[Culture]

I know that people are worried that smart phones might take over dslr.
And I have seen really good pictures with smart phones. As to how much they have been processed to look like that I dont know.
But personally I cannot take any good pictures with smart phones. And I am yet to see any of my family and friends do this.

Yes they look good on small screens but once you put them on a computer screen all the noise and upsharp image becomes too real.

Then i think, this image could have been better if it was taken with a dslr. Dont even have to be a fancy dslr.

Is this your experience too or what has been your experience?

[madhurvyas]

I know that people are worried that smart phones might take over dslr.
And I have seen really good pictures with smart phones. As to how much they have been processed to look like that I dont know.
But personally I cannot take any good pictures with smart phones. And I am yet to see any of my family and friends do this.

Yes they look good on small screens but once you put them on a computer screen all the noise and upsharp image becomes too real.

Then i think, this image could have been better if it was taken with a dslr. Dont even have to be a fancy dslr.

Is this your experience too or what has been your experience?

I think smartphones are killing Point and shoot market, dslr's and mirrorless are way better then any mobile camera. I have used Nokia 808 and Nokia 1020, both produces very good 5mp images, which looks great even on computer screens, but there 38mp output is similar to any other Point and shoot camera's.
Smartphones with good camera is future (if they somehow improve battery life) atleast they can replace P&S.

[Edgar_in_Indy]

I think that smartphone pictures also benefit from some nice screens on the smartphones. I've noticed that pictures viewed on my phone (Samsung Galaxy S4) tend to have more pop and are more vivid than when viewed on other display devices. So smartphone pictures that are actually lacking in contrast and color get an artifical boost thanks to the screen.

[Clavius]

When we photographers really apply our photography skills whilst taking pictures with modern smartphones very good pictures can result from that. It's unfair to compare our - for example - DSLR shooting with our preferred shutter speed, f stop and carefull focussing on a tripod to "green-mode" handheld cellphone snaps. Put some care in it and cellphone pics are actually quite good. And when people say: "Nice picture. That K-3 of yours sure is a great camera." in reaction to your cellphone shot, is actually a very nice compliment. I started using my phone like a DSLR simply because I have my cellphone with me MUCH more often then my big fat DSLR and lens combo.

[TER-OR]

The phones will kill most P&S markets. They're nice enough because you always have it. We hear a lot of hand-wringing around the camera market, but it's always been a moving and evolving thing.

A person with an artistic eye will still take better shots with a cellphone than most people snapping images with no consideration of composition.

[6BQ5]

The real litmus test of smartphone based photography is how well does the image print. I've printed a few of my images taken with an iPhone 4 and an iPhone 5. At 4"x6" the prints look OK, especially those taken in good light. Going bigger than that quickly reveals the limited dynamic range and increased noise levels, especially at higher ISO settings.

[grhazelton]

The New Yorker magazine has had a couple of back cover ads taken with a cell phone. Excellent pictures, certainly in terms of composition. Technical quality? How much can be determined from an 8 1/2 x 11 magazine?

[pentaxian_tmb]

The real litmus test of smartphone based photography is how well does the image print. .

Depends on how you look at it. The target market for camera phones do not print photos. They upload them and view them on mobile devices. The only people I know (shutterbugs excluded) that "print" photos taken from camera phones are those doing so for elderly family members.

[stevebrot]

I have done some fairly credible work with my smartphone. (At least I think the images are credible.) I just consider it to be a tool with its own characteristics. My Samsung provides an 8Mpx image with decent sharpness that prints well. It is not easily worked with in PP, but that is the tradeoff. There is a thread on this site dedicated to smartphone images:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/76-non-pentax-cameras-canon-nikon-etc/170927-phone-club.html









Steve

[Sage97]

Depends on how you look at it. The target market for camera phones do not print photos. They upload them and view them on mobile devices. The only people I know (shutterbugs excluded) that "print" photos taken from camera phones are those doing so for elderly family members.

I agree. Other than pros, not very many people print anymore.

[Edgar_in_Indy]

I think the image-quality problem with camera phones is twofold. First, you generally have a sub-par sensor and optics. But secondly, I notice that most people have no idea of how important it is to keep a camera still to get a sharp image.

People seem to think that their phones just have a magical ability to take pictures and all the user has to do is frame the picture and tap the screen. I see people taking pictures while moving or walking, not making any effort to keep the camera still, and often one-handing it. Even with a good camera, these kinds of habits will hurt the final image.

[philbaum]

I have a Samsung Galaxy S4. Relatively large screen and pictures look fantastic on it. The controls are pitiful compared to any kind of real camera, however. Shutter is really slow to activate in low light. If i'd had the choice over again, i would have paid more attention to the camera part of the phone. I think with a little attention, smart phones could be improved a lot

[john5100]

I have an iPhone 5s and it works well as a P&S. It challenges me to take photos with a limited camera and see what I can come up with. It's no substitute but it's fun.


Downtown Library by John Rudolph, on Flickr

[disord3r]

I think smartphones are killing Point and shoot market

I think this is where it stops. A smartphone can probably emulate to great extent (and maybe greater) what can be done via software, but the hardware differences are where it's going to fall short. The sensor sizes, the physical controls, having interchangable lenses... I don't think the DSLR market would suffer too badly. If anything, it would keep manufacturers focusing on features and enhancements that matter to enthusiasts and professionals as opposed to things that help you take better selfies and and auto-upload to facebook and stuff like that.

[Sagitta]

Smartphones will kill the camera industry just like the budget Kodak Instamatics did the camera industry back in the... wait, no they didn't.

The better analogy would be "Smartphones will kill the point and shoot market the same way the Instamatics killed the Rangefinder industry" (and point and shoots killed the budget Instamatic industry).

The point is everything evolves, and rarely does so in a way in which whats new is worse than whats old.