as if it is a 100 mm lens. And I guess my RX100 can beat it if I am willing to also take some long exposures or multiframe stacking for low light situations. The catch is do you feel the iphone provide you the level of convenience (like you do not need to do post processing, you do not need to bring tripod, you do not even need to remember to bring your camera) that you think is really worth it and could deliver some end result that you'll not regret that you did not use your dedicated camera?

Water proof. That may be really useful? I am not going to bring my phone to the pool or taking pictures when it's pouring. I also don't want to invest on a very clumsy underwater case. Will I (you) do that with the iphone? Anyone enjoyed using their phone as their main water activity camera?

Night mode. The sample images I saw from the website look very nice, at least for the size of image they post on line. I guess it is limited to static subject so I still need my camera and fast lens when dealing with moving subject. But could be handy when you need to take a snap indoors or at night etc.. Anyone feel it is really better than even a APSC camera for low light situation (without using tripod of course).

Portrait mode. Do pictures taken in this mode look realistic most of the time? DOF control is one main reason for a fast lens and large sensor and is nowadays phone camera good enough to simulate its effect in most of the cases?

A bright and contrasty screen that you would never have issue viewing under the sun?

How many of you think the phone camera is a good supplement to your photography tools and plan to use it for certain situations other than something you only think about to use when there is really no other tools available?

How many of you think it is worth it to go for the higher end camera module/feature when shopping for a phone that's originally intended as a communication tool?

Click to expand...

I think that in most of the cases, this is not a real dilemma, but a matter of being honest to ourselves: Why are we taking photos, what do we expect as a result, what do we expect from an experience of taking photos and what is most practical about it for us.
There is an inconvenient truth: a lot of people who still buy cameras don't really need them anymore because all they are taking are snapshots. Mostly JPGs straight out of the camera, no editing, and those photos are mostly taken just to preserve some memories, moments, family members etc. And for that, phone cameras are just fine. Those people like cameras as gadgets. It may not make much difference in reality but they are enjoying using the camera. And it is completely fine.
The thing is what do you feel and need?
I am far from a great photographer but I really like the experience of shooting with a camera. I think differently when I am taking a photo with a dedicated tool. My mind works in a different way. I enjoy it as a part of the trip, or as a part of the day, going through RAWs after and editing photos. And I want to get as much enjoyment as I can from the whole process. I am looking at my photos on a 32 4K monitor. Not because I pixel peep but because photos look nicer on a better screen. And again it feels better than looking at them on the phone. And on the big screen you definitely see difference compared to phone photos. For me, there is a lot of quality hedonism in cameras and photography.
You have a lot of practical questions. Having a nice, enjoyable, immersive experience is not about practicality. It's not about asking "is it good enough". It is about what do you want from it, what makes you feel good. Who cares what everybody else uses to look at your photos or if your family members see or don't see the difference. Is there a difference for you, that is what matters. And be sure, feeling great when taking photos can also make those photos better.
And even the "practical" side and all mantra about phone being "camera you always have with you". Yes, it is a camera that is always with me and that is, at least for me really not enjoyable AND not practical to use. And I REALLY wanted to make it work. Starting from good (not so?) old Nokia 1020, I would get phone with a great camera and in the end always end up either not using those photos or be annoyed that I didn't have a proper camera with me to take decent photo instead of subpar phone photo. And my experience, especially when traveling, was that phones are highly impractical as a photography tool. In most of the situations I was having a camera around my neck (I was using canon M's at the time) . It was small and out of the way when I don't need it. And when I do, I found out that it takes three seconds to take a photo while still holding something else, map or a bag in other hand. I just take the camera, turn it on take a photo and turn it off all with one hand. It's so fast and easy. And it is always there and ready. And then I want to take a photo with my phone, so I am switching stuff around, because I may be carry thing and I can literary take a photo with a small mirrorless while I am holding something in both of my hands, but it is impossible to do that with a phone. I am trying to get it out of the front pocket of my pants, I am fighting with his shape that is definitely not made with taking photos in mind, then trying to unlock it, turning on camera app, and then taking the photo. A photo that will inevitably look worse than the one I needed easy three seconds to take instead. I never found anything easy or practical about it.
And I feel the same about phones in general. They may replace the camera for most of the people, but they will never be practical and joyful to use compared to proper camera. I can do some stuff on them, reply email, look for something on the web but my desktop with a big monitor and proper keyboard will be always faster and better experience. I can watch videos and photos on my phone , but they will always look much better on big monitor or on my big TV. So for me phones are necessary evil, jacks of all trades, masters of none - except when it comes to their key feature - using them as a phone to talk to the people. It is nice to have a small computer in your pocket that does a lot of things at least decent, but the thing is if that is good enough for someone. For instance I am writing this on my desktop because typing this on a phone would take twice the time or even more.
So again, ask yourself why you take photos, what do you enjoy about it and how you can make it into an experience that you really like. It's not about night modes, megapixels, multiple lenses, "practicalities", it is about what works for you and makes you happy. Life is not only about most practical solutions, but about having certain experiences. Some people may look on their photos on a tiny screen, look at the car or a chair only from a point of its practical side, but for me, there is definitely a relationship between results and how I feel in the process. Cameras make me want to take photos and enhance my experiences, taking a photo with a phone doesn't. But if you don't feel the difference, it is also completely fine to just sell all the stuff and use the phone. Only you can know the answer.

I think you've summed up my feelings about the issue. As you say though, it's ultimately down to what people want to use. And choice must be a good thing.

It all depends on what you want, expect. Optics and bigger sensor are important, more control and settings is a big advantage,... For me personally the phone plusses are :always with you, small package, multiple focal lengths, instant processing or sharing, usually main camera is the best so it forces you to take a different approach, phones are developing fast, video quality is very good,.... I had the same doubts as you then I searched / found a lot of talented photographers which are using phones for more than selfies, I digged into specs and went for it. So nowadays my alpha series is usually at home in it's bag. And I started to take pictures again, memories, without pixel peeping or worrying of bring and changing lenses, etc. And prints up to A4 or sometimes A3 look great. I even have several photos on stock agencies taken with phone and have sold a few one.

If I look back at color pictures takes on 35mm film, we have come such a long way with phone cameras.

Sure there are things they cannot do, but they have been eating into the 'real camera' field for a long time now, and with good reason.

I have caught many images using the phone where I wish I had my real camera with me - but I'm still glad I have them.