You are reading a single comment by @gbj_tester and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
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?
gbj_tester
salmonchild
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.