Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Consumer Electronics > Digital and Video Cameras

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-07-2012, 05:35 PM   #1
Shephard
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 766
Default Camera phone vs Digital camera quality

My uncle is a photographer but he's travelling so I never got the chance to ask him this question.

Since every smartphone has a back camera and most have a front now I thought I would ask the question. Most seem to have at least a 5 megapixel back camera.

Is an 8 megapixel back camera from an iPhone or Galaxy 3 just as good as a real Digital Camera?

Like a $50 Digital Camera from Future Shop say vs one of these.

What about the more expensive ones?

Also Digital Cameras seem to take longer to take a picture. Where as the iPhone has like no shutter time.

thanks
Shephard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 07:00 PM   #2
yottabit
Golden Member
 
yottabit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,106
Default

I think ever since the iPhone 4 the back facing camera has been as good or better than a < $150 point and shoot, unless for some reason you need a large optical zoom

I have a Nikon L100 and find myself using the 4S camera much more often

If you go to a digital SLR you definitely get a lot better quality than a camera phone

Other than that today's camera phones are as good as any point and shoot I would say. Except in zoom and also low light performance

In contrast the front facing camera on the 4S is horrible

Also, with digital cameras it's not really about the megapixels. Image quality is determined by a number of other factors that are much more important!
__________________
"He's a lover, not a fighter. But he's also a fighter, so don't get any ideas." heat
yottabit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 07:19 PM   #3
Shephard
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 766
Default

what other factors for digital camera. what is SLR?

Do people still use cameras that require film?

I know the front camera sucks it's mainly for video chat.
Shephard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 07:47 PM   #4
MrA79
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 101
Default

Sensor size, processing software, etc are still important on a phone camera. The iphone 4S camera is about the best I've seen, in terms of overall quality. Just like with normal cameras, megapixels aren't everything.
MrA79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 09:28 PM   #5
alkemyst
No Lifer
 
alkemyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Corner of EPIC and ┼WESOME ST.
Posts: 82,017
Default

In bright light they fare comparably with the lower end cameras. In low light a camera phone usually is much much worst than even a sub-par compact.
__________________
The Masamune blade would repel the leaves and let them flow safely down the stream, while the Murasame blade would attract and cut them up.
alkemyst is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 12:35 AM   #6
pandemonium
Golden Member
 
pandemonium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Augusta, GA
Posts: 1,416
Default

I recommend visiting the compare tool over at gsmarena.com. Make sure you use the scaling feature when comparing different megapixels and cameras. That tool is a good baseline for understanding how well each phone holds up, and they even have a strong DSLR competitor for comparison purposes on there, the Canon 5D Mark II. They also have entry-level DSLR and compact dedicated cameras for comparing as well.

Shutter speed is dependent on several factors, but primarily for smartphones, it's quicker due to typical steadiness of being hand-held (as opposed to using a tripod or mount). This is also something that can't be adjusted by most smartphones (e.g. long exposures for time-lapse photography).

I personally see no reason to buy a discrete dedicated camera with how much smartphone cameras have developed. If you're not buying for semi-professional or professional use, then you're perfectly fine with the quality on a cameraphone (granted you objectively compare professional results of course).

DSLR = Digital Single-Lens Reflex



Cross-section view of a DSLR. Electronics and display not shown.
  1. Camera lens
  2. Reflex mirror
  3. Focal-plane shutter
  4. Image sensor
  5. Matte focusing screen
  6. Condenser lens
  7. Pentaprism/pentamirror
  8. Viewfinder eyepiece
__________________
..:: |We are but shadows of our achievements and dust of the stars; empowering the universe to have conciousness.| ::..
..:: |Fighting ignorance is bliss.| ::..

If you're curious about getting into vaping, I'd be glad to help! I quit smoking with vaping! /truestory
pandemonium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 12:47 AM   #7
finbarqs
Diamond Member
 
finbarqs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: West Covina, CA
Posts: 3,660
Default

don't forget, the flash on phones are terrible. Nothing really usable at all.
finbarqs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 01:59 AM   #8
pandemonium
Golden Member
 
pandemonium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Augusta, GA
Posts: 1,416
Default

My N8 would beg to differ.
__________________
..:: |We are but shadows of our achievements and dust of the stars; empowering the universe to have conciousness.| ::..
..:: |Fighting ignorance is bliss.| ::..

