Why do cameras need bigger lens than Smartphones

[Brisn5757]

Maybe we shouldn't be comparing Smartphone cameras with other types of cameras as it seems that the smartphone camera is very different in technology.

Brian

Well for better or worse, i don't think most people will go along with that. Some people insist phones are killing off the "giant bulky" ILC bunch. I don't agree with that and maybe you don't either but many people insist this is true. They see phones and ILC as competing for our dollars. So comparing them is a natural conclusion.

While i don't think phones are a replacement for my ILC, i do see them as maybe a supplement, potentially. As such i do care how my phone stacks up to my ILC, so a comparison makes sense for me too. As for the tech, it's not really any different. A sensor, a lens, and software to run it all.

Its technology that in theory should not work as the lens are too small but thanks to major brands of Apple and Samsung competing against each other technology has advanced since 2007 making many things possible,

I see far more smartphones being used to take photos and video (especially at concerts) than other cameras and manaufactors are producing less small compact cameras than they use to so in that respect the smartphone is slowly taking over. Give it time and your have optical zoom ability on a smartphone or maybe better digital zoom. I can command my smartphone to take a photo by saying "Shot", I don't know of other cameras that can do that.

Brian

 

[Kodakrevisited]

Its technology that in theory should not work as the lens are too small but thanks to major brands of Apple and Samsung competing against each other technology has advanced since 2007 making many things possible,

I think that sums it up, I also can't work out how come they are getting so good, the big camera companies are unlikely to equip their products with processing power that even comes close to smartphones, added to that, its easy to update a smartphones software through apps, so as new image processing becomes available you can just easily update your photo app on your phone (which can come from many many different developers) rather than waiting and hoping for firmware update on your camera, almost anything is possible in the near future, camera manufacturers must be very worried, and so they should be

Recently at work, I was struggling to shoot the dash grey dash of a prestige coupe from the rear seats in low light, my Nikon D7200 live view AF was utterly useless as the contrast detect AF just wasn't up to the job and I couldn't use the viewfinder, I needed the shot so in desperation I used my smartphone, it locked focus instantly, I shot the image at wide angle getting it all in frame, ISO640 @ F1.9 and it was fine (well good enough for the intended purpose), now that is what the camera companies are up against

--
Freelance Automobile Photographer

 

[FrancoD]

Its technology that in theory should not work as the lens are too small but thanks to major brands of Apple and Samsung competing against each other technology has advanced since 2007 making many things possible,

I think that sums it up, I also can't work out how come they are getting so good, the big camera companies are unlikely to equip their products with processing power that even comes close to smartphones, added to that, its easy to update a smartphones software through apps, so as new image processing becomes available you can just easily update your photo app on your phone (which can come from many many different developers) rather than waiting and hoping for firmware update on your camera, almost anything is possible in the near future, camera manufacturers must be very worried, and so they should be

Recently at work, I was struggling to shoot the dash grey dash of a prestige coupe from the rear seats in low light, my Nikon D7200 live view AF was utterly useless as the contrast detect AF just wasn't up to the job and I couldn't use the viewfinder, I needed the shot so in desperation I used my smartphone, it locked focus instantly, I shot the image at wide angle getting it all in frame, ISO640 @ F1.9 and it was fine (well good enough for the intended purpose), now that is what the camera companies are up against

--
Freelance Automobile Photographer

No manual focus on your D7200 ?

 

[Kodakrevisited]

No manual focus on your D7200 ?

Very little time

Very cramped so couldn't get my eye to the viewfinder

Angle tricky to use rear screen for focus, also not particularly reliable

Smartphone allowed me to get further back, AF worked perfectly also has a very big bright screen for framing

I am not saying a smartphone would be more suitable in many other situations but there are times when it is just a better tool for the job particularly when image quality has to be acceptable rather than exceptional

--
Freelance Automobile Photographer

 

[FrancoD]

Seriously it would be nice if the camera companies had the R&D founds available to Apple , Samsung and co.

I remember how in the early days of computer based video editing we were very thankful to the video game brigade for giving us much better video cards.

 

[Max Iso]

Its technology that in theory should not work as the lens are too small but thanks to major brands of Apple and Samsung competing against each other technology has advanced since 2007 making many things possible,

I see far more smartphones being used to take photos and video (especially at concerts) than other cameras and manaufactors are producing less small compact cameras than they use to so in that respect the smartphone is slowly taking over. Give it time and your have optical zoom ability on a smartphone or maybe better digital zoom. I can command my smartphone to take a photo by saying "Shot", I don't know of other cameras that can do that.

Brian

No offense Brian but i think you are pretty misinformed on tech. Several things above are inaccurate. Nothing about the lens sizes makes them "not supposed" to work. Even pinhole lenses obey the same physics as large format lenses.

