Camera phones and YOU.

Started 3 months ago | Polls
vallhall Senior Member • Posts: 1,039
Re: Fun with the phone camera
1

sportyaccordy wrote:

Jonsi wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

Jonsi wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

yardcoyote wrote:

Neither great art nor great photography was claimed. But when I make a snapshot,the possibility of "problems with the edges" is not a super high priority.

It's freeing. When you know your IQ is going to have problems no matter what you do and your image will never be anything but a snapshot, you are excused from worrying about a whole bunch of stuff. You can make a picture that is about nothing but the subject, the colors ( or monochrome tones) and the composition.

This is a good point. With smartphones, there's nowhere to hide. You're pretty much wholly dependent on the composition, so you better put your creative cap on. I can see how that would scare or infuriate pixel peepers and gear snobs.

Why would it scare or infuriate gear snobs?

Because they have convinced themselves that the only path to good photography is through their expensive gear.

The path to the best photography is. That's not a phone diss. But you're acting like there are no limits to camera phones.

The best in whose opinion? The post you quoted is a clear acknowledgement of phone's capabilities ("With smartphones, there's nowhere to hide. You're pretty much wholly dependent on the composition") so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

Yes, they take great pictures of the things that fall in their wheelhouse (selfies, 'street' and some landscape), but you can't do all the same photography with a phone that you can with a normal camera. A Nikon D5 with only a 300mm mounted is also limited. Just be realistic.

Obviously... nothing I've said is contrary to this.

Your replies are also revealing that your intent of this thread wasn't as innocent as you claimed, and I was basically correct in my first comment.

You said you wanted a civil conversation, yet keep calling those you don't agree with "camera snobs".

No, I call camera snobs camera snobs. There are phone zealots too. In any case you are looking for a fight where there isn't one. If you want civil conversation do your part

Dont spend time talking to jonsi...aka Borat!, its like talking to deaf ears!. And he is a real samrtphone hater in here!. And ofcourse his smartphone capabilities is very limited as he owns a iphone 6 with no zoom and s h i t ty low light performance

 vallhall's gear list:vallhall's gear list
Sony RX100 VI Samsung NX500 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 +2 more
nevada5
nevada5 Forum Pro • Posts: 13,686
Re: Camera phones?
2

Camera phone or phone camera?

-- hide signature --

Stay thirsty, my friends.
I'll try to be nicer if you'll try to be smarter.
It's fun being me -- Denny Crane.

 nevada5's gear list:nevada5's gear list
Canon PowerShot S120 Panasonic LX100 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 II ASPH Mega OIS +4 more
Bobthearch
Bobthearch Veteran Member • Posts: 8,190
Re: Fun with the phone camera
2

vallhall wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

Jonsi wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

Jonsi wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

yardcoyote wrote:

Neither great art nor great photography was claimed. But when I make a snapshot,the possibility of "problems with the edges" is not a super high priority.

It's freeing. When you know your IQ is going to have problems no matter what you do and your image will never be anything but a snapshot, you are excused from worrying about a whole bunch of stuff. You can make a picture that is about nothing but the subject, the colors ( or monochrome tones) and the composition.

This is a good point. With smartphones, there's nowhere to hide. You're pretty much wholly dependent on the composition, so you better put your creative cap on. I can see how that would scare or infuriate pixel peepers and gear snobs.

Why would it scare or infuriate gear snobs?

Because they have convinced themselves that the only path to good photography is through their expensive gear.

The path to the best photography is. That's not a phone diss. But you're acting like there are no limits to camera phones.

The best in whose opinion? The post you quoted is a clear acknowledgement of phone's capabilities ("With smartphones, there's nowhere to hide. You're pretty much wholly dependent on the composition") so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

Yes, they take great pictures of the things that fall in their wheelhouse (selfies, 'street' and some landscape), but you can't do all the same photography with a phone that you can with a normal camera. A Nikon D5 with only a 300mm mounted is also limited. Just be realistic.

Obviously... nothing I've said is contrary to this.

Your replies are also revealing that your intent of this thread wasn't as innocent as you claimed, and I was basically correct in my first comment.

You said you wanted a civil conversation, yet keep calling those you don't agree with "camera snobs".

No, I call camera snobs camera snobs. There are phone zealots too. In any case you are looking for a fight where there isn't one. If you want civil conversation do your part

Dont spend time talking to jonsi...aka Borat!, its like talking to deaf ears!. And he is a real samrtphone hater in here!. And ofcourse his smartphone capabilities is very limited as he owns a iphone 6 with no zoom and s h i t ty low light performance

Yeah, the camera on his $700 smartphone is no good so he should buy a $1200 smartphone...

Do you know how ridiculous that sounds?

Funny thing, no one ever says that to photographers with $700 Nikons.

-- hide signature --

Personal non-commercial websites with no ads or tracking:
Local photography: http://ratonphotos.com/
Travel and photography: http://placesandpics.com/
Special-interest photos: http://ghosttowns.placesandpics.com/

 Bobthearch's gear list:Bobthearch's gear list
Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S DX Micro-Nikkor 85mm f/3.5G ED VR +2 more
vallhall Senior Member • Posts: 1,039
Re: Fun with the phone camera
1

Bobthearch wrote:

vallhall wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

Jonsi wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

Jonsi wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

yardcoyote wrote:

Neither great art nor great photography was claimed. But when I make a snapshot,the possibility of "problems with the edges" is not a super high priority.

It's freeing. When you know your IQ is going to have problems no matter what you do and your image will never be anything but a snapshot, you are excused from worrying about a whole bunch of stuff. You can make a picture that is about nothing but the subject, the colors ( or monochrome tones) and the composition.

This is a good point. With smartphones, there's nowhere to hide. You're pretty much wholly dependent on the composition, so you better put your creative cap on. I can see how that would scare or infuriate pixel peepers and gear snobs.

Why would it scare or infuriate gear snobs?

Because they have convinced themselves that the only path to good photography is through their expensive gear.

The path to the best photography is. That's not a phone diss. But you're acting like there are no limits to camera phones.

The best in whose opinion? The post you quoted is a clear acknowledgement of phone's capabilities ("With smartphones, there's nowhere to hide. You're pretty much wholly dependent on the composition") so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

Yes, they take great pictures of the things that fall in their wheelhouse (selfies, 'street' and some landscape), but you can't do all the same photography with a phone that you can with a normal camera. A Nikon D5 with only a 300mm mounted is also limited. Just be realistic.

Obviously... nothing I've said is contrary to this.

Your replies are also revealing that your intent of this thread wasn't as innocent as you claimed, and I was basically correct in my first comment.

You said you wanted a civil conversation, yet keep calling those you don't agree with "camera snobs".

No, I call camera snobs camera snobs. There are phone zealots too. In any case you are looking for a fight where there isn't one. If you want civil conversation do your part

Dont spend time talking to jonsi...aka Borat!, its like talking to deaf ears!. And he is a real samrtphone hater in here!. And ofcourse his smartphone capabilities is very limited as he owns a iphone 6 with no zoom and s h i t ty low light performance

Yeah, the camera on his $700 smartphone is no good so he should buy a $1200 smartphone...

Do you know how ridiculous that sounds?

Funny thing, no one ever says that to photographers with $700 Nikons.

You realize the difference between iphone 6 and the latest from Huawei and Pixel?

 vallhall's gear list:vallhall's gear list
Sony RX100 VI Samsung NX500 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 +2 more
Jonsi
Jonsi Senior Member • Posts: 4,083
Re: Fun with the phone camera
5

vallhall wrote:

Dont spend time talking to jonsi

I'm ok with that.

..aka Borat!, its like talking to deaf ears!. And he is a real samrtphone hater in here!.

I love smartphones and will always own one.

And ofcourse his smartphone capabilities is very limited as he owns a iphone 6 with no zoom and shitt y low light performance

I've never owned an Apple product in my life and my V40 has an excellent camera, which I use.

Calm down.

Stop bypassing the profanity filter.

Read more.

Lie less.

