iPhone 5 vs Budget Compact

[havoc315]

Originally Posted by photo_chick

Are you sure that's not noise you're seeing? Looks a lot more like noise and not low resolution to me on those first two. But what do I know. I'm just a girl with a camera.

It's probably both. But I did notice, at least on the computer screen, shrink it down to "print size" of around 4x6, and noise/resolution wasn't an issue.

[rossb]

Originally Posted by photo_chick

Are you sure that's not noise you're seeing? Looks a lot more like noise and not low resolution to me on those first two.

Here is a 100% crop from the original, with EXIF in the file:

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/49...wnload/2385351

[havoc315]

Originally Posted by rossb

Here is a 100% crop from the original, with EXIF in the file:

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/49...wnload/2385351

Very noisy when you pixel peep. Looks quite good in a smaller print size.
The typical trade off with almost any camera indoors and low light, a more naturally lit picture, with more noise...
Or reduce the noise by allowing a flash to produce very unnatural lighting.
It's a personal preference, as to which is worse.. Noise or flash.
Personally, if the lighting was that low, I'd consider using my bounce flash, to allow a lower ISO without harsh flash reflections. But a bounce flash isn't an option on most compacts.

For example, this was taken at a wedding with an ultra high end compact. Apply aggressive noise reduction, so lost detail and still have noise... But that's the price for the more natural lighting.


moserwedding-105-6 by Havoc315, on Flickr


moserwedding-101-4 by Havoc315, on Flickr

As you can see, the iPhone picture you posted, isn't too much worse than the results from the rx100. I'm actually a bit surprised that its even close. This isn't a cheap compact by any means.

[rossb]

Originally Posted by havoc315

As you can see, the iPhone picture you posted, isn't too much worse than the results from the rx100.

The phone pic was taken in a very bright room with a lot of day light. The Sony P&S picture appears to have been taken in a much darker room. I do not agree with your analysis of these two images.

[havoc315]

Originally Posted by rossb

The phone pic was taken in a very bright room with a lot of day light. The Sony P&S picture appears to have been taken in a much darker room. I do not agree with your analysis of these two images.

Well I would hope so! If the iPhone can come close to the rx100, then I wasted a lot of money.
So I wasn't trying to make a side by side comparison...
Just demonstrating the difficulty of flash-less indoor photography for any camera, and the pros and cons of using a flash.

You seem hung up on wanting a strong built in flash. If that's a high priority for you, it's a good reason to take even a budget compact.
On the other hand, I would never use a built in flash for an indoor picture, unless I'm taking the photo for insurance purposes, etc. But I wouldn't use a built-in flash to ever try to get a "nice picture."

It's personal preference, I'd much rather have some noise instead of harsh glare from a flash. I will use a bounce flash indoors, but that's not an option on most compacts. Outdoors, I will sometimes use the built in flash as a fill flash.

[mikegood2]

So I just finished reading this tread, and also followed the previous thread that this discussion started and guess I'm just a little confused about the purpose of it. Is it just trying to show that the quality gap between a higher end smart phone and p&s have really narrowed and have negated the need for a lower end p&s? Or has it become the oh so common, your photo sucks and let me tell you why critique.

For starters, I do not have a smartphone, just can't justify the added data plan expense when I'm around wifi 90%+ of the time, but I have seen enough photos to at least give an opinion. I feel that the better smartphones are more than good enough to replace a point and shoot for everyday shooting for most people. Also the reality is that they do keep on improving every year , just look at the low light capabilities of the lumix 920?.

To me the point on the other thread was that for a trip to Disney World a smartphone camera (iPhone) was all anyone really needed and at least for me that is not the case. While a phone has the advantage of being a all in one device and very convenient it just would not work for me. That said if I had one I'm sure I would use it more that I would expect because of these advantages. A $150+ p&s (who am I kidding mine will cost more) just have to many other advantages like optical zoom, replaceable batteries, SD cards, etc. There are also so many options that a person can prioritize what features are important to them and buy accordingly.

Like many other people I don't get to Disney very often so the photos and videos I shoot are very important to me and a smartphone wouldn't cut it. What will work (p&s, micro 4/3, dSLR), well I guess that is what I have to figure out by June

[Pea-n-Me]

Can someone please post the thread that inspired this one?

[hakepb]

Originally Posted by Pea-n-Me

Can someone please post the thread that inspired this one?

I think this is it:
http://disboards.com/showthread.php?t=3038102

[mikegood2]

Originally Posted by hakepb

I think this is it:
http://disboards.com/showthread.php?t=3038102

Yep, that's the one. It was the 5th post by mrrogers that started the discussion/argument mainly between havoc315 and rossb

Sent from my iPad mini using DISBoards

[havoc315]

Originally Posted by mikegood2

So I just finished reading this tread, and also followed the previous thread that this discussion started and guess I'm just a little confused about the purpose of it. Is it just trying to show that the quality gap between a higher end smart phone and p&s have really narrowed and have negated the need for a lower end p&s? Or has it become the oh so common, your photo sucks and let me tell you why critique.

