Ugly Hedgehog® - Photography Forum
DSLR vs. Cellphone Cameras
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 next>>
Feb 26, 2019 08:33:46   #
editorsteve
 
I like the comments lauding both phone and DSLR. Use all the tools you can master. I certainly assume all the tools will continue to get better, too. Much better.

| Reply
Feb 26, 2019 08:43:43   #
Dikdik
 
gvarner wrote:
Do not fear the cameras in cellphones. They simply serve a niche in the photographic world and represent a transition from mainly mechanical to mainly digitally created photos.


Hopefully some cell phone users will move up to 'real' cameras.

Dik

| Reply
Feb 26, 2019 08:50:56   #
Kmgw9v (a regular here)
 
Dikdik wrote:
Hopefully some cell phone users will move up to 'real' cameras.

Dik


They will not. There is no need. They own and shoot with real cameras now.

| Reply
Feb 26, 2019 09:03:50   #
Dikdik
 
Kmgw9v wrote:
They will not. There is no need. They own and shoot with real cameras now.


I would disagree... phone cameras are pretty good and slowly improving... but, not there yet.

Dik

| Reply
Feb 26, 2019 09:10:32   #
blackest (a regular here)
 
TriX wrote:
How about shooting action in low light or produce 30-50 MB raw files that can be cropped to a large degree and still retain decent resolution? I could go on, but that small sensor kills your low light / high ISO performance and max resolution. Sensors are improving, but bigger will always be better (although "good enough" is good enough for many people.)


These cell phones can already do some quite impressive feats I tried a 30 second exposure at iso 3! (i think one of the new olympus cameras has a similar capability). Having 2 cameras its possible to get a depth map and select focus after the shot has been taken.

Actually my latest cell can't make calls as i haven't added a sim card, I didn't buy it to make phone calls.

Another nice thing is it can be controlled over wifi from an iPad.

| Reply
Feb 26, 2019 09:12:53   #
bodiebill
 
Cell phones are cheap compared to cameras??
Price out the cost of cell phones and satellite systems that make them possible.
I am surprised that so many young people have them. Perhaps their parents paid for them.
In any event they are quite expensive.

Until the Brownie Cameras photography was a limited hobby.
Product and system evolution rolls on and on.
What was new yesterday is passe today

| Reply
Feb 26, 2019 09:15:18   #
Country Boy (a regular here)
 
My fear is that the next new camera (Z8) will have a dial on the side for phone calls. We were driving to town yesterday and about 15 turkeys crossed the road in front of me. DSLR in back seat and cell phone in shirt pocket - to me that is the defining point. I can take the cell phone anywhere but not a larger camera.

| Reply
Feb 26, 2019 09:17:31   #
BebuLamar (a regular here)
 
bodiebill wrote:
Cell phones are cheap compared to cameras??
Price out the cost of cell phones and satellite systems that make them possible.
I am surprised that so many young people have them. Perhaps their parents paid for them.
In any event they are quite expensive.

Until the Brownie Cameras photography was a limited hobby.
Product and system evolution rolls on and on.
What was new yesterday is passe today


Yup! If someone said that they are going to pay for the phone as phone anyway then the cost of the camera is free. But a new Samsung for $1600 isn't cheap compared to a full frame Nikon D750 with the 24-120mm lens for $2000.

| Reply
Feb 26, 2019 09:20:09   #
lamontcranston
 
wingclui44 wrote:

I am still using my "Flip Phone" and will never want a Camera phone. I don't share my pictures with any social media, they are dangerous and getting worst. I have closed my account from Facebook. The world is changing fast!


I agree. As an extra precaution I put my aluminum hat on every morning when I get up and don't take it off until I go to bed. I think that helps but I still occasionally hear those black helicopters circling above my house.

| Reply
Feb 26, 2019 09:47:03   #
SteveHmeyer
 
gvarner wrote:
Dear DSLR owners:
Do not fear the cameras in cellphones. They simply serve a niche in the photographic world and represent a transition from mainly mechanical to mainly digitally created photos. The two worlds will eventually mesh together so thoroughly that you will not be able to tell the end product from one versus the other. And if you’re just a viewer and not a printer, the difference is negligible. I can fantasize a digital zoom that equals the quality of a mechanical zoom, built-in macro with on demand focus stacking, and an ultra-high ISO without noise. They’re on their way.
Dear DSLR owners: br Do not fear the cameras in ce... (show quote)


I’ve read all the replies and no one has mentioned that there is no magic here - no phone or camera manufacturer can violate the laws of physics. In cell phone world the game is emulation of what a “real” camera can do. Imagine a 500mm f/4 lens on an APS-C DSLR - you are shooting at an equivalent focal length of 800mm. I use this example because I took some shots of Cincinnati last night from 3.5 miles away for use as a background. Of course I needed a sturdy tripod, a big head and my iPhone to trigger it remotely. That’s a lot of glass to grab that available light - it simply cannot be done with a tiny lens and a small sensor using a cell phone camera - physics limits the quality of the results the cell phone gets - however software and processing can emulate the results but it will never match the quality. Of course when I first read the Dick Tracy comic strip and saw his wrist video communicator - I said it would never happen!

| Reply
Feb 26, 2019 10:08:43   #
Kmgw9v (a regular here)
 
Dikdik wrote:
I would disagree... phone cameras are pretty good and slowly improving... but, not there yet.

Dik


I have posted this in previous threads.
As an experiment I enlarged an image taken with my iPhone 7+ to 20” by 30”.
The resolution, color, image quality is incredible.

I have also said that I will not give up my DSLR’s, but I now have a different opinion about what can be done with an iPhone.
The naysayers need to come out of denial.

| Reply
Feb 26, 2019 10:08:44   #
gvarner (a regular here)
 
SteveHmeyer wrote:
I’ve read all the replies and no one has mentioned that there is no magic here - no phone or camera manufacturer can violate the laws of physics. In cell phone world the game is emulation of what a “real” camera can do. Imagine a 500mm f/4 lens on an APS-C DSLR - you are shooting at an equivalent focal length of 800mm. I use this example because I took some shots of Cincinnati last night from 3.5 miles away for use as a background. Of course I needed a sturdy tripod, a big head and my iPhone to trigger it remotely. That’s a lot of glass to grab that available light - it simply cannot be done with a tiny lens and a small sensor using a cell phone camera - physics limits the quality of the results the cell phone gets - however software and processing can emulate the results but it will never match the quality. Of course when I first read the Dick Tracy comic strip and saw his wrist video communicator - I said it would never happen!
I’ve read all the replies and no one has mentioned... (show quote)


No one argues that those little disposable film cameras you can still get aren’t "real" cameras because they look and feel like "real" cameras. They work just fine within their limits. Cell phones don’t look so much like "real" cameras but they work just fine for taking pictures within their limits. The current level of physics sets those limits for now. With nano-technology and other advances, it remains to be seen what the future holds. It’s all about computing power.

| Reply
Feb 26, 2019 10:12:37   #
Kmgw9v (a regular here)
 
gvarner wrote:
No one argues that those little disposable film cameras you can still get aren’t "real" cameras because they look and feel like "real" cameras. They work just fine within their limits. Cell phones don’t look so much like "real" cameras but they work just fine for taking pictures within their limits. The current level of physics sets those limits for now. With nano-technology and other advances, it remains to be seen what the future holds. It’s all about computing power.
No one argues that those little disposable film ca... (show quote)


Cell phones look like “real” cameras, because they are real cameras. It is what it is.

| Reply
Feb 26, 2019 10:23:04   #
TriX (a regular here)
 
IPhone 7 dynamic range (PDR): 7.15, Low light ISO:45 (3.84 EV)
Canon 5D4. dynamic range (PDR): 10.83, Low light ISO:5011 (10.65 EV)

‘Nuff said - there is no free lunch - you can have max performance or small size low weight, but not both



| Reply
Feb 26, 2019 10:43:25   #
traderjohn (a regular here)
 
SuperflyTNT wrote:
I really don't think this is anything new. The people that only use cellphone cameras are the same people that only used point & shoots. Most people were perfectly happy listening to AM radios rather than investing in Hi-Fi. If anything I'd say there are more people using SLR's now than back in the days of film.


Wow, that is really lame.

| Reply
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2019 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.