Are you Team Camera, or Team Phone? Thanks to NordVPN for sponsoring this video 🌏 Get Exclusive NordVPN deal + 4 months extra here → nordvpn.com/microfournerds It’s risk-free with Nord’s 30-day money-back guarantee! 🙌
So that is not an easy answer. I consider a dedicated camera to be flat out better... but there is something to the old saying: the best camera is the camera you have.
Team camera. It's also that digital detox, when you're with your camera and go roaming the streets or forests or parks, that provides a feeling that a smartphone can't.
Team camera. It's so much easier to change your settings and achieve the look you want with a camera and you can be sure of the quality of the lens you add onto your camera.
When you started talking about multiple lenses and computational features on your phone I had a laugh, because my phone doesn't. I do though use my phone a lot for photography lately. To light mushrooms so I can take nice photos with my camera 😁 Definitely team camera!
Just bought a well used cheap looking D90 and 35 1.8 g lense for this same reasons, there's only so much one can do with a Smartphone, very handy for assembly and disassembly of components as a reference, interesting article, cheers Mike
For me, smartphone photos are like fast food in terms of convenience and quality (and the taste designed to please as many as possible with low quality ingredients). I only recently came back to digital cameras after a decade of phone-exclusive life, and already regret the past as if I've been only eating McDonalds the whole time.
Of course. Did you take pictures with your camera jpeg only? No? Most of the time, it's a raw, and you're processing your raw files. Out of camera jpeg is just boring. Did you try to shoot raw with your phone? No? The results are going to surprise you. Quality is good enough for most of the street photography - and it doesn't look over processed. Do you know that samsung has computational ND filters up to 1000, and it works with raw? Do you know that samsung has dedicated astrophotography mode thar works with raw, and results are close to the m43 (of course with a tripod)? There was a time period when the camera gave you an instant benefit. If you invested in a camera, you are a photographer. This time is gone. Now, you can either create content or not. No one cares about your camera. But if you are good with a smartphone, most probably you are going to be even better with a camera (if it's better than your phone). Things are more complicated now.
@@igorpust6400 I shoot RAW+JPEG all the time and find that many of my shots look great in JPEG and require very little in the way of post processing which works as well on a JPEG image as a RAW one. I'm an Olympus/OM System user, and they have a long reputation for beautiful JPEG images, but the JPEGs out of some cameras are not as pleasing to some users which is why some only shoot in RAW. I think is your point about smart phones - that their RAW files have more potential for post processing. Possibly, but by the nature of RAW images, they don't include all of the computational tricks smart phones use to make very usable JPEGs, and I wonder just how much additional work it would take in post - and how many would have those skills - to even duplicate the phone's JPEG engine output, much less improve on it. I think it would be a great to see a video about shooting the same challenging subjects on a phone and a MFT or larger sensor camera and then seeing just what could be done with either in post.
@@igorpust6400Yeah but camera users don't care that others don't care. It's the personal satisfaction you get and if others notice great.. For many a phone is good enough and don't care about ergonomics, manual physical controls, etc. That's just fine for them.
I guess the key takeaway is a good photographer can pretty much take a good photo with any camera. But for me, I’m Team Camera. Creative optical control, lenses, depth of field and yes, image quality are what I need. Sensor size, not so much. Because I’m also team MFT.
With a dedicated camera you simply have much more possibilities to play around, try different stuff. That's also how you will learn photography better. Using a dedicated DSLM/DSLR also improved how I take smartphone photos, because only then I got a better understanding/idea of composition etc.
Team phone: the Xiaomi 14 Ultra have an 1" sensor... Team câmera: a G80/85 with a zoom and a prime cost less then half... Both teams: lets take pictures🎉 PS, I'm team CÂMERA. Great video
The phone camera is like a blender, microwave and airfryer. Dedicated camera with manual controls is like a knife, frying pan and stove top. Would Gordon Ramsey make better food than me in all scenarios? Most definitely. Would I make better food with the "manual" setup? Equally definitely.
The biggest disadvantage besides the ones you mentioned about smartphone photography to me is the artificial look of a smartphone photo. I have yet to discover a smartphone where that's not the case, even when you shoot raw. Smartphones are always implementing some sort of computational photography that tries to enhance edges (achieving the opposite though). You'll often get away with it when viewed on a phone but on the big screen it looks like soup.
I find that too. I wonder if i either need a better phone, or all phone photos are like that and they're just designed to look good on a screen at a small size on social media
i think the main issues causing the "artificial" look are the fact that there's so much noise due to the typically smaller sensor, there is really a much lower level of detail than would be acceptable in most cases (so you have to try hard to compensate with processing), plus the fact that main phone lenses are almost always like ~4mm focal length and shorter, which means even at f/1.8 (many phone camera lenses are here) it keeps everything in focus in almost all situations, including the far away things with even lower amounts of detailed captured than the close-up subjects... doesn't help that adding more megapixels in a sensor so small doesn't help unless they work in tandem at a lower effective megapixel resolution to basically "subsample". and overall because the parts are so small it's way more difficult to get the parts like the lenses to be built with such high quality as with larger pieces of glass (as i've generally seen, the smaller the lens, the worse the image quality tends to become)
@@MicroFourNerds you need an Android phone with a big sensor (bigger than 1/1.5") that allows the camera2 API (so, no Samsung) and a good camera app that works with the camera2 API. There are some cameras apps that are simple, with full manual controls, like ProShot, ProCamX, FirstLight or Pixtica, and deliver raw image. There are free apps but the user interface is horrible (HedgeCam2 and OpenCamera). Even more, there is an app called MotionCam that allows you to fine tuning the raw (yeah, any raw have some processing even in pro mirrorless cameras). Some warning: - The raw in some phones have a tint that messes with the skin tones. In my basic Oppo is a green tint, in my midrange Xiaomi is a magenta tint only in low light. It depends on the sensor. - Most smartphone sensors deliver only 10bit raw, so not too much latitude, few of them deliver 12bit and only a pair of them deliver truly 14bit. That's for speed, the phone need light raw to process the HDR and other computational things and stack several shots in 10bit is far lighter and enough for smartphone standards.
Smartphone manufacturers seem to not realize that having shadows is a good thing. They don't always have to be boosted into oblivion. Also I just really dislike the feel of shooting on a phone, it's awkward and using any manual controls is just irritating. I can change all settings on my cameras without even looking at controls, I can have my eye at the viewfinder the whole time and change whatever I need. Also forget shooting waist level, ground level, or above your head with any accuracy. Am I glad I have my phone to take quick snapshots and capture my daughter on a daily basis? Of course. But I don't have any pics that go in nice albums or on my wall that came from a phone. There's no comparison in quality, intention, and feel.
This is why I user older iPhones and iPods as cameras. The iPhone 4S and iPod Touch 5th gen (both 5mp) dont over-sharpen and HDR everything to death. They are cheap, small and light compared to modern smartphones and make a great alternative to a "digicam". I know the 3GS has been very popular over the last year for its old school "retro" vibe. They have gotten a bit too pricey though.
Hi! For myself, as someone who wants to take up photography only as a fun hobby and way to document my life and have a little creative outlet, the biggest deterrent to buying a camera was the cost when I already had a phone in my pocket at all times that can take decent photographs. But for so many of the reasons you mentioned: the tactile experience, being able to photograph without the distractions of a phone, having more creative freedom and control with different lenses, etc. I went did buy a camera and I am so glad I did. After watching so many of your videos I went ahead and bought myself a small old micro four thirds camera on ebay for cheap and I am having just an absoltue joy of a time with this new hobby. Thanks for all of the time and thought you put in to your videos:)
Even 15 year old point n shoots look better than my iPhone photos. Also just the experience of using the camera is much more fun than using a smart phone. Team camera here all the way.
I have the opposite experience: People get suspicious/defensive of you while brandishing a dedicated camera(exactly because they recognise you as a photographer, you must have some ulteriror motive or be some sort of pervert, i've had people demand of me to "delete the photo of their child" while i was pointing the camera in a different direction and upwards, and didn't even take the shot cuz they walked into it), and not even bat an eye if someone just stops to take a phone picture.
Depending on where you live there should be no expectation of privacy in a public place. It's a coin toss between them being unrealistic and how you present yourself and your professional image. I have laminated sheets with important stuff highlighted. I've been threatened for flying my drone and my response is I'm licensed and insured and to speak with me after my commissioned flight. If they refuse and cause an accident with the aircraft (yes a drone is considered an aircraft) it is a felony and I will press charges they will be arrested. I tell them to look at the laminated sheets and call the police department and wait for them. They have always walked away from me after that and left me alone. Be aware of your surroundings and laws and you should be fine.
The situation is pretty fluid. About fifteen years ago, people were very paranoid about photography in places like the UK, and you would have retail establishments with signs - not always very prominent - forbidding photography. Fast forward into the age of mass idiocy, however, and those same establishments not only tolerate people waving their phones around, but they have actually constructed dedicated spots encouraging picture-taking and sharing on "the socials".
Agree completely - I know several people with cameras who have been challenged in that way, quite often by security guys who usually haven't a clue about the law, and also Brian James , "That M43 guy" on TH-cam was verbally abused by a young girl because he unintentionally caught her in his photo - quite scary and as several people commented, unlikely to have happened if he'd been using a phone. Perhaps if we find ourselves in that situation using a camera, we should take it as a kind of back handed compliment.
