If you really love photography, the question is not whether to buy a ‘real’ camera, but how much money you can save on your smartphone to buy a ‘real’ camera. Now there are many people whose smartphones are more expensive than some ‘real’ camera, but they don’t have ‘real’ camera.

For me the biggest advantage is the low light, especially low light videos, the difference a bigger sensor +aperture makes is so much more apparent and it's something that's a lot harder to bump up with computational photography

For me, the ergonomics are a huge benefit when using an actual camera and that includes the fully articulating screen which has so many benefits over the smartphone.

My biggest complaint with the smartphone photography is the image processing. Don't know why but they always look over processed (heavy hdr, saturation and sharpness). This wasn't the case tho 5-6 years before, nokia 808 & 1020 were the epitome of quality, images taken from them had 3D pop, plenty of micro details and colour accuracy. If decade old smartphones can do this why can't current one?

Honestly the main advantage is the user experience, devices dedicated to one thing tend to be a lot nicer to use than devices that try and do everything

Smartphones images are good when viewed on phones....when u try to view them from a laptop or bigger inch screens then image falls apart

Spot on conclusion. Cameras are great if you enjoy the process of making pictures and geek out over having control of the outcome. I'd also add that sometimes the phone's software gets it wrong or muddles a great scene. Taking a sunrise or sunset picture with my iPhone 12, I can see where the camera is trying to artificially emphasize the orange colors and in the end, the scene often looks just a little off.

I think the main reason I personally enjoy using a camera instead of my phone is not even something technical like all you mentioned. My mindset is completely different when I am operating my camera than when I am using my phone, which I use for many things. My focus and my way of seeing around me changes if I have the camera in my hand, let alone having to actually learn a bit about photography to use it. Even if I had a phone/camera with large sensor and interchangeable optics all in one device... I think I would prefer the dedicated camera. Really good video and made me think a lot! Cheers and greetings from Mexico City!

I already bought a camera but I'm just here to see Chris Niccolls talk

Make this a start of a series. For example, Nighttime photos are getting better on smartphones, but if your aim is to capture more of the nightlife, then highlight how a dedicated camera can help you dial in the better shot compared to crossing your fingers that your smartphone took a decent one.

Honestly, dynamic range and color reproduction is pretty much my biggest one. I've never seen a smart phone camera even approach the kind of performance in difficult lighting situations that my trusty APS-C camera with its massive lens does. And let's be honest, the difficult lighting situations are quite often the most beautiful ones (sunset, sunrise, golden hour). All the scenarios where you don't have a ton of light and most cameras struggle to process colors accurately.

I've had people tell me Micro 4/3 aren't 'real' cameras because their sensor is too small, and then in the same conversation claim that a phone can take pictures just as well as a larger camera. For those curious, last time I looked up specs, the biggest sensor on a phone(whatever the top iPhone was at the time, a couple years ago) was 10% the size of a 4/3 sensor, or about 2.5% the size of a FF.

I am hobbyist photographer and 70 years old, I been using a camera for most of my life; film, DSLR and now mirrorless camera. So I prefer a stand alone camera versus my iPhone camera. But my adult daughters, who have children, they use exclusively an iPhone for all their photography and videos. The main reason, they can immediately post their videos or photos to a text message, Facebook, Instagram etc.. They never print a photo, since they don't own a printer, so they come to dad for prints of photos that I have taken or in rare case get a photo printed thru some sort of service. These days it's rare to see young adult and young parents at Disney, parties, vacationing, etc. with a stand alone camera. It's the time we live in, I guess....

I explained to my family last Sunday that the difference between a good camera and a phone is substantial unless you only look at pictures only on your phone. They were not convinced. However, they saw that the photo albums printed by a pro grade printing company looked fantastic.

One thing that is important to mention regarding Megapixel count, is that pretty much all phone sensors use pixel binning to end up with a 12MP shot. This does make sense though, since 180MP shots from a tiny phone sensor will probably hardly look good in any other condition than bright sunshine.

