Why do some pros say phones can take better photos than DSLRs in certain conditions

[kenoh]

(Would Mr. Fanboy be OK?)
I also agree with your dismissal of the word "many"!

Maybe the OP will return with clarification (and some kind of reference for the statement about "many" photographers)

I hope you would agree that a great device STILL needs to have a "driver" who knows how to drive - I mean get a great photo.

Absolutely... the drive is key and DigitalRev tv on youtube proved it by giving the crappiest cameras they could to pros and they all managed something quite special. By crappy I mean as in lego cameras etc... lego is awesome but not for cameras....

 

[Samtb]

Absolutely. A pro with an iPhone can take a better image than an amerture with a DSLR, especially in good light!

Of course one is never sure of the motives of endorsements of equipment. Some people will say anything for a freebie or a brown envelope !

Is this a case of “a bad workman always blames his tools”?

 

[kallisti]

Don't want to derail the vibe of all the responses in this thread, but there actually are circumstances where the tiny sensor on phones can prove to be an advantage over larger sensors.

Because of the small sensor size (and more importantly the small focal length of the associated lens), phone cameras can create large depth of field relative to the apertures used for a given exposure. If you want everything to be sharp front-to-back, a phone camera can do that easier than a camera with a full frame sensor.

Is the IQ going to be acceptable? Maybe, maybe not. But f/16 (or smaller apertures) on a full frame camera is going to create significant loss of sharpness due to diffraction. There is probably a point where the blurriness introduced from diffraction with a lens stopped down intersects with the IQ limits of a phone camera. When you factor in the needs for available light to create a proper exposure with a lens totally stopped down, I can see scenarios where a phone camera might be a wash with a full frame sensor or perhaps even better. To get the same DOF, your ISO might need to creep up to unacceptable levels or the shutter speed might be slow enough where you need a tripod. Or you may need to get creative and focus stack the image--which involves using a tripod and spending considerable time in post.

Not an issue with a phone camera since it can achieve a deep DOF with a larger aperture

I'm not saying phone cameras are better by any stretch. But it's good to remember that all cameras are tools with their respective strengths and weaknesses. There is no "perfect" camera that is optimal for everything. Hoping for such is like chasing after unicorns.

 

[cyb3rdud3]

Not something the pros I know say... They turn their noses up at 35mm full frame never mind a phone!

But the OP said that some professionals say a smart phone can take a better image than a DSLR.
I can't think of any examples where that is true. Saying it's the photographer or the camera you have on you, although true are not the point the OP was saying.
[doublepost=1514055640][/doublepost]
Why would a DSLR struggle with a selfie? Most if not all have a timer delay, or a remote.
But as someone who's never taken a selfie, what would I know!

Unless its for very specific (commercial) assignments I’ve never ever in my life heard my uncle or other professional photographers talk about the specifications of their equipment. Just not a point of discussion, the equipment are tools to get a certain job done, not stuff to boost about on an Internet forum or pontificate what a (technically) better image is. It all depends on needs to be done and ensure the client gets what they require or expect.

Some of the worlds best photos are made on equipment that many would argue until the cows come home that is worse...Yet it captured the emotion, told a story...Is it nice and sharp? Nah, who cares...that to me doesn’t determine what a better picture is.

 

[Apple fanboy]

Unless its for very specific (commercial) assignments I’ve never ever in my life heard my uncle or other professional photographers talk about the specifications of their equipment. Just not a point of discussion, the equipment are tools to get a certain job done, not stuff to boost about on an Internet forum or pontificate what a (technically) better image is. It all depends on needs to be done and ensure the client gets what they require or expect.

Some of the worlds best photos are made on equipment that many would argue until the cows come home that is worse...Yet it captured the emotion, told a story...Is it nice and sharp? Nah, who cares...that to me doesn’t determine what a better picture is.

I agree. But the OP said better. I don't see any camera phones taking better photos than DSLR's. Am I saying a camera phone can't take a good image? Not at all. Just that it isn't going to be better than the IQ of a better camera.
[doublepost=1514105149][/doublepost]

Is this a case of “a bad workman always blames his tools”?

