finally, a “what to buy” article that says “don’t buy”
You must log in or register to comment.
1 dayWe switched to phones out of convenience. They took decent enough photos so why carry around a separate camera? That’s the only reason we switched.
and here’s me never having owned an iPhone
i do agree phone cameras are superb these days
We all?
Strange. My phone doesnt look and feel like a fruit-phone.- Cornpop@lemmy.worldEnglish1 day
Most androids have trash cameras unless you are spending iPhone money on one.
Weird comment. I don’t know how it relates to my comment but sure.
You do you.
- stealth_cookies@lemmy.caEnglish3 days
There was always three things that made a standalone camera better than a smartphone camera: larger sensors, better glass, better ergonomics. For most people people those advantages went away once computational photography got good enough and technology improved which allowed for very compact lenses on larger sensors.
I’ve got a different background than most photographers in that I have a lot of experience in testing camera image quality. For me, a full frame mirrorless is still the way I prefer to take photos, as it has noticeably better and more natural looking images due to better hardware. Phone cameras suck in some ways like having realistic depth of field (portrait modes look so bad to me), but they also excel in using image stacking and AI enhancements to alleviate the hardware downsides to the point that I’ll sometimes prefer the phone over the prospect of trying to achieve the same on my full frame.
For me a good viewfinder makes framing and composition decisions way easier than the phone screen. Especially in bright sunlight.
- chewypoops@lemmy.worldEnglish3 days
No, the size of the sensor matters, and phones are mediocre cameras. I will die on this hill.
- SreudianFlip@sh.itjust.worksEnglish2 hours
Yes, I had a really nice canon slr and a rollei compact with the good zeiss glass, but went on a long cycle trip and grams counted, so I reused a disposable camera: plastic fixed lens, single speed, reloading it inside the sleeping bag at night and sealing it up with duck tape. Developed at whatever one-hour available at the small towns we passed through.
Turned out okay, but great shots. I sold many of those photos. Because I had any camera at all.
The phone is always with you though, unlike the camera which got left at home.
- XLE@piefed.socialEnglish3 days
There are very few (sub-$1500) point-and-shoot digital cameras of decent quality to even compare any more*. The ones that are left are targeted at vloggers, and despite how neat phone camera technology is (and it is incredible), it’s often astonishing how good a compact camera with a modern sensor and decent zoom has gotten.
It’s a shame the market got hollowed out by phones, because over the past few years, phones have just gotten more hallucinatory with their output images in an attempt to “fix” the photos they’re talking, and hardware innovation has stalled out. Because of course it has. They don’t have the space of a dedicated camera.
* IMO it is a disservice to Sony that the author mentions their $1500 camera but not the very similar ZV-1 model that’s only $800.
- IMALlama@lemmy.worldEnglish10 hours
and hardware innovation has stalled out. Because of course it has. They don’t have the space of a dedicated camera.
You’re totally not going to fit even a micro four thirds sensor in a phone, but there are a bunch of Chinese phones with larger sensors. Although they can be a PITA to find if you’re on the US, reviews like them.
I suspect the reason why we don’t see them from the mainline phone manufacturers comes down more to hardware BOM cost than packaging or size.
- 3 days
I don’t know if I’m alone in this, but I really don’t like the basic ergonomics of taking photos with my phone. To me there’s no comparison to the weight and layout of a dedicated camera.
Ok top of that, I like to fiddle with settings and focus manually, and I don’t want my images to be automatically filtered through AI or scraped by Google.
I can certainly agree that a big part of photography is being in the right place at the right time and using whatever camera you have to take the photo. And I know that the phone cameras these days are pretty good and more than enough for the casual user, but I like a dedicated camera, even a cheap and old one, if only for the experience of taking photos that way.
The ergonomics aren’t great compared to a dedicated camera. The camera sensor not being in the middle is annoying unless your subject is far away. Having to hold the phone so that you don’t accidentally touch the screen, accidentally block the camera, etc. is not ideal. The shutter is never in a great position, even if you do something like use the volume button as a shutter.
Even flip phone cameras were more convenient than that. With those the camera was roughly in the middle, and you could hold the phone in a way that felt less awkward.
OTOH, the thing that killed cameras for me was the ergonomics of getting the pictures off the camera and backed up online. You either needed to remove the memory card from the camera, make sure you had a USB to memory card adapter, plug it into a computer, drag the files somewhere, etc. then wait for that to complete, and remember to put the memory card back into the camera.
For a short while, the cameras claimed to have WiFi, but it wasn’t like you could just connect them to your home router and let the camera connect to the Internet and upload the photos. No, the camera created its own WiFi hotspot and you had to connect your laptop or something to that hotspot and transfer the files that way.
To me, the killer feature of phone cameras (aside from always being in my pocket) was that to back up the pictures I’d taken I had to… do nothing. I’d get home, use my phone as normal, and within half an hour, the photos were already online and backed up.
- Voytrekk@sopuli.xyzEnglish3 days
I understand why people want to go back to older analog things to try and stay offline, but the issue isn’t your phone itself. The issue is the apps that you load up on your phone that are there just to keep you distracted. Remove those, and your phone goes back to being a useful tool instead of a black hole for attention.
- shweddy@lemmy.worldEnglish3 days
The issue is the camera doesnt have half the settings a d/slr has. Phones take the artistry out of photography by giving you the “best” shot
- Voytrekk@sopuli.xyzEnglish3 days
Its not meant as a DLSR replacement. It was a replacement for the cheaper digital cameras that people used before. You can take decent shots with a phone camera if you know what you are doing, but it will still not compete with the professional equipment if you are going for the best.
- mynameisbob@lemmy.mlEnglish3 days
I never took those cameras seriously real glass kicks ass iphones are trash.
- sem@piefed.blahaj.zoneEnglish2 days
I don’t know off the top of my head, but I did a search in here the results.
- https://collider.com/movies-shot-on-iphones-ranked/
- https://fictionhorizon.com/films-that-were-shot-entirely-on-phones/
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_shot_on_mobile_phones
I thibk the ones I had heard of were Tangerine and maybe the Stephen Soderberg ones.
- Melonpoly@lemmy.worldEnglish7 hours
These are all experimental short films. You are almost always going to get weird and wonderful techniques used in those and they’re uousually not created by “professionals”
- 3 hours
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/28_Years_Later is the $150-million gross sequel to the trailblazing 2002 28 Days Later, which reinvigorated zombie horror.
The themes of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tangerine_(film) (2015) laid the groundwork for the same director’s Oscar-winning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anora .
