A few months ago, a few of my friends got the iPhone 4 that came with the newer cameras. I can tell you that those and the 4s and 5 produces awesome photographs by any standard. Obviously there are limitations in low light and no zoom, but compared to any digital camera in more favorable lighting, they perform exceptionally well.

Be the judge



http://www.flickr.com/cameras/apple/iphone_4s/

This post has been edited by mumeichan: Mar 7 2013, 02:06 PM

Wow, thank you all sifus for your great input. The last post by mumeichan is very convincing. However, I wish to see more photos taken by smartphones in low light condition - maybe this is one are that smartphones has to chase.

I have an idea so far:

Forget about P&S --> a good smartphone can replace it.

Then get a Mirco 3/4 like Lumix GF2 (used, cheaper) for more challenging situation.

Any thought?

using nokia pureview 808...lighting provided by my lcd monitor



This post has been edited by Everdying: May 29 2013, 01:22 PM

Wow... that's stunning - both the low light shot and the watch!

Yeah i know 808 has a very good camera, but windows phone might not be my cut of tea. wonder if iphone or android got any phone that can come close for low light or not.

For travel its always best to use a PNS camera even if your smart phone can take pics just as good or better.

-There are situations you will ask a stranger to help take a pic of you and your friends. That can just stranger run away with your phone. Your phone (contacts, apps, lots and lots of personal stuff inside just gone!). Better give a PNS camera than a phone to stranger right?

-Flash! PNS cameras have a more powerful flash that can shoot those difficult lightnings. PNS flash shots usually are better than phone flash shots. That LED ain't bright enough sometimes especially for those bright background shady face.

-Battery. You know smart phone battery get used up quickly so why use it up even more. Take pics til you can't make a phone call, NOW THAT'S SMART! With PNS camera you don't worry about low batt because its job is to use that batt just for pics! When traveling you are going to shoot hundreds of pics right?

-Can be lent out. Friend/relative (A lot for people don't have smart phones) is going for a wedding/travel and wants to borrow a camera. Will you let them borrow your smart phone for the weekend? Will you give them your DSLR? Yeah that PNS can be useful to keep them occupied and not get your valuable stuff.

Plenty of situations can make a PNS camera be the better choice no matter how good a smart phone camera gets.

best smartphone Picture Quality

1. Nokia 808
2. Galaxy note (any)
3. Iphone 5
4. Galaxy s3
5. Iphone 4/s

actually if follow dx0mobile.
1. nokia 808
2 samsung s4
3. iphone 5
4. note 2
5. samsung s3

htc one not yet benchmark, so waiting.

recent smartphone/cameraphones already quite advanced, like 808 Pureview, HTC One, S4, and in fact some of those already started to threaten the sales of compact PnS camera.

but no matter how good they're, a camera is still a camera, just like how a dedicated mp3 player performs better than built-in music player on phones.

of course some may argue that many features inside smartphones already can replace those dedicated gadgets, however there will still be situations that u gonna need a dedicated gadget to perform dedicated task.

dont expect smartphone camera's digital zoom to be as good as optical zoom on camera, and fancy DSLR-style bokeh, or even color/shadow/contrast reproduction etc. (still, some might argue that there are thousands of apps which can do magic to ur photo taken with phones)

personally, i dont agree or disagree of having smartphone to replace a camera for casual shooting, because afterall, photography depends on our own skills and creativity, if anyone claim that smartphone produce crappy photo as compared with dedicated camera, i would say that is totally B*LLSH*T.

one without skill but using the most expensive full-frame DSLR versus one got skill but using a simple PnS, who is going to have great photos at the end?

2 cents opinions, cheers

808 is not Windows Phone.

Are u serious? C510 better than S2? Wat do u mean by performance? Sharpness or steady pics?

I agree with your idea.

By Lumia 800

In some situations, yeah it gets noisy but still usable for me.

Here are somemore from other people.
S.E xperia x10 and arc S (supposed to have better low light shots)
https://forum.lowyat.net/topic/1673882?author=mode893

But then again, skills matter also.

U all forgot the almighty nokia N8

This post has been edited by danielcmugen: May 30 2013, 02:19 AM

For me I would prefer to buy something that I can use all the time, that's why I choose phone camera, good enough. My way of zooming is cropping. Since I'm financially tight, I'm not willing to spend thousands on a DSLR and just use it a few times a year. I admit phone camera got limitations, but I'll tolerate with it till I become rich and got extra money for DSLR. Lol.

[quote=danielcmugen,May 30 2013, 02:02 AM]
Are u serious? C510 better than S2? Wat do u mean by performance? Sharpness or steady pics?
I agree with your idea.
Steady pic.
Yup. I went camping with the C510 and S2. You need a very steady hand for the S2, plus no shutter button makes it kind of a chore. BTW...this thread so old

thanks bro, you do have a point.

[quote=mystvearn,May 30 2013, 04:31 AM]
[quote=danielcmugen,May 30 2013, 02:02 AM]
BTW...this thread so old

[/quote]
not too old wat, the topic is still very relevant until now... so i hope the moderators will not stop this.

wow, looking at the low light outputs from these two phones, still wows...

"But then again, skills matter also." --> skills? what skills needed on phone cams? there's not much we can control right?

oh yeah, it's symbian - but too bad it's dying! seems nokia 808 is the king of phone cam, but for now and future, not much choice other than ios or android.

