undecided between camera and smartphone

I started my travels with a portable Canon, and later, a Panasonic. They took excellent photos. Back then, cell phones were still very basic.

Over time, almost everyone started using their iPhones and Androids to take amateur pictures.

I used my Nikon D3400 on my last trip, but I must admit I'm getting tired of it. Cameras feel increasingly clumsy and heavy. Besides, short videos are everywhere nowadays...

I'm not a professional. Still, the quality of the Nikon D3400's photos is far superior to those from my old and underwhelming Motorola Edge 30 (see attached files).

Does anyone feel the same? Thinking of ditching the camera and switching to a smartphone?

Is there a middle ground? Maybe a non-professional, compact, lightweight camera just for travel? Or have smartphones truly won the battle for casual photography?

Olhos de Anjo said:

I started my travels with a portable Canon, and later, a Panasonic. They took excellent photos. Back then, cell phones were still very basic.

Over time, almost everyone started using their iPhones and Androids to take amateur pictures.

I used my Nikon D3400 on my last trip, but I must admit I'm getting tired of it. Cameras feel increasingly clumsy and heavy. Besides, short videos are everywhere nowadays...

I'm not a professional. Still, the quality of the Nikon D3400's photos is far superior to those from my old and underwhelming Motorola Edge 30 (see attached files).

Does anyone feel the same? Thinking of ditching the camera and switching to a smartphone?

Click to expand...

No... here are reasons why I don't like using a cell phone:

You usually can't change out the battery

You can't change out the memory card on most models anymore

Most phones have LED flash which is inferior to Xenon, which will wash out images

Most cell phones have very small sensors with low MP count, and a fixed aperture

Optical Zoom lenses in phones are very limited and have serious compromises

Cell phones have a non-ergonomic shape and limited controls because they aren't designed with photography as their main function

Cell phones lack professionalism

Cell phone lenses can get scratched & damaged easily

Digital zoom degrades photos and videos greatly

Phones can be hacked and your photos and videos can be deleted or exploited

Phones can be slow and bogged down with software & constant updates. What if something once in a lifetime is happening and you can't use your phone camera because it's updating out of your control?

Shooting in RAW usually requires an APP that you have to pay for

What if the phone software hangs or crashes and you can't use it?

What if someone calls or you receive an emergency alert when you're recording a video or trying to take photos at a critical moment?

There's no viewfinders in phones

There's no hotshoe in phones

A phone could be expensive because of bells and whistles that have very little to do with the camera

Olhos de Anjo said:

Is there a middle ground? Maybe a non-professional, compact, lightweight camera just for travel? Or have smartphones truly won the battle for casual photography?

Click to expand...

For travel I like to use a compact micro four thirds camera with a Superzoom lens. Phones can't do 10x or more optical zoom with a decently large sensor.

You could go with:

OM-D E-M10 IV, OM-5, OM-5 II with a superzoom lens, 14-150mm F4-5.6 II or 12-200mm F3.5-6.3.

Or Panasonic G100 or G100D with 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 II.

They are nice and small superzoom options, with EVF's and good handling. Good for travel while still compact. Compared to your D3400 with the 18-200 II.

Olhos de Anjo said:

Does anyone feel the same? Thinking of ditching the camera and switching to a smartphone?

Click to expand...

People who have decided to rely exclusively on their smartphones probably don't visit DPReview. Part of the smartphone's popularity may be that cameras are very costly for a single-function device. A smartphone can take decent photos in many situations and perform many other useful functions.

Olhos de Anjo said:

Is there a middle ground? Maybe a non-professional, compact, lightweight camera just for travel? Or have smartphones truly won the battle for casual photography?

Click to expand...

Check the Buying Guide for travel cameras. Here's a size comparison between the D3400 and Ricoh GR III.

Smartphone cameras do a wonderful job in bright light, but their photos still fall apart indoors or in low-light situations. For travel, I suppose that means inside old cathedrals or museums.

