Beginner Smartphone or a Compact Camera?

Messages
4
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi everyone, im thinking to learn more and take better photos.

And now i am considering to buy a new phone that takes good photos , which i already have a good working one, vs a compact camera?

The new G7X looks pretty good as well as the Sony RX....what do you think?
 
Sony RX will be in my opinion, a better start into Photography than any smart phone

Once you get the bug, more camera's and decent lenses will follow- trust me :)

Les
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nod
Really depends on what you want to do!

A smart phone is always with you, and takes perfectly good photos in 'normal' circumstances, the emphasis being on composition.
A compact camera will generally give you more control, you can choose to take control of the aperture for example to control how much of your picture is in focus, you can choose to take control of the shutter to freeze or blur motion etc, and that control allows you more creativity beyond composition, and the ability to take photos in more challenging situations.

If that part interests you, go for the compact, if it doesn't, nothing wrong with the phone camera at all. You can always use both :)
 
Its a personal thing but I cannot get on taking photos with a phone I prefer a camera with a viewfinder but that,s probably because I am old and set in my ways.
But like David says you can always use both and the phone is invariably with you not always the case with the camera.
 
Thanks a lot for the comments and they are definitely worth considering.

And yes, i can feel the photography bug biting and it itches. ;)

Found an interesting comparison between the G7X Mark III and P30 Pro to share, no specific brand preference for me but some interesting points as well.

View: https://youtu.be/S_gHCdKzobc


Kinda swaying me a bit as it does show that a camera still gives better quality when zoomed in and probably in dark environments.

So surprised by the P30 quality specially when its zoomed in!

What do you all think of the comparisons shown in the video?
 
A decent compact. Quite apart from anything else, a phone that will get anywhere close to a decent compact will be more expensive and will need upgrading after a couple of years max.
One potential downside is that you'll need something else to get your photos online (if that's your final use for the shots).
 
i was just thinking, just about to get that rare shot, the once in a lifetime shot and the smartphone rings. No go for a proper camera every time
 
Personally, I don’t use a compact camera - I came quite close to buying one last summer, but in the end decided to downgrade my full frame DSLR to a smaller Fuji set up and use my iPhone the rest of the time. I didn’t see there being enough of a step between a compact and a phone.

If the endgame is “getting into photography”, a DSLR/mirrorless setup - even a cheap second hand one is probably a better bet than a compact that will be outgrown.
 
A decent compact. Quite apart from anything else, a phone that will get anywhere close to a decent compact will be more expensive and will need upgrading after a couple of years max.
One potential downside is that you'll need something else to get your photos online (if that's your final use for the shots).
i was just thinking, just about to get that rare shot, the once in a lifetime shot and the smartphone rings. No go for a proper camera every time
Personally, I don’t use a compact camera - I came quite close to buying one last summer, but in the end decided to downgrade my full frame DSLR to a smaller Fuji set up and use my iPhone the rest of the time. I didn’t see there being enough of a step between a compact and a phone.

If the endgame is “getting into photography”, a DSLR/mirrorless setup - even a cheap second hand one is probably a better bet than a compact that will be outgrown.

Those are really great point!

For me now, budget is an issue so it does seem a proper camera is the way to go. :)

Pardon my ignorance but in the video there are some shots done in low light.

Are they considered good quality low light shots to the experienced folks here? :help:
 
A compact camera will generally give you more control, you can choose to take control of the aperture for example to control how much of your picture is in focus, you can choose to take control of the shutter to freeze or blur motion etc, and that control allows you more creativity beyond composition, and the ability to take photos in more challenging situations.

Very true ... well, TBH I don't know how good the latest mobiles are. But I assume they have a much smaller sensor than the G7X.

Here are some shots from my G7X Mark One.


