point and shoot vs iPhone

[springtime]

I have searched all over the internet to try to figure out the answer to my question, and have not been successful. I currently have a cheap point and shoot. I have seen some suggestions that an iPhone is often equal to or better than a point and shoot camera. I recently printed out some of my iPhone photos, and the quality is not great. I am not an expert by any means, but they were typical 4x6 photos in decent light, and they are just not clear. I do not know how to read the specs on cameras to compare my point and shoot with my iPhone 6, so I am not sure if it is any different, better, or if I really need to start saving some money for a better p&s. FWIW, I have a DSLR, but do not want to lug it all over Disney. Is it possible for anyone to take a look at the specs for my point and shoot and let me know if it is any better or worse than my iPhone 6?

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/compact-digital-cameras/coolpix-s5300.html

Also, recommendations for a decent p&s for under $400.

Thank you for any help or advice you can provide!

 

[havoc315]

The iPhone 6 has far more advanced features than that p&s, and very similar image quality -- the iPhone should have a faster aperture lens, much faster processor. The p&s has a slightly larger sensor. Where the p&s wins, more zoom (obviously), and slightly higher resolution.

Photos not being clear is usually a matter of not enough light, or simply not holding the camera steady enough.

You can find holiday deals on the original Sony rx100 for between $350-400.
It's really the starting point for cameras that have superior image quality to a good iPhone. (Though other cameras will have the advantage of far more zoom. But in terms of image quality, it's the starting point).

 

[bob100]

I have searched all over the internet to try to figure out the answer to my question, and have not been successful. I currently have a cheap point and shoot. I have seen some suggestions that an iPhone is often equal to or better than a point and shoot camera. I recently printed out some of my iPhone photos, and the quality is not great. I am not an expert by any means, but they were typical 4x6 photos in decent light, and they are just not clear. I do not know how to read the specs on cameras to compare my point and shoot with my iPhone 6, so I am not sure if it is any different, better, or if I really need to start saving some money for a better p&s. FWIW, I have a DSLR, but do not want to lug it all over Disney. Is it possible for anyone to take a look at the specs for my point and shoot and let me know if it is any better or worse than my iPhone 6?
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/compact-digital-cameras/coolpix-s5300.html
Also, recommendations for a decent p&s for under $400.

Thank you for any help or advice you can provide!

I agree, that P&S probably won't get you many advantages over a cell phone. You already have a DSLR so you know the value of using different lenses.
What you need is a mirrorless camera that can take small 'pancake' style lens for lightweight travel and can also use your DSLR lens
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[havoc315]

I agree, that P&S probably won't get you many advantages over a cell phone. You already have a DSLR so you know the value of using different lenses.
What you need is a mirrorless camera that can take small 'pancake' style lens for lightweight travel and can also use your DSLR lens
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

I'm a big proponent of mirrorless, but it is not a compliment to dSLR-- it is a replacement for dSLR.
It can be a great compromise -- depending which mirrorless, it will come close to dSLR quality or even completely match and surpass dslrs.
All while being smaller.

But even with a pancake lens, it may not be as small and compact as you want. And you may not be looking to replace your dSLR system.

Essentially -- if you want to compliment your dSLR with something truly compact for travel, then you probably want to look at the 1" sensor compact cameras like the Sony rx100.

If you want to replace your dSLR with a smaller system, the various mirrorless systems can be great.

 

[bob100]

I'm a big proponent of mirrorless, but it is not a compliment to dSLR-- it is a replacement for dSLR.
It can be a great compromise -- depending which mirrorless, it will come close to dSLR quality or even completely match and surpass dslrs.
All while being smaller.

But even with a pancake lens, it may not be as small and compact as you want. And you may not be looking to replace your dSLR system.
Essentially -- if you want to compliment your dSLR with something truly compact for travel, then you probably want to look at the 1" sensor compact cameras like the Sony rx100.
If you want to replace your dSLR with a smaller system, the various mirrorless systems can be great.

well, excusssee me !
my little inexpensive shirt pocket-size mirrorless camera (with the 22mm f/2) is used for events, bicycling, travel, etc. The DSLR is mostly for birds and sports. And mirrorless can take DSLR lens, a nice "complement". Sure, there are a range of mirrorless models with built-in VF, attachable VF, flashes, etc. some are large and expensive, some are small and cheap. and some will not fit in your pocket. In the future most interchangeable lens cameras will be without mirrors but until then take advantage of the range of options. I'd really like to get the latest "M5" but it's big and expensive !
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[havoc315]

well, excusssee me !
my little inexpensive shirt pocket-size mirrorless camera (with the 22mm f/2) is used for events, bicycling, travel, etc. The DSLR is mostly for birds and sports. And mirrorless can take DSLR lens, a nice "complement". Sure, there are a range of mirrorless models with built-in VF, attachable VF, flashes, etc. some are large and expensive, some are small and cheap. and some will not fit in your pocket. In the future most interchangeable lens cameras will be without mirrors but until then take advantage of the range of options. I'd really like to get the latest "M5" but it's big and expensive !
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

lol... No reason to get defensive.
I'm actually the opposite way --- I use my mirrorless for birds and sports, and use my dSLR for events and portraits. (I use them both for travel).
But it really depends on which mirrorless you have, and which dSLR you have. Point is, today's best mirrorless are even better for birds and sports than most dSLRs. If you are getting good APS-C mirrorless, there really is very little reason to also have a consumer APS-C dSLR.
Now, there are some older simpler cheaper mirrorless.... And because they are older and cheaper, they aren't as good as dSLRs. But they still aren't as compact as compacts...

