Smart Phone vs. $3400 DSLR

Joined
Aug 4, 2012
Messages
1,556
Location
SW England
Real Name
Rob
Hmm,

I was a bit disappointed by that article - it was a bit hit and miss, and seemed something of a missed opportunity. Shame really - I am a big fan of ars usually, and many of their articles are truly excellent IMHO. In particular, some of the photos taken with the expensive Canon were a bit rubbish really, which mostly hinted at problems with technique.

You'd be better off reading some of the stuff on http://www.soundimageplus.com/, where the chap David has recently been comparing some $1000-ish cameras (plus or minus) including some m43 stuff, with a Nokia Lumia 1020 phone cam, with useful results. I think the guy used to be a regular on here for a while, way back. He is amusingly opinionated, and changes fierce brand/system loyalties on a monthly basis - like a sort of uber fang bouy who has a very, very, short attention span.

But the conclusion (obvious to the sort of folk who lurk on forums like this) is that phone cams can easily replace expensive cameras for some tasks, and not at all for other tasks. But you'll need to get over the tiny detailed differences that pixel peepers and gear heads obsess about. ("my 2014 camera has almost a full stop more DR than your 2013 one" - etc).

Nevertheless, the ars article comments about ease of use, workflow etc are very true, and highlight why "proper" cameras are often not worth the bother for a lot of people.

Rob
 
M

minibokeh

Guest
The Ars Technica images were sub par on both the iphone as well as the DSLR side ... The author is honest about his lack of skill, but then what's the point?
I'm finding the examples e.g. from Ming Thein (love or hate the guy, up to you) much more meaningful: http://blog.mingthein.com/2014/05/26/mobile-photography-the-future-and-the-masses-part-ii/
Ultimately I want to see what's possible when somebody knows what they're doing, not what results from pushing the shutter and relying on "full auto".
?
 

kevinparis

Cantankerous Scotsman
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
3,912
Location
Gent, Belgium
yeah a very lazy article from the normally good arstechnica

though it does reinforce the idea that cameras don't take good photographs... only photographers do that
and if the light is dim and flat and the subject is boring, no matter how much technology you throw at the problem its never going to be a good photograph


K
 

50orsohours

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 13, 2013
Messages
2,420
Location
Portland Oregon
The Ars Technica images were sub par on both the iphone as well as the DSLR side ... The author is honest about his lack of skill, but then what's the point?
I'm finding the examples e.g. from Ming Thein (love or hate the guy, up to you) much more meaningful: http://blog.mingthein.com/2014/05/26/mobile-photography-the-future-and-the-masses-part-ii/
Ultimately I want to see what's possible when somebody knows what they're doing, not what results from pushing the shutter and relying on "full auto".
?
What would be the reason for not liking Ming?
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom