How much £ to spend to outperform a mobile phone?

[Barks]

For me mobile phones just aren't comparable, full stop. The laws of physics and sensor size give dedicated cameras a superior advantage through lager optics, but even then the image processing (which I guess tries to make up for these shortcomings) seen in most phones is appalling. I accept Android lets you shoot in RAW but the in camera image "enhancements" often ruin an otherwise good photo and the iPhone Portrait fake bokeh thing misfires more often than not. My inner OCD just loses it whenever I use portrait mode on my iPhone and it leaves a giant candle 3 metres behind my girlfriend's head razor sharp in focus. Don't get me started on shots of beers and cocktails with glass edges that turn to mist

As I think has been said, most mobile phones are fine for 99% of people who want to snap people, places, things but even an amateur photographer with some experience should be able to spot the difference particularly at wider apertures. In Raymond Lin's first reply, it is blindingly obvious to my eye which of those were shot on a phone.

 

[vodkacokebloke]

im surprised the Sony RX100 range hasnt been metioned. They are very pocket friendly, have excellent picture quality and features. There is currently seven versions of it, ranging from a probably discontinued original for cheap 2nd hand - up to 1200 for the latest mark 7.

 

[Earth[Tera].bin]

im surprised the Sony RX100 range hasnt been metioned. They are very pocket friendly, have excellent picture quality and features. There is currently seven versions of it, ranging from a probably discontinued original for cheap 2nd hand - up to 1200 for the latest mark 7.

It was "....I'd pick up a Sony RX100 Mk1, £150 on fleabay say. Cracking images for the price point and nearly ticks all your bullet points..."

 

[Captain]

One of these pictures was taken with a £1000 phone and one with a £329 DSLR, can you tell which is which?

 

[Raymond Lin]

The bottom one is DLSR.

 

[Captain]

The bottom one is DLSR.

Nope, bottom one is shot with an iPhone X and the motorbike was shot with a Canon 1300D.

 

[Raymond Lin]

Nope, bottom one is shot with an iPhone X and the motorbike was shot with a Canon 1300D.

i was fooled by that silly border

because if you look closer there is a lot of compression artefacts in the photos.

 

[Captain]

i was fooled by that silly border

because if you look closer there is a lot of compression artefacts in the photos.

True, i think just based on image quality, the 1300D will win everytime, that's only an 18mp sensor and it looks a lot sharper than the phone despite the phone costing 3x as much.

If i were only taking pictures of my food or pictures around the house then i absolutely would use my phone and ditch using a digital camera all together.

 

[Raymond Lin]

True, i think just based on image quality, the 1300D will win everytime, that's only an 18mp sensor and it looks a lot sharper than the phone despite the phone costing 3x as much.

If i were only taking pictures of my food or pictures around the house then i absolutely would use my phone and ditch using a digital camera all together.

I much prefer my camera for food photos, I think the phone is missing that something for food photos.

 

[Merlin5]

I much prefer my camera for food photos, I think the phone is missing that something for food photos.

Yes, from my new and so far limited experience of taking photos with a proper camera compared to when I was taking food photos with my phone, the phone doesn't give that 3D effect of shallow depth of field and separation from the background that the camera can. I'm guessing that's what you mean?

 

[Raymond Lin]

Yes, from my new and so far limited experience of taking photos with a proper camera compared to when I was taking food photos with my phone, the phone doesn't give that 3D effect of shallow depth of field and separation from the background that the camera can. I'm guessing that's what you mean?

It's both the focal length (phone is like 24mm, unless you have a new 3 lens ones) and I prefer the 50 and the bokeh it creates. I can't make my phone food photo looks like my camera yet.

 

[SDK^]

If i were only taking pictures of my food or pictures around the house then i absolutely would use my phone and ditch using a digital camera all together.

For me indoors is where phone camera's fall down, due to their lower light limitations. i.e. Higher image noise.
Phone cameras are awesome for general photos outdoors; because typically the light is good and the default software processing makes photos pop.

 

[craptakular]

Camera is just a box that captures light at the end of the day.

i prefer a proper interchangeable lens system for different requirements and I use various MD filters and polarisers.

The quality of the photo is predominantly determined by compositional aspects over costs of gear

 

[SDK^]

Camera is just a box that captures light at the end of the day.
The quality of the photo is predominantly determined by compositional aspects over costs of gear

Well yes and no - The camera does other stuff, than just capture light e.g. Auto focus for situations where accurate manual focus is hard to achieve.

