Mobile Phone photography

Raincloud

Raincloud

Messages
1,405
Edit My Images
No
Guys, gals.............Obviously the other thread has gone way off topic (Wedding costs) so i thought i would start this thread about mobile phone photography.

Its not meant as a thread where people can brag how much superior their DSLR is, even though we know they are superior. I just want to discuss this topic as for me, since recently owning a Lumia Mobile i am very much pleased with the shots that i have been able to take with it. I took it on holiday with me 2 weeks ago with my 550D in tow and i used the mobile 90% of the time. I am very impressed with the quality that came from it.

Ok, at this present time in history it is not going to beat a DSLR in the Pro tog world, even though there are some that are using them a lot more.

If you use a Mob phone camera now and again what do you think of them in general?

I did find that in low light, indoors it did struggle, as was expected. But in good light it was really really good.

I can see that in the not too distant future the mob phone camera is going to be the main choice for many people as it seems to be heading that way now. Not everyone likes them and not everyone is a Pro or a pixel peeper. Not everyone wants massive prints either!

I put together a photobook from my holiday shots and at A4 size i am more than happy with the results.

Please guys, no slagging each other off! Lets keep it civil. Ta
 
I'd personally say it's there already for the majority of people, almost everyone I know who isn't into photography just uses their iPhone (other phones are available) and aren't interested in anything else.

I have to say though, my phone (a Nexus 5) is perfectly good for on the spot snapshots, which is how I use mine - perfectly fine for uploading to Facebook or Instagram. I only wish the lens was a bit wider, but this can't be helped.

Someone said on here recently that most people could now just carry one camera with a 28mm or 35mm lens as that's what the majority of people are doing with their iPhones (etc) who's cameras are a similar focal length to the two primes I just mentioned.
 
Last edited:
It should be obvious, but:
Pro's
Always available
Decent enough resolution for most people, most of the time.
Easily shares with social media
With the right app I can easily change where I'm metering from, it's easier to get a shot first time in tricky lighting on my phone than any other camera I've owned.
Keeping a lens in my pocket without protection, then having fingerprints constantly smearing it looks cool, and is half the reason for the fashion of sun in the frame glare nowadays.

Con's
Tiny sensor means the depth of field is massive with no way to reduce it
Tiny sensor means low light ability is pants, which is a shame because often when I want a socially acceptable camera, the light is awful (inside a pub etc)
Lack of an interface to control any lighting, which again is a shame because as the low light performance is pants, a Bluetooth flash the size of another phone would make an awesome accompaniment.
Fixed focal length lens limits the creative possibilities (from a guy who still plans to own a Fuji x100 one day)
Keeping a lens in my pocket without protection, then having fingerprints constantly smearing it does nothing for IQ, and is half the reason for the fashion of sun in the frame glare nowadays.
 
I use my phone a fair bit for photography - I really like the immediacy of making the image, editing and publishing it that can be achieved on my phone. It's the complete opposite of my film camera and it's nice to have the choice.

I find I perform more extreme editing on my phone shots - maybe trying to hide any shortcomings ? As you say, not so good in low light, but I was given a mini tripod for my phone a while ago, so plan to try that out.

It's not a perfect solution, but it's very convenient and a camera I am almost always likely to have with me.

Couple of samples that I have got with my phone..

Door by Gary Smith, on Flickr

8 by Gary Smith, on Flickr

La Tour Eiffel by Gary Smith, on Flickr

Modern by Gary Smith, on Flickr
 
Ok, there are limitations to the mobile phone camera. This i shave seen myself while on holiday, but, i am sure things will get better.

For me, having a decent 'camera' in my pocket which is available at all times, even while sitting on the loo! Is superb when it comes to capturing unusual moments etc.

I was never one for a Mobile Phone Camera. I would never use it!! Now, since getting a new Lumia i find it is my go to camera! Ok, i am not on about Pro photography here. Just 'general' photography of everyday things, life etc.
 
GaryS70 said:
I use my phone a fair bit for photography - I really like the immediacy of making the image, editing and publishing it that can be achieved on my phone. It's the complete opposite of my film camera and it's nice to have the choice.

I find I perform more extreme editing on my phone shots - maybe trying to hide any shortcomings ? As you say, not so good in low light, but I was given a mini tripod for my phone a while ago, so plan to try that out.

It's not a perfect solution, but it's very convenient and a camera I am almost always likely to have with me.

Couple of samples that I have got with my phone..

Door by Gary Smith, on Flickr

8 by Gary Smith, on Flickr

La Tour Eiffel by Gary Smith, on Flickr

Modern by Gary Smith, on Flickr
Click to expand...