And one reason you see more phones at concerts is they usually ban anything that looks like a real camera. Most bands don't want the average joe taking high quality photos of a concert that can then be sold without the band making money, or undercut their own sales. The reason phones are not banned is bc they know phone cameras kinda suck in low light.

Also, digital zoom is not better than optical, unless the lens doing the optical zooming is terrible at the longer focal length. And i can digital zoom any camera by cropping the photo after it's taken. Poof, digital zoom.

And yes, my phone allows me to use words to take the shot. My G5 allows me several words. But in loud places it may not hear you, or other people might say trigger words and control your camera, ect. And, there's nothing that says a ILC can't do the same, it's a simple matter of software. Sony ILC will already take photos when they see somebody smile.

Hey if phones are good enough then good for the user. But people need to remember that most software trickery can be used on any format. There's little that is on a phone that can't be had on a large camera. The opposite isn't true concerning hardware. If the camera has a tiny lens and tiny sensor, there's not much you can do to get around it.

 

[David Pavlich]

Its technology that in theory should not work as the lens are too small but thanks to major brands of Apple and Samsung competing against each other technology has advanced since 2007 making many things possible,

I see far more smartphones being used to take photos and video (especially at concerts) than other cameras and manaufactors are producing less small compact cameras than they use to so in that respect the smartphone is slowly taking over. Give it time and your have optical zoom ability on a smartphone or maybe better digital zoom. I can command my smartphone to take a photo by saying "Shot", I don't know of other cameras that can do that.

Brian

No offense Brian but i think you are pretty misinformed on tech. Several things above are inaccurate. Nothing about the lens sizes makes them "not supposed" to work. Even pinhole lenses obey the same physics as large format lenses.

And one reason you see more phones at concerts is they usually ban anything that looks like a real camera. Most bands don't want the average joe taking high quality photos of a concert that can then be sold without the band making money, or undercut their own sales. The reason phones are not banned is bc they know phone cameras kinda suck in low light.

Also, digital zoom is not better than optical, unless the lens doing the optical zooming is terrible at the longer focal length. And i can digital zoom any camera by cropping the photo after it's taken. Poof, digital zoom.

And yes, my phone allows me to use words to take the shot. My G5 allows me several words. But in loud places it may not hear you, or other people might say trigger words and control your camera, ect. And, there's nothing that says a ILC can't do the same, it's a simple matter of software. Sony ILC will already take photos when they see somebody smile.

Hey if phones are good enough then good for the user. But people need to remember that most software trickery can be used on any format. There's little that is on a phone that can't be had on a large camera. The opposite isn't true concerning hardware. If the camera has a tiny lens and tiny sensor, there's not much you can do to get around it.

I'll wait until photographers that were paid several thousand dollars to shoot a wedding are able to show up with a phone before I consider the phone on par with a DSLR or Mirror Less ILC. Taking pictures of the kat or a static shot of a coin is one thing....

David

 

[nofumble]

Bigger lens is difficult to make and very expensive. Not too far from now, smaller cameras will have artificial DoF and all kind of digital manipulation to close the gap with large camera. The phone camera is getting faster each generation as well.

 

[Lee Jay]

I have taken photos in very low light conditions using my dSLR and its pushed the ISO up so high that the grain has caused major problems in the photo. I limit the shutter speed when the camera is hand held. I think its the post protection built in the Smartphone that helps a lot.

It just means that I can use my Smartphone in low light condition scenes.

No you can't.

Here's a test I just did. The SLR with slow-zoom on the top is how it looks to the naked eye.

--
Lee Jay

I get better results than that on my Galaxy Note3 phone.

No you don't. The Note3 is a generation earlier than the S5. My wife's Note 4 does the same as my S5 because they are of the same generation.

Maybe the Galaxy S5 does not process the photo afterwards for low lighting.

Irrelevant. I tried processing it in Lightroom and all that did was bring out blue thermal noise.

It's also possible that the Note 3 takes several photos and joins then together to result in a brighter photo just like my Sony HX200 camera does.

No it doesn't.

The Max ISO for the Note3 is ISO1000.

I shot at ISO 2000 with my S5. Note that the SLR used ISO 16000 (3 stops more than 2000) and 1/4 of a second (2 stops more than the phone) whereas the S5 won't take an exposure longer than 1/15th. 5 stops brighter than the phone minus the 1 2/3 stops difference in f-stop.

I use the Note3 in Auto mode

This was a newer generation phone than yours in auto mode.

Below is a low light photo I got from the internet that was taken by the Note3.

Not nearly as low light as the above.

Reference
https://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2459647

Brian

--
Lee Jay

 

[Lee Jay]

I have an S5 and it's horrible in low-light even compared to my tiny Canon Elph 500HS, way, way worse compared to my 7D Mark II with the 18-135/3.5-5.6, and even worse compared to my 7D Mark II with the 18-35/1.8. It's the difference between an almost totally black shot with the S5, a usable shot with the Elph and a great shot with the 7D.

