Apple's iPhone now the 'digital camera of choice' among consumers - Page 2

To which professional Nikon cameras are you referring?

No offense, but no. It's ridiculous to even suggest it. In fact, the fact that you say "professional" shows you don't know what you're talking about. Pro Nikons are full frame and require lenses that can support full frame (fx). The (wink) "professional" Nikons you're probably thinking of are entry level cropped sensor (dx) consumer DSLRs like the D40/D50/D60. Speaking as a guy who owned a D50 (which dates back to 2005, those images blow away what an iPhone 4S can do.

That's not a slam on the iPhone. iPhones are amazing cameras considering the limitations based on lens and sensor sizes... but to suggest a tiny camera in a phone is better than a pro Nikon from just a few years ago is ridiculous to the point of being laughable.

I well remember how just a few years ago 6 megapixel cameras were considered almost "Professional". The iPhone 4S has almost double that, well within the Professional definition of just a few years ago. These professional cameras did have much better lenses, but were/are far more unwieldy. As has often been said, the best camera is the one you have at that moment.

I can't think of any Video camera which comes close to the 4S definition - even professional HD Cameras would struggle. Do you know of any except perhaps than professional standard video cameras costing thousands of dollars? But again they are far more bulky and heavy.

As for tablets or even HD TV screens, none are in the same ball park as the new iPad's 3 million pixels. An HD TV has only 2 million!. Android tablets? Probably less than a million or even less!

I repeat, there is NOTHING to compare with the COMBINATION of the 4S and new iPad, whether as still or video individually, but especially as a combination still/video camera and viewer!

If you can name a higher quality combination, please do so!

Professional cameras have never been defined by the number of pixels. And professional HD cameras do not "struggle" to come close to the 4S definition. If you want to compare the 4S to other smartphones or consumer equipment, fine.

Yup. You probably do qualify as close to being the world's worst photographer. Perhaps part of the problem is that you don't understand the tools you're using. If you did, you'd get much better pictures.

Don't get me wrong... I own a $1400 DSLR body and have multiple lenses/filters/etc for it. I love my DSLR! But I still shoot with my iPhone sometimes, and love it as well. They say that the best camera is the one you have with you (meaning, no matter how amazing your full frame kit is, it won't do any good if it's sitting in your camera bag at home). That's the iPhone's true strength. It's a really good camera and it's always with you. I've gotten plenty of shots I would have otherwise missed because I didn't take my DSLR out that day. But, again, the iPhone is no DSLR.

The more you learn the true capabilities of your gear, the better photographer you'll be. Photography is art, so you've either got the eye or you don't... but along with having the eye for it, you need to understand your gear (and light, of course). I strongly suspect that you don't.

No, they weren't. I get that you're an enthusiast, but you simply have no idea what you're talking about.

The Nikon D50 was a 6 megapixel DSLR from 2005. If you wanted that body with a decent lens back then, you were spending over $1,000. Nobody in their right mind thought that was even close to being a pro body. A Nikon D50 with a prime lens would still outperform an iPhone today. Again, that's not a slam on the iPhone. It's a reality of lens size and sensor size. iPhones are absolutely awesome for what they are and can do... but to compare them to (wink) professional Nikons from just a few years ago is silly.

Exactly. This whole thread is a little too self-stroking. Actually I'd like to know what the consumer's 'digital camera of choice' really is.

I have a Sony video camcorder from 4 years ago that takes better pictures than my 4S and in 16x9 mode. But I agree it's too bulky to use all the time . BTW, it cost me $650.

What an idiotic post. The quality of the 4S camera on average rivals most compact cameras. What's your point? DO you think if these people weren't taking photos with their iPhones, they would be using SLRs that cost thousands of dollars instead? Nothing is being 'dumbed down'. You're one of these angry elitists that gets raged whenever anything becomes accessible to more people. Nothing is going to happen to photography, and I don't see how the fuck you can fault Apple for putting an emphasis on photography and including some of the best photo experience in their phones. You won't see National Geographic photographers using iPhones as their main camera anytime soon, so chill the fuck out. The people who are satisfied with using an iPhone would not be getting photos with an SLR anyway.