What's striking (For me) about these examples is the composition, and fortunately, that's one element of a photograph that isn't influenced by the type of camera used.

Edit. I keep going back to the "Door" pic. There's an Alice in Wonderland feel to it.
 
Last edited:
The main problem I have when trying to take a picture with my phone is seeing the screen in sunlight. When I can see the screen the pictures it takes are better than my Medion compact and possibly better than my Canon Ixus too.

My GF used to take a lot of pictures and film clips with her phone, she was always snapping away but not so much these days and she just points at stuff she wants me to take a picture of as when sending pictures to friends and family she prefers mine. She wont carry a camera though as she says they're too big and bulky and this is from someone who carries two phones (personal and work) and often a tablet too. It's just priorities I suppose. I don't know if I'll ever use a phone camera a lot but the big strength of these things is surely having them with you and I think that a lot of people these days are happy to have you shove a phone in their face and take a picture but try and do the same with a dedicated camera and they protest, just a sign of the changing times maybe.
 
Last edited:
I don't really see what your point is Riancloud, there has never been a time when the DSLR or SLR was the camera of choice for the majority of people, even a decent 35mm compact was to technical for some who preferred 110 or those appalling disc camera things. Mobile phone camera's offer joe public an ability to take photographs at anytime and that has got to be great for photographers. Hopefully people will take a greater interest in photography, realise the limitations of a phone camera and fuel the enthusiast market. There will always be some people who enjoy getting a great photograph out of phones just like people did with disposable cameras or 110.

Phone cameras have got a long way to go before they can compete with a dedicated camera for sports photography, wildlife photography etc etc.

What I personally find interesting is that there are some really good compacts that offer much more at less money and are smaller than a mobile phone. With the added advantage that no body can ring you on it!
 
I've got a Lumia as well. Supposedly the best one available on sale today. Yup it has a great pixel count, yup it can take a decent looking picture under the right conditions. And when looking at the pictures on the phone they look amazing. However ....

Cant see the screen well enough in sun light. When viewed off the screen it is actually not that good. I don't seem to do actually anything with the pictures captured. Zoom is still digital, and often don't find it wide enough.

I'm not a big fan.

I would love to see a mobile phone versus a dSLR contest.
 
The purpose of that would be to see them side by side with the same shot, light, conditions. Whilst phone cameras have improved, they are in my opinion so so far away that I think they'll never will be able to recreate the look.

Which doesn't have to be a problem as long as that is recognised. Take the comparison with music for example. It has taken a long time before people realised that actually low bitrate low quality digital music is crap. The industry will mature. Now whilst with music bigger file sizes are easy to handle as internet speeds have gotten faster. I'm not sure how that will work for phones without making them much bigger and fatter.
 
GaryS70 said:
Not sure what purpose that would serve ? They are utterly different devices, and a phone is clearly not going to compete with a DSLR.

Some very good (in my opinion) samples of mobile phone photography here
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Yes, some great shots there.
 
dejongj said:
The purpose of that would be to see them side by side with the same shot, light, conditions. Whilst phone cameras have improved, they are in my opinion so so far away that I think they'll never will be able to recreate the look.

Which doesn't have to be a problem as long as that is recognised. Take the comparison with music for example. It has taken a long time before people realised that actually low bitrate low quality digital music is crap. The industry will mature. Now whilst with music bigger file sizes are easy to handle as internet speeds have gotten faster. I'm not sure how that will work for phones without making them much bigger and fatter.
Click to expand...

I still don't get it - I don't think that a phone camera is intended to recreate 'the look' , as you call it, of a shot produced on a dedicated camera. They serve different purposes.

A phone camera is very likely good enough for the vast majority of people, who only intend to share the results on social media. For those who think it isn't good enough, they will likely have a dedicated camera.

People don't want a phone that is bigger and fatter, they want something convenient to slip in their pocket.

I personally think a phone camera can produce very good results (as evidenced in the link I shared previously) and I enjoy using mine for photography - it compliments my other cameras, but I can't see it as being comparable to my dedicated cameras. Then again, I can't fit my dslr into my back pocket either..
 
After using my Lumia on holiday recently and the great shots i captured i know i will be using that a lot more often.

Yes, it wont replace a DSLR for those who really are into the big toys of photography. But, its refreshing to pick up the mobile and just shoot away without some of the worries that come with more serious equipment. Not that i will be passing my DSLR on!
 
