Originally posted by BigMackCam I think it's an interesting comparison. The technology and image quality in camera phones is increasing at a significant rate, and many people are choosing to shoot with them as their main camera. We get posts on these forums occasionally from people claiming that you can't tell the difference between their DSLR and high-end camera phone images (someone recently challenged me to do just that, but didn't provide the photos for me to do so). So the OP's post provides useful balance to those claims, as even though most of us realise any comparison is a foregone conclusion, a few don't
I think it's an interesting and useful comparison, too.
As a curious photographer, it's natural to look at a image and wonder how it was made. What camera, focal length, aperture, shutter speed did they use? How might I replicate that image or that kind of image if I found my self looking at a similar composition or scene? Is it even possible for me to replicate that image with one of my cameras with either difficulty or ease?
In some cases an image taken with one camera-lens combination might be nearly impossible to replicate with another for reasons of focal length (e.g., 12 mm equivalent on 4x5), aperture (e.g., extremely shallow DoF with a small-format sensor), ISO (e.g., astrophotography with a smartphone), or perspective manipulation (e.g., replicating view camera tilt & shift in another format), etc.
That inevitably leads to assessing how some cameras as more or less versatile than others by virtue of their lens systems, control features, and sensor performance levels. And if one is deciding which camera to carry, then there's the question of trade-offs between photographic versatility, physical portability, and ergonomic ease-of-use.
Smartphones are clearly extreme portable and carrying a camera is clearly a big first hurdle to making an image. Smartphones have growing photographic versatility within the limits of their fixed focal length lenses and tiny sensors. But smartphones have poorer ergonomics especially if one wants more control over exposure and image parameters.
Overall, the point is that a growing percentage of images can be replicated with smartphones especially if the goal is social media sharing. And if a photographer is willing to accept the limitations of the format (no true shallow DoF, limited DR, poor low-light performance) and device (one prime lens, no physical controls, no viewfinder), then they really can do an incredible amount of high-quality photography with today's smartphones.
P.S. Here's an image taken with an iPad(!!!) that could not be taken with a DSLR:
Although a DSLR could easily replicate the 35 mm equivalent focal length and f/20 equivalent aperture (and smoke the iPad on IQ), this exact image perspective required the front entrance pupil of the lens to be 1 cm from the interior wall of the aircraft. Only the tiniest of camera bodies could get that close. Smartphones and tablet cameras can often be positioned where larger cameras simply cannot go.