All your arguments are valid BUT to get a good picture from a good camera you need everything you mentioned. For each situation you need a suitable lens, settings, lights, softbox and so on and so on. That one beautiful picture costs you literally thousands of dollars and years of experience. Buy a phone that automatically selects settings, press a button and that's it. 90% beautiful picture. Not to mention that any Action camera has 10x better image stabilization than any camera with a lens! So unless someone has big plans for photography, I always say buy a better phone and you'll be happier. P.S. I recently bought my first serious camera (X-T4) and I am very happy with the choice. At this point, I have already invested more than 3500 USD in just the camera, 2 lenses and basic equipment. But until I have gained experience, any iPhone takes better pictures...

The backpacker here. The one thing I absolutely love my phone camera over my "real" one is the waterproofing. When I'm hiking and it's down pouring, I put my xt4 away and break out my s21, and I don't have to worry. Other than that, I have come to be grossed at the images that come out of my phone they're so digitally enhanced that they no longer look normal. Maybe they parts just me great video, yall

I like photography as a hobby. I bought a real camera cause upgrading a phone every year seems to be more expensive than buying a camera one time. I still own my camera for 4 years and same with my phone. My friends kept upgrading their phone every year and always says that their new phone has better camera.

The truth is: Smartphone photos look only good in bright sunlight. If the amount of available light drops your photos get heavy noise processing or the camera slows down to multi-shot with long exposure that leads to blurry photos. It 's the nature and law of physics. You can't have it all with such tiny lenses and sensors on a smartphone that can't collect much light that well.

An often overlooked option is the superzoom camera. Usually the sensor is not much bigger than what you find in a smartphone but the range of lenses can often go from the 35mm equivalent of a 21 or 24mm lens to 800mm's or longer. The more expensive versions offer 1-inch sensor like the Lumix FZ1000 (25-400mm optical) and produce video and stills at the same time. I've used such a camera to easily produce prints larger than 16x20. Not bad for a camera that is basically a pocket system.

Great video! The camera manufacturers should be promoting this.

I'm not a beginner, but watching this was still helpful in terms of getting points I could use to other people claiming there is no need buying a dedicated camera anymore. Well, depends on the person of course.

This is my first video of Petapixel after you guys shifted from DPReview. I was a regular of your videos in DPReview throughout the years and I also bought two of my cameras Nikon and Fuji based on your recommendations and reviews. I absolutely love your videos and efforts of the whole team. Wish you guys fantastic years ahead.

The main reason why I love my D7200 and often prefer it over my iPhone 14 Pro is first the bigger flexibility especially with longer zooms and also that smartphones nowadays are just taking it way too far with their processing. Sometimes I think "oh this shot looks really great" but then as soon as I look at the image from my D7200 the shot from the iPhone looks absolutely terrible in comparison...

I bought an iPhone 14 Pro recently and for "the camera I always have in my pocket" it's pretty good. Personally I leave it in 48mp RAW not because I want 48mp images, but because it doesn't do the bonkers oversharpening stuff in that mode. However, I also bought a Lumix G95D recently and the comparison between taking pictures on them is just so illuminating. Intentionally taking pictures with the iPhone is limiting and annoying. Intentionally taking pictures on the Lumix is great. I can position myself in many different ways, I have control over everything, and I can still set it up so I'm in a point-and-shoot mode at the twist of a dial (I leave it in black and white when I do that.)

If I wasn’t already into photography as a hobby, just the handling alone would get me to buy a camera. I’ve never taken many phone pictures because of that. Other than landscapes if I’m out cycling and have minimal stuff with me. But it was never really fun like using a camera is.

As always - Chris and his reviews rock ! Thank you

Great video, as always. While on holiday I compared how long it took me to go from wanting to take a picture to taking it. Since I use a mid-price Samsung (A53), I might not have the best example of a mobile phone to hand, but even so, I found that I was missing numerous photo opportunities waiting for the mobile. Then, if I was in a great rush, I might touch the wrong part of the screen and switch to the front-facing camera or video. In comparison, my camera is ready almost instantly. My two cameras for comparison were a Sony RX100vii and a Fuji X-T30.

For professional work making content for social media, I use an iPhone 90 percent of the time because it is small, good enough and no one cares. When I don't get paid I prefer the R5 with f1.2 primes, because of the joy.

I do take many pictures with my phone (Pixel 7) and the quality is always impressive... Until I view the pictures on a larger computer screen. Impossible to crop, very noisy (or automatically denoised into mush). It's fine for casually capturing a scene when I'm not carrying my "big" camera, but the difference in quality is still obvious.

Wow, this was surprisingly valuable. I never expected to learn so much when I began watching. Very professional.

Thank you! I get asked this question often, especially when I post both large-camera photos and smart camera photos to social media and the average viewer can't tell the difference.

High end Smartphones are amazing for photo and video. But the ability to manually adjust dials and taking the time to frame the shots properly takes practice and is more fun with dedicated cameras.

Nice run and gun video. As far as a follow up, you might want to point out how low end phone cameras compare to high-end phone cameras.

Very lucidly & comprehensively explained. Great !

Great critique of cameras in phones and photos from ‘proper’ Cameras. And I always like the SOH … Thks !!

Screen glare is the main reason why I only use my phone for casual shots. I find it also handy for photographing bits out of magazines and newspapers that could be of later interest.

I’m 100 % with you regarding actual cameras vs phone cameras, but I wanted to mention a few tips regarding the iPhone (14Pro Max in my case). I use the photo mode, not portrait, with Live off, RAW on, and solely the 1x lens, without zooming. I’m careful to hold the camera “square” to the subject and I concentrate on slowing down and minimizing body movement. When used that way, the 48 MP RAW images are impressive, although you also have to be careful when transferring them in order to avoid unintentionally converting the format.

As far as touching the smartphone screen for taking photos is concerned, you can just set a timer of three seconds and keep it stable. Gimbal will make it even better. But the electronic viewfinder and fully articulated screen on the cameras are game changers. Some may argue that we do have pro settings in smartphones but the sensor size again makes it difficult to compete with the actual cameras.

Well said and very informative. Thanks. 😀

I appreciate how a significant portion of this video was actually saying how good cell phone cameras were, and that for most people who don't follow chiseled adventurous Canadians they probably are enough. As a photographer it's something I've been telling coworkers for years.

The main thing for me is the malleability of the files. Small sensors are getting better but bigger always has and always will be better. The bigger sensors look more natural or even "filmic" if you will.

I just LOVE the way Jordan smiles when he has his pictures taken.

Last shot was really cute, love your video, very informative

Three reasons for me: 1. Image Quality/DOF 2. Complete manual control 3. Interchangeable lenses

I was always inclined and even defended mobile photography (i still somewhat do). I did shoot a lot of things using my mobile phone for years and i even have thats really good in terms of camera but one day i picked up my 15 yr old dslr and realized mobile phone cameras are decades behind real full frames and crop sensors. Thus, i bought a mirrorless just recently, lol

Tienes tanta razón. Gracias por continuar haciendo videos.

I use them together. I find colors are better through well-chosen glass, but sometimes I can just get the phone out faster. To compose and work a shot the camera is always the way to go for me. But I also use the phone to work out some compositions along side it.. The end purpose for the photo is part of deciding which tool to use.

