Phones vs DSLRs

[Braineack]

I'm not inherently opposed to anything so long as it's good.

 

[Derrel]

i have high standards, unlike your sluts

I don't necessarily think the legacy approach to DSLRs is correct (designing them to be exactly like film cameras), and I will agree that they are WAY behind the curve in terms of utilizing today's tech/innovation, but cell phones can still barely give me the quality I've been used to shooting digital since the mid 90s. My current SG5 camera probably can match my old 1997 Sony Mavica in terms of IQ.

also remember I like to talk in hyperbole.

Compare the video ability of the Samsung Galaxy Note 3 against the Canon 5D Mark III...Video Test Samsung Galaxy Note 3 Versus the Canon 5D Mark III

In most respects, the straight out of phone video quality of the phone is as good as the d-slr's video...at least at typical Vimeo or YouTube size viewing...and that's the secondary issue nobody seems to be addressing: we're seeing images today on very SMALL displays. Even a large TV has a very low,low megapixel count. In 99% of today's viewing of on-screen images, the Megapixel count of the capture device is several times higher than that of the display device, and so we're seeing a down-rezzed image almost all of the time.

 

[sashbar]

Why compromise when you can have the best of two worlds?

Product page of RICOH GR - RICOH IMAGING UK LTD.

 

[table1349]

Geez....you're still carrying a phone? Hell I dumped having a phone in my hands for a smart watch that meets all my data needs and I use my DSLR for photography. Really nice being able to take photos and make a phone call or send a text message via voice commands all at the same time.

 

[Mr. Innuendo]

The iPhone 5S is more powerful than the computers that put a man on the moon.

I don't see anyone trying to run the International Space Station off of cell phones, though.

 

[Trever1t]

Did man really land on the moon?

 

[JoeW]

Nowadays, cell phones have as much technology as our Digital Single Lens Reflex (DSLR) cameras and it begs the question, "Which is better (or more necessary as a photographer's accessory), the highly portable and convenient-because-its-always-in-my-hand smart phone with a camera, or the much higher quality (although its a little heavier) and more-fun-to-use-because-of-the-more-convenient-and-professional-features DSLR camera?"
Most professional photographers still lug around the slightly heavier but better quality DSLR because they feel like they are not seen as a professional photographer unless they have a large intimidating lens, some still carry their cameras because they prefer to use the camera for what its made to do and use the phone for what its made to do (make calls), and some photographers enjoy the convenience of not having to carry around a heavy camera and bag and accessories but instead, carry around their smart phone and shoot happily with that because its convenient and they can carry it in their back pocket.
Where do you stand on this issue?

I completely agree. A very comparable example is your feet vs. your car. Your feet can transport you, require much less space, upkeep and maintenance then a car, no parking hassles, you take your feet everywhere you go, no need for a big ostentatious bag ("oh this? it's just my feet!"). Anyone with a car is obviously just a poseur seeking status--those of us in the know, know that feet are the real transportation answer.

Okay, sarcasm aside, I take a lot of pictures with my phone--it's very handy. But comparing a phone to a DSLR is like comparing feet to a car--there is no comparison.

I was at a Civil War re-enactment. Re-enactors were several hundred feet away and roped off (for safety purposes). I was shooting 'em with a 300mm lens...hmm...my phone can't do that. I was shooting a concept for my church (Stations of the Cross) where I needed to capture the reflection of the cross in the eyes of my model...my phone can't do that. I am planning to shoot a 4th of July macro shot of a series of red-white-and-blue pennants captured/refracted in a drop of water...my phone can't do that. I like to play with white balance...um...really can't do that with my phone...it becomes a post production action rather than fixing it before the shot. Just did some Bill Brandt type distortion shots with a fisheye lens--does your phone have a fisheye lens?

Look, I don't try to make calls with my DSLR or use it as a pedometer or check the weather with it. I take lots of pictures with my iPhone 6, it's a nifty little device. And as a camera, it's a really good point and shoot. So to the OP, be clear, what you're really saying is that a really good point-and-shoot camera is as good as a DSLR. And the only time this is every true is when you are just doing point-and-shoot work. So for some people, a point-and-shoot is the optimal choice. But for people who do more than "take snapshots" but instead "create pictures" you need the ability to shoot from hundreds of feet away or do macro of play with DoF. And a phone just won't do those things.

 

[bribrius]

Did man really land on the moon?

pictures don't lie. Geez, i thought we all knew that.

 

[astroNikon]

Did man really land on the moon?

pictures don't lie. Geez, i thought we all knew that.

A friend of mine is a believer in that we didn't land on the moon.
Amazing .... she ignores *ALL* facts etc related to physics, aerodynamics, rocket propulsion vs projectile speed. It's amazing. If you correlate the problems of the moon to the earth then nothing should fly or even get off the ground .. but they reject that correlation. It's mind boggling and essentially disregards common sense in order to support their ideology / conspiracy. Reminds me of this ==> Question about a 1908 photo that might be a fake Photography Forum

 

[407370]

I am planning to shoot a 4th of July macro shot of a series of red-white-and-blue pennants captured/refracted in a drop of water...my phone can't do that. I like to play with white balance...um...really can't do that with my phone...it becomes a post production action rather than fixing it before the shot. Just did some Bill Brandt type distortion shots with a fisheye lens--does your phone have a fisheye lens?
.

I bought a set of lenses for my NOTE 3.

Landscape (OK),

Macro (brilliant)

and Fisheye (weird)

all for about $50. I need to do a bit more practice with fisheye.

 

[bribrius]

i want to know why it is always phone vs. dslr. The majority of everything i shot in my life was on film or point and shoots a dslr is a very small percentage of it.

 

[table1349]

The iPhone 5S is more powerful than the computers that put a man on the moon.

I don't see anyone trying to run the International Space Station off of cell phones, though.

Only because the "Selfie" generation isn't in charge of NASA.

 

[JoeW]

I am planning to shoot a 4th of July macro shot of a series of red-white-and-blue pennants captured/refracted in a drop of water...my phone can't do that. I like to play with white balance...um...really can't do that with my phone...it becomes a post production action rather than fixing it before the shot. Just did some Bill Brandt type distortion shots with a fisheye lens--does your phone have a fisheye lens?
.

I bought a set of lenses for my NOTE 3.

Landscape (OK),
View attachment 97107
Macro (brilliant)
View attachment 97108


and Fisheye (weird)

View attachment 97109
all for about $50. I need to do a bit more practice with fisheye.

Exactly my point. In order to achieve those with a phone you're...adding lens. There are a bunch of lens (including I think a 200mm lens) that you can attach to a phone. But then it's not something you slip in and out of your pocket easily, just pop up and shoot.

All we're talking about here are a bunch of tools. And the OP is effectively saying...my tool without lens can do what your tool with lens can do when I add lens. Yes--that's my point (at least part of it).