Resolved Serious question… Sony camera (a6400&18-135) vs upcoming iPhone

[uacd]

Hi! New to the forum and posting for the first time, feeling this post will collect lots of laugher emojis but I am ready😄 I know question is quite silly but still want to ask it.

So I was thinking recently of replacing my old Nikon DSLR with something actually good. I looked at current market and want to spend somewhat in the ballpark of 800-1500€ on a camera+kit lens. The reason I wanna replace my trusty D5100 is because Nikon turned to be so greedy that they have discontinued all AF-S lenses and newer ones are not compatible with my cam, as well as I cannot even buy an original battery. Using 50mm FF prime lens is fun but not versatile, it is very hard to shoot landscapes with this one. Also I don’t really wanna search every dumpster or marketplace for overpriced second-hand options with growing mold and dust inside or vintage lenses that rely on manual focusing. Yeah I am too lazy to MF in 2025😆

Found a6400. Loving the color science, loving the feature set… but it is already 6 years old. I don’t think I might have a budget for something like a6700 or latest a7smth, as well as despite a6400 being *only* 6 years old, it has features of a 15 year old camera: not enough weatherproof and splashproof and still ancient micro USB, not USB C.

Since I have quite older iPhone I am thinking, maybe these old cams aren’t even worth it anymore? New iPhones offer awesome features like ProRAW and photographic styles.

I mean, I am not pro photographer and don’t earn money with my craft, just a hobbyist that wants to be able to shoot good pictures and not have to rely on hours of Lightroom RAW editing: this is the reason I discarded new Nikon, Fuji and Canon options straight away, they have horrible color sciences and SOOC profiles, just unbearable and tasteless IMO, not tryna offend anyone!😊

Thus at this point, maybe it is worth to wait and throw 1500€ into iPhone 17 Pro instead of a dedicated camera? At least I will have full water resistance, “always in pocket” experience and even 8K video as a bonus.

Currently leaning more towards new iPhone, but what are your opinions? Do you think camera market is bloated nowadays or is there still a reason to buy dedicated APS-C shooter? Lack of proper rain/snow/dust sealing in most modern offerings makes it almost automatic no for me, I love shooting in such harsh conditions, as well as living in damp European climate

 

[mollyc]

Your question might be serious, but it seems like you've already made up your mind. There is nothing wrong with being a dedicated phone shooter and millions of people operate that way. Convenience can't be beat.

You are asking your questions on a board dedicated to photography, so most of us have experience with standalone cameras. Let's clear up some of the misconceptions you are spreading in your post - I really hope your question is "serious" because it really doesn't sound that way from some of your wording.

Your existing camera is 15 years old. Let's be clear about what Nikon "being greedy" means. The market turned from a classic mirrored SLR configuration to a more modern mirrorless setup. This was led by Sony. The other camera makers saw that they also need to to pivot to mirrorless to keep up. So Nikon was only "being greedy" in the sense that they wanted to stay in business. There are plenty of batteries for all sorts of cameras and other electronics that are no longer made. I have countless dongles around my house to use old peripherals with my newer Macbook Pro. This is just how electronics work.

You do not need to spend hours editing in LR to get good colors. People seek out Fuji specifically for their colors because you can make so many jpeg profiles and never do any editing in post and just set up your camera the way you want to shoot and then your jpegs are ready to go. People have sought Canon forever for their "creamy skin tones," Nikon for punchy colors right out of the gate, Fuji for their film sims. Historically Sony has been known to be difficult with their color science, but today, in 2025?? You will never be able to tell what camera was used for any given photo based on the color. You can replicate any color in post from just about any modern camera. You can browse through our POTD thread here and I challenge you to guess what brand was used for any photo.

The reasons to buy a dedicated camera are better sensor size, better optics, better dynamic range, better details. A dedicated camera - even your D5100 - will run circles around a phone, even an iPhone 17. Phone photos just do not hold up when viewed against a camera.

There are several cameras from each brand that would probably fit within your budget and parameters but I am not sure you really want a dedicated camera, and that's okay. You don't have to convince a bunch of strangers that a phone fits your needs better. We also have a number of European photographers here who don't seem to mind photographing in the elements.

