Camera vs IPhone along with PhotoPass+???

[mmccutche]

Nearing 30 days til our first trip w family... As we countdown, a question that we wrestle with is whether we need a camera for the trip. Have signed up for photo pass+ and will have 2 IPhones.

Would you bring camera in addition to photo pass +?
Will the Disney photographers be wiling to take pics with our phones?

Thanks

 

[mickey1968]

I got along really nicely last year with my brand new iphone 5. It has 8 megapixel sensor and a faily wide open lens. It made posting pics to Facebook alot easier. Photopass photogs had no problem using my phone to take pics of me when I wanted. Also, I have printed a bunch for scrapbooking and the daytime pics look really crisp at 4x6, nighttime pics still have blur.

All that being said, I am shopping for myself a DSLR or high-end compact camera that will do well in low light for the nighttime parades and fireworks.

 

[kgsmith]

I did this on our mother-son trip last month. We took advantage of so many Photopass photographers while we were there, and we got a lot of great photos. And yes, they will take a photo with your phone. Many times I didn't even have to ask --They offered! That worked out well because I could text my husband with a photo right away (since he couldn't come with us on our trip).

I also used a Mophie battery case on my iPhone so that I could charge my phone while in the park. And I carried a Mophie power pack.

 

[AZlady]

Photographers will take photos using your phone. They even ask to do it!

 

[Pea-n-Me]

The simple answer is, "It depends": Which phone you have, what your photography habits and skills are, where you're going that day or night, etc. I'd probably bring everything, but might enjoy the freedom of leaving everything but the phone in the room once in a while, despite knowing I'd have some regrets here and there.

A friend of mine just came back and didn't bring her dSLR at all (or even a point and shoot; just her phone). She said it was awesome. I don't think I'd ever go that far, but to each his own!

 

[Tropical Wilds]

I wouldn't dream of relying on my cellphone camera for a Disney vacation. I use it to take some pictures, but not a lot. And the Photopass+ is fine for what it is, but we got a lot of crummy pictures back from that, plus if you're wanting a picture of something that's not near a PP+ Photographer, you're OOL.

 

[cjstarr]

I have to side with the other poster here that would never go to WDW without all their camera equipment. IMHO I could never trust a Iphone or any cellphone to give me the pictures I would want. Now this is from someone that does not get to go to WDW anytime I want. If and I say "if" I lived in Florida and got to go as much as I wanted to (once or twice a week) then I might go with only a cellphone but even the odds would be against me doing that as I would be afraid of missing a good shot. I enjoy the memories I get and I would want the pictures that I took to reflect this and to me a cellphone would not do this.
JMHO

 

[havoc315]

Among many factors to consider, is the camera alternative to the iPhone. The iPhone quality is quite comparable to some cheaper point and shoots. So you're not necessarily missing much if you rely on the phone.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

I don't know... I took a ton of pictures using my cell on our first trip. "On paper" the MP size was similar to my point-and-shoot at the time, but the final quality, especially in terms of flexibility for processing purposes, was waaaay different.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

For example, here's a cell phone picture that's from a cell phone (5 mp Trophy) with comparable MP to my former point-and-shoot:

And the comparable point-and-shoot (old 7.2 mp Cybershot):

The camera phone picture was a great memory picture, but I can't print it, I can't really do any editing to it... And while the picture below it isn't dramatically better, it is sharper, it did get more details, and I can edit it fairly well and it prints fine.

However, compare it to the point-and-shoot I brought for my next trip which is a 16.1 MP camera:


Reflections of Japan by Tropical Wilds, on Flickr


Transitions by Tropical Wilds, on Flickr


The Future of Paradise by Tropical Wilds, on Flickr

The picture quality is far and away better, and the camera itself was a Sony Cybershot that I only spent $100 on. It's smaller then my cell phone, I didn't drain battery life from my cell to use it, I could store more pictures, I could get a wider range of pictures, including macro, and they looked great when I printed them. It was no hassle to carry it around with me.

So I'm a big advocate of using a point-and-shoot over a cell phone. While it's possible to get good, even great shots with a cell, you'll get more of them with the point-and-shoot and what you can do with the pictures afterwards will have far more flexibility.

Plus, as I'm sure somebody will say, the MP is only a part of the story. A camera and a camera phone that has similar or the same MP won't necessarily be the same to use or take the same quality of pictures. There are a lot of features that are included in cameras that probably isn't in your cell camera which would mean that despite their technical "on paper" similarity, the quality of one will be better then the other.

