If you have not had a chance to see my iPhone X review, I recommend that you start there first. This post is a continuation of my thoughts on the photography market, computational photography and the use of artificial intelligence in photography. It is not a review of the iPhone XS or XS Max, although all the images in this article are from these devices. Think of this post as a gallery of images, with some distantly related thoughts mixed in.
iPhone XS Max @ 4.25mm, ISO 40, 1/1000, f/1.8
Table of Contents
Is Smartphone Really a “Smartphone”?
Back in the day, a phone was just a phone… A physical device that let us make and receive phone calls. In my childhood, calling someone meant picking up a handset, then picking a number from the rotary dial, inserting the index finger into the number hole and pushing the dial clock-wise until the index finger reached a metal “end” bar. We had to do that with each digit in a phone number, then wait in between for analog “clicks”. Then would come a long pause, before we finally heard rings in the telephone. If there wasn’t anyone on the other side to pick up the phone, it would just keep on ringing… Fun times to remember, but my kids have no idea what an analog phone even is. Give them the rotary phone and they will look like the kids in this video:
I remember my first time seeing an answering machine. It was a large, separate device with a tape recorder that you had to put on the same telephone line. The ability to leave a message was so confusing for many who didn’t know what it was. It was actually comical to hear all the calls with people trying to “talk” to the answering machine. “Hello? Can anyone hear me?” – such voicemails were fairly common.
Then right as we started getting used to answering machines, came the first “digital” phone. Instead of a rotary dial, you could now simply press a number on a keypad and the phone would do all the work. Except our phone systems weren’t upgraded for a number of years after that, so you would still hear the same clicking analog noises! When “tones” finally arrived to our national phone system, we already had those amazing “two-in-one” wireless Panasonic phones with built-in answering machines. That, to us, was such a huge leap – you could now walk around your house and talk to someone without tripping over a phone wire.
iPhone XS Max @ 6mm, ISO 16, 1/500, f/2.4
I remember the first time I saw someone use a cell phone. It was a huge “brick” with a very long antenna that they had to pull out when they made calls or received them. Oh, and they also had to pop it open! For me, even thinking that one could make a call while driving in a car was already mind-blowing.
Now compare all this to a modern smartphone. The word “phone” is still part of the word, but how much do we actually use it? The younger generation isn’t really using smartphones for making calls – most of their communication has shifted to digital messages and social media.
iPhone XS Max @ 6mm, ISO 125, 1/60, f/2.4
And I don’t blame them. In the USA, phone calls seem to have shifted to robocalls, the “new” spam. I do not understand why we have to live with robocalls and why the government is not mass-banning them. I personally don’t pick up any calls from unknown numbers anymore, because each time I do, it is either a huge loan that I qualify for, or an extended warranty of some kind. At the end of the year, I get bombarded with companies wanting to sell cheap healthcare plans. Most of these calls are illegal, according to the FTC. Sadly though, just like email spam that never stopped, robocalls do not seem to be going away anytime soon.
iPhone XS Max @ 4.25mm, ISO 25, 1/150, f/1.8
Anyway, I got sidetracked a little… Ah, the smartphone! Is that what we should keep calling it? From the standpoint of its functionality, the smartphone is more of a camera / personal computer now. It takes excellent images and video, it works sufficiently well for email and web browsing, and it even allows you to use productivity tools. Some smartphones are large enough to have high-resolution screens and others have dual screens, putting them in-between a mobile phone and a tablet, also known as a “phablet”. Long story short, a smartphone is more than a “smart” phone today. And with Apple and other manufacturers pushing more camera functionality into these devices, perhaps they now deserve a newer name like “camerasmartphone”?
iPhone XS Max @ 4.25mm, ISO 100, 1/120, f/1.8
Take a look at the newest iPhone 11 Pro (check out my detailed iPhone 11 Pro Review). The thing is a beast! With an insanely fast CPU + GPU, it is capable of recording 4K video from all of its cameras simultaneously. That’s a lot of processing power on such a small device. Huawei’s Mate 30 Pro is capable of shooting 4K at 60 FPS and slow motion video at 1080p resolution up to 960 FPS. That’s just mind-boggling, considering that none of the modern digital cameras can do this, not even the high-end $5K+ devices.