If you'd like to come back and discuss rationally why the color science of three major camera brands aren't up to snuff to you, a hobbyist, I'd love to know what specifically you are seeing. Most of us in this group are hobbyists as well, using all sorts of gear, some even dedicated cameras in brands you didn't mention. Calling modern color science "tasteless" just tells me that you aren't really willing to have a conversation in good faith. For the record, you didn't offend me, you just come across as someone looking for an argument.

And if you think the Sony you've picked out is exactly what you need, then you don't need the permission from strangers on the internet for that, either. Only you know what will fit your needs. But "color science" and "weather sealing" are two of the easiest things to get in a modern camera.

 

[uacd]

Your question might be serious, but it seems like you've already made up your mind. There is nothing wrong with being a dedicated phone shooter and millions of people operate that way. Convenience can't be beat.

You are asking your questions on a board dedicated to photography, so most of us have experience with standalone cameras. Let's clear up some of the misconceptions you are spreading in your post - I really hope your question is "serious" because it really doesn't sound that way from some of your wording.

Your existing camera is 15 years old. Let's be clear about what Nikon "being greedy" means. The market turned from a classic mirrored SLR configuration to a more modern mirrorless setup. This was led by Sony. The other camera makers saw that they also need to to pivot to mirrorless to keep up. So Nikon was only "being greedy" in the sense that they wanted to stay in business. There are plenty of batteries for all sorts of cameras and other electronics that are no longer made. I have countless dongles around my house to use old peripherals with my newer Macbook Pro. This is just how electronics work.

You do not need to spend hours editing in LR to get good colors. People seek out Fuji specifically for their colors because you can make so many jpeg profiles and never do any editing in post and just set up your camera the way you want to shoot and then your jpegs are ready to go. People have sought Canon forever for their "creamy skin tones," Nikon for punchy colors right out of the gate, Fuji for their film sims. Historically Sony has been known to be difficult with their color science, but today, in 2025?? You will never be able to tell what camera was used for any given photo based on the color. You can replicate any color in post from just about any modern camera. You can browse through our POTD thread here and I challenge you to guess what brand was used for any photo.

The reasons to buy a dedicated camera are better sensor size, better optics, better dynamic range, better details. A dedicated camera - even your D5100 - will run circles around a phone, even an iPhone 17. Phone photos just do not hold up when viewed against a camera.

There are several cameras from each brand that would probably fit within your budget and parameters but I am not sure you really want a dedicated camera, and that's okay. You don't have to convince a bunch of strangers that a phone fits your needs better. We also have a number of European photographers here who don't seem to mind photographing in the elements.

If you'd like to come back and discuss rationally why the color science of three major camera brands aren't up to snuff to you, a hobbyist, I'd love to know what specifically you are seeing. Most of us in this group are hobbyists as well, using all sorts of gear, some even dedicated cameras in brands you didn't mention. Calling modern color science "tasteless" just tells me that you aren't really willing to have a conversation in good faith. For the record, you didn't offend me, you just come across as someone looking for an argument.

And if you think the Sony you've picked out is exactly what you need, then you don't need the permission from strangers on the internet for that, either. Only you know what will fit your needs. But "color science" and "weather sealing" are two of the easiest things to get in a modern camera.

Thank you for the great answer!

No-no, I am not trying to convince anyone that smartphone is better than even ancient DSLR, NO. And will probably never happen, sensor size and optics… one cannot fool physics.

As for the Nikon, I was their fan obviously and wanted to upgrade to Z50 II at first but then I saw examples and was like… “where are the colors??? Why it looks so lifeless?”. I don’t know how to explain but something bad happened during the transition to mirrorless, they have lost their brand color.

I agree that everything can be done in post, even on smartphone! Definitely! But it is time, lots of time. What I love in my D5100 is that I can literally use M mode, set up ISO, WB, shutter (which I never change tho and use minimum like 3.5, 4 or 5) and get brilliant colors, picture and photos.

