Other Be sincerely! Do you really record like a PRO, or just want to have the camera features?

[Azathoth123]

’Pro’ equipment isn’t always better for a given type or style of photography. Nikon and Canon are struggling badly these days. A touch screen DSLR is almost non-existent, operating a DSLR is like operating a PC with DOS or NT 3.1. I have sheet film cameras from 4x5 inches to 8x20 inches panoramic. They’re fun to use and boy are real movements nice. But there’s a lot of photography that you cannot do with them. Like photojournalism/event photography, Low light photography, fast-subjects (sports, races, children).

in the film days, I used to use a small Canon Shure Shot 110 point and shoot for events and street photography, a lot of venues like motorcycle rallies and Mardi Gras for example, even a Nikon F2 which is about half the size of a pro DSLR was too big, people would be bumping into you. A tripod was out of the question.

For those types of photography, which has a lot in common with daily life photography, people frequently used a Leica, not for the quality but because it was small and unobtrusive and was fast to use. That’s why I used the Canon mentioned above. That’s a cell phone today. But even a Leica wasn’t considered ‘pro’ back then for many uses, almost no one used one in a studio or for architecture where you needed body movements. Phone cameras are where all the development money is going and the small size and diminishing difference in quality between phones and pro equipment means phones are why Nikon and Canon aren’t doing well. Computational photography and image stabilization is rapidly closing the quality gap.

these days, non-pros don't want to pay for and lug around pro equiment. Pros don't either except when they need the features/control of the pro equipment on the job. A three-lens Leica set was the gold standard for compact cameras, and the iPhone 11 Pro pretty much replicates that functionality now With the 3-lenses. i’m all for it unless I’m in a studio or need movements for architecture or landscape (neither of which are noted for moving much BTW).

 

[TJ82]

’Pro’ equipment isn’t always better for a given type or style of photography. Nikon and Canon are struggling badly these days. A touch screen DSLR is almost non-existent, operating a DSLR is like operating a PC with DOS or NT 3.1. I have sheet film cameras from 4x5 inches to 8x20 inches panoramic. They’re fun to use and boy are real movements nice. But there’s a lot of photography that you cannot do with them. Like photojournalism/event photography, Low light photography, fast-subjects (sports, races, children).

in the film days, I used to use a small Canon Shure Shot 110 point and shoot for events and street photography, a lot of venues like motorcycle rallies and Mardi Gras for example, even a Nikon F2 which is about half the size of a pro DSLR was too big, people would be bumping into you. A tripod was out of the question.

For those types of photography, which has a lot in common with daily life photography, people frequently used a Leica, not for the quality but because it was small and unobtrusive and was fast to use. That’s why I used the Canon mentioned above. That’s a cell phone today. But even a Leica wasn’t considered ‘pro’ back then for many uses, almost no one used one in a studio or for architecture where you needed body movements. Phone cameras are where all the development money is going and the small size and diminishing difference in quality between phones and pro equipment means phones are why Nikon and Canon aren’t doing well. Computational photography and image stabilization is rapidly closing the quality gap.

these days, non-pros don't want to pay for and lug around pro equiment. Pros don't either except when they need the features/control of the pro equipment on the job. A three-lens Leica set was the gold standard for compact cameras, and the iPhone 11 Pro pretty much replicates that functionality now With the 3-lenses. i’m all for it unless I’m in a studio or need movements for architecture or landscape (neither of which are noted for moving much BTW).

Agree with this so much. There is nothing more Pro than being able to quickly and easily do what you want. You see a scene and you want to capture it quickly.

If you have a DSLR you need to turn it on (my Sony A7 Rii loads pretty slow and it's supposed to be state of the art), uncap it, change setting and shoot. If you've done your homework you've saved your settings after countless hours experimenting and shooting and know which one to goto for that scene.

And that's if your DSLR is even hanging around your neck, or even with you, because lets face it, most people just don't want an expensive DSLR with them all day.

I'm losing count of times this year I packed my DSLR and lenses when heading out.. and then just went nah can't bothered and left it at home. Took some nice snaps with my X for Instagram instead.

Phones really are getting to the stage where unless you're doing something that requires a setup and is going to make you money, most people will be satisfied with the phone. They really are amazing for the small size of them. Most of the phone is a screen and battery.

5 years from now.. I think we really will see Pro phones. Phones that are significantly heavier than the non-Pro models, but have large sensors and lens sizes that make many pro-sumers like me sell their DSLR for good. Pros will sell off their Sony RX's and use the phone for all point and shoot work. Accessories will be taken seriously and massively boost zoom etc. It's going to be great.

 

[Azathoth123]

After writing the above post, I began reflecting about what’s really different and what lose/gain with an iPhone camera vs a ‘pro’ camera. I got out a Fuji mirrorless and looked at the menus/manuals for anything that didn’t pertain to the camera operation or couldn’t be done in post processing. I also looked for things that either can’t be, or are difficult to compensate for with a cell phone camera. The differences are surprisingly few. Here’s some differences to think about.

Megapixels - if you need more, for example to print very large prints with fine detail, most cell phones don’t have them. A few do, and Apple may follow suit later.

Use of a lens shade - clunky with a cell phone and can make a surprising increase in image quality in many instances. You can compensate using your hand or a hat to shade the lens as conventional camera users have done for years, but there‘s really no built-in lens shading of significance with cell phone cameras, they’re too thin.

Aperture adjustment - most are fixed and you can’t adjust the aperture in-camera. Computational photography is compensating and getting better - for example portrait mode - but it isn’t really the same and there seems no real solution in sight.