Jonsi
Jonsi Senior Member • Posts: 4,083
Re: Fun with the phone camera

sportyaccordy wrote:

Jonsi wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

Jonsi wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

yardcoyote wrote:

Neither great art nor great photography was claimed. But when I make a snapshot,the possibility of "problems with the edges" is not a super high priority.

It's freeing. When you know your IQ is going to have problems no matter what you do and your image will never be anything but a snapshot, you are excused from worrying about a whole bunch of stuff. You can make a picture that is about nothing but the subject, the colors ( or monochrome tones) and the composition.

This is a good point. With smartphones, there's nowhere to hide. You're pretty much wholly dependent on the composition, so you better put your creative cap on. I can see how that would scare or infuriate pixel peepers and gear snobs.

Why would it scare or infuriate gear snobs?

Because they have convinced themselves that the only path to good photography is through their expensive gear.

The path to the best photography is. That's not a phone diss. But you're acting like there are no limits to camera phones.

The best in whose opinion?

Probably everyone's. Except AOC, but he can't post here right now.

Comparing expensive photography gear... to a point-and-shoot is (in general) a bit of a stretch.  That's all I was saying.

Surely you agree.

Bobthearch
Bobthearch Veteran Member • Posts: 8,190
Re: Fun with the phone camera

vallhall wrote:

Bobthearch wrote:

vallhall wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

Jonsi wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

Jonsi wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

yardcoyote wrote:

Neither great art nor great photography was claimed. But when I make a snapshot,the possibility of "problems with the edges" is not a super high priority.

It's freeing. When you know your IQ is going to have problems no matter what you do and your image will never be anything but a snapshot, you are excused from worrying about a whole bunch of stuff. You can make a picture that is about nothing but the subject, the colors ( or monochrome tones) and the composition.

This is a good point. With smartphones, there's nowhere to hide. You're pretty much wholly dependent on the composition, so you better put your creative cap on. I can see how that would scare or infuriate pixel peepers and gear snobs.

Why would it scare or infuriate gear snobs?

Because they have convinced themselves that the only path to good photography is through their expensive gear.

The path to the best photography is. That's not a phone diss. But you're acting like there are no limits to camera phones.

The best in whose opinion? The post you quoted is a clear acknowledgement of phone's capabilities ("With smartphones, there's nowhere to hide. You're pretty much wholly dependent on the composition") so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

Yes, they take great pictures of the things that fall in their wheelhouse (selfies, 'street' and some landscape), but you can't do all the same photography with a phone that you can with a normal camera. A Nikon D5 with only a 300mm mounted is also limited. Just be realistic.

Obviously... nothing I've said is contrary to this.

Your replies are also revealing that your intent of this thread wasn't as innocent as you claimed, and I was basically correct in my first comment.

You said you wanted a civil conversation, yet keep calling those you don't agree with "camera snobs".

No, I call camera snobs camera snobs. There are phone zealots too. In any case you are looking for a fight where there isn't one. If you want civil conversation do your part

Dont spend time talking to jonsi...aka Borat!, its like talking to deaf ears!. And he is a real samrtphone hater in here!. And ofcourse his smartphone capabilities is very limited as he owns a iphone 6 with no zoom and s h i t ty low light performance

Yeah, the camera on his $700 smartphone is no good so he should buy a $1200 smartphone...

Do you know how ridiculous that sounds?

Funny thing, no one ever says that to photographers with $700 Nikons.

You realize the difference between iphone 6 and the latest from Huawei and Pixel?

I sure do.

I also remember when the iPhone 6 was new and the cellphoners were incessantly praising it's superior image quality, and few were even spouting "DSLR Killer" way back then.  They did the same with the iPhone 4.

While of course you and I know those phone cameras were utter rubbish.

And DSLR-Killer is no more true today than it was back then.

