Camera Phones by Nikon ?
May 25, 2023 14:09:56 #
SuperflyTNT wrote:
Well that explains why you’re happy with Pentax.
Shows what you know especially if you measure inputs instead of outputs.
May 25, 2023 14:16:50 #
Sorry, I'm not giving up my Nikon DSLR's for any smartphone. 1 can't match any of lenses I use.
2 no precise control over exposure. The whole idea is crazy
2 no precise control over exposure. The whole idea is crazy
May 25, 2023 14:30:37 #
SuperflyTNT wrote:
While iPhone can’t compete with my Nikons or Olympus it is certainly not a poor camera. It’s at least as good as any P&S camera and much better than many.
May 25, 2023 14:32:57 #
blthomas438 wrote:
Sorry, I'm not giving up my Nikon DSLR's for any smartphone. 1 can't match any of lenses I use.
2 no precise control over exposure. The whole idea is crazy
2 no precise control over exposure. The whole idea is crazy
Nobody ever suggested that. The original suggestion involved Nikon’s manufacturing a smart phone.
May 25, 2023 14:38:58 #
rehess wrote:
Nobody ever suggested that. The original suggestion involved Nikon’s manufacturing a smart phone.
May 25, 2023 14:48:36 #
Whoever said ‘not a chance’ was correct.
No camera company but Sony has the sensor capability, and no camera company could ever compete with nature App stores , navigation , health apps etc that are taken fr granted in modern smartphones with loyal user base, let alone manufacturing at scale
No camera company but Sony has the sensor capability, and no camera company could ever compete with nature App stores , navigation , health apps etc that are taken fr granted in modern smartphones with loyal user base, let alone manufacturing at scale
May 25, 2023 15:29:00 #
Urnst
Loc: Brownsville, Texas
DirtFarmer wrote:
Just think how silly we'd look holding our DSLR up to our ear.
I hesitate to make voice notes on my cameras because of that.
I hesitate to make voice notes on my cameras because of that.
May 25, 2023 15:38:20 #
MJPerini wrote:
Whoever said ‘not a chance’ was correct.
No camera company but Sony has the sensor capability, and no camera company could ever compete with nature App stores , navigation , health apps etc that are taken fr granted in modern smartphones with loyal user base, let alone manufacturing at scale
No camera company but Sony has the sensor capability, and no camera company could ever compete with nature App stores , navigation , health apps etc that are taken fr granted in modern smartphones with loyal user base, let alone manufacturing at scale
This thread is about Nikon’s manufacturing smart phones. I’m not aware of Sony’s manufacturing them.
May 26, 2023 03:12:53 #
ngphotog
Loc: Michigan
Why do we keep having this nonsensical discussion of whether smart phones will replace dslr's? The answer is that if a given photographer finds his/her needs are met with a smart phone, then so be it and that photographer should not be vilified for setting aside the dslr. Likewise, if a photographer finds that the smart phone does not meet his/her needs and a dslr is necessary to do so, then so be it and that photographer should not be condemned as a luddite who refuses to accept new technology.
I have written in two previous posts on this smart phone vs dslr debate that I was going to be visiting Yellowstone and would be keenly interested to see how smart phones are being use in wildlife photography there.
I have just returned from Yellowstone and this is my report based on talking to live photographers there. Keep in mind this is my own experience of one day doing wildlife photography in Yellowstone, and others may have a different experience.
The majority of folks who want to observe the more reclusive animals like wolves and bears up closer and get acceptable pictures more for their own personal pleasure are using Sawarvski zoom spotting scopes being the equivalent of 1,500 - 2,000 mm telephoto lenses, and attaching their smart phone to the eyepiece of the spotting scope with a fast attachment system such as the system from the Ollin Company. That type of system provides instant placement or removal of the phone from the spotting scope as circumstances dictate. When mounted on the spotting scope, the IPhone can be used to both observe the animal(s) in view and take pictures as shown on the viewing screen. The major challenges are that a bright day makes the view screen very hard to see detail clearly, the spotting scope glass is not meant to present high contrast imagery, and also the spotting scope glass flattens the image more than high quality telephoto photo lens glass. That all being said, those images when processed through photoshop and other software, are acceptable to them for their own enjoyment, such as sharing with family and friends, etc.
Mixed in with the large group of spotting scope users are the smaller group of serious wildlife photographers who are seeking the finest images they can possibly attain. Most of them are using 800 mm lenses, and I would say that about 90% of those 800 mm lenses are Canon (sorry Nikon.) These photographers are almost all men I would say age 50 and above. There were a few women using dslr's, but more using spotting scopes. There was friendly discussion and view sharing among both spotting scope folks and the telephoto folks, and both groups of users obviously know what the results of both systems are and have decided which meets their needs. So who is winning this imaginary dslr vs smartphone "war" in wildlife photography in Yellowstone. I am attaching a picture of folks viewing a wolf den with a mother and pups. As you can see, most, if not all, are using a spotting scope and smartphone.
Lastly, I think the entry level cost of the spotting scope and smart phone combo for serious long distance wildlife observations and photos may be playing a role in all this. One can buy a decent spotting scope and top tier smart phone for $3,000 - $4,000 or less. A Canon dslr and 800mm lens will cost something like $15,000 - $20,000, depending on new or used and other factors. And then there is the added burden of lugging it around, compared to pocket portability of a smart phone.
All that being said, I have concluded that a growing number of wildlife photographers, especially in the younger generations, are going to their smartphones instead of a dslr because they find the smart phone better meets their needs.
I have written in two previous posts on this smart phone vs dslr debate that I was going to be visiting Yellowstone and would be keenly interested to see how smart phones are being use in wildlife photography there.
I have just returned from Yellowstone and this is my report based on talking to live photographers there. Keep in mind this is my own experience of one day doing wildlife photography in Yellowstone, and others may have a different experience.
The majority of folks who want to observe the more reclusive animals like wolves and bears up closer and get acceptable pictures more for their own personal pleasure are using Sawarvski zoom spotting scopes being the equivalent of 1,500 - 2,000 mm telephoto lenses, and attaching their smart phone to the eyepiece of the spotting scope with a fast attachment system such as the system from the Ollin Company. That type of system provides instant placement or removal of the phone from the spotting scope as circumstances dictate. When mounted on the spotting scope, the IPhone can be used to both observe the animal(s) in view and take pictures as shown on the viewing screen. The major challenges are that a bright day makes the view screen very hard to see detail clearly, the spotting scope glass is not meant to present high contrast imagery, and also the spotting scope glass flattens the image more than high quality telephoto photo lens glass. That all being said, those images when processed through photoshop and other software, are acceptable to them for their own enjoyment, such as sharing with family and friends, etc.
Mixed in with the large group of spotting scope users are the smaller group of serious wildlife photographers who are seeking the finest images they can possibly attain. Most of them are using 800 mm lenses, and I would say that about 90% of those 800 mm lenses are Canon (sorry Nikon.) These photographers are almost all men I would say age 50 and above. There were a few women using dslr's, but more using spotting scopes. There was friendly discussion and view sharing among both spotting scope folks and the telephoto folks, and both groups of users obviously know what the results of both systems are and have decided which meets their needs. So who is winning this imaginary dslr vs smartphone "war" in wildlife photography in Yellowstone. I am attaching a picture of folks viewing a wolf den with a mother and pups. As you can see, most, if not all, are using a spotting scope and smartphone.
Lastly, I think the entry level cost of the spotting scope and smart phone combo for serious long distance wildlife observations and photos may be playing a role in all this. One can buy a decent spotting scope and top tier smart phone for $3,000 - $4,000 or less. A Canon dslr and 800mm lens will cost something like $15,000 - $20,000, depending on new or used and other factors. And then there is the added burden of lugging it around, compared to pocket portability of a smart phone.
All that being said, I have concluded that a growing number of wildlife photographers, especially in the younger generations, are going to their smartphones instead of a dslr because they find the smart phone better meets their needs.
May 26, 2023 06:28:33 #
Nikon's phone will have a big, yellow N on it, and Canon's will have a big, white C. Just wait and C - I mean see. 😋
May 26, 2023 06:58:02 #
ABJanes wrote:
Did you ever notice how even a bad true camera photo viewed on a iPhone or equivalent looks pretty decent? Smaller images are very forgiving.
Need get out a loupe! Something like the typical iphone 14 has the screen of higher resolution than a typical computer screen.
May 26, 2023 08:01:25 #
rehess wrote:
Nobody ever suggested that. The original suggestion involved Nikon’s manufacturing a smart phone.
May 26, 2023 09:50:36 #
Just purchased a Samsung S23 Ultra with a 200mp camera. The photos have wonderful color and this camera has settings that you can adjust the ISO and Aperture plus you can set the time exposure for night time shooting. All the settings and functions of a mirrorless/dslr camera with one thing that this phone does not have a Mirco SD card slot to transfer the photos to the card. Maybe in the future Samsung will put a Mirco SD card slot on the camera.
May 26, 2023 10:45:23 #
fetzler
Loc: North West PA
bnsf wrote:
Just purchased a Samsung S23 Ultra with a 200mp camera. The photos have wonderful color and this camera has settings that you can adjust the ISO and Aperture plus you can set the time exposure for night time shooting. All the settings and functions of a mirrorless/dslr camera with one thing that this phone does not have a Mirco SD card slot to transfer the photos to the card. Maybe in the future Samsung will put a Mirco SD card slot on the camera.
Let's not be silly.
1. My cheap Cheap Samsung phone has a microSD card slot.
2. Realize the your phone DOES NOT have 200MP. The laws of physics prevent a small sensor from having this number of pixels. Also how good can a lens be that is stuffed into a pocket.
3. Anyone can have more fake MPs by purchasing Topaz Gigapixel AI. I do not criticize this fine program that has legitimate uses.
May 26, 2023 11:54:29 #
SuperflyTNT wrote:
I used a Finepix Superzoom as my kayak camera before upgrading to the Sony RX10MIV. While it may get you the same or more reach than the 600 full frame lens it’s not the same quality. Your shot suffers from noise and lack of sharpness.
LOL. The lack of sharpness in the photo taken with the 600mm Nikkor was as soft as it gets
and some of that birds whites are burnt out as well... and it's as flat as a biscuit LOL.
And bud I, sure as heck don't need you
to tell me that the old Fujifilm bridgie struggles with noise in low light LOL.
Also a real focal length of about 200mm (as is the S6500fd aka S6000fd) is far from being a superzoom... as you would have it... being far shorter
than 600mm... LOL you are so full of it.
You bud, have an agenda. If you didnt, you would have sited the weaknesses of both images not just mine.
The reason I rarely visit this site anymore is because of the examples of the Dunning Kruger syndrome like you.
Do not respond to my posts again bud, and I will not respond to yours.
Now buzz off, and leave me alone.
Goodbye Fly.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill,
I'm sorry about the harsh words regarding your image.
My critisism was compelled by Flies ignorance.
I know you have taken much better photos than your example in this thread...
as have I... taken much better photos than my example (of the Corrella) in this thread.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.