To disagree a bit, many of the advantages of a camera over a smartphone are much less pronounced if you only use an entry-level camera with its kit zoom lens as demonstrated in this video. Especially for Canon's APS-C cameras, this is currently a problem, since only slow zoom lenses are natively available for the system. Of the 7 reasons mentioned in the video, 4 (lenses, depth of field, image quality, selfies) aren't dramatically better on a Canon R-Mount APS-C camera with the available APS-C zoom lenses than on a high-end smartphone. In fact, I'd argue that novice photographers take better pictures with smartphones because of their prime lenses. The quality of amateur photography - on Instagram and elsewhere - has generally improved now that most people compose their images by moving their bodies and the camera, rather than framing by zooming. Another "dirty secret" is that many smartphones, due to their better (AI-based) computational photography, have better auto white balance, color science, auto exposure and (due to their in-built multi-exposure HDR) even better dynamic range in bright light situations than traditional cameras. Many of the disadvantages of smartphones - such as oversharpened/overprocessed images - can be avoided by switching the camera app to raw and processing the raw files in Lightroom Mobile. I'd advise any amateur photographer to get the most out of their smartphone before considering switching to a camera.

Brilliant breakdown of the advantages! I'm convinced that a real camera offers unmatched versatility and quality 📸

Can you consider this as a way to start a series on how to move on from mobile to an dedicated camera. Since many of us were not camera users when there was no cellphones available, and now we are having the phone on hand to start taking pictures, in some moment you get interested to do more with the existing tool (smartphone), and with that you are getting more interested to jump to a "real" camera. That could be the idea of the future videos

Try the Samsung Z Flip 5 and use Flex mode as a tripod, use it in camcorder mode for great ergonomics, and use the cover display to take selfies using the main cameras. It doesn't have a zoom but still takes good pictures. But it doesn't replace a real digital camera.

Great video! I think the main advantage of an iPhone that trumps all the advantages of a pro camera is its portability. Hauling a large camera when traveling or visiting friends is simply not practical. I gave up my SLR years ago as I discovered that for most situations an iPhone works just fine. When I need a pro camera with powerful lenses for a graduation or a safari I rent one which is much more affordable and I also get to use the latest technology!

I invest quite a lot of time in custom cameras for Android. Its remarkable how much extra performance you can get out of them. Even video wise (Jordan) I'm talking opengate, RAW video. True RAW video, not some fake log or ProRes video.

THANK YOU for mentioning how to hold a dedicated camera properly. I get so many students in my classes who have come from cell phones and want to hold their camera at arms' length, which is VERY unstable - especially with longer focal length lenses. I get students who complain their cameras are at fault when it's actually about technique. Also, PLEASE when someone gets a camera, REFER TO THE MANUAL. I support the Canon User Forum and we get a lot of people asking questions they could easily have resolved for themselves if they actually looked them up in the manual. I always download the PDF version (you can put it on your smartphone and always have it to hand) for each camera and then I can search for individual words or phrases. Finally, photography has a technical aspect and a creative one. With the former, a cell phone does almost all the thinking for the user, but to get the best out of a dedicated camera, one has to learn about how to control exposure using shutter speed, ISO (BTW, it's a word, not an acronym, so don't spell it), and aperture, and how each has a different creative impact on the resultant image. That takes time, study and some effort, but the results are worth it.

Things lacking in iPhone photography vs Camera photography: 1) Lack of different lenses 2) Lack of Xenon/ bright flash 3) No high zoom or macro 4) No ergonomics of holding the phone and the shutter button 5) Weak optics overcome by high editing, filters and software processing 6) No strap to hold the phone when doing risky photography shots 7) No viewfinder 8) Very limited customizations

Personally I am still super impressed by the photos I take with my S22 Ultra. When I got it I expected the 10x telephoto lens to be more like an afterthought. Just one more big number to put into the ads to make the phone look good. Turns out it produces pretty sharp images though! It can't compete with my 200-500 but in a pinch I'm happy with it. I also mainly use my phone for taking videos and switching between the 4 lenses is great.

