Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

Perhaps I'm missing something here, but I don't understand this cellphone vs. compact camera thing. I understand that nearly everyone has a cellphone with a camera built in. Makes it very convenient, but it seems to me that the only thing gained is the ability to immediately post images online. And I know there are apps for cellphone cameras that expand their capabilities, but it seems to me that none of this can equal or surpass what a good compact camera can do. Further, most of the compact cameras have the ability to connect with a cellphone or other mobile device for posting online. Furthermore, a decent compact has a good optical zoom, as opposed to the purely and inferiour digital zoom in a cellphone camera. The Sony RX100xx line is a good example of this, and they all fit in a shirt pocket. Makes them as convenient as a cellphone, I would think.

So, looking to the future of cameras, it seems that cellphone camera technology is going to have to go a very long distance before it can equal that of a good compact camera. I use my iPhone 8 Plus for occasional snaps, but for more serious photography (or at least as serious as I can be) I rely on either my Canon G16 (at the moment) or my Sony A6300. I think, while the casual, very simple point and shoot camera has a dim future, I think there is a good future for high end compact cameras. For those who love to take pictures but want to keep things simple, without having to lug around a heavy camera body and a bevy of lenses, while retaining the features and controls of larger cameras, a good compact camera definitely has a niche. I guess, in the end, this thing about cellphone cameras versus compact cameras (or any other camera) is really an apples/oranges thing. Again, maybe I'm missing something here, but that's how I see it. Perhaps someone can enlighten me?

FreddB Loc: PA - Delaware County

"What's the best camera for...?"
"The one you have with you."

For the majority of the current population, that would be the cell phone.

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

Agree wholeheartedly.

Dave327 Loc: Duluth, GA. USA

If you appreciate the difference. Also, the newest smartphones take pictures that rival what a DSLR can produce. Some come with 2 lenses / sensors - standard and wide angle. The main advances come from computational / chip technology which the stand alone camera manufactures have not caught up with. Additionally, they have ignored fast connectivity with they smartphone (what I am taking about is something similar to Apple’s mirroring). How many times have you seen posts that complain they can’t seem to get connect apps to work with their device?

Last week or so there was a posting of some shots of a marina in Florida in the golden hour. They where so sharp even I didn’t believe they were shot with an iPhone 8. So, I downloaded one and sure enough it was.
I’m a canon shooter and have two bodies plus a Nikon point & shoot. I still run my remodeling business and we use our phone cameras every day for record job shots. I still marvel at their low light capabilities and the ability to sent pics with with a message.
My wife’s Samsung Note 2 takes pictures that rival what my canon bodies produce and for posting on social media who really cares? The point is; smartphones take pictures that are just fine for the majority of people. With a sound knowledge of light and composition they can take pictures that rival or come close to the stand-alone camera. Now, where they come up sort is being able zoom in high quality. Obviously, you cannot take a sharp picture of a eagle 150 ft away and even compact cameras would come up short trying to do that.
You are missing the fact that most people always have their smartphone with them and do not want to have remember to bring the compact camera.

Brokenland

I've used both at one point in time. But feel the compact or small camera has far better image quality than the smart phone or at least those smart phones we've used in the past. If you have enough to spend on a good quality smart phone you maybe surprised with the camera's image quality. But I'd rather have the freedom to select those lenses I want for a particular shot. I think IF I was ever able to actually afford a $1,000 plus smart phone and if it was android compatible, then I would for go the built in camera app and select the OpenCamera app instead. Even bridge cameras (which typically uses the smart phone sized sensor) are not the same as a smart phone or a smaller camera.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

Dave,

I think you are spot on with your mention of "computational / chip technology". Although shunned in the consistent UHH theme of "Manual Is Better", it is creeping into our cameras.

One example is my Olympus TG-5. It is loaded with versions of computational photography called "Scenes". It frequently impresses me in the "Auto" mode. Especially in low light.

Another example came when we had the eclipse a couple weeks ago. I was doing the usual long lens, tripod, manual, remote release procedure and got some keepable images. On a lark, I put my Panasonic camera on "iA", handheld the long (800 mm equivalent) lens and pushed the button. Expecting a click, the camera started chattering. It was using lens and body stabilization, stacking exposures and aligning them. It was my best shot of the night!

As we go forward, great cameras will have the computational prowess and connectivity of phones, more in camera processing choices and always good glass.

TonyP Loc: New Zealand

Yes you are right but I think it goes a bit deeper than that.

For most of us on this forum, photography is a priority. A hobby or an addiction. And we enjoy the gear that allows us to take a photo.
But we are a minority.
The rest of the world just want to capture a moment in time. And there are myriad reasons for that.
Show what they can do, have done. Bragging rights. A reminder of an achievement. Many different reasons.
But ultimately, they arent photographers so dont want or need a 'camera' per se.

Us here, most no longer millennials, but a bit older, view the of taking photograph as a journey. We enjoy the process of making a picture, maybe processing it a bit etc. Our pleasure comes from the journey.
A cellphone 'photographer' in my opinion just wants to get to the destination, and the quicker the better.