What you're thinking of as "low light" isn't really that low.

 

[MediaArchivist]

I see far more smartphones being used to take photos and video (especially at concerts)

Worst thing ever: someone says to you "My phone is awesome, check out this video I took of the concert last night!"

At least 45 seconds of you life evaporates, and you can't ever have it back. I have never seen a phone video of a concert that came even close to being enjoyable.

Never.

No, I don't want to see yours. It's not any better.

Even half decent cameras and dedicated consumer video cameras can't take good video at concerts. Photos? Depending on the lighting-- maybe. Give it a go and make an honest effort to delete the one that don't cut the muster. Be quick and don't annoy the paid ticket holders behind you. But video? Do a favor for whoever is behind you at the show and skip it. Your video is not any good, and even the band really does not want to see it.

 

[BrownieVet]

Re: Why do cameras need bigger lens than Smartphones

I don't know. I'm sure Philippe Kahn could answer your question, after all, he was responsible to putting that image capturing feature built-into computers and mobile phones.

 

[Mackiesback]

Its technology that in theory should not work as the lens are too small but thanks to major brands of Apple and Samsung competing against each other technology has advanced since 2007 making many things possible,

I think that sums it up, I also can't work out how come they are getting so good, the big camera companies are unlikely to equip their products with processing power that even comes close to smartphones, added to that, its easy to update a smartphones software through apps, so as new image processing becomes available you can just easily update your photo app on your phone (which can come from many many different developers) rather than waiting and hoping for firmware update on your camera, almost anything is possible in the near future, camera manufacturers must be very worried, and so they should be

Recently at work, I was struggling to shoot the dash grey dash of a prestige coupe from the rear seats in low light, my Nikon D7200 live view AF was utterly useless as the contrast detect AF just wasn't up to the job and I couldn't use the viewfinder, I needed the shot so in desperation I used my smartphone, it locked focus instantly, I shot the image at wide angle getting it all in frame, ISO640 @ F1.9 and it was fine (well good enough for the intended purpose), now that is what the camera companies are up against

 

[Mackiesback]

Yes, smartphones have come a long way. I recently got an iPhone 8 and was really impressed how nice the camera was, until I viewed the images on something larger than a tablet. Phones are great for making Facebook photos. Newer ones look good on tablets. Some shooters, given careful composition, have even made decent prints. But they are still behind.

If you view all your images on a tablet or smaller, the camera is mattering less and less.

 

[mamallama]

Smartphone designers know they don't have much depth to work with so they keep the lens simple and basic and not ask it to do functions like zoom and image stabilization. Those are functions can be done with the powerful computing software available in modern smartphones. In that way they keep the lens simple and basic and they perfect it and keep it small.

 

[Stevess]

I couldn't get this photo with a smartphone.


Jehnny Beth of Savages - End of the Road

ISO 20,000. FL 100mm (equivalent angle of view to 200mm on a 35mm camera). 1/250s.

--
Dutch
forestmoonstudio.co.uk
Photography is about light, not light-proof boxes.

If I were recording her using video on a smartphone camera like many people seem to then the results would be better but I don't expect results like in your photo. I have also had good result in a small camera that had a 5x zoom and 1/2.3 sensor when video recording a person on stage doing sound effects with his voice using the zoom to get close enough. The sound was good also.

But its good to know my smartphone camera is not limited to brighter light conditions.

Brian

The smartphone may "not be limited to brighter light conditions", but is limited by focal length.


School talent show - at least two dozen parents were crowded at the base of the stage trying to get a shot with their phones. Not the best picture, but just an example.

From the shot here, parents with smartphones on selfie sticks were lining up below the stage. I had to move ways back to not get selfie sticks in my shot, and still "failed". Looking at the images parents had posted in the school facebook group later that night, it seemed that only I, along with a couple of others with ILC's had gotten usable shots.

 

[Brisn5757]

I see far more smartphones being used to take photos and video (especially at concerts)

Worst thing ever: someone says to you "My phone is awesome, check out this video I took of the concert last night!"

At least 45 seconds of you life evaporates, and you can't ever have it back. I have never seen a phone video of a concert that came even close to being enjoyable.

Never.

No, I don't want to see yours. It's not any better.

Even half decent cameras and dedicated consumer video cameras can't take good video at concerts. Photos? Depending on the lighting-- maybe. Give it a go and make an honest effort to delete the one that don't cut the muster. Be quick and don't annoy the paid ticket holders behind you. But video? Do a favor for whoever is behind you at the show and skip it. Your video is not any good, and even the band really does not want to see it.