I would loooooove to see an in depth comparison of full frame and medium format image quality. Primarily on the saturation point of the photo sites since they are much bigger! Great vid as always

One big question you should ask is also: Do I want to edit my pictures after I took them? With a smartphone, once you take the picture it is "done", no further editing is needed. With a bigger camera, it makes sense to shoot raw and edit your pictures. That gives you much more control but is also more work and takes time - so for instant posting on Facebook you'll likely continue to use the phone. With a phone you can easily use iCloud or Google Photos to store all of your photos. With a dedicated camera, something like Adobe Lightroom makes more sense. About the image quality of smartphones vs. bigger cameras: One pretty striking example is the portrait of Chris at 5:03. You can see the huge amount of noise reduction applied by the iPhone, while the Canon picture is so much more detailed. There is a really big difference in the "effective" megapixels of those two images.

Good video. One comment: I'd recommend using the volume control on the (cabled) earbuds instead of the volume button on the iPhone itself. That eliminates button-press-related camera movement.

would love to see you talk more about used cameras. i know dpreview was funded by amazon but now that you're at a more independent publication supported by sponsorships, you should use fewer low end cameras that cost upwards of $1,000. as far as just taking pictures goes, any decent entry level camera from 10 years ago is going to serve a beginner just as well and is going to be 1/4 the price, and any older, moderately professional gear is going to blow a cheap new camera away

Definitely zoom and low light for me. Had a laugh at the selfie though, i always struggle to even take them with my phone, but the camera method actually looks easier :-)

Try to use multiple flashes on a smartphone controlled by the main camera as with the Nikon CLS (Creative Lighting System). WIth a camera you can adjust the amount of ambient and flash light.

This video makes quite sense. People buy iPhones arguing that they want better photos, but there's a 1% difference across iphone and other phones, compared to a much higher percentage of quality if you compare iphone with actual DSLR or special purpose camera or a drone camera

Here's my pitch for the smartphone killer entry level camera that I need personally: 1. Compact. It shouldn't be way bigger than the phone. That means nice compact primes, and light weight body I can chuck in a purse or jacket pocket easily. It's a camera that doesn't feel annoying to carry even if you ended up taking zero photos that day. 2. IQ - Honestly just no crunchy digital sharpening, and some nice high efficiency jpegs, with the standard latitude in dynamic range you can expect from apsc right now. Just enough that it doesn't fall apart quickly in non-ideal light. Plus, a pleasing no edit colour look like Canon, Nikon, Leica, or Olympus have. Maybe not as unfiltered as Sony with it's exactitude or Fujifilm with it's sometimes over-stylization. 3. AF - it doesn't need to blow my socks off, but it would be nice if it was somewhere in the range of S5II to A7IV. Canon would be great high middle to shoot for. 3. Selfie flip up screen. I can mount mics elsewhere, like on the side of the tripod head, use a cage or cold shoe adapter, or use lavs. Looking naturally up at the camera really helps us not have family vacation photos all looking like this: 🐶😏😒 100% not being able to use the best lens in selfie mode is terrible. The front camera is always mushy, crunchy, and noisy. 4. Ergonomics and UX. It should have a fantastic P mode with intelligent options to set limits on ISO and shutter speed. M mode is a given, but I suggest an M mode that has a tappable A setting for each of the exposure triangle to achieve P, A, or S. I hate locking and dragging sun icons to miss my shot anyway. Just copy the Ricoh GR for all the great one touch snap distance priority, tap to focus override, one touch AE when in manual mode type settings. Those are some of the best user centered designed cameras I've ever used. 5. Full touch operation, and a solid quick menu to avoid screen clutter. With a couple custom modes on a dial to let us jump to essential setups while the camera is off, so we can just power on and hit the shutter if needs be. All the swiping around on a tool not built for purpose is why I hate missing shots on my phone. 6. USB-C charging. If the batteries have to be tiny, give us little plastic cases for them to protect them from the elements when kept in pockets. I don't mind swapping out batteries like I'm reloading in call of duty, but I don't want them loose and raw in my pocket . 7. Fair stabilisation. I don't mind if it's mechanical, optical, or electronic tbh. Other people might though. If the body is small enough for a small mobile gimbal the basic stabilisation doesn't need to be unholy quality. Just enough to get you by at 1/8 of a second, or take out the micro jitters in handheld footage. 8. An app that works and is clean. All I want to do is open it, turn on the camera connectivity, hit connect on the phone, and then scroll through the gallery, multiselect and import. Idk why this is so hard. Alternatively give us a USB-C connection that auto opens the app when plugged in and can read right off the card for import. 9. Light and plastic is fine, like a phone. Just make the mount metal at least. Maybe sell tough cases/grips for the butter fingers, or if you want to slap it on as a pre-adventure precaution. Bonus points if they help with splash resistance. 10. Try to keep it under $1k USD if possible. I'd easily prefer to skip the $1k iPhone for a $200 entry level Samsung and then spend the difference on a camera that doesn't make me want to kill myself and then everyone else. This sounds bleak, but I have had a few cameras that came pretty close to this, but all missed the mark just a little. G7XII was super close it just needed DPAF and I'd be mostly happy, EOS M6II would be perfect for me if they had made any lenses, Z30 / Ricoh GR / A7c / ZV-E1 would be great if they had the flip up screen for more discreet low angle perspectives that don't draw attention to me, and ruin candid moments of pets and kids who suddenly become interested in my swively twisty transformer toy. The point is: We're close. I think camera companies need to invest in proper UX (not just UI) and also software a bit more. We need them to start thinking like they make devices not just cameras. /listicle