I have active granddaughters. A smartphone just can't handle indoor sports:


Google Pixel 9 XL shooting indoor basketball. Note the blue left hand and smeary noise reduction. The shutter lag is pretty bad (1/2 sec? 1 sec?) so it's hard to predict what you'll get when you tap the shutter button. This girl had ball in hand, shooting a basket, when I tapped the shutter button.


Sony A7R V shooting indoor basketball.

--
Lance H

I travel a lot by bicycle so I hate carrying any extra weight. But phones, as good as their cameras have become, have limitations. For me, the worst one is that you can't see the screen in many situations. Also, they don't have very good telephoto performance.

I initially got a Sony RX100, which took pretty good pictures and was very compact. But it was a miserable camera to use, partly because it was so compact. After a few bike trips, the camera went out of alignment and was unsharp across half the frame.

Then I got a Nikon Zfc. Sort of big and heavy but excellent picture quality and not too bad to use, although the viewfinder is no prize.

It's a matter of individual preference. Some people are happy with phone cameras and get good pictures out of them. I prefer a real camera and am willing to carry one.

Someone rejected RX100, but I like mine a lot. Either RX100Va or RX100VII. I think VI's AF is one generation behind the VII. The RX100Va has shorter focal length, but brighter lens than both VI and VII. The Va is an updated V, with VI's process and EVF/Screen (I think).

I got a AGR2 grip for my VII. There are other grips available if you search around.

Another option is LX100II. It's bigger than RX100.

As far back as 2005, smarthphones could take very decent images, similar to what a pocket camera could do.

Today, smarthone cameras have improved, but a dedicated camera still takes better images.

Is there a middle ground? Sure there is. It's called Sony ZV-1, takes excelent images and short videos, it's about the same price as the "average" phone and just as portable. It's actually a better camera than a D3400 with kit lens.

As usual, the best camera is the one you have with you. I always have my phone with me and use the camera function when I have to take a photo unexpectedly. When I plan to take pictures for whatever reason, I bring my real camera and my phone stays in my pocket

If you think you would enjoy using a smart phone, why not ?

I don't even have one but just for the photo side , I simply do not like holding one and I would need to wear glasses to see the screen so I woud have to put them on and off, something that I do not need to do using the camra EVF. But that is me....

Olhos de Anjo said:

I used my Nikon D3400 on my last trip, but I must admit I'm getting tired of it. Cameras feel increasingly clumsy and heavy. Besides, short videos are everywhere nowadays...

I'm not a professional. Still, the quality of the Nikon D3400's photos is far superior to those from my old and underwhelming Motorola Edge 30 (see attached files).
--

Click to expand...

Smart phones have come a long way but they still fall behind digital cameras. When my iPhone SE died I decided to buy an iPhone 16 Pro believing all the hype that the camera is as good as a proper camera. It cost me AU$2000. I bought my D3400 secondhand for $250 and it takes much better images. I wish I had bought a cheaper phone and spent the money I saved on more camera gear.

Malcolm R

My preference is a camera.

A camera (but not just one) allows me to accomplish what I want to do photographically, and I do not foresee this with a smartphone.

On the occasions I have handled a smartphone (I don't have one) to take someones photos for them, I disliked it. No favorable ergonomics that I could discern.

When I am taking pictures I am not taking family or social snapshots. I prefer the configuration of a camera. An element of this is I want to enjoy the experience of making photographs.

OTOH, when I have been in venues where seemingly everybody is taking pictures, and stand-alone cameras are almost non-existent, the smartphone users are very obviously greatly enjoying themselves. Very seldom am I approached because I am seen using a camera. The impression I gather is that a stand-alone camera is of no interest to these people. But given their enjoyment of their experience I have no criticism.

The camera vs smartphone question has been discussed and debated endlessly, with no resolution. A lot of bias and vituperation expressed by both sides in unsuccessful pursuit of resolution or conclusion.

My suggestion to you is make your decisions based on your experiences and preferences arising from those experiences. If the smartphone accomplishes what you want, then stick with it. If you are not getting the results you want, then try a camera (or several to get an idea of what can be accomplished). If you decide you need a camera to better accomplish what you want to do, then you will know which way to go.

