Don't hate me but -- mobile phone cameras?

Acccck · 02-02-2021 6:26pm #1

Alright, you're all gear-heads, but for times when you need a point and shoot and you want that integrated into your phone -- what mobile phones have the best cameras?

Irishphotodesk · 02-02-2021 8:03pm

Acccck wrote: »

Alright, you're all gear-heads, but for times when you need a point and shoot and you want that integrated into your phone -- what mobile phones have the best cameras?

It's all relevant to what you need, iPhone and Samsung seems to have lots of filters/processing built in .

Huawei seem to be doing great in terms of cameras but they have limited access to Google features (which may or may not bother you)

Depending on your budget and needs you can get a phone to suit ... For top end stuff you could spend 1k or more.

I would love to spend on a top of the line phone but finances dictate that I don't.

Gsmarena are usually fairly handy for comparing mobile phones

awec · 02-02-2021 9:35pm

The latest iPhone Pro models take incredible photos, and allow you to shoot in RAW*.

*Apple ProRAW, but I believe Lightroom supports it.

Examples: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/01/shot-on-iphone-12-portraits-cityscapes-the-night-sky-and-more/

magicbastarder · 02-02-2021 9:36pm

the google pixel phones are generally well regarded for camera performance, but being the owner of one (a pixel 3, so two years old), it's to a large extent down to the processing of the photos in the phone, rather than the hardware.
also allows RAW capture, to DNG format.

Morrisseeee · 03-02-2021 12:12am

I couldn't justify spending up to a grand on a phone, just so it has the 'best' camera. If I had a grand to spend, I'd get a cheap phone & a D-SLR or a laptop or a games console or pay off a few bills

magicbastarder · 03-02-2021 12:20am

Morrisseeee wrote: »

If I had a grand to spend

but that's not a genuine comparison. if you're going out to buy a phone, the difference between a phone you'd consider without the camera being a consideration, and the one you'd buy because of the camera performance, is nowhere near a grand.
or to put it another way, you're not spending a thousand quid *just* for the camera.

magicbastarder · 03-02-2021 12:21am

however, i will admit to being lucky; i've not paid for a phone, or paid a mobile phone bill, in approx 22 years.

Peregrine · 03-02-2021 12:22am

I got a Huawei P30 for €440 a year ago. The camera is still excellent. Great value for money. Newer Huawei products are quite limited though so it's probably not an option for most people.

DaireQuinlan · 03-02-2021 10:38am

magicbastarder wrote: »

i've not paid for a phone, or paid a mobile phone bill, in approx 22 years.

pages magicbastarder

SouthWesterly · 03-02-2021 1:13pm

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

pages magicbastarder

I got the joke

:D:D

awec · 03-02-2021 7:02pm

Morrisseeee wrote: »

I couldn't justify spending up to a grand on a phone, just so it has the 'best' camera. If I had a grand to spend, I'd get a cheap phone & a D-SLR or a laptop or a games console or pay off a few bills

Yea but you're hardly going to walk around with a DSLR on you all the time.

Calahonda52 · 03-02-2021 7:06pm

Acccck wrote: »

Alright, you're all gear-heads, but for times when you need a point and shoot and you want that integrated into your phone -- what mobile phones have the best cameras?

What about the Barrett 50?

Morrisseeee · 06-02-2021 12:49pm

awec wrote: »

Yea but you're hardly going to walk around with a DSLR on you all the time.

I never suggested that, I suggested using a 'cheap' phone

Cheap phones or second-hand ones still have pretty good cameras.

Personally I'm not going to fork out a grand just to have the luxury of having a fantabulous camera 'at hand'. I rather spend that grand and get better value for money. If money is no object then yeah sure, fire away.

Dartz · 07-02-2021 2:45am

The camera on my Pixel 3 is a marvel.

The Pixel 3a I had on holidays October 2019, could pick up the Northern lights through a plane window while flying over Siberia. It died, regrettably. Even so, Night Sight mode and the like make taking pictures a trivial thing.

The standard 3 is even better.

It's why I don't own a DSLR.

darragh o meara · 07-02-2021 2:55am

Have been using an IPhone 12 Pro Max for the last few weeks. Absolutely blown away with the camera on it, comes in very close at times to my Sony A7ii obviously with the more expensive lenses on the Sony it gains some ground but it’s certainly no slouch and I’m very happy with it. They ain’t a cheap phone, I was lucky enough to get a really good deal on an upgrade through my job.

gzoladz · 13-02-2021 8:57am

It is actually mind blowing what the phone cameras have become...very generous optical focal range, full manual controls, RAW, etc...off course they don't replace a bigger sensor or specialized camera, but I think in cases they are replacing your second/carry around camera, the one you take with you all the time, in case something shows up when you don't want to carry all the gear.

i.e. you can have a mid range phone (EUR 600/700) and a good portable carry around camera without intertchangeable lens (EUR 700/EUR800) or for the same money you can have an S21 Ultra or the latest Iphone.

Personal preference plays an important factor in this decission, but one to consider.

CelticRambler · 13-02-2021 9:39am

Going back to the original question:

Acccck wrote: »

for times when you need a point and shoot and you want that integrated into your phone -- what mobile phones have the best cameras?

the answer probably depends on what exactly is happening at those times when you need a point and shoot.

