LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksnever had a camera other than that on whichever phone i've got with me at the time. age 20
never had a camera other than that on whichever phone i've got with me at the time. age 20
No, because cheap compact cameras are better now too. If I'm careful, my phone (Galaxy Nexus) can take passable photos that might be comparable to those from a compact digital camera 10 years ago. However, my compact (Canon SX240) is now much better in low light, has 20x optical zoom, optical stabilisation, a far better flash than the phone, decent 1080p video and a load of other features I've probably never used. So, of course the phone is handy for day-to-day spontaneous snaps but I still take a dedicated camera if I'm going somewhere I know I'll want to take pictures.
Even though the photos are going no further than facebook (if that) the zoom and stabilisation are useful to help make up for lazyness and a lack of steady hands/skill on my part when taking the photos. That's what I miss when using the phone - not the outright quality of the dedicated camera but the confidence that I don't have to go back and double check every other photo, especially if the light isn't great. It looks like the G3 and the Galaxy Zoom models are moving in the right direction for me, but I don't think they're quite there yet and there's too much compromise required to get a decent zoom on a phone for the moment.
Smartphone cameras have advanced quite a lot in that regard since our Galaxy Nexi were designed.Originally Posted by Lanky123
When my last 4MP digital camera packed in about 2 years ago I never bothered replacing it as the phone I had at the time had a better lens.
One less gadget to charge now. My satellite navigation is the same. Sat in the car for years gathering dust.
(note to self - Gumtree)
I have an 8mp Nikon DSLR that’s getting on a bit. I still use it for work occasionally for things that require a tripod, macro or more accuracy with optical zoom, and I still think it takes better pictures than the mobile devices I have owned. There is to much software built into mobile devices these days to optimise memory space, or automatically blur out peoples blemishes etc, so although the device may output a 12mp photo, the detail when zoomed is never as good as a dedicated DSLR at the same resolution. But for trips and holidays the Nikon now stays at home. Its just annoying having to carry around a bulky camera in a protective case full of lenses, cleaners etc, and having to unclip it, remove it from the case and deal with shoulder straps, and balance everything else you are holding, often resulting in a missed opportunity for a great shot. I have been using a Sony Xperia Z for the last year, and I’m very happy with the quality for holiday snaps , and although I know the Nikon will give better results, the margin isn’t enough not for me to consider the Nikon anymore for trips because of the inconvenience it causes.
I agree with all that (though the DSLR is Canon in my case) but reached a different, erm, resolution to the problem.
In my case, I'd much rather have a good compact camera with me on holiday, than a phone. In fact, by and large, about the one thing I don't want with me on holiday is a phone, precisely because it is a holiday.
I make sure that those that might need to get hold of me, i.e. immediate family, have an emergency contact number, but I sure don't want all and sundry, let alone clients, calling me. For me, it's a good reason for using a compact camera not a phone.
Of course, I am one of those rare, weird, anachronistic and atavistic beings that doesn't feel out of place without a phone in arm's reach.
It'll shock nobody that knows me if I point out that I use a standalone SatNav because it's standalone, meaning it can't be "phoning home" to whatever nosy bleeps (and Google, I do mean you, among others) with my location data. For me, that's another reason not to use a smartphone, or if I do, to disable location services.
Yep, Even though the camera on my HTC One M8 isn't the best it's still my day to day camera for quick snaps. However, if i'm going somewhere with the family and I know i'm going to want to take better photos especially if some are at range I'll take my DSLR.
I was looking at this for a while for the same reason which I think would be a good compromise however still haven't got around to it - http://www.sony.co.uk/hub/lens-style-camera
That's a pretty cool add-on, quite tempting, but after seeing the price, not so sure..
I think there will always be a place for DSLR's in the professional market, especially in the studio environment or location shoots, the same as there will always be a place for high end PC's, as there are some tasks you simply cannot do, or would want to do on a tablet or smartphone, like 3d modelling, rendering, scientific number crunching etc. My Xperia Z would probably take 5 years to render one frame in 3ds max, that's if it even got to that stage, probably would just freeze trying to load the data.
Things like stand alone sat-nav devices, I think will eventually die out. My dad gave me his Tom-Tom after his new car had sat-nav built in. Used it a few times but then found that Google maps navigation was just as good, if not better, so brought a car holder for the Xperia Z, and now the Tom-Tom stays in a draw.
Oh yes, the 1020 camera is great.
This is the first photo I ever took, a test pic of a can.
It has such great image quality, whilst it lacks some dynamic range or similar, it is so light, portable and already in my pocket.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
I will say my nephew has that phone and the camera is impressive, but many of us don't walk around with £300-£400 phones. In my case the nokia 520 rather less impressive.
But as impressive as it is from a phone, a decent P&S will deliver better and cost less (of course the phone does more)
It might have spread further, but as far as I am concerned, this is merely an ongoing and evolutionary trend from a long time back.
I am the other way round. I have no trouble carrying my SLT on me on a daily basis, and until recently, I had my tripod on me on a daily basis (recently, the strap used for the tripod is being used to hold a katana). For me it is worth it just to capture an unexpectedly nice sunset, a rainbow, or a night view in the city. The weight doesn't bother me, and if something is happens so quick that I can't get my camera ready on time, then there is a fair chance that I will miss it on my phone too (I hate the time it takes to unlock a screen and open the camera app. Sometime I feel it's not faster than getting my camera ready to shoot). I am certainly no pro, but even as a hobbyist, it is worth it to me.
Last edited by TooNice; 19-07-2014 at 05:04 PM.
Depends on what Im doing. If im just out and see something I think needs a pic taking of then my phone works fine. But if Im planning to go somewhere I will take a point and shoot as the quality is so much better yes even than the 1020 the lenses size etc does make a difference its not all down to the sensor.
No, even a cheapie camera will easily outperform the best smart phone cameras. I bring a pocket camera with fully adjustable manual setting & proper image stabilization with a x20 optical zoom if i know i'm going to take some photos. NO grainy photos for me thanks, they look fine on a tiny phone screen but if u ever want to blow them up or view them on a 1080 TV they look awful.
Not sad to say - no. Doesn't help or hurt that I don't have an actual smart phone, by any definition, but merely a feature phone that does one thing very well - act as a phone. As a semi-serious photographer, I'm never without a camera anyway.
Esse Quam Videri
Out on the road today I saw a Black Flag Sticker on a Cadillac...
I use an an 808 Pureview, so YES.
Looks like pureview might be hitting a dead end, sadly. Hopefully not, though. Sony have the capacity to put some serious camera tech in their phones, but they don't seem to be really pushing it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
