you don't need a big sensor

[marcr1230]

here's a nice image that made the finals of a natgeo contest

I like the image and how it is flipped to make it dream-like

http://petapixel.com/2016/11/30/students-iphone-6s-photo-makes-finals-natgeo-photo-competition/

 

[Fjäll]

Sensor size has nothing to do with the artistic expression in photography. There are a lot of photographers that only shoot with their smartphones. There are no settings nor choices of focal lengths, all in absence of optical formulas and fancy features. Just image making. No distractions and only focus on the photograph.

Smartphones are not comparable to what high end digital cameras are capable of doing today, but they are more than good enough for most situations. We all know we can overcome the limitations of image capturing devices. (Any vintage rangefinder shooters?)

I doubt this kid would improve given he would have better gear.

Dan Tom knows his equipments limitations (iPhone). A moment ago on Instagram:

 

[uhoh7]

Sensor size has nothing to do with the artistic expression in photography.

Total nonsense, sorry.

That's not to say pretty pictures cannot be taken with a iPhone. But it's like a harmonica: plays just one key.

 

[sepiareverb]

That's what she said

 

[Darthfeeble]

As always the important specification is the skill behind the camera.

 

[Axel]

Sensor size has nothing to do with the artistic expression in photography...

+1

I totally agree and would like to add that the artistic impression in photography doesn´t depend from any kind of camera the picture is taken with.

 

[BillBingham2]

Total nonsense, sorry.

That's not to say pretty pictures cannot be taken with a iPhone. But it's like a harmonica: plays just one key.

But it's how you coax the notes out that makes it wonderful to listen to.

B2 (;->

 

[FrankS]

It's not the machine, it's the operator.

A talented photographer can make better images with modest gear, than a hack can with the best, most expensive gear. Gear only affects the technical quality, not the aesthetic quality. I thought we all knew that.

 

[Keith]

Unless you're deliberately trying to work with depth of field without having to involve software manipulation.

 

[CK Dexter Haven]

This only shows you don't need a large sensor to take THIS particular picture.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

IPhone is great for shots like this, HDR mode. Or was this NG contest sponsored by HUAWEI? 🙂

 

[Lss]

No, I need a big sensor.

 

[uhoh7]

It's not the machine, it's the operator.

Tell that to a solider. It's both. As it has been since the dawn of technology.

Please list the great photographers of the film era who shot exclusively with cheap sub-standard gear?

It's such a line of BS which HCB and many others would take: oh, it is not important, the camera the lens. Then you learn they were in fact quite picky and used excellent gear. More keepers LOL

Oh, you know if your eye is good, you are a true artist, you need nothing past a instamatic, or a pencil and paper. In fact just your finger and some sand. Might be hard to make a living , though.

No, I need a big sensor.

I'm sure you have a huge one 😉

 

[Jamie Pillers]

Total nonsense, sorry.

That's not to say pretty pictures cannot be taken with a iPhone. But it's like a harmonica: plays just one key.

I suspect many great photographers have made their way with one key... well maybe two. 🙂

 

[DanskDynamit]

Sensor size has nothing to do with the artistic expression in photography.

+1
The day that changes, I quit.

 

[rfaspen]

This again? Need adequate tool to make the image the photographer "sees". Period. Sometimes that means rather nice stuff, sometimes not. Then there's the need to make more than one image. Sometimes that means rather nice (reliable, robust) stuff, sometimes not. Then, sometimes there's the demands of the "client" that sometimes means rather nice stuff, sometimes not. Get the picture?

 

[Huss]

here's a nice image that made the finals of a natgeo contest

I like the image and how it is flipped to make it dream-like

http://petapixel.com/2016/11/30/students-iphone-6s-photo-makes-finals-natgeo-photo-competition/

That is such a sweet picture.

 

[LukasB]

I do understand both sides of the argument, and on a forum we do enjoy a good argument...

On one hand, yes - any good Photographer will be able to make great, compelling or evocative images with anything. But on the other, a Great Photographer will have more available to them with a Camera overflowing with Bells & Whistles. Though perhaps they may be nothing but a distraction.

There is no 'correct' answer, only good Photography. Which is then subjective.

Can you spell 'a-r-g-u-m-e-n-t'?

 

[Roger Hicks]

This only shows you don't need a large sensor to take THIS particular picture.

Exactly. For that matter, "need" is generally a worthless concept in photography. I do however like the full-frame 16 megapixel sensor on my Nikon Df because the low pixel density (by modern standards) allows silly-high ISO with good image quality. Do I "need" it? Of course not. Do I find it useful? Very much so.

Cheers,

R.

 

[silverbullet]

In the beginning of the 35mm photography, Oskar Barnack got the same arguments from large-format shooters against his 'small-negative-format' Leica. No wood body, no huge brass lens and no ground plate - it must be a toy..... ;-)It's nearly the same with today's discussion of m4/3 versus full format.