Here is the side by side of your EOS-M with compact lens, next to the RX100....
http://j.mp/2gCF4Ny

The EOS-M is still a good bit larger, and that's without even having any zoom capability.

In order to get the same zoom range as something like the RX100, the EOS-M becomes massive in comparison:

http://j.mp/2gCyIOb

 

[bob100]

lol... No reason to get defensive.
I'm actually the opposite way --- I use my mirrorless for birds and sports, and use my dSLR for events and portraits. (I use them both for travel).
But it really depends on which mirrorless you have, and which dSLR you have. Point is, today's best mirrorless are even better for birds and sports than most dSLRs. If you are getting good APS-C mirrorless, there really is very little reason to also have a consumer APS-C dSLR.
Now, there are some older simpler cheaper mirrorless.... And because they are older and cheaper, they aren't as good as dSLRs. But they still aren't as compact as compacts...
Here is the side by side of your EOS-M with compact lens, next to the RX100....
The EOS-M is still a good bit larger, and that's without even having any zoom capability.
In order to get the same zoom range as something like the RX100, the EOS-M becomes massive in comparison:

LOL !
yeaahhh .... right. different cameras, different lens, different sizes
different flash, different VF -- and certainly different prices!

And those mirrorless sports shooters. They sure are packing the sidelines, muscling in on the SI photographers, getting the Olympic shots ..... NOT !

 

[havoc315]

LOL !
yeaahhh .... right. different cameras, different lens, different sizes
different flash, different VF -- and certainly different prices!


And those mirrorless sports shooters. They sure are packing the sidelines, muscling in on the SI photographers, getting the Olympic shots ..... NOT !

Precisely.... and you won't find a mirrorless system that gives the same range as the RX100, that is any smaller or cheaper than the RX100. (in terms of size and capability, there are other comparable 1" models including the Canon G7x, but it's more expensive)

Talking consumers here. I don't see many consumers sporting Nikon D5's or Canon 1dX's....
For consumer sports and wildlife, something like the Sony A6300 surpasses the comparable dSLRs in the same price range.

Mirrorless sports and wildlife:

DSC02366.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr

Angry birds by Adam Brown, on Flickr

DSC01107.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr

Seagull in Flight by Adam Brown, on Flickr

DSC01924.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr

Unfortunately, Canon is way behind other mirorless in therms of making a camera capable of sports and wildlife. I think they are afraid of undercutting their dSLRs so they intentionally hold back their mirrorless.

 

[bob100]

Precisely.... and you won't find a mirrorless system that gives the same range as the RX100, that is any smaller or cheaper than the RX100. (in terms of size and capability, there are other comparable 1" models including the Canon G7x, but it's more expensive)

Talking consumers here. I don't see many consumers sporting Nikon D5's or Canon 1dX's....
For consumer sports and wildlife, something like the Sony A6300 surpasses the comparable dSLRs in the same price range.

Mirrorless sports and wildlife:

Unfortunately, Canon is way behind other mirorless in therms of making a camera capable of sports and wildlife. I think they are afraid of undercutting their dSLRs so they intentionally hold back their mirrorless.

LOL !
mirrorless is the future

Unfortunately Nikon is way behind other mirrorless cameras in terms of sports and wildlife !

Maybe the new Canon M5 will undercut DSLR sales,( I'll keep my old $479 DSLR camera as a 'complement (for now)



Untitled by PhotosCW, on Flickr

Untitled by PhotosCW, on Flickr

Untitled by PhotosCW, on Flickr

Untitled by PhotosCW, on Flickr

Untitled by PhotosCW, on Flickr

 

[seashoreCM]

Visual comparison.
Set your iPhone camera to minimum zoom (widest angle). Set your P&S zoom so it frames the same content and viewing angle. Take a picture of the same subject or view using each. Print the pictures and compare.

Specs comparison.
How many megapixels does your iPhone camera have? (The P&S has 14.) You can get very good snapshots with 8 MP but if you want to cut off the edges and enlarge just the middle (using Photoshop, etc.) to get the equivalent of more zoon, you may need more MP.
What is the maximum aperture of the iPhone camera lens? (The P&S is F/3.7.) The lower the F/ number the better the camera will perform in low light.
What is the maximum view angle of your iPhone expressed in mm (millimeters) focal length in 35mm film camera equivalent? (For your P&S it is 26mm.)
What is the fastest shutter speed of your iPhone camera? (The P&S goes up to 1/1500'th second.) The faster the shutter speed, the better the camera can take pictures of moving objects although in low light the camera cannpt take full advantage of this.
What is the flash range of your IPhone camera? (The P&S is rated for 11 feet although it autoselects the ISO which in turn may produce a little more graininess compared with an outdoor sunlit shot.)