And here we are, still wondering why the digital camera market is collapsing. Of course it is collapsing – and it will only continue to do so! Why should anyone who wants to take decent pictures suffer through the pain of spending thousands of dollars on a camera system, many hours of learning how to use the camera and how to post-process images from it, when the alternative is to use a small, portable and idiot-proof device that they have in their pockets at all times?
iPhone XS Max @ 4.25mm, ISO 320, 1/35, f/1.8
Big Camera Complexity Problem
Let’s review a typical workflow process of a photographer:
- Set up the camera and capture images / video
- Transfer media to a computer with sufficient memory and processing power to handle high-resolution images and video
- Import media into a photo / video application
- Organize and sort media
- Post-process media
- Export media
- Back up
- Print / display / publish media to the web
The problem is not just with the number of steps, but also with the complexity of each one. The first step of setting up the camera and capturing images / video by itself can take many hours of learning. The same goes with importing, organizing, post-processing, backing up and even exporting!
iPhone XS Max @ 6mm, ISO 16, 1/610, f/2.4
Now compare and contrast that to capturing images with a smartphone:
- Capture images or video with a single button
- Post-process the media using built-in or third party apps
- Publish the media
Anyone can do it. The best part is – there is practically no learning curve. Everything is touch-friendly and the results are instant. All images are backed up to the cloud automatically, so you don’t lose anything in case you lose your device.
iPhone XS Max @ 4.25mm, ISO 125, 1/120, f/1.8
Also, look at all the older generation that is far more comfortable with an iPad than they are with a desktop PC. When my mom moved to the USA, I tried to teach her how to use a computer to keep in touch with the family back home. After several attempts, she gave up. The mouse, all the clicking and typing she had to do, as well as the things that constantly popped up on the screen annoyed and frustrated her very quickly. And then I bought her an iPad… it changed her life. She uses it for everything today and she will never go back to a computer again. Why should she, when there is something easier and simpler to use that she can figure out on her own?
iPhone XS Max @ 6mm, ISO 50, 1/120, f/2.4
How Media is Consumed
What is your source of media consumption today? For me, and I am sure for many others reading this post, it is either a smartphone or a tablet. For most day-to-day news, I default to my smartphone, since it is always with me everywhere I go.
iPhone XS Max @ 4.25mm, ISO 25, 1/210, f/1.8
Five years ago, desktop users would account for 70% of the Photography Life traffic, with the rest (30% of traffic) coming from smartphones and tablets. Google Analytics says that in August of 2017 (just two years ago), the number of mobile users grew to a staggering 43%, with desktops still being the primary source of traffic. Guess what that number is today? 53%. The desktop is no longer the dominant source of web browsing for our readers.
And this is for a fairly technical photography website! I help run a number of other websites and I can tell you that sites with more generic type of content have already gone through this transformation earlier. For example, one site shows that the number of mobile users in the month of August of 2019 accounted for 79% of all traffic! That’s 8 out of 10 people choosing a mobile device for web browsing.
iPhone XS Max @ 6mm, ISO 16, 1/1250, f/2.4
It is clear that smartphones and tablets have already replaced desktops as devices for browsing the web. How things have changed…
Add social media platforms such as Instagram to the mix and the situation gets even clearer. Instagram now has over a billion active users. That’s a billion smartphone users looking at images that have the resolution of…wait for it…just 1.2 megapixels (1080 x 1080 pixels for a square image)!
What does this mean to us, photographers? Well, it means that the type of content we create is now primarily viewed on small devices with very little resolution. With camera manufacturers pushing 50+ MP sensors and 4K+ video recording capabilities, the question we need to ask ourselves is, who is all that extra resolution for?
iPhone XS Max @ 4.25mm, ISO 25, 1/1800, f/1.8
Clearly, most consumers aren’t using their 4K desktop screens to check out your photos. And even if they are, you are most likely not even publishing content at that resolution in the first place. Here at Photography Life, we export most images in 2048 pixel long resolution. So if we take the highest resolution image, it would be a 2048×2048 square, which is just 4.2 MP. Most standard content from 3:2 aspect ratio cameras is not going to exceed 3 MP. And yet we constantly talk about all these amazing cameras with super high-resolution sensors…how ironic! It turns out that we end up down-sampling most of our images anyway.
