Will smart phone cameras replace DSLRs in the future? (Page 6): I certainly hope not📸...

photodoc67

I certainly hope not📸

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

pegleg2001 wrote:

FYI: This is a blog from an imaging engineer at Apple. Very interesting details at the engineering “deep dive” level of what is going on at with sensors and image processing...

http://relativisticobserver.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/bigger-pixels.html

I just read this article. Very informative, and a lot of techno stuff to digest. All that considered, it's amazing how they can get all that stuff compacted into a small item like a sensor. I feel like I learned something new and have at least a tiny bit better understanding in that regard. Thanks for the link.

Idaho

I'll change that slightly to say what cameras, in general, will cell phones replace? A lot of them. SLRs will be affected but sales of smaller less expensive cameras will be affected more. I wonder if the camera companies are prepared for this....

Grace98 Loc: Waterlooville, Hampshire - United Kingdom

Mobile phone cameras are getting better and better. My Samsung Galaxy S6 takes some really sharp photos. It also has a wider angle than my camera.
On a recent holiday took many landscape shots with my mobile and to be honest came out much better than my camera. I'm attaching a couple of examples, taken at same time, same place no postprocessing at all...what do you think?

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

Mobile

Nikon D3300/18-300 lens
Nikon D3300/18-300 lens...

pmorin Loc: Huntington Beach, Palm Springs

My twin nephews, 18, are definitely of the smart phone generation. One is very much into photography and I have fed this interest by getting him his own equipment. He looks at the images taken with a cell and wants better than what he sees. The other is perfectly satisfied with the way his phone takes a pic and sees no reason to lug a camera around. Two sides of the coin.
I think that some form of high end camera will always be on the market. There will always be a demand for them. Cameras for the masses have evolved since the end of WWII to what we have today and will evolve further in the next seventy-five years. Some will be curious and get hooked just like all of us, others not so much. Technology changes and adapts, we will too.
Besides, which of us doesn’t love to research and buy new equipment?

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

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

Absolutely, already have.

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

Interesting points of view on this, although some of the predictions of doom seem a little overboard.

There is no question that cell phones will replace point and shoot cameras for casual family photographs - they mostly have already. There is also no question that professional photographers will need professional tools with the latest technology (Remember the first fully automatic SLR 35s?) and it looks like those will eventually turn to mirrorless models.

My question is this: Will the advanced amateur / photo hobbyist, whatever you choose to call a person who spends significant time and money seeking photos and displaying them as a matter of pride, turn away from dedicated equipment to make use of a tool they already have in their pocket in a more advanced way?

I've never thought so, but I sure see a lot of ads, social network posts, videos, etc. pushing people to improve their cell phone photography skills. Is this trend replacing equipment in the hands of actual photo hobbyists? Or is it motivating the family snapshooters to become owners of more advanced gear?

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

AndyH wrote:

Interesting points of view on this, although some ... (show quote)

As some people get serious about improving their cell phone photographs, they may run up against the limitations of those and go looking for cameras with more advanced capabilities.

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

JohnSwanda wrote:

As some people get serious about improving their cell phone photographs, they may run up against the limitations of those and go looking for cameras with more advanced capabilities.

That's the way I was leaning. One of our grandkids, a teenager, was getting so many compliments on his cell phone photos that he persuaded his parents to get him a used DSLR from a pawn shop. He's gotten a couple of lenses, and is now looking at upgrading to a higher capability body.

Isn't that how most of us got sucked into the hobby in one way or another? It's been a long strange trip from my first Argus C-3 Brick, but it's always onward and upward.

Besperus Loc: Oregon

Technology has been used to help people develope skills and interest in recording history and how life impacts their lives. Cameras on a cell phone have done this just as box cameras and 8mm movie cameras have aided and pushed manufactures in this development. Superior imaging is still the purview of larger imaging systems such as the current DSLR and the upcoming FF mirrorless technologies. Point and shoot cameras have slowly gone the way of the disc camera, 110, 127 film cameras, but there are the die hards which produce artful interesting images today using old technology.
I have seen what NASA and the NSA can do with gangs of cell phone cameras mounted in satellites, 1200 cameras interconnected pointed at earth can read a newspaper held in a person’s hands from hundreds of miles up!
But no, as tech progresses cell phone, all technology will improve. Tiny cameras in cell phones or ware able devices will improve as will DSLR devices. How would you like a DSLR with 100 megapixels or 200?

gsmith051 Loc: Fairfield Glade, TN

For me the shot from the smart phone is more appealing. But, I'm not going to junk my full frame camera yet!

/George

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

beerhunter13 wrote:

If you want to take pictures, use a smart phone. If you want to make pictures, use a camera.

False separation. I use DSLR to "take" pictures of speeding trains that smart phone couldn't handle. I know a guy who started with a smart phone picture of friends standing in front of church and "made" a picture of them standing on a beach.

ToBoldlyGo Loc: London U.K.

Just my thoughts here. Smartphones have their place just like a dedicated camera does. Currently a smartphone cannot freeze action on command, or be relied on to get the photo needed on when needed. But a dedicated camera cannot get into smaller areas, and is generally more conspicuous than a smartphone. I'll often end up choosing one over the other in given situations. I work for an animal charity, sometimes my DSLR will scare an animal. The smartphone never does. The phone is small and in my pocket, not sat on the table at home, or in another room.

ToBoldlyGo Loc: London U.K.

beerhunter13 wrote:

I have yet to see anyone photographing wildlife in... (show quote)

While I agree with your example, I disagree with your second paragraph. A smartphone has a camera. It's just as valid as a dedicated camera, sometimes more so. Check my example in my comment just above this. Just my thoughts of course, I mean no disrespect.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

Grace98 wrote:

Mobile phone cameras are getting better and better. My Samsung Galaxy S6 takes some really sharp photos. It also has a wider angle than my camera.
On a recent holiday took many landscape shots with my mobile and to be honest came out much better than my camera. I'm attaching a couple of examples, taken at same time, same place no postprocessing at all...what do you think?

Should have used store original. Can't really compare with the low res versions.