I feel the same way, no one cares if you are on your phone, but if you pull out a real camera people are like “what’s this for?” I at least feel more nervous if someone is in a shot I am taking with a dedicated camera. That is why I think this video was so great, because I don’t really think it is a team debate, as mentioned everyone always has a phone, so if I were to go to a restaurant, I might just use my phone instead of the camera. They work really well together, quick or discrete shots using phone, and fun, slower shots using the dedicated camera.
the main two reasons for me is that 1- i am very slow if i am not using tactile buttons. despite being a gen y (1987) and using smartphones since they are invented, i am very slow making the adjustments on touch screen, thus i generally miss the moment when i use touch screen controls. 2- i need an OVF or EVF to be able compose properly, i also have a little sony digicam i use a lot, and i still sometimes use my phone to shoot but results are composionally horrible in general so i only use them to snap every photos which i take to document things rather than artsy photos.
The specific thing that keeps me going back to cameras is the loss of low contrast environmental detail on phones. Here in BC that often means distant forests on mountainsides just falling apart into gray-green smears that suggest trees, but aren't really. And that's before you get into the world of lenses - lens choice, lens character and what they bring to the image. Nevertheless, I have my bases covered with my phone, Panasonic G9 and a Canon 5D classic for scratching the occasional full frame itch.
I specifically bought a camera to take a deeper breath, focus more on the process of taking a photo. Its a hobby to me and having no distractions makes it more fun to me. Besides that, even if i do things perfectly my phone sometimes makes images look like pants. The colours are all over the place sometimes and the main lens is wahaaay too wide i think.
i got myself an lx100 to take on trips and family stuff and the like, because of a few things - it doesn't oversharpen and blowout the shadows in my photos, the pictures have depth to them rather than the "everything is in focus" look, i can use the evf which makes it feel way more intentional, and it's absolutely beautiful to look at itself. i will always take my camera if my intention is to take "nice" pictures.
The best camera is the camera you always have around. For most of the time that would be my phone. But shooting with my phone, though I get some decent shots feels joyless. It's like owning an EV. It gets the job done bringing me back and forth but I do miss driving a manual internal combustion car. It's about how it feels. How tactile something can be and how that communicates with you. A dedicated camera is a joy to use. I recently got a used GX85 because of this channel and I found the love for photography again. No need to swipe menus to change setting when I can turn dials and click buttons. The sound of the mechanical shutter does the same joy for me as the start of our old gas car.
What a thorough discussion and I flatter myself that I would have said the same things. To me the computational photography on a phone is astounding in what it does to overcome the small sensor limitations. However the phone is an ergonomic nightmare as a camera and I make an image with it despite the device not because of it. And it is missing a mechanical shutter which, with a camera on a quiet day, gives a quiet little echo in my mind back to the 19th century.
Well I use both, phone and cameras, depending on the moment, the type of photo I'm taking, or the need to shoot very quickly. But I prefer using the camera. I'm an old school photographer: I did learn with a film SLR in my hands, hence using a camera is to me the "natural way" of taking photos.
Years ago I got a Sony Xperia SP and I've always loved how it have a dedicated shutter button with a proper and tactile half-press to focus function. The phone's sensor and performance itself is nothing to write home about, but that shutter button was the gateway into my love for tactile controls; I predictably carry a Fuji camera now paired with a manual focus lens.
I have micro hand tremors, so I have a 1 stop debuff on shutter speed with phones; everything looks blurry and grainy due to the shake + ISO bump. I do not have such a problem with my R6II + any IS lens.
I’m totally in that crossover that you mentioned…if I want a bigger sensor than a phone, why not get the camera with the bigger sensor? If I am gonna dig a camera out of my bag, why not get as many options as possible? I can crop in on a full frame, I can’t do the opposite with a crop sensor. I think all the benefits of getting a dedicated camera are also the reasons why you would want to get a bigger sensor. For me, it’s a nice barbell strategy, phone for convenience, S5IIx for more dedicated stuff. I don’t think a tiny camera can compete with the phone for convenience, or the FF for dedicated camera experience, and I only mean that in the sense that it makes compromises that I have no need to make if I have already decided to carry a dedicated camera. One other thing is that I think you made some great points, but it also can be the opposite, sometimes people are more concerned when you pull out a camera, but they are very accustomed to people on their phones taking photos. I feel more nervous walking around with a camera on a strap than i do carrying a smart phone (especially as there is so little point in stealing iPhones anyway). The one other point, is that they can be very synergistic, just because you are taking a picture using your phone, doesn’t mean that you have to be using the stock camera app, some of the apps let you control shutter speed and ISO, and aspect ratio, etc (not aperture typically), but I think a phone is the perfect first camera to learn on to see if you even like photography. For me, once I decided to jump in, I wanted to jump straight to the S5IIx. I do love your videos, you are so balanced and reasonable!
7:30 A battery bank is nice. I have iWalk Spartan Powerbank 13000mAh battery bank, I had it for years, it's heavy, but works. But the cable included is fragile, and the included compass doesn't work properly and cover for ports will fall off after few years. This year I got Upio Tricharge, for my Sony NP-FZ100 batteries. So I bring that instead now, unless I might need other batteries for my camera as camera battery is low and phone is low.
Team camera, also micro 4/3. I like the size and it's fun to carry around. Great vacation camera, and it's just nice to have a little control over your pictures.❤
I’m a full frame user with the largest digital photography camera, the canon 1dx. Sometimes I use my phone in emergency situations where I need a wider field of view. The images on the phone just feel too digital, especially if I view them on a larger screen. Phone pictures suffer from lack of dynamic range and over sharpening. I tried shooting raw on phone. For the love of god don’t do that. Just use the default app with auto settings. Phones use software trickery for a reason to increase dynamic range and resolution. A single raw exposure that is edited still looks inferior to a jpeg using the native app with auto settings. M43 is the sweet spot of you want something compact and still have good files.
One thing no one talks about is viewing the screen. My eyes are at an age where even with multifocal lenses I cannot readily go from the viewfinders to the screen. If I’m out shooting I’m wearing glasses for mid-distance viewing so cameras that have no viewfinder are challenging to use as I can’t comfortably hold them far enough away to see what the screen . This means putting a lot of faith in the AF to get what I want (talking to you S9). However I can adjust the diopter on a viewfinder to accommodate the glasses I’m wearing. Phones do have a larger more useable screen but it is a device designed for arms-length use and I’m not convinced that camera manufactures really consider this aspect of the camera system (looking at you Olympus). A smaller screen with small fonts and complex icons is not a great user experience.
Very fair and balanced take. Nice. Having said that, I feel that phone pics start to breakdown in terms of realism once you start zooming them. I rarely get a genuinely good image in a phone that is not somehow computerized/artificial/forced.
To me, in my personal opinion, using a phone to take a picture feels soulless. It's like driving a Tesla instead of a manual transmission classic car. I like using a camera for the full experience of taking a picture
@@BobbiRae-p7q I think much of that 'souless' feeling is not hearing and feeling the vibration from a physical shutter. With an electronic shutter it feels more like you just captured a still frame from video rather than a photograph. Which is why I'm not a fan of electronic only shutters.
6:12 With a proper protective case, screen protector you can drop it hundreds of times and it will be fine. I went for Nillkin Camshield, to protect the lenses, it lasts 2 or 3 years, before the door opens on it's own. But other cases exist.
I generally reserve my phone for snapshots and documentary purposes. I occasionally do that with my camera too, but I'm wayyyyy more likely to seek out a composition and be deliberate with my decisions when I have my camera in my hand. I just never feel the urge to do all that with my phone. Maybe that's why I take my camera everywhere.
Yep, always have a "real camera" in my pocket, or in a small bag (in the summer when it is too hot). Try taking a photo directly over your head with a phone. Or from your feet. Also taking pictures of anything fast moving. Thanks.
My Pixel 9 pro will never replace my good old Gx9 with the 12-32. Phone camera app apply a treatment even to RAW files, I've had to use a 3rd party app to get the true RAW data from the sensor. Phone image quality depends on the sensor you are using, with a dedicated camera, you get the same quality from wide to zoomed focal length, true color temperature and tint control.
It’s all about optics, I have a Blackmagic pocket cinema camera that replicates 16mm film, but I can shoot raw onto a drive using a iPhone but it all comes down to optics.
Well... why not use both? I have a gx9 with 25mm 1.4. Im contemplating whether to get a wide angle zoom or a telephoto zoom. My phone, oneplus 12, can take really good pictures given it's below 85mm. I might just save money (can only afford one lens anyways) and get myself a telephoto zoom.
My entire channel is all about that 😊 here are some recent videos with good recommendations th-cam.com/video/boLQhQ5X4ZU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=kTycJQtxCXbBVOAV th-cam.com/video/dWUMiLcuUV4/w-d-xo.htmlsi=x6Z4wGSmzEwxoOY2
I specifically purchased the phone I have because of the camera. However, I rarely use it. The ergonomics suck. Only the main sensor is any good, but too wide most of the time, and the RAWs aren't really RAW. Accessories might help, but would I carry them with me? Moreover companies that make accessories dont realize Android phones exist.
