/p/ - Photography » Thread #3749049

[77 / 10 / ?]

487KiB, 1536x1212, 2F89D986-46AD-4803-8D1B-F442C584E7EF.jpg

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 00:59:05 No.3749049 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>3749058 >>3749081 >>3749194 >>3749261 >>3749275 >>3749277 >>3749301 >>3749315 >>3749328 >>3749370 >>3749458 >>3749581 >>3749669

Looks like photography is finished boys. Time to wrap it up.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 01:10:19 No.3749058 Report

Quoted By:

>>3749049
Gear thread

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 02:18:49 No.3749081 Report

Quoted By: >>3749497 >>3753623

>>3749049
good luck keeping fingerprints off those

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 06:41:07 No.3749194 Report

Quoted By: >>3749249

>>3749049
this happens every camera iteration, and these articles are just piggybacking off of youtube shills.

I never thought I'd ever use shill in a sentence but here I am.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 09:01:39 No.3749249 Report

Quoted By: >>3749251

>>3749194
>this happens every camera iteration
Attacking previous arguments doesn't address this one. If you actually bothered to read the article that OP kindly didn't bother to link, it's hardly 'photography is finished'

> Will mirrorless cameras continue to offer benefits like larger sensors, electronic viewfinders and superior handling? Absolutely. But could some hobbyist shooters think twice about investing in a mid-range mirrorless camera when the iPhone 12 Pro Max offers such a compelling blend of hardware and software? Unfortunately for camera manufacturers, quite possibly.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 09:06:00 No.3749251 Report

Quoted By:

>>3749249
Well don't I look silly, not linking it myself
https://www.techradar.com/news/why-the-iphone-12-pro-max-is-apples-first-serious-attack-on-mirrorless-cameras

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 09:08:51 No.3749252 Report

Quoted By:

>iPhone

Who cares?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 09:14:58 No.3749254 Report

Quoted By:

Photography is finished the day people start paying someone else to pull out their phone and invest so little effort to taking a picture.

Until then, I'm cool with production managers and wedding couples and models wanting someone who has the gear to back up whatever the fuck they claim to be able to do, and not just someone who can pull a half-pound paperweight out of their pocket that they couldn't have just done themselves.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 09:48:00 No.3749261 Report

Quoted By:

>>3749049
So, it's still a tiny sensor with a tiny aperture but now it can stack images and stops outputting .jpg only?
Wow, that is some huge difference thant DSLR/MILC certainly can't do better at all...

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 33024879141_f41df9a443_o.jpg, 42KiB, 468x637

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 10:50:55 No.3749275 Report

Quoted By: >>3749281

>>3749049
>mobile telephone
>this bulleys the mftcuck
It's a good chuckle. Only boomers and weebs allow themselves to be bullyd into this hilariously overpriced and physics-limited system by the chad salesman.
When will they learn?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 10:58:09 No.3749277 Report

Quoted By: >>3749322

>>3749049
honestly ive seen samples and they are better IQ than m4/3rds...

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 11:14:32 No.3749281 Report

Quoted By:

>>3749275
"Overpriced" and "limited" are completely different categories compared to "worthwhile for the purpose".
Meanwhile, I even recommend people to consider a cell phone instead of cameras if they are not fully committed to photography.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 13:19:51 No.3749301 Report

Quoted By:

>>3749049
next model will have 6 cameras

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 434E2A77-148D-4FC3-899E-92CB0402 (...).jpg, 248KiB, 1242x692

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 13:56:20 No.3749315 Report

Quoted By: >>3749342

>>3749049
Lol how much better is it than the one I’m using rn? Because this one isn’t impressive at all compared to even my EOS RP.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 14:04:39 No.3749319 Report

Quoted By:

Did apply just invent xperia 1 ii?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 14:12:07 No.3749322 Report

Quoted By:

>>3749277
>they are better IQ than m4/3rds...
implying that means anything at all. m4/3rds is a trash format

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 14:20:09 No.3749328 Report

Quoted By: >>3749466

>>3749049
Why is it an attack on it, iphone cameras ARE mirrorless.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 15:03:38 No.3749342 Report