As it happens, I upgraded from a dumbphone to a smartphone when SonNo.1 emigrated and took his point-and-shoot with him, the one that I'd been using for snapshots and short video clips - the only photography I'd been practising for years. So I'm not inherently prejudiced against the camera capabilities of a phone.

But it was probably less than a month of having the phone-camera with me all the time before I realised how much I'd missed having a proper camera, and being able to take "proper" photos. These days, the DSLR travels with me a lot, but the phone still gets to take more photos. There's a huge difference in quality, though: most of the phone-photos are for reference, or to illustrate a point, or snapshots, or a digital photocopy of something I need to send to someone. And the number of technical faults/artefacts is very high - the small lens is incredibly easy to damage; dust, fluff, grease smears, condensation etc make many pictures unsuitable for serious use; not to mention the struggles of trying to use a touchscreen in the wet/cold/bright sunshine ...

So while I appreciate the quality of images taken by professionals using high-end phones, I'm not seeing the same quality in the photos sent to me by family and friends with the same cameras. For my own purposes, I don't need an 800€ phone-with-great-camera to take snapshots; I'd much rather spend the money on a 150-600mm Tamron zoom and improve the pictures that I take time to set up correctly.

thebaz · 21-02-2021 1:38am

I kind of remember trying to take pictures around 2005 with my old Sony phone - the camera was 2 MP - couldn't be done - the iphone was the first phone I remember that took decent shots, around 2010. Think the iphone probably still takes best shots - The problem with digital / be it phones or cameras , they seam to have limited life in comparison to film, after 2 years thers always some new update/feature that fixes / out-dates what you have.

Adrian.Sadlier · 21-02-2021 2:41am

thebaz wrote: »

...after 2 years there's always some new update/feature that fixes / out-dates what you have.

But if you go for a serious camera with interchangeable lenses it's not such an issue. The major investment is in the "glass" - the lenses. They are usually a 10-15 year investment (if you go for the pro options). Camera bodies come and go - lenses last for a long time. If you have bought wisely!

With phones, the camera body and lenses are locked in. A much shorter time to have a return on investment.

IMHO.

thebaz · 21-02-2021 12:08pm

Adrian.Sadlier wrote: »

But if you go for a serious camera with interchangeable lenses it's not such an issue. The major investment is in the "glass" - the lenses. They are usually a 10-15 year investment (if you go for the pro options). Camera bodies come and go - lenses last for a long time. If you have bought wisely!

With phones, the camera body and lenses are locked in. A much shorter time to have a return on investment.

IMHO.

True , I have some old lenses that still work perfectly, and had film cameras that have died but in general they hold ther functionality better than digital - if you get a new digital , within 2 years something comes out that seams to obsolete nearly what you have - and especially with phones now - Probably a lot of marketing stuff, that happened too in film days.

magicbastarder · 21-02-2021 12:21pm

my DSLR is still going strong, a nikon D300, a 13 year old design. yeah, i'd like better low light capability, but in the vast majority of cases, the camera is not the limiting factor.

CelticRambler · 21-02-2021 1:12pm

thebaz wrote: »

had film cameras that have died but in general they hold ther functionality better than digital - if you get a new digital , within 2 years something comes out that seams to obsolete nearly what you have - and especially with phones now - Probably a lot of marketing stuff, that happened too in film days.

As you say, the concept of being faced with shiny-new-and-improved devices has been with us for a very long time. As I went through my teens, from when I got my first film camera to when I got my last, there were constant innovations and improvements.

The main difference regarding obsolescence and phone cameras, as I see it, is not so much what happens with the camera but what happens with everything else that's going on in the slab of plastic and metal. For example: I really resent being told by my bank that I have to change my point-and-shoot camera because they want to send verification codes to an app that they've designed to not work with the slightly aged operating system on my phone. :mad:

That's why I'm happy to be chasing a 600€ lens (secondhand, just missed the same one for 350 last weekend

) but wouldn't spend a tenth of that on a phone/camera.

munstergirl · 21-02-2021 1:23pm

https://www.argos.ie/static/Product/partNumber/7126877/Trail/searchtext>MOTOROLA.htm

SIM Free Motorola G8 Power Lite 64GB Mobile Phone-Royal Blue 712/6877 €120.

Nice inexpensive phone, Argos says out of stock but if you select store some stores have stock.

Is it the best camera phone probably not, but it does take great photos.

PaulieC · 21-02-2021 1:29pm

Morrisseeee wrote: »

I never suggested that, I suggested using a 'cheap' phone Cheap phones or second-hand ones still have pretty good cameras.

Personally I'm not going to fork out a grand just to have the luxury of having a fantabulous camera 'at hand'. I rather spend that grand and get better value for money. If money is no object then yeah sure, fire away.

Pointless answer as the question was about which phone had the best camera.

Dan Jaman · 25-05-2021 2:44am

CelticRambler wrote: »

For example: I really resent being told by my bank that I have to change my point-and-shoot camera because they want to send verification codes to an app that they've designed to not work with the slightly aged operating system on my phone. :mad:

BoI? They did that to me at the start of the year. My old S-E Experia Arc-S was doing just fine since 2012 or so and I barely used it as a smartphone after the initial rush, but its camera was excellent.
When the bank's app refused to work on the creaky old phone OS, I acquired a Ulefone Armor X-7, which runs Android 10. I'm happy enough with the phone, but the camera on it is utter pants. A claimed 15Mp, but it's vastly inferior to the 8Mp camera on the old phone.

Don't hate me but -- mobile phone cameras?

Comments