Now I am not implying that high resolution cameras are not needed. There is a definite place for them among enthusiasts and professionals who intend to print very large images. I have already gone through this in my “how much resolution do you really need?” article. Professional landscape, studio and architecture photographers get paid for their work and obviously want to deliver the highest resolution and quality work to their clients. But if you are not one of them, you have to ask yourself – how much of your work do you actually print large? If most of your work ends up on social media platforms such as Instagram, or you print very little, you are potentially wasting a lot of your time and money getting the latest and greatest camera gear.
iPhone XS Max @ 4.25mm, ISO 25, 1/125, f/1.8
There is nothing wrong with geeking out about cameras, lenses and all the amazing technology. Many of us are hobbyists and truly enjoy using the best tools (or should we say “toys”?) we can afford. But that’s not what moves the camera market. A typical consumer has already moved away from point-and-shoot cameras, and many are leaving their large cameras at home in favor of a smartphone.
Big Cameras = Big Problems
I have already pointed out one of the biggest issues with digital cameras today – it is their complexity. Let’s take a look at this in a little more detail.
It is clear that the last few years have given us big advancements in camera technology. We have seen huge leaps in image resolution. Thanks to all the CMOS sensor advancements, we now have cameras that can produce amazing dynamic range and very little noise, even when shooting in extremely dark environments. We have specialized cameras with insanely fast autofocus systems, 10+ FPS continuous shooting speeds and huge buffers that can fit hundreds of images. Full-frame cameras are cheaper than ever, and the number of camera options is abundant – both used and brand new. We now have insanely capable mirrorless cameras, with lenses that can out-resolve their DSLR counterparts. Without a doubt, this all sounds amazing and it really is!
iPhone XS Max @ 4.25mm, ISO 250, 1/60, f/1.8
However, if we look from the standpoint of someone just starting out in photography, these advantages can quickly turn into a messy list of problems.
Choosing a camera system is a huge task in itself. One has to go through so many different types of criteria, including: camera brand, resolution, sensor size, autofocus system, shooting speed, video features, ergonomics, build quality, weather sealing, price, weight, so on and so forth. Lenses are a whole different ballgame: focal length, zoom vs prime, sharpness, weight, quality, native vs third party, focus speed, price, weight, etc. Add all the must-have accessories like straps, memory cards and support options, and things get progressively more complex.
iPhone XS Max @ 4.25mm, ISO 25, 1/2500, f/1.8
But that’s just the start of the problem. Once beginners get their first camera system, they quickly realize that their expenses and time commitment do not stop there. All of a sudden, their computers are not fast enough to post-process those high-resolution images and video. Their storage is insufficient. Their computer screens that used to handle web browsing and occasional gaming just fine, are no longer good enough – they now need IPS monitors and screen calibration tools for a consistent editing experience.
Then, as they take pictures, they realize that their cameras and lenses are not as perfect as they thought they would be. They spent thousands of dollars, only to find out that their camera autofocus system is out of whack, their lenses are not good enough to consistently produce sharp images. They find out about all the lens aberrations, field curvature and focus shift issues, lens decentering and other optical problems. DSLR shooters have to learn about lens calibration issues, while mirrorless shooters come across brand new problems related to things like red dot flares and phase-detection striping / banding issues.
iPhone XS Max @ 6mm, ISO 16, 1/2000, f/2.4
And we haven’t even gotten to post-processing, storage and backups. I could go on and on…but you get the point. Digital photography has gotten way too complex for most people. Even seasoned photographers are getting tired of all the things they have to keep up with in order to stay relevant and competitive.
iPhone XS Max @ 6mm, ISO 16, 1/70, f/2.4
What’s Not Going to Save the Industry
With declining camera sales, all camera manufacturers are suffering. Now that sensor performance has pretty much hit the limits of CMOS sensors and flat-lined, manufacturers are pushing towards more resolution and camera features. Clearly though, this is not enough to push more camera sales.
iPhone XS Max @ 4.25mm, ISO 32, 1/120, f/1.8
In fact, I would argue that unnecessarily increasing resolution will only result in declined camera sales. How much more resolution do we really need, when most lenses cannot resolve that much detail in the first place? I previously wrote an article that shows that most Nikon F mount lenses cannot resolve more than 36 MP.
This means that increases in sensor resolution are pretty much meaningless beyond 36 MP for the F mount. Unless lenses are developed from scratch specifically for high-resolution sensors (like those E-mount, RF-mount and Z-mount lenses), increasing camera resolution isn’t going to provide any advantages! You will simply end up increasing RAW file size, and that’s about it…
iPhone XS Max @ 6mm, ISO 16, 1/1150, f/2.4
This brings us to the mirrorless world. Yes, mirrorless cameras are the future for those of us who want to keep up with the latest technology and actually enjoy the benefits of high-resolution sensors. But for many photographers out there, all these advancements are just unnecessary, especially given the cost of moving to mirrorless.
Switching systems is very costly if you want to use native mount lenses. And no matter what some might say about adapters, they will never be as good as native lenses – they are meant to be temporary solutions and compromises. An adapter is yet another piece of gear to carry around, another point of potential failure and another point of attachment that is prone to decentering and other issues.
A solid 24 MP DSLR camera such as the Nikon D750 is plenty for the majority of photo enthusiasts. Why would they need more? Because the marketing departments are working hard on selling them on the latest and greatest. Notice how with each bump in camera resolution, we see all the promo images with crisp details and 100% crops that scream “amazing detail!”. Rumor sites build up the “pre-sale” excitement, while all the YouTube celebrities get to experience launch events with ready-to-shoot sets and free booze to boot. Keep them fed and happy, and they will say nice things to their millions of followers, who will be stupid enough to get into the latest hype.
iPhone XS Max @ 4.25mm, ISO 25, 1/125, f/1.8
Some camera manufacturers even think their strategy should be to make an “all-in-one” camera, such as the Zeiss ZX1. We have seen smartphones with large sensors that completely failed. We have seen smartphone attachments with large sensors that failed (remember “DxO One”?). Inevitably, the Zeiss ZX1 will also fail – I just hope it does not bring Zeiss down with it, similar to what happened with DxO.
It is clear that such products are not going to be able to serve as a “bridge” between smartphone and big camera users. It turns out that most consumers don’t give a damn about how large an image sensor on their smartphone is, no matter what manufacturers try to say. When they see huge billboards with “Shot on iPhone” written all over them, they realize that a typical smartphone is good enough for their needs.
iPhone XS Max @ 6mm, ISO 16, 1/160, f/2.4
And photographers with big cameras don’t seem to care about such cameras either. They are already used to the process of using a separate device to capture images, and a separate environment for editing their pictures.
So for me, such products as the Zeiss ZX1 are products of “void” – gadgets that nobody wants or ultimately cares about.
The smartphones are quickly taking over the camera world, and sadly, there is no stopping it now. I would say that it is already too late for most camera manufacturers to be able to offer a product that a typical consumer would want. Their only hope for the future is to retain their existing customer base. With all the technological advancements, artificial intelligence and cloud computing, the digital camera market is sadly going to continue to decline.
iPhone XS Max @ 4.25mm, ISO 100, 1/60, f/1.8
How Smartphones Will Take Over Most of the Camera Market
So far, some of the biggest factors for not wanting to choose a smartphone among serious photography enthusiasts have been: relatively low resolution, little dynamic range, lack of subject separation capabilities / bokeh and lack of specific features we commonly see on DSLR and mirrorless cameras. However, these are mostly temporary concerns that will likely be addressed overtime. Let’s go through these one at a time and assess their potential.
iPhone XS Max @ 4.25mm, ISO 25, 1/1900, f/1.8
Resolution: We are already seeing quite a few smartphone manufacturers push beyond 10 MP on their smartphones, and this is only the beginning. Going forward, expect to see smartphones with much more resolution. However, as photographers, we know that resolution means very little in the real world – image quality suffers with tiny pixels. There are already smartphones out there that can shoot 40+ MP images, but the resulting image looks no better than from a 10-12 MP smartphone, because the pixel-level quality is just terrible. With AI-based image processors, we will see more “cooking” of resulting images that will improve pixel-level quality. In addition, smartphones might start utilizing sensor shift to take multiple shots and merge them to get better detail.
Noise: Smartphones generally have poor noise performance, especially when shooting in low-light conditions. However, this is already changing with the latest generation smartphones that are able to run noise reduction algorithms to significantly reduce noise in images. The next step from here is simultaneous capture of 4+ images to average them out and create very clean images, even when shooting in dim conditions.
Low-light Photography: The first iteration of “night mode” is already here for both Android and iOS, and it already looks very promising. Smartphones are using multiple exposures captured at different shutter speeds to seamlessly merge them into a single image. Some cameras are even able to shoot extremely long shutter speeds, allowing them to be used for astrophotography needs.
iPhone XS Max @ 4.25mm, ISO 40, 1/120, f/1.8
Dynamic Range: Almost every modern smartphone can already capture HDR images. However, we are not far from the next step in dynamic range “revolution”, which involves taking multiple images at different shutter speeds for specific areas of the frame, then fully recovering all the highlight and shadow details. The resulting images would look much more natural compared to HDR photos and could potentially capture unlimited dynamic range.
Subject Separation: Apple and Android platforms are already taking advantage of AI-based algorithms that can use data from one or more cameras in order to separate subjects from the background. The first iterations had a lot of transition problems, but things are improving rapidly. Within the next few years, smartphones will be able to imitate the large sensor “look” quite well.
iPhone XS Max @ 6mm, ISO 16, 1/370, f/2.4
Focal Lengths: The iPhone 11 Pro has three cameras that cover 13mm, 26mm and 52mm focal lengths. With all the digital zoom options in-between, that’s basically a 13-52mm camera. I expect future cameras to follow suit and provide even more options to cover a bigger range of focal lengths.
It is clear that smartphone manufacturers are putting a lot of their resources towards creating an ideal camera that can capture both images and videos. Camera manufacturers won’t be able to compete with this, especially with their continuously-shrinking budgets and forecasts…
Smartphone R&D > Camera R&D
As technology progresses, the research and development (R&D) budget is going to play a key role in advancing the capabilities of cameras. With the elimination of the high-margin point-and-shoot market, continuous shrinkage of the entry-level market segment and declining demand on new cameras and lenses, camera manufactures are struggling to keep their R&D funds large enough to come up with ground-breaking products. Most cameras are simply being re-released with new labels and only slightly improved specs, which obviously interest a small percentage of potential customers and fans.
Now compare that to the fast-growing smartphone market:
Ouch! That’s 1.5 billion smartphone sales vs 121 million at the peak of camera sales in 2009. Who do you think is going to have more R&D money? Camera manufacturers are in trouble – they are continuously re-adjusting their sales forecasts and for a good reason. Soon enough, we will start seeing mass layoffs and camera division closures. That’s the inevitable outcome of this change. Camera companies experienced rapid growth from 1999 to 2009 and they all thought things are going to look amazing for them. Until smartphones moved in and started taking big chunks of their market share. Most didn’t realize what was happening until it was already too late.
Samsung was smart to pull out of the camera market on time. Sadly, only the strongest will survive this change going forward…
The Future of the Camera Industry
Sadly, the outlook for the camera industry is looking pretty grim. The camera companies that will most likely survive their new enemy, the smartphone, are going to be those who already have a strong client base. They will continue making specialized tools for enthusiasts and professionals, but their profit margins and market shares are going to shrink, while smaller R&D funding budgets will also impact new camera and lens release cycles.
iPhone XS Max @ 4.25mm, ISO 25, 1/3000, f/1.8
Still, camera manufacturers should think hard about making their cameras easier to use. Instead of increasing the complexity gap between smartphones and specialized cameras, they should focus on what they do best – deliver exceptional image quality with superb ergonomics and simple menu systems. This will at least keep their existing customers from jumping ship.
iPhone XS Max @ 4.25mm, ISO 50, 1/50, f/1.8
What does this all mean to us, photographers? Don’t worry – there is little reason for serious concern. These changes are going to happen whether we like them or not, but we have to stay focused and don’t waste our time and money getting the latest and greatest gadgets. Shoot with what you already have and enjoy every moment of it.
P.S. After the launch of the iPhone 11 Pro, some of our readers emailed me, saying that they are selling off their cameras to fully move over to the iPhone 11 Pro. That’s a pretty drastic measure, but something I anticipate to see more and more in the future…
What do you think about all this? Please let me know in the comments section below!
Thoughtful summary of the issues, Nassim–thanks for a good read.
Funny thing, though: I don’t know many non-professional, non-committed photographers who are happy with their smartphone photography. I hear mostly disappointment–a frequent riff on “my pictures don’t look like the Apple billboards.” And they blame Apple or Samsung or Google for (yet another) case of big-tech gaslighting. As a creative person who can wrap his fundamental skills around any imaging tech, you may be overestimating mass market satisfaction with smartphone photography. Yes it’s widely available (everyone has a smartphone anyway); and yes it’s conceptually less complex for many than the “real camera” alternatives that came before it; but neither guarantees inherently good, meaningful, satisfying imaging.
I try to point out that photography is a craft, that it’s bigger than whatever the imaging tech of the day happens to be. Nobody’s born with an artist’s understanding of light. Or of color. Or of balance or proportion. Nobody’s born with an adult’s lived vocabulary of visual narrative. And while it might be possible to “can” some of that learning into choice-alleviating algorithms, it may also be worth thinking about what we lose when we shoot an anonymous algorithm writer’s narratives instead of our own.
But speaking for myself–as someone who is generally happy with his smartphone photography and as someone who’s enthusiastic about its future technologies, I am nonetheless deeply tired of being told it rivals the quality or creative potential of “real cameras.” Because I have eyes, and I can see the results. And even *brilliant* smartphone photographs (such as those you’ve included as the “story art” for this piece) even published in small presentation sizes, fare poorly in pretty much any aesthetic quality I’d compare. The textures are ugly, the colors are simple and blocky, and there’s never much detail–it’s all just obvious, fakey-fake sharpening artifacts. And it’s not just me being persnickety; laypeople see the difference too. That’s another thing I get asked, often: “Why do photographs now all look so FLAT?”
Finally: I think you underestimate the biggest liability hanging over smartphone photography’s future, which is the bait-switch business model that drives it. “Data is the new oil,” the venture capitalists say; smartphone photography-videography + cloud storage + social media = the slickest way to collect and capitalize user data. Smartphone cameras exist to put every smartphone photographer to work for Google, Zuckerberg, et al. That wasn’t commonly understood ten years ago; but now, we’re all pretty clear about the lengths “surveillance capitalists” have been willing to reach. Lots of people aren’t comfortable with it. In the west, organic imaging shares on social media platforms have been in shallow decline since early 2017. The famous Mary Meeker “Internet Trends” VC deck shows real ambivalence toward these companies among the 13 – 18 year old set. (They love Youtube; but Facebook? Hard Pass. Insta? Only private.) The “influencer” economy is maturing toward skepticism and demands for factual ROI numbers, which it often has a hard time delivering. And regulators and investigators are circling. Will Google be as excited about pumping R&D into Pixelphone cameras if the U.S. and/or the European Union regulate profit opportunities away from the data those cameras snoop?
I point this out, of course, because the fate of big tech’s camera-centric “surveillance capitalism” is not a liability Nikon, Canon, Sony, etc. share.
Anyhoo, thanks again for the article–good food for thought!
Mark, I wish I could highlight your comment on this post! I’m very happy to see that we have readers who are so well rounded on complex topics and the realities we live in today. I couldn’t agree more with everything you stated in your comment!
It seems like we live in a virtual bubble, AKA “bubbleconomy”. The scary thing is, people are buying into it, to the point where they are betting their futures on it. The most wanted job among the teens is to be an “influencer” – they see the fame, the money and the followings these personalities have, and they create a mental image of their idols. If only they had known how much of it is fake!
I seriously can’t wait to see it all collapse!
“even *brilliant* smartphone photographs (such as those you’ve included as the “story art” for this piece) even published in small presentation sizes, fare poorly in pretty much any aesthetic quality I’d compare. The textures are ugly, the colors are simple and blocky, and there’s never much detail–it’s all just obvious, fakey-fake sharpening artifacts.”
Well said. And much better than I could have said it.
As an amateur/enthusiast who is still on the lower end of the photography growth curve few things that I feel makes a dedicated camera indispensable for me, despite having a smart phone on me:
1. The smart phones with a great camera set up are actually pretty expensive and beyond 3 years they are pretty much useless because the specs are too old to run the latest apps – be it the memory or the processing speed. My smart phone is not just a camera, it runs so many other apps and I need to change my phone to be able to run those apps. But to ensure that I get a phone with the best camera features, I need to spend for a high end phone – that is too much of a recurrent cost.for me.
2. Batteries: smart phones are battery guzzlers! Especially since we use them for so many other things. I have run out of battery at the end of the day and have missed out on some interesting shots. I get the time to seriously shoot photos only during trips and the evening shots are usually missed as I am busy trying to save battery for other tasks. A dedicated camera gives me the flexibility to simply swap batteries. Sometimes the choice is between being able to make an emergency phone call and the ability to take a memorable shot.
3. Flash photography: something I have begun to get a grip on and so far the solutions for external flash using a smart phone aren’t very enthusing.
4. Creative control is still better with my camera due to the ability to set a lot of parameters manually.
5. Ergonomics: one of the biggest reasons why I bought a basic DSLR in the first place was the ergonomics. I find them sturdier to hold, more flexible to position with flippy screens and MOST importantly, multiple dials and buttons which make it easier to quickly make the settings that I desire for the particular shot. This is certainly lacking in a smart phone.