Lastly, you can call it a tie. Have the camera with you for when you foresee you will need or want it, the smartphone for everything else because you already have it with you.

Make your own decision without influence from the emotions of others.

I think and believe the data supports that the smart phone has killed the entry level small camera market. Reality is the tech and quality inside a modern cell phone is going to be better than what any entry price camera can offer.

If you don't have $1000 or more to spend and unwilling to go used just go with a cell phone. Many current smartphones retail for over $1000 and a good amount of the tech/development resources is concentrated on the camera so really it is fairly simple.

I still believe the larger sensors in higher end cameras are superior to what any current smart phone can offer in terms of Image Quality so have no plans in not using my camera personally but if I am going out midday to capture memories I only bring my smartphone as the advantage of better image quality is much less in those situations and the phone is so much more convenient.

Olhos de Anjo said:

I started my travels with a portable Canon, and later, a Panasonic. They took excellent photos. Back then, cell phones were still very basic.

Over time, almost everyone started using their iPhones and Androids to take amateur pictures.

I used my Nikon D3400 on my last trip, but I must admit I'm getting tired of it. Cameras feel increasingly clumsy and heavy. Besides, short videos are everywhere nowadays...

I'm not a professional. Still, the quality of the Nikon D3400's photos is far superior to those from my old and underwhelming Motorola Edge 30 (see attached files).

Does anyone feel the same? Thinking of ditching the camera and switching to a smartphone?

Is there a middle ground? Maybe a non-professional, compact, lightweight camera just for travel? Or have smartphones truly won the battle for casual photography?

Click to expand...

A question of convenience over quality.

My preference is quality but my concession to convenience was to buy a 24-120 f/4 lens for those occasions when carrying two cameras is inconvenient.

I suggest we aren't speaking the same photographic language.

Olhos de Anjo said:

I started my travels with a portable Canon, and later, a Panasonic. They took excellent photos. Back then, cell phones were still very basic.

Over time, almost everyone started using their iPhones and Androids to take amateur pictures.

I used my Nikon D3400 on my last trip, but I must admit I'm getting tired of it. Cameras feel increasingly clumsy and heavy. Besides, short videos are everywhere nowadays...

I'm not a professional. Still, the quality of the Nikon D3400's photos is far superior to those from my old and underwhelming Motorola Edge 30 (see attached files).

Does anyone feel the same? Thinking of ditching the camera and switching to a smartphone?

Click to expand...

No, I don't feel like that.

Olhos de Anjo said:

Is there a middle ground? Maybe a non-professional, compact, lightweight camera just for travel? Or have smartphones truly won the battle for casual photography?

Click to expand...

Yes there are. Something like a Fuji X-E5 if you want the possibility of changing lenses. Or maybe a Fuji X100VI if a fixed lens camera is ok to you. If you want as small as possible, while still capable of very good IQ, then maybe you can consider the fixed lens Ricoh GRIII (GRVI will probably be here within a month or so).

You could also choose a more photography oriented smartphone (newest phones seem to be quite good, although, in my opinion, not as good as a proper camera, but then you also can make phone calls…not easy with a "proper" camera ;-) ).

Best advice….try before you buy.

Olhos de Anjo said:

Click to expand...

you need to clean that sensor....

I use a phone to capture a memory.

I use a camera for more fine-art related photos or anything I think might be worth printing.

Is an iPhone a capable camera? Yes, but I like playing with real cameras.

I think it depends on what you like to photograph and how you like to view them.

Smartphones are pretty good in good light when the scene works well with normal to wide angle lenses. If the light is good they can when work on moving objects pretty well. When displayed on a smartphone screen or HD monitor or if printed at 8x10 they print well also.