Any thought of buying a secondhand mirco 4/3 cam like the Lumix GF2 (~rm800)? the price is just a bit above p&s.
I think a micro p&s (for low light and serious shots) coupled with a good cam phone (for casual and impulsive shots) would be a good combo, no? Or, just put all my $ to get a real good high end smartphone with a real good cam? hmm... decision, decision...

Depends on what you want, TS. If you just want some snapshots for memories then I guess any camera will do, even a phone cam.

If you are particular about your pictures but don't want to be bogged down by weight and size and want something easy to carry around, then a compact camera will do.

If you don't want to compromise so much and want the best you can get out of what you have and do not mind lugging gears around, then by all means go for a DSLR with all the bells and whistles.

Skills will always help. It's not about the camera settings only. If you know about lighting, then you will know what's the optimal lighting conditions for your pics in a situation and even with a phone cam you can get better pictures than just clicking on the shutter and hoping the picture will turn out ok.

Knowing the limitations of the camera you are using will also help. You will know when you need to put your camera onto a stable, solid surface for a better picture than holding with your hands outstretched.

Skill is knowing what will get you a better pic and working out a solution based on the limitation of the equipment you are carrying. Even if you only have a phone cam but you know what to do, you can get very decent pictures.

I brought my DSLR for a trip to overseas last year. It is still my primary cam for the trip, worth the effort of bringing the bulky stuff after bringing home a lot of nice photos. But my Samsung Galaxy Note is a great compliment too - capture all of the dishes during meals (can't really bring out the big DSLR to shoot while everyone was staring at the delicious food). And it is quite a capable Full-HD video camera under bright daylight. Upgraded to Note II now and the responsiveness of the camera and video quality is even better.

The only gap left is a rugged camera - can't have either my DSLR and Note II in a pool with my kids. My next camera will be a rugged waterproof camera like the Olympus Tough TG-2. Btw, any good recommendation for rugged camera?

I think I’m on the same boat with TS, it will be pretty shocking if TS entered the world of real camera and found out it is so far behind the phone cam. Those common features in phone cam are not common in digital camera and it'll cost arm and leg if camera has them. Case-in-point:


1. Megapixels - Phonecam already has 12MP cam since 2009, while that time most DSLRs were just 6MP
2. 1080p - Full HD phone cam are so common, 5D Mark II which priced almost like 3 new born babies in china black market was the 1st DSLR to have this feature.
3. Display - when phone cam evolved up to retina display, most camera still stuck with low res with difficulty to see in sunlight.
4. Touch screen - not just phonecam already has touch to focus, today most cameras don’t even have touchscreen,
5. Video light LED is also common feature in cam phone, it almost non existence in real camera.
6. Image stabilization is not a buying factor in cam phone, but it is essential when buying a camera coz it is a rare feature.
7. GPS – Geolocation data on the Exif information – Phone cam people don’t even talk about this already coz it’s native.
8. Connectivity – Wireless connectivity like wifi and 3G is not even a handful number that we can call significant in real cam world.
9. Battery – while phone cam can just charge it on any usb ports, cameraman need to bring car battery around connected to some adapter and fake battery coupler.
10. Size – most photographers are still have the thinking that bigger is better when the evolution of technology proves otherwise. Until today most of them still think that it’s important to have mirror to reflect the image to another sensor to display on another smaller LCD display they call a viewfinder and this what DSLR is all about.

I can go on and on but lets get thing straight here when people like me looking for a camera to buy we expect most common features in our phone cam are already there and something can give more and not less. Image quality and effects are also arguable since most can be achieved in post processing.

1. your knowledge of DSLR is flawed very badly. in 2007 DSLR already sporting 8MP or higher. In 2009 DSLR were already 15MP or higher. 12 MP phone cam has laugeable quality. You need to understand that the image sensor is totally different. So your comparison on this point is flawed.

2. Related to point #1. Furthermore, most phone even today don't actually have Full HD. those that had before, were depending on small sensors and those with Full HD are often on the high end phones.

3. No relevance to quality of image captured. Cameras are focused on capturing images. LCD is less emphasized. This is very unlike mobile device where the screen is emphasized more than anything else.

4. Refer to point #3. Furthermore phones are touch enabled by default. Cameras don't have a need to go touch screen. So far all the touch screen are entry levels and various smaller cams.

5. er, that's because for cameras - we can mount dedicated video light. that puny 1 LED doesn't make things great either. I use them as my torchlight at most. LOL.

6. donno what you talking about. rare feature on camera? LOL. seriously, it goes back to point #1 - I really question your knowledge about cameras.

7/8. Cos photographers don't care? Again you must understand that GPS / connectivity technology is already part of phone. Brands just add on to it only because of marketing gimmick but in most cases, they don't even bother to use those things.

9. up to this point, what you say so far are just a lot of bull. FYI we just bring extra batteries for camera. Charger can use any wall point.

10. it's not about bigger the better, no matter how your phone camera will remain as it is, they're no way better than a dedicated camera.* (yes, we photographer are that some camera phone does better than some camera in the past, and perhaps some low entry camera)

---------------

Seriously man. Your comparison is flawed, and in many ways nonsensical.

You're like comparing a compact car vs a truck. Then you come say truck lousy because big, slow, not comfortable, whatever else when in actual fact they're 2 totally different devices made for different purpose.