"Why play video games at home when you can just play mobile games" Same shit, these people are just idiots. They never cared and they never will, they enjoy a purposeless life with no real intention. Everything is handed to them from their phone. Why meetup in real life when we can just text?
When I used to run my photographic store, we printed a lot of images, especially holiday and family shots. I could always tell the phone ones, as they had halos/fuzzy due to fingerprints on the lens
Since getting my iPhone 15 Pro - my first iPhone with a very good camera system - I've discovered it make a useful second camera. For instance, I was in Budapest recently and I stuck my 55-200mm lens on to my trusty EOS M5 when we visited the zoo. I was able to get up close to the glass for small animals and insects with the iPhone that I just couldn't with a telephoto attached. Likewise, with the 18-55mm "walkaround" lens attached when wandering the city, sometimes it wasn't wide enough, but the iPhone was.
Team Camera. I do have a phone, but after a year of trial and mostly error i gave up and got myself a proper smol camera that takes some of my favorite photos so far.
Of course small sensor less blur that's due to the real focal length of phone cameras. On my old HTC U12+ (probably there's not much difference in modern smartphones) the actual focal length of the main camera was 4mm. The "telephoto" lens was a whopping 6mm haha. You cant get natural bokeh with a smartphone considering that 8mm is considered fish-eye on most cameras. Well actually you can, on very close subjects, which the small lens of a smatphone allows you do to, macro(ish) stuff. Another advantage for M43 vs full frame, macro, more stuff in focus :D
I want a phone with an interchangeable lens mount. The flange distance with the NX mini mount was only 6mm (so a mount could still put only a couple of mm with sensor only being 4mm inside the phone). Such a shame that Samsung didn't persist with it.
This is such a good video and I'm SO glad to have seen this just now. I started getting into photography over the last 4 years exclusively on smartphones (Pixel 4a then 6a) and have learned a ton about editing and not so humbly lol think I've made some pretty great images. I've been a very vocal proponent and firm believer in mobile photography yet all this time I'm still nagged by the desire for a "real" camera, but money is a real issue. Not only does this video let me feel better about remaining with my device until I can comfortably afford the equipment, it really does clarify exactly why I should or should not upgrade. This helps immensely to stop the nagging feeling because now I have a much better understanding of exactly what I'm missing or not missing. It seems like a small thing but it's seriously helpful. Thank you so much. Oh also I'm really appreciating that I'm finding more and more info like this that's showing me that I don't necessarily need to spend an ENTIRE months rent to get started with a dedicated camera.
I didn't take a dedicated camera with me on a trip to SE Asia last year , just used a pixel 3 phone, was pretty surprised at the shots it took and the overall percentage that were great, I missed having a wide angle type setting and bought a camera with a lens for that for a trip to Japan in a week, I have a pixel 6 now and just noticed it has a 0.7x zoom , wide angle shot.....still taking the camera but wish I had discovered that sooner.....
I've had several phones that captured really nice images (either SOOC or using a GCam mod), but only two of them were good to shoot with: the LG G3 and the LG G4. The G4 had a brilliant RAW shooting mode where you had very quick and easy access to manual focus, shutter speed and white balance, and both were quick and responsive, so were great for discreet street photography. Later phones had more processing power and made use of computational photography to take quite impressive low light, astro and fake shallow dof portraits that might fool you for a moment. This was great, but none of them were nice to use. You just didn't really have real control. You are so right in saying it's the little things that make a difference. It's the lovely buttons and dials, the tilting screen, the viewfinder, the weight and heft of the camera body. Then there's the proper lenses! Last but not least: no distractions! So it's a no from me to those commenters. Why would I just use my phone when I can use a little MFT powerhouse instead? I'd rather enjoy the excellent balance of small size, good image quality, great handling and complete control that my MFT camera gives me, but thanks anyway.
2 days ago I went to print a 50x70 canvas, sure was happy I shot that one on a 24mp full frame camera on the highest setting. Tried to do that with a phone photo, it didn't go that well...
An important thing that never seems to come up on the Phone vs Camera debate (though it plays into ergonomics) is safety straps. Cameras by default have them. Whether its a neck strap, a side sling or even a wrist strap there is something between you and dropping your camera 40 feet onto a rocky outcropping, into a river or a lake, or preventing your photo device from being the Gorrila's favorite new toy at the local Zoo. I know of a few daring photographers who take off straps of all kinds because they annoy them. I am not one of them. I've dropped my phone so many times from just casual use. I don't need to be even more prone to drop it while gripping it in a manner its not normally gripped in order to get a better more stable photo. Give me a grip for my fingers, and a strap over my wrist, chest or neck. Those are my requirements on Team Camera.
I'm team camera when I have one with me, otherwise I'm team phone. And video is photography as well, you didn't discuss which one is better for video. Great video, thanks for sharing.
Even with the newest smartphones, they still tend to take pictures that look as though shot through thick glass. Sure, they get bumped up automatically in post, but often there’s just something off about colours and detail. A camera also wins in ergonomics. Physical controls beat touchscreens every time.
Or as a certain commercial has taught me: why not both? I got my m43 camera that i use to take higher quality pics and where i try to think about composition and stuff like that. On the other hand, I use my phone for the more silly stuff like funny street signs and such. In some cases it´s easier to quicky get out my phone and take a pic in 1 second and in other cases it works better with a camera to take some times to get the composition and things like that right. If you can´t pick between 2 choice, always go for the 3th one 😊
I am fortunate to have Xperia 1 VI and RX100 VII. The phone takes really nice pictures, realistic, not oversharpened or oversaturated. Exactly opposite to iPhones or Samsungs. Great macro, waterproofing, faster adjustments of settings on a touch screen and being invisible on the street are main advantages but RX100 offers way better image quality in every situation. To be fair, good light makes the gap slightly smaller. Between those two it is convinence vs fun (if we forget about quality).
หลายเดือนก่อน
I use cameras to photograph people that are important to me. Other things like landscapes, buildings, food etc.... that are mostly photographed by me to share online and delete I shoot with a phone. So the determining factor for me is how important the subject is (subjectively). Simple as that. It took me over 45 years to come to this conclusion. But now my life is a joy! LOL :)
Well said, Em. I find myself in team both. I don't find taking pics with my phone an enjoyable feat, but it gets things done and works best on certain occasions (like when documenting my daughter's first step or taking a group photo on a casual hang out with friends). But when I go travelling, I always carry my Fujifilm camera to get the images I know I want. That being said, it still blows my mind to find that people are still arguing camera vs smartphone. Just use whatever tool that works best for you and have a great day, people 😁
It's like comparing a multi-tool to a proper wrench or screwdriver. The multi-tool is certainly capable of getting some small jobs done and has the advantage of being small and portable, but it's not able to replace the toolbox once things get a little more serious.
Just grabbing my "camera" that has no optical zoom, can't simultaneously use the screen and best lens to take holiday selfies with the family, can't flip up the screen for low angle shots so have to get into the dirt, has no tactile controls to get ready for shots while powered down, really wants ideal lighting to maintain quality, can't quickly swap batteries out for 100% charge but rather needs a power bank plugged in, probably can't swap in more storage when full, has no custom modes to quickly get settings dialed in for a sudden shot of the pets being silly, has to be updated every year because it was loaded with bloat to artificially shorten the product lifecycle, won't stop pinging me with doom scroll ad seeking or work notifications while I'm out and about, and for a reasonable quality one I've shelled out as much or more than any compact camera that comes packed with better dedicated features and usually a larger sensor. I can watch TH-cam on it though. Absolute lemon. 🤦
If you're trying to use your phone like a camera Just get a camera. Because i don't really see my phone as anything but a computer with a camera on it. It's pretty okay as a camera but pretty good at literally anything else you use it for like a computer
I've used "proper" cameras for over 50 years - starting out working for a portrait photography studio. Since then, I've used all manner of cameras, as well as currently running a photography website. Recently I sold all my cameras apart from a Fuji bridgecamera. I've purchased a new generation smartphone as my primary camera as I am totally sick of carting around heavy cameras and extra lenses. Where I live, when out in public I get seriously eyeballed if I have a camera and a bigish lens on it - conversely a smartphone is discreet and goes unnoticed. As I approach 70, I don't need to be burdened with a bag full of gear, when a smartphone and when necessary, a small gimbal is all I need. For anything else I can use the bridgecamera. No more gear bag and other extras. I think we have to move past the idea that only a real camera can take a real photo. We no longer live in that world any longer and it's time to recognize that the smartphone is an excellent camera in its own way.
My preferred ‘pocketable’ camera is the Fuji X100-series. People enjoy to be photographed by it and I enjoy mastering all exposure. However, it’s not always in my pocket and then I am allways happy with my phone. Or when I have both and I want to make a more wide-angled photograph ‘because the church doesn’t fit into my Fuji..’
A very smart, enjoyable high-level view. I use three formats: iPhone 15 Pro is stupendous for Apple ProRes RAW song video clips. The APS-C Canon R50 gives insane portraits at 300/2.8 equivalent with the EF 70-200/2.8 L II. The Canon R6 is wonderful for theater events needing 1/500-plus in low light (Adobe's Denoise AI is crazy good). That said, Tyler Stalman's Peru iPhone 16 Pro video is super.