That being said, how many MPs are Iphones? 8? A majority of point-and-shoot cameras have better then an 8mp camera. The picture you get from a 14 mp camera, which is pretty much industry standard for low-end cameras (assuming you don't have an older camera of course) will be a lot different. Certainly enough of a difference that'll offset the hassle of sliding it into your back pocket.

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

It all depends on the purpose of your photography. If you are looking for snapshots in marginal to good light, then the phone will work okay. If you want to do something more creative, ie, slow shutter speed night photography, good fireworks shots, dark rides, some types of action shots, etc., then you will probably need something more than an iphone. For myself, photography is an important part of the trip and I wouldn't think of going without my equipment. Also, the last time we did Photopass, I wasn't blown away with the quality. Many shots were unusable.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

My iPhone 3GS took horrible pictures, really, but my 5 does very well. Before I got the 5 (or the rest of my family got 4S's) I would have said don't bother. But we've gotten some really nice pics on them (see link in signature), and as I said above, I'd feel comfortable taking just my phone out on occasion. (Granted, much of it is skill level, as with any camera. I couldn't even tell you how many MPs it has as it's not something I pay any attention to whatsoever. Specs don't do much for me - show me the PICTURE!)

I think even a few years ago, the thought of taking good pictures with a phone was kind of ludicrous. Now, it's a reality for many people. And as with anything else, as technology and skill improve people can eek out some decent pics with a phone. More and more people are doing it, and some cool blogs are turning up. It's just such a handy device.

I actually used my phone last week to quickly crop some sports pictures I'd done with my dSLR and 70-200 - using screenshot - mainly because I wanted to get a few out quickly to the kids to have for their Facebook and Instagram and whatnot. The pictures themselves, as a whole, were average, but I was able to crop them so they looked very cool, and right now most of the team is singing my praises, thinking I'm the best photographer out there - thanks to my iPhone!

The camera phone picture was a great memory picture, but I can't print it, I can't really do any editing to it... And while the picture below it isn't dramatically better, it is sharper, it did get more details, and I can edit it fairly well and it prints fine.

I don't really understand this because you can edit > print any picture once you upload it. Sure, the pic itself might be limited as a JPEG, but you can do some basics to it and if it was decent in the first piace, it could look even better. Agree the phones themselves don't have a lot of editing tools, but there are apps that you can get and other things - my kids are always showing me new things (that I otherwise might not be aware of). My DD's been taking beautiful panoramics very easily with her iPhone.

 

[whoever]

In perfect lighting, with perfect framing, and no movement... sure... a camera on a smartphone can work... in anything but optimal conditions... even cheap P&S are better. Megapixels don't mean much past 12mp IMHO. Sensor size which often accompanies said MP, on the other hand = light sensitivity which is what you want.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

I don't really understand this because you can edit > print any picture once you upload it. Sure, the pic itself might be limited as a JPEG, but you can do some basics to it and if it was decent in the first piace, it could look even better. Agree the phones themselves don't have a lot of editing tools, but there are apps that you can get and other things - my kids are always showing me new things (that I otherwise might not be aware of). My DD's been taking beautiful panoramics very easily with her iPhone.

I know you can print and edit them, but what I mean is that, realistically speaking, the prints either have to be small to be "usable," or presentable, and in terms of editing, you can do a lot of superficial stuff, stuff that may even look good on the phone and decent when you display them online, but it's a lot harder to salvage an OK picture taken with the phone to a great picture using photo editing software. Even using a point-and-shoot, in a less-then-perfect picture, you can often coax out something really nice with some processing. The processing options for phone pictures is more superficial and basic, and even if you download them to a computer and use photo editing software, you won't be able to coax out a good picture in the same way you can with a regular camera. It just doesn't perform the same.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

Eh, I think you just have to keep your expectations in check if you're relying on your phone. You will still be able to capture some decent snapshots without having to carry or fiddle around with camera gear, and that can be a nice trade off. You may even surprise yourself by getting some really good shots if you put a little effort into it. I think we'll be seeing more and more evidence of this as more people use them for everyday photography.

As for the editing aspect, again, times are changing. Many aren't even making prints any more, and lots of people, including myself, aren't very interested in editing much at all. Maybe some basic cropping or coloring, but that's about it. Simple. And that's really what phone photography is, IMO: keeping it simple.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Eh, I think you just have to keep your expectations in check if you're relying on your phone. You will still be able to capture some decent snapshots without having to carry or fiddle around with camera gear, and that can be a nice trade off. You may even surprise yourself by getting some really good shots if you put a little effort into it. I think we'll be seeing more and more evidence of this as more people use them for everyday photography.

Camera phones still have a little bit to go before they can be truly competitive with even cheapo point-and-shoots. I think the appeal is largely convenience, but when it comes down to it... When we weigh camera phone vs point-and-shoot, as you said, ask what your expectations are. If you want something that takes functional, memory pictures, not anything you'll print, and end up with a bunch of pictures that are decent enough with a few great ones, things you just want to take, upload onto Facebook, or the extent of your photoediting is an Instagram filter, and then you're done with it... Sure, a camera phone is fine. If you want something that gives a better overall picture, more flexibility with the picture and how it can be used, even if you want pictures to print off and display at home, you may find the camera phone extremely limited. An 8 MP phone (or a 6 or 4 MP... There's a lot of those running around) will not yield a picture that would look as good or be as flexibile if you used a basic, cheapo point-and-shoot. $100 gets you a 16 MP camera, which is going to give a final product that is certainly noticeably different, delivers consistent results, and performs better in a wider range of environments. It's a big difference from an 8 MP phone camera.

I'm not knocking camera phones... I use mine constantly, I'm addicted to Instagram, and there are countless pictures I've gotten simply because the convenience and availability of a camera phone allowed me to get it. But it has a time and place, and I think some people may be disappointed at the quality and usability of pictures that come from relying on camera phones to be the main mode of capturing memories on a several thousand dollar vacation. If keeping pictures that are going to look consistently good over the years, with usable quality and an appearance beyond an "I was here" picture is even a little important to somebody, a small point-and-shoot is the way to go. They're smaller then a cell phone, at least mine is, and no hassle to carry.

As for the editing aspect, again, times are changing. Many aren't even making prints any more, and lots of people, including myself, aren't very interested in editing much at all. Maybe some basic cropping or coloring, but that's about it. Simple. And that's really what phone photography is, IMO: keeping it simple.

I'm not sure phone photography isn't a statement on simplicity as it is convenience. And I don't know what anybody's ultimate intentions are with the pictures they take, I was just stating that if one is going to do anything beyond taking a picture and uploading it, or if they want to print or edit it, then camera phones won't be for you. If somebody just wants to take it and keep on going, they don't want to edit it, print it, or have it as anything other then a memory they scroll through on a Facebook album, then maybe they can get by with a camera phone. There's nothing wrong with doing things that way... My first trip in 2011 I did that. I was happy with it at the time, but disappointed with it since. I wish I'd taken more and better pictures.

 

[havoc315]

In perfect lighting, with perfect framing, and no movement... sure... a camera on a smartphone can work... in anything but optimal conditions... even cheap P&S are better. Megapixels don't mean much past 12mp IMHO. Sensor size which often accompanies said MP, on the other hand = light sensitivity which is what you want.

Some time ago, I posted a side by side analysis of a cheap P&S versus the iPhone 5. Though there were various factors, overall, the iPhone came out slightly ahead, produced sharper pictures with truer colors.

Many P&S Camera sensors are not significantly bigger than the iPhone... On top of that, they often use slower lenses than the iphone. (which I believe uses a 2.0 aperture).

Overall, I find the iphone quite comparable to budget P&S cameras (those under approximately $100-$150) in terms of image quality.
Each has certain advantages ---
Even the cheap P&S camera is likely to have a slightly better flash, and will have the availability of optical zoom.

The iphone has the additional advantages of: A far better processor, a high definition touch screen, accessibility to apps for instant photo editing, photo sharing, photo emailing, for the ability to do things like in-camera HDR and panorama.

So in a social media generation, where the image quality truly is quite comparable, the iphone carries certain advantages. I'd never use the iphone instead of a dSLR. I'd never use the iphone over my RX100. But if I had to choose between a $60 Polaroid digital camera that I recently saw, versus the iPhone.. I'd pick the Iphone every time.

Since it's relevant, here were some of my earlier comparison pics:


water1 by Havoc315, on Flickr


water2 by Havoc315, on Flickr


tennisball1 by Havoc315, on Flickr


tennisball2 by Havoc315, on Flickr


bottle1 without flash by Havoc315, on Flickr


bottle2 without flash by Havoc315, on Flickr

 

[BirdsOfPreyDave]

Photography is a large part of the enjoyment I personally get from a WDW vacation. I can't imagine not bringing my full kit with me to Florida. On particularly rainy days, I'll take a waterproof P&S instead of my DSLR, but I always have a camera of some sort. I'll take a few photos during the course of the day for some instant Facebook gratification, but the majority of our photos come from my DSLR.

We use PhotoPass+ to get the on-ride photos, dining photos, and group photos that include me, too. They're not a replacement for the other pictures I take on the trip, though; they're a supplement to them.

Now, not everyone is a photography hobbiest. If your only desire is to capture the moment and have photographs to put in an album of your trip (or possibly just to share online), the iPhone camera is an incredibly convenient way to get very good snapshots. (That's not to diminish from the iPhone's ability to capture wonderful artistic shots, too.)

You need to decide what's important to you.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

Camera phones still have a little bit to go before they can be truly competitive with even cheapo point-and-shoots. I think the appeal is largely convenience, but when it comes down to it... When we weigh camera phone vs point-and-shoot, as you said, ask what your expectations are. If you want something that takes functional, memory pictures, not anything you'll print, and end up with a bunch of pictures that are decent enough with a few great ones, things you just want to take, upload onto Facebook, or the extent of your photoediting is an Instagram filter, and then you're done with it... Sure, a camera phone is fine. If you want something that gives a better overall picture, more flexibility with the picture and how it can be used, even if you want pictures to print off and display at home, you may find the camera phone extremely limited. An 8 MP phone (or a 6 or 4 MP... There's a lot of those running around) will not yield a picture that would look as good or be as flexibile if you used a basic, cheapo point-and-shoot. $100 gets you a 16 MP camera, which is going to give a final product that is certainly noticeably different, delivers consistent results, and performs better in a wider range of environments. It's a big difference from an 8 MP phone camera.

I'm not knocking camera phones... I use mine constantly, I'm addicted to Instagram, and there are countless pictures I've gotten simply because the convenience and availability of a camera phone allowed me to get it. But it has a time and place, and I think some people may be disappointed at the quality and usability of pictures that come from relying on camera phones to be the main mode of capturing memories on a several thousand dollar vacation. If keeping pictures that are going to look consistently good over the years, with usable quality and an appearance beyond an "I was here" picture is even a little important to somebody, a small point-and-shoot is the way to go. They're smaller then a cell phone, at least mine is, and no hassle to carry.



I'm not sure phone photography isn't a statement on simplicity as it is convenience. And I don't know what anybody's ultimate intentions are with the pictures they take, I was just stating that if one is going to do anything beyond taking a picture and uploading it, or if they want to print or edit it, then camera phones won't be for you. If somebody just wants to take it and keep on going, they don't want to edit it, print it, or have it as anything other then a memory they scroll through on a Facebook album, then maybe they can get by with a camera phone. There's nothing wrong with doing things that way... My first trip in 2011 I did that. I was happy with it at the time, but disappointed with it since. I wish I'd taken more and better pictures.

If you look at my first post on this thread, I said that I'd feel comfortable for an outing or two taking just my iPhone 5. That's me. I've been to WDW enough times and done the whole Rambo photography thing enough that I'm comfortable with that. (And recently I've found myself dreaming of exploring WDW with the freedom of just a phone after so many years of shlepping kids and back-breaking bags around! ) Someone else might not be. As I also said, it just depends; and that a friend of mine (a DVC member who loves her Pentax dSLR) just returned from a trip with only her smart phone and she called it "awesome".

Again, before I upgraded my iPhone, I would have said much of what you're saying, too. Now I just feel differently based on my own and my family's experiences. Even my teen DD is taking some beautiful pics with her 4S. (I offered to buy her a point and shoot camera of her own last Christmas, and she said no, she didn't need it, didn't want to carry it, etc.) As havoc has pointed out from a specs standpoint, an iPhone5 is quite comparable to a cheap point and shoot. I was in a major tourist area of Boston not too long ago and all I saw was either dSLRs or phones being used. I didn't see one point and shoot camera anywhere.

The simple answer is, "It depends": Which phone you have, what your photography habits and skills are, where you're going that day or night, etc. I'd probably bring everything, but might enjoy the freedom of leaving everything but the phone in the room once in a while, despite knowing I'd have some regrets here and there.

A friend of mine just came back and didn't bring her dSLR at all (or even a point and shoot; just her phone). She said it was awesome. I don't think I'd ever go that far, but to each his own!

But really, back to the OP's question. It really just depends.

 

[maddiebee]

Is it cumbersome to have a DSLR with you? I really want to get some nice photos that we can potentially blow up pretty large, on our trip this year. My main issue with bringing a camera is just lugging it around and it being in the way. Is it ok to have on rides?

I have an Iphone4, a (awful) point and shoot and a DSLR. I have a friend who has a really nice Nikon Point and shoot which I think would be a good compromise for me but I also would prefer to not have to buy something new. I'm also up for an upgrade. Would it make sense to go for the Iphone5 for this?