1. Tv mode, shutter speed 0.25 second
tueA_YwSa71dTPycp_wm1Qo8ZJIWu7wWNawIAX6yDsbPtc2Me5buk880gyprkDdupWGRRACnokkUF1-D-AmfISLNdDb1fTNGv--MH-wXPzE3IL5JgdLVyXdyXaR1vI9qs8fClK7BXSpM1XixpGZP4q5ejbhIlfsw5zyxIENLyFGXHFqhg5eBy8CKqgyzadP1rKVAlXIt2tIwpTCmXIFKvrHqp_HtHBUwog1fNCS-kHfpzPx1pgYMZYwJXw5QSyzmx0EqThj_mLEdeyoRmW--41SKcIgk6obU4DAbF3DMWGzVNv9r8wXnnRwhuabxOxTMm-2micfvv4fjqHEyj5AhAYCdz2QrE1O-W2g6T_mIUGh75AT3-4Rtekn115LUHHSDEp6dj4-ftD_pu_sSLivDAsUjfmU7jwGqGrukKbRocUr34XEn9KMBauwDUVI86WD7T11bvAoRZ9XSDeXbGyv-fODORQ-BSkbGBu_7UU_4fHAAYd562NcpFxyzIr3eUeAfvpiPX8RSOFqoTgG1WqQ4MW9dIz2hYN4NbxJ_biC8vz5lk5lJyyJU10D5j9QzvBuI5ILNR7FTWpJ3HqdddUBKBn_dXzustCGQFsMmd3SmA27zkA3P6cXEhaEBM0a16sXuJYxZGViwjYHUJxTHzKCy7CByaP3KWuSNLAPKCgFqX7VzT4Gor-vU7LAL4_xaFUKe5tYSwcNL3XKC2LKKc8HRLbiA=w1499-h867-no




2. Tv mode, shutter speed 0.25 second
bXxeUDHsFgYsqv_zdo0uKKu6TWEqjDKX4WrQYQQAoCpREx0Whjp6sadm_Ai-Ckj_Q7ue7JXGc9vQee60SqC2McJmRinooBkVrpPCPXh2V7iO-zILRJpennuX3Ov6JskgTtbI8NR4oyFAe94cVmOQMWVK7M7X2eb0FOp6d_LWZZQrXfp45iyPqfmEHonaDYynHhHINJ0NgohXqmMkOKKa5POSn1T2eD-DhviaK0jppy6YJ_3lYU1PjO37XCp2zBkKg0trFG5T2G6jQQwX-bHvAjRkgrWdp8T0LmHbrxoDQ3n6tIAUpUOSaAocqWAXNkO6NNuJ10zDEjwEqKq0eLiWtTQkCPM2J_PBiKkcfUrMvV9j0bR6AhIhwyefqDnGjyLtW-WqEgY9EdOAruceCvsrwgtnl9e5bIQWPgODwf3M22AAdUSpbGX_sN_rAeXZ_ZOIgApbsr-TyK8g4ScDQ0fvaF1S01kXFC5YV3b4axvp9HQc_VK6TFd1_9gAm0NXI_O1oO7LwP1fiYNbWtKRqM4IGkOb0JcrLKmKk8Bm7qHflWlCVB053w2GKqxNmvfQ58Uwd_V71oD_3DMTbSyzwyydVgCoKrZwbu8uPgmnZfatKqstHZEyE-1R6oSEsA2RepudPvBz2vC_cg-oMQAQgXS-F4PZmcMhVmQXzoth-QuRjYl9sr6ABw31wIioMrfrEpnatHFOOLKLFyxBrY3ze99eitW8=w1700-h867-no




3. Av mode, aperture f/2.8
jBHF4exAOU9xUenlfnuWRAb_YTwiiTtZuOrZ97sCWQUZocTeAmB7slY9ehsnJwSVwDCTKUs58XQ3rf0MGxTtAf3XYP7p8-JVaGzOqvxTwUcf7haP3QIUABHlWDeI7f4IoMyn-POBrUGJ6rExqtXUOHQNQpipYbsOfeGf6FNUvhmxq0mfQ5VH4Zn0-9M5Oj85hjpa5bchMPlwtAtPD_InsWOQACQT-UcCSbOGSvhBOpKe9U-05tpdCwQByBHuRewMF6VyqMP5_80fcvhctKA21-VNLvDdX3Gf38AdPPBlRIUYYDguFawJyGeJtVrKm7iBHl760tNGOuZ2gB3tch52lsaPmgjNdYscS83267JWb4OR7Y6yMS78dXRADqwgS7zRe8zeDZ7Epwoutuqs1unUl9kww4cC5URi3EtE5-MkA5InqRZXvK3_VO4ikB47qp45slIC6ugv8Kb4KsWXbAOLw3F15fg3NFYyEBLTy8-gbAnruYfCetZNMj-Lfv4LuUGSRrh_VfOKupAo46y-zsq0Ru77Qy_tYjBHnaC76O0WjHKUtSEhlYGwh7sLFhk_OGrpJfgPhdnsYQTHumyJ69f6zz832qi2vnOhCanMIUN3WoRauWu6hedhCk_gQpHn2GUU5oU9p5sL-vhMaXHuyqdt3s2pSj2Eg3nEG29pB2SWc_r2707FvefxBiO6pMZ1URkkdjrC-SToLBn3LCR7PH1gFf172Q=w1115-h867-no



@H Casera ...