I use my phone when it is a photo where getting it right the first time is more important than getting a good looking shot (e.g. back lit shots, shots of kids/pets moving around or even just big groups that's hard to wrangle, super wide) but will take my camera out if I have the time to actually think about the shot and adjust for the lighting, framing. Phone for function, camera for art.
I use my iPhone 12 mini a lot. For work mainly. But I have some “real” photos also. Good for landscape in good light. Good for video. Obviously not for long telephoto work or shallow DOF portraits. I won’t ever carry a camera for in-case. But when I have pre-meditated plans, then I get the camera. If your phone photos look artificial it’s probably not a good phone camera
What is the difference in size between the GM1 and the GX850? If the GM1 had a tip-up rear LCD like the GX850, I'd buy one in a heartbeat. I'd also give the GX850 serious consideration if it was (is?) available in the US. Do you know if the GX850 was marketed by Panasonic under a different model number in the US? Neither of these cameras need IBIS since Panasonic offers OIS in their 12-32mm zoom and their Lumix G X Vario PZ 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 zoom lenses. Tell us more, Emily. I'm old school and definitely Team Camera.
So the other model names for that camera are: GX800 GX850 GF9 I did a little comparison video between the different smaller lumix cameras recently. You will be able to see lots of size comparisons to the gm1 in the video 😊 th-cam.com/video/boLQhQ5X4ZU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=rnBRx7RlLgR0t9fp th-cam.com/video/boLQhQ5X4ZU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=rnBRx7RlLgR0t9fp
100 percent. I am team camera, but only because I've made attempts to ditch it all and go phone only, even spending on the latest Samsung flagship only to be greatly disappointed with trying to push or pull the RAW files and the limitations posed by the device.
I extended my smartphone 120mm tele to 720mm. The result surprised me, the ai within the phone did a good job with the building structure and the letters on a huge poster, but not good at all on the image in the poster. Cameras are improving very slowly while smartphone are improving by leaps and bounds.
For me the benefits of using a phone are (a) the speed with which I can go from taking it out my pocket to photo taken, and (b) it's discrete - most people don't pay attention to someone holding a phone whereas they would a phone. If neither of those matter, my GM1 is my everyday carry and gives so much more easy control over composition than the phone camera can.
I have been without a camera for so many years, but working, life, kids, stopped me from going back to "photography" now I'm retired and one of the first things I did was..... buy a camera (G9) !! Said that I shot with my wife's phone for many years, if you know "Light-Subject-Composition" you can take some great pictures, if you learn tecniques I used to use on my Nikon F1 (breathing on your lens, panning, short movements and on and on) the phone can be great. I took some good "impressionist" photos and even some great Street. But beware, your brain will ALWAYS say: wish I had a camera for this, wish I had a tripod, wish I could put 3 seconds or "B" wish I had a decent zoom and on and on..
I much prefer a camera. The over sharpened is often really terrible. I do like the computational aspect for sure. Snapping a photo at night and getting something usable is always great, compared to when it takes 1-2 minutes to set up my camera and tripod. In some cases it might be the only option as well depending on outside variables.
It's the image, not necessarily the image quality (down to a certain point). My only sale to date was a photograph taken with my smart phone whilst my two cameras were taking time lapses of a tidal bore, so therefore unavailable. The buyer would not be aware of how I'd taken the photo but was clearly happy with the image itself.
Down here in the Southwestern USA the strong bright sun makes it hard for me to use a rear screen on a good camera or a phone screen for composing. Viewfinders only. Depending on the assignment and conditions, I will often grab one of my trusty DSLRs. My 76 year old eyes appreciate it.
Team camera…but I do use my phone a lot, simply because it’s almost always accessible and fast! I still prefer to use a camera when I want to get the best photos or video (video on iPhone quite good however and likely meet most needs for me). For zooming in…absolutely a camera!
I'm team camera but I still get some amazing images from my phone. I love the experience of using a camera... especially the lack of notifications! My phone is a Sony b/c it gives the most camera-like experience for any phone on the market imo. It's a bit like watching a movie on your laptop vs. a proper tv, they're both fine but one is easier to be immersed in the experience.
I actually dont consider the computational features on phones a plus, they tend to give that "phone look" to pictures. I do consider my phone as an assist in photography. For bulky film cameras that don't have a photometer I can compose my shot to check if it's worth it, and use a lightmeter app I'd I consider the shot is worth it.
Ι never bother taking images via my phone unless it's a "gotta keep that moment" situation and nothing else. That said I have no issues with anyone thinking otherwise. But I could never connect with my phone; it just doesn't feel right in my hand. And the image quality on most phones is just crap, my 2005 compact Olympus takes (much) better images than my 2023 android. Sure ...I could get an iphone! And spend 1500$ in order to get images no better than a pocket-size 2008 1/2,5" sensor camera that can now be found for 30$. So, no thanks. Not for me. Had I had the spare money I'd choose to get something really useful to add on my photography kit.
Team Camera for sure cause of the OVF/EVF. But if i dont have a camera on me, I use ProCam on my iphone so I have full control over the camera and shoot in raw.
Team camera. But, sometimes I onlyhave my phone. So, that is what I use, … but mostly just to capture a ‘record shot,’ a quick, best I could do under the circumstances shot, where I don’t care about an over processed jpeg/HEIF or RAW file with the inherent phone sensor limitations.
Hello Emily, I'm in agree with your analysis at least at 90%. I just have a different experience on how "people perceive" phones and Cameras. Here in Italy you can take pictures with phone in the street and remain totally invisible, while happen exactly the opposite with the camera. With a camera others see you like an alien! Shooting at a street, or aso in a park, may happen that someone come to you asking "why did you photograph me?" even if the pictur was made at the entire street/parc/green field.
My main photography interest is wildlife, and so there's no real comparison for me, and I can't really imagine there ever will be. You can't take a good, sharp, clear picture of a bird 100 meters away with a phone, you need a LOT of glass to get there. I suppose, at some point, you might see a phone that can connect to large lenses, but it might mean having a mount that would add so much size and bulk to the phone that it would lose the pocketable convenience that draws people to phones in the first place.
Larger sensors are better but the smaller sensors have also gotten better over time. Plus with newer noise reduction programs you can take some really good images. Within the same generation of cameras the larger the sensor will be better. But sometimes small sensors can be better for some special jobs.
I think convenience would be the biggest thing for why most would prefer a smartphone over a camera. I think though that some, not all, that advocate for such probably either don't understand or aren't really interested in photography as such, but they just want a camera with them for those special moments.
I take better photos with a viewfinder - preferably optical - to my eye and the edge of the camera pressed to my eyebrow.. It's as simple as that for me. Slightly old-school. Maybe, but that's what I like. I have a nice phone which takes truly excellent pictures. I consider it indispensable and a joy - whenever I'm just not prepared to carry camera.
I'm so distracted by my phone on a near daily basis. When I started using and carrying around a camera, I could actually just relax and focus on taking photos rather than take a photo, check it, see a notif, check it, open corresponding app, spend five minutes scrolling, hopefully put phone down before I start doom scrolling. Obviously, not 100% the phone's fault, but I have a really difficult time with it. Which is why I love having a camera on me!
A few years ago, I was debating whether to buy a premium smartphone or a camera for the first time. The phone won because I wanted something that would be easy to carry, quick to whip out and have an inbuilt telephoto lens. Sadly, that phone died after 1.5 years, and now that I have downgraded to a new phone, I kind of wish I had opted for the camera instead. I still want to get my hands on a budget camera that can scratch my itch for zoom shots and astrophotography.
Smartphone makers cram in so many pixels for 2 reasons: 1) Marketing 2) using oversampling to filter out noise (and there is lots of noise) But yeah, those sensors are not built to output 200MP images (even though some can), they output heavily processed 12MP images.
Are you Team Camera, or Team Phone? Thanks to NordVPN for sponsoring this video 🌏 Get Exclusive NordVPN deal + 4 months extra here → nordvpn.com/microfournerds It’s risk-free with Nord’s 30-day money-back guarantee! 🙌
So that is not an easy answer. I consider a dedicated camera to be flat out better... but there is something to the old saying: the best camera is the camera you have.
Team camera.
It's also that digital detox, when you're with your camera and go roaming the streets or forests or parks, that provides a feeling that a smartphone can't.
Team camera. It's so much easier to change your settings and achieve the look you want with a camera and you can be sure of the quality of the lens you add onto your camera.
When you started talking about multiple lenses and computational features on your phone I had a laugh, because my phone doesn't. I do though use my phone a lot for photography lately. To light mushrooms so I can take nice photos with my camera 😁 Definitely team camera!
Just bought a well used cheap looking D90 and 35 1.8 g lense for this same reasons, there's only so much one can do with a Smartphone, very handy for assembly and disassembly of components as a reference, interesting article, cheers Mike
For me, smartphone photos are like fast food in terms of convenience and quality (and the taste designed to please as many as possible with low quality ingredients). I only recently came back to digital cameras after a decade of phone-exclusive life, and already regret the past as if I've been only eating McDonalds the whole time.
That's a really good analogy!
Exactly. Would a fine dinner be the same if you ate it standing at a table in McDonalds?
Of course. Did you take pictures with your camera jpeg only? No? Most of the time, it's a raw, and you're processing your raw files. Out of camera jpeg is just boring. Did you try to shoot raw with your phone? No? The results are going to surprise you. Quality is good enough for most of the street photography - and it doesn't look over processed.
Do you know that samsung has computational ND filters up to 1000, and it works with raw?
Do you know that samsung has dedicated astrophotography mode thar works with raw, and results are close to the m43 (of course with a tripod)?
There was a time period when the camera gave you an instant benefit. If you invested in a camera, you are a photographer. This time is gone. Now, you can either create content or not. No one cares about your camera.
But if you are good with a smartphone, most probably you are going to be even better with a camera (if it's better than your phone). Things are more complicated now.
@@igorpust6400 I shoot RAW+JPEG all the time and find that many of my shots look great in JPEG and require very little in the way of post processing which works as well on a JPEG image as a RAW one. I'm an Olympus/OM System user, and they have a long reputation for beautiful JPEG images, but the JPEGs out of some cameras are not as pleasing to some users which is why some only shoot in RAW. I think is your point about smart phones - that their RAW files have more potential for post processing. Possibly, but by the nature of RAW images, they don't include all of the computational tricks smart phones use to make very usable JPEGs, and I wonder just how much additional work it would take in post - and how many would have those skills - to even duplicate the phone's JPEG engine output, much less improve on it. I think it would be a great to see a video about shooting the same challenging subjects on a phone and a MFT or larger sensor camera and then seeing just what could be done with either in post.
@@igorpust6400Yeah but camera users don't care that others don't care. It's the personal satisfaction you get and if others notice great.. For many a phone is good enough and don't care about ergonomics, manual physical controls, etc. That's just fine for them.
I guess the key takeaway is a good photographer can pretty much take a good photo with any camera. But for me, I’m Team Camera. Creative optical control, lenses, depth of field and yes, image quality are what I need. Sensor size, not so much. Because I’m also team MFT.
You tell them Marlene!
Mask On Nurse Marty (Ret)
With a dedicated camera you simply have much more possibilities to play around, try different stuff. That's also how you will learn photography better.
Using a dedicated DSLM/DSLR also improved how I take smartphone photos, because only then I got a better understanding/idea of composition etc.
Team phone: the Xiaomi 14 Ultra have an 1" sensor...
Team câmera: a G80/85 with a zoom and a prime cost less then half...
Both teams: lets take pictures🎉
PS, I'm team CÂMERA. Great video
The phone camera is like a blender, microwave and airfryer. Dedicated camera with manual controls is like a knife, frying pan and stove top. Would Gordon Ramsey make better food than me in all scenarios? Most definitely. Would I make better food with the "manual" setup? Equally definitely.
The biggest disadvantage besides the ones you mentioned about smartphone photography to me is the artificial look of a smartphone photo. I have yet to discover a smartphone where that's not the case, even when you shoot raw. Smartphones are always implementing some sort of computational photography that tries to enhance edges (achieving the opposite though). You'll often get away with it when viewed on a phone but on the big screen it looks like soup.
I find that too. I wonder if i either need a better phone, or all phone photos are like that and they're just designed to look good on a screen at a small size on social media
i think the main issues causing the "artificial" look are the fact that there's so much noise due to the typically smaller sensor, there is really a much lower level of detail than would be acceptable in most cases (so you have to try hard to compensate with processing), plus the fact that main phone lenses are almost always like ~4mm focal length and shorter, which means even at f/1.8 (many phone camera lenses are here) it keeps everything in focus in almost all situations, including the far away things with even lower amounts of detailed captured than the close-up subjects... doesn't help that adding more megapixels in a sensor so small doesn't help unless they work in tandem at a lower effective megapixel resolution to basically "subsample". and overall because the parts are so small it's way more difficult to get the parts like the lenses to be built with such high quality as with larger pieces of glass (as i've generally seen, the smaller the lens, the worse the image quality tends to become)
@@MicroFourNerds you need an Android phone with a big sensor (bigger than 1/1.5") that allows the camera2 API (so, no Samsung) and a good camera app that works with the camera2 API. There are some cameras apps that are simple, with full manual controls, like ProShot, ProCamX, FirstLight or Pixtica, and deliver raw image. There are free apps but the user interface is horrible (HedgeCam2 and OpenCamera). Even more, there is an app called MotionCam that allows you to fine tuning the raw (yeah, any raw have some processing even in pro mirrorless cameras).
Some warning:
- The raw in some phones have a tint that messes with the skin tones. In my basic Oppo is a green tint, in my midrange Xiaomi is a magenta tint only in low light. It depends on the sensor.
- Most smartphone sensors deliver only 10bit raw, so not too much latitude, few of them deliver 12bit and only a pair of them deliver truly 14bit. That's for speed, the phone need light raw to process the HDR and other computational things and stack several shots in 10bit is far lighter and enough for smartphone standards.
The latest generation of phones all have amazing image quality on the main sensors.
@@nicholaseales well... that's what they always say but... have you tested it yourself and viewed the pics on a monitor?
I wield both. GX85 with a prime or telephoto or for long exposures, and my Pixel 6 for ultrawide and Night Sight.
Smartphone manufacturers seem to not realize that having shadows is a good thing. They don't always have to be boosted into oblivion.
Also I just really dislike the feel of shooting on a phone, it's awkward and using any manual controls is just irritating. I can change all settings on my cameras without even looking at controls, I can have my eye at the viewfinder the whole time and change whatever I need. Also forget shooting waist level, ground level, or above your head with any accuracy.
Am I glad I have my phone to take quick snapshots and capture my daughter on a daily basis? Of course. But I don't have any pics that go in nice albums or on my wall that came from a phone. There's no comparison in quality, intention, and feel.
Smartphone image processing makes everything look so strange...
This is why I user older iPhones and iPods as cameras. The iPhone 4S and iPod Touch 5th gen (both 5mp) dont over-sharpen and HDR everything to death. They are cheap, small and light compared to modern smartphones and make a great alternative to a "digicam". I know the 3GS has been very popular over the last year for its old school "retro" vibe. They have gotten a bit too pricey though.
Just turn off HDR
Hi! For myself, as someone who wants to take up photography only as a fun hobby and way to document my life and have a little creative outlet, the biggest deterrent to buying a camera was the cost when I already had a phone in my pocket at all times that can take decent photographs. But for so many of the reasons you mentioned: the tactile experience, being able to photograph without the distractions of a phone, having more creative freedom and control with different lenses, etc. I went did buy a camera and I am so glad I did. After watching so many of your videos I went ahead and bought myself a small old micro four thirds camera on ebay for cheap and I am having just an absoltue joy of a time with this new hobby. Thanks for all of the time and thought you put in to your videos:)
I did the same thing about 5 years ago, and I am very happy I did. They are great cameras and easy to carry around and easy to use. Team lumix.😂
Even 15 year old point n shoots look better than my iPhone photos. Also just the experience of using the camera is much more fun than using a smart phone. Team camera here all the way.
I like the experience with a camera over a phone plus knowing that the image quality is going to be waaaaaay better than that of a phone. Great video.
I have the opposite experience: People get suspicious/defensive of you while brandishing a dedicated camera(exactly because they recognise you as a photographer, you must have some ulteriror motive or be some sort of pervert, i've had people demand of me to "delete the photo of their child" while i was pointing the camera in a different direction and upwards, and didn't even take the shot cuz they walked into it), and not even bat an eye if someone just stops to take a phone picture.
Depending on where you live there should be no expectation of privacy in a public place. It's a coin toss between them being unrealistic and how you present yourself and your professional image. I have laminated sheets with important stuff highlighted. I've been threatened for flying my drone and my response is I'm licensed and insured and to speak with me after my commissioned flight. If they refuse and cause an accident with the aircraft (yes a drone is considered an aircraft) it is a felony and I will press charges they will be arrested. I tell them to look at the laminated sheets and call the police department and wait for them. They have always walked away from me after that and left me alone. Be aware of your surroundings and laws and you should be fine.
The situation is pretty fluid. About fifteen years ago, people were very paranoid about photography in places like the UK, and you would have retail establishments with signs - not always very prominent - forbidding photography. Fast forward into the age of mass idiocy, however, and those same establishments not only tolerate people waving their phones around, but they have actually constructed dedicated spots encouraging picture-taking and sharing on "the socials".
Agree completely - I know several people with cameras who have been challenged in that way, quite often by security guys who usually haven't a clue about the law, and also Brian James , "That M43 guy" on TH-cam was verbally abused by a young girl because he unintentionally caught her in his photo - quite scary and as several people commented, unlikely to have happened if he'd been using a phone. Perhaps if we find ourselves in that situation using a camera, we should take it as a kind of back handed compliment.
I feel the same way, no one cares if you are on your phone, but if you pull out a real camera people are like “what’s this for?” I at least feel more nervous if someone is in a shot I am taking with a dedicated camera. That is why I think this video was so great, because I don’t really think it is a team debate, as mentioned everyone always has a phone, so if I were to go to a restaurant, I might just use my phone instead of the camera. They work really well together, quick or discrete shots using phone, and fun, slower shots using the dedicated camera.
the main two reasons for me is that
1- i am very slow if i am not using tactile buttons. despite being a gen y (1987) and using smartphones since they are invented, i am very slow making the adjustments on touch screen, thus i generally miss the moment when i use touch screen controls.
