-
Digital cameras, and digital cameras that you can also make phone calls with and use to do email are pretty much the same thing.
This is so not true.
There is an ocean between the two.
Phone cameras use very small, predominantly plastic, lenses and almost everything is done in software to correct the various issues that arise and to enhance the photo to give the illusion of the optics being more capable than they are.
Dedicated cameras use proper optics, and their hardware is all around manipulating the light through the optics and onto the sensor in a way that minimises the work that the software has to do to capture the image. The sensors are larger too, meaning even less correction and even higher quality.
The difference in technique between the two is astounding, and aside from the subjects remaining the same there really is no similarity.
No smartphone will ever perform as well as a camera as glass (optics) is the one thing that cannot be shrunk adequately. Software will never beat optics. Software just produces an entirely different style and feel of photography... more real-time, social, casual... and as such, those two threads will never be merged. They are different things.
Velocio-
They are different things
Or, to put it another way, they are the same thing but with slightly different emphasis on the different stages of faking up an image out of electricity.
If the chemical photography thread permits anything from a box brownie to a Hasselblad, why the snobbery over different levels of digital sophistication?
-
They are different things.
Yes - you're right, they are.
But it's completely irrelevant for most people, the fact that the lens is plastic and the sensor is tiny - it does not matter anymore if it's just for screens or anything but big prints.
Daily papers have published stuff I shot with an iPhone 4 years ago, it looked nice.
You have more that enough pixels now, and even image stabilization now and 5-digit ISOs.Can we agree that it's about the image one views in the end?
Modern smartphones can deliver astounding quality, and there's no point whining about that there's software involved.. in all digital cameras, even the pro-ones, is software involved if you shoot JPG, that "improves" the image.
This may not be as "honest" as really capturing all the beautiful rays of light with a Zeiss lens, but fuck it, it really is about the image people are going to see in the end, and nothing else - only jealous idiots look at an image and say "ah the shot is great but it's not cool because his camera used software / he used photoshop / etc. etc.".
gbj_tester
salad
Where's the difference nowadays?
Digital cameras, and digital cameras that you can also make phone calls with and use to do email are pretty much the same thing.
I think that indeed the content of the two threads would complement aother.
Sure, phones are generally used more for "daily" stuff and "snapshops", but I really don't think it's an issue, or particularily true with users here, as people pretty much care about a good image - and it's really not a difference in my opinion if the device is also a phone.
I mean really - you say smartphone, but these things really are great, small digital cameras with a nice screen (that you can also make phonecalls with) - aren't they?