 

[Brisn5757]

I have taken photos in very low light conditions using my dSLR and its pushed the ISO up so high that the grain has caused major problems in the photo. I limit the shutter speed when the camera is hand held. I think its the post protection built in the Smartphone that helps a lot.

It just means that I can use my Smartphone in low light condition scenes.

No you can't.

Here's a test I just did. The SLR with slow-zoom on the top is how it looks to the naked eye.

--
Lee Jay

I get better results than that on my Galaxy Note3 phone.

No you don't. The Note3 is a generation earlier than the S5. My wife's Note 4 does the same as my S5 because they are of the same generation.

Maybe the Galaxy S5 does not process the photo afterwards for low lighting.

Irrelevant. I tried processing it in Lightroom and all that did was bring out blue thermal noise.

It's also possible that the Note 3 takes several photos and joins then together to result in a brighter photo just like my Sony HX200 camera does.

No it doesn't.

The Max ISO for the Note3 is ISO1000.

I shot at ISO 2000 with my S5. Note that the SLR used ISO 16000 (3 stops more than 2000) and 1/4 of a second (2 stops more than the phone) whereas the S5 won't take an exposure longer than 1/15th. 5 stops brighter than the phone minus the 1 2/3 stops difference in f-stop.

I use the Note3 in Auto mode

This was a newer generation phone than yours in auto mode.

Below is a low light photo I got from the internet that was taken by the Note3.

Not nearly as low light as the above.

Reference
https://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2459647

Brian

--
Lee Jay

Unless you created the Samsung Galaxy Note3 you don't know how the photo is processed. My Sony HX200 camera takes several photos and combines them to give a brighter photo for low light conditions. I noticed that the note3 takes longer to process the photo after its tsken in low light conditions.

Also some upgrade of products are not always better than the perious edition. I prefer the note 3 to the note 4. My friebd has a nite 4 and some features are missing.

It can also depend how close the object is to the phone as to what results you get.

The main problem with low light conditions was that the smartphone can have troubled focusing.

Brian

 

[Brisn5757]

Its technology that in theory should not work as the lens are too small but thanks to major brands of Apple and Samsung competing against each other technology has advanced since 2007 making many things possible,

I see far more smartphones being used to take photos and video (especially at concerts) than other cameras and manaufactors are producing less small compact cameras than they use to so in that respect the smartphone is slowly taking over. Give it time and your have optical zoom ability on a smartphone or maybe better digital zoom. I can command my smartphone to take a photo by saying "Shot", I don't know of other cameras that can do that.

Brian

No offense Brian but i think you are pretty misinformed on tech. Several things above are inaccurate. Nothing about the lens sizes makes them "not supposed" to work. Even pinhole lenses obey the same physics as large format lenses.

And one reason you see more phones at concerts is they usually ban anything that looks like a real camera. Most bands don't want the average joe taking high quality photos of a concert that can then be sold without the band making money, or undercut their own sales. The reason phones are not banned is bc they know phone cameras kinda suck in low light.

Also, digital zoom is not better than optical, unless the lens doing the optical zooming is terrible at the longer focal length. And i can digital zoom any camera by cropping the photo after it's taken. Poof, digital zoom.

And yes, my phone allows me to use words to take the shot. My G5 allows me several words. But in loud places it may not hear you, or other people might say trigger words and control your camera, ect. And, there's nothing that says a ILC can't do the same, it's a simple matter of software. Sony ILC will already take photos when they see somebody smile.

Hey if phones are good enough then good for the user. But people need to remember that most software trickery can be used on any format. There's little that is on a phone that can't be had on a large camera. The opposite isn't true concerning hardware. If the camera has a tiny lens and tiny sensor, there's not much you can do to get around it.

Thats OK Max.

I'm interested in what others say..

My reply.

To put it another way if I showed someone a photo I printed that was taken with smartphone then people would find it hard to believe that a camera with tiny lens could produce a good photo. I still find it hard to believe myself.

Has to improving digital zoom on smartphones I'm thinking that many things can ne possible in the future. Sony and Panasonic cameras have options for better zoom results when going beyond optical zoom. But like yoi indicated at the moment optical zoom is the best you can get.

But not only concerts i also see people using their smartphone for family photos, buildings, gardens etc. It would make a interesting survey. One possible reason is so they can send friends the photo or put it on Facebook/YouTube.

If you know of any camera that you csn command by voice then let me know. I find it useful when holding my smartphobe with two hands as its large in size.

Brian

 

[Brisn5757]

Yes, smartphones have come a long way. I recently got an iPhone 8 and was really impressed how nice the camera was, until I viewed the images on something larger than a tablet. Phones are great for making Facebook photos. Newer ones look good on tablets. Some shooters, given careful composition, have even made decent prints. But they are still behind.

If you view all your images on a tablet or smaller, the camera is mattering less and less.

Smartphone photos should still look good on a 22 inch computer monitor. What did you view your photos on?