2- i need an OVF or EVF to be able compose properly, i also have a little sony digicam i use a lot, and i still sometimes use my phone to shoot but results are composionally horrible in general so i only use them to snap every photos which i take to document things rather than artsy photos.
The answer is simple. Proportions and final quality of the images, colors, textures, depth of field. I use my phone for “emergency photos”
what is that tiny tripod @ 0:40 ?
The specific thing that keeps me going back to cameras is the loss of low contrast environmental detail on phones. Here in BC that often means distant forests on mountainsides just falling apart into gray-green smears that suggest trees, but aren't really.
And that's before you get into the world of lenses - lens choice, lens character and what they bring to the image.
Nevertheless, I have my bases covered with my phone, Panasonic G9 and a Canon 5D classic for scratching the occasional full frame itch.
I specifically bought a camera to take a deeper breath, focus more on the process of taking a photo. Its a hobby to me and having no distractions makes it more fun to me.
Besides that, even if i do things perfectly my phone sometimes makes images look like pants. The colours are all over the place sometimes and the main lens is wahaaay too wide i think.
i got myself an lx100 to take on trips and family stuff and the like, because of a few things - it doesn't oversharpen and blowout the shadows in my photos, the pictures have depth to them rather than the "everything is in focus" look, i can use the evf which makes it feel way more intentional, and it's absolutely beautiful to look at itself.
i will always take my camera if my intention is to take "nice" pictures.
The best camera is the camera you always have around. For most of the time that would be my phone. But shooting with my phone, though I get some decent shots feels joyless. It's like owning an EV. It gets the job done bringing me back and forth but I do miss driving a manual internal combustion car. It's about how it feels. How tactile something can be and how that communicates with you.
A dedicated camera is a joy to use. I recently got a used GX85 because of this channel and I found the love for photography again. No need to swipe menus to change setting when I can turn dials and click buttons. The sound of the mechanical shutter does the same joy for me as the start of our old gas car.
What a thorough discussion and I flatter myself that I would have said the same things. To me the computational photography on a phone is astounding in what it does to overcome the small sensor limitations. However the phone is an ergonomic nightmare as a camera and I make an image with it despite the device not because of it. And it is missing a mechanical shutter which, with a camera on a quiet day, gives a quiet little echo in my mind back to the 19th century.
Well I use both, phone and cameras, depending on the moment, the type of photo I'm taking, or the need to shoot very quickly. But I prefer using the camera. I'm an old school photographer: I did learn with a film SLR in my hands, hence using a camera is to me the "natural way" of taking photos.
Years ago I got a Sony Xperia SP and I've always loved how it have a dedicated shutter button with a proper and tactile half-press to focus function. The phone's sensor and performance itself is nothing to write home about, but that shutter button was the gateway into my love for tactile controls; I predictably carry a Fuji camera now paired with a manual focus lens.
I have micro hand tremors, so I have a 1 stop debuff on shutter speed with phones; everything looks blurry and grainy due to the shake + ISO bump. I do not have such a problem with my R6II + any IS lens.
I’m totally in that crossover that you mentioned…if I want a bigger sensor than a phone, why not get the camera with the bigger sensor? If I am gonna dig a camera out of my bag, why not get as many options as possible? I can crop in on a full frame, I can’t do the opposite with a crop sensor.
I think all the benefits of getting a dedicated camera are also the reasons why you would want to get a bigger sensor. For me, it’s a nice barbell strategy, phone for convenience, S5IIx for more dedicated stuff. I don’t think a tiny camera can compete with the phone for convenience, or the FF for dedicated camera experience, and I only mean that in the sense that it makes compromises that I have no need to make if I have already decided to carry a dedicated camera.
One other thing is that I think you made some great points, but it also can be the opposite, sometimes people are more concerned when you pull out a camera, but they are very accustomed to people on their phones taking photos. I feel more nervous walking around with a camera on a strap than i do carrying a smart phone (especially as there is so little point in stealing iPhones anyway).
The one other point, is that they can be very synergistic, just because you are taking a picture using your phone, doesn’t mean that you have to be using the stock camera app, some of the apps let you control shutter speed and ISO, and aspect ratio, etc (not aperture typically), but I think a phone is the perfect first camera to learn on to see if you even like photography. For me, once I decided to jump in, I wanted to jump straight to the S5IIx.
I do love your videos, you are so balanced and reasonable!
Thanks. Just at the right time too
7:30 A battery bank is nice. I have iWalk Spartan Powerbank 13000mAh battery bank, I had it for years, it's heavy, but works. But the cable included is fragile, and the included compass doesn't work properly and cover for ports will fall off after few years. This year I got Upio Tricharge, for my Sony NP-FZ100 batteries. So I bring that instead now, unless I might need other batteries for my camera as camera battery is low and phone is low.
Team camera, also micro 4/3. I like the size and it's fun to carry around. Great vacation camera, and it's just nice to have a little control over your pictures.❤
I’m a full frame user with the largest digital photography camera, the canon 1dx. Sometimes I use my phone in emergency situations where I need a wider field of view. The images on the phone just feel too digital, especially if I view them on a larger screen. Phone pictures suffer from lack of dynamic range and over sharpening. I tried shooting raw on phone. For the love of god don’t do that. Just use the default app with auto settings. Phones use software trickery for a reason to increase dynamic range and resolution. A single raw exposure that is edited still looks inferior to a jpeg using the native app with auto settings.
M43 is the sweet spot of you want something compact and still have good files.
A camera is for taking photographs. A smartphone is for taking snapshots.
One thing no one talks about is viewing the screen. My eyes are at an age where even with multifocal lenses I cannot readily go from the viewfinders to the screen. If I’m out shooting I’m wearing glasses for mid-distance viewing so cameras that have no viewfinder are challenging to use as I can’t comfortably hold them far enough away to see what the screen . This means putting a lot of faith in the AF to get what I want (talking to you S9). However I can adjust the diopter on a viewfinder to accommodate the glasses I’m wearing. Phones do have a larger more useable screen but it is a device designed for arms-length use and I’m not convinced that camera manufactures really consider this aspect of the camera system (looking at you Olympus). A smaller screen with small fonts and complex icons is not a great user experience.
Your videos are always interesting. Thank you!
Very fair and balanced take. Nice.
Having said that, I feel that phone pics start to breakdown in terms of realism once you start zooming them. I rarely get a genuinely good image in a phone that is not somehow computerized/artificial/forced.
Love my iPhone. Love my X100. Love my 50R. Soooo yeah, tiny sensor, APSC and medium format digital.
Can't stress enough how much i love your content!!!!!
I'll happily agree with you.......... a camera is the best option for photography.
To me, in my personal opinion, using a phone to take a picture feels soulless. It's like driving a Tesla instead of a manual transmission classic car. I like using a camera for the full experience of taking a picture
@@BobbiRae-p7q I think much of that 'souless' feeling is not hearing and feeling the vibration from a physical shutter. With an electronic shutter it feels more like you just captured a still frame from video rather than a photograph. Which is why I'm not a fan of electronic only shutters.
@@overnightdeliveryI mean it makes sense for them to exist
Just love the feel and how I capture an image with a camera that I never get with the phone.
6:12 With a proper protective case, screen protector you can drop it hundreds of times and it will be fine. I went for Nillkin Camshield, to protect the lenses, it lasts 2 or 3 years, before the door opens on it's own.
But other cases exist.
I generally reserve my phone for snapshots and documentary purposes. I occasionally do that with my camera too, but I'm wayyyyy more likely to seek out a composition and be deliberate with my decisions when I have my camera in my hand. I just never feel the urge to do all that with my phone.
Maybe that's why I take my camera everywhere.
Yep, always have a "real camera" in my pocket, or in a small bag (in the summer when it is too hot). Try taking a photo directly over your head with a phone. Or from your feet. Also taking pictures of anything fast moving. Thanks.
My Pixel 9 pro will never replace my good old Gx9 with the 12-32.
Phone camera app apply a treatment even to RAW files, I've had to use a 3rd party app to get the true RAW data from the sensor.
Phone image quality depends on the sensor you are using, with a dedicated camera, you get the same quality from wide to zoomed focal length, true color temperature and tint control.
Which app did you use to get the true raw data?
It’s all about optics, I have a Blackmagic pocket cinema camera that replicates 16mm film, but I can shoot raw onto a drive using a iPhone but it all comes down to optics.
Well... why not use both?
I have a gx9 with 25mm 1.4. Im contemplating whether to get a wide angle zoom or a telephoto zoom.
My phone, oneplus 12, can take really good pictures given it's below 85mm.
I might just save money (can only afford one lens anyways) and get myself a telephoto zoom.
