Will smart phone cameras replace DSLRs in the future? (Page 2): "New cell phones have remarkably great cameras that will satisfy the needs of many/most serious picture takers..."...

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

"New cell phones have remarkably great cameras that will satisfy the needs of many/most serious picture takers..." Kmgw9v speaks with wisdom here... And much depends on the target audience... In fact I've seen rather outstanding imagery captured with mobile devices and likewise I've seen way too many pathetic images captured by high end DSLR's and Mirrorless cameras...

Knowing your target audience and meeting or exceeding their expectations is a universal truth that hasn't change on the commercial side of the equation for many decades and will likely continue to remain valid into the foreseeable future...

Folks it isn't about kit, it is in fact about the aesthetics of your visual statement, the sooner you get your head around this the more likely you will be able to successfully migrate into the commercial arena... (at least this has proven to have merit in my experience).

I wish you all well on your journey...

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

Jakebrake wrote:

I just read an article on the Sony a7R III in Outdoor Photography, and damn, if I wasn't so heavily invested in Canon that would be my system.

https://www.outdoorphotographer.com/photography-gear/cameras/sony-a7r-iii/

As soon as Canon gets its head out of its a** and produces a decent FF mirroless, I am going. If that does not happen in the next two years, I will switch to Sony.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Jakebrake wrote:

I just read an article on the Sony a7R III in Outdoor Photography, and damn, if I wasn't so heavily invested in Canon that would be my system.

https://www.outdoorphotographer.com/photography-gear/cameras/sony-a7r-iii/

You might want to do some more research and / or rent one and confirm the lens line-up is not there nor are the controls on the body for exposure adjustments. A high fps number without effective controls to adjust the exposure to changing light is an incomplete implementation. Adapting 3rd party lenses may address missing focal lengths, but is the AF performance the same as the lenses on their native bodies? And be sure to bring a pocket full of batteries if you plan to shoot all day. Sony is pushing the other two and they have resources to wipe them both off the map. But, they may need less of the mass-market approach of the larger corporation within their high-end camera division.

warrior Loc: Paso Robles CA

BlueMorel wrote:

No, we'll all have chips on our optic nerves and take photos by blinking. Photos will be transmitted by a blue tooth.

Really, I use both, but a phone is no substitute for a good dslr with a good set of lenses. But a phone is more portable and has its uses, sometimes just as a phone.

That's what my Jitterbug is for just a phone.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

Until they figure out how to put a megA-zoom lens (or interchangeable lenses) and lower noise high ISOs into a cell phone, there will be those who need a real camera.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

There have always been a large number of people who are point-and-shoot or snapshot shooters, and a minority of serious amateur or pro photographers. The snapshooters have overwhelmingly gone to cell phone cameras, and are probably getting better shots than the days of film point-and-shoot cameras. The latest cell phone cameras can take great photos, even allowing large prints. But they do have a lot of limitations in the type of photos they can do. Serious photographers are always going to want cameras with advanced capabilities. It's not always DSLRs - there are now mirrorless cameras with similar capabilities, but advanced cameras for serious photographers are not going away.

pmorin Loc: Huntington Beach, Palm Springs

PhotoFem wrote:

I see people using iphones, smart phones and now even with new lens attachments to take photos of everyday life...and even nature. Perhaps, this is because they can instantaneously post their images on Facebook and Instagram. Instagram even has rudimentary tools to improve bad images...or, even alter their original look.
Any thoughts on this?

Thanks,
Jen

Phone cameras are fine for snapshots in most situations. But the photo they take just does not have the detail of a DSLR shot. This is a photo taken at Sawyer Glacier in Alaska with an IPhone 6plus. It looks ok at the scale shown, but there is no real detail available if you zoom in.
You get a nice snap, but not the detail for a larger print.

(Download)

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

PhotoFem wrote:

I see people using iphones, smart phones and now even with new lens attachments to take photos of everyday life...and even nature. Perhaps, this is because they can instantaneously post their images on Facebook and Instagram. Instagram even has rudimentary tools to improve bad images...or, even alter their original look.
Any thoughts on this?

Thanks,
Jen

No and yes. The cellphone has replaced the compact camera and is the camera of choice when one doesn't have their regular DSLR or mirrirless. For some people, though, the cellphone will be the only camera they will have.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

Jakebrake wrote:

Most of the people you see running around clicking away with their smart phones are not serious pro photographers, or dedicated hobbyists. I realize the technology in camera smart phones has improved by leaps and bounds, but that medium is still for snap shots and selfie's IMO. A smart phone will never capture an image like a DSLR will. BTW, I dumped Facebook a couple of weeks ago after the crap Mark Zukerberg and FB was pulling. Don't need them!

Would you care to post just one photo that comes from your dslr, that is a better picture than the ones in this link?

https://www.ippawards.com/winners-of-the-2017-iphone-photography-awards-announced/

tdekany Loc: Oregon

CHG_CANON wrote:

You might want to do some more research and / or r... (show quote)

I thought that you would be more up on the latest tech. The new battery from Sony is as good as the best from a dslr. Lens lineup is also fine now. What most people use, Sony has.

I will not comment on the control claim you had made. That is ridiculous.

jcboy3

PhotoFem wrote:

I see people using iphones, smart phones and now even with new lens attachments to take photos of everyday life...and even nature. Perhaps, this is because they can instantaneously post their images on Facebook and Instagram. Instagram even has rudimentary tools to improve bad images...or, even alter their original look.
Any thoughts on this?

Thanks,
Jen

Smart phone cameras have replaced P&S cameras. You don't need to haul around any other camera to take very good photos. You don't have the flexibility to change focal length, but that's where the attachment lenses come in handy. And, there are a whole slew of apps for processing the images on the smart phone.

And the phones take pretty good video now, as well. I was talking to a video pro the other day; some of his clients now REQUIRE that they shoot commercial videos with smart phones. They are in the smart phone or related business, but the phones have gotten so good that you can actually produce quality commercial product with them.

The niche that requires DSLR quality is dwindling. I use my DSLRs occasionally, usually shoot micro four thirds, sometimes a P&S, and sometimes a smart phone. The occasion where I want to drag 26 lbs kit is few.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

PhotoFem wrote:

I see people using iphones, smart phones and now even with new lens attachments to take photos of everyday life...and even nature. Perhaps, this is because they can instantaneously post their images on Facebook and Instagram. Instagram even has rudimentary tools to improve bad images...or, even alter their original look.
Any thoughts on this?

It's not just about being able to instantaneously post on the internet, but also about having a camera with you at all times.

When I'm at a food store buying groceries for example, it is unlikely that I am carrying a DSLR on me. So if I see something interesting happening I want to capture, the smart phone camera will simply have to do! When I get home from shopping, I edit the images on my computer... using a proper image editor, not Instagram tools.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

tdekany wrote:

I thought that you would be more up on the latest tech. The new battery from Sony is as good as the best from a dslr. Lens lineup is also fine now. What most people use, Sony has.

I will not comment on the control claim you had made. That is ridiculous.

You might want to put your Kool-Aid down for a bit and let your head clear ....

I spent some time last week researching the A7III vs A7II and have the older model scheduled for a rental next week. I do seem to have missed the A7III / A7RIII models now shipping with a new battery that pushed the usage count into the 1500-image range. Something that does exceed the Nikon and Canon performance. My research was the smaller sensor A7III / II models rather than the 'R' 40+ MP bodies.

But, there's still several areas that are inferior, including no E-mount (FF) lenses above 400mm and a flash-sync limited to 1/250. No shutterspeed nor ISO control dials on the body is a non-started for me shooting action / BIF in manual and dynamically changing light. I'm also concerned about a lossy compression of Sony RAW files. Of course, if you're unfamiliar with these features / limitations or lens models, their absence likely have no relevance to your needs. But, because you are unaware of them does not make them unimportant.

n3eg Loc: West coast USA

Smart phones will replace point and shoot cameras. Mirrorless will replaced DSLRs.

bkyser Loc: Fly over country in Indiana

Remember pixels aren't the only part of the equation. If they ever figured out a way to put a larger (at least a 4/3 sensor in a smart phone, enlarging photos to a useable size, maybe. I'm thinking that there may be a technology Including lens technology that will allow a larger sensor area to be covered by a lens so close to it, but it isn't there yet.

Honestly, with all the talk of "the end of professional photography," I'm seeing a turn around. More people are starting to want to hire pros for weddings, and portrait work. I've had record years the last couple of years, and should be on track to do better again this year.

I do see the advantages of the newer system with electronic viewfinders, but it isn't the camera used, it's the person creating the photos that counts.