DSLR vs iPhone camera

[lance70]

I started with a Nikon D60 years back and a 50mm lens, you can't go wrong with any of the major brands out there whether it's a DSLR or mirrorless system....Nikon, Canon, Fuji, Sony....not just the body but they all make high quality glass as well. Cell phones came a long way as well and as other people have said it's more about just getting out there and shooting and see what works for you.....as said if the lighting is perfect a cell phone will take amazing shots but if you are shooting for a customer and the lighting changes you will have far more options with the DSLR system to get the shot required, especially if you need to make prints.

 

[ayen]

Did you guys let 'graduating' to a DSLR camera and then to better models of DSLR cameras happen organically or did you skip steps, so to speak?

I started with a bridge (i think coolpix) camera around 8 years ago because my parents bought that. With that I discovered i love photography so I bought a nikon d3100 with kitlens. Later i bought a 35mm 1.8 lens. After a while i upgraded to a nikon d7100 because of the quality and limitations off the d3100. Then i started o invest in lenses (2.8 17-55mm nikkor and 50mm 1.4). After a few years photographing with this m, I sometimes start to think about my next camera upgrade.

I bought everything secondhand and i saved a lot of money this way. I will keep doing this.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-A510F met Tapatalk

 

[photoflyer]

To me, phone cameras are great for snapshots of people (but not portraits) and landscapes. The results can be exceptional. That said there are a lot of shots that you simply will not get without the right equipment and that may mean a DSLR or mirrorless camera. However, even with the right equipment you will need to develop the skills required to get the shots you want. That is where the fun begins.

 

[Solarflare]

Did you guys let 'graduating' to a DSLR camera and then to better models of DSLR cameras happen organically or did you skip steps, so to speak?

Well, I wasted a lot of money on inferior cameras, every time realizing after a while it wasnt what I wanted.

In retrospect I should have bought a Nikon D700 when it came out, plus a couple primes (probably Nikkor AF 35mm f2 and Nikkor AF 180mm f2.8). But nobody was there to give me that piece of good advice.

 

[Strodav]

I've always loved photography and taking pictures, but I'm only just getting started with learning how to take good pictures and that includes the camera that's used. I have been thinking of getting a good DSLR camera (and stop using my smartphone's crappy one), but since it's very expensive, I've been pushing it off.
I have recently seen some pictures posted online where someone uses her iPhone camera, and the pictures look great (plus she has specific lenses to along with it for certain situations) - I was amazed how advanced iPhone cameras are these days. My husband has an iPhone X, so I wondered if it would be a good option to start with that or if learning how to use a DSLR is better. Are there advantages to using DSLR over iPhone and if so, what are they? Any other advice on what camera would be good to use/how to avoid spending too much?

Smartphones, like the iPhone X, are excellent at certain types of photography like landscapes, some types of portraits and even macro photography, but are poor at sports and wildlife. What's really impressive is how Apple (and others) use the processing power of the phone for image enhancement, but they are limited. Good ones are around $1000. IMHO the next step up is a bridge camera, which is basically a fixed lens dslr. Nikon, Canon, Sony and Panasonic (Lumix) are well known brands and you can get an excellent camera for between $500 and $1000. This is where I recommend you start. Once you master or outgrow a bridge camera it will be time to look at a dslr.

 

[407370]

I had bridge cameras since they became a thing and I have no intention of ever buying a DSLR. I am however upgrading to Nikon P1000 Bridge at Christmas.
I do a lot of macro on very small plants and I just cant find any system that beats my Samsung S8+ with a $20 Macro lens. The phone is useless in low light / indoors / moving target but I dont typically face those conditions.

 

[RickyMidnight]

nice comparison on those shots Brianeack
the iPhone actually looks great and has great color, but as EJA64 stated, with DSLR you have more option to adjust things.
I am very new to this and am trying to learn as mush as I can and having fun doing so.

 

[Braineack]

You can adjust all the same things and more on a cellphone.

A camera is just a tool and it's better to take the shot than not; regardless of the camera.


here's another from my Pixel 1 vs my D800:

IMG_20180601_163028
by Braineack, on Flickr

DSC_9908
by Braineack, on Flickr


IMG_20180602_055758
by Braineack, on Flickr

DSC_9741
by Braineack, on Flickr


Quality wise at 100%, the iPhone X images (wife's phone) look like trash IMHO. I dunno why anyone raves about them. On screen, they look fine, but they are pretty bad. One of the reasons I went with the Google Pixel phone, which images are actually impressive at 100%.

 

[AlanKlein]

Brain: Your cellphone images are better IMO because they have much greater DOF, one of the advantages of cells and P&S's. The DSLR shots are very narrow and the out-of-focus foregrounds detract from the subjects. I can;t comment on the quality of the pixels. But as long as you're not blowing up the image to much, cells are fine for quick grabs in good light. Plus there's always that expression in force that says that you can;t get a picture at all if you don't have a camera with you. Cell phones are always with you.

 

[Braineack]

I agree. I like to stay around f4 and sometimes forget to stop-down:


IMG_20180602_061415 by Braineack, on Flickr


DSC_9763 by Braineack, on Flickr

 

[Solarflare]

[...] Plus there's always that expression in force that says that you can;t get a picture at all if you don't have a camera with you. Cell phones are always with you.

See, problem solved.

I never have a smartphone with me due not owning one.

I always have my DSLR with me. And if I have to go really lightweight, my Ricoh GR.

 

[AlanKlein]

Brain: There's nothing wrong with narrow DOF if that's what you're shooting for. There's a woman on flickr who always shoots her Hassy medium format with an extremely narrow focus, even on landscapes. I'm growing fond of them. In my case, I always shoot stopped down for my landscapes.

But when I travel on vacation, and only take my lightweight 1" P&S, I like the idea I can shoot in P mode most of the time and get a shot that is in focus front to back. Sure I give up portrait's narrow focuses, for the most part, but I don't think that effects the slide shows I put together overall. The P&S pixels look fabulous on my 75" UHDTV and with only 8mb required, it gives me room to crop the original 20mb shots. Of course, ISO's are better in the P&S then cell phones. So I won;t use cell phone pictures in the slide show unless they're really good and taken during the day. Of course, if my wife wants one of her cell shots in there, well, who am I to argue?