I find myself using both a lot these days too :)
So do you have a recommendations on what small camera to start off with
My entire channel is all about that 😊 here are some recent videos with good recommendations
th-cam.com/video/boLQhQ5X4ZU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=kTycJQtxCXbBVOAV
th-cam.com/video/dWUMiLcuUV4/w-d-xo.htmlsi=x6Z4wGSmzEwxoOY2
I specifically purchased the phone I have because of the camera. However, I rarely use it. The ergonomics suck. Only the main sensor is any good, but too wide most of the time, and the RAWs aren't really RAW. Accessories might help, but would I carry them with me? Moreover companies that make accessories dont realize Android phones exist.
Great content. Love your views on this subject.....Team camera for me...
"Why play video games at home when you can just play mobile games" Same shit, these people are just idiots. They never cared and they never will, they enjoy a purposeless life with no real intention. Everything is handed to them from their phone. Why meetup in real life when we can just text?
Next up, they will be saying, "A phone? Why bother taking pictures when you can use AI?" Indeed, why bother doing anything?
Being able make creative decisions is what makes the difference between a photographer and a person who takes pictures.
When I used to run my photographic store, we printed a lot of images, especially holiday and family shots. I could always tell the phone ones, as they had halos/fuzzy due to fingerprints on the lens
Since getting my iPhone 15 Pro - my first iPhone with a very good camera system - I've discovered it make a useful second camera. For instance, I was in Budapest recently and I stuck my 55-200mm lens on to my trusty EOS M5 when we visited the zoo. I was able to get up close to the glass for small animals and insects with the iPhone that I just couldn't with a telephoto attached. Likewise, with the 18-55mm "walkaround" lens attached when wandering the city, sometimes it wasn't wide enough, but the iPhone was.
Team Camera. I do have a phone, but after a year of trial and mostly error i gave up and got myself a proper smol camera that takes some of my favorite photos so far.
Of course small sensor less blur that's due to the real focal length of phone cameras. On my old HTC U12+ (probably there's not much difference in modern smartphones) the actual focal length of the main camera was 4mm. The "telephoto" lens was a whopping 6mm haha. You cant get natural bokeh with a smartphone considering that 8mm is considered fish-eye on most cameras. Well actually you can, on very close subjects, which the small lens of a smatphone allows you do to, macro(ish) stuff. Another advantage for M43 vs full frame, macro, more stuff in focus :D
Very well said!
I want a phone with an interchangeable lens mount. The flange distance with the NX mini mount was only 6mm (so a mount could still put only a couple of mm with sensor only being 4mm inside the phone). Such a shame that Samsung didn't persist with it.
This is such a good video and I'm SO glad to have seen this just now. I started getting into photography over the last 4 years exclusively on smartphones (Pixel 4a then 6a) and have learned a ton about editing and not so humbly lol think I've made some pretty great images. I've been a very vocal proponent and firm believer in mobile photography yet all this time I'm still nagged by the desire for a "real" camera, but money is a real issue. Not only does this video let me feel better about remaining with my device until I can comfortably afford the equipment, it really does clarify exactly why I should or should not upgrade. This helps immensely to stop the nagging feeling because now I have a much better understanding of exactly what I'm missing or not missing. It seems like a small thing but it's seriously helpful. Thank you so much.
Oh also I'm really appreciating that I'm finding more and more info like this that's showing me that I don't necessarily need to spend an ENTIRE months rent to get started with a dedicated camera.
I didn't take a dedicated camera with me on a trip to SE Asia last year , just used a pixel 3 phone, was pretty surprised at the shots it took and the overall percentage that were great, I missed having a wide angle type setting and bought a camera with a lens for that for a trip to Japan in a week, I have a pixel 6 now and just noticed it has a 0.7x zoom , wide angle shot.....still taking the camera but wish I had discovered that sooner.....
So true, great video
I've had several phones that captured really nice images (either SOOC or using a GCam mod), but only two of them were good to shoot with: the LG G3 and the LG G4. The G4 had a brilliant RAW shooting mode where you had very quick and easy access to manual focus, shutter speed and white balance, and both were quick and responsive, so were great for discreet street photography.
Later phones had more processing power and made use of computational photography to take quite impressive low light, astro and fake shallow dof portraits that might fool you for a moment. This was great, but none of them were nice to use. You just didn't really have real control.
You are so right in saying it's the little things that make a difference. It's the lovely buttons and dials, the tilting screen, the viewfinder, the weight and heft of the camera body. Then there's the proper lenses! Last but not least: no distractions!
So it's a no from me to those commenters. Why would I just use my phone when I can use a little MFT powerhouse instead? I'd rather enjoy the excellent balance of small size, good image quality, great handling and complete control that my MFT camera gives me, but thanks anyway.
2 days ago I went to print a 50x70 canvas, sure was happy I shot that one on a 24mp full frame camera on the highest setting. Tried to do that with a phone photo, it didn't go that well...
An important thing that never seems to come up on the Phone vs Camera debate (though it plays into ergonomics) is safety straps. Cameras by default have them. Whether its a neck strap, a side sling or even a wrist strap there is something between you and dropping your camera 40 feet onto a rocky outcropping, into a river or a lake, or preventing your photo device from being the Gorrila's favorite new toy at the local Zoo. I know of a few daring photographers who take off straps of all kinds because they annoy them. I am not one of them.
I've dropped my phone so many times from just casual use. I don't need to be even more prone to drop it while gripping it in a manner its not normally gripped in order to get a better more stable photo. Give me a grip for my fingers, and a strap over my wrist, chest or neck. Those are my requirements on Team Camera.
About time someone did a video like this. My opinion is you can become an expert in one or the other. I use both and know they both can do far more.
I'm team camera when I have one with me, otherwise I'm team phone. And video is photography as well, you didn't discuss which one is better for video. Great video, thanks for sharing.
Even with the newest smartphones, they still tend to take pictures that look as though shot through thick glass. Sure, they get bumped up automatically in post, but often there’s just something off about colours and detail.
A camera also wins in ergonomics. Physical controls beat touchscreens every time.
Team Camera, all the way. I hate the ergonomics of a smartphone for photography.
The thing about phones is that processed look, especially phones that dont have a proper manual mode.
Or as a certain commercial has taught me: why not both? I got my m43 camera that i use to take higher quality pics and where i try to think about composition and stuff like that. On the other hand, I use my phone for the more silly stuff like funny street signs and such. In some cases it´s easier to quicky get out my phone and take a pic in 1 second and in other cases it works better with a camera to take some times to get the composition and things like that right. If you can´t pick between 2 choice, always go for the 3th one 😊
I am fortunate to have Xperia 1 VI and RX100 VII. The phone takes really nice pictures, realistic, not oversharpened or oversaturated. Exactly opposite to iPhones or Samsungs. Great macro, waterproofing, faster adjustments of settings on a touch screen and being invisible on the street are main advantages but RX100 offers way better image quality in every situation. To be fair, good light makes the gap slightly smaller. Between those two it is convinence vs fun (if we forget about quality).
I use cameras to photograph people that are important to me. Other things like landscapes, buildings, food etc.... that are mostly photographed by me to share online and delete I shoot with a phone. So the determining factor for me is how important the subject is (subjectively). Simple as that. It took me over 45 years to come to this conclusion. But now my life is a joy! LOL :)
Well said, Em. I find myself in team both. I don't find taking pics with my phone an enjoyable feat, but it gets things done and works best on certain occasions (like when documenting my daughter's first step or taking a group photo on a casual hang out with friends). But when I go travelling, I always carry my Fujifilm camera to get the images I know I want.
That being said, it still blows my mind to find that people are still arguing camera vs smartphone. Just use whatever tool that works best for you and have a great day, people 😁
It's like comparing a multi-tool to a proper wrench or screwdriver. The multi-tool is certainly capable of getting some small jobs done and has the advantage of being small and portable, but it's not able to replace the toolbox once things get a little more serious.
Just grabbing my "camera" that has no optical zoom, can't simultaneously use the screen and best lens to take holiday selfies with the family, can't flip up the screen for low angle shots so have to get into the dirt, has no tactile controls to get ready for shots while powered down, really wants ideal lighting to maintain quality, can't quickly swap batteries out for 100% charge but rather needs a power bank plugged in, probably can't swap in more storage when full, has no custom modes to quickly get settings dialed in for a sudden shot of the pets being silly, has to be updated every year because it was loaded with bloat to artificially shorten the product lifecycle, won't stop pinging me with doom scroll ad seeking or work notifications while I'm out and about, and for a reasonable quality one I've shelled out as much or more than any compact camera that comes packed with better dedicated features and usually a larger sensor.
I can watch TH-cam on it though. Absolute lemon. 🤦
If you're trying to use your phone like a camera
Just get a camera. Because i don't really see my phone as anything but a computer with a camera on it. It's pretty okay as a camera but pretty good at literally anything else you use it for like a computer
I've used "proper" cameras for over 50 years - starting out working for a portrait photography studio. Since then, I've used all manner of cameras, as well as currently running a photography website. Recently I sold all my cameras apart from a Fuji bridgecamera.
I've purchased a new generation smartphone as my primary camera as I am totally sick of carting around heavy cameras and extra lenses. Where I live, when out in public I get seriously eyeballed if I have a camera and a bigish lens on it - conversely a smartphone is discreet and goes unnoticed. As I approach 70, I don't need to be burdened with a bag full of gear, when a smartphone and when necessary, a small gimbal is all I need. For anything else I can use the bridgecamera. No more gear bag and other extras. I think we have to move past the idea that only a real camera can take a real photo. We no longer live in that world any longer and it's time to recognize that the smartphone is an excellent camera in its own way.