If you're curious about getting into vaping, I'd be glad to help! I quit smoking with vaping! /truestory
pandemonium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 02:56 AM   #9
blastingcap
Diamond Member
 
blastingcap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 5,869
Default

Phones usually do okay in bright light and can be good for macros, but will usually suffer from:

- inability to isolate (blur background) as well
- inability to optically zoom
- inability to focus as quickly and accurately as a higher-end camera, let alone track movements
- inability to flash as well or as long range as a real camera
- inability to take RAW photos
- inability to start up quickly and take multiple shots in a row quickly
- suffers more from low light (higher ISO affects tiny sensored phone cameras a lot more than larger-sensor cameras)
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoFox View Post
We had to suffer polygonal boobs for a decade because of selfish corporate reasons.
Main: 3570K + R9 290 + 16GB 1866 + AsRock Extreme4 Z77 + Eyefinity 5760x1080 eIPS
blastingcap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 02:11 PM   #10
Munky
Diamond Member
 
Munky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 9,377
Default

Phones are improving in photo quality, but so are compact digital cameras. Since phones still rely on a smaller sensor than even an average P&S, they will continue to be inferior in technical detail. That's not even considering other shortcomings, like a pathetic excuse for a flash, no optical zoom, no optical image stabilization - hell, most phones don't even have a real two-stage shutter button.

In other words, phones are ok if all you wanna do is take lame FB pics or wanna-be-artist Instagram snapshots. But if you're concerned with actual photo quality, then phones are still a mediocre substitute for a camera.
__________________
Core i7 @ 3.2-3.8 / AMD 6950 / 12GB DDR3 1600 / Asus Xonar D2 / Samsung 275t / Logitech z5500
Munky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2012, 02:15 PM   #11
Muse
Lifer
 
Muse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Under the rainbow over Berkeley
Posts: 14,516
Default

My Canon ELPH 100HS that I picked up refurb for under $100 has image stabilization, 4x optical zoom, can take multiple shots in short time, does HD videos, is so small and light I can carry it in my pocket everywhere (about the size of a deck of cards, less than 5 oz. including memory card and battery), has cheap batteries, is pretty good in low light situations, also has a moderately useful flash. It's not a phone.
__________________
Quotations on happiness!

Last edited by Muse; 11-13-2012 at 02:44 PM.
Muse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2012, 06:59 PM   #12
Shephard
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 766
Default

Ok I use to have a nikon coolpix. I can't remember the specs on it but I really liked it. I only got to use it a few times before someone stole it from me...

I found this old camera in one of my boxes today. Is it better than an iPhone 4 or 5 I am curious to know.

Finepix e510. I think it's maybe 6 years old I am not sure though.
Shephard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2012, 10:03 AM   #13
AnitaPeterson
Diamond Member
 
AnitaPeterson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 5,319
Default

Re: the Fujifilm Finepix e510

I am not a fan of Fujifilm digital cameras. On those that I played with, I find that often times they have produce "washed-out" colors and a kind of "plastic-wrap" contours. I am not, however, acquainted with the one you have. Since it's got a zoom as well as two macro modes, it probably still overtakes most cellphone cameras, though....
__________________
May you live in interesting times!
AnitaPeterson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2012, 12:19 PM   #14
randomrogue
Diamond Member
 
randomrogue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5,462
Default

If you're not printing them and are only posting on facebook then a camera phone might be acceptable to your average person. However if you look closely it's lacking detail and is very smudged. If it's low light it's downright terrible and the flash on them makes pictures look horrible. The second you compare a camera phone picture to just about any point and shoot on a computer screen or printed it becomes very apparent.

I think they're fun for snapshots but that's it. My 3MP digital camera from almost 15 years ago would compete very well with any camera phone today. My DSLR is in a completely different league.

Check out flikr or something and look at different images. With that said I should point out that I've seen some great pictures on a camera phone since it's a fingertip away even while stumbling home drunk from the bars. That's a nice little advantage.
randomrogue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2012, 12:53 PM   #15
Kaido
Lifer
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 29,633
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shephard View Post
My uncle is a photographer but he's travelling so I never got the chance to ask him this question.