Quoted By:

>>3749315
Got the same, it's actually impressive compared to other normie phones and lagdroids, but against a mirrorless it's a toy.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 15:52:38 No.3749370 Report

Quoted By:

>>3749049
Looked up some test shots they're kinda almost as good as my g5x but not really plus I can't seem to find any sites that let you open up the image in full. if anything p&s might need too look out in like 5 years or more

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 17:21:08 No.3749458 Report

Quoted By:

>>3749049
haha 8 year old dslr go *clack clack clack*

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 17:35:10 No.3749466 Report

Quoted By:

>>3749328
>being this pedantic

You’re gonna go far anon I can just feel it

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 19:00:43 No.3749494 Report

Quoted By: >>3753322

>”omg! The latest iPhone has the best camera ever!!!”
And yet, it never works out that way. They show choice photos edited by the best Photoshop and Lightroom experts paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to make you think they’re great, but let’s be honest, iPhones are convenient tools and nothing more. My 70s film SLR takes pictures that are worlds better. Not to mention my R6. These articles are nothing but puff pieces to get normies and gadgetfags hyped for the newest phone “drop” so they can load Snapchat 0.1 seconds faster to take the same shitty selfie or sunset pic, again.

Come back in 10-15 years, but by then mirrorless will have improved too, so it’s moot. GTFO. Imagine being scared by a camera phone, you fucking consoomer, stop doing their marketing for them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 19:04:22 No.3749497 Report

Quoted By: >>3749503 >>3753623

>>3749081
the fingerprints dont do shit just as scratched lens dont do shit on your DSLR

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 19:18:22 No.3749503 Report

Quoted By: >>3749677 >>3753623

>>3749497
I get awful blooming on my phone's camera unless I wipe it with my sleeve before shooting

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 21:31:18 No.3749564 Report

Quoted By:

The camera on the iPhone could be gearwise, better than the most expensive and best precision hasselblad or leica in existence.

But it will never excuse the fact that the people using iPhones are immature toddlers with no feel for lighting, framing, and composition.

The best tool is only as good as the person using it. We humans are quickly becoming the lowest common denominator.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2020 22:12:34 No.3749581 Report

Quoted By: >>3749793

>>3749049
mirrorless cameras come in APS-C, 35mm Full Frame, and (nearly) Medium format sensor sizes

I just don't see how such an incredibly tiny sensor with insanely tiny photo sites will ever hope to compete with mirrorless sensors that have absolutely massive photo sites by comparison. And the more pixel they add to phone sensor, the smaller each photo site becomes, it's just so much lose-lose. You're not capturing an image. You're generating an image that the phone's image processor thinks you took. This is mad.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2020 01:42:42 No.3749669 Report

Quoted By: >>3749764

>>3749049
Professional photography is NOT about the gear. When I was a working pro, the joke was:
Q: What's the difference between an amateur and a professional?
A: The amateurs have much better equipment
>so true

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2020 02:15:27 No.3749677 Report

Quoted By: >>3753623

>>3749503
Keep using your sleeve and you'll end up with PERMANENT blooming.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2020 08:47:08 No.3749764 Report

Quoted By:

>>3749669
I've got a 1300d and a spread of budget zoom lenses am I a pro now

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO FireShot Capture 048 - iPhone 4S (...).png, 369KiB, 670x557

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2020 09:39:31 No.3749773 Report

Quoted By: >>3749786 >>3749862 >>3750027

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2020 10:11:29 No.3749786 Report

Quoted By:

>>3749773
lmao

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2020 10:44:01 No.3749793 Report

Quoted By: >>3749864 >>3753320

>>3749581
>the smaller each photo site becomes, it's just so much lose-lose
this is where you are wrong, the closer photos sites get to the size of a single photon, the better image quality will become as there is less distortion and interference per photo site, if DSLR/MILC manufacturers used the same photo site size and density as mobile phones, their IQ would be exponentially better.. why don't they? oh they will, they just need to milk the consoomer so they trickle the tech improvements year on year