6. Phone calls and messages/email popping up in the middle of taking a photograph. This is the same reason why I also prefer castable audio over Bluetooth audio. Your focus activity is not too badly disrupted by other activities on your phone.
Having said this, there are certainly things I wish my dedicated camera could do:
1. Ease of sharing images on social media. Cameras with easy connectivity are still expensive. Not too many allow you to directly share to facebook or Instagram or even to WhatsApp without using the phone as an intermediary.
2. The ability to do post processing easily or even a decent automatically done post processing.
I personally feel that one way digital cameras could have a better chance of survival was if they were to be able to seamlessly integrate with smartphones. Everyone has smartphones with them today. If the camera could be integrated with the smartphone in a way to seemlessly transfer data to the smart phone and harness the computing power only to receive that data back with the final result. The camera could give the hardware capabilities which are still in many ways superior and more durable compared to what smartphones have to offer. Geotagging and other metadata could be easily taken from cellphones and added. It would open up more exciting possibilities.
I think it’s personal preference but for me..
1. Realistically it’s more like 5+ years I’m only just finding this with daughters device, if you’re really into something wouldn’t you upgrade at around 5 years? plus the cost would be offset against your basic phone
2. Usb portable charges will keep you going for hours..
3. You’re right but there are many remote flash solutions if going down this route
4. These are all features that are being added all the time.. reference the amount of R&D being spent
5. Personal preference.. I find DSLRs heavy unless using a tripod.. but that’s just me I guess
6. Swipe right and put it in driving mode..
Smartphone cameras became really good, but in my experience they are still not very usable in low light, e. g. in dimly lit rooms. Details are smeared away and slow shutter speeds lead to severe motion blur when photographing kids. Even the iPhone 11 shows these weaknesses.
Last but least it is also easier to use filters and speedlights with a dedicated camera. I also enjoy using evfs.
I am convinced, that there will always bei some enthusiasts, which will buy “real” cameras. :-)
Excellent article Nasim and a whole field of outstanding responses to it. Mark and Jozef (above) both made very interesting comments I thought.
Like some of the other contributors, I come from a film world with most of my work having been done on 5X4 inch film (4X5 for you Americans!) or medium format. I am therefore used to big cameras and slow working methods. The mental discipline that setting up a 5X4 shot imposes on you is very interesting and the polar opposite of the sometimes thoughtless, smart phone shooting I see so often. As a result, the current crop of cameras seem to me to be little short of miraculous, very fast to use, great fun and enormously capable!
I too use a smart phone, but very seldom and have a deep dislike of the current obsession by people with them with regard to social media, especially youngsters. I have taken the odd snap on mine and the quality is surprisingly good, to a point but the experience of doing so, I find very uninteresting and un-pleasurable. I especially dislike the absence of a viewfinder.
I do not mind carrying my D850 around with me, enjoy the process of taking photographs with it and have no fear of having to put a little work and knowledge into the whole process. Frankly I do not find it too technically challenging (you have to put a little work in up front though), love the process of editing, post-production, the stunning quality of the images on my iMac and the beautiful prints that are the final destination.
For me, the journey is important, I do not use social media and so have little interest in any form of instant transfer to Facebook or whatever. I can get an edited image sent in an email within three or four minutes and that is quite rapid enough for any needs that have at the moment .I am no longer in the position of having clients needing images yesterday and so can, and do, just take my own sweet time with it all!
Yes, I do get distressed when I send images that I may have spent a significant amount time producing, to friends and family and know that they will at best look at them for a few seconds on their smart phone. I am beginning to send fewer and fewer for this reason. Ultimately, I take photographs for ME and find the images coming from my cameras and their lenses give me huge pleasure from the taking stage to the final image. If someone else enjoys them too, then that is a bonus!
I am also happy that so many people do take wonderful family snaps and videos on their phones. The democratisation of image making has been a great bonus in most respects, although it is also abused but then this has always been true of photography, since its beginnings in the 19th century! It certainly has been a wonderful documenting medium for my family and friends.
My conclusion is that even if a smart phone were to be able to beat the technical quality that I could produce with my camera, I would continue shooting images my own way with a dedicated camera and enjoying the process. I still shoot film sometimes and enjoy that too!