For starters, I do not have a smartphone, just can't justify the added data plan expense when I'm around wifi 90%+ of the time,

The purpose is just an intellectual discussion of the merits of a good smart phone camera, when compared to low-end point and shoots. Just to address whether a good camera phone can serve as a replacement for a low-end point and shoot, can even be a superior camera to really low-end point and shoots.
Obviously, the answer to these questions depend a lot on the priorities of the shooter -- if optical zoom is extremely important for example -- it may push someone in one direction. While if easy photo sharing is important, it will push the shooter in another direction. So this was to look at the more basic question of image quality, under like circumstances.

As to your statement about not having a smartphone --- I would not recommend to anyone that they get a smartphone specifically FOR photography. With a data plan, that would be a ridiculous price to pay just for iphone-camera.
So the way I looked at the question.... if someone already has a very good smart phone camera, and wanted basic snapshots without investing much money, is it worth it for them to get a cheapy budget P&S?

While conclusions will vary, and depend on the priorities a person will set, my own conclusion is that I find the IQ of the iPhone 5 is better than very low-end point and shoot cameras... Throw in the extra conveniences, I'd prefer it over a very low-end point and shoot. BUT, it would never replace my dSLR, or a good compact system.

[mikegood2]

Thanks havoc315 and don't get me wrong I thing you brought up a useful discussion.

One of the problems with discussion boards is that it can be easy to misinterpret what someone writes and discussions can easily get hijacked. I ran into that with photochick the other day where we both misread what the other wrote. I also ran into that with the photography pet peeve thread I started last week where one of mine was the use of cel phone for cameras. In my defense though, I was basing that on my visit almost two years ago and referencing flip phones. I don't think smartphones used for photography will bother me this summer.

Like many have mentioned before, whatever works for someone else is great, but at the same time that might not work for them. Our last trip we shot with a Nikon P300 and S9100 and were happy with the quality we got. I also brought my dSLR, but only used it on two days, because it was just to inconvenient. Would I have gotten better results with the DSLR, sure, but the convenience of the p&s were greater and we also took more photos than we would have otherwise. The fact that I shot a good amount of video, which my dSLR couldn't, also had a big influence on my decision.

Sent from my iPad mini using DISBoards

[havoc315]

Originally Posted by mikegood2

Thanks havoc315 and don't get me wrong I thing you brought up a useful discussion.

One of the problems with discussion boards is that it can be easy to misinterpret what someone writes and discussions can easily get hijacked. I ran into that with photochick the other day where we both misread what the other wrote. I also ran into that with the photography pet peeve thread I started last week where one of mine was the use of cel phone for cameras. In my defense though, I was basing that on my visit almost two years ago and referencing flip phones. I don't think smartphones used for photography will bother me this summer.

It's ironic that I'm the one who, at least on the surface, is advocating on behalf of smart phones. I seldom ever use my smart phone for pictures. I do believe in making reasonable investments, within your budget, in good gear. And that better gear can produce better pictures.

But I think sometimes there is bad information out there, bad conventional wisdom. And I don't subscribe to any absolutes. In the thread that inspired this one.... You had some posters arguing that smart phones are as good as most P&S cameras. I certainly don't agree with that statement (though there are some shooters, based on their priorities, who will always prefer the smart phone). Then you had other posters saying that just about any P&S in across-the-board superior to any smart phone. I found that statement to be equally inaccurate. (while a separate and distinct P&S may always have some advantages, based on the shooter's priorities, I think between my own experience, what I have seen from others, what I have read from professionals, and the objective testing I have seen from dxomark... a good smart phone camera can produce superior images to lower level P&S cameras).

Discussions like this aren't meant to insult anyone, they aren't meant to "win" or "lose." Just provide fodder for thought, to challenge people's notions and let them think critically. (My own opinions have evolved in this discussion.)

And a thread like this.... can give a novice insight into whether to upgrade from a smartphone camera or not.

[ukstitch]

Interestingly on this topic, Jessops (a long standing photography retailer here in the UK) has gone into financial administration today and it's been said that one of the key reasons is that they've lost their "amateur" market who now favour the cameras built into their smartphones instead.

[boBQuincy]

Originally Posted by ukstitch

Interestingly on this topic, Jessops (a long standing photography retailer here in the UK) has gone into financial administration today and it's been said that one of the key reasons is that they've lost their "amateur" market who now favour the cameras built into their smartphones instead.

A lot of this is due to choosing convenience over quality, much like MP3s instead of CDs or fast food over good food (and I sometimes make those same choices too). Unfortunately the less convenient but higher quality choice often becomes a niche market in time.

[Pea-n-Me]

Thanks to those who posted the link to the previous thread.

Sticking my neck out here, but hopefully it's worth it....

I think trouble brews around here when people vehemently state opinions as facts. Or try to persuade others to their way of thinking when others have different views, experiences and understandings.

The worst is when people assume others are stupid because they made different choices. Especially about brands, and as of late, types of cameras.

There are so many aspects of photography. Different things are important to different people. It's so individual...

It hasn't been often that it has happened here, but it seems to be happening more lately. I've wondered why some posters have left the forum and have been told firsthand that this is the reason.

Sad. Because we should be able to discuss things without arguing and to show some sensitivity when others have a different opinion. Sometimes you just have to let it go if it's becoming intense or personal.

I mean, informational discussions are one thing. But arguments are another.

This is a great, friendly forum for information. Let's strive to keep it that way.