Comparing phones with a camera like an R10 will make any average person say I prefer the phone. It's an enormous size and weight difference. If cameras want to stay relevant for non professional photographers and videographers, they have to invest in form factors like the one of Ricoh GR or Sony a7c and lighter smaller but equally powerful interchangeable lenses.

The first time I got exposed to proper settings on a smartphone was with the Nokia Lumia 1020. 41 MP with a Zeiss lens, and you can have it on manual to change the shutter speed, ISO, and exposure. I was able to create long exposure shots off the highway. Now I have the sony a6000 and the a7iv. Great cameras for my professional work.

as for smartphone shutter button, when I touch the screen I usually introduce much less shake than pushing a button

I’ve rarely taken a photo with my iPhone that I like. I mean, sure they’re selfies, but…

Shooting past 2x zoom on a phone is a big disappointment.

It be nice to have a comparison of what phones do as good on wide angle pictures. I consider the phone an emergency part of the kit and would like to upgrade to something that is nicer, but have the feeling most reviews are not done by photographers, so they are always a little bit too accepting of some visual artifacts on the images.

Love your work 👏

I've never gotten on with smartphone cameras - everything is basically ultra wide to wide angle, for "normal" you end up cropping massively and it all ends up looking like junk - Google/Android (?) colours are absolutely bonkers saturated out of the box - All the AI / computational stuff gets irritating. Google routinely offers to take things out of shots that I wanted in, or offers to crank up the saturation to 11 from the 10 it chose in the first place. (admittedly, I can probably mostly turn all that stuff of)

I am currently going in the other direction. There is often no need anymore to take a separate camera with me since I've got the S23 Ultra. And as we all know, the best camera is the one we can have all the time with us.😊

Thanks for the video

I pretty much agree with what you said. I have owned many real cameras over the years. Starting with Canon and Pentax film cameras. I've also owned numerous digital camera since they first came out. My current camera is a Sony a6600 and I really like it. I've got some very good lenses for it. For my personal use, I'm not sold on full frame. But, I have rented full frame cameras a couple of times and tried them out. I do take photos with my smart phone, now and then. But not for doing 'real' photography. They're quick and handy for some situations but I still much prefer a real camera. I'm currently wrestling with whether to get the a6700 (there's a lot I like about it) or getting a one of the full frame models. Anyway, thanks for the informative video.