I do also own Canon EOS M200 which I bought in 2020 I believe, and I will probably sell it because despite it has APS-C sensor the colors are very bad, as well as the kit lens – comparing to my aged and almost dead 18-105 it is night and day, I had never had black vignetting even when I had used 105mm. So it feels like Canon is cutting corners there. What is fun is that their premium shooters (such as R7) have absolutely different color science and more or less adequate kit lens.

Thus I was thinking of Sony because this one has exactly every feature I need. And at first I thought of buying ZV-1, a compact blogger-oriented shooter, but I had seen comparisons and even older iPhone 14 with almost the same sensor size (1’ vs 1/1.14’) has very huge advantage over it. Surely optics in Sony are way, way better (Zeiss never disappoints!), but otherwise iPhone had won by all other criteria (sharpness, processing).

Still hesitant about the decision but will think. After all after whole 15 years I had learned dedicated cam can be cumbersome when it comes to taking it with you😃 And most compact shooters unfortunately are almost the same as iPhone or sometimes even worse (G7X, G9X, abovementioned ZV-1, RX100 etc).

After all these toys are not cheap, thats why I was asking other people about their opinion. Sorry for missing the thread, I should have probably posted it to more relevant one and not general discussion

 

[uacd]

UPD: if the question seems out of place in this thread, I would ask Mod team to move it to relevant one, didn’t pay enough attention and posted to general photography thread, I am sorry for that

 

[OldMacs4Me]

Note that the Z50 and the later Z50ii allow for a lot of in camera adjustment. Typically the colors are accurate, but many prefer increased saturation levels. That can be done in camera or post image. Preview or (God forbid) Photos is up to that minor task and much more. Personally I prefer to make adjustments on my computer as adding saturation is easier than spilling it. But to each their own. An exception to this is when I am copying 35mm slides or negs. With color negs I try to offset the orange masking as much as I can in camera. Copying slides, I generally lower contrast in camera by a step.

I do love the low light performance with this camera. ISO 3200 is almost noise free, and latitude (dynamic range) is excellent even at that fast speed. ISO 6400 is still very usable, but at that setting the latitude is a bit weaker.

A fair amount of territory was covered in this thread. Some regular images and some things you may not be doing on a regular basis.

Nikon Z50 First Impressions.

I bought this camera primarily to speed up digitizing a huge whack of 35mm slides, B&W negs and colour negs. I chose to go with the 50mm ƒ-2.8 macro and the 18-140mm zoom. Preferring a single lens to cover my ordinary shooting range. I have an old Epson scanner which does really well with...

forums.macrumors.com

I will emphasize that all makes of current cameras have extreme bell & whistle bloat. Expect to spend a week or two learning to navigate the menus and figuring out how to best set the camera for your personal needs. Believe me, it's time well spent. I strongly suggest you try several makes as one may just feel better to you than the others. When I bought mine I made sure the camera store would a allow a return or exchange if I wasn't happy, so I had 30 days to give it a really good workout.

 

[Apple fanboy]

Hi! New to the forum and posting for the first time, feeling this post will collect lots of laugher emojis but I am ready😄 I know question is quite silly but still want to ask it.

So I was thinking recently of replacing my old Nikon DSLR with something actually good. I looked at current market and want to spend somewhat in the ballpark of 800-1500€ on a camera+kit lens. The reason I wanna replace my trusty D5100 is because Nikon turned to be so greedy that they have discontinued all AF-S lenses and newer ones are not compatible with my cam, as well as I cannot even buy an original battery. Using 50mm FF prime lens is fun but not versatile, it is very hard to shoot landscapes with this one. Also I don’t really wanna search every dumpster or marketplace for overpriced second-hand options with growing mold and dust inside or vintage lenses that rely on manual focusing. Yeah I am too lazy to MF in 2025😆

Found a6400. Loving the color science, loving the feature set… but it is already 6 years old. I don’t think I might have a budget for something like a6700 or latest a7smth, as well as despite a6400 being *only* 6 years old, it has features of a 15 year old camera: not enough weatherproof and splashproof and still ancient micro USB, not USB C.

Since I have quite older iPhone I am thinking, maybe these old cams aren’t even worth it anymore? New iPhones offer awesome features like ProRAW and photographic styles.

I mean, I am not pro photographer and don’t earn money with my craft, just a hobbyist that wants to be able to shoot good pictures and not have to rely on hours of Lightroom RAW editing: this is the reason I discarded new Nikon, Fuji and Canon options straight away, they have horrible color sciences and SOOC profiles, just unbearable and tasteless IMO, not tryna offend anyone!😊

Thus at this point, maybe it is worth to wait and throw 1500€ into iPhone 17 Pro instead of a dedicated camera? At least I will have full water resistance, “always in pocket” experience and even 8K video as a bonus.

Currently leaning more towards new iPhone, but what are your opinions? Do you think camera market is bloated nowadays or is there still a reason to buy dedicated APS-C shooter? Lack of proper rain/snow/dust sealing in most modern offerings makes it almost automatic no for me, I love shooting in such harsh conditions, as well as living in damp European climate

So Nikon shooter here. Started with a D3100, then a D300 and my last couple of DSLR's were a D7100 and D750.

I switched to the Z6iii last year and have been enjoying the new features. Personally I don't see any difference with the colours between the models. It really depends on how you post process. I always shoot RAW and edit on my Mac.

I don't shoot too often on my iPhone because I don't really enjoy the experience in the same way as I do shooting with a dedicated camera. But that's me.


If you are happy with your current camera why not just buy a lens or two? A 14-24mm would be nice for landscape. I sold mine to fund my last purchase. Beautiful lens for landscape. Or if you want to switch to Sony there are plenty of good options. You can't really choose a bad camera in 2025.

 

[tizeye]

Former Nikon shooter...who jumped to Sony after borrowing a friend's original, just introduced, A7 for daughter's 2014 wedding. After lugging my Nikon D610 around Europe, the A7 was notably lighter with both being full frame cameras. Was ready to upgrade the D610, considering the 800, but made the switch. Did hire a photographer for the wedding and he shot an older Sony/Minolta DSLR and second shooter shot a D800...both were impressed with the camera. Will note that I learned during the transition and have heard from others that while current Nikon, Sony and Canon can use legacy lens "with an adapter", it is very clunky and limited. While you can use your old glass, you will want to sell and update to current mount lens.

Bought my wife the original A6000 which she currently has with the two kit lens, and have toyed with upgrading to the 6400 (or even the 6700). The 6400 was the last to use the "W" battery, so have a charged battery backup available. The 6700 uses the "Z" battery, same as my current camera with much better battery life. My camera, after a couple of upgrades, is the A7RIII...well out of your budget even though a couple generations back.

Sony vs iPhone...hands down, Sony, and in general don't get distracted by megapixels as it is the sensor size that makes the difference. My iPhone Pro 15 is no slouch in the photo department and "available" but the Sony is primary.

Last week I took a multi day trip down to the Everglades and other places around Miami to the upper Keys. I left my A7RIII and most full frame glass home and traveled light with the A6000 with the two kit lens. OK, since I was driving, I did find a place for the 200-600 which would be an absolute monster (300-900 equivalent) on the A6000, but never used it. 95% of the photos were with the Sony. About the only time I used the iPhone was in Roberts Fruit Stand (an amazing surprise) and when eating a picnic lunch in the Everglades and a Cardinal was keeping an eye on us hoping for handouts (we don't feed the wildlife). I noticed a woodpecker hopping in the brush so edged my way around to the back hoping for a better angle. Was startled when a bird jumped up in front of me, landing about 10' away with wings spread on the ground like distracting from a nest. Never seen it before and had to go back to the picnic table to get my iPhone, returning to take a picture for the Merlin ap where it was identified as a Chuck Will's Widow. Took several with the Sony as well and they were much nicer.

 

[Clix Pix]

Just skimmed through this thread.....

To the OP: my questions for you are: Are you really excited about the potential in photography and what you can do with it? What would be your main goal in taking photos in the first place? Who do you perceive as a potential audience for your images, if any? What are the types of subjects and/or styles which you prefer to shoot? Landscapes? Architecture? Macros? Abstracts? Portraits? Sights seen while traveling? Snapshots of family and friends?

