Jump to content
Woodentop

A tip for phone-camera users

Recommended Posts

Similar to me GPS.

 

The Practica L then LLC.

 

Moved up to  a Canon A1 then an F1.

 

Downhill thereafter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Griff said:

Similar to me GPS.

 

The Practica L then LLC.

 

Moved up to  a Canon A1 then an F1.

 

Downhill thereafter.

 

Common sense steps in and you end up buying what you need rather than what you think you need.

 

It amuses me when I see people with very expensive DSLR's slung round their necks, and when you get in to conversation they have no idea what it can do as they just use "P" for everything, but the street cred they think it brings is worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am told the DSLR is old hat and Sony lead the market with full frame cameras today, however I don't have the money to change to mirror less camera at moment. Tried using phone, seem to end up with video instead of still.

 

See no point in 64 mega pixels, better to zoom in camera in the main to display photos they are reduced to around 2 mega pixel. But do want the ability to zoom in and use low light, plus record as 12 or 14 bit photos. So always shoot in RAW.

 

The phone I can only hold in two hands, the camera I used two hands and my head pressed onto  view finder and tuck arms in to steady the camera, or use a tripod. I also set view finder for my eye.

 

I will admit having a camera in the phone means always a camera ready, but self timer and tripod does better selfie than  any phone.

 

Good tip as to shutter release, all I need now is proper view finder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a camera user for longer than I can remember (way back in the middle 60's) I quite naturally use the Eye Level View Finder (EVF on a Fuji digital ) as one would have done with a conventional 35mm film camera.

 

The downside of using the digital screen on the back of the camera (Fuji FinePix S4500) is the potential for glare as is also the case with camera phones (no the anti-glare screens are a waste of time/money).

 

The use of the EVF screen is a considerable help in steadying the camera because of the close bodily contact as apposed to holding it out at arms length and experiencing a rather quite stressful shoot despite the anti-shake programmes that are built into many cameras.

 

My Nikon F-801's and Nikon F80's are somewhat heavy especially when equipped with telephoto lenses and both have the view finder system.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Beat this lot:

Kodak Brownie II box camera, Kodak Brownie 44a, Praktica Nova 1B, Praktica LTL, Nikon EM, Nikon FG

Nikon 301, Nikon 501

Then into digital:

Ricoh RR30*, Nikon D70s, Fuji JX400, Nikon D80 body, Nikon D7000 body, Sony HX5*, Lumix TZ30*, Lumix TZ70*, Lumix TZ80, Lumix FS50, Canon Ixus60, Olympus C3030,* Olympus C5050

Thrown in there in no particular order:

Mamiya 645*, Konica A4, Ricoh FF9, Yashica 124G, Olympus SP - there must be some more but memory fades!

Of all the film cameras in the first group I have only the C5050 and 501 left, all the others were traded in or in one case stolen. I have all of the digitals except those with asterisks of which the RR30 was the old one traded in - the others were either broken (fell off the car roof mainly) or went missing from my pocket (TZ70) or stolen (C3030 along with the 301.)

I traded in the 645 to get the F301, but I still have the others and they all work!

Edited by Woodentop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did the member insert a :blink: ?

What was confusing about my post other than I never mentioned Camera Phones other than in paragraph two when I stated the obvious that an awful lot of people really struggle with and spend good money on a resolve that does not work. 

  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AWanderingLancastrian said:

Why did the member insert a :blink: ?

What was confusing about my post other than I never mentioned Camera Phones other than in paragraph two when I stated the obvious that an awful lot of people really struggle with and spend good money on a resolve that does not work. 

 

Very +1 - which is where I started this thread!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the Medion from Aldi and find the camera hard to use the hints sound good on the  side button use but no settings as far as I can see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With my Sony Xperia the shutter button is on the top right and the volume is for zoom :mellow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 15/05/2019 at 15:54, ericmark said:

I am told the DSLR is old hat and Sony lead the market with full frame cameras today, however I don't have the money to change to mirror less camera at moment.

 

I have a DSLR, not mirrorless, but reports on mirrorless with electronic viewfinders (EVF) are that they are not yet the equal of optical viewfinders (OVF), so DSLRs are hardly old hat yet.  Some people report nausea with EVF, caused by a slight time lag perhaps.

 

However, I'm sure mirrorless/EVF will improve and prevail eventually, if only because they are cheaper to make (not reflected in Sony's prices though).  Sony have put their weight behind mirrorless and I believe their full frame cameras (and their APS cameras?) are now all mirrorless. Canon, Nikon and Pentax are the other full frame DSLR makers and still offer OVF; each brand has its advantages - Canon for sport and reportage, Nikon for general use, Pentax for landscape and architecture.

 

Canon are definitely the leaders in the share of the DSLR plus mirrorless market, with the rest trailing behind. Cynically, market share is in proportion to the volume of advertising and other forms of promotion (including paying for reviews).

Edited by Bolingbroke
Last paragraph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bolingbroke said:

 

I have a DSLR, not mirrorless, but reports on mirrorless with electronic viewfinders (EVF) are that they are not yet the equal of optical viewfinders (OVF), so DSLRs are hardly old hat yet.  Some people report nausea with EVF, caused by a slight time lag perhaps.

 

A couple of years ago that was the case, and the reason I held on the my Canon 750D, but that was certainly not the case with the Panasonic nor the new Canon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sony DSC H 400 bridge camera for me 63 zoom very easy to use.

Point auto focus(hold shutter half way down) and shoot.

https://www.sony.co.uk/electronics/cyber-shot-compact-cameras/dsc-h400

bought mine used £150.

Only drawback it drains batteries so I have 3(£10 on eBay) plus cheap separate charger.

I seldom use the big digital screen prefer the viewfinder.

Its great for getting those dots in the picture eg seals fishing boats sea eagles robins etc.

Bought as it had the most powerful on board zoom at the time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like Griff I was fed up with humping around a big bag full of accessories that were not all used on certain trips, so I bought a Panasonic Lumix FZ 200, well impressed mega zoom, now no need for various lenses, Last year I bought another Panasonic Lumix a TZ 70 with a viewfinder that fits into my pocket and goes everywhere with me, gone are the days of messed up shots due to camera shake, I still use my I phone 7 that has a camera that I am also pleased with

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ancell said:

Sony DSC H 400 bridge camera for me 63 zoom very easy to use.

Point auto focus(hold shutter half way down) and shoot.

https://www.sony.co.uk/electronics/cyber-shot-compact-cameras/dsc-h400

 

But only has a very small 1/2.3” sensor.

 

That was the problem I had when looking for my new compact, loads of expensive cameras but very few with a decent sized sensor.

 

The chart below shows the significant differences in size from a 1/2.3”  just up to a 1 inch sensor.

7765413A-B02B-4916-BD68-B9BFE13FC29A.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I knew about this and used it when a couple asked me to take their photograph in Venice recently. Don’t know which phone it was but the volume button I pressed rattled off a fast burst of shots, about a dozen I think. They didn’t mind but wonder if this is a menu setting on other phones. Can be handy eg to avoid blinkies, but a nuisance if unintended as it quickly eats up memory. 

10 minutes ago, Les Medes said:

Like Griff I was fed up with humping around a big bag full of accessories that were not all used on certain trips, so I bought a Panasonic Lumix FZ 200, well impressed mega zoom, now no need for various lenses, Last year I bought another Panasonic Lumix a TZ 70 with a viewfinder that fits into my pocket and goes everywhere with me, gone are the days of messed up shots due to camera shake, I still use my I phone 7 that has a camera that I am also pleased with

Ditto re the LUMIX FZ. I do a lot of close-up/macro photography and the Lumix has a useful post-focus feature that allows close ups with everything in focus.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/05/2019 at 15:46, Grandpa Steve said:

It amuses me when I see people with very expensive DSLR's slung round their necks, and when you get in to conversation they have no idea what it can do as they just use "P" for everything, but the street cred they think it brings is worth it.

Guilty as charged however our Canon DSLR only set us back £600 with the lens.  I am not that familiar with it as have only had it for about a year and do not use it very often.  For nearby shots I generally use the smartphone however for long distance shots I use the DSLR to bring the object into focus.  I feel out of place with it slung around my neck but have no alternative as use elbow crutches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No doubt it is an age thing, but I don't see much on a live view screen in bright daylight, and practically nothing if the sun is shining right on it.  Unfortunately digital compacts have more-or-less discontinued having viewfinders.  I might use my phone as a camera in an emergency (witness pictures after a car crash etc) but I would just have to point it in the gernal direction and hope for the best.

 

1 hour ago, Grandpa Steve said:

But only has a very small 1/2.3” sensor.

I thought that was a typo, but looking in DP review I found it means 6.17 x 4.55 mm.  How did they derive that notation?! But crikey that's tiny, and fitted in some bridge cameras that could easily accomodate larger sensors without making the body bigger.  That's a puzzle why, because there are technical reasons (rather complex I believe) why a larger sensor beats a smaller one, even with the same number of pixels or nominal resolution.

 

Early digital cameras had tiny sensors (often video camera types) as larger ones were prohibitively expensive to make. But as time went on, manufacturing improved and sensors up to APS size (the old film format, shown in Grandpa's post) became affordable.  Now "full frame" sensors (the old 24x36mm film format) are affordable at least to serious amateurs and one-man-business professionals, and the mega-expense market has moved on up to "medium format" digital (served by Fuji, Pentax, Hasselblad and newcomer Phase One). In fact a modern full frame digital camera is more the size and weight of an old 645 medium format camera.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm asking for advice on compact camera purchase in mt post of this morning if you can read and help please.

"Replacement compact camera advice."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/05/2019 at 09:04, Grandpa Steve said:

 

But only has a very small 1/2.3” sensor.

 

That was the problem I had when looking for my new compact, loads of expensive cameras but very few with a decent sized sensor.

 

The chart below shows the significant differences in size from a 1/2.3”  just up to a 1 inch sensor.

7765413A-B02B-4916-BD68-B9BFE13FC29A.jpeg

 

Problem is from what I can google full frame cameras cost £700-£3000 not including 63 zoom.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
39 minutes ago, ancell said:

 

Problem is from what I can google full frame cameras cost £700-£3000 not including 63 zoom.

 

Where did you find a full frame for £700? The cheapest I can find is the Nikon D750 for a bit over £1000 (without lens). The dearest would be a Nikon D5, the wrong side of £5k.

 

Add £300-£500 for a kit zoom lens, typically F4 28-120mm , or about £1000 for a better F2.8 24-70mm which has become a kind of standard lens among all the full frame makers. Not sure what you mean by a 63 zoom.

 

An APS format camera is the best compromise for many people, being considerably less bulky and pricey than FF, yet of equally high quality build, good size sensor, and still with a resolution beyond what most would ever need.

Edited by Bolingbroke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ancell said:

 

Problem is from what I can google full frame cameras cost £700-£3000 not including 63 zoom.

 

 

As I replied earlier, if you are printing photos up A2 then a 1 inch sensor is fine.

 

For anything lees or for viewing on a PC then a 1/2.3” sensor, which is more or less the standard for many compact and bridge cameras is absolutely fine.

 

You only need a full frame camera if you are producing images that would go on an advertising hoarding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bolingbroke said:

Where did you find a full frame for £700? The cheapest I can find is the Nikon D750 for a bit over £1000 (without lens). The dearest would be a Nikon D5, the wrong side of £5k.

 

Add £300-£500 for a kit zoom lens, typically F4 28-120mm , or about £1000 for a better F2.8 24-70mm which has become a kind of standard lens among all the full frame makers. Not sure what you mean by a 63 zoom.

 

An APS format camera is the best compromise for many people, being considerably less bulky and pricey than FF, yet of equally high quality build, good size sensor, and still with a resolution beyond what most would ever need.

 

My Sony Cybershot bridge camera has a 63 times magnification built in Carl Zeuss zoom lens.

Its very easy to use if a trifle bulky I leave it in the car so it’s always to hand.

I keep it in a compact camera case just open case turn on point and shoot.

I always use the viewfinder as the light usually renders the screen pretty useless.

The autofocus is pretty slow on full zoom which limits its use for anything moving faster than a fishing boat I have seldom found this a limiting factor for the photos I take.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read reviews that the new Huawei P30 Pro phone is the absolute bee's knees when it comes to photos and makes the Samsung S10 camera look old and obsolete?

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Durbanite said:

I have read reviews that the new Huawei P30 Pro phone is the absolute bee's knees when it comes to photos and makes the Samsung S10 camera look old and obsolete?

 

 

But still only uses a 1/1.7” sensor which if you carve up into 40Mp makes 40 very small image capturing  elements.

So whilst it makes a better phone camera than the rest it is no replacement for a proper camera. and as a positive it is still a bigger sensor than the 1/2.3” sensors used in many expensive compact and bridge cameras.

 

But again if all you want is to take snaps and print the odd 7x5 then its good enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Grandpa Steve said:

 

 

But still only uses a 1/1.7” sensor which if you carve up into 40Mp makes 40 very small image capturing  elements.

So whilst it makes a better phone camera than the rest it is no replacement for a proper camera. and as a positive it is still a bigger sensor than the 1/2.3” sensors used in many expensive compact and bridge cameras.

 

But again if all you want is to take snaps and print the odd 7x5 then its good enough.

 

That's true but many people (the majority?) are attracted (and fooled) by the phone camera's processing and particularly over saturation of colour (hated here!).  Attempting here (in this post) to get double figures of () and just made it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...