Not surprising really, there are probably a lot more Cavaliers being driven around than Mercedes.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Passes Nikon to Become Second Most Popular Camera Brand on Flickr
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Physics won't change in a few years. Cameras that can make better images are constrained by the physics of better images, which unfortunately do not favor very tiny cameras.
what is wrong with flickr?
1 tb space, can upload and download originals, what else do you need?
not hipster enough?
1 tb space, can upload and download originals, what else do you need?
not hipster enough?
Last edited:
Sorry, but no.
Yes, quality-wise, no smartphone camera will beat a DSLR, but there are several situations in which an iPhone will do exceptionally well. And the iPhone makes up for quality with convenience and (software) flexibility like no DSLR can.
Austin Mann's shots in Iceland (http://austinmann.com/trek/iphone-6-plus-camera-review-iceland) are a testament to how good iPhone photography can get.
Bottom line, there are two camera "accessories" that are often overlooked, and they are available to iPhone users: eyes and brains. Those two tools, in most cases, are responsible for the best photos.
You're arguing against a straw man. Of course the iPhone isnt the highest quality camera available. Nobody ever said it was, not me and not the original article.
I'd rather have a good quality picture, though not the best, than no picture at all. That's all I'm saying.
does canon have that much of the market share today over Nikon? Granted this is flickr
My 2008 Panasonic LX3 (premium compact camera) still outperforms most, if not all smartphone cameras. Even Lumia 1020 or Nokia 808 can't beat the LX3 in optics and dynamic range.
Actually the iPhone is a Swiss knife. There are pretty good compact "pistols" like a Fujifilm XF1, just to cite one example, but there are also little great cameras like a Panasonic LX7 or a Samsung NX Mini.
They probably do, but I'd just expect that Apple would be higher still -- how many iPhones do you see people carrying compared to all cameras of any make?
Only someone who lives with their camera on automatic would make such a blatantly wrong and naive statement.
It may be true that users would rather leave their DSLR at home and take heir phone with them itself, and while not as perfect, these days, its probably just as good.
However, there is zero chance of professionals ditching their DSLR's and using their smart phones...
That will never happen. Regardless of how good smart phone cameras get.. A DSLR will always be better.
However, there is zero chance of professionals ditching their DSLR's and using their smart phones...
That will never happen. Regardless of how good smart phone cameras get.. A DSLR will always be better.
I have but it isn't a patch on using a real camera. All that app does is grant control that I had in a point-and-shoot camera from the late 90's!
I'm not a pro either. It's just a hobby for me, software and sensor stuff aside it's all down to the lens.
----------
More and more I'm seeing the iPhone as a jack-of-all-trade device. This being another issue; it takes pictures but it's nowhere near as good as a dedicated device.
I think the only device it surpasses a dedicated version of is a GPS and MP3 player. The games aren't as good, the camera isn't as good, web browser is much better on a computer.
You mistake what's being said: it's a far better camera than the average consumer has had, especially for in thing: it's always in your pocket, and still and movies, slow-mo and time-lapse, and sharing with friends or websites or anything else can be done in a second. Cameras don't do that. True, I'd miss zooms, but then, they're way overused anyway, and 90% of pictures are taken of friends and family and children especially. And the scenery where you're going.
I've had a 35mm camera since I was 17. That's a while ago. For the average consumer, as a replacement for the standard consumer digital camera, the automatic circuitry gives you far better than what you'd get with a point and shoot.
The traditional camera's market was never that much of the market. Most people in the 20th century had Brownies and Instamatics and even cardboard cameras for a while.
The hobbyists, professional photographers and such, will want the latest variant on a camera which the user can control manually. Most people don't care that much, and their phones are definitely far better than the point-and-shoot.
It's very much like Jobs said on the launch of the iPad. You'll have the "truck," the desktop computer, but most of your work will be done on smaller, mobile devices. It's definitely that way for me. I haven't had my traditional DSLR out for years.
Consumer favorite, no doubt. There's no threat to Nikon except in losing end consumer interest. Hobbyists still aim at higher quality cameras because they're interested in photography on a technical level while average consumers aren't.
Flickr stats are not impressive. Flickr used to be a place for professional photographers to climb the social awareness ladder and get exposure,, but that's no longer the case. Flickr's arrogant management and moderators chased away many professionals over the years by deleting accounts for nonsense violations and political infighting, deleting images for same, and for their presumptuous TOU and a public statement by a moderator that they'd rather see vacation snapshots than art on their site. Now it's just a place for sharing snapshots, photo enthusiasts that take nice shots and want to share them with groups of friends, and for companies and organizations to share photos of product or social events, etc. Don't be too worried about what this "favorite camera" suggestion means to professionals or to Nikon and Canon.
Besides, professional photographers have already been screwed by computer industry marketing back in the day when Microsoft, WordPerfect, and Corel destroyed the stock photography market by buying and giving away massive stock photo libraries with their office packages. The online stock photo houses further rammed home the point that stock photography was no longer a valuable service in the eyes of the market when they paid photographers almost nothing to sell stock images to users at super low cost. Then there's the proliferation of image theft to combat... Artists and photographers aren't able to live on things the way they used to...
Flickr stats are not impressive. Flickr used to be a place for professional photographers to climb the social awareness ladder and get exposure,, but that's no longer the case. Flickr's arrogant management and moderators chased away many professionals over the years by deleting accounts for nonsense violations and political infighting, deleting images for same, and for their presumptuous TOU and a public statement by a moderator that they'd rather see vacation snapshots than art on their site. Now it's just a place for sharing snapshots, photo enthusiasts that take nice shots and want to share them with groups of friends, and for companies and organizations to share photos of product or social events, etc. Don't be too worried about what this "favorite camera" suggestion means to professionals or to Nikon and Canon.
Besides, professional photographers have already been screwed by computer industry marketing back in the day when Microsoft, WordPerfect, and Corel destroyed the stock photography market by buying and giving away massive stock photo libraries with their office packages. The online stock photo houses further rammed home the point that stock photography was no longer a valuable service in the eyes of the market when they paid photographers almost nothing to sell stock images to users at super low cost. Then there's the proliferation of image theft to combat... Artists and photographers aren't able to live on things the way they used to...
Yeah I don't understand the beating Flickr is getting either. There are plenty of pros - and I mean REAL PROS on Flickr that post their work there. Likewise there are also tons of "selfie-or-nothing" types as well.
But I've always found it quite easy to weed out the garbage on Flickr.
Absolutely. Pro/art photographers used to take photographs with large format (120/620) cameras and (4x5, 8x10) view cameras. Then they switched to crappy little 35mm film cameras and similar-sized SLR digitals and still got great photos. Many are now using iPhones except in special situations (low light, shallow depth-of-field, long telephoto, etc.) And still ending up with stuff on glossy magazine covers.
The most common sighting of a large bunch of Nikon/Canon SLRs used to be a few bus loads of Japanese tourists. Saw a bus load recently at a major tourist site, and, while there were still a couple SLRs in use, the vast majority were taking photos with their mobile phones.
Haven't seen a large format view camera in actual use recently... 35mm SLRs are going the same way.
The very best camera is the one that's with you when a great photo op arises.
It's just convenience.
The last real camera that I bought was an old Sony Mavica 3.3 megapixel with a Carl Zeiss Lens that can take pictures clearer and sharper than my iPhone can today. I rarely used it back then because it was a full sized camera and I had to charge the battery to use it. Back then, it cost me $1,000.
Even now I'll charge it up once or twice a year and take it out and I am so impressed with the quality of the pictures and think maybe I'll start using it again but I never do.
The iPhone always wins because it is with me and always charged and people never complain over the picture quality when I show them online so it's the winner.
The last real camera that I bought was an old Sony Mavica 3.3 megapixel with a Carl Zeiss Lens that can take pictures clearer and sharper than my iPhone can today. I rarely used it back then because it was a full sized camera and I had to charge the battery to use it. Back then, it cost me $1,000.
Even now I'll charge it up once or twice a year and take it out and I am so impressed with the quality of the pictures and think maybe I'll start using it again but I never do.
The iPhone always wins because it is with me and always charged and people never complain over the picture quality when I show them online so it's the winner.
Ehhh, that would probably be the scenario where I'm least likely to use a "proper camera". You'll just be that annoying parent walking around shoving their DSLR up in everyone's head at the birthday party.
75% (roughly estimation) of people use point-and-shot cameras, in this class, iPhone is the best. The rest of you prefer DSLR.
Phone cameras do not compete with DSLR. To prove my point, sales from point-of-shoot non-phone cameras have been declined for years. People mostly buy Canon (and other brands) for DSLR.
DSLR and Compacts (which are in between DSLR and point and shoot). Basically, Compacts are equivalent to low-mid end DSLR without the ability to change lens (often that way, you get a better lens out of the box for your money).
Like the G16 which sells for less than $400 (during the holidays) and has a very bright 1.8-2.8 zoom len. You lose in having a smaller sensor, but gain in having a brighter lens and in size of the camera. This is not an expensive camera and it makes very fine photos and videos (especially if you don't mind going out of full manual) (only thing I miss from a larger camera the is bokeh not exactly what I'd like).