Interesting video since I have this exact combo, an iPhone 13 Pro and an R10. Ive been a professional portrait/fashion photographer nearly 20 years and my iPhone remains my most used camera, by far. There are grips for the iPhone and Godox makes a great flash. I have 3 really good lenses in my iPhone and when the 15 comes out, I will have even better ones with larger sensors, faster apertures and a 46 megapixel main sensor. I also have apps to do things no "real" camera could ever do. Like the FIMO app, which gives me the ability to shoot dozens of classic film simulations and get a great variety of looks, everything from slide film to large format.I can also use an app like NOMO that emulates dozens of classic film cameras, everything from disposable toy cameras and Polaroids to pinhole and large format cameras. Photos from both these apps are very similar to the original film/camera look. IMO, the one and only advantage for a dedicated camera is if you need large prints, but I havent had to do those in ages. Most my work goes on websites and social media these days and smartphone photos are more than capable. Ive done entire clothing shoots for clients outdoors using an iPhone and most love it. Especially since I can Airdrop the photos to them at the shoot and they can edit and post them before we have even finished. The day is fast approaching where I won't even need a dedicated camera any longer.

My main reason is that cameras are fun! Photography is neat and using a camera with manual controls teaches you how that process works. I love smartphone photography and I think it's amazing that we all have access to great cameras in those devices, but using a "real" camera teaches you photography as a craft. It places the emphasis on photography as a fulfilling process, rather than just the end result product.

In bright daylight, there is barely any difference but in lower light is really where the "real" cameras quickly show their value. A tiny bit of movement messes up the phone's algorithms and results in smudgy results. Using a flash lets me shoot in pitch black if I want with a camera. Now, APSC vs full frame is where it gets tricky. I always grab my APSC camera due to the small size and weight of the fast lenses and the results are indistinguishable at equivalent settings. Sure, you can go much faster with FF but the size and weight become such that I barely use the FF camera anymore.

You did it. You really said it all. Your videos going to my personal library about REALLY knowing how to live in this century. Thank you

I have a Pixel 6 that still is considered to have one of the best smartphone cameras. But it sucks. everything looks like a HDR. The level of detail is bad. the colors washed out. and the lens is bad, it makes very strong and ugly flares against the light and looses contrast dramatically. for a snapshots ok. for serious stuff not. even a 15 year old APS-C outperforms a modern smartphone in most daylight situations by far. and also in the night with a tripod.

Don't forget the JOY of handling a real camera vs a smartphone. This makes you take more pictures!

I couldn't imagine trying to photograph a rally car flying by me with a smartphone and still have proper motion blur in the background and wheels: so-called panning shot, the hardest shot to pull photographing motorsports.

The photo on 6:45 is just gold, made me smile.

PetaPixel TV Viewers just wouldn't have the same ring to it, would it?

It’s a little ironic choosing a Canon RF APSC camera when there are very few lenses for that particular mount and sensor size, honestly MFT would be a more compelling step up from mobile phones especially given the lens choice from super macros to anamorphic glass. Isn’t OM Digital Solutions a sponsor too?

Very good comparison. The HDR comparison is missing in this video - smartphones overperform DSLRs/Mirrorless thanks to software processing. With a DSLR you can overperform the smartphone only after editing or after creating a manual HDR photo, and is difficult to do this in filmmaking without cameras that records in RAW.

thank u for the useful video👍❤😊 ❤&respect from GB

Perfect. Do not waste on pricy Smart phones considering Camera Quality or photography. Just use smartphone for office /personal contacts mails or chats etc... a dedicated camera is always better no doubt about it. In fact there is no need of such hype on smart phones promotion in terms of photography.

One major issue I have with all my full frame cameras is none of them are small enough to fit in my pocket for carrying it around every time I go out.