No doubt that you will continue shooting the same. But the “market” won’t. The author’s point is that dedicated cameras have little R & D going into new models. It is becoming a smaller and smaller nitch market. As with records (33 1/3 type), there will always be the devout hobbyist and memorabilists, and ultra-purists around to buy stuff. But with the market for such things declining to a few percent of what it once was, prices will increase and new product improvements will decline as I disappointingly discovered in thinking I would easily be able to upgrade my 7-year old Fuji HS50EXR.
I have spent thousands of dollars on DSLR cameras, lens, carrying cases, and watched countless hours of how to videos and tutorials. Then my mom posts a few pictures on Facebook and she looked like she had a professional photographer and an expert in Lightroom help her with the photos. In reality she just bought an iPhone 11 Pro. I 100% agree with this article. I would buy a high end Mirrorless full frame sensor camera if it was as easy to use as an iPhone. It would be nice to Have a dedicated camera but with kids and work I don’t have the time or want to spend hours learning and sitting at a computer processing images. I understand it’s a hobby for some but I just want a good end result.
This article is nonsense tbh… Remember this rule: a smartphone will never replace a camera with some good real glass. I’m not saying this article is bad or whatever, i’m saying that you are false about camera menu, sales and etc. Btw, I’m iPhone 11 user :)
I have downloaded all the full des images from the last smartphones and … sorry but it is not for me. AI makes the images really average. Fake bokeh, skin tones and textures… and even iso 80 is really average in quality…
I see the point of a camera carried all around, but it can replace à ML with a 50 1.2. At least for my need.
Surely the point is that while the iPhone is fine for taking things that are conveniently large and standing conveniently still, they have a way to go before they can touch, say, a D7500/7DmkII with a 300/f4, 10-24mm or a 180/f2.8 macro.
The experience of taking a picture with a smartphone (of any brand and vintage) is like eating a reheated frozen gas-station burrito. In contrast using a D/SLR or Mirrorless camera is all about the experience and is akin to planning, preparing, savoring, sharing and reminiscing about a fabulous 6-course meal with matching wines.
One is simply an act, the other a memorable experience.
One uses someone else’s brain, the other uses yours.
Nick, hahaha, I love the gas station burrito analogy – that made me laugh! :)
I fully agree with you, which is why you and I will continue using our amazing cameras to capture images!
Amen. I was just on the Luminous Landscape site and the phrase “Contemplative Camera” reached out and grabbed me.
Cheers.
But that gas-station burrito surely fills you up in the when the 6-course restaurant isn’t open or you only have 5 minutes to eat your lunch eh? :-)
My most used lens is my 300/2.8.
When they make a cell phone that can replace it I’ll dump my DSLR.
The biggest drawback to phones as cameras is the lack of a viewfinder and a proper shutter release. Sure you can trick your smartphone out with all kinds of accessories to partially solve this problem but DSLRs with real viewfinders are superior.
This is your view. Mine is that I don’t care how I get the image. I just want to get what I see in my mind in a digital file or film image. If the smartphone (for me iPhone) is the best way to do it and I have that tool with me then that is the best method.
I would call myself a hobbyist photographer who has a D5100 + few primes+ zoom + light setup.
I also have a neck problem (dislocation between C2 and C3 vertebrae) which would make any daylong shoot with DSLR a pain for the next 2-3 days.I was worried that I might have to give up my hobby at some point of time.
Then I bought IPhone 8plus and I haven’t looked back since then.Ofcourse you cannot compare the two Just in the same way you cannot compare dx and fx.But you work with the limitations you have and that is life. Also cameras don’t take pictures you do!
I have actually rekindled my joy of photography after years of lugging many kilos of gear like an albatross across my neck.
I recently joined a B-school in Germany and I was undecided whether to take my gear or not.It was a very emotionally challenging decision but I did leave it behind and I am happy with the photos I take with my smartphone.
The joy of not missing a moment just because you don’t have your DSLR is simply amazing.
This is rant and is absolute nonesense i have an iPhone 11 pro and it doesn’t campare to a real high quality mirrorless camera, simply due to the fact of sensor size, pictures from smartphones are shallow, unexpressive and many times fake digital feeling. It’s simply not the same.
Similar comments are expressed by audio purists who argue that nothing “digital” beats the analog vinyl records through a tube amp. And you see where that has taken the audio industry. One individual or 1,000 do not comprise “the market”. Millions do. And those millions have a different set of interests and standards than the devout followers of a dying industrial form factor.