# Who says mobile phones are not digital still camera's?



## chirantha7777 (Feb 13, 2013)

The above was taken with a Samsung GT-i9100 Galaxy S2 mobile phone using a Back-lit CMOS sensor at 8.0MP. I asked the Nikon Photo competition if they would allow it. And they just said "NO!"... I submitted it anyway


----------



## tirediron (Feb 13, 2013)

I don't know that anyone did; they certainly are, just not very qood quality ones (relative to a DSLR).  Not sure what the point of entering the image is if you have already been told that it's inadmissable...


----------



## chirantha7777 (Feb 13, 2013)

You won't get change if you don't ask for it


----------



## Usul (Feb 13, 2013)

Nobody says you can't take an interesting photo with your phone camera. But in most light conditions it don't allow you to take technicaly good photo.  I've never seen good cell photos at tricky condition in most cases they was made outside at clear sunny days  (like your one). I saw here a lot of very good photos taken with P&S or cell phone cameras but in the same time they could be done better with DSLR or they couldn't be done eather if the the light conditions wasn't so good.

P.S. Nice shoot. If you have oportunity to photograph such landscapes do it with DSLR.


----------



## chirantha7777 (Feb 14, 2013)

Usul said:


> Nobody says you can't take an interesting photo with your phone camera. But in most light conditions it don't allow you to take technicaly good photo.  I've never seen good cell photos at tricky condition in most cases they was made outside at clear sunny days  (like your one). I saw here a lot of very good photos taken with P&S or cell phone cameras but in the same time they could be done better with DSLR or they couldn't be done eather if the the light conditions wasn't so good.
> 
> P.S. Nice shoot. If you have oportunity to photograph such landscapes do it with DSLR.



These layouts don't last for a long time, at most 60 seconds because of the upper wind. So by the time I take out the camera from a bag and set up for the shot, the shot will be long gone! Also DSLR's are easy to break and expensive to repair and odd to carry. Which is why a good mobile camera is really important.


----------



## Light Guru (Feb 14, 2013)

chirantha7777 said:


> Usul said:
> 
> 
> > Nobody says you can't take an interesting photo with your phone camera. But in most light conditions it don't allow you to take technicaly good photo.  I've never seen good cell photos at tricky condition in most cases they was made outside at clear sunny days  (like your one). I saw here a lot of very good photos taken with P&S or cell phone cameras but in the same time they could be done better with DSLR or they couldn't be done eather if the the light conditions wasn't so good.
> ...



And cell phones aren't easy to break?  

NOBODY  ever said mobile phones are not "digital still camera's" like your subject line says. They have a digital camera sensor in then and so by the very definition of a "digital still camera" yes they are one. 

What people DO say is that cell phone cameras are limited, in what they can do and in what conditions they will produce a decent image.


----------



## chirantha7777 (Feb 14, 2013)

Light Guru said:


> chirantha7777 said:
> 
> 
> > Usul said:
> ...


Yes they are! 

They can survive a drop. 
They have cases that protect them from big falls. 
They have scratch resistant glass
They are thinner than DSLR's and pocket camera
They have neat pouches that clip on the belt
They are more resistant to extreme weather/moisture
They are less heavy/less form factor
Person carrying a mobile phone is a normal thing whilst carrying a big DSLR and/or a bulging pocket camera is a bit of a issue and not a normal thing you see on the road.


----------



## Usul (Feb 14, 2013)

If you are satisfied with quality of your cell photos so go on and use it. Personaly I rather will carry my 'heavy' DSLR than take pictures what I don't like.


----------



## chirantha7777 (Feb 14, 2013)

I'm not at all satisfied with the low light quality of mobile phones. However what I'm saying is that there are certain times that you can just get away with the mobile phone for that beautiful shot.


----------



## chirantha7777 (Feb 14, 2013)

Both of the above taken with my Samsung Galaxy S2 (GT-i9100). Screw the Nikon photo competition!
EDIT: Btw, these are UNTOUCHED photo's from the phone.


----------



## Benco (Feb 14, 2013)

chirantha7777 said:


> Usul said:
> 
> 
> > Nobody says you can't take an interesting photo with your phone camera. But in most light conditions it don't allow you to take technicaly good photo.  I've never seen good cell photos at tricky condition in most cases they was made outside at clear sunny days  (like your one). I saw here a lot of very good photos taken with P&S or cell phone cameras but in the same time they could be done better with DSLR or they couldn't be done eather if the the light conditions wasn't so good.
> ...




You'll find that a DSLR user would not be in that position, if there's a good photo in the offing the camera will be out, with an appropraite lens on and set ready for the conditions. When I'm out and about I like to have my camera ready to capture images of birds on the wing and it's perectly capable of going from switch on-up to eye-adjust exposure-focus-shoot in time to get the shot I want, DSLRs are _not_ slow.

If mobile phone cameras are your thing then cool, go with it. I'm pretty sure you'll not convince a DSLR user that a phone is better though.


----------



## chirantha7777 (Feb 14, 2013)

Benco said:


> chirantha7777 said:
> 
> 
> > Usul said:
> ...


Ofcourse not! DSLR's are much better (I own a D5100, SB-900, P7000 etc).  BUT that doesn't mean photo's taken with a good camera phone should be  turned down from Nikon and its photo competitions!  My photo's prove exactly that!


----------



## ralphh (Feb 14, 2013)

chirantha7777 said:


> Usul said:
> 
> 
> > Nobody says you can't take an interesting photo with your phone camera. But in most light conditions it don't allow you to take technicaly good photo.  I've never seen good cell photos at tricky condition in most cases they was made outside at clear sunny days  (like your one). I saw here a lot of very good photos taken with P&S or cell phone cameras but in the same time they could be done better with DSLR or they couldn't be done eather if the the light conditions wasn't so good.
> ...



I don't know what you do with your DSLRs, but I've owned DSLRs for nearly 10 year and I've never broken one yet.  I do agree they're a pain to carry - I carry the camera only if i'm going out specifically to take photos.  

I went over to m43 briefly to try to carry a camera with me all the time, but you still need a camera bag, it's just lighter, so came back to DSLRs.  I do agree that a good phone camera is nice to have, but something like a Canon s95 fits in a jeans pocket just as easily, and takes much better pictures.  A phone is always with you though...


----------



## Benco (Feb 14, 2013)

chirantha7777 said:


> Benco said:
> 
> 
> > chirantha7777 said:
> ...



Did they give you a reason why they rejected your photo?


----------



## chirantha7777 (Feb 14, 2013)

Benco said:


> chirantha7777 said:
> 
> 
> > Benco said:
> ...



Question :


> Hello,
> 
> I have taken some beautiful photos using my galaxy s2 gt-I9100 phone  which has a 8Mp backlit Cmos sensor camera. Can I submit those to the  competition?
> Thank you,
> Chirantha


Answer :


> Dear Mr.Chirantha,
> 
> Thank you for your inquiry.
> 
> ...


----------



## sm4him (Feb 14, 2013)

chirantha7777 said:


> Light Guru said:
> 
> 
> > And cell phones aren't easy to break?
> ...



And yet, the percentage of cell phone users I know who have irreparably damaged their phones is MUCH higher than the percentage of DSLR owners I know who have irreparably damaged their cameras.



chirantha7777 said:


> Benco said:
> 
> 
> > chirantha7777 said:
> ...



So, this whole thing is just because you're ticked off that Nikon said your camera phone wasn't an "official" digital still camera. It's their contest, their rules. They can include, or exclude, any type of cameras they want to. They may have worded it a bit poorly, but it's still their right to say "yea" or "nay".  I'm more surprised that they allow non-Nikon cameras than I am that they *don't* allow cell phone pics.  I wouldn't get all twisted up about it--none of the pictures you've posted here were in any danger of winning anyway. They're pretty snapshots, but they are just nothing special and wouldn't have held up against some of the truly spectacular stuff a Nikon photo competition is likely to get.


----------



## runnah (Feb 14, 2013)

If it doesn't use film, its not a proper camera.


----------



## Benco (Feb 14, 2013)

runnah said:


> If it doesn't use film, its not a proper camera.



Film? hah! if it doesn't use plates it's not a proper camera. :mrgreen:


----------



## ClickAddict (Feb 14, 2013)

sm4him said:


> ....
> And yet, the percentage of cell phone users I know who have irreparably damaged their phones is MUCH higher than the percentage of DSLR owners I know who have irreparably damaged their cameras.



Not saying a phone is a better camera, but this argument misses a key point.  If people carried their DSLRs on them 24/7 like they do their phones, I'm betting you'd see a MUCH higher percentage of damaged cameras.


----------



## jake337 (Feb 14, 2013)

ClickAddict said:


> sm4him said:
> 
> 
> > ....
> ...



No.

They have camera straps and camera bags for a reason.


----------



## jake337 (Feb 14, 2013)

Benco said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > If it doesn't use film, its not a proper camera.
> ...



If it has a lens instead of just a pinhole it's not a proper camera! :lmao:


----------



## jake337 (Feb 14, 2013)

chirantha7777 said:


> I'm not at all satisfied with the low light quality of mobile phones. However what I'm saying is that there are certain times that you can just get away with the mobile phone for that beautiful shot.



Well of course!  If you plan on keeping your prints small or only sharing online.


----------



## jake337 (Feb 14, 2013)

Usul said:


> Nobody says you can't take an interesting photo with your phone camera. But in most light conditions it don't allow you to take technicaly good photo.  I've never seen good cell photos at tricky condition in most cases they was made outside at clear sunny days  (like your one). I saw here a lot of very good photos taken with P&S or cell phone cameras but in the same time they could be done better with DSLR or they couldn't be done eather if the the light conditions wasn't so good.
> 
> P.S. Nice shoot. If you have oportunity to photograph such landscapes do it with DSLR.



It all depends on the cell phone being used.   I love my HTC One S!  It's there in a pinch when I don't have my D90 or FM2.  That being said I would still rather use my D90 or FM2, lol.  As I do love the shot below I would love to retake with my DSLR and some proper off camera lighting!


----------



## sm4him (Feb 14, 2013)

ClickAddict said:


> sm4him said:
> 
> 
> > ....
> ...



I wasn't making that argument in regards to the entire debate, just THIS point:




chirantha7777 said:


> These layouts don't last for a long time, at most 60 seconds because of the upper wind. So by the time I take out the camera from a bag and set up for the shot, the shot will be long gone! *Also DSLR's are easy to break* and expensive to repair and odd to carry. Which is why a good mobile camera is really important.



I'd just contend that a DSLR is NOT easier to break than a cell phone--harder in fact, because cell phones are not really built to last.


----------



## jake337 (Feb 14, 2013)

sm4him said:


> ClickAddict said:
> 
> 
> > sm4him said:
> ...




I've shattered 3 phones gorilla glass screens in the past 8 months......

All from falls that were less than 12 inches.....


----------



## Buckster (Feb 14, 2013)

chirantha7777 said:


> Benco said:
> 
> 
> > chirantha7777 said:
> ...


They can have any rules they want, whether you like it or not.



chirantha7777 said:


> My photo's prove exactly that!


No.  Sorry to be blunt, but they do not.  Your photos are not competition-worthy.  They are boring and trite and banal, and deletion would be easy and painless for nearly anyone here.


----------



## ralphh (Feb 15, 2013)

chirantha7777 said:


> My photo's prove exactly that!



To me the prove they opposite - they show why Nikon don't want entries from camera phones - they don't want millions of identical photos of the sea from everyone that's been to the beach and had their phone with them.  I'm not saying your photos are terrible, but I'm pretty sure everyone at the beach that day with a camera phone could take something similar -- ok, yours shows some considderation to rules of composition with the horison 1/3rd of the way up, rather than across the middle, but really, that's not going to make it a winner.

You've got to remember that every entry needs to be looked at, however briefly, which takes manpower, which costs money.  Opening it up to everyone that owns a camera phone and can point it at the sea / their girlfriend / famous local landmark would probably cost them a fortune to go through.    Every photo they look at that isn't a winner if effectively a waste of time, so why open it up to huge numbers of non-winners, the majority of who aren't going to be 'photographers' (pro or hobby) and will have no clue at all?

Imagine every person in london (just over 8 million) sending them near identical, unimaginative photos of tower bridge, and everyone in NY (also just over 8 million) sending them near idendical unimaginative photos of the empire state building, repeat for every large population centre with some famous landmarks.....  it'd cost them a fortune, and the suicide rate amongst judges would staggering!


----------



## .SimO. (Feb 15, 2013)

Cell phone cameras are definitely convenient and a very small few are worth admiring over.  And Nikon most likely declined your entry to politely tell you your photo sucks... j/k.


----------



## Canuk (Feb 15, 2013)

Just an interesting side note. Has anyone seen pics printed from a cell phone capture?

Yesterday, I was at the local camera store and asked the owner if he had anyone that got some phone pics printed. Luckily he had and he allowed me to see them. The photos were only printed 8 x 10, all 3 of the pics were soft and almost pixelated at that small size. 

I do use my iPhone to take snaps or use it for work when I need to show something quickly for approval, I work in the oil patch so my work has nothing to do with photography. I personally have no delusions of my iPhone being a proper camera that I can use for proper photographic purposes. Images that look good on the web do not necessarily look good in print.


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 15, 2013)

OP,

Since even low end point and shoots will outperform the average phone camera (Image Quality)... I would much prefer a low end point and shoot to any Phone Camera!

Since ANY DSLR will far outperform any Point and Shoot... I would always take the DSLR over a point and shoot.

If size and convenience are more important to you than Image Quality, fine.. use your phone! But don't expect it to win any contests with competent judging, when competing with images from DSLR's. 

I am sure there are contests for phone images out there... I would suggest those. I am sure that Mattel, Hasbro or somebody will sponsor one......


----------



## cgipson1 (Feb 15, 2013)

jake337 said:


> Usul said:
> 
> 
> > Nobody says you can't take an interesting photo with your phone camera. But in most light conditions it don't allow you to take technicaly good photo.  I've never seen good cell photos at tricky condition in most cases they was made outside at clear sunny days  (like your one). I saw here a lot of very good photos taken with P&S or cell phone cameras but in the same time they could be done better with DSLR or they couldn't be done eather if the the light conditions wasn't so good.
> ...



Nice image... this would be worth duplicating with a DSLR!


----------



## CrossHypus (Feb 16, 2013)

The're shot by a low-priced Chinese-made smart phone,what do you think of the picture quality.


----------



## ralphh (Feb 17, 2013)

I think they're so small that picture quality is almost irrelevant.. All you can see at this size is composition and colours


----------



## CrossHypus (Feb 17, 2013)

ralphh said:


> I think they're so small that picture quality is almost irrelevant.. All you can see at this size is composition and colours



These are 100% crops.


----------



## ralphh (Feb 17, 2013)

well first off, they can't be 100% crops unless your originals were verily heavily cropped - at 664 pixels wide your crops should be showing 1/5th of the frame in each dimension, not nearly half as you have an 8mp camera in that phone, secondly, while they're not bad for a camera phone, they're far worse than any DSLR 

a 100% 664px crop should show about this much (but bigger, obviously)


----------



## Mully (Feb 17, 2013)

I find it amusing that some people enter a contest that has rules then try to bend the rules to suit there own agenda .... why bother enter at all.... find a cell phone photo contest instead


----------



## CrossHypus (Feb 17, 2013)

1)The originals of first and the third picture are cropped in order to show macro effects.
2)I never say that a cell phone is better than or comparable to the DSLR. 
3)If you print them out in 4R size, 'Far worse' is inaccurate.
4)A photo with good picture quality doesn't mean that it is a good shot. I think we all talking about whether a cell phone can take a good shot rather than with picture quality or not. As jack337's photo, it may not with good picture quality, but it impress others. So do you think good picture quality is really so much important in a photo?


----------



## Cation (Mar 6, 2013)

My cellphone camera is the one that we use to capture special moments and scenery. I'm quite happy with the results of the photo clear and crisp. But I would not mind getting a DSLR as a birthday present


----------



## o hey tyler (Mar 25, 2013)

chirantha7777 said:


> Yes they are!
> 
> They can survive a drop. - So can a DSLR
> They have cases that protect them from big falls. - So do DSLRs
> ...



.


----------



## runnah (Mar 25, 2013)

If I ever need to take a photo of myself in a mirror or what I am having for lunch I will reach for my phone.


----------



## Compaq (Mar 26, 2013)

Untitled by Anders Myhre Brakestad, on Flickr


----------



## jake337 (Mar 26, 2013)

CrossHypus said:


> 1)The originals of first and the third picture are cropped in order to show macro effects.
> 2)I never say that a cell phone is better than or comparable to the DSLR.
> 3)If you print them out in 4R size, 'Far worse' is inaccurate.
> 4)A photo with good picture quality doesn't mean that it is a good shot. I think we all talking about whether a cell phone can take a good shot rather than with picture quality or not. As jack337's photo, it may not with good picture quality, but it impress others. So do you think good picture quality is really so much important in a photo?




Picture quality is only relevant to print quality needed and how the image will be viewed.

 If the image is only going to be viewed on a phone, in small print or online than it is not that important unless you look at image at 100% instead of 5 to 10 feet back.  Which is the same aspects to images printed from any system. 

 I could print HUGE with my D90, or a D40, with the intentions of the image being viewed from 20-30 and no one would notice the lack of image quality till they stepped too close.

If an image needs to be tack sharp, or you want it to be, all the way till your nose touches the print then so be it, buy into MF/LF film and digital backs.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Mar 26, 2013)

Is OP arguing the point "cell phone cams are acceptable for quality images"?  I'm on the lost train =)


----------



## runnah (Mar 26, 2013)

2WheelPhoto said:


> Is OP arguing the point "cell phone cams are acceptable for quality images"?  I'm on the lost train =)



Until my cell phone can work with my pocket wizards I consider it useless.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Mar 26, 2013)

runnah said:


> 2WheelPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Is OP arguing the point "cell phone cams are acceptable for quality images"?  I'm on the lost train =)
> ...



+1 all day. Perhaps we should create an app for that


----------



## Ilovemycam (Mar 26, 2013)

chirantha7777 said:


> The above was taken with a Samsung GT-i9100 Galaxy S2 mobile phone using a Back-lit CMOS sensor at 8.0MP. I asked the Nikon Photo competition if they would allow it. And they just said "NO!"... I submitted it anyway




Very nice! Anything that take a pix is a cam. A lady artists made a pinhole cam she put in her mouth to shoot pix with a eye border shaped from the mouth. It was her mouth cam. Good work and good you submitted it as well.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Mar 26, 2013)

Ilovemycam said:


> chirantha7777 said:
> 
> 
> > The above was taken with a Samsung GT-i9100 Galaxy S2 mobile phone using a Back-lit CMOS sensor at 8.0MP. I asked the Nikon Photo competition if they would allow it. And they just said "NO!"... I submitted it anyway
> ...








  leaving that one alone =)


----------



## o hey tyler (Mar 26, 2013)

runnah said:


> 2WheelPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Is OP arguing the point "cell phone cams are acceptable for quality images"?  I'm on the lost train =)
> ...



You got that intervelometer for your phone to your camera, right? How's that working for you?


----------



## cgipson1 (Mar 26, 2013)

Cell phones are the Disc cameras of the digital era! (for those that remember the Disc camera!) 

For those that don't:  

Kodak Disc Cameras | Discussing Vintage Kodak Disc Cameras

Disc film - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## jake337 (Mar 26, 2013)

2WheelPhoto said:


> Is OP arguing the point "cell phone cams are acceptable for quality images"?  I'm on the lost train =)




They are!!!  At least for viewing at small sizes online.  Or printing smaller sizes.  Which also depends on the viewing distance suggested.  A 8mp camera phone should be able to print out an 8x10 no problem.  With upsampling maybe even a bit larger.

iPhone photo prints: How big can you go?



I'll be honest that I have never printed images from my cell phone or plan to but that is not to say it isn't possible.


----------



## runnah (Mar 26, 2013)

o hey tyler said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > 2WheelPhoto said:
> ...



So so, really hard to dial in exact figures because it uses touchscreen sliders.


----------



## Greiver (Apr 8, 2013)

runnah said:


> If I ever need to take a photo of myself in a mirror or what I am having for lunch I will reach for my phone.


The two main criteria for Facebook/Instagram "photographers."


----------



## Corir (Apr 8, 2013)

I say Hell Yes Samsung does the Digital greatly, but then again it is in no condition to compete with Nikon......!!!
Its too simple, A Samsung is not a camera nor it is made for photography, whereas Nikon is construct for this purpose.... Now if you customize a Samsung that reaches the quality of Nikon, how can you say Samsung is way better or at least capable like Nikon...?


----------



## chirantha7777 (Apr 28, 2013)

I'm not here to argue that my phone camera is better than my DSLR. But Nikon should remember that it is a photo competition! Photo's are digital images taken through light sent to a sensor through a set of lenses! I own a Cybershot DSC-W210 I bought in 2009, my galaxy S2 camera shoots far more detail than the Cybershot camera and with less noise! The problem is the image taken with the W210 is acceptable to the competition! While comparatively the far high quality image of the phone is not just because we call it a phone camera!

We can argue about this all day but Nikon is conducting a PHOTO competition! so camera's are camera's! Weather its in side your car or inside your phone.... Its a set of a lenses projecting a image onto a digital image sensor!


----------



## Buckster (Apr 28, 2013)

WGAF


----------



## TATTRAT (Apr 28, 2013)

chirantha7777 said:


> I'm not here to argue that my phone camera is better than my DSLR. But Nikon should remember that it is a photo competition! Photo's are digital images taken through light sent to a sensor through a set of lenses! I own a Cybershot DSC-W210 I bought in 2009, my galaxy S2 camera shoots far more detail than the Cybershot camera and with less noise! The problem is the image taken with the W210 is acceptable to the competition! While comparatively the far high quality image of the phone is not just because we call it a phone camera!
> 
> We can argue about this all day but Nikon is conducting a PHOTO competition! so camera's are camera's! Weather its in side your car or inside your phone.... Its a set of a lenses projecting a image onto a digital image sensor!




Was it a cell phone camera comp?


----------



## Greiver (May 1, 2013)

All I'll say is: phone camera's are in a different league from DSLR's. Not just in the obvious ways. Competitions are for those that are serious about photography and wanna show off their best shot(s), these are mostly entered by pros, people that intend to try and become pros, and the occasional dude who shrugs his shoulders and enters for ****s and giggles. 

The way I see it, this is the atmosphere that Nikon wants with its competition(s), and when they see someone entering a picture taken with a phone camera (however good it may look for a picture taken by such device), they just don't see it as being at the same level, it seems lazy, or better yet, it kinda makes you seem like you're not taking anything seriously (even if you are.)

Basically: phone cameras are in their own little "casual, everyday, amateur-hour" category and don't fit in with anything that has to do with actual digital cameras.


----------



## Dikkie (May 5, 2013)

Nikon should have a condition that says you have to send the Exif data aswel, or the raw image.

This way, they can immediately see which competitors they have to delete from the contest.


Anyway... I'm off entering a Cell Phone Camera Contest with my Nikon DSLR photos


----------



## RihhanaNZ (May 9, 2013)

Snaps you have taken above are magnificent. But technically speaking, digital imaging can be only done with digital cameras having higher imaging attributes.


----------



## ktan7 (May 9, 2013)

The capture looks fantastic on the phone; just as good!


----------



## Gavjenks (May 14, 2013)

If you want to take artsy camera phone shots such as you would enter into a competition, an oceanscape is not the way to go.  This is very traditional territory that a DSLR will win at every time.

I would suggest instead that you sit back and think about what makes a cell phone camera unique and play to its personality and strengths more. Like for instance, some sort of photograph that could only possibly be taken with an extremely narrow cell phone shaped body to wedge in someplace, or attach it to some balloons, or I don't know, something like that.


----------



## photoguy15 (Jun 3, 2013)

take a look at the Samsung galaxy s4 camera.


----------



## esselle (Jun 3, 2013)

lol that's great, OP!
They're not without their limitations, but they can take some pretty good quality photos...cell phones have come a long way! 
I wonder what the underlying reason is for rejecting the use of a mobile phone.


----------



## dxqcanada (Jun 3, 2013)

Snappers binned, mobe-armed hacks drafted at Chicago paper ? The Register


----------



## ArtCHee (Jan 1, 2016)

chirantha7777 said:


> The above was taken with a Samsung GT-i9100 Galaxy S2 mobile phone using a Back-lit CMOS sensor at 8.0MP. I asked the Nikon Photo competition if they would allow it. And they just said "NO!"... I submitted it anyway



Digital Photography has proven to be an AWESOME advancement!!  Your mobile phone takes INCREDIBLE snapshots at 8MP. But the Samsung GT Galaxy S2 - despite its many designations - is a PHONE with a bunch of nice attachments. I look at my family photo album at photos taken in my childhood. These are precious... BUT the great majority are "fuzzy" black & white SNAPSHOTS. Even my high school senior portrait is not all that sharp. So when you compare your cell phone digitals to the old Kodak Brownie snapshots, they are AMAZING!!

A PROFESSIONAL grade DSLR (digital single lens reflex) camera, with several interchangable lens and flash attachments my cost $8,000.00. Why would ANYONE pay that kind of money for a camera that you can't even put in your pocket or in a holster on your hip?? There IS a reason: they take higher quality photographs WHEN USED WITH THE PROFESSIONAL'S KNOWLEDGE/EXPRIENCE. High MP numbers on a cell phone are USELESS without a lens that can provide the necessary detail. I seriously doubt that the 1/8" lens on my cell phone is all that good. BUT IT TAKES EXCELLENT SNAPSHOTS.

For taking SNAPSHOTS of clouds at the beach, all you need is your cell phone. If you are a professional taking photos of a wedding party on the beach, you are NOT going to use a cell phone. A SMARTCAR will get you from point A to point B. So will a Cadillac Escalade. Which would you rather have to get to Point B. When I want to take photos of my family gatherings at Thanksgiving and Christmas, I go get my tripod and  Canon SX50 HS. A pretty good "point and shoot", with some sophisticated features. And, BTW, it has a 50X zoom lens (200X with digital zoom). Can't do that with my cell phone camera.


----------

