do today's camera phones take better pics than 1st gen DSLR's?

[Oyeve]

Hell, my Olympus C5060 takes better pics than my S4, Note 3 and IP5.

 

[Commodus]

I'd say the differences between early DSLRs and better smartphones aren't so big that it'd be worth hauling the DSLR around. Yes, you'll definitely get better optics, but mobile sensors have come a long, long way.

More importantly, software makes all the difference. On an older DSLR, I have to wait until I get back to a computer to copy the files and slowly post them online. On my phone, I can have photos and video on multiple social networks within minutes. A great shot doesn't mean much if no one can see it!

 

[openwheel]

Most of the best photos I've taken are with cellphones. DSLR just can't beat the convenience. My 3 week vacation last Dec in Europe I simply left my DSLR at home and was I glad I did. A point and shoot and Galaxy S4 took care all the important shots we need. Avoid looking like a foolish tourist and lugging a giant camera with long lens.

If I have kids then it will be a different story.....that diaper bag comes in handy

 

[cronos]

See now the last two replies have some great points and are likely correct but that was a completely different discussion and was not what was asked in the OP.

Can the pictures taken from current phones compete with images taken with the first prosumer DSLRs? Assuming the photographer knows anything about taking photographs, the answer to that question is definitely a no.

 

[mnewsham]

Can the pictures taken from current phones compete with images taken with the first prosumer DSLRs? Assuming the photographer knows anything about taking photographs, the answer to that question is definitely a no

Obviously, yet amazing shots can still be taken with a cell phone camera, hell my phone has actual optical image stabilization IN A PHONE. Some of the replies in this thread seem to imply that cell phones can't take decent quality pictures at all, which is just not true any more.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

I think there's a lot of smug people in this forum who are like "No freaking way." I agree that DSLRs are amazing, but remember the P&S back in 2004? I have a SD600 and it just absolutely sucks. The noise processing was so bad that ISO400 would make the whole picture grainy. The iPhone comfortably shoots ISO1200 with better noise control. P&S and DSLRs have evolved too over time with the increase of processing power. The noise control you can get today at ISO1600, or 3200 was completely impossible back then. You might as well throw sand all over your film when you develop if you wanted those ISOs with a DSLR back then.

I have some Rebel XTI photos I'm looking at and they look decent, but an iPhone also looks great. You won't get the same bokeh effects, but in terms of sharpness? When you post it at a web resolution, even like 1280x720 or something on Facebook, the iPhone can often look just as good. Day shots you can get even better images SOOC on an iPhone with HDR, etc. Night shots? Yeah, no contest. Good luck trying to replicate what I do at the club with my flash and bounce techniques.

And careful even when you pull P&S out. There's still a lot of budget level $100 cameras that look half decent. They in no way compare to a high end P&S like a Canon S95 or Sony RX100. The difference is night and day. Everytime someone asks me for a new camera, without a doubt I point them to the high end P&S. There's no point wasting your money on something less.

 

[cronos]

Again, two awesome replies that are absolutely true, but not what was asked in the OP 😀

 

[mnewsham]

Again, two awesome replies that are absolutely true, but not what was asked in the OP 😀

:thumbsdown:

If you're just going to be off topic please stop replying, while the OP is not about cell phone vs. point and shoot. You can't deny that it is still very relevant, so please just stop if you have nothing to add.

 

[vi edit]

And careful even when you pull P&S out. There's still a lot of budget level $100 cameras that look half decent. They in no way compare to a high end P&S like a Canon S95 or Sony RX100. The difference is night and day. Everytime someone asks me for a new camera, without a doubt I point them to the high end P&S. There's no point wasting your money on something less.

Yeah, my Rebel has collected dust since getting my RX100. It's a fantastic little device. Video is very good and the low light shooting is *almost* as good as a full body SLR. Amazing piece of technology.

 

[Jinny]

i use a canon 5d Mki. its not exactly first gen, but about 9 years old.
a phone camera is not even remotely close.

 

[TerryMathews]

just wondering how far we've come with these tiny lenses and sensors.
or how crappy the original DSLRs were (before my time/experience with DSLR).

Class photography newbie mistake, confusing resolution with visual quality.

There are a laundry list of things that a an old DSLR can do that a camera phone cannot given that the DSLR has a decently sized image sensor.

The problem is, those things that DSLRs excel at are niche activities.

Non-moving subject, close range, sufficient light, your camera phone is probably going to take equal or better shots.

Soccer game at dusk? Only the DSLR will give you usable shots and only then with good glass.

 

[CptObvious]

The newest smartphones use camera sensors that are more technologically advanced than current DSLR sensors, and much better than 1st gen DSLRs. For example, the Sony Exmor RS (in the newer iPhones and Galaxy Ss) uses stacked structure sensors and backside illumination, as well as a much higher pixel pitch than DSLR sensors, including Sony's 24MP APS-C and 36MP APS Exmor sensors.

However, even with advances in sensor technology, a smartphone sensor can't overcome the laws of physics and the light-gathering ability of a larger sensor, even if a first gen. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format#Table_of_sensor_formats_and_sizes The iPhone 5S has a sensor area of 17.3 sq mm, while the biggest smartphone sensor is the Nokia 808 PureView (85.33 sq mm). Contrast that with your average DSLR sensor (~350 sq mm), a full-frame sensor (860 sq mm), or even a high-end compact like the Sony RX100 (116 sq mm).

 

[finbarqs]

take your cell, and take a pic of a high contrast scene. Hell take a pic at night, and see if you can even get details on the lit parts. Take it to a concert, where it's quite challenging for the phone to sort out the exposure.

 

[TerryMathews]

The newest smartphones use camera sensors that are more technologically advanced than current DSLR sensors, and much better than 1st gen DSLRs. For example, the Sony Exmor RS (in the newer iPhones and Galaxy Ss) uses stacked structure sensors and backside illumination, as well as a much higher pixel pitch than DSLR sensors, including Sony's 24MP APS-C and 36MP APS Exmor sensors.

However, even with advances in sensor technology, a smartphone sensor can't overcome the laws of physics and the light-gathering ability of a larger sensor, even if a first gen. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format#Table_of_sensor_formats_and_sizes The iPhone 5S has a sensor area of 17.3 sq mm, while the biggest smartphone sensor is the Nokia 808 PureView (85.33 sq mm). Contrast that with your average DSLR sensor (~350 sq mm), a full-frame sensor (860 sq mm), or even a high-end compact like the Sony RX100 (116 sq mm).

As they say in the car world: there's no replacement for displacement.

 

[notposting]

I don't have a DSLR, so I can't directly compare. Obviously there are comparisons like some of the ones listed above, there are some inherent restrictions on the phone cameras (lens, sensor size, optical zoom, etc).

As for cameras we do have, my wife and I started off with a 2mp Finepix way back in the early 2000's. Took some really nice shots on it though. Upgraded to the S2 IS at some point, and used it for quite awhile. Once our son was moving around a lot by the end of 2011, we picked up an ELPH 100 HS (in hot pink! 😛). The ELPH with the backlit sensor really upped the game for indoor shots.

As for phone cameras during this time, I went from various crap flip phones to the OG Droid, then an HTC Trophy. They were basically all garbage.

Got the Lumia 928 last year, (so decent size cell sensor, but still in same league as iPhone's etc, not 808/1020 league). Hardly use the ELPH anymore (wife does every now and then) as the photos are in the same neighborhood of quality. Playing with the various settings available (wb, manual focus, ISO, shutter speed, exposure) can bring out pics I wouldn't have even tried with my old cell phones. And of course, I *always* have my phone on me -- and the pics can be shared immediately, can take a pic with friends/family, a little cleanup, and email away. Some of the phones are starting to save in RAW now. (Also, the 1020 and 1520 don't just crop, they will interpolate until close to 3x 'zoom'. Which helps with the 5mp version of the pics they save.)

Looking at the DPReview Connect article, it is pretty amazing where the phones have gotten to. Do they measure up across the board? No. Can they take some great shots? Yep. 🙂

Someone with a good eye and an understanding of their equipment should be able to take a good shot (which may mean appropriate for their equipment) regardless, right?

 

[TerryMathews]

Someone with a good eye and an understanding of their equipment should be able to take a good shot (which may mean appropriate for their equipment) regardless, right?

If appropriate for their equipment includes the scene itself, then yes.

Youre never going to get PDAF on a smartphone camera. And no amount of technology is going to overcome the limitations of superdense photo sensors relative to their less dense counterparts.

A DSLR is a prosumer+ tool. Just like not everyone needs a GTX780, not everyone needs a DSLR. I have one and dont use it for most photography. That said, when I need it, its irreplaceable.

 

[openwheel]

As they say in the car world: there's no replacement for displacement.

Force induction.
Sorry, back to topic.

 

[TerryMathews]

Force induction.
Sorry, back to topic.

Are you implying you can't apply forced induction to a large displacement engine? ;-)

 

[openwheel]

Force induction can be replacement for displacement.

Unless, of course, you only read what you want to read.

 

[TerryMathews]

Force induction can be replacement for displacement.

Unless, of course, you only read what you want to read.

Still failing to see how its a replacement.

Youre equating displacement with HP when in reality it is much more which is why it makes a better than decent analogy to sensor size.

 

[SKORPI0]

Camera sensor size: Why does it matter and exactly how big are they?

What different-sized sensors – Full Frame, APS-C, MFT, 1-inch, 2/3-inch, 1/2.3-inch, 1/3.2-inch – would have captured if using the same lens to take this photo

 

[openwheel]

Still failing to see how its a replacement.

Youre equating displacement with HP when in reality it is much more which is why it makes a better than decent analogy to sensor size.

You are assuming I equate displacement with HP. That's the beginning of your failure to see how its a replacement. Even if I was, you still lose the argument. Perhaps you can find me at any automotive/racing forum and we can continue the discussion.

I understand your analogy that larger sensor is the way to go. Just that your borrowed quote from automotive World is not a good one.

 

[TerryMathews]

You are assuming I equate displacement with HP. That's the beginning of your failure to see how its a replacement. Even if I was, you still lose the argument. Perhaps you can find me at any automotive/racing forum and we can continue the discussion.

I understand your analogy that larger sensor is the way to go. Just that your borrowed quote from automotive World is not a good one.

So then explain why because what youre saying runs contrary to my understanding of racing.

"You're wrong." with no explanation behind it is a specious argument.

ETA: and the more I think about it, the more I think you're assertion that it isn't a good analogy is incorrect.

Displacement: sensor size
FI: backlit CMOS

 

[shortylickens]

Just thought I should point out that the question wasn't if todays camera phone take better shots than 10 year old DSLRs like the rebel, but rather 1st gen DSLRs, in which case we're talking stuff like the DCS 100 which came out almost 23 years ago.

which still have better pixel level quality, just inferior in the features.

 

[openwheel]

PM sent Terry