Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: So this is the future...  (Read 20760 times)

jferrari

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 484
So this is the future...
« on: May 16, 2015, 08:34:45 pm »

In my best Jackie Gleason: "and awaaaay we go!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBnMysaReFc
Logged
Nothing changes until something changes.

michael

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5084
Re: So this is the future...
« Reply #1 on: May 17, 2015, 08:53:42 am »

The future is always a bit scary at first.

Michael
Logged

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8901
Re: So this is the future...
« Reply #2 on: May 17, 2015, 09:48:02 am »

The future is always a bit scary at first.

Yes, but I'm glad this wasn't posted under the "Medium format" forum though ;) .
Glad we now have a forum for discussion about these little marvels, right here.

Colby Brown seems enthusiastic about the camera's image quality on his blog.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Rainer SLP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 727
    • RS-Fotografia
Re: So this is the future...
« Reply #3 on: May 17, 2015, 01:03:21 pm »

Interesting advertising for a ...

... perhaps New Smartphone ...

but what left me thinking is

... accurate colors ...

Who defines what an accurate color is ?

especially having half of the world more or or less a certain type of colorblindness

 ;D
Logged
Thanks and regards Rainer
 I am here for

Some Guy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 729
Re: So this is the future...
« Reply #4 on: May 17, 2015, 01:18:03 pm »

Does seem to be going that way doesn't it?

I can imagine somewhere down the line they'll do snap-in Zeiss Otus lenses (Maybe $500 for a snap-in Otus f/1.4?) onto the things.  They already are into the 50MP range with some cell cameras and now venturing into RAW area too.  Imagine Otus quality snap-in lenses in a pack that fits into your shirt pocket: Wide. Normal. Tele. Maybe a Super-Tele.

All this doesn't bode well for the current majors as this cell stuff is ramping up faster than the majors with AF, VR, WB, Control Modes, Editing, Immediate uploading. Locations to shoot (Via GPS and cellnet.).  Best times. Weather.  Plug-in to hardware to set screen color calibration (Just did it!). Etc.

Oh, another very nice factor is the badges don't hassle me with the phone.  Pull out a DSLR and one gets the "Where's your permit?  Looks commercial. Etc." treatment from them as a source of revenue enhancement.  Yeah, I like to pay them $500 for some over-priced permit and insurance signed over to them just to take a photo.  I can park my RV for $50 a night, but pull out some big pro-looking camera and it shoots up to $500 if they think it's commercial.  Hell, a fishing or shooting permit or license isn't that much.  >:(

SG
« Last Edit: May 17, 2015, 01:20:07 pm by Some Guy »
Logged

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: So this is the future...
« Reply #5 on: May 17, 2015, 05:07:57 pm »

Gah! Regardless of how good the phone camera is that was cringe inducing marketing language in that advert. So obviously scripted and not the photographer's words.
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele

Rainer SLP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 727
    • RS-Fotografia
Re: So this is the future...
« Reply #6 on: May 17, 2015, 08:18:06 pm »

Gah! Regardless of how good the phone camera is that was cringe inducing marketing language in that advert. So obviously scripted and not the photographer's words.

After seeing that video I lost all respect for this photographer ...

Must have been more bucks he got then he was making in a year with his own work ...
Logged
Thanks and regards Rainer
 I am here for

spidermike

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 535
Re: So this is the future...
« Reply #7 on: May 18, 2015, 06:54:43 am »

After seeing that video I lost all respect for this photographer ...



Why? What respect did you have for him before?
Is it because you believe a camera phone cannot be that good? I checked his website and he mentions printing to 32" - and evne if that is hyperbole it means that an A4 print will be pretty good.
It will certainly be interesting to see what the photos look like.
His website has a fair few jpegs and some links to the DNG files if you want to check them out (or would that spoil a good rant).


Quote
So obviously scripted and not the photographer's words.
Again, from his site:

"While I partnered with LG to create both images and videos to help promote the global launch of the LG G4, they never asked me or payed me to write this review. These thoughts and opinions are mine and mine alone. Even if you think that I am biased because of our business arrangement, I have provided enough details and high resolution images for you to come to your own conclusions about this device."
I am willing ot ive him the benefit of the doubt if the mages stack up.
Logged

michael

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5084
Re: So this is the future...
« Reply #8 on: May 18, 2015, 08:37:09 am »

The writing has been on the wall for some years.

A few years ago a major cell phone maker hired the chief digital scientist from one of the top digital camera companies. This was not announced publicly, and at the time I thought it a bit of a stretch. Now I know that it wasn't, and that it was a brilliant far-sighted move.

Like it or hate it, for the mainstream population cell phone photography now is photography.

Excuse me... where did I put my 645z?

