Advances in smartphone photography

[Godfrey]

Value is driven by personal needs, so if I don’t see the value in what smartphone CAN deliver with all its functionality because I don’t need it or don’t like it - it is an objective assessment of the value. It may have a value to someone, but not to another. It does not deny the advances of the technology - it is great. But for me it does not replace my cameras.

I agree that one's personal evaluation of a thing is driven by personal needs, but the value of that thing should be measured against objective, external standards of what it is capable of doing and how well. Once you have the valuation, you make your choices against the context of your priorities, desires, and needs.

I have not ever said that a smartphone can replace my cameras. Not at all. I have said that my smartphone can do some kinds of photography better than any of my other cameras, which is easily demonstrated. If I value the kinds of photography my other cameras do more than what the smartphone can, well, I choose to use them over the smartphone.

There is a reason why my home is littered with so many cameras, you know. 🙂

My iPhone 8 Plus does a wonderful job of being a camera with its dual camera setup and all the great image processing apps, etc. With the Moment camera app, case, auxiliary lenses, and grip—plus an excellent tripod adapter and any of my tripods!—it become a full system of photographic equipment capable of a lot of things beyond what the bare phone can do.

The biggest issue with this "full system" is that once you add all that additional equipment to what you need to carry, the only weight and space savings involved over any of my other cameras is the trivial difference of the additional weight and size of the other cameras themself. You have to judge for yourself whether it is worth carrying the smartphone system for the things it does beyond what any of my other cameras do vs just carrying the phone for what it does beyond any other cameras' capabilities and carrying the specific camera system for its unique advantages.

This is a complex, personal set of choices that depends upon what it is you intend to do with your photography.

Most of the time, I carry just it and a small, foldable stand that I can fit in my wallet like a credit card so that I can always have a support to use for when I need to fully stabilize the camera or get a photo of myself in the absence of another person to hold it. And I carry another camera for most of my photographic aims. Example: I was in SF overnight for a dance concert on Monday and I carried the iPhone 8 and my Minox 35. During my day of walking and wandering about the city, snapping pictures and enjoying some stores and such, I did all my photography with the Minox: it is perfect for that kind of urban, street stuff. During the concert, I didn't even bother to carry the Minox because it would prove almost useless ... but I made 13 still photos and 10 videos with the iPhone that I'm really satisfied and pleased with.

The Raised Hand – Bill Graham Civic Center Auditorium, San Francisco 2019
iPhone 8 Plus, rendered with Snapseed​

Use whatever works to get the photographs you want to make. 😀

G

 

[dourbalistar]

Or, perhaps don't.

We're all here to share photos, discuss, and elaborate. You are free to disagree, but there's no need to be rude. 😉

Please elaborate...

I prefer using film cameras, and usually carry at least one with me most everywhere. I enjoy vintage film cameras, developing and digitizing my own film, and sharing the photos that I take. On the occasions that I don't have a film camera with me, I'm glad that my smartphone is capable of taking what I find to be very good images. What's more, the image quality has advanced significantly over the past few years.

This is a complex, personal set of choices that depends upon what it is you intend to do with your photography. Use whatever works to get the photographs you want to make. 😀

G

Well said, Godfrey. 🙂

 

[ptpdprinter]

I have a master's degree in photography, and photography is massively important to me...

But I haven't used my camera since May, 7 months ago. And before that, it was the previous March.

I now only use my camera for serious projects and commissions.

So what you are saying is that you haven't done any serious projects since May.

 

[Pál_K]

... Rather, my point is that smartphone imaging has improved to a point that a single handheld exposure is actually comparable to a 20-second exposure on a tripod using an APS-C digicam.

As far as the lighting, it was a single (75-watt?) porch light about 15-feet away. It was so dark that when taking the digicam photo, I had to (ironically) use my smartphone flashlight in order to achieve focus using my adapted manual focus lens. In any case, I wasn't so much trying to capture the light as my eyes saw for this photo, but a more detailed photo of the flower. It's an oxypetalum epiphyllum, whose flowers only bloom once per year at night, and wilts by the morning...

Ok, thanks for the background info. I've always been impressed with the low-light imaging capabilities of digital sensors and wish my phone's camera was more sensitive to low light (a Motorola G6 where my manual settings for the camera go to ISO 3200).

Strange behaviour for that flower! I'll have to research it.

 

[RichC]

So what you are saying is that you haven't done any serious projects since May.

I've various ongoing projects - planning, meetings and research, but none ready to be photographed. I've studio sessions and trips booked for later this year (e.g. the May 2019 project has a second shoot in Lapland this spring with the MAP6 Collective). My projects can take months of planning before I'm ready to take photographs!

My point really is that I now only use a "serious" camera for my art projects. For all other photography, I've sold or given away my film or compact cameras (film and digital) and now use my phone as it's more convenient, faster and gives just as good or better-quality images.

 

[sooner]

I wanted to bump this thread after reading more about the Iphone 12 and how far computational photography has come. I'm normally upbeat about the size of any niche market to buoy our respective interests in photography, but now I think we are on the verge of revolutionary (not just evolutionary) change. Seems like the only thing the iphone can't do better is telephoto sports. Everything else--low light, resolution and sharpness, bokeh, even anti-shake--the Iphone 12 does better. As a gear geek, this scares me. But I wonder at other possibilities, like film being enhanced by this paradoxically, and even an iphone-like thin device used as a digital back to film cameras. Beyond potentially driving Canon and Nikon into bankruptcy, what do you all think the results will be?

 

[jarski]

..., what do you all think the results will be?

first I think Apple marketing is very convincing and good at hyping their products to the new levels. just look some of first iPhone announcements, and you might still want to buy the thing, even if its completely outdated by now.

but yes, it seems also true that phone makers can push some of traditional camera makers to the point where they decide that additional investments are not worth it, and leave the business.

 

[sooner]

Jarski, I don't think this is just hype. Just look at the "night mode" on the Pixel and iphones. You can only come close to these results with a large sensor, expensive lens, and ISO 6400 on a dslr, and still fail because you need the post-processing to get the colors right. Sharpness and lack of grain are other areas where they have overcome the inherent shortcomings of super small sensors. The "always on" and stacking ability of these phones, combined with incredible computing power, is changing the game. How will Canon/Nikon/Sony compete with this?

 

[valdas]

Seems like the only thing the iphone can't do better is telephoto sports. Everything else--low light, resolution and sharpness, bokeh, even anti-shake--the Iphone 12 does better.

Better than what? Latest Sony or Nikon mirrorless? It would be interesting to see such comparison. I am skeptical before I see independent tests. And by the way - bokeh, I would take out that one off the comparison. It is subjective and there is no such thing as “better bokeh”. Bokeh is a result of a lens, not a sensor. Sure, one can “paint” out of focus areas, but what does it mean “it is better“ - like 8 elements 35mm Summicron, v4 35mm Summicron, 85mm Contax Planar? They are all different, there is “no better”.

I do not deny the advances are tremendous, but I am still skeptical it will immediately destroy camera companies. It will do the damage, it already does. But those companies are still there - they can also adapt and improve and innovate. We will see...

 

[sooner]

Valdas, yes, I am saying that computational photography is at a point of putting the big $3k cams out of business. As for bokeh, while the quality of it may be subjective, what I mean is that "portrait mode" on these phones and the stacking technology on which it's based makes the out of focus areas better than with most regular lenses. Believe me, I find this realization profoundly disturbing!