Which Lumia have you got? I've got the 930 and whilst on the phone it looks ok in nice light I'm not that impressed with it elsewhere. On the phone screen it seems to have the advantage over my iphone 6+ but elsewhere like on my calibrated monitor and imported in lightroom I find it rather mediocre and soft.

Granted a lot better than most mobile phones, but not that great if I am honest.
 
640 i have. Made a photobook of a great % of them. Some are A4 size and i am happy with them but to be honest i am not a pixel peeper. As long as it is acceptable and looks nice i dont mind.
 
Hmm interesting. On paper that one should be much worse than my 930. I'm not a pixel peeper either, not at all, bur neither am I impressed by them.
 
I hate to sound picky (but I'm going to), is the use of phrases like 'acceptable and looks nice' or 'great shots I captured' helpful at all? Maybe showing us the great shots might convince us, or just accepting that different people have different requirements, and it's not about 'big toys' but it's about using the right tool for the job.

This post seems to condense to one person saying 'my mobile phone produces photos that are good enough for me' versus a lot of photographers saying 'in the right conditions, where a certain type of photo is required a phone will do an ok job, but not really good enough if you're serious about quality'.

It's obvious that a device the size and shape of a phone will never be a great camera (the laws of physics), but the convenience of them means that they're all the camera most people will need. but we also need to accept that 'most people' aren't photographers, and photographers do need more than the mobile phone can offer.

Yesterday afternoon we had a barbie, it's a cliche but every adult there owns an iPhone, but I still got the camera out and took a handful of photographs with a 35mm 1.4 and an 85mm 1.8. Those lenses allow me to create images that the phone will never be able to compete with. They're not 'toys' they're 'tools' I can use to produce images of a quality that is technically good enough for me and that impress the subjects too, they don't understand the science, but they know my pictures look better than their phone pictures.
 
Phil V said:
Yesterday afternoon we had a barbie, it's a cliche but every adult there owns an iPhone, but I still got the camera out and took a handful of photographs with a 35mm 1.4 and an 85mm 1.8. Those lenses allow me to create images that the phone will never be able to compete with.
Click to expand...

Me and the missus went to buy an anniversary ring the other day. We took a photo of us holding the ring with my iPhone, and we were going to post it on our Facebook wall so our friends and family could see the ring. While it looked an OK photo, it did look rather wishy washy, and mushy. I waited till we got home, and I took another photo with my Fuji X10. There was no comparison with the images, the image from the X10 is the one that went on our Facebook

My phone just could not show off my missus lovely hands, nail varnish and more importantly the anniversary ring.

X10 captured the lovely skin tones on her hands, nail varnish was a lovely vibrant colour. Most importantly, the ring looked great.

In short, images from my iPhone look flat and artificial. Images from X10 looked alive and real, with good blurred background.

I would only use photos from phone, as a reference point. Photos from camera for something more meaningful, and special.
 
I agree with both @Phil V and @jonbeeza

There is no denying the convenience of a camera phone. It is the exception that I've not got mine with me, so definitely better to have something than not. Great for going around a shop and places and reminders or moments. To me it is the equivalent of the instant camera when growing up, or those film cameras in a box you could buy from a cigarette kiosk.

Undoubtedly it has its place and many people like them. Although it does really make me wonder when I see people carrying their tablets at a zoo or school play and hold it to take a photo. Viewfinder is s***, output quality is s***, its in peoples way, flash barely ever gets switches off. Just a plain old nuisance.

But I'm not daft, they have their place and it is still growing a little. Cant see them improving that much though.

But @Raincloud cant you post some images from your Microsoft 640, I'm really curious to see what you like so much about it. As said I like my Nokia Lumia 930 on the phone screen but it looks all so flat when you take it out on other media.
 
Or Simply;

Photographer:
Someone who uses a camera to create an image representing their viewpoint of a subject.

The 'tools' we use to do this are viewpoint*, composition**, light***.

*if we include focal length here
**if we include depth of field here
***if we include adding our own lighting tools here

That makes the mobile phone a pretty useless tool for us to create images, because it gives a fixed FL lens, no control over DoF and no interface for external lighting. So the phone will be limiting our creative ability, which is fun to play with as a concept (like a pinhole camera) but no use when we have a goal we need to reach which needs our control of the whole process.
 
Phil V said:
That makes the mobile phone a pretty useless tool for us to create images, because it gives a fixed FL lens, no control over DoF and no interface for external lighting. So the phone will be limiting our creative ability, which is fun to play with as a concept (like a pinhole camera) but no use when we have a goal we need to reach which needs our control of the whole process.
Click to expand...

Phil - while I agree with the points you are making on the whole, I do disagree with this part - have you looked at the images in the link I posted earlier ? Some very good (in my opinion) images there, in particular 2, 6, 12, 13 & 20. I would be happy having taken any of those.

Also, as for the external lighting part, there are a number of 'off-phone' flashes available now, including the Nova and the iBlazr - again, not perfect but certainly an improvement over the tiny, built in flash on most phones.
 
Some of your points are very true Phil. I am not saying the mobile will replace a DSLR. Pro togs will always be able to discern between a mobile and a DSLR shot i am sure. I am no pro but the mobile i have lets me take pics that are acceptable to me and my family. I really like them! I also use a Canon 550D with a 50mm and i love that too.

As a pro you obviously need all those different things that a mobile cant deliver. All i am saying here is that not everyone is a pixel peeper or inspects a pictures every inch for clarity etc.

These forums are not just for pro togs or people who like state of the art photography equipment. They are here for 'photographers' and 'photography'.

One can still be very creative with a mobile phone camera! Couple of posts above someone posted a link to some very clever shots.

Plus, these device have improved quite a bit over the years and i see no reason why that shouldn't continue. Technology never stands still!
 
The fact that a mobile is to hand nearly all of the time, make it an excellent tool to capture a moment in time. As pointed out by others, it does have it's limitations. But it can't be denied that the mobile phone camera has made taking photos more popular than ever.
The fact that I phone is designed to fit in your pocket (well most of them, they do seem to be getting bigger by the minute), is a great restriction on what the camera part of the phone can achieve. Maybe they should make a compact camera with phone capabilities instead.
 
For me it's the quality of the final image, obviously due to the very tiny sensor. Phone images remind me of the old poor quality screen grabs I did many years ago.
 
GaryS70 said:
Phil - while I agree with the points you are making on the whole, I do disagree with this part - have you looked at the images in the link I posted earlier ? Some very good (in my opinion) images there, in particular 2, 6, 12, 13 & 20. I would be happy having taken any of those.

Also, as for the external lighting part, there are a number of 'off-phone' flashes available now, including the Nova and the iBlazr - again, not perfect but certainly an improvement over the tiny, built in flash on most phones.
Click to expand...
Then you've misunderstood my point, it's not a useless tool because it's incapable of taking a decent picture (I've never said that) , my point is that it's not versatile enough to be a proper picture making tool.

I've seen a few of the lighting solutions, but I haven't seen anything that does the job properly yet, which is unfortunate, because I think it should be easy to do. Here's the punchline though: if there was a market, it'd have been done by now, the fact that it hasn't proves that not enough people who care exist.
 
Raincloud said:
Plus, these device have improved quite a bit over the years and i see no reason why that shouldn't continue. Technology never stands still!
Click to expand...

And there's the crux, of course they're improving, but there are still physical limitations that are constants.

No one suggests camera phones won't get better, but they can't overcome the focal length, tiny sensor and DoF issues, because they're obviously dictated by the physical size of the phone. Of all the recurring arguments which happen on forums, this one frustrates me the most. It's like trying to explain fossils to a creationist. The laws of physics aren't about to change soon just because Sony want to sell a 'top end' camera as part of a phone.
 
Raincloud said:
Guys, gals.............Obviously the other thread has gone way off topic (Wedding costs) so i thought i would start this thread about mobile phone photography.

Its not meant as a thread where people can brag how much superior their DSLR is, even though we know they are superior. I just want to discuss this topic as for me, since recently owning a Lumia Mobile i am very much pleased with the shots that i have been able to take with it. I took it on holiday with me 2 weeks ago with my 550D in tow and i used the mobile 90% of the time. I am very impressed with the quality that came from it.

Ok, at this present time in history it is not going to beat a DSLR in the Pro tog world, even though there are some that are using them a lot more.

If you use a Mob phone camera now and again what do you think of them in general?

I did find that in low light, indoors it did struggle, as was expected. But in good light it was really really good.

I can see that in the not too distant future the mob phone camera is going to be the main choice for many people as it seems to be heading that way now. Not everyone likes them and not everyone is a Pro or a pixel peeper. Not everyone wants massive prints either!

I put together a photobook from my holiday shots and at A4 size i am more than happy with the results.

Please guys, no slagging each other off! Lets keep it civil. Ta
Click to expand...

To be fair, you did say it's not about comparing a phone to a dedicated camera. You simply wanted to know, what people thought about using a phone as a camera. OK my thoughts are, I would never use a mobile phone to take photos that I wanted to cherish. A phone sensor and lens etc, simply does not produce an image that gives me that hypnotic feeling I get, when I view an image that means something to me. My eyes seems to bounce from a phone image image, as its flat and lifeless. Whereas an image from a camera can draw me in, and keep me captivated for ages.