Not sure I understand what you are saying, but if it's a rubbish photographer with good gear (and I should know!), can't produce a good image then the issue isn't what's in his hand.
[doublepost=1514105515][/doublepost]

Don't want to derail the vibe of all the responses in this thread, but there actually are circumstances where the tiny sensor on phones can prove to be an advantage over larger sensors.

Because of the small sensor size (and more importantly the small focal length of the associated lens), phone cameras can create large depth of field relative to the apertures used for a given exposure. If you want everything to be sharp front-to-back, a phone camera can do that easier than a camera with a full frame sensor.

Is the IQ going to be acceptable? Maybe, maybe not. But f/16 (or smaller apertures) on a full frame camera is going to create significant loss of sharpness due to diffraction. There is probably a point where the blurriness introduced from diffraction with a lens stopped down intersects with the IQ limits of a phone camera. When you factor in the needs for available light to create a proper exposure with a lens totally stopped down, I can see scenarios where a phone camera might be a wash with a full frame sensor or perhaps even better. To get the same DOF, your ISO might need to creep up to unacceptable levels or the shutter speed might be slow enough where you need a tripod. Or you may need to get creative and focus stack the image--which involves using a tripod and spending considerable time in post.

Not an issue with a phone camera since it can achieve a deep DOF with a larger aperture

I'm not saying phone cameras are better by any stretch. But it's good to remember that all cameras are tools with their respective strengths and weaknesses. There is no "perfect" camera that is optimal for everything. Hoping for such is like chasing after unicorns.

Acceptable IQ is the point here. People talk about usable ISO on modern cameras being much higher than I would accept as useable.
But each to their own.
When camera phone pictures are shown on an iPhone screen (I have a 7+), they look good.
When I stick them on my 24" screen to edit, not so much. Printing is a similar story.

I'm not much of an iPhone photographer. I get that people use them as it's what they have on them, but that's not really my lifestyle.
If I'm doing photography I take the best kit I have for that circumstance.

 

[kenoh]

Is this a case of “a bad workman always blames his tools”?

A bad workman is an ****** when it comes to fixing snags too...
[doublepost=1514106308][/doublepost]

Don't want to derail the vibe of all the responses in this thread, but there actually are circumstances where the tiny sensor on phones can prove to be an advantage over larger sensors.

Because of the small sensor size (and more importantly the small focal length of the associated lens), phone cameras can create large depth of field relative to the apertures used for a given exposure. If you want everything to be sharp front-to-back, a phone camera can do that easier than a camera with a full frame sensor.

Is the IQ going to be acceptable? Maybe, maybe not. But f/16 (or smaller apertures) on a full frame camera is going to create significant loss of sharpness due to diffraction. There is probably a point where the blurriness introduced from diffraction with a lens stopped down intersects with the IQ limits of a phone camera. When you factor in the needs for available light to create a proper exposure with a lens totally stopped down, I can see scenarios where a phone camera might be a wash with a full frame sensor or perhaps even better. To get the same DOF, your ISO might need to creep up to unacceptable levels or the shutter speed might be slow enough where you need a tripod. Or you may need to get creative and focus stack the image--which involves using a tripod and spending considerable time in post.

Not an issue with a phone camera since it can achieve a deep DOF with a larger aperture

I'm not saying phone cameras are better by any stretch. But it's good to remember that all cameras are tools with their respective strengths and weaknesses. There is no "perfect" camera that is optimal for everything. Hoping for such is like chasing after unicorns.

Ahh! But the phone camera wont render fine detail at distance the way the large sensor would. E.g. foliage at distance.

I think the OP needs to go talk to said pros... And get some more parameters for us to argue over...

Notice OP didnt say successful pros, just pros... I suspect if my brother in law rocked up to one if his gigs with an iphone, he would have a challenge getting the shot. Nit sure an iphone can fire studio strobes.

On a positive note, we know AFB wont accept his invite to Harry's Batchelor bash...

 

[Apple fanboy]

A bad workman is an ****** when it comes to fixing snags too...
[doublepost=1514106308][/doublepost]

Ahh! But the phone camera wont render fine detail at distance the way the large sensor would. E.g. foliage at distance.

I think the OP needs to go talk to said pros... And get some more parameters for us to argue over...

Notice OP didnt say successful pros, just pros... I suspect if my brother in law rocked up to one if his gigs with an iphone, he would have a challenge getting the shot. Nit sure an iphone can fire studio strobes.

On a positive note, we know AFB wont accept his invite to Harry's Batchelor bash...

Imagine hiring a wedding photographer and them turning up with an iPhone! Bridzilla time!

Also my time at stag do's are well behind me mate! To many ended up very messy!

 

[kenoh]

Unless its for very specific (commercial) assignments I’ve never ever in my life heard my uncle or other professional photographers talk about the specifications of their equipment. Just not a point of discussion, the equipment are tools to get a certain job done, not stuff to boost about on an Internet forum or pontificate what a (technically) better image is. It all depends on needs to be done and ensure the client gets what they require or expect.

Some of the worlds best photos are made on equipment that many would argue until the cows come home that is worse...Yet it captured the emotion, told a story...Is it nice and sharp? Nah, who cares...that to me doesn’t determine what a better picture is.

You havent heard gear chat because a basc level of specification is assumed.

Look on you tube at the number of folks talking about taking a fuji or a sony mirrorless on a shoot and being asked about their lack of a proper camera. It is nonsense but illustrates a point.

So your uncle probably never has that discussion because he has the kit not a phone. Counter to this, how many times has he said, i only have my phone with me when you are out.

A good craftsman will make good work no matter but at the end of the day, a purpose built camera will be "better" at least 9 times out of 10 when all else equal.

 

[MacRy]

I mean...it’s probably true if you shoot Nikon

*Lights fuse and runs away*

 

[kenoh]

I mean...it’s probably true if you shoot Nikon

*Lights fuse and runs away*

There is that but didnt want to rub salt in...

 

[Apple fanboy]

I mean...it’s probably true if you shoot Nikon

*Lights fuse and runs away*

What's that Spider boy?
You want me to post more Spider pics?

 

[The Bad Guy]

Er...sources for this thread title?

 

[kenoh]

right.... I'm sure that any of this would really happen, but...
Not even a picture for your mum?

This one tickled me actually. My mum is dead... she was the Charles and Di era of royal wedding couples and an interesting factoid, she had to tell the Queen thanks but no thanks. The year she passed away, she was invited to the Royal Garden Party - something to do with her time in the Army but she couldn't make it - too ill to travel.

 

[Apple fanboy]

This one tickled me actually. My mum is dead... she was the Charles and Di era of royal wedding couples and an interesting factoid, she had to tell the Queen thanks but no thanks. The year she passed away, she was invited to the Royal Garden Party - something to do with her time in the Army but she couldn't make it - too ill to travel.

I turned down my obe to. Service to Nikon!

 

[deep diver]

Why are many professional photographers these days saying that in some conditions smartphones can take better photos than DSLRs? Surely a DSLR with its bigger sensor will always beat any smartphone?

They are the pros that do not own DSLRs.

I mean...it’s probably true if you shoot Nikon

*Lights fuse and runs away*

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend." Perhaps this is a topic Nikon and Canon users can agree on.

.

 

[someoldguy]

I turned down my obe to. Service to Nikon!

Don't feel bad about that , I turned down elevation to Cardinal because I don't like heights ...

 

[deep diver]

MacRy hates spiders. someoldguy is afraid of heights. This is starting to sound like the "Neurosis of the Day" forum.

 

[jerwin]

aside from the size factor, a lot of the older dlsrs are rotten at video. And in really good lighting conditions, a iphone may produce a acceptable image.

 

[Southern Dad]

The iPhone is small, easy to handle, and ready in an instant. The DSLR that I also carry, takes me a couple minutes to get out and use. The photos taken with the iPhone X are pretty good. I am sure that with the right lens, the right tripod, and the time, the DSLR can take better pictures. But iPhone cameras are pretty good.