Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

People who shoot photos with their lens hood on backwards

....This isn't even an argument worth having...

Is there any argument worth having where the instigator of the argument insists that they're right and aren't prepared to accept any of the views of other people? Apologies if I have misunderstood this thread, Bungle, but I think this thread would be more appropriately titled "Here ye should come if ye wish to hear that your photography related opinions are incorrect".
 
I must have imagined all of Ed's posts then....

that's what I thought.

People have argued that you can take good shots with phones. People have pointed out that some pro shots are made with phones. Nobody has argued that phones are technically better at taking photos than cameras.

You will not find a single person on this thread who has said that. Not one.

What you will find is people saying it's perfectly possible to be a terrible photographer with an expensive camera or a great photographer with a phone camera.
 
You're unbelievable. It's what you've been arguing throughout this entire thread. And what you are still arguing with your pointless pictures.

I gave you a long list of how DSLRs have the advantage, but apparently that was "moving the goalposts", as if that statement made any sense what so ever.
Can you produce a quote from me that backs up your claims or not, then?

I'm not interested in your highly confused 'interpretations' of what you think I may have said, just the facts. Ta.
 
that's what I thought.

People have argued that you can take good shots with phones. People have pointed out that some pro shots are made with phones. Nobody has argued that phones are technically better at taking photos than cameras.

You will not find a single person on this thread who has said that. Not one.

What you will find is people saying it's perfectly possible to be a terrible photographer with an expensive camera or a great photographer with a phone camera.
Bollocks they haven't it's exactly what Ed's been arguing. I really do not have the time or inclination to argue with a bunch of people who argue one point of view, then deny that's what they said at all while still arguing the same thing. I can't go back and quite because I'm on my phone, but it's plain for all to see what Ed has been posting.
 
Bollocks they haven't it's exactly what Ed's been arguing. I really do not have the time or inclination to argue with a bunch of people who argue one point of view, then deny that's what they said at all while still arguing the same thing. I can't go back and quite because I'm on my phone, but it's plain for all to see what Ed has been posting.

You obviously think he has, but he really hasn't.

He says so multiple times just above these posts. He's not arguing that at all.

I'm not sure why, when he says "I'm not arguing that at all" you refuse to believe him.
 
It's exactly what Ed is arguing.

No he's not, and neither is anyone else.

He's saying that superb photos can be taken on modern cameraphones and has provided photographic evidence of that.

They may not match up to DSLRs for flexibility after certain levels are surpassed, but millions of users (including some professionals occasionally) are more than happy to produce great pictures at or below those levels and benefit from the hugely increased convenience.
 
Last edited:
The reason people are laughing at you Bungle73 is because you're attempting to tell professional photographers they're doing it wrong and you're doing it from an amateur standpoint.

You're like someone shouting really loud advice at a football match.
Where are these "professional photographers"? I haven't seen any here. Only one person who claims to have done "pro" work, yet think a phone can match a DSLR.
 
Just to throw my tuppence in, someone whos good with a camera will get a good photo regardless of what they're taking a photo with. Some of the best photos Ive taken have been with an empty beer can with a hole in it.

But phone cameras will never be a replacement for a good quality camera, they just dont have the ability to reproduce the quality, and will never have the physical shape or size to give you any real control over shutter speed or apertures, as real control over them needs them in their physciality, and by the nature of a camera phone, being predominantly a phone before a camera, means that being pocket sized will always be important.
No, of course not, but they can be just as good as a dSLR for some uses in some conditions and come with the added bonus of being far more likely to be carried with you at all times.

Decent phone cameras can take photos that are easily good enough for most professional publishing uses and that's why so many news outlets and magazines are only to happy to use them. I've sold a photo off my S4 and without zooming right in to pixel level it looked every bit as good as something taken on a 'proper' camera.
 
Ok I'm done with this thread for now. I will come back when I can get on my PC and quote the posts Ed is too stupid to remember posting.
 
Ok I'm done with this thread for now. I will come back when I can get on my PC and quote the posts Ed is too stupid to remember posting.
It might be worth you asking yourself why you're the only person on this thread that seems to think I made such a claim.
 
Is there any argument worth having where the instigator of the argument insists that they're right and aren't prepared to accept any of the views of other people? Apologies if I have misunderstood this thread, Bungle, but I think this thread would be more appropriately titled "Here ye should come if ye wish to hear that your photography related opinions are incorrect".
That DSLRs are superior to phones is not an "opinion", it's a fact. A fact known by anyone who knows more than a little about photography.
 
Now that Bungle has gone, lets talk about that Nokia Lumia 1020. I followed editor's link to the site showing the photo series taken in Iceland with that phone. Those images were outstanding for a phone camera. Then I checked out details of the camera. It apparently has a rather larger sensor (although no measurements were given) than one of the Ixus models of compact camera. It seems to have some superior control system for exposure and a button that helps you to hold the camera with one hand while taking pictures. Also there is a special plastic holder that can be added to make the phone feel more like a camera with a grip. Nokia have probably succeeded in making the Lumia 1020 the best phone camera of all.
 
Last edited:
Hang on is this seriously the debate thats going on, that phone cameras are a match for DSLR's in the modern day and age?

Jeez.
No, that's just the straw man that got set up by Bungle in what is starting to look like an increasingly desperate attempt to Be Right At Any Cost.

Including, it would seem, to any credibility he might still have around these parts.
 
Now that Bungle has gone, lets talk about that Nokia Lumia 1020. I followed editor's link to the site showing the photo series taken in Norway with that phone. Those images were outstanding for a phone camera. Then I checked out details of the camera. It apparently has a rather large sensor (although no measurements were given) than one of the Ixus models of compact camera. It seems to have some superior control system for exposure and a button that helps you to hold the camera with one hand while taking pictures. Also there is a special plastic holder that can be added to maker the phone feel more like a camera with a grip. Nokia have probably succeeded in making the Lumia 1020 the best phone camera of all.
I had it on trial for a few days and was impressed with the quality. It even has a usable zoom. It's still nowhere as convenient to use as a dedicated camera, but the bolt-on handgrip makes a huge difference.

It took incredible daylight photos, but the low light ones really impressed me:

lumia.jpg
 
*bookmark

Bagel.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom