Why smartphones are killing compact cameras
Smartphones,mobile tech,Android,mobile photography,mobile,iPhone
Read the article:
Check out ~~our favorite stuff on Amazon:
Download the Android Authority App:
Listen to our Podcast:
—————————————————-
Stay connected to Android Authority:
-
-
-
-
—
Follow the Team:
David Imel:
Ryan Thomas:
Adam Molina:
Joe Hindy:
Gary Sims:
Kris Carlon:
Adam Sinicki:
Bailey Stein:
Jimmy Westenberg:
#smartphones #killing #compact #cameras
Wow this video is really terrible.….. This “reviewer” probably used a camera that isnt a smartphone for the first time in his life.…
But smartphone camera can’t zoom as well as digital cam point and shoot.so how would it kill ?
The images from phone are already heavily processed by software, which can be bad or good, depending of what you want. The phones leaves you a little room for post processing (even in RAW). Straight from the camera, the phones can beat even the low entry DSLR / mirrorless, but with post processing software, the cameras easily beats the phone. Also, this is applied to high end compacts vs DSLR. But, still, that is no excuse for such underexposed photos from a compact camera, a camera that was designed to do things easier. It also costs a lot of money for the performance you get. This is not about Sony, all the premium cameras are about the same. At least they should develop a better auto mode, comparable to the smartphones, and leave the PASM as it is today. In these days you have anything you need from a premium compact camera (and even more), on a smartphone, that can be cheaper than the premium compact. You have ultra wide camera, standard angle camera with bright aperture (26mm / 1.5 — 1.8 etc), and even tele A strong image processing in a device that you carry with you all day. For me that sounds like all ingredients to a perfect camera companion, when you don’t want to carry your big APS‑C / FF camera with you. This is why compacts will vanish.
Really bad comparison! There are almost no point-and-shoot cameras sold anymore. The RX100 certainly is not a P&S camera. It’s an advanced camera that just so happens to be small and handy. Hell you can get a DSLR kit for the price of an RX100! The smartphone IS the new P&S camera.
I still use those, and I got them all second hand, mostly not even opened by the owners.. They bought them years ago and then used their smartphones.. Got them super cheap and I am happy
Smartphones donot have the perfect background blur bcoz they use software to blur the bg but camera has natural background blur
Can you give me your camera 😁😂😂
I still use my Sony compact cameras, they zoom way better than my iPhone 5s
The conclusion is get a 1 inch sensor point and shoot if you will shoot raw and take the camera always with you . If you will shoot Jpeg (other than Fujifilm camera’s which use bigger aps‑c sensor) and you are not a pro buy a phone with a good camera.
DSLR camera
MRL camera
Still no1
BTW fck smart phone photographer that busy body at wedding and birthday party if they think they can make good photo people don’t pay photographer… distraction fungus 💩💩
11 months ago phones were walking all over compact cameras.. Today they’re all over bridge cameras… DSLRs aren’t safe..
Business Opportunity in Ruvol
I have invented a Board Game [still unpublished and not yet out in the market] that I believe is guaranteed to be as challenging and exciting as CHESS. I called it “RUVOL.”
It is my hope that one day Ruvol may surpass chess as the “Number One Board Game in the World.”
The weakness of chess is it always starts in fixed positions that the opening moves become “memorizable.” In fact, not a few have so mastered the moves that they can play against their opponents “blindfolded.” It is for this very reason that the great Bobby Fischer introduced his so-called “Fischer Random Chess,” where the starting position of the pieces is “randomized” to make the memorization of openings impracticable. Fortunately, it is also for this reason that I invented Ruvol where “every game” has been calculated to be a challenging one to play.
HOW IS RUVOL PLAYED and HOW YOU CAN MONETIZE IT?
I detailed everything in my YouTube video. Here is the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcqth0m3-R0
BIG MONEY POTENTIAL IN RUVOL!
It is worthwhile to note that the people who play chess will be the same people who will play Ruvol. In my Google search, I learned there are around 800 million chess players in the world. Even just a small percentage of these 800 million is good enough to earn big money from Ruvol either as an ONLINE GAME BUSINESS or as a PHYSICAL PRODUCT DISTRIBUTOR.
You may contact me at: rodolfovitangcol@gmail.com.
Thanks and God bless!
RODOLFO MARTIN VITANGCOL
The Ruvol Inventor
If you are serious about photography you will always use a camera and NOT a smartphone.
Smartphones are toys that will be extinct in a few years.
the problem is most people don’t know how to take good pictures with their phone. you’ll never get rid of professional quality cameras…
they still sell gpses, cameras, music players, video players and portable game consoles, calculators, watches, calendars, daily planners and fit bits. most people don’t replace their tv every 2 years, and for the same reason they won’t be willing to throw away their camera every 2 years (unless all they use it for is stupid selfies for social media). imagine having to buy a clunky phone and a contract every time you wanted to use one of those devices…
pixel 4 lookss much better…
Just get a smartphone and if you take photography seriously, get an interchangeable lens camera whether it’s a mirrorless camera or a dslr.
you did mention raw but forgot to show what that looks like on all 3 of them, i bet the result would be shocking, ai does a great job hiding the flaws of those tiny sensors, would be fun to see how even an old rx100 raw image looks in comparison to the latest high end phones, and also the video can be shot on manual mode on compact cameras unlike phones which also makes a huge difference in low light situations
Rx100 range all good used it for 5 years now great quality
Went on vacation for nearly two months to Spain and all I had is a iphone 11 and a Canon powershot s110 for zoom. That’s all I need and yes I am a photographer and have my dslrs but you don’t want 2 to 3 pounds of gear around your neck.
the comparison is irrelevant. point and shoots are not dying because any kind of technical advancement, or because phones are surpassing them in quality, because I assure you, they’re not, lol. phone pictures are only good for Instagram and the web, and not much else. they are dying because because they’re running out of use cases and just the convenience of always having a phone with a decent enough camera on you at all times. the use case of a point and shoot was to provide a cheaper entry point for photography, or for photographers to have a camera with them at all times, and phones actively serve both of those needs. add on to that, that the used mirrorless market and them allowing you access a whole new world of cheap vintage lenses has made getting into photography extremely affordable, if you wanted the cheaper entry point to get into photography, you would just take that one.
You could have set AUTO HDR in Sony’s RX100. You only have to set this one time, so it is practically still auto/point and shoot.
I recently took some photos with my iPhone and my Powershot g1x mark iii, and the roll off of the bokeh was much better with my point and shoot. There was a lot of elements that would make the portrait mode look terrible on the iPhone. And in post, I was able to get great dynamic range.
Not exactly a fair comparison. The point and shoot is from 2015! Wished that you used a more modern point and shoot. But then again, companies like Canon are getting really lazy nowadays. Their last released cheaper PowerShot, the PowerShot SX740 HS was released in 2018. 4 years ago!
Smartphone cameras are weak cameras with processing already heavily applied.
Any real photographer who has ever edited an image would know that the dynamic range on real camera blows any phone out of the water easily, zoom in and see how noisier the shadows and how blown out highlights on phones are.
In terms of zoom range, phones almost always switch to a smaller, far weaker sensor for zoom, crop in on the RX and its game over.
Bokeh on phones, even at their best, is still a joke. Making the background blurrier because thats what full frame cameras do just isnt possible, the bokeh in this video is just gaussian blur with some ball outlines. The sony’s bokeh is smooth and realistic.
Most important of all, ergonomics. I can carry an RX100 all day in my hand and feel confident that my composition, my exposure and my operation is precise.
All in all, with a good eye, a real photographer would always be able to make an RX stretch its legs further than any smartphone ever could, and yes, I believe an experienced photographer could a use an RX100 1st gen to make image that would stomp the iphone 13 pro max, full stop.
Your review misses the forced evolution of compact cameras entirely. Today’s compact cameras aren’t being marketed as point and shoot cameras — they are being pitched as DLSR level performance in a pocketable form factor. The cannibalisation of the market by smartphones have culled the simpler, “dumb” point and shoot cameras and forced the more functional survivors to become more professional and pivot towards “proper photography” to survive.
Today’s compact cameras are basically pocketable bridge cameras that are almost as capable as DSLR and mirrorless lens cameras and the intended audience are the professional and amateur photographers who want to have something pocketable when they aren’t carrying a kit or want a backup/secondary camera. This new market is smaller but also much higher margin where customers are willing to pay much more. Pretty much all of the big players are back in the game for compact cameras (Sony RX100, Canon G5/7/9X, Leica Q2, Panasonic LX100, Fuji X100 etc. etc.).
The gap is not closing — you are stuck with fixed focal lengths, a lack of aperture control as well as plastic lens elements instead of glass. Even if the sensor sizes reach parity, the lack of real-estate prevents anywhere close to the same functionality for the intended audience.
The audience appreciate the focal lengths, variable apertures and the manual controls — as well as the need to digitally develop the photos on lightroom or photoshop to get the most out of their snaps. — as well as the need to digitally develop the photos on lightroom or photoshop to get the most out of their snaps.
We are also seeing another stage of the evolution as the social media boom has led to adoption of what used to be stills first cameras as vloging devices — compact cameras are starting to become video first and photography second.
Here’s why I think this video nails it:
Yes, you can get more out of the point and shoot RAW files… In *post*. But that’s not how your average amateur photographer uses cameras. And people who know how to process RAW are generally not using compact point-and-shoots at all anyway, they reach for interchangeable lenses.
This video asks the question: how well do point and shoots, with years of development for providing a good image in auto, stand up to a phone camera? And they don’t do well, which is why compact cameras are dying a pretty rapid death. (And keep in mind, those phones can shoot in RAW as well).