-- hide signature --

Personal non-commercial websites with no ads or tracking:
Local photography: http://ratonphotos.com/
Travel and photography: http://placesandpics.com/
Special-interest photos: http://ghosttowns.placesandpics.com/

 Bobthearch's gear list:Bobthearch's gear list
Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S DX Micro-Nikkor 85mm f/3.5G ED VR +2 more
vallhall Senior Member • Posts: 1,039
Re: Fun with the phone camera

Bobthearch wrote:

vallhall wrote:

Bobthearch wrote:

vallhall wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

Jonsi wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

Jonsi wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

yardcoyote wrote:

Neither great art nor great photography was claimed. But when I make a snapshot,the possibility of "problems with the edges" is not a super high priority.

It's freeing. When you know your IQ is going to have problems no matter what you do and your image will never be anything but a snapshot, you are excused from worrying about a whole bunch of stuff. You can make a picture that is about nothing but the subject, the colors ( or monochrome tones) and the composition.

This is a good point. With smartphones, there's nowhere to hide. You're pretty much wholly dependent on the composition, so you better put your creative cap on. I can see how that would scare or infuriate pixel peepers and gear snobs.

Why would it scare or infuriate gear snobs?

Because they have convinced themselves that the only path to good photography is through their expensive gear.

The path to the best photography is. That's not a phone diss. But you're acting like there are no limits to camera phones.

The best in whose opinion? The post you quoted is a clear acknowledgement of phone's capabilities ("With smartphones, there's nowhere to hide. You're pretty much wholly dependent on the composition") so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

Yes, they take great pictures of the things that fall in their wheelhouse (selfies, 'street' and some landscape), but you can't do all the same photography with a phone that you can with a normal camera. A Nikon D5 with only a 300mm mounted is also limited. Just be realistic.

Obviously... nothing I've said is contrary to this.

Your replies are also revealing that your intent of this thread wasn't as innocent as you claimed, and I was basically correct in my first comment.

You said you wanted a civil conversation, yet keep calling those you don't agree with "camera snobs".

No, I call camera snobs camera snobs. There are phone zealots too. In any case you are looking for a fight where there isn't one. If you want civil conversation do your part

Dont spend time talking to jonsi...aka Borat!, its like talking to deaf ears!. And he is a real samrtphone hater in here!. And ofcourse his smartphone capabilities is very limited as he owns a iphone 6 with no zoom and s h i t ty low light performance

Yeah, the camera on his $700 smartphone is no good so he should buy a $1200 smartphone...

Do you know how ridiculous that sounds?

Funny thing, no one ever says that to photographers with $700 Nikons.

You realize the difference between iphone 6 and the latest from Huawei and Pixel?

I sure do.

I also remember when the iPhone 6 was new and the cellphoners were incessantly praising it's superior image quality, and few were even spouting "DSLR Killer" way back then. They did the same with the iPhone 4.

While of course you and I know those phone cameras were utter rubbish.

And DSLR-Killer is no more true today than it was back then.

Have you tryed a phone like Huawei P30 Pro?...probarly not!.

I have a Ipad Pro 10.5 with the same camera as iphone 7, and its ok in good light, but terrible in low light, and ofcourse no zoom

 vallhall's gear list:vallhall's gear list
Sony RX100 VI Samsung NX500 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 +2 more
vallhall Senior Member • Posts: 1,039
Re: Fun with the phone camera

I loooove this threads!:-D

 vallhall's gear list:vallhall's gear list
Sony RX100 VI Samsung NX500 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 +2 more
Jonsi
Jonsi Senior Member • Posts: 4,083
Re: Fun with the phone camera

vallhall wrote:

I loooove this threads!:-D

Because it gives you an excuse to behave the way you do.

OP sportyaccordy Forum Pro • Posts: 14,907
Re: Fun with the phone camera
1

Bobthearch wrote:

I sure do.

I also remember when the iPhone 6 was new and the cellphoners were incessantly praising it's superior image quality, and few were even spouting "DSLR Killer" way back then. They did the same with the iPhone 4.

They probably were superior... for cell phones. As far as people spouting "DSLR killer"... you do realize you don't always have to take the bait right?

While of course you and I know those phone cameras were utter rubbish.

And DSLR-Killer is no more true today than it was back then.

