iphone vs APS-C dSLR/mirrorless

[havoc315]

I expect this post may be controversial. A few years ago, I was surprised to find compact cameras -- with 1" sensors, that had largely caught up to dSLRs... at least when compared to a dSLR with kit lens.
For the sake of this post, when using the term dSLR, I mean a consumer APS-C camera, whether dSLR or mirrorless.
It has gone as a matter of accepted wisdom that dSLRs have better low light performance than smart phones. This certainly was true for a long time.
Some caveats -- a dSLR still has far more potential than a smart phone. If you are shooting raw and/or using better lenses and/or really utilize the proper manual settings.
And a dSLR with a kit lens will still be able to do things that a smart phone can't do -- namely zoom in and out to different focal lengths. Most dSLRs will also have higher resolution, so if you are printing large, they will be better.

Now, with all those footnotes out of the way --- I believe today's best smart phones have caught up to dSLRs in terms of low light performance, at least when shooting a still scene. The smart phone will resort to much slower shutter speeds, not necessarily making it ideal for anything moving.

But, when shooting jpeg, full auto, with kit lens....

For this comparison, I used the Sony A6300, set to jpeg and full auto, with the included kit lens. I shot the same scene in the same light, with the iphone 7:

A6300 and kit lens auto by Adam Brown, on Flickr

A6300 and kit lens auto by Adam Brown, on Flickr

In these 2 examples, I find the IQ nearly identical for mid-sized images. I actually find the iphone shot a bit better exposed.

Next 2 examples were in even lower light:

Untitled by Adam Brown, on Flickr

Untitled by Adam Brown, on Flickr

IQ is nearly identical again, though I actually prefer the white balance in the iphone image. The A6300 white balance looks too yellow and orange for my taste.

I think I'll do some more side by side.. maybe trying portraits next.

But for shooters who want to stick to pure auto, and who aren't going to upgrade lenses, the newest smart phones may indeed be the best options. (depending on what and how they shoot).
Remember... the iphone 7 is no cheap camera. It includes many high-end camera aspects -- It has a 1.8 lens, so much wider aperture than dSLR kit lenses. dSLRs all have computers built-in, but the iphone has a much faster and more powerful computer -- which allows it to make calculations faster, which allows for improved image quality as well. It has a touch screen, far superior to any dSLR. It has much better social media/wifi/sharing features than any dSLR. It has superior video features compared to most dSLRs.

If you're comfortable shooting at 28mm and foot zoom, a good smart phone *might* be the best camera for an auto shooter.

 

[fractal]

Agree after playing around with my wife's new IPhone 7.

Very comparable to a DSLR/mirrorless with kit lens. The new portrait mode also lets you cheat by digitally blurring out the background, which gives you a "look" you might not be able to get with a kit lens.

 

[havoc315]

Agree after playing around with my wife's new IPhone 7.

Very comparable to a DSLR/mirrorless with kit lens. The new portrait mode also lets you cheat by digitally blurring out the background, which gives you a "look" you might not be able to get with a kit lens.

Yes, still no comparison to an enthusiast photographer who knows what they are doing, processing raw, upgrading lenses.

But so often, we get the person asking for the best camera they can use on auto. 5 years ago, I would easily have said that even on auto, a dSLR beats a phone. I don't think that's true anymore.

 

[havoc315]

Part 2... Let's try a subject not guaranteed to stay still...

Untitled by Adam Brown, on Flickr

Untitled by Adam Brown, on Flickr

#1 is the A6300 with kit lens --- I think it looks pretty bad. #2 is the iphone pic, and I actually think it looks a bit better. Much better exposure. Though in fairness, I had to take a few photos with the phone, as a couple came out blurry at first.

Then decided to try the A6300 on manual settings, with a better lens... the 35/1.8. It's a very different focal length, and will lead to narrower depth of field. So it's not a perfect comparison. Though I shot manually, I stuck to jpg with no post processing.

Untitled by Adam Brown, on Flickr

I do think it is the best of the three shots, but the exposure is actually better on the iphone. In the real world, I would have shot in raw and post processing, and then it would be clearly superior to the iphone.
But.. I'm more and more convinced, that the iphone is not just viable, but may be preferable for auto-jpg shooters.

 

[xlxo]

Thoughts....