1. & 2. shows how you you can have fun with a slow shutter speed, blurring movement. Tube train & Royal Mail lorry.
3. shows how you can make the subject stand out against an out-of-focus background. Human statue, Lisbon.

I down know if it's possible to get this "creative" with a mobile. ;)
 
The features of modern consumer electrickery increase year on year, but the limits of physics remain.

At the core of any electric camera is an electric photo-sensor. On a camera-phone or compact this is generally pretty small. Forget the number of mega-pixies it may boast; but the sensor will be a sliver of silly-cone, that ion a smart phone may only be a couplr of mm square. In a typical APS-C sensor DSLR, it will be about 12mm x 16, and in a 'full-frame' DSLR it will bne the same size as a bit of 35mm film, 24x36mm; Ied umpety times bigger.

Lets talk the crop-factor..... much over-used and oft mis-understood term... a lens is a lens is a lens; eg, if I pick up the old M42 screw fit film camera a few feet away from me, that has a 50mm lens on the front. This is the 'normal angle' lens. Ie its neither wide angle nor telephoto. It also has a fixed focal length of 50mm so its not a 'soom' either. BUT that 'normal' angle is deturmined from having an ngle of view of 'about' 45degrees.

Wider is a wide angle; narrower is a telephoto. Wide angles make subjects small in the frame, telkephotos make the same subject big... ZOOM is merely a variable focal lengthy.. it may be wide angle, teklephoto or both, and the usual 'kit' zooms that come one most conmsumer cameras are both, eg the 18-55mm, kit lens on my Electroic Pictuire maker is a wide angle at 18mml, a mild telephoto at 55mm a 'normal angle' at 35mm but all the whgile a ZOOM 'sos I can change that angle of biew or focal length twisting the 'zoom' ring.

Lets stick the 50mm 'normal angle' 50mm lens from the film camera on the electric picture maker... its still a 50mm lens, BUT with a smaller sensor behind it, its only capturing the central position of the image it would put on 35mm film, the image is 'cropped' and has an angle of view of just 30 degrees... important thing here is that the focal length has not changed, just how much of the image the lens projecvts on the sensor we chuck away.... or 'crop' and the smaller the sensor the more we crop, the narrower the angle of view we effectively get, the more 'telephoto' the view becomes.

This is very useful if you are a camera maker; now the smaller the sensor you use, first the cheaper that tends to be to make, but also the shorter and hence cheaper the lens that gives the 'normal' 45Deg ish angle of view, more still, the greater the 'crop factor' the more effective zoom you can get out of a lens, fort any particular mm of 'zoom' travel....

eg; the 'normal' angle zoom on my EPM is 18-55mm, a focal length travel of 37mm, for 3x zoom. the normal angle zoom for one of my 35mm film cameras is 35-70mm, a travel of 35mm for just 2x zoom. So with a smaller sensor you get more effective zoiom x for the same or less actual lens teavel. A litrtke more extreme, on the small sensor 'Bridge' camera, a sticker boasts 30x zoom, but it gets that from the smasll sensor sixe asnd hige crop-factor NOT an enormous amount of lenxs travel.

There is a certain amount of 'so what' to this and it largely doesn't matter, but it does.

I have a little micro-sensor action cam, which has just a 4.5mm lens as its 'normal angle' ie about 45deg AoV. I also have a 180 deg AoV fish-eye for the APS-C SLR which is also 4.5mm focal length... at such short focal length the closest focus distance and the range of critical focus beyond that is also peculiarly short, to the point that with the EPM, the 4.5mm lens is effectively focus free and everything I will likely ever point the camera at will be in acceptable focus.... a phienomina exploited by the action cam maker who can effectivelyu fix the focus of the action cam lens so it doesn't hav to have ANY focus mechnism, let alone a complicated and expensive 'auto-focus' system, anmd the lens and camera arte cheaper to make....

This is fine if you want nice sharp in focus pictures, it is NOT so wonderful if you want to see pictures with the back-ground out of focus and those 'bokah' effects so many rave abouit from using wide apertures, because small sensor cameras just wont make them.....

Its actually something that lead to the F-No arms race on 35mm film cameras in the 1970's and 80's, and the fast fifties of old, that negged folk fitting them to more modern EPM's begging fast aperture f1.8 or f1.4 lenses to let folk try get these sort of effects... when 120 roll film cameras were the norm, folk got these shallow focus effects by accident os the crop factor wors backwards too; I have a 120 folder also in arms reach, the lens on that that gives the aprox 45 Deg normal' AoV is actually 105mm, for a 60x90mm size 'sensor'.. that lens gives a faior bit of 'Bokah' at normal-ish sort of focusing ranged even at what would be considered pretty moderate f-numbers, like maybe f4, because the lens is so 'long'.. hence when 35mm 'small format' cameras came along manufacturers chased ever lower f-number to get the same effect.. and trend has continued with ever 'faster' f-no lenses for small sensor digital cameras....

I mention all this because it is illustrative of the difference.... oif you get even a compact digital camera, it will likely still have a pretty small sensor size, making such effects harder to achieve. The difference between 35mm filom and 120 roll film film is fairly large, but even 35mm film is making it hard work. Get down to APS-C sixed senors and its vcey hard, and smaller still, nie on impossible.

You also get other effects and anoloies where the smaller sensor cameras are not making it easy to explore photographic technique or effect.

And of thats your goal, then 'really' you should take any fixed lns camera off the menu, and be looking at more conventional interchangeable lens cameras, whether MFT or APS-C sensor cameras, because whatever the marketing hype of smaller sensor offerings ultimately they re likely to frustrate, giving you 'bit' of the big camera versatility but ultimately not the full-monty.... ie entice without encouraging you.....

Depends what your expectations and aspirations are though ultimately.... {ersonally I dont get on with cwmera phones; they are like a swiss army penknife, handy, but jack of all trades masters of none, and dam,n fiddly to use! I hated it when my daughter handed me her smart phone and asked me to take a photo; with banana fingers to start I dont get on with touch screens, but having to go through half a dozen menus just to get to the camera function, rather than just the one 'om-off' witch on a compact or more conventional WPM and not even that on many film cameras! Is/Was a cjhore I could do without, especially if I was trying to grab a short lived 'moment'. Here a proper camera scored big time. Beyond that IF I was tackling anything tricky or awkward or trying anything more technical, the versatility of a more elaborate SLR was almost essential...

So.. do you just want to take snap-shots, in which case a camera phone is as good as anything, and of to hand and you can use it convenient; if you want to dop this photography thing though, you probably need an interchangeable lens SLR at lest to start the learning, as entry level DSLR's offer a lot of versatility and bang for your buck, where even MFT or mirrorless system cameras are probably a bit higher up the food chain and beg you know more before you start....

So it depends what you want really, BUT I wouldn't pick a smart phone for camera 'features' any more than I would pick a camera to make phone calls!!! Horses for courses, and there is so little twixt consumer phone-cams and consumer compact & bridge cams, that its the wrong question, really...
 
I sort of got lost in the suggestion above. He may be making the same suggestion as I am. But, I won't carry on as long.

I have no idea what your limits and purposes are. But, for the price of either choice you could purchase a good used entry level DSLR and some middle, good used lenses. Then use that camera to actually learn what photography is all about. Choose wisely and carefully your kit and you may be able to resell it for what you paid for it, and then be able to answer your own question. Good shooting.
 
Last edited:
I sort of got lost in the suggestion above. He may be making the same suggestion as I am. But, I won't carry on as long.

I think that boiled down, it comes out as "Smartphones use a very small sensor, so they need lenses with very short focal lengths. The consequence of this is that depth of field is virtually unlimited, and there is zero scope for isolating the subject with the rest of the image out of focus. A camera would allow you to do this".
 
I think that boiled down, it comes out as "Smartphones use a very small sensor, so they need lenses with very short focal lengths. The consequence of this is that depth of field is virtually unlimited, and there is zero scope for isolating the subject with the rest of the image out of focus. A camera would allow you to do this".

I've just googled the above mentioned phone. I'm not saying it's any good but, DXO says ...

Upgraded bokeh mode with super-resolution
In addition to the all-new zoom system, the P30 Pro features an upgraded bokeh mode. Super-resolution generates an image with 54mm equivalent focal length and good detail rendering. It then uses data from the time-of-flight (ToF) laser (which measures the distance to objects in the scene) to confirm and fine-tune the initial depth-map generated by the primary and super-wide cameras.

https://www.dxomark.com/huawei-p30-pro-camera-review/ ... o_O
 
Really depends on what you want to do!

A smart phone is always with you, and takes perfectly good photos in 'normal' circumstances, the emphasis being on composition.
A compact camera will generally give you more control, you can choose to take control of the aperture for example to control how much of your picture is in focus, you can choose to take control of the shutter to freeze or blur motion etc, and that control allows you more creativity beyond composition, and the ability to take photos in more challenging situations.

If that part interests you, go for the compact, if it doesn't, nothing wrong with the phone camera at all. You can always use both :)

Yes. The annoying moment when your camera (amen, I mean phone) RINGS in the middle of taking a nice photo of a robin that you managed to quietly get closer to!! Also annoying when you're trying to take photos of criminals exchanging drugs and money, while you're hiding in a dark shadow, then the phone not only rings and vibrates but also LIGHTS UP and "Opps!" you've been spotted! And we all have been trained to make every effort to keep our cameras steady, to avoid the infamous camera shake, yet some of the phones decides to vibrate when you get an incoming text message, whoa! Since when did cameras start getting a built-in mini camera shaking machines? :)

I can see something wrong with phone cameras. :)
 
Yes. The annoying moment when your camera (amen, I mean phone) RINGS in the middle of taking a nice photo of a robin that you managed to quietly get closer to!! Also annoying when you're trying to take photos of criminals exchanging drugs and money, while you're hiding in a dark shadow, then the phone not only rings and vibrates but also LIGHTS UP and "Opps!" you've been spotted! And we all have been trained to make every effort to keep our cameras steady, to avoid the infamous camera shake, yet some of the phones decides to vibrate when you get an incoming text message, whoa! Since when did cameras start getting a built-in mini camera shaking machines? :)

I can see something wrong with phone cameras. :)
People can actually ring you on your phone? So old school :)
 
If you think you're getting the photography bug then, rather than buy a compact or a phone with better camera on limited funds, I'd be more inclined towards a used micro four thirds (M43) camera with kit zoom & a prime with a wider aperture for low light (i.e. 25mm f1.8). Cost will be around the same, but it will be useful for much longer, and could be a stepping stone to better kit.
 
Last edited:
A compact with a big sensor for its size. Phones suffer from small sensors imo
 
I think that boiled down, it comes out as "Smartphones use a very small sensor, so they need lenses with very short focal lengths. The consequence of this is that depth of field is virtually unlimited, and there is zero scope for isolating the subject with the rest of the image out of focus. A camera would allow you to do this".
Thank you. Unfortunately, I tend to get 'long winded' when offering my comments, too. But, in all that I became completely befuddled about what his point was. Simply stated as you did would have been far better for all readers concerned. But, I too often also fall into the trap of 'liking' to hear myself talk.
 
Dunno if the OP will ever come back or not so I may just be thinking out loud...

I've never liked back screen shooting so for that reason I prefer a camera even if there's no difference in picture quality.

My Mrs and her friends take a lot of smartphone pictures and they often look lovely on a phone or tablet screen but when viewed at high magnification on my pc the weaknesses are often there, mushy files, lack of detail, noise, subject movement etc but for looking at as a whole picture they're often perfectly adequate and even very good.

For someone wanting to get into photography with cameras and lenses then a camera is probably the best option :D and also if you want higher quality to look at closely or print very big and also for shallow DoF too if that's what you're into but for convenience and blending in with the masses I do think that camera phones make a lot of sense and can give picture quality which looks very nice on a phone or tablet screen as a whole picture.

I suppose a good option is to have a nice camera and a nice phone camera too.

And a PS to that.
I've just printed a smartphone picture for someone, it's only A5 as that's all they wanted, and it looks lovely and will be framed tomorrow when I'm sure it's dry.
 
Last edited:
The Sony RX100 III is kind of hard to beat at the price point it is nowadays and beats the images coming out of my personal Pixie 3 or my work iPhone X.
 
Back
Top