People who shoot photos with their lens hood on backwards

[editor]

You're the that's "off again". I made a simple statement, that DSLRs are better than camera phones.....which they are....and you keep coming out with "But my phone takes nice pictures in perfect conditions when there's r in the month so that obviously means DSLRs aren't better at all!"

You said they were a "million times" better without specifying a shedload of wriggly caveats about specific shooting conditions. You said that smartphones were never used by pros, except an entire newspaper office kitted out their staff with them, and they've graced prestigious front covers.

Your problem is you're really not very knowledgeable in this subject and make the tragic mistake of making statements without actually knowing the facts first.

 

[Spymaster]

I made a simple statement, that DSLRs are better than camera phones.....

What people are telling you is that with photography as with many things you have to make trade-offs. If you want a super-dooper sensor, ability to change lenses, etc, etc, then of course a DSLR is going to be the ticket. But if you just want something that takes decent photos in reasonable conditions at the drop of a hat, lugging round a DSLR is going to be a pointless pain in the bollocks and the iPhone in your arse pocket, or a compact, is perfect.

 

[twentythreedom]

What have we learned about the people mentioned in the OP? There seems to be very little in this thread actually about them.

 

[Bungle73]

You said they were a "million times" better without specifying a shedload of wriggly caveats about specific shooting conditions. You said that smartphones were never used by pros, except an entire newspaper office kitted out their staff with them, and they've graced prestigious front covers.

Your problem is you're really not very knowledgeable in this subject and make the tragic mistake of making statements without actually knowing the facts first.

Actually, I think the problem is that you are now arguing for the sake of it.....either that or you have no idea what the hell you are talking about. Which is it?

First, you're the one bringing caveats into it by concentrating on one particular shooting condition as if that has any relevance to the argument whatsoever.

I just gave you around half a dozen examples of where a DSLR is better, but you're still obsessesed with your one picture taken in perfect conditions.

Did you actually read that article about the newspaper you quoted? As I already pointed out, the reason they are now using iPhone is because they SACKED their in-house photographers. The people given phones aren't photographers, they're just regular journlists. They are still going to employ freelance photographers, who presumably will be using DSLRs. So this idea that they've got completely iPhone-only is nonsense. And it was a cost-cutting measure, nothing more.

And just because a few images from a phone have been on a magazine cover, it in no way at all means a DSLR is not superior. A few images mind you, taken by someone who is still mainly using DSLRs.

 

[neonwilderness]

And just because a few images from a phone have been on a magazine cover, it in no way at all means a DSLR is not superior.

No one is disputing that

But that's not to say that phones aren't capable of producing decent quality images that can also be used (see editor's example for instance).

 

[Bungle73]

What people are telling you is that with photography as with many things you have to make trade-offs. If you want a super-dooper sensor, ability to change lenses, etc, etc, then of course a DSLR is going to be the ticket. But if you just want something that takes decent photos in reasonable conditions, lugging round a DSLR is going to be a pointless pain in the bollocks and the iPhone in your arse pocket, or a compact, is perfect.

Um, that's not the argument being had here.

 

[5t3IIa]

Um, that's not the argument being had here.

What is it then? Quick quick! No re-reading!!

 

[Bungle73]

What is it then? Quick quick! No re-reading!!

It is "Is a DSLR technologically superior to a camera phone".

 

[existentialist]

I reckon Bungle is some reinvention of Tobyjug.

Well, I guess there was a vacancy there. I look forward to Mr Bungle's entry for the "Boat Happy" competition

 

[neonwilderness]

It is "Is a DSLR technologically superior to a camera phone".

I thought we were talking about lens hoods and drugged up idiots who store them on their lenses?

 

[Bungle73]

I thought we were talking about lens hoods and drugged up idiots who store them on their lenses?

That was about a dozen arguments ago.

 

[editor]

It is "Is a DSLR technologically superior to a camera phone".

That's not what you claimed in the first place, you deceitful little shit.

 

[existentialist]

I don't see the point in fancy cameras with optical lenses these days. My phone is 26 megapixels with a x30 zoom.

Tsk

(mind you, he bit, didn't he? )

 

[Bungle73]

That's not what you claimed in the first place, you deceitful little shit.

Um, yes it is. That is exactly what I claimed. And also what we've been arguing about for the past god knows how many pages.

You know someone's lost the argument when a)they start getting abusive, and b) they start claiming that the original argument wasn't the one that were having in the first place, when it clearly was.

 

[editor]

A phone doesn't come anywhere near to equalling the quality of even a budget DSLR, no matter how many megapixels it's got.

You really haven't much of a clue when it comes to photography because this a statement from Planet Idiot. That is all.

 

[editor]

You know someone's lost the argument when a)they start getting abusive..

Rarely have I self-pwnage so complete as this:

Um, don't tell fucking lies.

Fuck off. Shit face started in case you didn't notice in post@175.

Posted yesterday.

 

[Bungle73]

You really haven't much of a clue when it comes to photography because this a statement from Planet Idiot. That is all.

I really don't have time for your games any more.

Do this:

Go onto a photography forum - pick any one - and pose this question:

Which is the superior camera, a phone or a DSLR?

Then post the results back here.

Kthxbye.

 

[existentialist]

p.s. before I lost it, my lens hood was always on backwards.

I wonder what Bungle was doing before he lost it?

 

[existentialist]

I really don't have time for your games any more.

Do this:

Go onto a photography forum - pick any one - and pose this question:

Which is the superior camera, a phone or a DSLR?

Then post the results back here.

Kthxbye.

What, and do all your legwork for you?

Invariably, when people rise to challenges such as yours and get an answer the challenger doesn't like, all kinds of special pleading ensues - "ah, you went to THAT forum?"; "Oh, well, he WOULD say that"; "well, yes, but those were different circumstances", etc.

Pointless. Almost as pointless, in fact, as the three or four arguments you've managed to have on this thread.

 

[weltweit]

My camera club runs competitions which I don't normally enter, but I might try to score a 10 or a win with an image from my iPhone.

I know its limitations, deep dof, only good in good light, prone to motion blur etc, but a limited landscape, or a head and shoulders portrait with a clean background might work.

 

[Spymaster]

Um, that's not the argument being had here.

Well that's precisely the argument you were having here (comparing an S4 to a Ricoh):

Now try taking a picture in low light, then try a macro shot, then try taking one of something far away, then a sport's action shot, then a long exposure shot, then try getting a narrow DoF shot. There's a reason people buy DSLRs.

You're arguing that a DSLR is better than a cameraphone in all those situations. The massive, massive, advantage that cameraphones have is portability and therefore useability which kind of fucks your question regarding which is "better".

 

[Bungle73]

Well that's precisely the argument you were having here (comparing an S4 to a Ricoh):

It's not actually.

You're arguing that a DSLR is better than a cameraphone in all those situations. The massive, massive, advantage that cameraphones have is portability and therefore useability which kind of fucks your question regarding which is "better".

Um, no it doesn't. And that is ONE thing, and one thing that someone primarily concerned with image quality - which is what we are talking about here - would not be that concerned with most of the time.

What is the predominant camera type of choice for amateur photographers, and for pros? It's a DSLR. Case closed.

 

[weltweit]

 

[neonwilderness]

What is the predominant camera type of choice for amateur photographers, and for pros? It's a DSLR. Case closed.

Got any facts to back that up with before you declare "case closed"?

Also how are you defining amateur? Anyone who takes photos that isn't a pro, or something more restrictive that suits your argument?

 

[neonwilderness]

What, and do all your legwork for you?

Invariably, when people rise to challenges such as yours and get an answer the challenger doesn't like, all kinds of special pleading ensues - "ah, you went to THAT forum?"; "Oh, well, he WOULD say that"; "well, yes, but those were different circumstances", etc.

Pointless. Almost as pointless, in fact, as the three or four arguments you've managed to have on this thread.

Careful, you might get reported to Amateur Photography for saying things like that.

 

[weltweit]

If photographers are those who take photographs, there are millions of camera phones in the UK now.

 

[fractionMan]

DSLRs are crap for making phone calls. Phones win. Case closed.

 

[Bungle73]

Got any facts to back that up with before you declare "case closed"?

Also how are you defining amateur? Anyone who takes photos that isn't a pro, or something more restrictive that suits your argument?

I think it was abundantly clear what I meant. But very well. I mean people who have a serious interest in photography and make a hobby out of it.

 

[fuck seals]

Chap's got a problem.

Consistently starts a thread about a fairly innocuous subject and makes a mild questionable statement about it. Amazon, the red hanky people, disabled access to trains, et al. Again & again.

When questioned he retreats to a you-all-have-an-urban-hive-mind position; entrenches his position; exclaims massive disbelief that no-one can see the bleeding obvious; resorts to exaggeration, generalizing from the particular, cries wolf, and a whole bunch of other highly disingenuous tactics to extend the thread's life.

He likes the attention, he likes the persecution

I'm fucking sick of it; it's disruptive, ill-mannered, tedious, and adds nothing to the site. editor - i petition for a ban.

 

[neonwilderness]

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u...to-insight-with-david-ward-iphone-photography

I mentioned the ritual of shooting on 5x4, and what I mean by this is that when you work with that kind of camera there are a series of steps you must engage in to produce an image that's usable. This slows you down. In a way that's a good thing, because it makes you look at your subject so you can't make a quick snap. This can help you see connections you might otherwise have missed. However, one of the things you may miss out on is the more ephemeral moments that present themselves to you. Some events, such as a patch of light or a subject moving quickly, are fleeting and you can miss them while setting up your 5x4.

He clearly hasn't got a clue