Anyway, just perused your post history and it seems you're nothing but a damn troll, with 100% of your posts being negative about Apple, and containing the words 'dumbing down'. What a fucking broken record. iOS didn't rape your dog. [insult removed]. You seem to want Apple to focus solely on the professional market, an absolutely idiotic strategy, which is why you're so butthurt with their consumer success. Just switch another platform if you're so offended and enraged and spare yourself the pain, and us your incessant whining. iOS is the most successful platform of the last few years, it isn't going anywhere, and is clearly the future of Apple's consumer platform. They've sold more iOS products in a YEAR than they have Macs in the entire history of the company. The battleground is in mobile. If you're not cool with that, just jump ship now. Maybe you can switch to Windows 8, I heard they're slapping a tablet interface with massive tiles on the desktop, maybe that's more towards your 'anti-dumbing down' philosophy? As for OSX, I use it on a daily basis for professional work, and nothing has been made worse by newer version- Lion is the most powerful version yet, and Mountain Lion won't change that. Apple is selling more Macs than it ever has before. Enough with your concern trolling, Apple is looking towards the future and is making hundreds of millions of people happy with their products, and couldn't care less about [insult removed] like you who want the 'good old days' back so that you feel special.

Sometimes there is nothing but a good lengthy rant. Thanks for your post! I feel better now.

Whatever Apple does, some nerds will always be there to complain.

Very true, but people would have more 'real' cameras with them if the ones on the iPhone weren't good (particularly if the 4s wasn't so good - I drag the DSLR and point-and-shoot around a whole lot less now).

Pretentious much?

Apple is the 'crack' of this decade. People who don't even have jobs will do whatever they can to get an iPhone. And once they get them they stare at them and walk around tripping over curbs and walking into fountains, and texting while driving. They've become obsessed with their devices to the exclusion of nearly everything else in life. They are like the kids with video games who'd rather play a BMX game on TV than to actually go outside and ride their bikes. People used to engage others in conversation while in public. Not anymore. they just stare at their devices texting dumb LOLs and never even make eye contact with anyone else.

Excuse me while I go check my other Apple fanatic websites.

I recently spent some time going through pictures I've taken over the course of my life. Without exception the pictures I get even on any of ny iPhones, including the 3GS, are far better than 99% of the photos in my album. Better even than those from my Olympus OM1, the last film camera I owned.

We're talking SMAPSHOTS here folks, not professionally lit studio photos. Moments from our lives. Having the camera with you to get 'that photo' FAR outweighs any staged 'high quality' picture.

It's not about pixels... It's about sharing memories.

No they wouldn't. They'd just bemoan having lost the opportunity to get the picture.

The first model was US-only, so I guess the 3G got off to a great start in 2008 worldwide, then when the 3Gs came people were probably halfway their two year contract. When that expired, everyone got the forth generation and have skipped the 4s because of that contract. This is what I hear from a lot of people here in Europe. That is also the reason I think it makes sense that the 3G is more popular than the 3Gs.

Frankly I think these telco contracts are a total ripoff. They look like it's a cheap way in getting an iPhone, but if you calculate it you are better of getting it at full retail price and get a SIM-only 'contract' or whatever it's called in your country.

I for one am not getting a new iPhone simply because my contract expires; I'll buy new and resell my one year old. Every year.

So yeah, strangely, the order of 4, 4s, 3G, 3Gs makes sense to me.

For those whiny people whining about how the headline is "misleading", please use reading comprehension. Please. It's for the good of everyone.

The headline is clearly paraphrasing a direct quote in the article; the quote contains the now infamous "camera of choice" line.

Read that again: a quote. From an industry analyst.

If you disagree, criticize him, not AI. And stop with the whining.

That may make sense in Europe, but in the U.S., plans are the same whether you sign a contract or not. So it makes sense to get a subsidized phone.

Greatest photo tip?

f8 and be there.

awesome! i feel better now, too.