Where the phone falls short for me is telephoto, particularly action, and lower light, particularly if the subject is moving. In my photography I like to shoot all genres including:

• Portraits (smartphones do ok here, but they don't really compete with an 85f1.4 and strobes.)
• Travel (smartphones do pretty well here except indoors and night).
• Kids and friends kids sports (smartphones aren't good at these, particularly basketball, volleyball and competition band)
• Wildlife (smartphones stink here)
• Travel (depending on the specific circumstances, smartphones can work well for this)

For displaying, I can easily see the difference between my phone and my camera if the picture is displayed at any size (I'm using a 27 inch 4k monitor) and I can see the difference when I print them (typically 10x10 photo books). I still use cell phone pics in the books, but I don't make them too big and I can see a difference (depending on how large they are and the conditions under which they were taken).

I will say this, smartphones have gotten good enough that for me to get enough improvement to justify a full size camera, I would want more than enough entry level setup. Buying used, $1500 to $2000 would get a decent, high performing setup.

For reference, I'm shooting with a Google Pixel 8 Pro and Sony camera setup with a good lens selection

Olhos de Anjo said:

I started my travels with a portable Canon, and later, a Panasonic. They took excellent photos. Back then, cell phones were still very basic.

Over time, almost everyone started using their iPhones and Androids to take amateur pictures.

I used my Nikon D3400 on my last trip, but I must admit I'm getting tired of it. Cameras feel increasingly clumsy and heavy. Besides, short videos are everywhere nowadays...

I'm not a professional. Still, the quality of the Nikon D3400's photos is far superior to those from my old and underwhelming Motorola Edge 30 (see attached files).

Does anyone feel the same? Thinking of ditching the camera and switching to a smartphone?

Is there a middle ground? Maybe a non-professional, compact, lightweight camera just for travel? Or have smartphones truly won the battle for casual photography?

Click to expand...

My suggestion would be to get a high-end compact like the aforementioned Sony RX100 series or even Fuji X100 series camera. Doesn't have to be the latest model.

Olhos de Anjo said:

I started my travels with a portable Canon, and later, a Panasonic. They took excellent photos. Back then, cell phones were still very basic.

Over time, almost everyone started using their iPhones and Androids to take amateur pictures.

Click to expand...

Some pro photographers also use smartphones.

Olhos de Anjo said:

I used my Nikon D3400 on my last trip, but I must admit I'm getting tired of it. Cameras feel increasingly clumsy and heavy. Besides, short videos are everywhere nowadays...

I'm not a professional. Still, the quality of the Nikon D3400's photos is far superior to those from my old and underwhelming Motorola Edge 30 (see attached files).

Does anyone feel the same? Thinking of ditching the camera and switching to a smartphone?

Click to expand...

I certainly never, ever considered dumping my camera.

To me, photography is a hobby. I feel great when I come back from a walk with my camera (even though sometimes I didn't capture anything); that never happens when I shoot with my phone.

That said, I understand your concern. I gave up photography when my second kid was born, as I was unable to travel with those two cute babies with me plus four pounds of gear... But that was in the film era. Modern ILCs are much lighter.

Olhos de Anjo said:

Is there a middle ground? Maybe a non-professional, compact, lightweight camera just for travel? Or have smartphones truly won the battle for casual photography?

Click to expand...

If you take pics only when travelling, and depending upon the variety of scenes you like to capture, then a recent smartphone might be the solution. IMO, high-end compacts are expensive, including second-hand, because manufacturers simply stopped investing in that kind of product.

___
Photography is so easy, that's what makes it highly difficult - Robert Delpire

Olhos de Anjo said:

Does anyone feel the same? Thinking of ditching the camera and switching to a smartphone?

Is there a middle ground? Maybe a non-professional, compact, lightweight camera just for travel? Or have smartphones truly won the battle for casual photography?

Click to expand...

My experience was quite the opposite, I moved from a Smartphone to my first camera about four years ago and for me the middle ground was a bridge camera, specifically a secondhand Panasonic FZ1000.

I'm interested in wildlife photography and I know for a fact I simply would not have been able to take the pictures I have with a smartphone, the zoom on the FZ1000 alone is a game changer.