Should I buy a proper digital camera even though I have a good camera on my phone?

[Mr Allen]

Topic.

Been looking at cameras on PC World website and I'm seen some good ones for less than £100 , even Sony branded one which has good reviews.

But, I'd only use a camera about 3 or 4 times a year to take loads of pics at Comic Con type events and Balls, of which there's a few coming up next year according to ads on Facebook.

So anyway, should I save up for a good spec standalone camera or stick to the one in my phone?

 

[Progster]

Other. That's something I can't answer, you need to figure that out for yourself. Write a list of all the pros and cons of each, assign each one a score out of 10 as to how important they are for you, add them up and see which one comes out on top.

 

[Autistamatic]

The main difference between a compact camera and a phone camera (in everyday use) is that all but the cheapest compact cameras have some kind of optical zoom lens, whereas phones do not (with a couple of exceptions like the Huawei P20 Pro).
Is a zoom lens important to you? If it's not then save your money for something else and carry on using your phone

 

[Mr Allen]

The main difference between a compact camera and a phone camera (in everyday use) is that all but the cheapest compact cameras have some kind of optical zoom lens, whereas phones do not (with a couple of exceptions like the Huawei P20 Pro).
Is a zoom lens important to you? If it's not then save your money for something else and carry on using your phone

Yeah a zoom would be good, especially when I'm taking long distance shots and action shots like the dancing at the Balls and that.

 

[Ezra]

Phone cameras have zoom capability.

 

[Autistamatic]

Phone cameras have zoom capability.

Generally speaking it's digital zooming on phones rather than optical zooming. The same effect as taking a picture in full resolution then cropping and enlarging a section of it. Optical zooming using lenses allows one to get "closer" to the subject without loss of resolution. There are a couple of high end phones now on the market that have an optical zoom like the P20 Pro mentioned previously, but even they can only achieve around 2x magnification due to their compact size.
The zoom lens on my wife's samsung compact camera which is a couple of years old, is honestly amazing. I'd have to spend several hundred pounds (or more) to get a similar degree of magnification on my DSLR.

 

[WildCat]

Are you into professional photography? If not, the camera on yours and most smartphones will suffice. Your money, your choice and your decision alone though.

 

[Mary Terry]

Save your money and buy a nice Christmas present for your parents. Cell phone cameras work fine for what you're photographing and they do have zoom capability like Autismatic said.

 

[Autistamatic]

I think the main consideration when making what is, for you, quite a big outlay, is:
"Will I get enough use out of it to justify the expense."
For what it's worth, it doesn't sound like you'd get to use it that often. Another thing to think about is that ANY camera would be an extra thing for you to carry around to your costume events but you'd have your phone with you anyway. Last time I looked, Spiderman didn't have any pockets But aT least Batman's got his utility belt.
What model of phone do you have Rich?

 

[Judge]

It's amazing to see the evolution of both quality and functionality of cameras within the technology of a smartphone.

For those dependent on such a phone, you can count on having to upgrade at some point in the near future. And with it, the quality and functionality of digital photography is likely to rise as well. In essence, at this point of the game, it may be more prudent- and convenient to stick with your smartphone as your principal camera.

I hate to admit it, but I think it's a fair assessment that the smartphone industry is slowly beginning to crowd out the digital SLR industry in general. Personally I will always prefer using a good digital SLR, but in terms of a marketing demographic at this point in time, I'm the exception more than the rule.

If I were to prefer a digital camera in spite of owning a smartphone, I'd honestly be considering a product in the neighborhood of close to three hundred pounds. Keeping in mind that while there are a few big-name manufacturers of low cost cameras, it doesn't alter that axiom, "You get what you pay for".

 

[Autistamatic]

I bought a DSLR primarily for video, but I've played around with photography too since I got it. My old phone takes great photos an crystal clear 1080p video, but I need something with an optical zoom lens for video. We've got the compact camera and both my wife and I have Huawei phones. Our phones take far more pictures than either of the standalone cameras and with the resolution being very high (13MP on the P8 I recently replaced and 20MP on the P20 I recently got) digital zoom is a realistic function to use. If your phone has a camera of around 8MP or higher then the digital zoom is likely going to be all most people will need.
My wife runs two Instagram accounts with nothing but her phone and some companies use her photos to advertise their products.
I would only take a dedicated camera out with me If I had a particular purpose in mind that required something I can't do on a phone tbh.
We have a couple of professional/semi-profesional photographers in our membership here. Maybe one of those will stop by and offer an opinion

 

[Mr Allen]

I think the main consideration when making what is, for you, quite a big outlay, is:
"Will I get enough use out of it to justify the expense."
For what it's worth, it doesn't sound like you'd get to use it that often. Another thing to think about is that ANY camera would be an extra thing for you to carry around to your costume events but you'd have your phone with you anyway. Last time I looked, Spiderman didn't have any pockets But aT least Batman's got his utility belt.
What model of phone do you have Rich?

Motorola Moto G6.

Last month I almost bought a Sony camera from CEX for £18, which had good reviews, but they didn't have the memory stick for it in stock, and you can't use it without one of those because they don't take the normal memory cards.

I've seen a good camera on Amazon for £64 that takes SDHC cards, that's a Sony, OK I know my allegiance is to Microsoft, but they don't do cameras

@Judge, I know the cheaper cameras aren't as good or reliable, that's why I'm prepared to pay a little more, but that one I saw on Amazon this morning for £64 has 4 out of 5 stars in reviews.

Plus if I had the 300 quid, I'd have spent it on a 4K TV during the "Black Friday" sales last week.