Chris, I used to follow your own channel years back. Were wondering where you went. Well I still do prefer(from this one video I've seen on 'PetaPixel') your old videos. But this video were quite interesting since it more or less took on a new finding I found for myself now that I after a few years not taking photos with anything else than my phone. Since my personal absence from using my (now) old DSLR's in my mind I thought phones were having quite good cameras nowadays, BUT now that I picked up photography again and my two camera bodies that I have is my really old Nikon D700 and fairly newer crop sensor Nikon D7100. I honestly actually just use my D700 but bought a new lens the Sigma 70-200 Sport, other 'old' favourite lens is Sigma 24-105 f/4 ART. And honestly I was blown away on how much better the D700 is than the latest mobile phone, I mean this is a camera body that is around 15 years old or so, and 'only' 12.1 Mpix, but it has way sharper, way better dynamic range, way better contrast and colours with especially my Sigma 70-200 than any phone of today. So now I've finally found my way back, and i am upgrading to a newer full frame Nikon DLSR 810 or 850 in the near future. What I've else found is that Photoshop's AI functions to create AI pictures out of you own pictures and masking is worrying, but I did like On1 and Topaz Labs AI plugins for Lightroom since they can in some cases save an old picture that is slightly out of focus or enhance a really old photograph with both size and details in face - the last part I am very impressed with.

Great one!

I consistently take better photos with the camera. Maybe partly because I’m in photographer mode when I’m holding a camera. I frame and compose better. On my last family trip I only bought the iPhone, thinking to save gear and that it would be good enough. But all photos feel over sharpened and has no vibe at all. They almost all have an artificial look to them, and don’t portray the beautiful holidays in a nice way at all. But the iPhone consistently takes better group photos in shitty lighting. Backlit people in front of a window, you got it. People in overcast, you got it. But in good lighting the dedicated camera group pictures are potentially even better. They just look more like true documentation, and representing my memory in a much better way. For videos though… I think iPhone wins in most uncontrolled scenarios.

The pity of those "real cameras" is their shitty user interface, totally pre-Win95 style.

There is one area that I can think of in which smartphone cams shine over real cameras: computational photography that is. Smartphone manufacturers knew from the start that their cams will optically and sensorwise never be on par with purpose built photo cams. This drove them to try and compensate these shortfalls with computing power. They succeeded in this endeavour to a remarkable degree. I think we are now seeing the advent of purpose built photo cams also making progress in the area of built-in computational photography. It will be interesting to see what such algorithms can work when they are fed with quality optical and sensor data. For my part and for the time being I stick with raw data from my Canon R5 and keep processing that out of cam in LrC and PS.

The shallow depth of field has a lot to do with the extra small sensors on the phone. They can be 5mmx5mm so even when the lens is fully open, the DOF is significant. Out of focus is done digitally.

i got into photography because i loved taking/editing pics with my phone (stopped at iphone 13 pro), but knew i could "do better". so, i bought an inexpensive a6100. it was a noticeable improvement, especially with the 50-210mm kit lens. i then bought some 16mm and 30mm 1.4 lenses and the sigma 70mm-200mm 2.8 telephoto lens. game-changing. i'll still use my phone for a quick pic with friends. but "real" cameras for life!

Very valid arguments! That’s why I still keep and use my DSLR for serious photography.

Regarding selfies taken with the back camera: once upon a time I had a Sony Ericsson, which had a small curved mirror under the back camera, so you could be sure what the photo would look like.

The thing I’m reminded of is just that wish I had the money to upgrade both lol. I’d love a tele, and night mode on all three cams (and improved AWB), of my iPhone 11 but it’s only paid off recently. And for dedicated, while I’d like better AF and miss the flippy screen on my T5i (mirror dead, live view only) my SL1 is still good enough for like 95% of shots (and some of that could be fixed with faster glass, but investing $$$ into an old mount). For which maybe my next upgrade would be a used 70/80D and 18-135 USM if I could get a good enough price? But yeah, undeniably convenient having a camera on you at all times, when you can’t or don’t want to pack even your smallest dedicated one. I also can’t wait for camera makers besides Olympus to compete more on computational photography with dedicated cameras, while hopefully also allowing more flexibility in tweaking the parameters than smartphones with their seemingly locked down special sauces of processing. Anyways yup, first world problems and I’ll probably be waiting for a better job before splurging on tech ambitions again.