Facts of life that override the two methods preceding: The quality of the lens is probably the biggest factor that determines the picture quality. I am guessing wildly that P&S cameras on average have better lenses than smart phones.

 

[klmall]

Not a major point in this discussion but the camera or phone or whatever is as good as the person who is using it. I am comfortable using my compact and full-size DSLR but I still have problems taking pictures with my excellent Samsung and Nexus phones. It's harder to hold and position my hands as I grow older so I rarely get the pics I want with thin phones. Even my older Canon G12 takes great shots with almost no effort at all.

 

[havoc315]

LOL !
mirrorless is the future

Unfortunately Nikon is way behind other mirrorless cameras in terms of sports and wildlife !

Maybe the new Canon M5 will undercut DSLR sales,( I'll keep my old $479 DSLR camera as a 'complement (for now)



Untitled by PhotosCW, on Flickr

Untitled by PhotosCW, on Flickr

Untitled by PhotosCW, on Flickr

Untitled by PhotosCW, on Flickr

Untitled by PhotosCW, on Flickr

Very nice shots. Actually, Nikon is way behind in mirrorless in general, but not particularly in sports and wildlife. Their "1" series shoots 20-60 frames per second, with autofocus faster than any dSLR in good light. So for outdoor day light sports, the Nikon is pretty well versed for sports and wildlife.
Where Nikon mirrorless fails, is image quality. They don't make a APS-C or full frame mirrorless. They are sticking for now with 1" sensors, paired with fairly slow lenses. Not an impressive combination.

The Canon M5 is finally catching up in terms of an enthusiast mirrorless... really the first such model from Canon. But I'm not so sure how it performs as a sports shooter. It is listed as 7 frames per second (not bad for a dSLR but poor compared to other mirrorless), and buffer of only 29 jpgs (unknown how many RAWs)... Not sure how good the focus tracking is.
Where the Canon system excels is full compatibility with the entire Canon glass lineup.

 

[mom2rtk]

Not a major point in this discussion but the camera or phone or whatever is as good as the person who is using it. I am comfortable using my compact and full-size DSLR but I still have problems taking pictures with my excellent Samsung and Nexus phones. It's harder to hold and position my hands as I grow older so I rarely get the pics I want with thin phones. Even my older Canon G12 takes great shots with almost no effort at all.

No cell phone camera will ever work for me, for the same reason. Too light for my hands to ever hold still enough.

 

[mom2rtk]

LOL !
mirrorless is the future

Unfortunately Nikon is way behind other mirrorless cameras in terms of sports and wildlife !

Maybe the new Canon M5 will undercut DSLR sales,( I'll keep my old $479 DSLR camera as a 'complement (for now)



Untitled by PhotosCW, on Flickr

Untitled by PhotosCW, on Flickr

Untitled by PhotosCW, on Flickr

Untitled by PhotosCW, on Flickr

Untitled by PhotosCW, on Flickr

Very nice!

 

[springtime]

Thank you so much for your replies. I am not looking to replace my DSLR. Honestly, I don't use it nearly to its capabilities, so a reasonably priced alternative is best for me. I will check out the rx100. No reason to bring along a p&s that is only marginally better.

 

[havoc315]

Visual comparison.
Set your iPhone camera to minimum zoom (widest angle). Set your P&S zoom so it frames the same content and viewing angle. Take a picture of the same subject or view using each. Print the pictures and compare.

Specs comparison.
How many megapixels does your iPhone camera have? (The P&S has 14.) You can get very good snapshots with 8 MP but if you want to cut off the edges and enlarge just the middle (using Photoshop, etc.) to get the equivalent of more zoon, you may need more MP.
What is the maximum aperture of the iPhone camera lens? (The P&S is F/3.7.) The lower the F/ number the better the camera will perform in low light.
What is the maximum view angle of your iPhone expressed in mm (millimeters) focal length in 35mm film camera equivalent? (For your P&S it is 26mm.)
What is the fastest shutter speed of your iPhone camera? (The P&S goes up to 1/1500'th second.) The faster the shutter speed, the better the camera can take pictures of moving objects although in low light the camera cannpt take full advantage of this.
What is the flash range of your IPhone camera? (The P&S is rated for 11 feet although it autoselects the ISO which in turn may produce a little more graininess compared with an outdoor sunlit shot.)

Facts of life that override the two methods preceding: The quality of the lens is probably the biggest factor that determines the picture quality. I am guessing wildly that P&S cameras on average have better lenses than smart phones.

Actually... smart phones tend to have excellent lenses. The iPhone 7, for example, has a 6 element sapphire lens with 1.8 aperture. Far better than most p&s cameras. As it is also a super powerful computer, the superior processing power further enhances image quality.