On the fence about moving from iPhone 13 Pro to mirrorless?

[Danfango]

Wrote a large diatribe that no one will care about so deleted it and started again.

Basically I think I got better photos out of my old D3100 9 years ago than I get out of my 13 Pro now because of the lump of glass in front of it, greater control, less processing. I am using Halide on the 13 Pro for ref.

Advantages of the 13 pro is that it's light, rugged, waterproof, tiny and also has a fully functioning computer attached to it ?

Thus I'm thinking about blowing this year's bonus on a mirrorless (Edit: or an entry level/mid range DSLR). Thoughts?

Examples with zero processing.

D3100 in 2013 - good colour balance, good contrast, nice DoF relation / bokeh in the background.

iPhone 13 Pro in 2021 - oversharpened, colour saturation slightly too high, contrast slightly too high, no depth.

Not feeling the 13 Pro. It's fine for casual shots but if I want to do something nice it's really not there.

 

[mollyc]

a dedicated camera will always be better than a phone. ? many of us use “big” cameras regularly (some bigger than others).

but yes, your d3100 took better photos.

 

[squawk7000]

I don't think anyone is going to argue with your reasoning. A 'big' camera is more versatile and can take many photos that are just not do-able with a phone. As for better, yup you've got it.

The phone is the camera you always have with you, but a dedicated camera will give more control for those serious about photography

 

[cthompson94]

I do the exact same, I use my 13 Pro max for "regular" shots and video especially since most of my video involve a 2 year old so I need something quick and easy to not miss a moment. I bring my A7III dang near every time I go out when I know I may go out somewhere that may make a good photo. You can find great small form factor mirrorless cameras if you want something with a small form factor or of course something larger.

I can only speak for my experience with Sony since that is what I use. The A6000 series are great and compact with a crop sensor but can utilize all of the E-Mount lenses available (of course do the math if it is a FF lens) and I love my A7III although I am saving for the A7RIV due to not shooting as much video on the camera anymore so switching to a more photo centered camera is what I want to do instead of a more hybrid one.

 

[Clix Pix]

The OP mentions considering mirrorless or DSLR. I would suggest that since the photographic industry and technology are definitely moving more and more towards mirrorless and DSLRs are slowly falling away in popularity and usage, that going with mirrorless seems to make more sense. It wasn't clear whether or not the OP still has that D3100 and lens(es) any more or not. If so, especially if only a couple of lenses anyway,IMHO it still makes sense to trade that gear in on a current mirrorless body and lens(es).

Mirrorless has advantages over DSLRs:

Somewhat smaller and lighter-weight body (unfortunately the lenses haven't shrunk all that much, especially the FF ones!)

Silent shutter (especially useful when shooting wildlife or in situations where the clacking of a shutter is distracting and disturbing, such as weddings, press conferences, etc.).

Electronic Viewfinder (some feel that they still prefer the optical VF found in DSLRs but most find that once they become accustomed to the EVF that they like it a lot. It provides significant information prior to shooting, including the actual exposure of the scene so that it is possible to make necessary corrections and adjustments before hitting the shutter button).

Other features and functionality that I can't think of just at the moment that just are not possible on a DSLR.

 

[mollyc]

yes i would agree mirrorless over dslr.

 

[Danfango]

Thanks all for the replies. I shall digest them carefully this evening.

 

[OldMacs4Me]

Just want to add another element to the equation. Monitor resolution. My latest monitor is an ASUS PA248QV. This is pretty much at the bottom end price and sizewise for photo quality monitors. The resolution on this is 1920x1200.

As you get into bigger monitors that resolution increases. Long story short you need to consider what monitor you will be using down the road. The 1 inch sensor on my little Lumix ZS200 is considerably larger than on the iPhone and I would consider that 1 inch sensor the minimum size that will consistently deliver images that will fill a 1920x1200 screen and still look crisp and clean. If you are considering a significantly higher resolution monitor, I would be recommending the micro4/3rds as the minimum size.

After that a lot depends on what your tastes are. If you favor maximum depth of field then the 1" or micro 4/3rds sensor would be a logical choice. If you consider narrow depth of field as essential, you need to be looking at full frame sensors.

Another advantage of any camera with a 1" or larger sensor, is that it will deliver great 11x14 prints and 16x24 prints should usually be well within its abilities.

 

[Danfango]

Good point and will consider that.

I’m using the 14” MBP built in display and a 27” 4K Iiyama jobby. But I really want to be able to print on 10x8’s if I can down the line.

 

[OldMacs4Me]

Even my little Fuji XP90, with its teeny sensor will produce decent 8x10s. If you want to crop or print bigger than that, then you need to get away from the tiny iPhone sensor.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

Throw in that at least some of the mirrorless cameras out there are just as weatherproof as your phone, provided both body and lens are of the same make and rated as weather resistant. Some brands you can dump water on, or even accidentally run over with a truck.

Pretty much any recent camera can do 8x10s. You have to get into pretty large printing before a super-high MP count is in order. I have some 8x10s of pictures I took with a 4MP camera, if that gives you any idea. 20-25MP will certainly do, IMO.

 

[mollyc]

I have a 24x30 print that I made with an 8mp crop body camera in 2008-ish.

 

[Slartibart]

first: IMHO the best photos come from the camera you carry with you.

second: while I don’t have a iPhone 13, I think that many effects (the OP critizises in his example photo) of the computational photography defaults can be overcome when shooting RAW and using e.g. Hallide on the iPhone.

third: if you actually print your photos (sometimes), resolution isn’t really a problem - as @mollyc already indicated. An iPhone 13 should be sufficient.

fourth: for the pure joy of it get a real camera... additionally. ???

 

[winxmac]

Go with a dedicated camera than a smartphone...

Data transfer in a dedicated camera with a memory card slot is way better and easier than using flagship smartphones that no longer include memory card slot, well iPhones never had a memory card slot to begin with... Yes you can do a cable transfer from phone to a mac or pc but is very slow... You can AirDrop photos and videos to your Apple devices [I don't have a mac and I don't know if AirDrop works on Hackintoshes] or you can use apps like ShareIt or Send Anywhere to have the photos transferred wirelessly to a pc... Or upload to iCloud or OneDrive then download it using those apps...

I was asked to do a transfer of photos and videos from the iPhone to a Windows computer... Since there is iCloud for Windows and iCloud backup is enabled, I used that to download them however, right as we speak it is still showing downloading 300 plus items with no progress whatsoever even though I have started the download since yesterday... I downloaded the photos and videos per year since the total number is 10000 plus photos and videos... I have kept the computer running for more than a day now and it is currently showing high CPU usage of iCloud Photos even though nothing new is being downloaded and the progress is still saying downloading 300 plus items [which was the same number since yesterday]...

I am not sure how the experience will be when using the iCloud app on a mac, but I guess you will just use the AirDrop feature instead since it is much faster... I am trying to save everything from the iCloud to the computer even though I have initially downloaded everything that was uploaded to OneDrive... I am not sure why the total number of files on iCloud is greater than what is on OneDrive... I think it's because of iCloud keeps all the original files as well as the edited ones...

Regarding data transfer convenience, I'd go with a dedicated camera rather than a smartphone... The issues I have encountered and headache I've had reminded me that a dedicated camera is still the best tool for taking photos and videos with the added convenience of data transfer...

 

[julesme]

Keep the iPhone, but also use the mirrorless camera for occasions when it’s appropriate.

There’s a good reason why feature films and TV shows are made on large video cameras that cost $40-$70K (the majority are made on Arri Alexa systems), along with expensive dedicated lenses, as opposed to just filming with a small, portable, inexpensive iPhone. Today’s iPhones can’t offer the same depth of field control or dynamic range.

Perhaps 20 years from now the computational software will be able to make up the difference, but the physical limitations of an iPhone enclosure are significant when it comes to camera sensors and lenses.

 

[Fravin]

I have a 24x30 print that I made with an 8mp crop body camera in 2008-ish.

Just want to add another element to the equation. Monitor resolution. My latest monitor is an ASUS PA248QV. This is pretty much at the bottom end price and sizewise for photo quality monitors. The resolution on this is 1920x1200.

Printing is the real problem @OldMacs4Me

Our iPhones have a tiny sensor compared to APS-C or FF cameras. And the size matters here. A large sensor has more sensitive diodes that can read and record better than the little ones in such a tiny sensor as in our iPhones (that has the largest sensors among smartphones btw).

Images generated by larger sensors has more detail and are prone to retain texture more naturally. In the OP's picture taken with the iPhone is clearly shown that software processing affects picture detail and mess with the texture.

When printing the pictures taken with larger sensors shows more detail, better looking textures and offer more colour density to the editor. Bear in mind that even in higher quality monitors, the image is still shown in digital format, where pixels have no size. While in digital world, there's no relation between pixel and size. A pixel is a pixel until you decides to bring it into the real world.

For OP I admit that cameras are better than iPhones. But iPhones are cheaper than the best cameras. And iPhone is small enough to be kept in your pocket. A bigger and better camera (even a mirrorless one) will be heavy and better lens will increase the overall weight.

So, have in mind the benefits of each system. As a photographer, I choose my Fujifilm XT3 for shooting pictures and my iPhone to text messages.

 

[AstroRexaur]

You've tried enabling Raw and deactivating "prioritize faster shooting"? I compared without raw and PFS enabled and the photos are exactly as you describe your iPhone photo. Then activated Raw and deactivated PFS and the photos got a massive difference.

edit: I've trying to upload the comparison but don't let me!

 

[AstroRexaur]

You've tried enabling Raw and deactivating "prioritize faster shooting"? I compared without raw and PFS enabled and the photos are exactly as you describe your iPhone photo. Then activated Raw and deactivated PFS and the photos got a massive difference.

 

[nastysailboat]

I honestly think both of these photos are great. I too have an old d3100 and Im wondering how you got such an incredible photo with it. I never felt like it was better than my iPhone.

 

[ian87w]

Thus I'm thinking about blowing this year's bonus on a mirrorless (Edit: or an entry level/mid range DSLR). Thoughts?

TL;DR: Instead of buying another/new body (I'm assuming you already have a DSLR body), use the money to buy a good/better lens.

Ask yourself what's the purpose. Do you actually want to dive into photography as a hobby? If so, are you willing to lug around a camera with a decent lens (or two), and are you willing to spend the time shooting in RAW and process the photos afterwards? If so, and if you already have a camera body, put the money on a good lens (if you don't have one already, or you only have the kit lens).

Why? For photo taking, there has not been much improvements in digital camera technology. With a good lens, a decade or two old body can still deliver excellent result, as the basics of photography (aperture, ISO, shutter speed) remain the same. All the new tech goes into video recording imo.

My perspective is different. I would love to take great photos, but the best camera is the one I have with me. And I'm not the person who like to carry bulky cameras around, let alone waste more time processing the RAW files and then try to figure out storage for them. During vacations and family times, I'd rather just enjoy the time and use my smartphone. The results are good enough, and I can share them with friends/families immediately and they are happier as well. And with automated cloud backup and HEIC files, storage is no longer an issue. It simplifies the logistics so I can enjoy the time instead fussing over pixels. But that's me.

 

[OneSon]

I've always used a dedicated camera so I find smartphone photography very counterintuitive due to lack of a EVF, no physical shutter button etc etc. For me using a camera is a very physically rewarding process - looking through the viewfinder, adjusting the shutter speed and aperture, moving the focus point. It's less about 'image quality' and more about the ergonomics. I would never replace my cameras with a smartphone. I use an Olympus M43 camera and also a Fujifilm APSC.

