You get what you pay for and they can last decades, far outlasting the camera body. Some of mine are 30 years old and still provide an excellent photo.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPhone X iPhone X or dslr
- Thread starter Josh85826
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You get what you pay for and they can last decades, far outlasting the camera body. Some of mine are 30 years old and still provide an excellent photo.
I’ve been shooting DSLRs since 2004 and mirrorless since 2010. I’m very impressed by the image and video quality of my iPhone X, but it really should be compared to a compact camera with a built in lens that covers moderately wide to moderately telephoto. Interchangeable lens cameras are more versatile because you can use any lens you are willing to buy/rent and carry. The camera itself will also have some advanced features not available on a smartphone. An interchangeable lens system gets a lot more expensive once you spend a few years investing in lenses, but lenses are long term investments that hold their resale value quite well. Then there is also a learning curve that is steeper than that of the iPhone. That said it doesn’t have to be a huge investment. The number and type of lenses, bodies, and accessories you own depends on what you like to photograph and how into it you are, and what results you expect.
You can probably get some excellent car photography photos with the X, but a mirrorless or DSLR camera will be able to leverage wider lenses and will ultimately resolve more fine detail. One big difference will be the amount of dynamic range and detail you can pull from highlights and shadows. HDR mode on the X can help there though, and so can shooting RAW.
Another advantage of a DSLR or mirrorless camera is shooting comfort. If you are taking a lot of photos, nothing beats using a viewfinder for comfort. It’s also nice to have a larger grip and physical knobs, dials and buttons that let you change settings quickly.
If you will be shooting cars as a hobby, give the iPhone X a try. You will get some great photos and videos. If you start to find there are shots you want that you can’t get, ask other photographers what they are using for those shots. I would think a polarizer would be helpful as well for outdoor shots. It would control the glare of sunlight off metal and glass. You can actually buy them for iPhones. If you are planning to do car photography as a professional, you should research it quite a bit. Professionals not only choose the best gear for the job, but they always have backup gear as well. They also learn and practice until they are able to consistently get the shots they want.
Last edited:
Hahaha yeah good one. The two are not even remotely comparable. You can’t compare a tiny little camera on a phone with pixel duplication and artificial processing to the standard a DSLR can achieve in the hands of somebody knowledgeable in photography.
Absolutely no phone camera can replicate the quality of an optical camera with high quality glass. This topic is discussing the camera feature of the iPhone X compared to a DSLR btw and not the fact you can’t check your Instagram on a Canon 5D MKIII lol.
Do you have a source for that?
If you claim a phone camera takes comparable photos to a top DSLR, then my guess is you aren’t into photography or know much about it anyway. This topic isn’t about opinion but more factual evidence. There is absolutely no way the tiny camera on the iPhone X can compete with a DSLR with a range of high quality lenses. That my friend is an absolute fact.
Logic. Common sense. Yes, if you are into photography, sure you can see the difference. I’m willing to bet though that most people aren’t and if you had them look at pictures, they couldn’t tell. Probably only side by side. All I’m saying is the average person likely can’t tell or certainly doesn’t care.
Most photographs these days are viewed on social media or compressed for web use too. There is a reason why DSLRs exist though and if a photographer turned up at your wedding with an iPhone X, you’d be worried. If I tried a panning shot of a Formula car coming out of Stowe at Silverstone I’d have a blurry mess on an iPhone with enough fuzzy noise to destroy the background. If I wanted to take wildlife photos from 200 yards away, I wouldn’t use an iPhone either. People could tell the difference in a range of circumstances believe me.
As a point and shoot, the iPhone is excellent. My iPhone 6S can give great results for small prints and social media.
Yea, I totally get your point. I’m just saying for the average person, they probably wouldn’t be able to tell the difference in most situations.
True. If it’s a picture of your dinner, dog or cat in front of the fire or your son or daughter running around the garden then the average person with no idea what a good photograph is would struggle. Add an Instagram filter and it becomes the greatest picture on the newsfeed. Sadly this generation judge photos based on app filters these days.
So the majority of people are photography experts?
[doublepost=1517175388][/doublepost]
Yup, it’s a dying art unfortunately.
If you are even asking the question, you will be fine with the phone camera.
Have you ever done sports photography before? Have you ever done photography before at all?
Have you ever done sports photography before? Have you ever done photography before at all?
That is fine. I like having an X in my pocket for quick photos but it is a handicap in some situations. I have had opportunities for photos that I missed because I didn't have the right lens for the DSLR with me. I can't carry all of my lenses with me all of the time. That is the main beauty of the X. I can be taking a quick walk on the pier in board shorts and I will have my X with me. My DSLR is in the backpack in the truck because I don't want to lug the heavy thing everywhere I go.
Sure, makes sense. For those that appreciate the differences, an iPhone isn’t there yet. For most, it’s just fine.
The sensor on a DSLR blows the iPhone X sensor out of the water. Granted I have taken some pretty decent images with my X, but it doesn’t compare to my Fujifilm X100F mirrorless camera.
Always remember, it’s about the camera sensor, not the pixels.
Always remember, it’s about the camera sensor, not the pixels.
Let me play devils advocate here.
How doesn’t the photos from your X compare to your mirrorless photos ?
People are getting kinda twisted up here. A “better” camera (lens whatever) will not make one a better photographer.
True.
But it can make it possible to capture shots that would not otherwise be possible.
As well, "better" misses the point entirely. A better word would be "appropriate".
Finally, a topic to which I can speak with a fair amount of real world experience. When talking photography, equipment choice is only a small portion of the question. An iPhone photographer with an solid understanding of composition, leveraging available light, etc will almost always walk away with a better photograph than a novice photographer armed with the nicest mirrorless/dslr setup on the market. Combine this with Adobe Lightroom for iOS which allows one to shoot in raw with much more control over white balance, shutter speed, aperture etc than the stock camera app and the phone becomes even more powerful. Strap the phone on to a tripod and add a remote shutter release and your options are even better, especially when working in low light.
With all of that said, there is no way that I would willingly replace my camera setup with my iPhone for anything that I might want to print or sell at a later date. The sensor on the iPhone is pretty impressive but large prints (think 20x24 gallery canvas wraps etc..) will suffer. I do however view my iPhone coupled with Adobe Lightroom as a nice compliment to my workflow and for images that will never exist outside of a computer screen or social media it is more than adequate. I often use it for casual family shots or spur of the moment photography.
As mentioned in earlier post this boils down to your intended use. If you are wanting to move into a more serious photography role you will be better served with a mirrorless/dslr setup. If you want to take great photos for sharing online you will do well with an iPhone and some basic photography instruction. Have fun with whichever option you decide. Check out the Fuji x-t20 if you are considering a camera or perhaps find a used deal on a x-t1. Both are nice, compact, quality options to get you moving.
With all of that said, there is no way that I would willingly replace my camera setup with my iPhone for anything that I might want to print or sell at a later date. The sensor on the iPhone is pretty impressive but large prints (think 20x24 gallery canvas wraps etc..) will suffer. I do however view my iPhone coupled with Adobe Lightroom as a nice compliment to my workflow and for images that will never exist outside of a computer screen or social media it is more than adequate. I often use it for casual family shots or spur of the moment photography.
As mentioned in earlier post this boils down to your intended use. If you are wanting to move into a more serious photography role you will be better served with a mirrorless/dslr setup. If you want to take great photos for sharing online you will do well with an iPhone and some basic photography instruction. Have fun with whichever option you decide. Check out the Fuji x-t20 if you are considering a camera or perhaps find a used deal on a x-t1. Both are nice, compact, quality options to get you moving.
Let me play devils advocate here.
How doesn’t the photos from your X compare to your mirrorless photos ?
People are getting kinda twisted up here. A “better” camera (lens whatever) will not make one a better photographer.
