But as I suspected, that article has a familiar, huge blind-spot: in a word "zoom". Or "reach". The ability to photograph a small or distant subject, like even a face in a "long portrait" framing
I agree. My current phone camera (Pixel 3A) suffers greatly from a lack of reach. The upcoming Samsung S20
supposedly offers an optical zoom function - possibly 3:1 or even 5:1. That would go a long way towards sealing the deal for me.
A few months ago, I chanced upon a drum circle, a group of 50 or so drummers who'd assembled ad hoc on a beach in Vancouver. I was able to shoot reasonable quality video (and sound!) of this event and edit it into a pretty neat little three minute film. If I'd used a "regular" camera, as soon as I pulled out the video camera, everything would have changed. But because I was "just some guy with his phone", nobody cared. This is exceptionally liberating.
I don't intend on any BIF shoots with my phone, though.
This is not great art, but...
... it shows what a phone can do
hand held, several hours after sunset.
While I was shooting this image, the word "astrophotography" appeared on my screen. Google has apparently upgraded my phone. I did a few test shots and they did indeed show stars. However, even Google can't allow me to shoot stars hand held. The exposure time was more than a minute, and the results were surprising, but soft. I intend to go out again, armed with a tripod, to see what Google has in store for me.
luxborealis' recent travel article on Ethiopia was an eye-opener. Like him, my D800 sits unused. My RX10 Mk IV has been sold, despite its extraordinary flexiblity.