For what it's worth I use a dedicated camera, dedicated MP3 player (Sony Walkman) and a dedicated gaming device (Switch Lite). This actually means my smartphone is simply a phone and messaging device with some occasional web browsing. I therefore buy entry level smartphones (e.g. older iPhones or the SE). Using a single device to do everything puts a lot of strain on that one device and you can end up with a jack of all trades, master of none situation.

 

[r.harris1]

I'd recommend both your phone and a camera of your choice . The more tools the better. We're conditioned to think that what we should value is unobtrusiveness and lightweight as primary features of consideration. While worthy things to think about, there's also the fun of photography itself, flexibility with lenses and a lot of control over the final output that you have with a dedicated camera. Both tools have their uses, for sure. Having both is a great thing. And honestly, it's not hard to pick up and carry a dedicated camera so it's "the one you have with you". And best of all, you don't get phone calls and texts on them .

 

[mollyc]

I personally "see" better with an actual camera vs my phone, even if I were to match quality and optics. When I pick up a camera I go into photographer mode and my thinking shifts in a way that doesn't if I just open up a camera app.

 

[Danfango]

I honestly think both of these photos are great. I too have an old d3100 and Im wondering how you got such an incredible photo with it. I never felt like it was better than my iPhone.

Thing I found with the D3100 was lots of light, so take photos on a sunny day. The camera was quite frankly completely under-reviewed. My father, an ex-professional photographer, was absolutely shocked that it was knocking on the door of his full frame DSLR.

Couple more from it

Clacton beach in Essex (horrible place but you can make it look nice with some B&W )

More Kew Gardens ...

It really was exceptional considering it was introduced 12 years ago now!

 

[Danfango]

Firstly a big thanks to everyone who has replied to this thread so far. Some quick replies as the day job is completely interfering with my ability to do anything actually productive today.

One comment really hit home and that was for the joy of it and I think that might have actually sold it for me at the end. It's important that you enjoy life and I rather like being able to relive things through the photographs I have taken. I know it's purely selfish indulgence, but what the hell

Regarding the two people who mentioned my old D3100, I no longer have it. I went through a bad patch in my life around 2015 and it was sold unfortunately. My fortunes changed in 2018 and I managed to turn my life around since. During that period I was entirely inactive on photography other than the odd pictures of my kids here and there. Only recently have I had the funds to even consider this and Apple mugged me for all the kit in my sig before I got to look at cameras ?

On the subject of disabling prioritise fast shooting and shooting RAW. That's what I've mostly been doing with the 13 Pro so far already after discovering one of the other threads on here about it. It's not bad but I think the problems I have are more physical limits with the lens and sensor system than something which can be changed in software unfortunately. This was shot on the 13 pro as RAW originally:

Talking dedicated devices, I mostly live out of a couple of large rucksacks these days as a "digital nomad" I suppose you could say. I try to avoid purchasing too much stuff I have to keep so the iPhone 13 Pro was an excellent compromise there. But it might be a compromise too far for stuff I care about. I don't carry a walkman or gaming device any more and never will though, even if I miss my old GBA ?

On data transfer, I rather like SD cards as well. One reason I got the 14" MBP recently, apart from the screen and horsepower, was the SD slot. iCloud integration with the Photos app is pretty good though, if a little buggy occasionally. It suffices for my archival needs. My father gifted me an Adobe Lightroom sub which I'm feeling slightly guilty for not using at the moment too so figure I should probably look in that direction as well (fully offline though - Adobe cloud can go to hell).

Sorry for the length of that one ... so the conclusion. Probably going to grab a Nikon Z50 with the dual lens kit. There's a decent 50mm and 250mm lens with it which is one more lens that I had with the D3100. The price is reasonable. It may fill a hole in my heart.

Again thanks all for the thoughtful replies

Edit: one thing I forgot to mention was the fact I am constantly having to remind myself not to use digital zoom on the 13 Pro which means I spend a lot of time running up and down hills trying to get close enough to something without changing what I have seen just to satisfy the lack of a linear zoom and be at the mercy of the digital zoom. A decent lens avoids that instantly and lays less ruin to my knees.