 

[Autistamatic]

Well according to Techradar the Moto G6 has a dual sensor 12MP rear camera, 8MP selfie camera and can do 1080p video at 60fps. The sample pictures they had on there looked really good too.
At 12MP the digital zoom should be pretty good - more than enough for the kind of pictures you talked of earlier. My old P8 is 13MP and the clarity, even on blown up cropped images is superb.
Honest opinion - you'd need to be spending a lot more than you're budgeting to make a significant improvement over your phone. Use the money towards one of the events or a new costume maybe?

 

[Judge]

Well according to Techradar the Moto G6 has a dual sensor 12MP rear camera, 8MP selfie camera and can do 1080p video at 60fps. The sample pictures they had on there looked really good too.
At 12MP the digital zoom should be pretty good - more than enough for the kind of pictures you talked of earlier. My old P8 is 13MP and the clarity, even on blown up cropped images is superb.
Honest opinion - you'd need to be spending a lot more than you're budgeting to make a significant improvement over your phone. Use the money towards one of the events or a new costume maybe?

Not bad for a smartphone. My Canon DSLR only has 10 megapixel capability, though I've never thought that to be any kind of limitation. I've never wanted to print anything crisp and clear beyond what my printer can print anyways, at 8.5" x 11". And when I share photos online I seldom display them any larger than 800 x 533 pixels.

The one advantage I would have in such instances might be in lens quality and perhaps aperture or shutter priority. I tend to shoot with aperture priority, being more mindful of depth-of-field than shutter speed. Plus I have image stabilization, allowing handheld shutter speeds somewhat lower than 1/60 a second without blurring.

Still, just seeing tv commercials of all the major smartphone manufacturers, their photographic ability seems to get better and better. While I'm still resisting owning such a phone, but it may eventually be inevitable to buy one at least for emergencies when out in the car. Still it might be fun to have a phone that is camera ready for most of the time I'm out and about.

Interesting to see how CNet compares this smartphone's camera ability to other more expensive phones:

The Moto G6 shouldn't be this good and still cost $249

 

[Southern Discomfort]

My phone is a OnePlus 3T and I can shoot in 4K with that. But I bought I Nikon DSLR camera because I go to a photography group. If I weren't doing that then I wouldn't have bought it.

I know this is a step up from the conversation but I think it still stands. If you're got a phone of reasonable newish quality then there really is very little reason to buy a £100 camera. But I'm not saying you should instead by a £400 DSLR. You're are only going to use this camera as you say for comic cons and things, it just isn't worth it in my books.

And stop having fast jabs at Sony. LEAVE SONY ALONE! I MEAN IT!

 

[Autistamatic]

The one advantage I would have in such instances might be in lens quality and perhaps aperture or shutter priority

The latest generation of phones are just getting better all the time. The P20 I just got has a "pro" mode that allows for aperture, shutter speed and ISO settings as well as manual or auto white balance and image stabilization in both photo and video modes, HDR and can shoot in RAW format. I believe the OnePlus 3T mentioned above has most or all of those facilities too.
I've got a Canon too, a 200D (I think it's called "Rebel SL2" in the US) which takes great pics but the only advantage it really has over the P20 is lens flexibility and being a dedicated camera it's more tactile. When you consider that the sensor on the Canon is 24MP yet the P20 is 20MP on the back and the selfie camera is 24MP - same as the Canon, the gap between them is very narrow unless you need features like interchangeable lenses or filters. The phone will even do 4K video (The Canon does max 1080p 60fps) and 960fps in 720p for 32x slow motion. It's an astonishing piece of kit for the price of it.The cash price of the phone is less than my DSLR was (just).
I'm not a phone junkie btw I rarely make calls or texts other than to my wife but it is a security thing and I like having a computer/camera/voice recorder/notepad/calculator/web browser in my pocket. It's the ultimate electronic multi tool

 

[Judge]

The latest generation of phones are just getting better all the time. The P20 I just got has a "pro" mode that allows for aperture, shutter speed and ISO settings as well as manual or auto white balance and image stabilization in both photo and video modes, HDR and can shoot in RAW format. I believe the OnePlus 3T mentioned above has most or all of those facilities too.

Yep. Nice! And with all the features you'd expect on a better digital SLR.

I sometimes wonder if most phone users are aware of all those features and really make use of them. Having a wide range of ISO settings makes a camera so versatile over many complex lighting considerations. Coupled with image stabilization and there ya go. Very cool.

 

[Autistamatic]

I honestly wouldn't know what half those functions did if I hadn't already got the DSLR but they've worked exactly as expected when I've played with them. If you like photography or video then I'd seriously think about getting a mid to high end phone now so you've always got a quality camera to hand. It won't replace your DSLR but the functions they offer now have really surprised me. The newer models are even coming with obscene amounts of memory too. I saw one packing half a terabyte the other day!
I can still remember being cock-a-hoop when I first got a 20MB hard drive for my Amiga now you can stick a powerful computer with 25000 times that in your pocket. Gotta love Moore's law

 

[FreeDiver]

Generally speaking it's digital zooming on phones rather than optical zooming. The same effect as taking a picture in full resolution then cropping and enlarging a section of it. Optical zooming using lenses allows one to get "closer" to the subject without loss of resolution.

Digital zooming on a phone is not all that bad if you know what you are doing. For example, if your phone can record in 4K and you set it for 1080p. You can still get a 2:1 digital zoom without any loss of resolution.

 

[Autistamatic]

Digital zooming on a phone is not all that bad if you know what you are doing. For example, if your phone can record in 4K and you set it for 1080p. You can still get a 2:1 digital zoom without any loss of resolution.

.
Absolutely, however for still pictures there will always be a loss of resolution. For a "serious" photographer digital zoom can be a limitation, but for taking snaps as mementos, as Rich wants to do, it should be more than adequate. The camera on his phone is pretty decent