Smart Phone vs. $3400 DSLR

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by Biro, Oct 11, 2014.

  1. Biro

    Biro Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 8, 2011
    Jersey Shore
    Real Name:
  2. coffeecat

    coffeecat Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Aug 4, 2012
    SW England
    Real Name:

    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, 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.

  3. minibokeh

    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:
    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".
  4. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    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

    • Like Like x 1
  5. 50orsohours

    50orsohours Mu-43 All-Pro

    Oct 13, 2013
    Portland Oregon
    What would be the reason for not liking Ming?
  6. Promit

    Promit Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 6, 2011
    Baltimore, MD
    Real Name:
    Promit Roy
    I'm on ArsTechnica daily, reading their stuff, and I love their site. And this was my assessment as well; it was a very lazy and vague article that didn't do a good job of informing anybody.
    • Like Like x 2