Having said that, I recently saw the results of a worldwide competition included a number of categories won by people using a cellphone.
As its often said, the most important bit of equipment resides about 2 inches behind the camera.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

"A cellphone 'photographer' in my opinion just wants to get to the destination, and the quicker the better."

I've been looking at the Adobe offerings for cell phone processing. Lightroom CC (mobile), Photoshop Express, Clip, Mix, Rush, Illustrator Draw, Photoshop Sketch and more. Many on this forum may have no exposure to them, yet there are many "photographers" that take them seriously and seriously process images before they get to their destinations.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

The big difference is that most people, including those who are not regular photographers, have their phones close by 24/7 whereas most people who have small pocket cameras don't necessarily have them in their pocket, or even near them, all the time. The second thing is that a separate pocket camera is one more thing to carry and one more expense. Additionally if you decide you want a compact camera rather than a pocket camera, it's not like you can slip into your front pants pocket. There's also the fact that most people today value convenience over quality, especially when the quality of higher-end cell phone cameras is very good to start with. When I'm out and about I don't always have my camera with me, but I always have my cell phone with me. And while it's not a perfect replacement for a good quality camera, in a pinch it does the job.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

I don't doubt that cellphone cameras have come a long way since the first ones appeared in those old flip phones. I've taken some pretty nice pictures with my iPhone, but as advanced as it is, it doesn't allow me the flexibility of my G16 or A6300. And while it's true that there are clip on accessory lenses for cellphone cameras, none of them are really that good, and it seems each new iteration of a cellphone has a different set up for their built in lenses. Nonetheless, I continue to be impressed with the quality of cellphone images, yet I will nearly always go to one of my dedicated cameras. I have no fear that compact cameras are on their way out, save for the most simple ones that allow one to only point and shoot. By the way, some of the "scene selections" work pretty well. My favorite is the sunset scene selection.

Bill_de Loc: US

It all depends on the end use. There have been magazine covers done with cellphones. Here's one from Billboard.

https://bgr.com/2017/02/17/iphone-7-plus-billboard-magazine-portrait-mode/

---

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

Yup, if you know what you're doing, of course. The best camera out there will only produce mediocre images, at best, if the photographer doesn't know what they're doing.

G Brown Loc: Sunny Bognor Regis West Sussex UK

What you say is true ONLY as long as a large numbers of people appreciate having large printed images. Not only is Facebook and other sites pushing inferior photography as an expression of 'what is happening' but also online media seems to accept Cell phone 'reporters'.

The age of printed magazines is coming to a close....Video has merged Photography and Media by the use of DSLR's, but for how long.

Like Horse riding.....a few enjoy it occasionally But the car rules...

Soon the demand for a 'separate' camera will dwindle as us current old folks decline. WE are the ones who value the DSLR and are capable of explaining why! Our great grandchildren will have other ideas!

Have fun while you can

Bipod

It comes down to two questions: first, is optics important in a camera? If not, then cameras can be
made as small as you like. Second, how important to use is have really tiny camera (did you used
to own a Minox?)

It would be nice if Apple would release the basic specifications for the cameras in its iPhone X: image
sensor format, image sensor type, 35-mm equiv focal length, etc. Unfortunately, it doesn't so we have
to rely on a tear-down.

Apple iPhone X Specification
https://support.apple.com/kb/SP770?locale=en_US
Front camera:
Lens: 6-element
Aperture:
Wide-angle: f/1.2
Telephoto: f/2.8

Preliminary tear-down of the Apple iPhone X:
https://techinsights.com/about-techinsights/overview/blog/apple-iphone-x-teardown/

Samsung Galaxy S9 and S9+ Specifications
https://www.samsung.com/global/galaxy/galaxy-s9/specs/
S9 Front camera:
Sensor size: 1/3.6"
Pixel size: 1.22µm
Sensor ratio: 4:3
Field-of-view: 80 degrees
Aperture: f/1.7

S9 tear-down: https://www.techinsights.com/about-techinsights/overview/blog/samsung-galaxy-s9-teardown/

S9+ tear-down: https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Samsung+Galaxy+S9+Teardown/104322
Aperture: f/1.5 and f/2.4 (disagrees with official spec)

It's pretty obvious that there is no mechanical shutter in either smart phone. So must
rely on a sensor with either a rolling shutter (limits speed and causes artifacts) or a
global shutter (reduces resolution and burst rate, and casuses heat).

It's equally obvious that Apple's sensor format is also tiny. The front sensor appears
to be a Sony CMOS, according to the folks who did the tear-down.

There is no question that the electronic hardware and software in both phones are excellent.
Alas, the image sensor is dinky and the lens is plastic. There is no real shutter. The result
is like a car with beautiful upholstery, a great radio, and a lawnmower engine.

le boecere

Read this on the British "digitalcameraworld" website, this morning:

8. (Sir Don) McCullin on mobile photography

"I've never been afraid of other people taking pictures. Everyone takes pictures on their phones now. Any joy I get out of it is because I don't have to look at them and secondly, they don't really improve very well when you try to enlarge them."