RE: A better shot than expected

avatar

You are viewing a single comment's thread:

When it works, it works. This one obviously has good depth in the picture so in those conditions nothing more to be desired. Speaking from a practical perspective.

The main difference between those and "Pro cams" is the latter do well in poor conditions, too. The worse the conditions, the more powerful camera we need.

That aside, my smartphone cam is terribly terrible in all conditions, but that's because I use an old and cheap model.

Good luck and have fun with your photos and family time :)



0
0
0.000
3 comments
avatar

The worse the conditions, the more powerful camera we need.

Yep, and the phones will take a very long time to close many of these gaps.

That aside, my smartphone cam is terribly terrible in all conditions, but that's because I use an old and cheap model.

I think my last was too.
At the end of the day, it is nice to be able to quickly capture a photo at lunch without having to require a 2kg rig :D

0
0
0.000
avatar

Yep, and the phones will take a very long time to close many of these gaps.

Especially when it comes to mechanics and not only electronics. But size gets smaller all the time, in the camera field, included. And the mirrorless class of cams already do quite well compared to DSLR... and they weigh about 0.2 kg. But it's also about policy and market conditions. Some space level technologies are not worth it implementing in consumer goods as smartphones yet, while they're still too expensive. And some have been there since the beginning, of course.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I have had a mirrorless (olympus EM-1) for about 5 years now and have been really happy with it. The glass is still pretty heavy in my pro lens but more manageable than what I had for Canon. Carry on now includes more than just camera :)

0
0
0.000