But that's just my preference, we all have different tastes.
 
I have no problems with carrying around a small camera kit,as a matter of fact i would feel lost without a camera bag on my shoulder,my mobile phone "handy" but at the end of the day could quite easily leave it at home :)
 
Phil V said:
Then you've misunderstood my point, it's not a useless tool because it's incapable of taking a decent picture (I've never said that) , my point is that it's not versatile enough to be a proper picture making tool.
Click to expand...

I guess it depends on how versatile you need every camera you own to be.

I've a bunch of fast lenses: an 85L f/1.2 and 135/2.0 among them, but I certainly don't use them wide open all the time. It's nice to have the option, but a lot of my photography is done with 24 or 35mm lenses at f/8.

Some of my film cameras are fixed lens f/2.8 35mm rangefinders and I tend to treat using my iPhone more like using an Olympus XA (which my iPhone has effectively replaced in my pocket).

It doesn't stop me having fun within its limits.

Balloons by -cybertect-

Tower Bridge Fog by -cybertect-

Ken Cox by -cybertect-

Rockpile by -cybertect-

Frost Shadows by -cybertect-
 
Last edited:
Musicman said:
I guess it depends on how versatile you need every camera you own to be.

I've a bunch of fast lenses: an 85L f/1.2 and 135/2.0 among them, but I certainly don't use them wide open all the time. It's nice to have the option, but a lot of my photography is done with 24 or 35mm lenses at f/8.

Some of my film cameras are fixed lens f/2.8 35mm rangefinders and I tend to treat using my iPhone more like using an Olympus XA (which my iPhone has effectively replaced in my pocket).

It doesn't stop me having fun within its limits.
Click to expand...
:banghead::banghead::banghead:
You've just agreed with me...
We agree that it's a useful tool to have for what it does, but you'd want more versatility in your entire toolset. :)
 
Phil V said:
they don't understand the science, but they know my pictures look better than their phone pictures.
Click to expand...

This is why my GF leaves the picture taking to me when she wants some shots to send to friends and family but putting a camera on a phone was a very good idea :D as there are going to be times when it's the only picture taking device available.

I'd use my phone more if I could see the screen better outside in daylight as it takes pictures that are better than a couple of my compact cameras can take. I don't think I'll ever use one instead of a half decent camera though, not like some bloggers do "a year with a phone as my only camera" type things just as I wouldn't want my Canon Ixus to be my main camera. Maybe you need to be a very good photographer to get the best out of a camera phone :D
 
The amount of filters and the likes of Instagram helps with the popularity of the mobile phone as a camera as does our need for instant gratification. It is possible to take a snap of your dinner apply a filter and upload it to social media in a matter of seconds.

The biggest advantage I can see with mobile phone photography is that people nearly always have a phone on them.

Horses for courses but as this is a photography forum there is a possibility that most of the members would be looking at dslr, mirrorless, csc, etc rather than a mobile phone for their photographic needs.
 
Phil V said:
, my point is that it's not versatile enough to be a proper picture making tool.
Click to expand...

This is where i disagree as there are plenty of people, including some pros who have demonstrated how versatile the mobile phone camera can be! It can, in some cases, be more versatile that a 'proper' camera! Just think of the ease in which it can be used, the not needing to carry an assortment of lenses for different situations etc etc.

I am not saying it will overtake the DSLR. But, who knows what technology will bring to the Mobile phone camera several years down the line! Software is enabling the mobile to go where it shouldn't ought to go!

Plus other interesting inventions:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...ographers-compete-with-the-professionals.html

The way i see it, some pro togs just completely hate mobile Phone cameras as they can see how much they are encroaching on the 'real' camera world! They hate the fact that these little devices can take some decent photos where they have had to spend thousands to do the same.

Some people just have to face the fact that as tiny cameras, the mobile phone is an awesome little camera to have in your pocket!
 
Last edited:
Phil V said:
:banghead::banghead::banghead:
You've just agreed with me...
We agree that it's a useful tool to have for what it does, but you'd want more versatility in your entire toolset. :)
Click to expand...

Absolutely I'm in agreement with you on that.

Where I would differ is that a lack of versatility precludes a camera from being a proper picture making tool. A Rolleiflex 3.5E is very limited in comparison to most SLR system cameras, but enough serious photographers made very effective use of them over the years. It's hard to argue it's not a proper picture making tool.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top