Depends how you measure the deaths. On technical merits? Obviously not. Sales? I think a strong case could be made. I'm sure there are millions of ILCs collecting dust in drawers and closets as their owners do all their photography with their phones. Most people don't care about the things that make ILCs "better". It's all very relative.

-- hide signature --

Sometimes I take pictures with my gear- https://www.flickr.com/photos/41601371@N00/

 sportyaccordy's gear list:sportyaccordy's gear list
NEX-5T Sony a7R II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG Macro HSM II +6 more
vallhall Senior Member • Posts: 1,039
Re: Fun with the phone camera

Jonsi wrote:

vallhall wrote:

I loooove this threads!:-D

Because it gives you an excuse to behave the way you do.

Do you talk about yourself?

 vallhall's gear list:vallhall's gear list
Sony RX100 VI Samsung NX500 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 +2 more
Jonsi
Jonsi Senior Member • Posts: 4,083
Re: Fun with the phone camera

sportyaccordy wrote:

I'm sure there are millions of ILCs collecting dust in drawers and closets as their owners do all their photography with their phones. Most people don't care about the things that make ILCs "better". It's all very relative.

While obviously just conjecture, I happen to believe you're right.  Though I think it's mostly out of convenience.

People already have a camera in their phone, their phone is in their pocket, and they are good, so just use it.

The conjecture about "most people" is very likely correct if you refer to "most people" on Earth. They don't care about ILC's or even point and shoots.  Their phone takes pictures and that's all they need.

I think within the photography community "most people" don't go out to capture an image to put on their wall and grab their phone to do it.

I'm not saying they can't, and I know some do. But most probably don't.  I'll assume that's what you mean by it being relative.

I think phones had a huge affect on P&S sales, not so much DSLR sales. But in both cases it is about convenience, not because they want "better".

Selene Senior Member • Posts: 1,259
Re: Smartphone camera use

Mark Scott Abeln wrote:

I frequently use my smartphone camera for everyday photos posted to Facebook or Instagram, or if I want a reminder:

An art event I was interested in attending.

A stray dog wandering in my neighborhood, and posted to the Facebook page of an animal rescue group.

Picture of my kitties being cute, to send to my wife.

Helping my dad shop for a table.

Something for Instagram.

Wedding day for Facebook.

Something for Facebook.

I keep the phone with me most of the time, and I frequently run into stuff for photos, where IQ isn’t important.

I make most of my cat pictures with my phone because it is always there; it is also good if I see something Interesting when I am out.  If I think I will be doing photography, I will take a camera and lens.

OP sportyaccordy Forum Pro • Posts: 14,907
Re: Fun with the phone camera

Jonsi wrote:

I think phones had a huge affect on P&S sales, not so much DSLR sales. But in both cases it is about convenience, not because they want "better".

For sure, phones definitely hit P&S sales hard. But ILC sales are down by 1/2 from the peak. And it seems most of those sales are at the bottom of the market. Definitely seems like phones are having an effect there too.

And better is subjective. For many, convenient is better. This isn't foreign to the photography community either. Most major camera innovations (film to digital, auto focus/exposure/white balance, video) have been convenience based. Even image quality helps with convenience- more base ISO DR = less bracketing. Higher resolution sensors = shorter lenses get more reach. Better high ISO performance = smaller, slower lenses- maybe zooms- and possibly smaller formats too. So the pursuit of convenience is hardly limited to civilians... it's huge for enthusiasts and pros too.

-- hide signature --

Sometimes I take pictures with my gear- https://www.flickr.com/photos/41601371@N00/

 sportyaccordy's gear list:sportyaccordy's gear list
NEX-5T Sony a7R II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG Macro HSM II +6 more
Jonsi
Jonsi Senior Member • Posts: 4,083
Re: Fun with the phone camera

sportyaccordy wrote:

Jonsi wrote:

I think phones had a huge affect on P&S sales, not so much DSLR sales. But in both cases it is about convenience, not because they want "better".

For sure, phones definitely hit P&S sales hard. But ILC sales are down by 1/2 from the peak. And it seems most of those sales are at the bottom of the market. Definitely seems like phones are having an effect there too.