Cameras in general are going this route. Going forward for the moment, higher dynamic range and better signal to noise ratio would bring a lot more improvement than simply adding more pixels. With the currently available digital backs and some of the high end dslrs, you've got more than enough detail for even storefront advertisements, yet it's still nice to see captures without a lot of noise or an overly processed look from its removal. Even Canon is starting to go this route. It surprised me slightly given the numbers posted by Nikon. For some reason I thought the D3s was a bit higher. I just looked it up. The files are beautiful anyway.

Not really. Except for professional photographers who could use a box camera to take great pictures (it's less the camera than the brain), the iPhone, and any other smart phone, is used for convenience and spur of the moment shots that just happen.

The great digital cameras are very much worth the price for the professional. It's the point and shoot cameras which are being pressured by the good enough cameras. But, further, the iPhone supports immediate publication and backup: via iCloud, text messaging, email. Then there is GPS; not available on most dedicated cameras -- camera manufacturers do not have the capacity to compete at this level.

I agree because pixels are just one factor to be considered when considering a digital camera. Considering a camera a professional model because it has 6 megapixels or more is like saying a quad-core phone is better than single-core phone because it has more cores or that a car with the bigger engine is better.

When will people finally get it that they shouldn't buy anything based solely on the specs, Product purchases should be made based on how a products overall performance best fulfills their particular needs.

Move your finger away from the lens, then.

Not unless "12MP camera" is spelled "4.5 inch SuperHybrid SuperActive Supersaturated ScamOLED screen with Super PenTile pixelz Super"

"Dumbing down"??? What, are you looking down on the "lowest common denominator" from your high horse? Then watch these videos:
http://m.cbsnews.com/postwatch.rbml?...&cbsID=7385686
http://thenextweb.com/apple/2011/09/...accessibility/

Yeah, iOS is for everybody, not just some f***ing technology elitist like you.

I'd suspect that it's ease of use that makes it possible for iPhone users to take a photos worth keeping and then moving that photo off the phone. Android devices are a joke in comparison.

Always nice to hear about new products. After all, competition is good.

This flickr looks interesting. Nice to know there is another site out there to compete with google picasa. Has anyone here used flickr who can tell me how it compared to picasa. Can you do a one click upload of all the phones pics and thier metadata to flickr?

Thanks

Wiki gives a nice list:

\t▪\t500px
\t▪\tBlueMelon
\t▪\tFlickr
\t▪\tFotki
\t▪\tImageshack
\t▪\tImgur
\t▪\tInterartcenter
\t▪\tipernity
\t▪\tJalbum
\t▪\tKodak Gallery
\t▪\tKoodibooK
\t▪\tLockerz
\t▪\tMobile Me
\t▪\tPanoramio
\t▪\tPhanfare
\t▪\tPhotobucket
\t▪\tPicasa
\t▪\tPiczo.com
\t▪\tPixable
\t▪\tSmugMug
\t▪\tSnapfish
\t▪\tShutterfly
\t▪\tStreamzoo
\t▪\tWebshots
\t▪\tWikimedia Commons[7]
\t▪\tWindows Live Photos
\t▪\tWoophy

Some support RAW, some don't. Some don't require you to sign up, which I like. I use Imgur, PhotoBucket and (of course) MM Gallery.

But I still cannot grasp at the reason why Apple is going to terminate Gallery after June 30th. Maybe at the time of announcement they thought they shouldn't be trying to do everything at once when creating iCloud and they thought that a year of MM support would allow them enough time to migrate this feature to iCloud as well. One can hope, but I hate all the silence. So yes, I gave my feedback on all missing MM features in iCloud and emailed 'some folks' at Apple.

canon 5d mkii is a 3000 dollar camera!!!, and the iphone alot less. and i would think that more pros use the 3k camera, and since they make money off the camera, they must be using flickr to should off the work... the "papps" use flickr?...

learned something new... I figured that flickr was a photo site for sharing family photos.

BTW... it is not the camera that makes good pictures, it is the person behind the camera that does. by using better equipment, allows your photo to make more money...

for video xl100 is better than the 5d mkii, (discounting lenses, but watch out for the rolling shutter skew on the 5d mkii)