Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-22-2018, 12:50 PM - 2 Likes   #31
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,290
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
The technology and image quality in camera phones is increasing at a significant rate
The improvement of image quality is measurable relative to image quality of mobile phones, that's why DXO did not test and grade phones with the same scale as they do for cameras, otherwise the phone would be found at the bottom of the scale.
The confusion for most of us comes from the fact that we as mostly not use the image quality we get out of our cameras, there is some much information from a K1 image that the quality is clamped to the maximum that can be rendered by a small display because on a 4k (or HD) display of 10bit depth, a lot of the details and depth is lost. Yet, we don't always need excellent image quality, sometimes we want to take a snapshot to send it to someone as a mean of communication, and in that case, the camera phone is practical.

06-22-2018, 04:27 PM   #32
New Member




Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 3
Jack of all trades is a master of none. A phone's primary use is to make calls, a camera's is to take pictures.

06-22-2018, 04:44 PM - 1 Like   #33
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 9,095
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
The confusion for most of us comes from the fact that we as mostly not use the image quality we get out of our cameras, there is some much information from a K1 image that the quality is clamped to the maximum that can be rendered by a small display because on a 4k (or HD) display of 10bit depth, a lot of the details and depth is lost.
For sure, there's a lot more info in a RAW file than we can reproduce on a typical PC screen, or photo printer. Where it comes into play most of all is in post-processing flexibility, as we typically export to lower quality 8-bit JPEG files for sharing online and printing (although I realise many people will print from TIFF).

Still, if we take a RAW image from a K-1, process it, then export to a JPEG using RGB colour space, and compare it to a JPEG (or processed RAW) from a high quality camera phone, there are still huge differences in image quality as a result of the sensor - plus any signal processing between the sensor and imaging engine.

What's amazing is that we can get decent images - when viewed at reasonable reproduction sizes - from the tiny sensors in high-end camera phones. But the best of them will always have a tough time compared to a good m4/3, APS-C or full-frame sensor camera, especially when images are viewed at larger sizes or cropped (or taken in less than decent lighting conditions). Add to that the dynamic range, focal length range (compared to ILCs) and lack of creative depth-of-field control, and camera phones will always be devices with significant limitations... But, if you can happily work within those limitations, they're very useful photographic tools

Last edited by BigMackCam; 06-22-2018 at 05:31 PM.
06-22-2018, 04:49 PM - 1 Like   #34
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 28,915
Np reason you can't pull a phone out of your camera bag, when it's the best tool for the task at hand. People used to occasionally pull a 110 camera out as well. A camera is a camera. Give it to a photographer, and he/she will figure out what it's good for.

There really is no one vs the other though. They're all just cameras in the bag.

06-22-2018, 04:52 PM - 1 Like   #35
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 9,095
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Np reason you can't pull a phone out of your camera bag, when it's the best tool for the task at hand. People used to occasionally pull a 110 camera out as well. A camera is a camera. Give it to a photographer, and he/she will figure out what it's good for.

There really is no one vs the other though. They're all just cameras in the bag.
Absolutely. The situation often dictates which tool is best for the job at hand and, sometimes, that really is a camera phone - as @photoptimist demonstrated earlier...
06-22-2018, 04:55 PM   #36
New Member




Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 3
I can see that - I used a point & shoot when I couldn't afford a DSLR, and some of my best pictures resulted from it.

06-22-2018, 05:02 PM   #37
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 9,095
QuoteOriginally posted by TomHawk Quote
I can see that - I used a point & shoot when I couldn't afford a DSLR, and some of my best pictures resulted from it.
Exactly. In the same way, sometimes my activities mean that my larger ILCs and lenses aren't practical companions, but taking my little Q or Q7 with a well-chosen lens fitted means I can still get some great shots

BTW, welcome to the forums
06-22-2018, 05:07 PM - 1 Like   #38
New Member




Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 3
Thank you!



06-22-2018, 08:08 PM   #39
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 40
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Np reason you can't pull a phone out of your camera bag, when it's the best tool for the task at hand. People used to occasionally pull a 110 camera out as well. A camera is a camera. Give it to a photographer, and he/she will figure out what it's good for.

There really is no one vs the other though. They're all just cameras in the bag.

Agree.
06-23-2018, 02:54 AM   #40
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 17,863
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
The improvement of image quality is measurable relative to image quality of mobile phones, that's why DXO did not test and grade phones with the same scale as they do for cameras, otherwise the phone would be found at the bottom of the scale.
The confusion for most of us comes from the fact that we as mostly not use the image quality we get out of our cameras, there is some much information from a K1 image that the quality is clamped to the maximum that can be rendered by a small display because on a 4k (or HD) display of 10bit depth, a lot of the details and depth is lost. Yet, we don't always need excellent image quality, sometimes we want to take a snapshot to send it to someone as a mean of communication, and in that case, the camera phone is practical.
There is less value to shooting with a K-1 (or any larger sensor camera) if you insist on using straight of camera jpegs. The beauty of larger sensors is what you say -- there is more information there. But that is only realized through bumping shadows, dodging, burning and selectively sharpening. To me, part of post processing is flattening an image to the point that it can be revealed fairly easily on a normal screen or print. The detail is there, but even good jpeg engines don't do a very good job of selectively adjusting your image.

This is nothing new. If you read Ansel Adams' trilogy of books, you find in The Negative him giving detailed instructions as to how he developed images in order to maximize their impact. He certainly was a good photographer, but he kept copious notes on how he wanted to work on each negative to get the most out of it.
06-23-2018, 04:37 AM   #41
Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,065
Everyone here seems to be focusing on quality of the final image - seemingly assuming that such a thing exists. When I was traveling with my daughter a couple of years ago, she asked me to quickly take a picture as we drove along; the only "camera" I had at hand was my smart phone, and it could not focus in time .... the picture she had wanted was basically gone by the time it was ready to take the picture. I don't have experience with a Galaxy, but my experience with smart phones in general is that they have trouble focusing when motion is involved - the specialized processors used on "real cameras" seem to handle this job much better.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, camera vs pentax, hand, images, k1, limitations, pentax, phone, photo industry, photography, s9 camera vs, samsung s9 camera
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K1 Vs K1 Mk2 Mallee Boy Pentax K-1 50 05-17-2018 09:00 AM
K-5 vs MZ-S vs LX vs PZ-1p vs ist*D vs K10D vs K20D vs K-7 vs....... Steelski Pentax K-5 2 06-28-2017 04:59 PM
Enthusiast vs Prosumer vs Semi Pro vs Pro vs APSC vs Full Frame mickyd Pentax DSLR Discussion 10 11-12-2013 07:14 PM
Camera comparison: One X vs Galaxy S II vs Nexus vs N8 vs iPhone 4S jogiba Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 3 04-12-2012 07:41 AM
Samsung Techwin's camera biz is now Samsung Digital Imaging and its NX plans. samsung Pentax News and Rumors 3 03-13-2009 08:42 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:52 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top