Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more
Can't Access your Account?
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
Mobile coverage is fairly patchy in th UK as well, for phones, not just internet.
Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.
Quote: I don't care how many pixels a camera phone has, they still can't beat the quality of a DSLR
On a site such as EPZ, I would expect that to be the general view, but - out there in the real world - camera phone photos have become 'good enough' (for most users anyway) and I have noticed friends of mine, who used to use small compacts, just don't bother using them any more... even though the cameras have the advantages of optical zoom, better sensor etc.
Quality has become less (way less) important than convenience.
That quite probably holds true for huge swathes of people who take photographs...and good ones at that... but I dont believe that people that look on photography as an art or indeed a living will ditch dedicated cameras... that isnt to say you cant create art or good photographs with camera phones.
Quote: Mobile coverage is fairly patchy in th UK as well, for phones, not just internet.
True. I'm in south west London and often can't get a signal here. If they can't feed London, what hope for the rural areas
I was thinking of all the valleys in Devon and Cornwall, where line of sight is almost nowhere.
You go to the highest window on the north west side and stand on your left leg whilst holding the phone as far outside as possible in your right hand, and you can just catch your emails. That sort of thing. The pubs and hotels ought to paste up instructions. It's qute a laugh sometimes.
Quote: You go to the highest window on the north west side and stand on your left leg whilst holding the phone as far outside as possible in your right hand, and you can just catch your emails. That sort of thing. The pubs and hotels ought to paste up instructions.
There are parts of inner London, and also the suburbs, which are the same - you don't have to go to a rural area.
But there was no problem getting an excellent signal in the Outer Hebrides!
Quote: But there was no problem getting an excellent signal in the Outer Hebrides!
Hope it wasn't a rude one, CB...
Quote: The thing is, newfocus, that you assume that all of the world is like wherever you live. It isn't. England is a country, not the world.
If you got that impression that from my post, I've not phrased it well. I appreciate lots of places aren't well connected yet, enjoy cultural diversity and don't for a second think the whole world is like England. I spend at least a day in the average week totally out of any mobile signal too
The point I was trying to make is that smart phones are fundamentally designed to be connected devices. I do a bit of mobile app development from time to time and whether we like it or not, that always connected philosophy's built into the architecture of the products at every level. I'm not doubting that you could make good use of offline information on a phone, just that the phone manufacturers and vendors are selling connectivity rather than storage.
Not read the whole thread, but thought I'd add my view as a dSLR user and an iPhone user:
I use the iPhone a lot for pictures. I have it with me at all times and it's tiny. It prouces photos that are at least as good under normal conditions as the compact cameras I used as a child, so I don't see a problem with regards quality. Most snaps (of which the majority of specal moments are captured as) are low quality but that isn't an issue.
If however I am going out to "get some decent shots" I'll be taking the 5D, lenses, flashes, light stands, tripod, remote, etc. These are the times when quality is important to me. These are the times I am "painting with light" rather than capturing a moment. The iPhone is a note in a diary. The dSLR is a chapter in a novel that has been drafted, written, proofread, rewritten, edited and finalised. Big cameras are a tool for creating art, not memories.
I think the original question has only really been raised due to the recent accessability of higher quality cameras. Until 5 years ago, not many people had anything bigger than a compact camera. Sure, dSLRs are more common now, but even with the prices having dropped, their purpose has not really changed. They are monsters. They will not give a point-and-shooter a better image. They are big and heavy and unnecessary for day to day shots.
IMO, long live the camera phone revolution as these are the images that we will all look back on and smile. Not because they captured perfect images, but because they were the tools we had with us at that special, unpredictable moment.
These days it's easy to get impression that real things die. Everyone around dines at McDonald's, drives a tin foil car of the company he did not hear of some ten years ago, and spends hours on Facebook and Twitter instead of talking to a live person just by him (her). But that does not mean that everything good goes - it just means that convenient surrogates became so easily and conveniently available. A decent car was and is expensive, good restaurant takes more time and money than some fast food outlet, and mobile phone with a half-blind camera is given by a phone company almost for "free" as compared to the price of Nikon D800 (and we better have Leica left alone). Modern mobile phone has given a camera to everyone - thing unimaginable some time ago - and they are happy to use it. As for me it only means that "DSLR for dummies" books going to be replaced by "mobile photography for dummies" ones. And the process is already going...
I agree with the sentiment, but the examples threw me.
Quote: Everyone around dines at McDonald's
I did once. I think I might know two people in America who sometimes do. But it's hardly everyone. It's a popular idea that everyone does, but I think probably most people don't.
Quote: drives a tin foil car of the company he did not hear of some ten years ago
I bought my 4x4 nearly 12 years ago.
Quote: spends hours on Facebook and Twitter instead of talking to a live person just by him (her).
My Facebook is largely in place of writing letters and posting snapshots around the world. It's for keeping in touch with family and a few friends. Seems to be how the rest of the family use it - we're in several parts of the UK, in Queensland, NSW, Adelaide and Perth, Zambia, South Africa, Sweden, and Ohio. We didn't ever keep in touch like we do with Facebook, and now it links to Skype as well, so talking is sometimes feasible at the same time. Not just one to one either.
Twitter I use more like reading specialist magazines or society newsletters, and sometimes writing in to same, although it's not an exact match.
Of course it could be that I'm just not normal ... not that I'd want to be ...
Quote: Of course it could be that I'm just not normal ... not that I'd want to be ... Smile
A man in his post- 40s who knows that convenience is no substitute for quality must be normal, but hardly fits into "everyone" category. So good to know that I have a company
Mobile phone cameras are pretty good for taking avatars though. Mine was. I also use it when lazy to tear some ad out of a newspaper Convenient, you know...
Hmmm! I don't like to stand out in a crowd, but I never eat at MacDonalds, my wife & I both drive Alfa's, I have never had a Twitter account and I don't have an active Facebook account. My HTC phone's camera has hardly ever been used. Don't get me wrong, I am more than literate in Mac & PC (I also started and run a website) and I understand the menus on my D7000 (well most of them), but I don't think the human race has regressed as far as you imagine. There are some pretty interesting people out there.
I live in an area that is usually packed with tourists mostly in summer true but there are winter travelers here also, and the amount of cameras that they bring far out weighs the so called phone camera, all different sized lens pointed at our Cathedral from all around the world, so in that respect I do not see the traditional camera on the way out far from it, from my experience mostly but not all phone camera users are under 25 and just use it to capture that moment in time, but real camera users take photographs that also try to tell a story and/or to produce a piece of art, they put thought in to what they are doing. Camera phones are a novelty, as far as I am concerned handy if you have prang in your car to take a picture of the evidence, but people who use the traditional camera be it a DSLR, Bridge or point and shoot, put more thought in to their moments and besides any one can use a phone camera, but if you love your traditional camera you learn to understand it and what it can do, not much call for that on an iphone, as it is just another app to add to the list of functions.
Quote: Hmmm! ..... I don't think the human race has regressed as far as you imagine. There are some pretty interesting people out there.
I had my post re-read - not a word about regress. I did not say that - you did. But the progress itself takes a side road sometimes - now not the for first and not for the last time in history. From purely technical point of view iPhone, Galaxy, HTC, etc. are simply amazing machines (and represent some progress in that way) - but I think they get abused for convenience and all bunch of commercial reasons.
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
You must be a member to leave a comment
Get the latest photography news straight from ePHOTOzine in your email every month and win prizes!
01/09/2014 - 30/09/2014
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
View September's Photo Month Calendar