In good light for general photography, the iPhone X does an excellent job, and you might need to pixel peep or print large (or view on a large high res display) to see a difference. The lower the light gets, the bigger the differences get. That said the iPhone X and 8 series are much better in low light than my previous iPhone 6 was. Where comparisons become impossible are when you mount lenses on a DSLR or mirrorless that extend your capabilities making it possible to get shots you just can’t get with the focal lengths of the iPhone. People like to say the camera doesn’t matter, but the truth is that it does. If the camera didn’t matter, professional and amateur enthusiast photographers wouldn’t ever bother with camera upgrades or additional lenses. Yes there are some brilliant photographers who get by with only one prime lens or even just a smartphone. It’s possible if you decide that a single camera and lens is all you need to capture the types of shots you want to get and you stick to that style of photography and subject matter. Sometimes the limitation can also force some creative decisions and help you explore some interesting perspectives. Ultimately though, photographers discover that cameras and lenses are just tools and having the right tools for the job can make a huge difference. Yes a good photographer can produce excellent results with a single small multi-tool, but they will make decisions based on the capabilities of the gear. Whatever tools you use, you must learn how to use them well. That includes learning what they do and do not do well.
Learning to take better photos can be mostly about composition, timing, learning to see photos in your head that will have impact... any camera will give you some tools to explore... but there is a technical side to the art as well. Ideally I would argue that a camera that gives you independent manual control over the exposure triangle (shutter speed, aperture, ISO) is better to learn with and therefore might just make you a better photographer even when you are shooting with the iPhone. That’s why many photography classes require a dedicated camera with manual controls.
Last edited:
BTW, a DSLR might not be the ideal choice for sports photography. Mirrorless would probably be a better choice.
In high school and college (70's, film days!) I had both an SLR (some basic Topcon) and a rangefinder (Leica CL). I rarely used the SLR. The CL was great for sports, street photography (anti-war protests were big at the time!), and photographing the emerging punk music scene in Detroit.
Anything where you have to get close in (motorsports doesn't really fit...) the rangefinder and fast leaf shutter had an advantage. No clacky sound. High speed film (Tri-X for B&W, Kodachrome 400 for color) and a reasonably fast lens meant I could get away without flash. If you don't draw attention and aren't annoying, you can get shots you wouldn't otherwise be able to get.
I think modern mirrorless digital cameras might approximate the experience of shooting with a rangefinder.
SLR and you are annoying, and somebody will be looking for some permit or badge you probably don't have.
Phone and you are just annoying and please get back to your seat and away from the stage/court/track/behind the barriers!
In high school and college (70's, film days!) I had both an SLR (some basic Topcon) and a rangefinder (Leica CL). I rarely used the SLR. The CL was great for sports, street photography (anti-war protests were big at the time!), and photographing the emerging punk music scene in Detroit.
Anything where you have to get close in (motorsports doesn't really fit...) the rangefinder and fast leaf shutter had an advantage. No clacky sound. High speed film (Tri-X for B&W, Kodachrome 400 for color) and a reasonably fast lens meant I could get away without flash. If you don't draw attention and aren't annoying, you can get shots you wouldn't otherwise be able to get.
I think modern mirrorless digital cameras might approximate the experience of shooting with a rangefinder.
SLR and you are annoying, and somebody will be looking for some permit or badge you probably don't have.
Phone and you are just annoying and please get back to your seat and away from the stage/court/track/behind the barriers!
Photography is an art form and a “good” photograph is, of course, very subjective, but also a “good” photograph doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with color or sharpness or dynamic range.
You’re absolutely correct with your statement “better photos can be (and I would argue ARE) about composition, timing, learning to see photos in your head that will have impact....”.
As the late, great Ansel Adams once said “a good photograph is knowing where to stand”.
When I’m making photographs (as opposed to just playing around and digi-snapping), I almost always follow the light. Look to see what it’s dancing on and how to try and capture it’s vision to me.
Lastly another A Adams quote “there are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs”.
So true about following the light, and Adams was known for waiting and waiting for it, and for returning many times if necessary. I live in the Pacific NW where excellent light can be unpredictable and fleeting for much of the year. I actually prefer the rainy months to the sunny Summer, because the cloud cover can sometimes produce a giant soft box effect that goes from flat to amazing and back to flat again rather quickly. Some of my favorite photos are ones I took while walking or biking to and from work, or while out on my lunch break. It’s why I like to carry a camera all the time. I bought a m4/3 camera years ago to have something more portable, but I’m finding that the iPhone X works really well for daily carry.
There are types of photographs where technical quality matters more than others, and there are photographs where it’s all about the subject, timing and composition. If a photograph has enough emotional impact, the technical quality hardly matters.