12:57 I turn Mobile Data off. then i don't get distractions, unless someone calls me. But I always bring my camera with me now.
My preferred ‘pocketable’ camera is the Fuji X100-series. People enjoy to be photographed by it and I enjoy mastering all exposure. However, it’s not always in my pocket and then I am allways happy with my phone. Or when I have both and I want to make a more wide-angled photograph ‘because the church doesn’t fit into my Fuji..’
A very smart, enjoyable high-level view. I use three formats: iPhone 15 Pro is stupendous for Apple ProRes RAW song video clips. The APS-C Canon R50 gives insane portraits at 300/2.8 equivalent with the EF 70-200/2.8 L II. The Canon R6 is wonderful for theater events needing 1/500-plus in low light (Adobe's Denoise AI is crazy good). That said, Tyler Stalman's Peru iPhone 16 Pro video is super.
I use my phone when it is a photo where getting it right the first time is more important than getting a good looking shot (e.g. back lit shots, shots of kids/pets moving around or even just big groups that's hard to wrangle, super wide) but will take my camera out if I have the time to actually think about the shot and adjust for the lighting, framing. Phone for function, camera for art.
I use my iPhone 12 mini a lot. For work mainly. But I have some “real” photos also. Good for landscape in good light. Good for video. Obviously not for long telephoto work or shallow DOF portraits. I won’t ever carry a camera for in-case. But when I have pre-meditated plans, then I get the camera. If your phone photos look artificial it’s probably not a good phone camera
What is the difference in size between the GM1 and the GX850? If the GM1 had a tip-up rear LCD like the GX850, I'd buy one in a heartbeat. I'd also give the GX850 serious consideration if it was (is?) available in the US. Do you know if the GX850 was marketed by Panasonic under a different model number in the US? Neither of these cameras need IBIS since Panasonic offers OIS in their 12-32mm zoom and their Lumix G X Vario PZ 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 zoom lenses. Tell us more, Emily. I'm old school and definitely Team Camera.
So the other model names for that camera are: GX800 GX850 GF9
I did a little comparison video between the different smaller lumix cameras recently. You will be able to see lots of size comparisons to the gm1 in the video 😊
th-cam.com/video/boLQhQ5X4ZU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=rnBRx7RlLgR0t9fp th-cam.com/video/boLQhQ5X4ZU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=rnBRx7RlLgR0t9fp
100 percent. I am team camera, but only because I've made attempts to ditch it all and go phone only, even spending on the latest Samsung flagship only to be greatly disappointed with trying to push or pull the RAW files and the limitations posed by the device.
I extended my smartphone 120mm tele to 720mm. The result surprised me, the ai within the phone did a good job with the building structure and the letters on a huge poster, but not good at all on the image in the poster. Cameras are improving very slowly while smartphone are improving by leaps and bounds.
For me the benefits of using a phone are (a) the speed with which I can go from taking it out my pocket to photo taken, and (b) it's discrete - most people don't pay attention to someone holding a phone whereas they would a phone. If neither of those matter, my GM1 is my everyday carry and gives so much more easy control over composition than the phone camera can.
I have been without a camera for so many years, but working, life, kids, stopped me from going back to "photography" now I'm retired and one of the first things I did was..... buy a camera (G9) !! Said that I shot with my wife's phone for many years, if you know "Light-Subject-Composition" you can take some great pictures, if you learn tecniques I used to use on my Nikon F1 (breathing on your lens, panning, short movements and on and on) the phone can be great. I took some good "impressionist" photos and even some great Street. But beware, your brain will ALWAYS say: wish I had a camera for this, wish I had a tripod, wish I could put 3 seconds or "B" wish I had a decent zoom and on and on..
I love the channel name!
I much prefer a camera. The over sharpened is often really terrible. I do like the computational aspect for sure. Snapping a photo at night and getting something usable is always great, compared to when it takes 1-2 minutes to set up my camera and tripod. In some cases it might be the only option as well depending on outside variables.
It's the image, not necessarily the image quality (down to a certain point). My only sale to date was a photograph taken with my smart phone whilst my two cameras were taking time lapses of a tidal bore, so therefore unavailable. The buyer would not be aware of how I'd taken the photo but was clearly happy with the image itself.
Down here in the Southwestern USA the strong bright sun makes it hard for me to use a rear screen on a good camera or a phone screen for composing. Viewfinders only. Depending on the assignment and conditions, I will often grab one of my trusty DSLRs. My 76 year old eyes appreciate it.
Team camera…but I do use my phone a lot, simply because it’s almost always accessible and fast! I still prefer to use a camera when I want to get the best photos or video (video on iPhone quite good however and likely meet most needs for me). For zooming in…absolutely a camera!
I'm team camera but I still get some amazing images from my phone. I love the experience of using a camera... especially the lack of notifications! My phone is a Sony b/c it gives the most camera-like experience for any phone on the market imo. It's a bit like watching a movie on your laptop vs. a proper tv, they're both fine but one is easier to be immersed in the experience.
I actually dont consider the computational features on phones a plus, they tend to give that "phone look" to pictures. I do consider my phone as an assist in photography. For bulky film cameras that don't have a photometer I can compose my shot to check if it's worth it, and use a lightmeter app I'd I consider the shot is worth it.
Ι never bother taking images via my phone unless it's a "gotta keep that moment" situation and nothing else. That said I have no issues with anyone thinking otherwise. But I could never connect with my phone; it just doesn't feel right in my hand.
And the image quality on most phones is just crap, my 2005 compact Olympus takes (much) better images than my 2023 android.
Sure ...I could get an iphone! And spend 1500$ in order to get images no better than a pocket-size 2008 1/2,5" sensor camera that can now be found for 30$.
So, no thanks. Not for me. Had I had the spare money I'd choose to get something really useful to add on my photography kit.
Team Camera for sure cause of the OVF/EVF. But if i dont have a camera on me, I use ProCam on my iphone so I have full control over the camera and shoot in raw.
Team camera. But, sometimes I onlyhave my phone. So, that is what I use, … but mostly just to capture a ‘record shot,’ a quick, best I could do under the circumstances shot, where I don’t care about an over processed jpeg/HEIF or RAW file with the inherent phone sensor limitations.
Hello Emily, I'm in agree with your analysis at least at 90%. I just have a different experience on how "people perceive" phones and Cameras. Here in Italy you can take pictures with phone in the street and remain totally invisible, while happen exactly the opposite with the camera. With a camera others see you like an alien! Shooting at a street, or aso in a park, may happen that someone come to you asking "why did you photograph me?" even if the pictur was made at the entire street/parc/green field.
My main photography interest is wildlife, and so there's no real comparison for me, and I can't really imagine there ever will be. You can't take a good, sharp, clear picture of a bird 100 meters away with a phone, you need a LOT of glass to get there. I suppose, at some point, you might see a phone that can connect to large lenses, but it might mean having a mount that would add so much size and bulk to the phone that it would lose the pocketable convenience that draws people to phones in the first place.
Larger sensors are better but the smaller sensors have also gotten better over time. Plus with newer noise reduction programs you can take some really good images. Within the same generation of cameras the larger the sensor will be better. But sometimes small sensors can be better for some special jobs.
I think convenience would be the biggest thing for why most would prefer a smartphone over a camera. I think though that some, not all, that advocate for such probably either don't understand or aren't really interested in photography as such, but they just want a camera with them for those special moments.
I take better photos with a viewfinder - preferably optical - to my eye and the edge of the camera pressed to my eyebrow.. It's as simple as that for me.
Slightly old-school. Maybe, but that's what I like.
I have a nice phone which takes truly excellent pictures. I consider it indispensable and a joy - whenever I'm just not prepared to carry camera.
I'm so distracted by my phone on a near daily basis. When I started using and carrying around a camera, I could actually just relax and focus on taking photos rather than take a photo, check it, see a notif, check it, open corresponding app, spend five minutes scrolling, hopefully put phone down before I start doom scrolling. Obviously, not 100% the phone's fault, but I have a really difficult time with it. Which is why I love having a camera on me!
A few years ago, I was debating whether to buy a premium smartphone or a camera for the first time. The phone won because I wanted something that would be easy to carry, quick to whip out and have an inbuilt telephoto lens. Sadly, that phone died after 1.5 years, and now that I have downgraded to a new phone, I kind of wish I had opted for the camera instead. I still want to get my hands on a budget camera that can scratch my itch for zoom shots and astrophotography.
200MP on my phone sucks compared to 61MP on a Sony A7R IVa I haven't compared to my GH7 yet with a 25-50mm f/1.7 🤔
imagine how tiny the pixels are if you cram 200 million of them into such a small sensor area, now it all makes sense
Smartphone makers cram in so many pixels for 2 reasons:
1) Marketing
2) using oversampling to filter out noise (and there is lots of noise)
But yeah, those sensors are not built to output 200MP images (even though some can), they output heavily processed 12MP images.
phone photos are soulless shit
straight to the point and factual.
I'm Team Camera. It's the tactile experience for me, for sure.