Quality of mobile phones changing amateur digital photography?

This may sound a funny thing to say, but I find it far more hassle to use the phone than to carry a camera
TheBigYin said:
Same here - used to be 10x8's when I printed my own film stuff, and I just prefer prints that size as a minimum... anything for the wall however has to be properly BIG.
Click to expand...

I usually have a display going in the coffee room in the (shared) building I work in. Recently picked up some plain 12X16 white frames with 12X8 aperture inset mounts and had a bunch of pictires printed to go in them & hang there as a new display. Normally 15X10 is my smallest, & I'll go up to 20X30 canvasses (the limit of spending, really). Let me say that I'd forgotten how 12X8 is almost embarrassingly small in a reasonable sized room.
 
I went to Rome last year and took a few pics with my Lumia 520. Photos turned out really nice! Was well surprised.
 
karmagarda said:
Yeah, Nokia (I believe) are still considered to have 1 of the best camera phones out.

FYI though, with the help of apps you can control the aperture on an iPhone. In fact, I posted my argument above far too soon, because I just found out you can also do manual focus with the help of an app!

For anyone interested look up VSCO cam. Have only just started playing with it now.
Click to expand...

unless something has changed they dont have adjustable iris, so its software fakery :/
 
Horses for courses.

I think smartphones have hit the compact camera market because people have their phones in their pocket and they do a great job.

I passed my smartphone to my my daughter and got a new compact instead because I have to carry my work 'brick phone' most of the time and I'm not lugging two phones about.

For general happy snaps when I'm out and about with the family I'll have my compact and if not my wife or one of the kids will have a smartphone so I'm not going to take my DSLR out with me.

If I'm out photographing wildlife or Landscapes then I'll not choose a phone or my compact over DSLR or long lens.
 
I also think one important thing here is it does indeed matter what smart phone you have. Which is why I made the point about it being a change over very recent years. Even the iPhone 5 wouldn't have stopped me taking a DSLR with me. It's just the very recent phones that I find are just really good quality. Like the iPhone 6 / 6 plus, Samsung Galaxy S5/S6, Sony Xperia Z3, HTC One M8, Nokia Lumia 1020, just to mention a few. If you start talking about older model phones then I think the loss in quality isn't made up for by the convenience.
 
MOD EDIT:TIDIED UP

Has anyone yet said that smart phones offer far better iq than the best earlier cameras from which many defining moments of the 20th century were captured on?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ahhh s***e - wrong thread (that comment was supposed to be on the pookeyhead , discuss thread in Talk N&G)

on your point - yes and no, better IQ at the sensor possibly, but a lot of the lenses on smart phones are s***e and no where near the quality of the early zeiss etc lenses
 
Last edited:
thanks mark (off to write 100 times in my best cursive hand... 'do not post with two windows open' )
 
big soft moose said:
thanks mark (off to write 100 times in my best cursive hand... 'do not post with two windows open' )
Click to expand...

it could be worse... imagine what could happen if I mis-posted something that was intended for a staffroom discussion in the "front of house"...
 
If it's either/or, then I'd rather leave my phone at home to be honest ;) I do think the original question of whether it has changed amateur photography is true, though. Most weddings I've shot recently, the couple have had a crowd sourced gallery of camera phone pics online the day after the wedding! The quality of the images is never great, but there are often some interesting perspectives in there; one or two photographers can never capture every moment in the way a few dozen can! I think that's what smartphone cameras have revolutionised - they've made it so that there is always someone there at the right time when something amazing unfolds.
 
Smart phones have taken over the disposable camera sector, but they still can't beat even a midrange compact. When I look at my iPhone 5 and 6 images (occasionally) on my PC screen (as my photos stream syncs to a folder on my PC) I always cringe looking at the quality at that size on a 23" monitor.

It's a shame some people consider how useable the images are on whether they'll look acceptable on Facebook...
 
Brazo said:
MOD EDIT:TIDIED UP

Has anyone yet said that smart phones offer far better iq than the best earlier cameras from which many defining moments of the 20th century were captured on?
Click to expand...
But sadly, the phone images will be consigned to a phone or memory card and never printed, and eventually lost in the ether of digital waste!
 
Brazo said:
MOD EDIT:TIDIED UP

Has anyone yet said that smart phones offer far better iq than the best earlier cameras from which many defining moments of the 20th century were captured on?
Click to expand...

I very much suspect that if someone were to post images of similar subjects, image quality etc etc now without any reference to using vintage gear then we'd critique the lack of crispness, soot & whitewash tones and blown sky detail. Those images may have some compositional and intentional meaning for us, but are no longer technically acceptable. Yes, a phone cam can produce images of a higher technical quality, but most of the time there would be no reason to accept what is still a mediocre image. Why not just use modern disposable film cameras all the time - they probably have better image quality than many of the early popular film cameras too?
 
odd jim said:
But sadly, the phone images will be consigned to a phone or memory card and never printed, and eventually lost in the ether of digital waste!
Click to expand...

A few years ago someone asked me if I could copy the pictures from her compact camera onto a memory card so she could show them to people on her computer, so I did and what struck me was she had pictures on her camera going back years and she had obviously used the camera as her little portable album and just viewed and showed others the pictures on the back screen. There must be a lot of people who do this with both phones and cameras.
 
Brazo said:
Has anyone yet said that smart phones offer far better iq than the best earlier cameras from which many defining moments of the 20th century were captured on?
Click to expand...

As it's not true, probably not.

Almost all cameras from the 20th century would give better quality than a phone camera.


Steve.
 
ones with a large negative, decent glass and proper focusing system really should, and decent film. actually if you compare raw files with no sharpening etc to film then they arent too different, but the lack of grain structure means we can sharpen lot more with digital
 
And let's not forget the photos we see from really old prints are reprints from a print or negative damaged and decayed over time, so it's hard to judge what the original print might have looked like.

If you've seen some well preserved prints they can be really very good, better than a camera phone!

God, I despise camera phones, they really are the dumbing down of photography. I was once asked on FB what app I used to create the background blur on a particular photo. My reply was a photo of my 35mm f/2...
 
Last edited:
pingu666 said:
ones with a large negative, decent glass and proper focusing system really should
Click to expand...

Just about any 35mm camera ever made will beat the pants off of an image created by a phone camera. It doesn't need exceptional glass, any type of focusing system or a large negative to do that.


Steve.
 
I think the 808 and 1020 stand a decent chance, certainly vs the not very good films. But the fixed focus box cameras aren't masters of sharpness...
 
odd jim said:
God, I despise camera phones, they really are the dumbing down of photography. I was once asked on FB what app I used to create the background blur on a particular photo. My reply was a photo of my 35mm f/2...
Click to expand...

I can understand your point of view but... we're never going to get as many people to carry cameras as carry smart phones and I think I'm right in saying that there are vastly more photographs taken now than at any other time. OK, many of these will be relatively low quality pictures (of cats? :D) but for many people they'll be perfectly good enough and will give people a lot of pleasure, just look at the number of holiday / night out / special occasion / child pictures that are taken and sent to family and friends all over the world every day and that has to be a good thing :D

There may even be some people who are inspired enough buy smart phone photography to go out and get a better camera and take more / better pictures.

It's a win win IMVHO and the only losers are the compact camera manufacturers. Sad for them though :(
 
Steve Smith said:
Just about any 35mm camera ever made will beat the pants off of an image created by a phone camera. It doesn't need exceptional glass, any type of focusing system or a large negative to do that.


Steve.
Click to expand...

My first camera was a fixed focus Kodak with two settings, sunny and cloudy. I loved that camera and I still have it and I have a soft spot for cameras like that and I have a Medion compact which is similar in concept. It has one button on it :D I can actually see a lot of positives for smart phone photography but for the reasons I stated earlier... (hassle getting it out of my pocket and can't see the screen...) I'd rather use a camera but I think that all in all camera phones are (Shock! Horror!) a good thing :D
 
One of my favourite cameras is a Coronet 6-6. 120 film and fixed shutter speed, aperture and focus. The results are great... and it cost me £1.


Steve.
 
I think you only have to look at the photos on Facebook to see the difference between non photographers and photographers using phones photographers understand the limitations of phone cameras others do not hence vast amounts of garbage taken and posted.
I did a wedding for a friend last month and when they came back from the Caribbean honeymoon asked me to take the photo's off their phones and put them on a disc having "Tidied them up" so they could get some prints,800 shots of which less than 100 were usable
 
CaptainPenguin said:
I think you only have to look at the photos on Facebook to see the difference between non photographers and photographers using phones photographers understand the limitations of phone cameras others do not hence vast amounts of garbage taken and posted.
I did a wedding for a friend last month and when they came back from the Caribbean honeymoon asked me to take the photo's off their phones and put them on a disc having "Tidied them up" so they could get some prints, 800 shots of which less than 100 were usable
Click to expand...
Of which two end up printed and framed.. .. I've seen many pro's produce the *exact* same end result from a wedding.. .. so what's the difference if it's taken with a phone or a "proper camera" ;)

(I'm old-fashioned, I don't get the 10,000 shots on a disk type of wedding product - a dozen genuinely good shots is the core of a printed album and for framing on the wall)
 
You know guys, I couldn't agree more. I hike a lot and carry 13kg of SLR gear with me up mountains and often take a few images on my phone to send to the missus along with a trip position update so she has strong info in case I ever need a rescue and it was these small images that made me realise that in 8 out of 10 cases I could get an image almost as good on my iPhone as I can with my 5D3 and EF 16-35 L IS combo. So many times I've got home, loaded into Lightroom and thought, yeah, that's nice, and only when I've gone to process it have I realised its a jpg and thought "No" surely it's not from my phone!! I've started storing phone images in their own sub folder now and a few times have taken a couple of near identical shots with 5D3 and iPhone6 for comparison at home. When I get to the office, I will pop a couple up, see what you think. This whole process led me to buying a decent compact and since then, my SLR hasn't been out once. In fact, there are MANY reasons that my compact is better for what I do than my SLR, none of which are actually image quality.
 
Stu Blackpool said:
So many times I've got home, loaded into Lightroom and thought, yeah, that's nice, and only when I've gone to process it have I realised its a jpg and thought "No" surely it's not from my phone!!.
Click to expand...

If your iPhone is giving you images almost as good as a 5d3 and 16/35L, you're doing something wrong with the 5d3 :)

My iPhone images (5 & 6) on a 23" monitor look awful (from a technical point). Always noisy, poorly rendered and with awful blues and reds!

Surely you'd know it was from your iPhone though? You'd have to go into your photostream (if sync'd) or email it to yourself? It wouldn't just appear it LR within your imported 5d3 images?
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
If your iPhone is giving you images almost as good as a 5d3 and 16/35L, you're doing something wrong with the 5d3 :)
Click to expand...

I agree. Thats why I didnt say they were as good.


odd jim said:
My iPhone images (5 & 6) on a 23" monitor look awful (from a technical point). Always noisy, poorly rendered and with awful blues and reds!
Click to expand...

Mine seem to come out just fine.

odd jim said:
Surely you'd know it was from your iPhone though? You'd have to go into your photostream (if sync'd) or email it to yourself? It wouldn't just appear it LR within your imported 5d3 images?
Click to expand...

No - As I dont import directly from camera. I drop all images from any given hike into its own folder then import that folder.
I used to drop all camera images and CR2's into the same folder named "Helvellyn - Sept 21st 2014" for example, then import that folder.
 
Stu Blackpool said:
I agree. Thats why I didnt say they were as good.




Mine seem to come out just fine.



No - As I dont import directly from camera. I drop all images from any given hike into its own folder then import that folder.
I used to drop all camera images and CR2's into the same folder named "Helvellyn - Sept 21st 2014" for example, then import that folder.
Click to expand...
Ah I see. I've always been disappointed with my iPhone images, especially the 6 which people have raved about.

I honestly don't like the images from them on screen (a proper screen!)

I know what you're saying about the convenience aspect re phone and good compact, one of the reasons I'm looking at a Canon M3 (though not a compact as such) for a 7 week expedition in Sept...
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
Ah I see. I've always been disappointed with my iPhone images, especially the 6 which people have raved about.
Click to expand...

They will never be perfect of course, but nobody is saying they are. But when your phone can shoot an image like this, sometimes its hard to justify carrying an SLR.

p1098438559-5.jpg
 
Back to my original example, as im back in the office now...

Helvellyn - September last year, a few days after iPhone 6 launch, naturally I took it with me and wanted to test the camera. So here is an image looking back across striding edge from helvellyn Summit at 3120ft. I sat here for a breather and to enjoy the view after the ascent and setup my 5D3 and then replicated the same composition with the iPhone 6. Personally, I was surprised at the outcome. To ensure technical comparison I didnt use any filters for this shot.

p1137618177-5.jpg


p1137618191-5.jpg


Ones the Canon 5D MK3 with 17-40 f4 L, battery grip and tripod mounted on a Manfrotto BeFree carbon.
The other is a telephone.
 
Last edited:
As long as you use manual exposure, they work well in snow too, something else that just wouldnt have been possible with a phone a couple of years ago.

p415420654-5.jpg


A camera phone, like any other camera is just a tool that needs operating correctly.
Its actually nice to get some good images on a phone, it forces you to stop and consider the best way to get a shot without the luxuries of zoom and image stabilisation.
Its a great reminder at times that cameras dont take pictures, people do.
 
odd jim said:
I know what you're saying about the convenience aspect re phone and good compact, one of the reasons I'm looking at a Canon M3 (though not a compact as such) for a 7 week expedition in Sept...
Click to expand...

Dont discount the G7X for that expedition mate. Thats what I have settled on for hiking now and ive done a lot of comparisons with it Versus my 5D3 and find it incredible, even in low light.
I wrote a topic about it on here versus the 5D3 somewhere for others looking for a compact.
 
Yeah I saw that, it's quite impressive. I keep comparing it to the original eos m which you can get new with the 18-55 for £199. That's my dilemma, that with the 22mm pancake, an m3 for £599 with the same and now the g7x into the frame!

I'd like to take my 6d but the 24-105 I'd take is heavy-ish, and I'd only be taking a 35mm f/2 and 14mm so won't be *massively* inconvenient.

But there are two places I'm going where security isn't great, so I quite like the idea of being a little more incognito!
 
Excellent examples Stewart! I had intended posting a few myself, but I wouldn't have had the comparisons available. But it gives a very good example of the point I'm making. Which is the quality has come along that much that now convenience has really come into play too.

I'd also like to make the inverse argument that many people have tried to make in favour of DSLRs, which was basically this said in a couple of different ways:

You must be doing something wrong with your DSLR if you find your phone shots equally as acceptable.
Click to expand...


The reverse is actually very true too. If you aren't happy with shots from an iPhone 6 / Samsung S5/S6, etc etc... then you're doing something wrong. I have many mushy photos on my iPhone 6 (that I love, but are rubbish quality). All of which I made 1 of the following mistakes: Rushed shot/didn't select focus properly/didn't account for lighting. Sometimes I didn't have time to fix the problem, because it was just a snap I spotted while I had phone in hand. Here's an example of one of these shots (which I love!).


Om nom! by karmagarda, on Flickr

Is it mushy and a bit noisy? Yes. Yes it is. But considering it was shot indoors with limited light available, and it was a moving baby, it's a massive step up from older camera phones.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top