[zzeitg]

Plus they are small and light and probably in your pocket.

Well, from another point of view, that's the only reason why I occasionally use the phone's camera (= it's in my pocket).

If I intentionally go out to take photos, I take my K-1, K-3 or K-7.

(Still looking for a compact "always with me" camera. Maybe Zeiss ZX1 - if they ever put it on the market (?))

[BigMackCam]

It's worth looking at the iPhone XS / XS Max sample gallery over at DPR:

iPhone XS / XS Max sample gallery: Digital Photography Review

Examining the various shots zoomed in, predictably the best results are in good light at low ISO. Here, they're very good for a phone camera, though it's obvious that NR is applied even at base ISO. As light weakens and the ISO creeps up, detail is lost to NR, and things begin to look rather painterly. Of course, these are JPEGs, so it should be possible to squeeze out a bit more image quality and balance the NR vs detail better by shooting raw and developing by hand...

[hjoseph7]

Fen, I myself was shocked by the images that came out of an iPhone and this was several years ago ! I was attending a luncheon sponsored by my day-job and I had my Pentax K-5 IIs with with Pentax 31mm f1.8. A colleague of mine showed me some pictures he had been taking with his iPhone. All of them where perfectly exposed and sharp. Considering we were in very dim lighting and he wasn't using flash, the pictures looked great. No fiddling around with aperture and shutter speed, no research on where the light was coming from, no Tripod/Monopod, just click, click, click and the pictures came out looking great ! Tell you the truth, I felt a little embarrassed carrying all that "expensive" gear. After the luncheon we compared images and lucky for me the pictures from the Pentax combination 31 mm lens won out, but not by much. I'm not sure what algorithms these iPhone use but maybe Canon, Nikon, Pentax, etc. should start taking a look. The problem with the iPhone is when it comes to printing and blowing up the image. Although the newer models have more megapixels, I could barely print a decent image past a 5x7 with my iPhone 5. Another problem is creativity and control. The other day I was at a horse race-track. There were a bunch of people with their iPhone's out taking pictures of the horses as they raced by. I said to myself NO WAY ! Come to find out that the highest shutter speed on an iPhone 6 is 1/10,000 of a second ! No that is not a typo 1/10,000 of a second. SCARY ...

[Dartmoor Dave]

It's worth looking at the iPhone XS / XS Max sample gallery over at DPR:

There's also a phone photos thread here on PF, containing abundant evidence that talented photographers can often get better photos with their phones than the untalented would get with any amount of high-end gear: The Phone Club! - Page 58 - PentaxForums.com

Of course, I'm still using the same Nokia 3510 that I bought in 2001, so my phone hasn't even got a camera. None of my cameras have got phones either.

[mickey]

Mobiles are good fun.
Nowhere near the enjoyment of a digital slr.
A world apart from the enjoyment i have with my ME Super.

A mobile phone will always be for snapshots as far as i am concerned, regardless of so-called quality.

Each to their own.

[texandrews]

Phone: Samsung Galaxy Note 9, DXO 107 rating for stills

360: Ricoh Theta Z 1, Theta V

Dedicated cameras: Pentax K1U2; Pentax 645Z; Pentax WG series (older model)

Since I am shooting across a variety of formats, I'll weigh in here.

The phone is very handy, very capable. I use it for all of my snaps, and I use it in professional circumstances at the museums I work in for quick documentation of installation details and for condition reporting on occasion. For instance, just yesterday and the day before I used it to augment existing shots as I was rewriting a manual for glass door installations between gallery spaces (we use and re-use them, and they have special closers that are ADA compliant). For documenting these installation details, the camera is mostly adequate. It's also pretty good for documenting some condition issues.

The 360 cameras do things no other cameras can do, and add the element of end-user interaction. A new world, and I am very keen on developing this for my museum work, both to give conservation/collections management abilities to see things they otherwise could not or would find very difficult, such as the interior of a bronze or other metal casting; to give installations/exhibits the ability to do the same, and add to that views of spaces in the building we have trouble accessing but must understand in order to assess suitability for attaching objects and structural supports, installing electrical components/systems, & etc; and to give our events, social media and web teams new media capabilities.

The little WG camera was specifically purchased for fishing---which I don't have much time to do anymore! It's just a snapper that can be used one-handed. Still better then a phone for this purpose.

The dedicated ILC cameras are for the highest quality work for both my professional and personal artistic practice. In a museum setting, only the best will do for certain projects, and the best must be had. I also prefer the K1U2 for better flexibility to document active installations, and it's a must have with flash for events. I use the Z for my personal art work, and for documentation of art and finished installations. Again, only the very best IQ is acceptable in these situations, so the Z edges out the K1U2, while for events the K1U2 edges out the Z.

Horses for courses. That's really all there is to it.

[gofour3]

They don’t do anything better than what they replaced except inadequately emulate several better dedicated devices in one portable package.

Exactly and all the people who only listen to music on a smartphone, have no idea what they are missing compared to a home audio system.

Phil.

[ThorSanchez]

I've been in photography since the 1970s, used many different cameras, some rudimentary, some very sophisticated. I have an iPhone 8, and can't (won't?) use the camera on it. The user interface is horrible, and unintuitive, and I'm damned if I'm going to take the time to figure it out.
For instance; to take a picture, I need to push a button, the only button on the phone takes me out of the camera mode when I push it. This to me is a major flaw in logic, ergonomics and user interface.

I'm a Mac user from way back, and generally like the way they do things, but that part of their phone is lost to me. I don't care how good the camera is if I can't use it.

I just took my Android phone (a Pixel 1) from my pocket, woke it up, hit the camera icon, and took a photo. I timed it. It was six seconds. That's roughly the same time it takes me to pick up my K-3ii, turn it on, and (if the settings are to my liking at default) take a photo.

[Wheatfield]

.
Last month I visited my brother in Phoenix Arizona USA. We went on many nature hikes. As usual, I brought along a camera, and my brother (who also loves to photograph) brought along his camera.

On this trip I took my new Panasonic micro 4/3rds camera and a couple lenses (20mm, 90mm). My brother shot his smartphone, the latest offering from Samsung.

To my surprise, he got more keeper images than I did, and his best images were better than my best images were!

Unless you've done a side-by-side shoot against the latest smart phone cameras from iPhone/Google/Samsung, you have no idea how far their built in cameras have evolved. I've got an iPhone 6, and it's images are a far cry from those now produced by the iPhone 10 XS!


Check out this article where a professional printer talks about how the latest smartphone cameras are making image files that produce surprisingly good 30-inch by 40-inch prints. Also, the latest smart phones have great HDR and Panoramic capabilities, and have larger 12MP sensors that produce RAW files that can be editied in Lightroom mobile.

The gap is narrowing between smartphone images and big camera images.

Me, I intend to keep shooting my Pentax K-1's because I'm a bokeholic and love the DOF and 3D-pop I get from shooting fast lenses wide open on a full frame sensor.

Have you ever shot one of the latest smartphones? How does it's images compare with images from your big camera? What makes a big camera's images better than images from one of the latest smartphones?

This discussion comes up daily on DPR. They always turn out to be troll threads. Just sayin’.

I bought a Huawei P20 Pro last year, which, at the time, had the best camera in a cell phone. It has been surpassed this year by the Huawei P30 Pro. These things are evolving the same way DSLRs were 15 years ago.

You Americans don’t know what you are missing if you think the cameras in iPhone/Google/Samsung are the best there is. They are just the best you can get.
Huawei teamed up with Leica for their cell phone cameras. It makes one wonder how long it will be before you poor sods have to pay a 25% tariff to get Leica cameras, but I digress.

The stuff I get from my Huawei cell phone is excellent for a cell phone, substantially better than what is being produced by Apple/Google/Samsung. Some of it is the camera quality, some of it is the AI that the processor is using, but that quality is not in the same league as a 35mm DSLR and good lens such as the K1 and one of the newer D FA lenses.

Simply put, there is no replacement for real estate. Bigger sensors give a better image. Its a simple equation. AI can only do so much.

What is happening is that cell phones are picking off the low hanging fruit in the camera industry. They did away with P&S cameras a few years ago, and now that we are seeing genuine zoom lenses in them rather than the AI enhanced zooming that is done with multiple single focal length cameras (the Huawei P30 Pro has a real zoom lens), I expect small sensor bridge cameras to be next on the block.

Cell phone cameras are getting substantially better. Never is too big a word to use in relation to when they will get to the point they can outdo a full size DSLR, but the headstone for bridge cameras is on it’s way to the graveyard, and I don’t expect M43 will be around much longer. Cell phones don’t have to get better, they just have to get good enough to starve the camera industry to the point where there is a lack of viability.

This is what happened to P&S camera, it is what is happening to bridge cameras now, and it may well be what happens to M43 in the near future. Who knows, APS-S might become a thing of the past in a few years as camera companies start concentrating their dwindling resources on larger format cameras that have a sufficient quality edge to keep cell phones at bay for the moment.

Note that Panasonic has tossed their hat in the Full Frame ring, and our favourite brand appears to be moving ever more upscale to give them lots of room between them and cell phones. It may well be that it isn’t a coincidence that we aren’t seeing a K3II replacement. There may be more to this than just running out of prime numbers.

We are seeing real cameras being pushed to the fringes of the photographic marketplace.



---------- Post added 05-11-19 at 10:52 AM ----------

The question that I have to ask about smartphone photos is, is the imaging better, or is the electronic post processing better? So then the real question is, did you take a good photo, or did the phone make it good?

Did you take a good photo with your DSLR or did the in camera jpeg engine make it good?

---------- Post added 05-11-19 at 10:55 AM ----------

So, Paul... will you be choosing the iPhone XS or Huawei Mate 20?

It will have to be the IPhone. He can’t get a Huawei in his country.

[Take-5-JB]

It is difficult to slalom behind a kayak, and near impossible to run class III+ rapids in a ski boat.

I don't know...why don't we all wear gray clothes, white underwear, and flip-flops?

Smart car vs Lamborghini? Dancing the Tango vs shuffling around? Having knowledge of Tacitus versus knowing any of the Reality TV personalities.

Variety, thrill, personality, endeavor, understanding, using cognitive initiative.......

"Vulgar and inactive minds confound familiarity with knowledge, and conceive themselves informed of the whole nature of things, when they're shown their form or told their use." Samuel Johnson, "The Rambler: A periodical Paper" circa 1750-1752.

I don't know....maybe because its there.

JB

[Wheatfield]

Exactly and all the people who only listen to music on a smartphone, have no idea what they are missing compared to a home audio system.

Phil.

Did you know that if you put your cell phone in a cereal bowl the sound improves? It’s true. Try it sometime. The point that is being missed by all the Debbie Downers is that cell phones only need to be good enough at any particular task to make their convenience trump a lack of quality that may or may not be there.
Add a Bluetooth receiver to your stereo and the cell phone is as good as the CD player you have hooked up.
My truck can play internet radio via my cell phone. It beats the heck out of over air commercial radio. I have a decent enough JBL Bluetooth speaker that I can enjoy music from my cell phone in the house. I can add another if I want stereo.
Before you say that is fine but you have to add accessories to make your cell phone work properly, let me remind you that your turntable is useless without an amp and speakers.

Cell phones are biting chunks out of every home entertainment market in existence. They are trading convenience for quality to be sure, but that is the way it has always been.

[monochrome]

Did you know that if you put your cell phone in a cereal bowl the sound improves? It’s true. Try it sometime. The point that is being missed by all the Debbie Downers is that cell phones only need to be good enough at any particular task to make their convenience trump a lack of quality that may or may not be there.
Add a Bluetooth receiver to your stereo and the cell phone is as good as the CD player you have hooked up.
My truck can play internet radio via my cell phone. It beats the heck out of over air commercial radio. I have a decent enough JBL Bluetooth speaker that I can enjoy music from my cell phone in the house. I can add another if I want stereo.
Before you say that is fine but you have to add accessories to make your cell phone work properly, let me remind you that your turntable is useless without an amp and speakers.

Cell phones are biting chunks out of every home entertainment market in existence. They are trading convenience for quality to be sure, but that is the way it has always been.

I gave my daughter two of those speakers for Christmas. They fill her living space with pretty good sound. She has no other audio playback gear, unlike my house where I have a stack of components, tower speakers, secondary speakers and hidden cabling. Just for listening. And my Amp pairs with Bluetooth devices and WiFi. I will say the digital output is better heard in Direct Mode than profiled.

Then there’s the AV.

[StiffLegged]

I did read the article linked by the OP, and although the writer was impressed by the results from an iPhone XS, he also says "To be clear, the camera that took these files that impressed me so wasn’t showing me quality in detail and tonality that I’ve never seen before. In fact, quite the opposite—I’ve seen better and seen it often." I also think this discussion has been much like those from the days when digital was gaining traction among serious photographers.

One thing will never change – whether the photographer uses an iPhone, Huawei, DSLR, MILC, Leica rangefinder, or 8x10 film camera, the most important thing is the person behind the apparatus. It's not how much expensive gear we lug around, it's how we use what we have. Gearheads can make rotten photos as much as smartphone shooters.

[gofour3]

Did you know that if you put your cell phone in a cereal bowl the sound improves? It’s true. Try it sometime. The point that is being missed by all the Debbie Downers is that cell phones only need to be good enough at any particular task to make their convenience trump a lack of quality that may or may not be there.
Add a Bluetooth receiver to your stereo and the cell phone is as good as the CD player you have hooked up.
My truck can play internet radio via my cell phone. It beats the heck out of over air commercial radio. I have a decent enough JBL Bluetooth speaker that I can enjoy music from my cell phone in the house. I can add another if I want stereo.
Before you say that is fine but you have to add accessories to make your cell phone work properly, let me remind you that your turntable is useless without an amp and speakers.

Cell phones are biting chunks out of every home entertainment market in existence. They are trading convenience for quality to be sure, but that is the way it has always been.

Problem is the source material is compressed, CDs/LPs played on a decent audio system can bring out details that are missing from downloaded music files. (Unless you pay extra for uncompressed versions or upload CD's in an uncompressed format to your cellphone.) No comparison in music quality really and the difference is like watching TV with "coke bottle" glasses on.

However most people don't seem to buy CDs/LPs & audio components any longer, so yes the vast majority must not care.

I always enjoy having any visiting "Millennial" relatives listen to a CD/LP on my home reference audio system and see their reaction. Priceless....

Phil.

[surfar]

It has been surpassed this year by the Huawei P30 Pro. These things are evolving the same way DSLRs were 15 years ago.

And theres this about to happen


Samsung's 64MP camera phone sensor outmuscles any Canon or Nikon camera | Digital Camera World

---------- Post added 05-12-19 at 08:58 AM ----------

The Latest Smart Phones Are So Capable

Yes and becoming more so every new release.

the latest smart phone cameras from iPhone/Google/Samsung,

Huawei,as Wheatfield stated have the leading camera.They have obseleted all others at this point in time.