Not surprising really, there are probably a lot more Cavaliers being driven around than Mercedes.
For a quick picture a cellphone does the job be it Apple or others. For professional quality pictures there's no way that a cellphone camera will produce What Nikon or Canon can. Remember I'm talking at this point in time in a few years things might change
Unfortunately the average consumer doesn't give a hoot about quality photos. I guess when you are making duck faces and showing off your money items you don't need crisp images.
Unless you are on a bright sunny summer day, as good as it is for a phone, it just flat out sucks when compared to a proper dSLR with good glass.
That's logic - but not really accurate. If all you have is a McDonald's hamburger available to you at the time you're hungry - it's the best hamburger. It's the best (and only option). That doesn't make it the best burger. It gets the job done.
The statement alone can't quantify quality.
If this analysis were to have been done a few decades ago one would find that Kodak Instamatics and Brownies handily beating out Nikon and Canon even though they were crap cameras. What surprises me is that Apple doesn't also beat Canon.
Hardly. The optics still suck, lack of zoom (crop is not zoom) and high compression on phone cams will still limit their usefulness.
Yes, phones are great for quick snaps, and catching something on the run but for capturing family moments nothing beats a proper camera.
The iPhone camera is like a pistol. You only carry a pistol because it is HANDY, not because it is the best solution (rifle or shotgun) to a social problem.
You still need a proper camera for longer-range issues.
does canon have that much of the market share today over Nikon? Granted this is flickr
I can't say that I'm surprised. traditional camera days are numbered. More people use their phones as their cameras.
I'm not a pro camera user, but have you tried Camera+ to manually control stuff? I love that app!
Hardly. The optics still suck, lack of zoom (crop is not zoom) and high compression on phone cams will still limit their usefulness.
Yes, phones are great for quick snaps, and catching something on the run but for capturing family moments nothing beats a proper camera.
Only someone who lives with their camera on automatic would make such a blatantly wrong and naive statement.
what is wrong with flickr?
1 tb space, can upload and download originals, what else do you need?
not hipster enough?
A good photographer or anyone with a "good eye" will take amazing shots with ANY camera available.
but for capturing family moments nothing beats a proper camera.
When I can have changeable lenses, adjustable shutter speed, aperture, and the functionality of a DSLR, then we can talk.
True many people want a DSLR but they're a minority compared to those who want to snap pictures and post them to facebook and what not.
iPhone cameras are great for phone cameras, but most popular does not equal best.
I just got my fist Nikon (DSLR) and I love it!
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.