Do you shoot in RAW or .jpg? If you mentioned this in your posts, apologies if I may have overlooked a reference to that. Right then and there for many people (aside from budget) that is a consideration in terms of choosing both a camera body and a lens or two as well as deciding if using an iPhone would suffice instead.

Do you like to work in post-processing with adjusting the final outcome of your images to your own satisfaction or are you perfectly happy to skip all of that and simply let the camera or iPhone do most of the work? iPhones can to a certain extent provide relatively pleasing images, especially if only shared on social media sites anyway. However, they still do have their limitations if someone wants to delve into shooting something in a way which may be beyond the iPhone's scope and ability to achieve even reasonable results.

It's good that you are exploring all of this before making any sort of purchasing decision.

 

[r.harris1]

Much of “color science” is down to the raw processor and sometimes that’s in concert with the camera manufacturer (e.g. Fuji film sims), sometimes not. All raw files are just luminance data (monochrome per color channel) with some metadata instructions for things like white balance that are used by a given raw processor. Your raw processor of choice (Lr, C1, DxO, Apple Photos, etc) is what turns that data into color images (for those sensors with color filter arrays). Literally no one needs to spend hours on an image in any program unless they want to. All you have to do is choose the camera form-factor you want and go to town. In the right hands (this is 100% key), any camera these days can work wonders. It’s unlikely anyone would be able to tell what camera you’re using. This though is 100% down to the person shooting and processing the image. No camera can substitute for actual skill .

If an image from any camera looks “flat”, it’s generally not down to the camera, but how it was processed by the photographer. Lenses do matter, obviously, as this is how the color frequencies get focused on the sensor, but I mean heck, most dedicated cameras have a sensor produced by Sony Semiconductor and then a bespoke media processing chip for moving the raw data to storage, amongst other things (e.g. Nikon’s Expeed). Some camera manufacturers may tweak the color filter over the sensor for some models, but most don’t since it’s so expensive to do. Camera manufacturers generally think: let post-processing handle it.

 

[richardallan]

Still hesitant about the decision but will think. After all after whole 15 years I had learned dedicated cam can be cumbersome when it comes to taking it with you😃 And most compact shooters unfortunately are almost the same as iPhone or sometimes even worse (G7X, G9X, abovementioned ZV-1, RX100 etc).

I don't know how you came to this conclusion but it is absolutely untrue. I can't speak for the others but I have had a Sony RX100iii for 10 years and it is an outstanding camera. I have an iPhone 15 Pro and even taking raw photos with an app like Halide there is no comparison. That's not to mention all the proper camera controls you have at your disposal. The RX100iii is so good that when I changed systems I didn't really even look at Canon or Nikon. I bought an A7RV about 18 months ago. One definite reason I chose Sony was the huge availability of third party lenses. Anyway, I have also since bought an RX100vii which is practically a miniature A9.

As far as the A6400 goes, I'm pretty sure it does have weather sealing. As I have already said, there is a huge amount of recent lenses available for it. You obviously have a budget so you need to make the decision I guess. You also have to decide if you're going to shoot raw or jpeg. If you aren't interested in shooting raw and post processing then I would probably just go with the phone in your situation.

 

[uacd]

Just skimmed through this thread.....

To the OP: my questions for you are: Are you really excited about the potential in photography and what you can do with it? What would be your main goal in taking photos in the first place? Who do you perceive as a potential audience for your images, if any? What are the types of subjects and/or styles which you prefer to shoot? Landscapes? Architecture? Macros? Abstracts? Portraits? Sights seen while traveling? Snapshots of family and friends?

Do you shoot in RAW or .jpg? If you mentioned this in your posts, apologies if I may have overlooked a reference to that. Right then and there for many people (aside from budget) that is a consideration in terms of choosing both a camera body and a lens or two as well as deciding if using an iPhone would suffice instead.

Do you like to work in post-processing with adjusting the final outcome of your images to your own satisfaction or are you perfectly happy to skip all of that and simply let the camera or iPhone do most of the work? iPhones can to a certain extent provide relatively pleasing images, especially if only shared on social media sites anyway. However, they still do have their limitations if someone wants to delve into shooting something in a way which may be beyond the iPhone's scope and ability to achieve even reasonable results.