• nothing beats the compact size of a smartphone. Sadly low light and flash photography is the weakness.
• DSLR's come with different sizes.... the Nikon D3%00 is very compact compared to other DSLR's. My D300 loses the vertical grip when travelling.
• Need to think about what lenses you plan to use or travel with. When travelling, I like my 18-200/18-300 zoom lenses. Don't have time for lens swapping during an excursion.
• I considered mirrorless....
  • which is cheaper... D3%00 versus Sony A6%00?
  • which lens is cheaper?
  • batteries.... mirrorless suck battery big time with those LCD's. Not only are they expensive.... the extra batteries take up extra space and weight in the camera bag.

 

[bob100]

I agree, use your smartphone
(or a $100 mirrorless if you want versatility)


Untitled by c w, on Flickr

 

[havoc315]

Thoughts....

• nothing beats the compact size of a smartphone. Sadly low light and flash photography is the weakness.
• DSLR's come with different sizes.... the Nikon D3%00 is very compact compared to other DSLR's. My D300 loses the vertical grip when travelling.
• Need to think about what lenses you plan to use or travel with. When travelling, I like my 18-200/18-300 zoom lenses. Don't have time for lens swapping during an excursion.
• I considered mirrorless....
  • which is cheaper... D3%00 versus Sony A6%00?
  • which lens is cheaper?
  • batteries.... mirrorless suck battery big time with those LCD's. Not only are they expensive.... the extra batteries take up extra space and weight in the camera bag.

Actually, as demonstrated, the iPhone isn't worse than a dSLR + kit lens in low light.

As I demonstrated in another thread, mirrorless APS-C is about the same price as mirrorless dSLR. (For example, the a6500 is much cheaper than the d500. The a6300 is a far better camera than the d7200 but it's the same price, the entry level a5100 is cheaper than the entry level d3400,etc) Depending on which lenses you value, mirrorless may be cheaper or may cost a tiny bit more.
In terms of size -- if you are a wide angle and prime shooter, mirrorless can be MUCH smaller.(even with extra batteries) If you're a telephoto shooter, weight differences become more negligible.

I know some people love the convenience of the 18-200/300 lenses. My problem with them, you're taking a nice camera, and hobbling the IQ to make it worse than a smart phone.

 

[bob100]

Actually, as demonstrated, the iPhone isn't worse than a dSLR + kit lens in low light.

As I demonstrated in another thread, mirrorless APS-C is about the same price as mirrorless dSLR. (

I know some people love the convenience of the 18-200/300 lenses. My problem with them, you're taking a nice camera, and hobbling the IQ to make it worse than a smart phone.

it's all about convenience, price and performance

For the 99% a cell phone is enuff
For the elite 1% - cell phone and a mirrorless (with more than a 100-300 lens)

Untitled by c w, on Flickr

 

[zackiedawg]

While this might address the question of what the general masses should use - especially those with no interest in photography but just wanting to get photographs of their trips - the modern phones have become very smart with all their auto processing decisions, designed to give the best screen-displayed result for those who don't want to take the time to learn anything about how to control the exposures - it really is a better solution for most because most likely it's with them already, and it often will make better decisions to deliver a poppy, nice looking result if pixel-peeping isn't involved - which it rarely would be for most people. What it doesn't address is the person who really does enjoy photography - and just may not derive any pleasure out of using a phone to take a photo. I know this is a small group of people, but it's worth considering that even if an iPhone camera was the same resolution and the same sensor size as a P&S model - some folks would still prefer the P&S model because it has an optical zoom, it has direct controls on the body, it has a tactile shutter button, it has a viewfinder, and so on...it's just more comfortable and enjoyable to use for some. That's what it comes down to for me - I simply enjoy using cameras - so I'll always bring one, no matter how small the trip, how limited my packing space, or tough it would be to carry. I'll range to smaller cameras and larger cameras, but never a phone camera...because I just don't like the entire interface, design, and style of shooting with a flat rectangle with all touch controls that might ring at any moment with a call.

 

[havoc315]

What it doesn't address is the person who really does enjoy photography - and just may not derive any pleasure out of using a phone to take a photo. I know this is a small group of people, but it's worth considering that even if an iPhone camera was the same resolution and the same sensor size as a P&S model - some folks would still prefer the P&S model because it has an optical zoom, it has direct controls on the body, it has a tactile shutter button, it has a viewfinder, and so on...it's just more comfortable and enjoyable to use for some.

I 100% agree. I'm not trading in my kit.
You could say I'm addressing the people who ask, "I want to step up to a real camera, but I don't want bulky, I don't want to spend a lot extra on lenses, and I want to stick to auto... I just want better pictures in auto mode."
Truthfully... we've become spoiled. Today's best smart phones are the best kit-auto cameras around.

They are NOT a replacement for people who love the experience and tactile feel of a camera, people who want to take manual control over the exposure, people who want telephoto for sports or wildlife, people who want beautiful Bokeh with creamy blurred backgrounds.

But if you're an auto-shooter sticking to around 28mm, it may be your best option.

 

[xlxo]

Another thing to consider..... phone battery life.

 

[havoc315]

Another thing to consider..... phone battery life.

Honestly... that's where the phone is a winner. Especially since how easy it is to re-charge the phone battery with a "rod."

I mean, if you're taking thousands of shots in a day, the phone isn't the best solution. But a casual photographer isn't taking that many shots.

 

[bob100]

I 100% agree. I'm not trading in my kit.
.

yes, I'm also one that's not trading in my "kit"

especially when the cell phone pics are at longer exposures
(but I've got the 'rod" for cell phones)

www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[puddleduck]

iphone and other cell phone cameras can take some good pictures, on the surface the pictures look good but you will never have the flexibility to crop and otherwise manipulate them, there is just not enough depth there. I salvaged a lot of shots by being able to crop them, resize them etc.

 

[havoc315]

I've been trying to use the iPhone camera more... and I'm impressed. Still not replacing any of my "real" cameras.... But it really can do as well as most kit dSLRs..

Stop by Adam Brown, on Flickr

 

[Pea-n-Me]

I still use my dSLR primarily for sports, but my iPhone has pretty much become my daily camera. I would have to blow the dust of my mirrorless, haven't used it in a while. I do think a lot of the quality you're going to get depends on the user, not only in capturing the shot, but perhaps cropping or editing it, if needed. I am one who enjoys using a camera, but lugging all the dSLR gear around is cumbersome, and that I don't like.

Time to revive this: http://www.disboards.com/threads/photo-sharing-iphone-and-mobile-devices.3060063/

 

[bob100]

I still use my dSLR primarily for sports, but my iPhone has pretty much become my daily camera. I would have to blow the dust of my mirrorless, haven't used it in a while. I do think a lot of the quality you're going to get depends on the user, not only in capturing the shot, but perhaps cropping or editing it, if needed. I am one who enjoys using a camera, but lugging all the dSLR gear around is cumbersome, and that I don't like/

right, it's the camera you always have with you. if I'm going to an event, museum, etc. I'll try and take the mirrorless, - small and light and better than a cell phone. I'll use the DSLR for sports and places where I'm not walking around all day and need the long telephoto
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[dmaxphil]

Just got the 7 plus and I think I was (maybe) expecting too much. Portrait mode in anything but bright light is resulting in extremely grainy images. In outdoor light, the effect is pretty convincing. In normal photo mode it takes good shots, but 100% crops are not really comparable to APS-C, though I'll admit I haven't really worked on my technique with this monster.

 

[havoc315]

Just got the 7 plus and I think I was (maybe) expecting too much. Portrait mode in anything but bright light is resulting in extremely grainy images. In outdoor light, the effect is pretty convincing. In normal photo mode it takes good shots, but 100% crops are not really comparable to APS-C, though I'll admit I haven't really worked on my technique with this monster.

I wouldn't expect 100% crops to be quite as good (but closer than I would have expected).

For the perfectionist, which I generally am myself, the phone will not satisfy.

But if you are looking at facebook sized images... or printing 4x6.. or even printing 8x10... Without extensive cropping... on auto.. in jpeg.. Other than optical zoom range, I think there is very little advantage of the aps-c kit dSLR.
Let me put it this way -- I have taught 2 terms of an into-to-enthusiast-photography class -- It is basically middle aged adults who have owned a dSLR for several years, and now want to figure out what to actually do with it. Most of them had never even cropped photos before, at least not on a regular basis. They all had been take the photos straight out of the camera, and have them printed at Costco or posted on facebook.

My kids are 12 and 10. As recently as 5 years ago, if went to any type of school function (play, birthday party, picnic, etc), at least half the parents would have dSLRs and would be snapping away. Now, 95% are snapping away with their iphones -- And I doubt their photos are any worse. Their photos may actually be better -- I think the "auto" mode on an iphone might be smarter than dSLRs.
Same with Disney World -- I just went in summer of 2016 for the first time since 2012. In 2012, I saw at least half the families taking photos with dSLRs.... In 2016, I would say only 10-20% seemed to be using dSLRs or mirrorless.. everyone else was using phones. And I doubt their photos were any worse in 2016 than in 2012.

Anyway... your photo samples are pretty sharp and detailed. No worse than the layperson gets out of a kit dSLR.

 

[mom2rtk]

My DD got an iphone 7 this week. I'm really anxious to try this test out for myself!