Same price smarthone & slr quality

On 3/04/2021 2:35 am, nospam wrote:
In article , geoff
wrote:

At about the same price are the smartphones yet up to the quality of the
SLRs?

as the saying goes, the best camera is the one you have with you.

spec-wise, slrs are better, but smartphones slip into a pocket. how
often do you carry an slr with a bag full of lenses with you?

smartphones can also do things an slr cannot, such as capture a depth
map for later processing, night mode and various other things.


.... but can be a PITA in many outdoor lighting situations to see the
LCD image for composition, or even find the 'shutter' button..

nonsense.

get a better phone.


What would you call 'better' ?

pretty much anything.

there is *no* issue whatsoever in using a smartphone in sunlight,
especially with recent phones which have *very* bright displays, nor is
there any difficulty in finding the shutter button, which is large and
easy to find, but can also be triggered by the volume buttons or
anywhere on the display if the user prefers, although the latter will
preclude touch focus/exposure.

there are cases that add a 'real shutter button' and a grip:
http://snap6.bitplayinc.com/img/kickstarter/kickstarter-bg-01-video.jpg
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/00...uttercase1920-
1008_1296x.jpg

and if that's not enough, there are also remote displays and remote
shutter buttons. those with an apple watch can do either or both with
just the watch, which also has a display that can be seen in bright
sunlight.

and it's not just phones. lcds on compact digicams and slrs have no
issues in sunlight either (except maybe the cheap crap), and on some of
them, the shutter button is not always obvious or not ergonomically
placed. remote displays and shutter buttons are an option for many of
those cameras.

I guess you seldom get to go outside, let alone with the sun behind you.

as usual, you would guess wrong, although this past year it was less
than usual, for obvious reasons.


Clearly my up(ish)-market Samsung is crap, and I and the people you
sometimes see trying to take a photo with their cell-phone or LCD-backed
camera when the sun behind them, need to upgrade to your Apple.

geoff

In article , Incubus says...
do you carry your slr everywhere?

Pretty much. That's why I bought a D600.

I use my phone whenever I need to quickly take a picture of
something (for instance to avoid having to write down things on
a piece of papar). For photography I use a real camera.

--
Alfred Molon

Olympus 4/3 and micro 4/3 cameras forum at
https://groups.io/g/myolympus
https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

In article , geoff
wrote:


.... but can be a PITA in many outdoor lighting situations to see the
LCD image for composition, or even find the 'shutter' button..

nonsense.

get a better phone.


What would you call 'better' ?

pretty much anything.

there is *no* issue whatsoever in using a smartphone in sunlight,
especially with recent phones which have *very* bright displays, nor is
there any difficulty in finding the shutter button, which is large and
easy to find, but can also be triggered by the volume buttons or
anywhere on the display if the user prefers, although the latter will
preclude touch focus/exposure.

there are cases that add a 'real shutter button' and a grip:
http://snap6.bitplayinc.com/img/kickstarter/kickstarter-bg-01-video.jpg
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/00...uttercase1920-
1008_1296x.jpg

and if that's not enough, there are also remote displays and remote
shutter buttons. those with an apple watch can do either or both with
just the watch, which also has a display that can be seen in bright
sunlight.

and it's not just phones. lcds on compact digicams and slrs have no
issues in sunlight either (except maybe the cheap crap), and on some of
them, the shutter button is not always obvious or not ergonomically
placed. remote displays and shutter buttons are an option for many of
those cameras.

I guess you seldom get to go outside, let alone with the sun behind you.

as usual, you would guess wrong, although this past year it was less
than usual, for obvious reasons.


Clearly my up(ish)-market Samsung is crap, and I and the people you
sometimes see trying to take a photo with their cell-phone or LCD-backed
camera when the sun behind them, need to upgrade to your Apple.

i didn't say anything about a particular brand, but that might resolve
it for you.

it's also interesting that you won't disclose which samsung it is.

the galaxy s21 ultra has a display that is capable of 1500 nits and
received a sunlight visibility rating, with the non-ultra s21 at 1300
nits:
http://www.thelec.net/news/articleView.html?idxno=2293
Samsung Display said on Tuesday that its latest OLED panel
has received the Sunlight Visibility verification from Underwriters
Laboratories (UL).

for comparison, a typical desktop/laptop display is 500-600 nits.

i see many people taking photos in all sorts of lighting conditions
(well, i did prior to last year) including outdoors in bright sunlight,
without any issues. it's *not* a problem, nor has it been, except for
those with ****ty phones or ones with a dim display.

20 years ago, i used a nikon coolpix with an lcd display on the back,
one which was dimmer than what's available today, with *no* issues
taking photos outdoors in sunlight. if that could do it, then a phone
can do it.

In article , Incubus
wrote:

At about the same price are the smartphones yet up to the quality of
the
SLRs?

Even the cheapest DSLR has a better sensor than the most expensive
smartphone.

but nowhere near as good of an isp or cpu.

If we're talking about quality as per the subject, the sensor and quality
of
available lenses are the only relevant details.

false.

what matters is can it produce the results that the user wants.

A smartphone, with its crappy sensor and horrible optics, can never do that.

yet it can, and does.

not always (nothing is perfect), but there are definitely situations in
which a phone is the better choice.

slrs do not have anywhere near the compute power of a phone.

On 7/04/2021 10:39 am, nospam wrote:
In article , geoff
wrote:


it's also interesting that you won't disclose which samsung it is.

Glad you find that 'interesting'. My current is a S10+ . Yes it is great
for many things. It is possible to flare the screen in some angles that
looking through a view-finder is immune to.


i see many people taking photos in all sorts of lighting conditions
(well, i did prior to last year) including outdoors in bright sunlight,
without any issues. it's *not* a problem, nor has it been, except for
those with ****ty phones or ones with a dim display.

For the most part true, but as above sometimes can be. That's all I am
claiming.


20 years ago, i used a nikon coolpix with an lcd display on the back,
one which was dimmer than what's available today, with *no* issues
taking photos outdoors in sunlight. if that could do it, then a phone
can do it.

Maybe 10 years ago for a particular series of trips I similarly used a
little Panasonic Lumix TZ something-or-other(?) camera which was compact
and had a great mechanical zoom range. Super for travel and outdoors
(hiking, mountaineering, skiing, etc). There were situations where
gymnastics were necessarily to shield the display that would not have
been necessary with my viewfinder cameras.That's all I'm claiming. Not
some all-encompassing damnation of external flat-panel display
photographic devices.

I *do* see people in situations struggling to see clearly to compose an
image. No, not most of the time, but definitely occasionally. No idea if
I spent double the money for a S21 anything would be different, but I am
happy with my phone as it is not my primary photo device and cannot
justify upgrading for any reason.

geoff

On 7/04/2021 10:32 pm, Whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 6 April 2021 at 23:39:32 UTC+1, nospam wrote:
In article , geoff
wrote:


.... but can be a PITA in many outdoor lighting situations to see the
LCD image for composition, or even find the 'shutter' button..

nonsense.

get a better phone.


What would you call 'better' ?

pretty much anything.

there is *no* issue whatsoever in using a smartphone in sunlight,
especially with recent phones which have *very* bright displays, nor is
there any difficulty in finding the shutter button, which is large and
easy to find, but can also be triggered by the volume buttons or
anywhere on the display if the user prefers, although the latter will
preclude touch focus/exposure.

there are cases that add a 'real shutter button' and a grip:
http://snap6.bitplayinc.com/img/kickstarter/kickstarter-bg-01-video.jpg
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/00...uttercase1920-
1008_1296x.jpg

and if that's not enough, there are also remote displays and remote
shutter buttons. those with an apple watch can do either or both with
just the watch, which also has a display that can be seen in bright
sunlight.

and it's not just phones. lcds on compact digicams and slrs have no
issues in sunlight either (except maybe the cheap crap), and on some of
them, the shutter button is not always obvious or not ergonomically
placed. remote displays and shutter buttons are an option for many of
those cameras.

I guess you seldom get to go outside, let alone with the sun behind you.

as usual, you would guess wrong, although this past year it was less
than usual, for obvious reasons.


Clearly my up(ish)-market Samsung is crap, and I and the people you
sometimes see trying to take a photo with their cell-phone or LCD-backed
camera when the sun behind them, need to upgrade to your Apple.
i didn't say anything about a particular brand, but that might resolve
it for you.

it's also interesting that you won't disclose which samsung it is.

the galaxy s21 ultra has a display that is capable of 1500 nits and
received a sunlight visibility rating, with the non-ultra s21 at 1300
nits:
http://www.thelec.net/news/articleView.html?idxno=2293
Samsung Display said on Tuesday that its latest OLED panel
has received the Sunlight Visibility verification from Underwriters
Laboratories (UL).

for comparison, a typical desktop/laptop display is 500-600 nits.

i see many people taking photos in all sorts of lighting conditions
(well, i did prior to last year) including outdoors in bright sunlight,
without any issues. it's *not* a problem, nor has it been, except for
those with ****ty phones or ones with a dim display.

20 years ago, i used a nikon coolpix with an lcd display on the back,
one which was dimmer than what's available today, with *no* issues
taking photos outdoors in sunlight. if that could do it, then a phone
can do it.

But the LCD on the back of any camera or phone aren't used to take the picture only to review it
so the nits are a pretty useless conparision anyway.


Um, and rather vitally to frame and compose it before hitting the shutter.

geoff

On Apr 7, 2021, Whisky-dave wrote
(in ):

On Tuesday, 6 April 2021 at 23:39:32 UTC+1, nospam wrote:
In , geoff
wrote:


.... but can be a PITA in many outdoor lighting situations to see the
LCD image for composition, or even find the 'shutter' button..

nonsense.

get a better phone.

What would you call 'better' ?

pretty much anything.

there is *no* issue whatsoever in using a smartphone in sunlight,
especially with recent phones which have *very* bright displays, nor is
there any difficulty in finding the shutter button, which is large and
easy to find, but can also be triggered by the volume buttons or
anywhere on the display if the user prefers, although the latter will
preclude touch focus/exposure.

there are cases that add a 'real shutter button' and a grip:
http://snap6.bitplayinc.com/img/kickstarter/kickstarter-bg-01-video.jpg
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/00...uttercase1920-
1008_1296x.jpg

and if that's not enough, there are also remote displays and remote
shutter buttons. those with an apple watch can do either or both with
just the watch, which also has a display that can be seen in bright
sunlight.

and it's not just phones. lcds on compact digicams and slrs have no
issues in sunlight either (except maybe the cheap crap), and on some of
them, the shutter button is not always obvious or not ergonomically
placed. remote displays and shutter buttons are an option for many of
those cameras.

I guess you seldom get to go outside, let alone with the sun behind you.

as usual, you would guess wrong, although this past year it was less
than usual, for obvious reasons.

Clearly my up(ish)-market Samsung is crap, and I and the people you
sometimes see trying to take a photo with their cell-phone or LCD-backed
camera when the sun behind them, need to upgrade to your Apple.
i didn't say anything about a particular brand, but that might resolve
it for you.

it's also interesting that you won't disclose which samsung it is.

the galaxy s21 ultra has a display that is capable of 1500 nits and
received a sunlight visibility rating, with the non-ultra s21 at 1300
nits:
http://www.thelec.net/news/articleView.html?idxno=2293
Samsung Display said on Tuesday that its latest OLED panel
has received the Sunlight Visibility verification from Underwriters
Laboratories (UL).

for comparison, a typical desktop/laptop display is 500-600 nits.

i see many people taking photos in all sorts of lighting conditions
(well, i did prior to last year) including outdoors in bright sunlight,
without any issues. it's *not* a problem, nor has it been, except for
those with ****ty phones or ones with a dim display.

20 years ago, i used a nikon coolpix with an lcd display on the back,
one which was dimmer than what's available today, with *no* issues
taking photos outdoors in sunlight. if that could do it, then a phone
can do it.

But the LCD on the back of any camera or phone aren't used to take the picture only to review it
so the nits are a pretty useless conparision anyway.

There are cameras which lack either an OVF, or an EVF, and depend on an LCD for framing/composition and all VF function. So they do more than function as a review screen, and unfortunately many are vulnerable when it comes to usability in harsh light.

--
Regards,
Savageduck

In article ,
Whisky-dave wrote:


But the LCD on the back of any camera or phone aren't used to take the picture only to review it
so the nits are a pretty useless conparision anyway.

yes they are

In article , geoff
wrote:

it's also interesting that you won't disclose which samsung it is.

Glad you find that 'interesting'. My current is a S10+ . Yes it is great
for many things. It is possible to flare the screen in some angles that
looking through a view-finder is immune to.

https://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_s10_plus-review-1901p3.php
We measured 385nits of maximum brightness on our S10+ unit when
handling the slider manually. Letting the Auto take over, the phone
is capable of cranking that up to more than twice that - 793nits in
our test. That's a class-leading result and a substantial jump from
the Note9 and S9+, and also the iPhone XS Max. The iPhone remains
capable of pushing the manual brightness much higher than the S10+,
if that's your thing.

793 nits is a bit more than half that of the s21, assuming you're in
auto mode. otherwise, it's not surprising you're having difficulty in
sunlight, at just under 400 nits, or roughly 1/4 that of the s21.

In article ,
Whisky-dave wrote:


But the LCD on the back of any camera or phone aren't used to take the
picture only to review it
so the nits are a pretty useless conparision anyway.
yes they are

No they aren't the person does thatr's why there are so many **** movies in
portait format when they should be in landscape.

people are stupid.

And that doesn;t matter how many nits the screen does it;'s the nit using it.

it does in sunlight.