It's good that you are exploring all of this before making any sort of purchasing decision.

Hi! Thank you for answering. Lots of great questions indeed, will sum them up and address them as well as I can:

- I had some amateur experience with D5100 for maybe 10 years and stopped using camera when lens felt no more crisp and sharp (turned out – due to mold, never encountered this because it was my first camera);
- I had experimented with RAW alot, especially when it came to night shots and long exposure+ND filter experimentations. But mostly I learned to just shoot SOOCs in Manual mode, thanks to optical viewfinder it was quite pleasant experience. As a result I was able to ditch editing and just made the shots I like straight on the camera;
- I mainly shoot nature and landscapes. Had some portrait experience too but this is not what I enjoy. Shooting for myself, I am not even a huge Instagram poster or influencer. Rarely I do print images (small size prints, nothing extraordinary);
- I also have tremendously huge experience with iPhoneography. Started with iPhone 4, then 5, 6s, 11 that I currently use. Mostly pleasant experience, I don’t mind having slightly over-processed photos and lower sensor resolution. In some threads on MR I had seen people shooting good stuff in ProRAW and thought if it is a game changer;
- I do also own Canon EOS M200. And this is the worst camera I had ever tried. Despite having APS-C sensor, its dynamic range is comparable to iPhone 3GS. Fell victim to viral marketing of the camera and seemingly good price (700€ or smth). In fact used it maybe two or three times, considering to sell it but doubt anyone would buy it😆
- Still trying to decide because it seems that after 15 years cameras haven’t got down in price but only became more expensive, 1000€ nowadays is considered “budget camera”, and there are lots of disadvantages for this price such as poor build quality, poor image processing, poor kit lens, and in general it is a price of older shooters or small compact cameras (that have other disadvantages - small sensor and huge noise floor).

To sum up, small tldr:
I shoot jpegs, soocs, rarely tune them to my liking (maybe slight color balance touch-ups and saturation boosts). Prefer natural colors because I shoot landscapes & nature mainly

 

[Apple fanboy]

Hi! Thank you for answering. Lots of great questions indeed, will sum them up and address them as well as I can:

- I had some amateur experience with D5100 for maybe 10 years and stopped using camera when lens felt no more crisp and sharp (turned out – due to mold, never encountered this because it was my first camera);
- I had experimented with RAW alot, especially when it came to night shots and long exposure+ND filter experimentations. But mostly I learned to just shoot SOOCs in Manual mode, thanks to optical viewfinder it was quite pleasant experience. As a result I was able to ditch editing and just made the shots I like straight on the camera;
- I mainly shoot nature and landscapes. Had some portrait experience too but this is not what I enjoy. Shooting for myself, I am not even a huge Instagram poster or influencer. Rarely I do print images (small size prints, nothing extraordinary);
- I also have tremendously huge experience with iPhoneography. Started with iPhone 4, then 5, 6s, 11 that I currently use. Mostly pleasant experience, I don’t mind having slightly over-processed photos and lower sensor resolution. In some threads on MR I had seen people shooting good stuff in ProRAW and thought if it is a game changer;
- I do also own Canon EOS M200. And this is the worst camera I had ever tried. Despite having APS-C sensor, its dynamic range is comparable to iPhone 3GS. Fell victim to viral marketing of the camera and seemingly good price (700€ or smth). In fact used it maybe two or three times, considering to sell it but doubt anyone would buy it😆
- Still trying to decide because it seems that after 15 years cameras haven’t got down in price but only became more expensive, 1000€ nowadays is considered “budget camera”, and there are lots of disadvantages for this price such as poor build quality, poor image processing, poor kit lens, and in general it is a price of older shooters or small compact cameras (that have other disadvantages - small sensor and huge noise floor).

To sum up, small tldr:
I shoot jpegs, soocs, rarely tune them to my liking (maybe slight color balance touch-ups and saturation boosts). Prefer natural colors because I shoot landscapes & nature mainly

Generally I’d advise people to avoid kit lenses and buy second hand older pro lenses. Why have an 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 lens when you can have a 24-70mm f2.8. Or a 50mm f1.8 prime. Lots of options on a budget.

 

[uacd]

Why have an 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 lens when you can have a 24-70mm f2.8. Or a 50mm f1.8 prime. Lots of options on a budget.

Price😃 These fancy lenses are significantly pricier than the body itself. I mean I do understand it is totally ok in photography world for a lens to cost as much as body or more, but I just wanted something that I would grab from time to time to shoot "better than a phone" pictures: obviously taking big camera often gave me frowns from other people around since everyone seems to had forgotten that "there are cameras!". In my logic, buying 1300-1800 EUR camera (body and lens) that I will sometimes take on weekends and vacation can be a bit too pricy in our changing world, especially since I don't earn my income with photography. And iPhone doesn't feel as guilty, after all it is a computer, a camera, a phone!😃 Btw, my old Nikkor 18-105 wasn't bad at all. Just got moldy/dusty after years of active use in various weather conditions, incl snow and rain. Servicing it already was as expensive as buying 50mm ff prime lens (that basically gave me 75mm equivalent and was too portrait to my liking).

 

[richardallan]

To sum up, small tldr:
I shoot jpegs, soocs, rarely tune them to my liking (maybe slight color balance touch-ups and saturation boosts). Prefer natural colors because I shoot landscapes & nature mainly

I'd just be sticking to using your phone then...

 

[Clix Pix]

OP, so......from what you have told us, yes, it sounds as though you already have made your decision, and that is to stick with using an iPhone. That's fine, I've seen some interesting images shot with iPhones, and indeed there is a community of people who do nothing but iPhoneography. Enjoy!

One thing I might add, though, is that it is pretty well known that often the colors displayed in shots taken with iPhones are a bit too saturated and use HDR a bit too heavily, so personally, but this is just my opinion -- I wouldn't consider that as presenting "natural colors."

 

[cjsuk]

Ooooh this one is a little close to my heart. Whole thread here https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...-i-can-be-bothered-to-take-my-camera.2447112/ (worth reading through the whole thing)

So I went down that path a few years back and again recently. I took a trip to Pompei this year and my 15 pro was so bad I burned the credit card and went back a couple of months later with a new Nikon Z50ii and 18-140mm lens because what came back was garbage.

Even the best phones are, how shall we say, pretty awful compared to even an ass end 2013 DLSR (I had a D3100). My problems with them:

1. The lenses are utter crap. It's three very compromised lenses with some digital trickery to bridge the gaps. This consists of some abhorrent distortion correction, digital zoom using possibly the worst interpolation algorithm they could muster plus some AI smeared over the top.
2. The noise and digital artifacts are visible if you print to 10x8".
3. ProRAW doesn't give you anything. There is still a lot of digital post processing. Perhaps not colour but there's a lot of weird digital looking noise and distortion correction
4. White balance makes me want to cry if there's anything wood or orange in the image. Completely shoots the thing.
5. Some of the colour reproduction is insane. Like Krusty the ****ing clown insane.
6. Everything is oversharpened to bits.
7. The phone shoots in HDR and the dynamic range presentation on non HDR displays is completely ****ed up regardless of what you do to it.
8. Damn iPhone won't focus on what you want to half of the time.

Really it crushed my soul a few times when I got back and looked at the photos on a proper monitor (Studio Display).

If you can be bothered to carry a cheap mirrorless around you won't use the phone. That's the deciding factor.

My carry is a Nikon Z50ii + 18-140mm Z DX + peak designs strap + USB-C cable. That's it. Don't even need a case. Just throw it in your bag.

I will buy a standard 128 gig iPhone when this 15 Pro goes out of cycle.

Zero edit - D3100 entry level junk with kit lens shot I took in 2012. Show me an iPhone that can do this. That's 13 years ago....

----

At this point I think we are sold a lie.

 

[Timpetus]

Wedding photographer for 14 years and amateur for many more years before that, here. I tend to alternate when I go on vacation between high and low tech photography. Sometimes I try to be more "unplugged" and work with the limitations of my iPhone and one or two of our Fujifilm Instax cameras, other times I bring the whole kit (Sony A7III with 24-105mm f/4, 50mm macro, and 70-200mm f/4, at a minimum. I have other lenses, too, but those are the ones I get the most use out of on vacation.

I'd recommend trying a better lens than the 18-135, if you do get the Sony. It's a great camera, but those kit lenses with a wide focal range are just not made well. The glass is at least 10x more important than the camera, and your skill is at least 50x more important than any part of your gear. The best camera is the one in the hands of a photographer who knows what to do with it and is in the right place at the right time to get the shot they want.

Regarding color science, while I agree that straight from the camera JPEGs have more pleasing colors on some brands than others, when you shoot RAW (you should) none of that matters; you have full control of the resulting colors. You can build a preset as a baseline for every type of photo you typically take, if you want. The sky is the limit, just don't overexpose anything you want to pull back details from

 

[richardallan]

Ooooh this one is a little close to my heart. Whole thread here https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...-i-can-be-bothered-to-take-my-camera.2447112/ (worth reading through the whole thing)

So I went down that path a few years back and again recently. I took a trip to Pompei this year and my 15 pro was so bad I burned the credit card and went back a couple of months later with a new Nikon Z50ii and 18-140mm lens because what came back was garbage.

Even the best phones are, how shall we say, pretty awful compared to even an ass end 2013 DLSR (I had a D3100). My problems with them:

1. The lenses are utter crap. It's three very compromised lenses with some digital trickery to bridge the gaps. This consists of some abhorrent distortion correction, digital zoom using possibly the worst interpolation algorithm they could muster plus some AI smeared over the top.
2. The noise and digital artifacts are visible if you print to 10x8".
3. ProRAW doesn't give you anything. There is still a lot of digital post processing. Perhaps not colour but there's a lot of weird digital looking noise and distortion correction
4. White balance makes me want to cry if there's anything wood or orange in the image. Completely shoots the thing.
5. Some of the colour reproduction is insane. Like Krusty the ****ing clown insane.
6. Everything is oversharpened to bits.
7. The phone shoots in HDR and the dynamic range presentation on non HDR displays is completely ****ed up regardless of what you do to it.
8. Damn iPhone won't focus on what you want to half of the time.

Really it crushed my soul a few times when I got back and looked at the photos on a proper monitor (Studio Display).

If you can be bothered to carry a cheap mirrorless around you won't use the phone. That's the deciding factor.

My carry is a Nikon Z50ii + 18-140mm Z DX + peak designs strap + USB-C cable. That's it. Don't even need a case. Just throw it in your bag.

I will buy a standard 128 gig iPhone when this 15 Pro goes out of cycle.

If you have any interest in photography and are using an iPhone you should use an app other than just the built in camera app. I use Halide but there are others.

Here are some photos from my iPhone 15 Pro that I took a while ago while scouting areas to try some astro photography. These are all raw photos taken using the app Halide. I have just done some basic edits to these in Adobe Camera Raw. No sharpening has been applied.

 

[cjsuk]

If you have any interest in photography and are using an iPhone you should use an app other than just the built in camera app. I use Halide but there are others.

Here are some photos from my iPhone 15 Pro that I took a while ago while scouting areas to try some astro photography. These are all raw photos taken using the app Halide. I have just done some basic edits to these in Adobe Camera Raw. No sharpening has been applied.

I have used Halide and Lightroom Mobile's built in camera for ref.

Still the issues persist...

As for your shots, no offense but I can see the distortion in the first one and the third one, there is still oversharpening.

Quick comparison. One of the moggies hanging around at the Acropolis in Athens.

iPhone 15 Pro...

Z50...

 

[richardallan]

No offence taken. I am not extolling the use of iPhones for serious photography. I rarely use mine for that. I was just pointing out that if you choose to use an iPhone instead of a camera then you will get much better results if you don't use Apple's camera app. Like I said, these have had minimal processing. It would be trivial to decrease the distortion in the first one if you wished to do that and what you perceive to be over sharpening in the third one is probably a result of reducing the file from 12MP to 2MP and massive Jpeg compression.