• Fast moving sport photos would not look great, if they were all out of focus, regardless of the composition and exposure.
• Wildlife photography leads itself to expensive telephoto lenses to achieve that good composition. Having a camera with silent shooting is also an advantage.

 

[Captain]

For me indoors is where phone camera's fall down, due to their lower light limitations. i.e. Higher image noise.
Phone cameras are awesome for general photos outdoors; because typically the light is good and the default software processing makes photos pop.

Yeah i get that, i don't have much experience or knowledge to get the best from a digital camera.

I had the Canon 1300D for a year before moving onto the Sony A7iii but completely fell out of touch with the whole photography life.

Looking to get back into it once i'm back from my holiday next week, have seen the A7R4 for as cheap as £2300 which is really tempting me to push the buy button

 

[SDK^]

Yeah i get that, i don't have much experience or knowledge to get the best from a digital camera.

I had the Canon 1300D for a year before moving onto the Sony A7iii but completely fell out of touch with the whole photography life.

Looking to get back into it once i'm back from my holiday next week, have seen the A7R4 for as cheap as £2300 which is really tempting me to push the buy button

The A7R4 is probably the camera to go for right now.
Is that the Broadway Way Tower you posted above? I’ve been there a few times and have ridden up Saintbury and Fish Hill a few times too

 

[Captain]

The A7R4 is probably the camera to go for right now.
Is that the Broadway Way Tower you posted above? I’ve been there a few times and have ridden up Saintbury and Fish Hill a few times too

Yeah Broadway tower, me and my dad like to go there on the bikes normally before carrying on to Stow on the wold.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Yeah i get that, i don't have much experience or knowledge to get the best from a digital camera.

I had the Canon 1300D for a year before moving onto the Sony A7iii but completely fell out of touch with the whole photography life.

Looking to get back into it once i'm back from my holiday next week, have seen the A7R4 for as cheap as £2300 which is really tempting me to push the buy button

Stick with what you have. Buy better lenses(if there are serious flaws with them) and try and improve your technique as much as possible. Your A7 is more than capable enough - I have an old D600 with an old tele lens,which I use at airshows,and I almost thought of upgrading too. Then I decided to change some aspects of my technique and it helped a noticeable amount.

On internet forums,too many people are gearheads and just throw money at hardware. For the vast majority of photographers,a modern 35mm frame dSLR from the last 4 years isn't the limitation,its usually the photographer,or in some cases the lens if it has some serious flaws(very poor focusing speed or excessive front focus or back focus). Also camera bodies loose money much quicker than decent lenses,which are always the better investment IMHO.

 

[Snaggle]

I have been rocking my canon 700d with a variety of semi decent lenses .. was more than happy with the quality and type of shots i was taking . Of course we always wish for a faster lens or more fps .. but overall i did everything i needed . Then i got a Huawei P20 Pro . Was just blown away with the quality of pictures .. the night shot was a game breaker for me .. How often was i at a museum or castle and the dslr pics would be blurry or under exposed or impossible to capture due to lack of light and requiring a tripod . It got to a stage where i would take the phone and leave my dslr at home or in the car .

So i went on the hunt for a camera with basically a phone type OS but with a proper lens.. sadly they dont exsist ... 6 months later still nothing other than some chinese type thing .. BUT if someone made a p40 pro with eithier removable lens or even a fixed 20-135 i would be sold and would happily sell all my gear and just buy that .. Im sure im not alone but not sure it will ever happen

 

[Raymond Lin]

I have been rocking my canon 700d with a variety of semi decent lenses .. was more than happy with the quality and type of shots i was taking . Of course we always wish for a faster lens or more fps .. but overall i did everything i needed . Then i got a Huawei P20 Pro . Was just blown away with the quality of pictures .. the night shot was a game breaker for me .. How often was i at a museum or castle and the dslr pics would be blurry or under exposed or impossible to capture due to lack of light and requiring a tripod . It got to a stage where i would take the phone and leave my dslr at home or in the car .

So i went on the hunt for a camera with basically a phone type OS but with a proper lens.. sadly they dont exsist ... 6 months later still nothing other than some chinese type thing .. BUT if someone made a p40 pro with eithier removable lens or even a fixed 20-135 i would be sold and would happily sell all my gear and just buy that .. Im sure im not alone but not sure it will ever happen

They kinda do, in mirrorless.

The reason it doesn't with a DSLR is because the focusing is done on the focus screen, on a phone and mirrorless it is done on the sensor, which hsa a LOT more information.

As for all the computer trickery like night mode, that's a software thing and expensive cameras won't have that, it will however let you capture the images you need for you to process them in your computer to get the same thing. From colour adjustment to stacking images.