Jump to content

Cell phones replace DSLRs!


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

How will they physically fit the Medium Format sensor in the phone though? 
Will be one huge phone.

This could actually happen with a lot of lenses and sensors in one device. But it's not something we'll see tomorrow. Maybe in 3-4 years. Who knows?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EOSHD Pro Color 5 for Sony cameras EOSHD Z LOG for Nikon CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
5 hours ago, araucaria said:

I saw a post on this forum where a guy debunked the sensor size myth. Another guy said that the smaller the sensor, the smaller the equivalent lenses. Cellphones are the future, Imagine a camera the size of your fingertip shooting IMAX quality pictures.

Here's the math and physics: http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/

Here I verified the math and physics: http://brightland.com/w/the-full-frame-look-is-a-myth-heres-how-to-prove-it-for-yourself/

I used the Canon 70-200 F2.8 II lens to eliminate lens-lens differences (vs. comparing 2 primes which can't be matched closely- incorrect focal lengths and differing lens construction).

Folks desiring to 'debunk' my debunking (the full frame look (or MF, LF) has/have special magical properties that can't be measured) need to carefully perform tests with a static subject/background and camera position (and follow the math and camera/lens set up precisely). If differences are found, that's cool, then the next step is understanding why in practice the math/physics don't match experiment (from which new math can be derived to better describe reality- the scientific method).

Provided sufficient optics and sensor tech are developed (such as light-field, multi-sensors, etc.), tiny lenses and sensors will be able to provide very shallow DOF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that we are missing the point here. Of course DSRL with their larger sensor and better optic offer better flexibility, especially in low light but nowadays, smartphones have reach a very decent level. In daylight, It would be hard for me to differentiate 2 photo side by side taken from a DSLR and an Iphone.

Many user here can disagree with that level of quality but we are the minority. The mass who doesn't care about DOF, manuel mode and all that stuff has already voted. They elected Iphone and Droid phones with the consequence of killing the point and shoot market.

All smartphone have a camera, no need for extra weight and cost, they take acceptable pic for food blog, soccer mom, selfie, pets and vacations etc. They also offers the immense advantage of being able to upload a pic on FB, instagram and twitter in 2 seconds.

For this type of application,s who cares about dynamic range, 14 bits, etc. Most people won't go further than instagram filter and faceswap.So why throw extra $$$ to get a heavy camera than can't upload anything and add filters without a computer ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Tiago Rosa-Rosso said:

I believe technology will sooner or later find a away to emulate the look of medium format in a tiny format. Don´t know how or when, but i don't think its impossible.

Computational Photography/Imaging is a rapidly growing field: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_photography

This is how shallow DOF, HDR, 3D capture/reconstruction, and post-processing DOF control will someday become commonplace with tiny devices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Members
7 hours ago, jcs said:

Folks desiring to 'debunk' my debunking (the full..

Nothing to debunk. Its photography 1.1 and comon knowledge among photographers for 100 years. Its just Tony N and a few others that have people going crazy with their equivalent BS. 

But at the end of the day. Spend $1000 on a small sensored camcorder and $1000 on a DSLR with a 50/1.8 and you will have two different looking videos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FOV equivalence exists, fair enough...

But that can't change the fact of light sensitivity. A larger area captures more light, all else being equal your sensitivity will be greater.

That's still the biggest problem with small sensosrs.Even speed boosters have a limit on the light they can pass. All this talk of "it's now an f0.5" isn't true because the glass limits the transmission eventually.

Even the XC10 with its "1-inch" has a native ISO of 500, fixed-pattern noise and so on.

Bigger really is better ;) though trying to keep focus... autofocue really helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at upcoming cameras like the L16 I think you are going see the a majority of cameras in phones and consumer and prosumer cameras are going to look very different than they do today. Will it technically be the same? No, but as JCS states computational photography is going to be wildly disruptive to the industry. It's like comparing bows and arrows to guns and bullets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • EOSHD Pro Color 5 for All Sony cameras
    EOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
    EOSHD Dynamic Range Enhancer for H.264/H.265
  • Create New...