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO smug brainlet.png, 12KiB, 611x429

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2020 14:45:15 No.3749862 Report

Quoted By: >>3749936

>>3749773
> someone else made the argument before and was wrong
> therefore all future versions of the argument will be wrong forever
> argument doesn't need disproving on its own (dis)merits

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2020 14:46:39 No.3749864 Report

Quoted By:

>>3749793
Do you have a source for this claim? Ideally more than conspiracy theorizing

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2020 16:35:50 No.3749928 Report

Quoted By: >>3749969

I wonder how long will it take for AI filtered pictures from small sensors to look exact the same as a bigger FF camera with high quality glass. Not a lot, i guess.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO F36BE8CF-7811-470B-BCAC-C8F1087F (...).png, 433KiB, 420x410

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2020 16:58:44 No.3749936 Report

Quoted By: >>3749967

>>3749862
>it’s true this time, I swear you guys!
Son, the iPhone 12 Pro Max Ultra couldn’t even come close to a 2010 DSLR much less a 2020 mirrorless. Do yourself a favor, instead of standing in line for the latest iPhone drops and Hypebeast niggercore $500 shoes and shit, save up your money for a few years and get yourself a real camera you colossal faggot. You’re a fox trying to convince yourself you don’t care about the grapes but to the rest of us it’s painfully obvious.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2020 17:47:01 No.3749967 Report

Quoted By: >>3749989 >>3755919

>>3749936
> logical fallacy pointed out
> invents a projected persona at the other end of the line and calls it rude names
You sound really angry. Do you need to talk?

I didn't say shit about what camera I think is good or not good, just that pointing to previous variations of this argument (with a different phone!) doesn't disprove this one.

> the rest of us
We're all alone here, Son.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2020 17:51:05 No.3749969 Report

Quoted By:

>>3749928
It's just the matter of dof cameras. Once they get advanced enough to handle minute detail, you'll be able to perfectly mimic any kind of aperture.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2020 18:25:32 No.3749989 Report

Quoted By: >>3750007

>>3749967
You strawmanned his position into a logical fallacy. Guy who posted the 4s article simply showed that every year now this same argument comes out in web articles galore that the latest $1K Apple(tm) iPhone(tm) camera is totally giving the latest DSLR/mirrorless cameras a run for their money.

But in reality it wasn’t true in 2011, or 12, 13, 14... and it’s not true today.

Instead of defending blatantly false articles, come back down to earth and reality. Phones come nowhere close. Does it mean they won’t ever? No. But the onus is on you to prove it’s ever happened. Pro-tip: it hasn’t yet.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2020 19:05:24 No.3750007 Report

Quoted By: >>3750016

>>3749989
>You strawmanned his position into a logical fallacy
> it wasn’t true in 2011, or 12, 13, 14... and it’s not true today
No, that right there was the argument in its entirety. Not
> this article is wrong because x
just
> this article is wrong because other people have made it (again, with different, older phones) in the past

> No. But the onus is on you to prove it’s ever happened.
I'm not here to prove anything, sport. Other than the flaw in trying to argue against something by arguing against other things.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2020 19:31:51 No.3750016 Report

Quoted By: >>3753373

>>3750007
We’re all still waiting for evidence from you that today’s top tier phones come anywhere near close to even mid-tier mirrorless cameras from a couple years ago. (X100F for example.) Therefore his argument is perfectly valid and points out the dishonesty of the fake news media.

Why did you decide to die on this hill?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2020 20:14:24 No.3750027 Report

Quoted By: >>3750393

>>3749773
lol.
Imagine being a turd muncher who writes sharticles like this.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2020 10:54:22 No.3750352 Report

Quoted By: >>3750353

What’s the dof equivalent on these lenses vs full frame?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2020 11:05:21 No.3750353 Report

Quoted By:

>>3750352
like f/14 iirc

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2020 13:34:43 No.3750393 Report

Quoted By:

>>3750027
gotta generate them ad clicks somehow

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1BA5B400-21E1-49A8-A09F-EDBDE946 (...).jpg, 64KiB, 646x358

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 04:17:31 No.3753313 Report

Quoted By:

>Looks like photography is finished boys. Time to wrap it up.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 04:34:27 No.3753320 Report

Quoted By:

>>3749793
>the closer photos sites get to the size of a single photon
i want a cell phone camera that only captures shot noise

the tech to reduce photons from spilling over is out there already

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 04:37:23 No.3753322 Report

Quoted By:

>>3749494
>it’s moot
it's chinks now

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 07:16:57 No.3753373 Report

Quoted By: >>3753667

>>3750016
>We’re all still waiting for evidence from you
Why? Why does pointing out a logical fallacy in an argument make me an ambassador for the opposite? I don't really care whether the latest slab gizmo is as good as mirrorless.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 07:28:52 No.3753374 Report

Quoted By:

I know it's all marketing bs, but qrd on deep fusion technology?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1595375712079.jpg, 1MiB, 1696x1500

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 14:36:42 No.3753527 Report

Quoted By: >>3753577 >>3753625 >>3753672

All their test shots are carefully engineered for the best looking result. Real world results are far worse.

I have an iPhone 12 Pro and it looks like a typical smartphone camera. A small part of me was naively hopeful about the 52mm equivalent "telephoto" lens offering a better option for cell phone snapshots with a more standard lens perspective than the typical wide angle phone camera. Instead, I realize that it basically looks like you took a wide angle photo and cropped it, because the quality is typical cell phone quality.

"Serious attack on mirrorless cameras." What a joke.

Here's a comparison. I took a snapshot the other day of some food with the iPhone 12 Pro and my a7iii. 52mm equivalent on the iPhone 12 Pro and 55mm on the Sony. First the iPhone photo...

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1591906526710.jpg, 2MiB, 2293x1500

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 14:37:48 No.3753528 Report

Quoted By: >>3753577 >>3753578 >>3753581 >>3753597 >>3753628 >>3753642 >>3753651

...then the a7iii photo. The iPhone photo is SOOC with a crop and resize to 1500px short edge. The Sony photo is RAW minimally auto adjusted for exposure and white and black point by Capture One Pro, with slight sharpening, exported to 1500px short edge.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 16:29:34 No.3753577 Report

Quoted By:

>>3753527
>>3753528
Absolutely laughable. I can even tell the massive difference instantly on my tiny phone screen lmfao.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 16:31:12 No.3753578 Report

Quoted By: >>3753579

>>3753528
You're eating to much, anon.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 16:35:02 No.3753579 Report

Quoted By: >>3753611

>>3753578
I hope you're joking

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1604327868811.jpg, 36KiB, 340x239

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 16:47:59 No.3753581 Report

Quoted By:

>>3753528
>all that fat
>chromatic aberrations everywhere
>eating like a pig on next to a screen

Are sonyfags all like that?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 17:17:28 No.3753597 Report

Quoted By: >>3753603

>>3753528
Dynamic range is definitely better on the sony, especially the highlights.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 17:22:10 No.3753603 Report

Quoted By: >>3753604

>>3753597
Dude, you can't possibly evaluate dynamic range on that image. op has a thin stripe of meat in focus on mirrorless. That's the only part you could use in comparison.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 17:25:30 No.3753604 Report

Quoted By:

>>3753603
Holy shit he thinks that matters lol

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 17:33:03 No.3753611 Report

Quoted By:

>>3753579
Nah, this is way too much for one meal.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 17:57:25 No.3753623 Report

Quoted By:

>>3749497
Retarded nigger.

>>3749503
Based triple digit IQ with good vision.

>>3749677
Shut the fuck up.

>>3749081
It ain't that hard, desu.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 18:01:08 No.3753625 Report

Quoted By: >>3753662

>>3753527
Post both RAWs.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 18:04:36 No.3753628 Report

Quoted By:

>>3753528
where are the veggies!

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 18:37:39 No.3753642 Report

Quoted By: >>3753689

>>3753528
Too blurry. Stop down that aperture bro.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 18:45:32 No.3753651 Report

Quoted By:

>>3753528
> Mirrorless is better because muh shallow DoF
I see that all meat diet is working wonders on your cognitive abilities

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 19:00:07 No.3753662 Report

Quoted By: >>3753668

>>3753625
Here you go.

Sony raw:
https://mega.nz/file/BE4mEBBY#oonaB1WixzrWT5WV8mBh3usb_vjy0dDC-5rc4YBHWTw

iPhone original:
https://mega.nz/file/wJhgATTY#LU9LTnudvNjkh1ZIhrW6rkt1Ioo_dLGXjmQgOCpZvQM

iPhone JPG (converted by the phone):
https://mega.nz/file/cJgEGL7Y#wQrk7Y5rc53DpiAzsa_SdRiVHn49Lcp6yrWl_r6asic

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 19:09:54 No.3753667 Report

Quoted By:

>>3753373
Pointing out a logical fallacy to discredit the whole argument is in itself a fallacy.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 19:10:06 No.3753668 Report

Quoted By: >>3753669

>>3753662
>HEIC
Do you not get actual raws from the iphone? HEIC isn't raw.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 19:11:12 No.3753669 Report

Quoted By: >>3753671

>>3753668
You don't get actual RAWs from the iPhone, no. You can download apps that will capture DNGs I think, but the stock camera app does not do that.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 19:14:31 No.3753671 Report

Quoted By: >>3753689

>>3753669
Damn.
Your A7 photo isn't great because bokeh meme and the lens isn't great (bad abberation when wide open) but the quality is 10000x better than the iShit. Night and day difference between the bone texture.

iPhone shot literally looks like it's made of fucking wax or something. Disgusting.
It should be illegal to call phone shots photographs. They're simply not true to life at all.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 19:16:49 No.3753672 Report

Quoted By: >>3753686

>>3753527
my 8+ looks 10X better than this maybe you're just unaware.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 19:53:09 No.3753686 Report

Quoted By: >>3753780

>>3753672
>maybe you're just unaware
Huh? Unaware of what?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 20:00:08 No.3753689 Report

Quoted By:

>>3753642
>Too blurry. Stop down that aperture bro.
>>3753671
>Your A7 photo isn't great because bokeh meme and the lens isn't great (bad abberation when wide open)
Yeah, if I was going to take the picture again I'd stop down a bit. I just thought it looked cool and snapped a quick photo on both so I could compare them after eating.

With the color palette of this photo, you could just do a quick brush over the contrasty areas with chromatic aberrations and desaturate those colors. But there's no denying that they're there in the RAW, and Capture One's lens corrections didn't get rid of them.

>iPhone shot literally looks like it's made of fucking wax or something
Yeah. Basically every photo looks like that. Whatever processing is going on makes the photos have that sickly quality to them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 22:06:32 No.3753769 Report

Quoted By:

i recently got the new SE and was secretly hoping the camera would be as good as modern-day smartphone cameras are hyped up to be. truth is, it's not that good. My old pentax q-s1 by comparison takes insanely sharp, high quality photos.

Of course, my phone is the camera I have on me 100% of the time, whereas I have to make a conscious decision to take out the "proper" cameras, including charging the batteries beforehand.

Granted the SE is no 12, but I seriously doubt the camera on that is that much better. Also, no RAW shooting with the default camera app sucks since that's the camera you have access to from the lock screen. And let me tell you, that is a huge bonus, speeds up your ability to take a shot a lot.

I'm def looking into picking up a GRIII now because of my experience with this phone.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 22:16:28 No.3753780 Report

Quoted By: >>3753791

>>3753686
How to shoot lel

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 02 Nov 2020 22:34:52 No.3753791 Report

Quoted By:

>>3753780
Yeah, smartphone shooting is pretty hard. You got me.

CapS

CapS Sat 07 Nov 2020 04:30:35 No.3755919 Report

Quoted By:

>>3749967
Wow, that had yo hurt in the crybaby ass xD
Anyway, that argument has been valid (that apple is trash compared to proffesional cameras) 'til today.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches