# Looks like the smart phones are catching up to the DSLR - Nokia Lumia 920 Amazing!



## camz (Sep 10, 2012)

I would buy this phone just for the Camera...forget the service!  Pretty impressive, has an internal cinemagraph editor and much more.


Who needs flash with this technology? Low light revolution.


----------



## camz (Sep 10, 2012)

Camera discussion begins at 11:22.


----------



## NCRoadster (Nov 18, 2012)

I purchased this phone 2 weeks ago. The optical image stabilization is really nifty. It lets me capture pics with 1/3 sec shutter speed without a tripod.


----------



## rexbobcat (Nov 18, 2012)

Wait...People still buy Nokia phones?


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 18, 2012)

pretty soon the iphone will replace DSLR's as the premier wedding photography camera


----------



## KmH (Nov 18, 2012)

How many interchangeable lenses are available for the Nokia?


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 18, 2012)

I hope that lots of photographers begin buying these instead of dSLRs....it will help thin the herd.


----------



## MLeeK (Nov 18, 2012)

I can just see the new list of questions to ask your wedding photographer... 
Do you use an iPhone? Do you instagram?


----------



## amolitor (Nov 19, 2012)

If you have enough pixels, you don't need interchangeable lenses. You just crop.

It's pretty funny to see people who wouldn't even consider using film to shoot a wedding mocking, however gently, the new technology coming down the road.


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 19, 2012)

amolitor said:


> If you have enough pixels, you don't need interchangeable lenses. You just crop.
> 
> It's pretty funny to see people who wouldn't even consider using film to shoot a wedding mocking, however gently, the new technology coming down the road.



we are actually moving a bit backwards. going to see if we cant incorporate our mamiya m645 into our wedding portraits. 
but seriously...its not just about technology.  its about how that technology gets used. and anything photography related will be judged not just by pixel quality, or ISO capability...but also by how well the photos can be enlarged.  cropping is all fine and dandy until you need that picture blown up on canvas.


----------



## Immensity (Nov 19, 2012)

The question is though, how good is it at making phonecalls?


----------



## camz (Nov 19, 2012)

To me the question is for the DSLR sector to incorporate these features in their market. Why not to avoid loose of market share...shiets as a wedding photographer who wouldn't want shooting capabilities without a tripod or flash at very slow shutter speeds? In fact internet capabilities would be amazing. 

Eventually I think these little phones will have the capability of a full frame sensor(Eventually). It's more of the opticals(lenses) on these that might have problem catching up to the DSLRs. I see both categories(DSLR and Cameraphones) meeting somewhere in the middle. Samsung just came out with a camera that has android OS installed expanding on wifi capabilities and social media sharing:

Samsung Galaxy Camera Review - SlashGear 

It's coming folks...wether we like it or not.


----------



## christop (Nov 19, 2012)

I think a big problem with using a phone as a camera is not a technical one. Phones simply do not have the ergonomics of a good camera. Would you want to work for a few hours (say, as a wedding photographer) holding a camera phone in its "camera" orientation? I wouldn't. I'm getting hand cramps just thinking about it! Phones also don't have the same level of control at your fingertips like good cameras do. Just try to change the exposure settings, plane of focus, etc, on your phone with one hand! The only thing I can't currently do with one hand on my 10D is change focus, and that's only because I have a manual focus lens on it.

You could probably get a good hand grip for the phone, but that can't fix all the issues (unless it can also tap on the screen with a stylus to automatically adjust settings on the screen. ). Or a phone designer might even address the ergonomics and usability issues, but it would be a challenge to keep it usable as a phone. Or the phone could be designed to take a DSLR-like grip that plugs into its data port (USB or proprietary connector) so the grip can control all of the settings. Hmmm, I wonder if that's the direction some phones will go....


----------



## camz (Nov 19, 2012)

christop, good points but I'm looking beyond that =). To address ergo wise, I have a 4/3 size and I don't mind shooting with it all day. Look at the samsung camera I placed a link on above.  Ergo wise just like the 4/3 size. 

But can you imagine posting images immediately on facebook of SDEs(Same Day Edits) for your clients friends/family who couldn't make it to their wedding. Or photobooth session slideshow, or a little short video clips on youtube or vimeo. If we as the pros don't, I'm pretty sure the guests will! haha. As pros we should go with the times and offer these services. If we're losing on print sales then let's capture the market with new capabilities and be always one up of the consumer. Let's offer something the layman can't give. 

People will continue to want their information much faster and timely than what we're used to. When these things start coming out and we don't adapt...we better go find and do someting else =). Shoot I'm in my thirties and I already feel old because of how fast technology is moving forward.


----------



## amolitor (Nov 19, 2012)

We're not THAT far off from the days when ergonomics don't matter much either. There will be enough pixels, and the lens will be short enough, that you're just going to be pointing the camera roughly in the right direction and cropping in post anyways. Hang it around your neck, look roughly in the right direction, and press the button on the bluetooth remote.


----------



## camz (Nov 19, 2012)

amolitor said:


> We're not THAT far off from the days when ergonomics don't matter much either. There will be enough pixels, and the lens will be short enough, that you're just going to be pointing the camera roughly in the right direction and cropping in post anyways. Hang it around your neck, look roughly in the right direction, and press the button on the bluetooth remote.



True, but there will always be products for the consumers/prosumers and the pros.  It maybe advanced all around but as pros it's our job to keep the edge to stay ahead of the game =). I can't even imagine how the market is going to be in 10 years. haha it changes so fast it makes it harder to forecast.


----------



## amolitor (Nov 19, 2012)

I predict that some time during my lifetime (10 years? Maybe 20?) the pros will mostly be using something quite different from what we see today. The best way to record a wedding is going to be with something that seems impossibly exotic to us today, coupled to a large amount of post processing. I've proposed it before, but let's try it on again: a light-field camera with a super-wide angle lens and a 100Mpixel sensor 16 bits deep. Focus, set DoF, adjust exposure, crop to taste, all in post.

The amateurs will still use DSLRs which will be wonderfully retro, and they'll be obsessed with "getting it right in the camera" and so will the film guys, and the wet-plate guys.

Photography more than other arts seems to hold on to older technologies. That's not an indictment, it's neither good nor bad, it just is.


----------



## Tareq935 (Nov 21, 2012)

Yes it's true that phone cameras are slowly but steadily catching up with DSLRs but I do have a feeling that DSLR will always retain its place no matter how good the cell phone cameras become.


----------



## manaheim (Nov 21, 2012)

amolitor said:


> I predict that some time during my lifetime (10 years? Maybe 20?) the pros will mostly be using something quite different from what we see today. The best way to record a wedding is going to be with something that seems impossibly exotic to us today, coupled to a large amount of post processing. I've proposed it before, but let's try it on again: a light-field camera with a super-wide angle lens and a 100Mpixel sensor 16 bits deep. Focus, set DoF, adjust exposure, crop to taste, all in post.
> 
> The amateurs will still use DSLRs which will be wonderfully retro, and they'll be obsessed with "getting it right in the camera" and so will the film guys, and the wet-plate guys.
> 
> Photography more than other arts seems to hold on to older technologies. That's not an indictment, it's neither good nor bad, it just is.



That seems unlikely.  Camera bodies have been around a long time and haven't significantly evolved in shape and ergonomics for, what?  50 years?

What seems more logical is you'll wind up with cell and/or wifi/wimax technologies built into the existing camera form factors... and in fact, we are starting to see that now.  No question you'll also see "good cameras" built into phones, but unless Nikon, Canon, Sigma, Tokina, etc. are all seriously wasting their time, you're not going to get any real quality out of either a tiny sensor or a tiny lens.

It's like anything new and flashy... will it replace SOME of what the "old school" things do?  Certainly.  I can't imagine cooking corn in a big pot full of boiling water when I can just wrap it in cellophane and microwave it.  Will it replace everything that the old school things do?  No way.  Microwaved cookies are gross.

The question is how much actually gets replaced.  For example, digital has done QUITE a job replacing film.  However, television didn't even come close to wiping out radio, and last I checked video did not quite kill the radio star.


----------



## thetrue (Nov 22, 2012)

manaheim said:


> I can't imagine cooking corn in a big pot full of boiling water when I can just wrap it in cellophane and microwave it.


You actually do this?


----------



## manaheim (Nov 22, 2012)

thetrue said:


> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> > I can't imagine cooking corn in a big pot full of boiling water when I can just wrap it in cellophane and microwave it.
> ...



I do.  It's excellent.  Have you tried it?

The only thing I've found better is grilling, but again... same point... I'm not going to toss out the microwave and stove just because grilling is better for corn.


----------



## thetrue (Nov 22, 2012)

I've not tried it, but I most certainly will. Grilling with the husk on makes for some awesome corn. 

Back on topic, I use my phone camera for cute things my son does when my camera is on the other side of the room, or for sneaky ass shots in line at Dunkin donuts  kidding kidding. I would never use my phone camera for a beautiful sunset or an interesting scene. Certainly never for a portrait or anything either.


----------



## JClishe (Nov 22, 2012)

I have this phone - the low light performance is amazing. Last week I was at the St Louis arch at night with a small group. We all snapped a few pictures with our phones, and when the people I was with saw my pictures they all, almost in unison, went "Whoa! How did you do that?!". The difference between my photos and everyone else's was enormous. I'm not talking about putting photos from 2 camera's side by side and scrutinizing the difference. I'm talking HUGE difference. This video (Nokia Lumia 920: Sarah&#39;s match is a Windows Phone - Full Length - YouTube) does a side by side comparison of the 920 with an iPhone in low light and I can confirm that the results between my 920 and my wife's iPhone 5 is consistent with the results in the video.


----------



## amolitor (Nov 23, 2012)

manaheim said:


> amolitor said:
> 
> 
> > I predict that some time during my lifetime (10 years? Maybe 20?) the pros will mostly be using something quite different from what we see today. The best way to record a wedding is going to be with something that seems impossibly exotic to us today, coupled to a large amount of post processing. I've proposed it before, but let's try it on again: a light-field camera with a super-wide angle lens and a 100Mpixel sensor 16 bits deep. Focus, set DoF, adjust exposure, crop to taste, all in post.
> ...



The "Leica" body, which is really what the modern DSLR comes from, has remained pretty much the same for a long time, yes. Many pros didn't use 35mm film for "serious stuff" 20-30 years ago, though. Weddings were shot with 35mm, but that was either a "low budget" option or a "photojournalistic style" option. The guys shooting fashion and catalogs and everything were mostly medium or large format.

The change from the Mamiya/Hassleblad body to the Canikon WunderKamera was much more than a simple film to digital conversion.


----------



## Buckster (Nov 23, 2012)

I personally don't see it, and I'm a fairly forward thinking, new-idea-embracing sort of person.

Photography's not just about "f_ocus, set DoF, adjust exposure, crop to taste" _though_.

_Successful, compelling photos are far more about understanding and controlling light and shadow in a composition than just getting a continuous stream of images that capture everything in the room as is, then picking out 40 or 50 shots out of possibly millions of "as is" captures that rolled out of half a dozen or more auto-capture devices scattered around the room over several hours, even IF anyone would have the time or inclination to sift through all that visual data looking for the gold to "crop to taste" for printing.

It's like saying that if you just put enough processing power behind a random word generator, it'll eventually spit out the next Shakespeare play, and all you have to do is print it.  Of course, you'll need to sift through billions of pages of worthless word-trash to find it first, but won't it be cool?

The basic concept of light focused through a lens to a medium in a dark box hasn't changed since the first camera obscura.  Leica was just another iteration of that concept, not an entirely new way of capturing images.


----------



## rexbobcat (Nov 23, 2012)

amolitor said:
			
		

> I predict that some time during my lifetime (10 years? Maybe 20?) the pros will mostly be using something quite different from what we see today. The best way to record a wedding is going to be with something that seems impossibly exotic to us today, coupled to a large amount of post processing. I've proposed it before, but let's try it on again: a light-field camera with a super-wide angle lens and a 100Mpixel sensor 16 bits deep. Focus, set DoF, adjust exposure, crop to taste, all in post.
> 
> The amateurs will still use DSLRs which will be wonderfully retro, and they'll be obsessed with "getting it right in the camera" and so will the film guys, and the wet-plate guys.
> 
> Photography more than other arts seems to hold on to older technologies. That's not an indictment, it's neither good nor bad, it just is.



But you'd still have to deal with perspective distortion lol.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Nov 23, 2012)

Smart phone have come a long way thus far, but as far as camera functionality and performance...back the junk truck up and fill it with smart phones


----------