Michael
Logged

Some Guy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 729
Re: So this is the future...
« Reply #9 on: May 18, 2015, 10:29:41 am »

I was looking at the LG G4 specs and learned it supports a removable microSD card (Ugh! So small!) up to 2 terabytes!  Crikey, I didn't know anything so small could hold so much.  :o

Does RAW (Wonder what cell phone format it will be in, and the converter needed?), laser auto-focusing, and a 3,000 mah removable battery too (Bigger than some DSLRs.).

Looks like my one week old Samsung S6 Edge is already obsolete.  Bah!   :'(

I can see in a couple of generations out, kids will be saying "What's a Nikon?" or "What's a Canon?"  So goes the tech world.

SG
Logged

spidermike

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 535
Re: So this is the future...
« Reply #10 on: May 18, 2015, 10:56:00 am »



Does RAW (Wonder what cell phone format it will be in, and the converter needed?)
Apparently it is DNG so it is pretty much a universal format.
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600

On one hand, I am very happy for what the cameras in so-called "phones" can do these days.  They are vastly more capable than the cameras that once introduced many millions of people (including me) to photography, Kodak Brownies and Instamatics, and are likely to increase enthusiasm for photography and lead those enthusiasts to add other gear, once they push up against the inherent limits of what a "tiny lens camera" can and cannot do. (Those classic cameras also had lenses of very small aperture sizes and thus abundant depth of field and limited low light abilities, partly because that great DOF was needed for them to work with their fixed-focus lenses. And yes, it is ultimately lens size and more specifically front element size that imposes many of the limits on what a smaller camera can do, and only indirectly the sensor size.)

But some of this advertisement is so nonsensical that I have to suspect at least "prompting" from the advertising people. In particular:

a) Raving about the low f-stop of the camera-phone's lens, and comparing it to a lens of similarly low f-stop for a camera of far large format, as if he or any experienced photographer can be unaware that this says nothing about the phone-camera having comparable abilities in either low-light performance or depth of field control -- for reasons that have been thrashed to death in this and every other photographic forum.

b) Showing off the array of lenses that he uses, including obviously some telephotos (i.e. lenses for making images of a narrow angle of view), and then ignoring the severe limitations for "narrow angle of view" photography with this camera.  Or any current phone-camera. Or any camera with front elements and effective aperture diameter small enough to fit into a phone or a pocket.
Logged

Some Guy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 729

On one hand, I am very happy for what the cameras in so-called "phones" can do these days.  They are vastly more capable than the cameras that once introduced many millions of people (including me) to photography, Kodak Brownies and Instamatics, and are likely to increase enthusiasm for photography and lead those enthusiasts to add other gear, once they push up against the inherent limits of what a "tiny lens camera" can and cannot do. (Those classic cameras also had lenses of very small aperture sizes and thus abundant depth of field and limited low light abilities, partly because that great DOF was needed for them to work with their fixed-focus lenses. And yes, it is ultimately lens size and more specifically front element size that imposes many of the limits on what a smaller camera can do, and only indirectly the sensor size.)

But some of this advertisement is so nonsensical that I have to suspect at least "prompting" from the advertising people. In particular:

a) Raving about the low f-stop of the camera-phone's lens, and comparing it to a lens of similarly low f-stop for a camera of far large format, as if he or any experienced photographer can be unaware that this says nothing about the phone-camera having comparable abilities in either low-light performance or depth of field control -- for reasons that have been thrashed to death in this and every other photographic forum.

b) Showing off the array of lenses that he uses, including obviously some telephotos (i.e. lenses for making images of a narrow angle of view), and then ignoring the severe limitations for "narrow angle of view" photography with this camera.  Or any current phone-camera. Or any camera with front elements and effective aperture diameter small enough to fit into a phone or a pocket.

As the kids say, "There's an app for that!"

Software in the things is going to take care of a lot of things like bokeh, CA, moire, DOF, WB, etc. much like a bunch of software like Photoshop/Lightroom do today with all the 3rd party add-on software plugins.  The phone's internal memory and processing power is growing to more than most desktops (What's that?) and that is going to be a big issue down the road for Canon/Nikon/Etc.  What bokeh?  Just set it in the phone's editor (Per example off mine of people leaving their junk all over the place, even on railroad tracks.).

I've only played with my Samsung S6 Edge for a couple of days now and I must say it's pretty impressive against my old Nikon D7000 (Same 16 MP.).  No doubt someone will ramp it up another level in far shorter time span than Nikon or Canon too.  Sort of scary, but I can see grand kids saying "Grandpa, what's a Canon?" much like watching them try and text with a rotary dial phone.  ;D

Getting old sucks trying to keep up with all this fast progression stuff, imho.

SG
Logged

Rainer SLP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 727
    • RS-Fotografia
Re: So this is the future...
« Reply #13 on: May 18, 2015, 01:31:34 pm »

Hi Spidermike,

Quote
His website has a fair few jpegs and some links to the DNG files if you want to check them out (or would that spoil a good rant).

By no means  ;D and yes I would like to see some more RAW images if that phone so I can change my opinion  ;)

I do not care about JPG samples. I like to see what comes out from the camera with no manipulation at all. I did take a look at the DNG images but would like to see some higher ISO images if possible.
Logged
Thanks and regards Rainer
 I am here for

spidermike

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 535
Re: So this is the future...
« Reply #14 on: May 18, 2015, 01:55:40 pm »

Hi Spidermike,
I did take a look at the DNG images but would like to see some higher ISO images if possible.
Isn't that like saying a talking dog is nothing special if it can't quote Shakespeare? The very fact it produces images of that quality at all is something to be lauded, surely.  Your first comment was that you had lost all respect for the photogrpaher for daring to say a cameraphone can produce good images - now you are moving the goalposts by saying you want to see high-ISO images.
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600

Software in the things is going to take care of a lot of things like bokeh, CA, moire, DOF, WB, etc.
Please read my subject line (and your own!), my main point is limitations in dealing with low light or narrow angle shots, not such much the obsession in some quarters with blurry backgrounds ("bokeh!").

[ADDED: as fas as I can tell, all of his fine sample images are at ISO speed 50 and wide angle FOV.]

On the the hand, I agree that camera-phones have some great advantages when it comes to post-processing, due to the fact that these devices can offer (a) an abundance of processing power and memory compared to "traditional" digital cameras, and (b) a large high quality touch-screen interface with a well-designed operating system and APIs to make good use of it. This in turn is because phones already have those resources for other reasons (all those other apps) so there is no added cost in applying those resources to photography. For a traditional compact digital camera instead, adding that level of "pocket computer" hardware and software resources would probably add significantly to the cost.  And that would be an additional cost barrier to buying a traditional compact camera, since most potential buyers already have those computer resources in their pockets.  (I am in favor of the approach of wireless pairing of a non-phone camera to a phone in order to offer such whiz-bang features.)
« Last Edit: May 18, 2015, 02:43:55 pm by BJL »
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Re: So this is the future... on the other hand
« Reply #16 on: May 18, 2015, 02:42:52 pm »

To balance my skepticism about some "over-optimistic" talk, I will say that his samples make a good argument that, within its limitations, the results of this camera are not noticeably inferior to what a huge majority of "SLR snap-shooters" could achieve, and maybe better in practice because it is so much easier to make quick fixes in-camera before "sharing".  (One more small piece of evidence for my prediction that the combination of entry-level SLR and f/5.6 kit zoom is about a decade from extinction.)

I am also fine with evaluating the end results that can be achieved, rather than demanding to examine the intermediate stage represented by a raw file -- that is a bit like demanding to evaluate a camera and lens combination by examining undeveloped film, if that were possible.
« Last Edit: May 19, 2015, 09:42:52 am by BJL »
Logged

Rainer SLP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 727
    • RS-Fotografia
Re: So this is the future...
« Reply #17 on: May 18, 2015, 04:21:58 pm »

Isn't that like saying a talking dog is nothing special if it can't quote Shakespeare? The very fact it produces images of that quality at all is something to be lauded, surely.  Your first comment was that you had lost all respect for the photogrpaher for daring to say a cameraphone can produce good images - now you are moving the goalposts by saying you want to see high-ISO images.

OK Spidermike, you are right. I do not know what I am talking about. Just ignore my comments as perhaps I am having difficulties expressing myself ... and perhaps if I try my posting would be too long and boring ...

Just ignore me ...
Logged
Thanks and regards Rainer
 I am here for

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6229
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
Re: So this is the future...
« Reply #18 on: May 19, 2015, 11:31:04 pm »

A few years ago a major cell phone maker hired the chief digital scientist from one of the top digital camera companies. This was not announced publicly, and at the time I thought it a bit of a stretch. Now I know that it wasn't, and that it was a brilliant far-sighted move.

Are you talking about who I think you are talking about? You know a Dane in Silicon Valley?

:~)
Logged

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: So this is the future...
« Reply #19 on: May 21, 2015, 05:05:31 pm »

Again, from his site:

"While I partnered with LG to create both images and videos to help promote the global launch of the LG G4, they never asked me or payed me to write this review. These thoughts and opinions are mine and mine alone. Even if you think that I am biased because of our business arrangement, I have provided enough details and high resolution images for you to come to your own conclusions about this device."
I am willing ot ive him the benefit of the doubt if the mages stack up.
Whether the camera phone is good or not has nothing to do with the terrible marketing talk/depiction and clunky false sounding dialogue.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2015, 05:17:51 pm by jjj »
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up