Since every smartphone has a back camera and most have a front now I thought I would ask the question. Most seem to have at least a 5 megapixel back camera.

Is an 8 megapixel back camera from an iPhone or Galaxy 3 just as good as a real Digital Camera?

Like a $50 Digital Camera from Future Shop say vs one of these.

What about the more expensive ones?

Also Digital Cameras seem to take longer to take a picture. Where as the iPhone has like no shutter time.

thanks
A lot of it depends on how it's going to be used. There are pros and cons to using a cell phone as a camera, and that especially depends on the model you get.

I've been using an iPhone 4S to shoot photos with for about a year now. My Canon T2i dSLR has only come out 2 or 3 times in the last year for serious shoots, because I have so much fun using my smartphone camera. I can take pictures, edit pictures, and send pictures all from one device, anywhere I am. I really enjoy it as a hobby. You can take some excellent pictures, check out the "Through the lens of an iPhone" series on iPhoneography to get some ideas:

http://www.iphoneography.com/journal...s-of-an-iphone

For me, the biggest downside is no optical zoom. But since it's a cameraphone, a lot of times you can just...walk closer to the subject. So it's a gripe but not a dealbreaker for me. The quality is definitely not as good as a dSLR, but 8 megapixels is nothing to sneer at. If you want to take the "professional" route on an iPhone, the 645 Pro app mimics a lot of dSLR features and almost lets you take RAW photos (you can do uncompressed JPG's or TIFF's, which look a lot better than the regular camera apps):

http://www.cultofmac.com/162068/645-...r-seen-review/

I primarily use Camera+ because (1) I can lock the focus & exposure independently, (2) it has easy tweak features (clarity, auto, backlight, flash, etc.), (3) good crop tools, and (4) fun filters (more like Lightroom presets than Instagram, if you know the difference):

http://campl.us/

Here are some other tools in my toolbox:

Perfectly Clear: Noise reduction
http://www.athentech.com/iphone-ipad.html

AfterFocus: Lets you select objects and do a dSLR-style blur
http://appm1.com/afterfocus/

Image Straightener: Allows for rotation of images
https://itunes.apple.com/app/image-s...er/id473124432

Photo FX: Filters from Tiffen, really really great app. Awesome film grain.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/phot...300630942?mt=8

Snapseed: More powerful image tweaking program
http://www.snapseed.com/home/mobile/features/

PhotoToaster: I like this better than Photoshop Express
http://www.eastcoastpixels.com/cgi-bin/product.php?p=4

I have a handful more, but that's enough to give you an idea. I think I'm up to 25,000 shots on my 4S now. I really enjoy it. I love my Canon T2i dSLR and my collection of vintage Zeiss lenses, but...the iPhone is always in my pocket, ready to go in seconds, ready for me to tinker with editing, ready for me to send via email, twitter, and facebook. I'm a fan
__________________
Dave Likes Food
Kaido is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 07:57 AM   #16
torrado
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 3
Default

Best softwares for editing are adobe photoshop.
torrado is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 01:36 PM   #17
Kaido
Lifer
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 29,633
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by torrado View Post
Best softwares for editing are adobe photoshop.
Free iPods edit better!
__________________
Dave Likes Food
Kaido is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 03:08 PM   #18
blastingcap
Diamond Member
 
blastingcap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 5,869
Default

Maybe you wouldn't need to edit it so much if it were a real camera.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoFox View Post
We had to suffer polygonal boobs for a decade because of selfish corporate reasons.
Main: 3570K + R9 290 + 16GB 1866 + AsRock Extreme4 Z77 + Eyefinity 5760x1080 eIPS
blastingcap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2012, 03:01 PM   #19
AnitaPeterson
Diamond Member
 
AnitaPeterson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 5,319
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shephard View Post
Like a $50 Digital Camera from Future Shop [...]
Side note for our American friends: FutureShop is a store akin to what Circuit City used to be in the States (except that CC has folded, and FS is owned by BestBuy). Pretty much a poor pretense that there's competition on the market (even though it's not...)
__________________
May you live in interesting times!
AnitaPeterson is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.