And better is subjective. For many, convenient is better. This isn't foreign to the photography community either. Most major camera innovations (film to digital, auto focus/exposure/white balance, video) have been convenience based. Even image quality helps with convenience- more base ISO DR = less bracketing. Higher resolution sensors = shorter lenses get more reach. Better high ISO performance = smaller, slower lenses- maybe zooms- and possibly smaller formats too. So the pursuit of convenience is hardly limited to civilians... it's huge for enthusiasts and pros too.

Yes.  I was just referring to the convenience of access (the phone is always with us).  I probably should have been clearer.

Mackiesback
Mackiesback Senior Member • Posts: 6,690
Re: Fun with the phone camera

vallhall wrote:

Bobthearch wrote:

vallhall wrote:

Bobthearch wrote:

vallhall wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

Jonsi wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

Jonsi wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

yardcoyote wrote:

Neither great art nor great photography was claimed. But when I make a snapshot,the possibility of "problems with the edges" is not a super high priority.

It's freeing. When you know your IQ is going to have problems no matter what you do and your image will never be anything but a snapshot, you are excused from worrying about a whole bunch of stuff. You can make a picture that is about nothing but the subject, the colors ( or monochrome tones) and the composition.

This is a good point. With smartphones, there's nowhere to hide. You're pretty much wholly dependent on the composition, so you better put your creative cap on. I can see how that would scare or infuriate pixel peepers and gear snobs.

Why would it scare or infuriate gear snobs?

Because they have convinced themselves that the only path to good photography is through their expensive gear.

The path to the best photography is. That's not a phone diss. But you're acting like there are no limits to camera phones.

The best in whose opinion? The post you quoted is a clear acknowledgement of phone's capabilities ("With smartphones, there's nowhere to hide. You're pretty much wholly dependent on the composition") so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

Yes, they take great pictures of the things that fall in their wheelhouse (selfies, 'street' and some landscape), but you can't do all the same photography with a phone that you can with a normal camera. A Nikon D5 with only a 300mm mounted is also limited. Just be realistic.

Obviously... nothing I've said is contrary to this.

Your replies are also revealing that your intent of this thread wasn't as innocent as you claimed, and I was basically correct in my first comment.

You said you wanted a civil conversation, yet keep calling those you don't agree with "camera snobs".

No, I call camera snobs camera snobs. There are phone zealots too. In any case you are looking for a fight where there isn't one. If you want civil conversation do your part

Dont spend time talking to jonsi...aka Borat!, its like talking to deaf ears!. And he is a real samrtphone hater in here!. And ofcourse his smartphone capabilities is very limited as he owns a iphone 6 with no zoom and s h i t ty low light performance

Yeah, the camera on his $700 smartphone is no good so he should buy a $1200 smartphone...

Do you know how ridiculous that sounds?

Funny thing, no one ever says that to photographers with $700 Nikons.

You realize the difference between iphone 6 and the latest from Huawei and Pixel?

I sure do.

I also remember when the iPhone 6 was new and the cellphoners were incessantly praising it's superior image quality, and few were even spouting "DSLR Killer" way back then. They did the same with the iPhone 4.

While of course you and I know those phone cameras were utter rubbish.

And DSLR-Killer is no more true today than it was back then.

Have you tryed a phone like Huawei P30 Pro?...probarly not!.

I have a Ipad Pro 10.5 with the same camera as iphone 7, and its ok in good light, but terrible in low light, and ofcourse no zoom

proberly(sic) not because he lives in the USA, and getting that phone here is kind of a PITA.

 Mackiesback's gear list:Mackiesback's gear list
Nikon Coolpix 5000 Nikon Coolpix A Nikon D50 Nikon D100 Nikon Df +18 more
Mackiesback
Mackiesback Senior Member • Posts: 6,690
Re: Fun with the phone camera

sportyaccordy wrote:

Jonsi wrote:

I think phones had a huge affect on P&S sales, not so much DSLR sales. But in both cases it is about convenience, not because they want "better".

