Obviously I still use my MILC, but literally iphone cameras are fucking perfect for photography in general. You can even shoot RAW and have 3 native focal lengths to choose from (3 different lenses). If the old magnum photographers could choose between an iphone or their clunky 50s film cameras they would've chosen an iphone 9/10 times.
>>4306045>If the old magnum photographers could choose between an iphone or their clunky 50s film cameras they would've chosen an iphone 9/10 times.I mean they were a bunch of snapshitting early lifers so why not
>>/g/
>>4306045phone cameras look like complete shit
>Stop being le pretentiousiPhone photos look like shitAndroid photos come with essentially crippling your social life unless you're 40+is having taste pretentious? Maybe to an american who considers the barn the peak of architecture. I'm technically american too, but I feel like i'm an alien here because most of my family is fresh off the boat from europe and i'm going to be honest here:The amish are not unique among americans.You ALL share their needlessly pretentious hatred of nice "immodest" things.You ALL have the same neurosis from your evangelican protty "culture". It shows in your churches. And it shows in your "non-pretentious" camera that doesn't allow white, black, or blur, everything must be shown and sharp to be modest and utilitarian visual note taking with no creative flair. No soul.All the amish lack of cultureBut without the amish morality!Fuck ya'll, I'll use a nice camera. Bitch about it. Cry "consoom" while you live in 2000, 4000sqft, pay $30k for a car, and eat out, I don't care, you have no taste, you have no morals, and you have no culture. Real cameras are based specifically because they refute this superficial modesty.
>>4306064The burgerstanian modest working man larp is pervasive and cringe>will drive luxo-truck and never use it for truck stuff>sports car or luxury sedan? tiny dick tryhard pretentious faggot snob cork sniffer shithead!>will drink overpriced “craft” beer. wine? faggooooot!>will use $1500 iphone>$800 sony a7c+tamron prime? WHY ARE YOU SO PRETENTIOUS FUCKING CONSIMERIST
>>4306064>>4306089Why are you samefagging and posting as anon, you fucking commie vatnig? Americans made it to the moon and your failed country didn't, deal with it fag.
>>4306091>only one (you)Be catholic or orthodox and you automatically notice americans hatred of nice things (and how it morphs into hypocrisy) because churches really form the base of a culture.
>>4306045>RAW file on a phone is the same as RAW file on a camerai have some really bad news for you...also, in addition to that, image processors and both sensor size and design is WAY different (better) on even digishits, compared to phones.phones are phones, devices made for communication and internet browsing and cameras are just one of many secondary options/gadgets of the device. there is quite literally no space in or on the phone, for manufacturers to put the same size/tech processors, image processors, sensors, lenses, etc.. etc... and all that allows for way better and way more detailed raw file coding and reading, resulting in way better image quality at the end... long story short: a dedicated device for taking images will always produce better images than a phone and thats a fact, whether you liked it or not.even shitty compact cameras like TZ90, X100V, GRlllX and others OR even digishits... they all make and will continue to make WAY better images than any phone does and ever will, unless you make a phone the size of a brick, where you can put the same tech thats in an full size ILC...
>>4306091Not a samefag, but i'm glad someone else sees the weird hypocrisy where americans think they're enlightened anti-materialists - with $1500 locked down, crippled, disposable phones that purport to, but do not, replace a proper computer and a camera, and mostly serve to pressure your friends to buy iphones to resolve compatibility disputes. >$1500 disposable chiniPhone>eats red meat and candy every day>woah you have a dedicated camera that will last 10-20 years? tryhard.
If all you're doing is taking snapshits of your cat or doing """street""" photography sure an iphone is plenty fine, especially if all you're doing is posting shit on facebook or sending stuff to friends. But for any actual genre of photography worth a damn even a 15 year old dslr from your local pawn shop that costs 1/10 of the newest iphone will be better and offer more flexibility.
>>4306115>must-earn gearfaggotryyou can use a nice camera for anything. just like you dont have to be an athlete to eat real food instead of fortified grain slop, beans, and ground meat.
>>4306115Phone photos, even "good" phones, have an ugliness to them that you can do without. Just use a half decent camera.
>>4306045I know this is a troll, but there are people who approach this level of retardedness regarding cell phone cameras. These same people cry out their phone has the bestest camera ever, and in 1 year, drop another $1200 on the next model and say the same thing.
>>4306045These threads are all the same, the people who refuse to use iPhones or think phones suck for photos are always going to buy cheap shit phones that don’t take good photos. They then reinforce their wrong beliefs. It’s all there on Flickr, go look, millions of photos from top quality high end iPhones.The photos look amazing all things considered. Some tiny 1cm camera you carry around in your pocket. Especially once you factor in its video capabilities too. You won’t even be able to tell the difference from a dslr unless you zoom in or go searching for low light photos. My iPhone now takes 80% of my photos while the d800 only comes out occasionally and I still take iPhone photos at the same time, d800 just has better focal length options with 24-70 and 70-200
>>4306476>the photos look amazingThey look like actual shit. I’m unfollowing people for it. Americans have no taste? Americans actively fight good taste across the world? I believe it. If it comes from the US it is anti-culture.
>>4306476>”phones look amazing”>has ken rockwells tasteEvery time
>>4306480I don’t know what you are expecting of a photo, dslr mirrorless are the ones on Flickr with Rockwell tier saturation and editing, phones just produce a nice balanced photo. Browsing the iPhone galleries is like browsing the film groups, the average standard is good, mirrorless dslr is a crapshoot of good and awful even for $10k models.
How can I get my phone to look like my D80? Nothing looks like my D80. Makes me sad.
>>4306491>tasteless flickr boomers are how you measure cameras
>>4306495Flickr is vastly superior to any test chart. It shows an exact average of the photos achieved by a regular person using the cameras.
no thanks
>>4306100>GRIIIXYou're wrong on this one.
>>4306501Flickr shows the below average camera user.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelDSC-W50Camera Softwaredarktable 4.6.1Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2024:04:22 16:28:53Exposure Time1/125 secF-Numberf/7.1Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating80Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeSpotLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length6.30 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1393Image Height1858RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastHardSaturationHighSharpnessHard
I shoot for fun and my fun comes from using cool cameras.Phones aren't cool (anymore) so they're of no interest to me.
>>4306045Well since I matured, and my social life has been dwindling. My phone is perfectly capable for my needs, I don't even think I'll be getting a flag ship next time round. The photos I take with it are OK, for what they are. But that's it. I only use the camera to quickly share something. I recently dug out my wife's old Nikon digishit cameras, one has a broken door the other is pretty much new, L32. One thing I did notice was I actually go through the photos, process them, and file them or print some. When I used my phone for quick photos they'd just pile up and I forget about them. Not only that, but newer phones save all your photos on some sort of cloud, who knows what fucked up shit your photos are being use for nowadays... also, the optical zoom is worth it.
>>4306577Every photo you take on an iphone is analyzed off site and apple asks that you trust they dont actually see the content, they're just identifying your friends, family, and even pets as unique repeating faces and making sure you dont have any CSAM bro, if you're against this you are literally in favor of legalizing pedophilia!The precedent is unnerving. What's next, a video of state enforcers kicking protestors ends up auto-censored?
>>4306583I'm more schizo than that. I believe AI is stealing our identities pretty much... I don't want my sons entire life recorded and stored on some cloud so when he's older some AI robot will look like him from birth to his adult years.
>>4306589The NSA already had automated systems recording hours and hours of your voice to automatically flag you, or not flag you, as a domestic terrorist for future monitoring. What corporations are doing is childs play.it probably won't ever hurt you unless you want to become a major public figure, then come the recordings of you admitting to molesting women
>>4306590Deep fakes. Identify theft is what I'm worried about.
>>4306592They've probably already been doing that. AI voice faking exists, the NSA has been bugging everything forever without a single human eye on most of the data, and a lot of that data includes hours of public figures voices. Who knows how many published phone calls from politicians were actually real and whether or not the man in question got his own phone call in the middle of the night telling him what he already said and that he better go along with it or elseIf all of this worries you, dont shoot digital, the amount of baked in insecurity in all consumer technology is insane. Pretty much every PC made since the 2010s has the possibility of a third party accessing it via a small cell radio even if it is turned off and you think your drive is encrypted. This is a hardware feature, using loonix will not save you, and loonix is such a bloated mess (with lots of state contributions) it's probably bugged too. Shoot film only. Develop your own film. Print your own film, directly on photo paper, in a darkroom. Or use a computer and printer from 2005.
>>4306593Ha. No... the chances become exponential once you get cell phones involved. I'm not worried about other people, humans stealing identity. I'm worried about AI, robots, etc. Non humans having access to large swathes of data at all times. If I use a digital camera, I could upload my photos offline, and process them and then save on an external device or print and delete. Photos that my wife supposedly 'delted' off her old phone can be accessed through the cloud.
>>4306045I used to be all about iPhone photography, all the way until the 14 Pro. Then I bought a fucking Canon Rebel T7 as my first DSLR and once I got the settings down with a 50mm lens, it blew my smartphone out of the water.
>>4306045>literally iphone cameras are fucking perfect for photography in generalNo, no they are not.iPhone cameras are trash memes. If you like the "iPhone look" you need to get off social media.iPhones have done irreparable damage to the human psyche and people don't even know what things are supposed to look like anymore, between their post-processing in-camera faking details and imagining shit, to ugly photo stacking techniques and hideous tone mapping for /r/shittyHDR and plenty of denoising artifacts and unsharp masking, and high pass filters out the ass.My budget android on the other hand, that actually supports RAW (not proprietary fake raw, but real RAW), is an acceptable camera.The usability is simply cancer though. If phone nigger manufacturers would give us another side button that's touch activated to serve as a shutter button, they'd be less cancerous to try and use.When the phone weighs a few ounces and has a clicky hard clicky clack clicky button for volume/power on, those buttons are not sutable for using as a psuedo shutter button, they are impossible to gently press without making the phone shake slightly. Real cameras have dual activation shutter buttons that allow a half press to engage AF then a gentle "full press" to let you more safely take the shot with minimal movement. Phones could do the same, but they don't.Instead, I use my phone to control my real camera with the app so I don't have to buy a dumb remote shutter device.Phones are great. Just not at being cameras. It's part hardware, part design. The biggest problem is badly designed products making it difficult to take decent photos.
Can anyone itt tell me why phone cameras are bad? All I'm hearing is vague shit like "it's just bad" or "it's just ugly bro" when modern phones are clearly capable of making competent pictures. Show me a comparison betweena a phone camera and a "real" camera and explains in technical terms why it's superior.
>>4308104left phone vs right 18 year old digishitone looks soft, the other looks like baby poobut for convenience phones cannot be beat
As much as I enjoy the convenience, I can’t stand the smudginess that is particularly visible at night or in low lighting.
>>4306045I was initially in the "phones are just as good" side but they really aren't. The photos from my previous Pixel looked shitty when I looked back on them and while the new iPhone Pro RAW photos look really good, they still are not as good as a real camera.So a iPhone Pro/Pixel Pro is fine if you don't have a main camera at the time or you're just starting out, but it is not as good as a proper camera. Not even close.>>4308113>>4308129These. Though again, using RAW on the phone can mitigate this shit since it doesn't include almost all of the post processing of a normally taken phone photo.
>>4308151>Though again, using RAW on the phone can mitigate this shit since it doesn't include almost all of the post processing of a normally taken phone photo.If you use the proprietary fake RAW formats like Pro RAW, they do include the post-processing and are shit.You need third party apps to get real RAWs and not all phones can even deliver that.
>>4308154>If you use the proprietary fake RAW formats like Pro RAW, they do include the post-processing and are shit.To a point. The part you can't remove is how it uses multiple exposures for the photo (not to create a HDR effect however, but for quality) as straight out of the camera has some noise. Otherwise, pretty much all of it can be turned off in post-processing, especially awful shit like sharpness and tone.>You need third party apps to get real RAWs and not all phones can even deliver that.True. The phones that can at least do it via third party apps are the iPhone Pro models and the Google Pixel Pro models. If someone is using some shit like Oppo or Motorola, then yeah, they won't allow RAW.
>>4306045Fuck phones. I waited overnight for the original iPhone, prob before half you spring chickens were alive. Early adopter, early abandoner. The phone-cam's advantage is that if you're a simple fuck hooked on addictive design and the alternating dopamine & cortisol hits you get from it, then it's the camera that's with you, which is the best camera. Bit it's not a great camera, no matter how much bullshit they try to wedge in their algoriddms. Not enough light, suck a dick, learn to shoot film, then shoot med format digi or cry when ur kids hate u bc all you have of their childhood is fucking jpegs from a phone.
>>4308192>Early adopter, early abandoner. Well no shit, early anything is terrible. I was around for the time of chunky laptops that could barely last an hour and digital cameras with photo resolutions measured in the hundreds of pixels (pure sovl).>cry when ur kids hate u bc all you have of their childhood is fucking jpegs from a phone.I miss the days when every post on Facebook was written like this. I crie every tim. That's the same as cameras of our time anyway, such as with disposable film cameras and the like. They weren't invincible against shit quality, user error or being lost either.We're in a lucky spot currently for phone cameras. The mid 2000s were grim since digital photos from the average person (i.e early phone cameras) were truly terrible, so every childhood from that time period is going to have some seriously low quality photos.
>>4308193I miss u too sweet tits.I jumped ship at the 13 Pro Max. The fucking 11 actually made a better image than the 13. and neither looks like anything compared to a 45mp sensor behind Nik's Z glass.
>>4308196The 15 Pro Max has been really good and I did like the 13. But even then, a proper camera (be it DSLR or Mirrorless) shits on any phone camera on the market currently.The best part of them by far is purely the "it's here and it's small" aspect.
>>4308113Don't zoom in on pics taken on an iPhone 5 then. This is a non issue.
>>4308151>still are not as goodWhy?
>>4308216I don't have to zoom in at all, all the ugly shit is noticeable even with my old 1080p monitors
>>4308197>shits on any phone camera on the market currentlyHow?
>>4306064It is unusual to read such an excellent post on this site.
>>4308113That’s only if you want to walk around with a phone on you like some sad teenager on a digital leash bc they’ll be directionless and lonely without “feeling connected”. Carry a camera instead of a phone.
>>4308156If you're allowing the camera to bake the images and do multi-exposure merging and noise reduction, that's not RAW.The only way multi exposure merging works is when done through software on a PC, with RAWs done from a camera set up on a tripod for stationary subjects with controlled lighting. Like exposure bracketing.You're NEVER going to get noise free images from a phone, if you think you do, you're dealing with overbaked denoised garbage.Just accept a little noise (don't denoise it, leave it in) and with RAW the images can actually look fine.The problem is in the post-processing.Medium format cameras have noise in their lowest ISO setting. To think a phone can present an image with zero is hilarious. Obviously the noise in medium format, or full frame, is quite low with proper exposure but it is still present. APS-C approaches noisy territory with as little as 1 stop underexposure or 200 ISO, and micro four thirds is usually visibly noisy even at base ISO.Phones will be noisier than micro four thirds at equivalent ISO values but considering some phones go down to like 40 ISO they might look like ISO 800 on full frame at their best, which isn't unusable. Inferior, but decent.
>>4308216and that's a non-argument"I don't like A very much because it doesn't do X, B does X so I like it more""Just dont do X then"[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeLeica Camera AGCamera ModelM8 Digital CameraCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2018 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:04:27 20:08:25Exposure Time1/350 secF-Numberf/6.7Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating160Lens Aperturef/6.7Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, AutoColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width3292Image Height2351White BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardUnique Image ID000000000000000000000000000033CC
>>4306064>Android photos come with essentially crippling your social lifewut
>>4308301It's a retarded American thing, when usinh iMessage or some retarded shit like that your conversation bubbles turn green if you are on AndroidThat is it
>>4308301Applel copium trying to say you must buy Applel to be hip with the niggers who steal them, they rely solely on Applel fed software and services like "airdrop" because Applel faggots are incapable of knowing how to transfer files between themselves without it being Applel proprietary shit.Most Applel phone owners don't even know how to copy their photos to their computer, and some simply upload to icloud and download (lossy compressed copies) back to their PC.Trust me, that guy's an idiot.If your social life depends on having a proprietary device you don't actually have one, you're just a child, and your schoolyard acquaintances have simply been groomed into the Applel ecosystem.Some of these idiots think Androids are defective because they have different UIs for the messaging app, and different "emojis". Shit you not. This is how legitimately retarded they all are. They're worse than Adobe faggots who can't live with different software because learning different hotkeys would kill them or something, so they commit to paying monthly for Adobe cloud shit they can't even use when offline. All a meme.
>>4308301Apple refuses to grow the fuck up and allow google to make android services compatible with theirs. So this means android users use whatsapp/telegram for a lot of that shit, and are eventually pressured to buy iphones because all their friends already have facetime and imessage (especially group messaging where an android user can fuck up the entire text) and not everyone is installing weirdo apps.Eventually, the EU and DOJ will come down on apple for this so they've said they might implement better messaging compatibility with some RCS support, but something tells me it will be as half baked as facetime with android.
>>4308304>Your friends are not your friends because they are not computer nerdsYou have no idea how the real world worksMost people do not have, and never have had, any interest in how computers work, and especially no interest in showing others how to set up apt-get install something alias runthing='something -k -y -s --dragon-dildo=yes'iPhones really do just werk, no learning about computers required, and in some ways this is why there's a wide push to get everyone to only use an iphone for evertyhing, because people who learn about computers tend to pirate software and music because it's your data on your hard drive and you're just sharing it, and disable web trackers, and circumvent anti-adblock screens.
>>4308311>computer nerds>incapable of drag/drop or share something via Discord (normie software, used by normie people)You've been debunked. Shill.Just shut the fuck up retard.
>>4308318>Discord (normie software, used by normie people)Wow I didnt know mason the sad gamer catboy was normal
>>4308319SkypeSteamFacebergAnythingYou do not need Applel services to send somebody a JPEG
>>4309968Dont forget bluetooth transfer if you wanna do peer 2 peer transfer without bouncing off the internet.Or the old IR transfer protocol, but phones don't come with IR blasters anymore so its actually obsolete now.
>>4309968>Alright I'm just going to need you to install>What?>You need to install steam>WHAT>Ok, install facebook>They're stealing my data!>Skype? telegram?>What the fuck are you talking about just buy an iphone dear god whats wrong with them>we-well you cant customize the homescreen as m->Stupid.>and the camer->Why did you pay $2000 for a fuji
>>4309986*Sends you a direct link to the image on my home server*nothin personell kid