Use of a polarizing filter - you’ll need to hold the filter in front of the lens or use a Moment-type case and filter mount. All other filters can Pretty much be replicated in software, but if you need to remove reflections, you can’t do it in post.

You don’t usually carry a spare - most pros carry a spare body or two. That’s not a justifiable thing for regular to do with a cellphone, though I suppose that you could because even a 11 Pro Max is cheap compared to pro digital cameras.


Pro cameras can utilize a wider range of focal lengths, important if you need it, because there‘s a limit to how much that you can crop and preserve image quality, and if you can’t back up you can’t attach a wider lens (though you could maybe shoot a pano and crop it or attach a supplemental lens). This is important with wildlife photograhy when you can’t approach your subject because of disturbing it and possibly getting eaten.

Geometry of the lens and sensor - not something that most people think about or that you can do anything about with any camera, but cell phone camera geometry is highly constrained and so cannot always use the optimal lens design - sensor geometry.

That’s about it, not many are show stoppers and many can be compensated for to some degree. But there are also disadvantages to pro cameras which have been noted above.

You can’t stick one in your pocket

The operation is convoluted and the interface designed in the 1990s. They really, really, need to work on this, it’s the difference between operating a late 1990s feature phone and a modern cell phone. You simply couln’t use the features of a modern cell phone with that UI, pro cameras really are UI limited.

You have to open the camera to change lenses with the possibility of getting dust on the sensor. This is a fairly big thing because cleaning a sensor in the field is not trivial. It will stop you for some time. Some pros carry multiple bodies with lenses attached and don‘t change them in the field unless they have to.

They’re expensive. A three lens Leica digital set will cost about the same as 20 iPhone Maxes.

 

[cannono]

Why is Skills+Want the Camera not an option? Why do skilled people need the old phone in this scenario???

 

[swandy]

I am not a “pro” but have been using a multitude of cameras for over 50 years, so probably more experience than most cell phone users. To me the most important camera is the one you have with you and that is generally a person’s phone. So to me any improvement in the iphones ability to take photos is welcome. Though I will admit I am trying out the 11 instead of one of the Pro models because to me the ultra wide lens is much more interesting than the 2x zoom. I am hoping that aside from that extra lens the capabilities of the 11 compared to the Pro models will be the same. (Aside from the screen which to my eyes was not significantly better when viewing photos and I don’t watch much video on my iPhone.)
Like has been said before in this thread - the equipment does not make a “pro”. My son-in-law works at the NY Post first as a photographer and now as the photo editor. One of the 9-11 stories that he related to me that he heard involved that one of the most published photos was taken with a disposable camera. Some working pro was down near the WTC for something not photography related and didn’t have their cameras with them. When they realized what was happening they ran and bought some disposable cameras and used those. (No I don’t remember which photo or the name of the photographer, sorry.)

 

[ASUgrad1999]

Because these moments are once in a lifitime, you should really use more advanced equipment than a phone. Professional video camera.
Therefore your argument doesnt stand up for me.

A camera, any camera, is only good if you have it with you and it’s ready to shoot. A professional video camera, yea, you might use that once and a while for planned things but most everyday moments the phone is perfect. Argument stands up fine for me!

 

[Sweeperdk]

Give a poor Photographer the best Camera and the result will remain poor.

Give a great Photographer a crappy Camera and the result will be great.

What are you trying to say here? This stuff is old news.

 

[Jimmy James]

The real point worth making is that an amateur with the Pro will make better videos than a similarly skilled amateur with an iPhone 7.

 

[Arndroid]

Because these moments are once in a lifitime, you should really use more advanced equipment than a phone. Professional video camera.
Therefore your argument doesnt stand up for me.

this is dumb. People keep their phones with them at all times. Not practical to also carry a camera bag everywhere, especially when you are already carrying supplies for a kid.

 

[Macalway]

I don't take scenic shots, but these phones are getting so go at it, I might start in on it.

 

[TrueBlou]

Top iPhone, bottom Panasonic I'm guessing?

You'd be dead right then, for what it's worth, the iPhone X image is much, much closer to how it actually looked on the day. The Panny image for instance doesn't as accurately represent the colours of the sea, sky and sand, as the eye saw them, not without me going into Photoshop and doing some editing. (Or spending more time on the day tweaking camera settings, but the wife was with me so I didn't have as much time to spend taking photos).

By comparison the Panasonic, which along with its lenses cost considerably more than an iPhone 11 Pro Max 512GB, looks flat, next to the iPhone shot.
Though, as I said, these are un-edited, I would ordinarily do some editing on the shots from the Panasonic.

Would I give up my mirrorless camera to just use an iPhone? Eh, no.
But I'm completely happy to use the iPhone on the days when I'm not lugging my camera bag around, which is a heck of a lot of the time.

Not to mention that for quick, whip it out and hit the button shots, the iPhone captures the atmosphere of scenes very well indeed. I'd have to spend some time adjusting aperture, shutter speed, white balance, Iso and so on, with my Panasonic to achieve similar out-of-camera results, by which time I may have missed the shot.
Sure, there's an Auto setting, but even then, did I remember to enable auto focus? did I remember to switch on O.I.S? did I take the lens cap off? These, and others, are things I just don't have to consider with the point-and-shoot of the iPhone.

So no, personally I'd never give up my iPhone cameras, they have replaced my need to carry any other pocketable point-and-shoot camera, and I'll take any, and every improvement they can throw my way.