For sure, phones definitely hit P&S sales hard. But ILC sales are down by 1/2 from the peak. And it seems most of those sales are at the bottom of the market. Definitely seems like phones are having an effect there too.

Perhaps an effect, but I think it is far easier to pin it on the fact that the pipeline is full, and the new models don't offer enough of an upgrade to keep the early adoption/saturation ordering cycle humming at the same level as it was when the pipeline was just getting filled. This happens with TVs, Home PCs, heck, it is even starting to happen with cell phones. It is ridiculously predictable, and has nothing to do with the quality of the product or the condition of the economy.

And better is subjective. For many, convenient is better. This isn't foreign to the photography community either. Most major camera innovations (film to digital, auto focus/exposure/white balance, video) have been convenience based. Even image quality helps with convenience- more base ISO DR = less bracketing. Higher resolution sensors = shorter lenses get more reach. Better high ISO performance = smaller, slower lenses- maybe zooms- and possibly smaller formats too. So the pursuit of convenience is hardly limited to civilians... it's huge for enthusiasts and pros too.

 Mackiesback's gear list:Mackiesback's gear list
Nikon Coolpix 5000 Nikon Coolpix A Nikon D50 Nikon D100 Nikon Df +18 more
Laybourne
Laybourne Forum Member • Posts: 57
Re: Fun with the phone camera

vallhall wrote:

Bobthearch wrote:

vallhall wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

Jonsi wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

Jonsi wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

yardcoyote wrote:

Neither great art nor great photography was claimed. But when I make a snapshot,the possibility of "problems with the edges" is not a super high priority.

It's freeing. When you know your IQ is going to have problems no matter what you do and your image will never be anything but a snapshot, you are excused from worrying about a whole bunch of stuff. You can make a picture that is about nothing but the subject, the colors ( or monochrome tones) and the composition.

This is a good point. With smartphones, there's nowhere to hide. You're pretty much wholly dependent on the composition, so you better put your creative cap on. I can see how that would scare or infuriate pixel peepers and gear snobs.

Why would it scare or infuriate gear snobs?

Because they have convinced themselves that the only path to good photography is through their expensive gear.

The path to the best photography is. That's not a phone diss. But you're acting like there are no limits to camera phones.

The best in whose opinion? The post you quoted is a clear acknowledgement of phone's capabilities ("With smartphones, there's nowhere to hide. You're pretty much wholly dependent on the composition") so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

Yes, they take great pictures of the things that fall in their wheelhouse (selfies, 'street' and some landscape), but you can't do all the same photography with a phone that you can with a normal camera. A Nikon D5 with only a 300mm mounted is also limited. Just be realistic.

Obviously... nothing I've said is contrary to this.

Your replies are also revealing that your intent of this thread wasn't as innocent as you claimed, and I was basically correct in my first comment.

You said you wanted a civil conversation, yet keep calling those you don't agree with "camera snobs".

No, I call camera snobs camera snobs. There are phone zealots too. In any case you are looking for a fight where there isn't one. If you want civil conversation do your part

Dont spend time talking to jonsi...aka Borat!, its like talking to deaf ears!. And he is a real samrtphone hater in here!. And ofcourse his smartphone capabilities is very limited as he owns a iphone 6 with no zoom and s h i t ty low light performance

Yeah, the camera on his $700 smartphone is no good so he should buy a $1200 smartphone...

Do you know how ridiculous that sounds?

Funny thing, no one ever says that to photographers with $700 Nikons.

You realize the difference between iphone 6 and the latest from Huawei and Pixel?

somehow, if wonder if they do. A toaster from 5 years ago still performs like a toaster, but a smartphone from 5 years ago shoots like a potato.

But you have some of these people who are used to the very linear, glacial pace of change with regular cameras thinking the same must be true with smartphone cameras when in fact the change is more like exponential.

-- hide signature --

Fear is the darkroom where the Devil develops his negatives.

tcg550 Veteran Member • Posts: 8,926
Re: Disconnected
2

nicodimus22 wrote:

I have a GoPhone that I rarely use, with a camera on it that I never use, to post photos to social media that I'm not on.

As you use social media to declare that.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads