The Camera is only as good as the Photographer

[strikeIII]

People that rely on a good camera should really take a step back and take the time to learn how to use it. I'm no pro photographer but I do like to take good photos. It's good to at least build some skills on how to do just that. Don't rely on the camera to take a good photo for you instead take the time to make it a good photo. Just something to think about with the slew of debates between which device has the best camera.

Below are a couple of interesting articles to read that pertains to anyone who cares about taking good photos.

Rant: We Photographers Have Lost Our North, Stop the Endless Gear Debates

Rant: We Photographers Have Lost Our North, Stop the Endless Gear Debates

 

[badMojo69]

But that's the rub...people don't want to be good photographers. They just want Point...shoot...great photo and are willing "evidently" to pay a lot of money to get it. I think the Pixel does a good job of post processing with the camera. But itsn't nothing that can't be replicated by another phone with an equally specd camera and software.

 

[hpilot]

I take photography very seriously. I have a $3200 Sony camera body plus thousands more in high quality glass. What you are talking about is not what the average person comparing a phone camera is looking for. They just want a well exposed (high dynamic range), well focused shot on full auto mode and consistent. They also want it fast so they don't miss a shot. The artistic stuff is fine, but that is not factored in while shopping for the best camera in a phone. I get your point that these are all just the tools, and they don't guarantee a well composed and impressive photographic work of art. I have made some nice shots with some really poor cameras, but not consistently. I guess the bottom line is that people just want as much help as possible with their photos. And yes, pixel-peepers annoy me too. https://www.flickr.com/photos/110775021@N02/

 

[jephanie]

I do a lot of photography myself with "pro-sumer" level equipment and, without reading the attached article, my thought is that people complain about crappy camera phone quality more often because they don't know when they should take a pic and when they shouldn't bother trying.

No camera phone's sensor and lens combo is going to pull off miracles when you're shooting in the dark at a person who has a bright light source behind them pointing at the camera's lens. The HDR tricks help with marginal conditions and the Pixel is one of the best at it right now. But there really are times where people are expecting their phones to perform miracles when what they should do is just move around a little or turn people to face another direction and get likely better results OR realize that the conditions they are in will result in a low quality shot and they should take it only if they can accept that and still appreciate the moment they captured.

 

[Friendzone]

I can only speak for myself but I agree with the replies. I have zero inclination to learn to be a good photographer on a smartphone, and would never use anything other than tapping the app, pointing it, and clicking. If I was holding an actual camera in my hands, that would be an entirely different story. Having said that, I also wouldn't complain about my photo quality from the phone if the bad photo was due to me rather than the phone or me using the phone beyond its limitations.
Some people will say you can't carry a camera with you everywhere you go and that's true. But speaking for myself again I've never been somewhere that I felt required photo quality beyond a phone camera without my dedicated camera with me.

 

[strikeIII]

I do understand that not everyone wants to be a good photographer but even auto mode is not perfect and doesn't expose properly or grabs the wrong focus point. The point is no matter what you still have to lean how to use it properly.

 

[1213 1213]

It would be nice if tech sites like this one dedicated some time to this sort of thing. They could even generate loads of clicks by doing it slowly over a month or three in an episodic fashion.

 

[akin_t]

Over the past 5 years, I've owned anywhere from $5,000 to $7,000 worth of pro-sumer camera gear, and your argument would make sense to someone like me.

However, it is just noise and more excuses when we're talking about cell phones. People are looking for point and shoot, literally.

If people can't point and shoot with a phone camera, then it's the equipment/software that's at fault. Ethos behind point and shoot is to make it as easy and monkey proof for anyone to take a picture.

So instead of telling people to learn how to be photographers, you should be contacting that 24/7 support on the Pixel asking them to revise the camera or something.

 

[hal1]

90% of people are taking hundreds of photos to keep on their phone to show people. They are not making 8 by 10 prints. In that respect, they are not examining the quality that closely, but rather just showing them to people on their phone

 

[Laura Knotek]

I go back to the days of 35mm film and all manual cameras (Canon F-1). I've gotten good shots using the old point and shoot 110 and 126 cameras and even cameras on feature phones. I agree that it is indeed usually the photographer, rather than the camera, that determines the quality of the photo.

 

[Laura Knotek]

90% of people are taking hundreds of photos to keep on their phone to show people. They are not making 8 by 10 prints. In that respect, they are not examining the quality that closely, but rather just showing them to people on their phone

That's true for the most part. I have ordered prints for family members who liked specific photos I've taken using my phones.

 

[PhiPsi32]

I was trained on the Nikon FM2, and I still like taking manual photos. What I see now is much less skill overall even amongst trained photographers. They bracket their photos and frame average or otherwise process the images after the fact to get the best result.

 

[strikeIII]

Over the past 5 years, I've owned anywhere from $5,000 to $7,000 worth of pro-sumer camera gear, and your argument would make sense to someone like me.

However, it is just noise and more excuses when we're talking about cell phones. People are looking for point and shoot, literally.

If people can't point and shoot with a phone camera, then it's the equipment/software that's at fault. Ethos behind point and shoot is to make it as easy and monkey proof for anyone to take a picture.

So instead of telling people to learn how to be photographers, you should be contacting that 24/7 support on the Pixel asking them to revise the camera or something.

I understand that majority of people just want to point and shoot. But this day in age these flagship phones are more than capable of producing a solid image and when people complain that the shot they take is not clear when there are plenty of pictures showing otherwise then they need to rethink how they take pictures. My OP was geared towards people who consider the quality of the camera when purchasing a device and if that's the case then there's still some responsibility of the user to learn how to take a good photo rather than blaming it on the device. People need to learn and know the limitations and work around that. You can give a $5000 kit to anyone and that doesn't mean they'll still take good photos even in the auto setting.

BTW, this was in no way defending the quality of the Pixel, or any other device for that matter, I'm simply just stating that you can read or watch reviews all day of people comparing the photo quality of all these flagships but at the end of the day the person taking the photos is what determines the quality.

 

[akin_t]

I was trained on the Nikon FM2, and I still like taking manual photos. What I see now is much less skill overall even amongst trained photographers. They bracket their photos and frame average or otherwise process the images after the fact to get the best result.

Well that's what technology does. It makes things easier.

Keep in mind that you probably got a lot less keepers on your FM2 than you will on a D5.

 

[Friendzone]

I understand that majority of people just want to point and shoot. But this day in age these flagship phones are more than capable of producing a solid image and when people complain that the shot they take is not clear when there are plenty of pictures showing otherwise then they need to rethink how they take pictures. My OP was geared towards people who consider the quality of the camera when purchasing a device and if that's the case then there's still some responsibility of the user to learn how to take a good photo rather than blaming it on the device. People need to learn and know the limitations and work around that. You can give a $5000 kit to anyone and that doesn't mean they'll still take good photos even in the auto setting.

BTW, this was in no way defending the quality of the Pixel, or any other device for that matter, I'm simply just stating that you can read or watch reviews all day of people comparing the photo quality of all these flagships but at the end of the day the person taking the photos is what determines the quality.

That's fair. If complaints are going to be made, and the poor quality is user error rather than the hardware/software you have a fair point

 

[I800C0LLECT]

I agree with the last few sentiments. People have begun to focus on what phones can't do... No matter how trivial. I think that just goes to show how far we've come. We used to get excited over what they could do. I guess we're hitting a performance plateau?

We're getting spoiled.

 

[PhiPsi32]

Well that's what technology does. It makes things easier.

Keep in mind that you probably got a lot less keepers on your FM2 than you will on a D5.

Sure, point being "manual photography" now isn't manual photography in the traditional sense. Optimizing a point and shoot camera to burst, frame average, and color correct is simply a streamlined "lights out" algorithm that mimics what pro photographers would do with Photoshop or something similar.

With regrds to the second, a good phot tech can develop and print good photos from bad film. I wasn't a great photographer, but I had awesome people in my development lab.

 

[Impulses]

There's a ton of things phones can't do and will never be able to do until the entire form factor changes (possibly to a modular approach)... $650 spent on a Sony RX100 or even cheaper compacts (Canon G9x, Panasonic GM5, etc) will get you vastly better low light photos than any phone, and some degree of DoF control, and a wider choice of focal lengths, etc etc.

There ARE things phones can currently do which high end cameras can't do or haven't attempted to do... Fast near-instant HDR is one such thing, even a $2,000 camera requires you to turn on bracketing and possibly hold it way steadier and the in camera processed HDR usually pales in comparison to what you can do on a PC (and/or only incorporates 3 frames etc).

I feel like the computationally intensive approach Google is taking with their camera is probably the smartest path to improving smartphone cameras right now, sensor/lens wise they plateau'd quite a while ago, it just took a while for some companies to fix their shoddy JPEG post processing... That's also something even pro cameras can struggle with mightily, it's also somewhat subjective and why most photo enthusiasts just shoot RAW and post process themselves.

As to education... Meh, most people aren't really interested in learning something new skills-wise, and the core concepts of photography are rarely presented in a newbie friendly way within the confines of a camera's UI, it takes a commitment and time investment. Most people don't even have a clue what HDR stands for, or what kinda camera they could get for smartphone money (a much better one!). They don't wanna know about the relationship between shutter speed and aperture or ISO, they just wanna P&S.

There's nothing wrong with that IMO, tho I do think a lot of people would be better off getting themselves a separate camera rather than a new smartphone. Not only are there some huge advantages that have been overlooked by that "phones killed the P&S" meme but they're all Wi-Fi connected now for the most part, they're nearly as convenient as a phone for quick sharing.

M4/3 shooter here, nothing as fancy as the guys who commented on having invested over 5 grand in camera gear (guessing FF?)... Tho I've experimented a lot and own 2 bodies + half a dozen lenses. I bought into M4/3 for all the things a phone or even a compact could never do, so the lens choices largely reflect that (primes, ultra wides, teles, etc).

 

[Impulses]

Despite my wall of text above and somewhat pessimistic outlook on people I'll add one more positive note... Well half positive. I do think the dedicated camera industry has done an absolute TERRIBLE job of promoting the advantages a dedicated camera has, and promoting ease of use in general... Those two things combined with the glut of older small sensor compacts (which barely evolved in a decade) are what lead to the demise of the P&S at the hands of smartphones.

All that being said, there is more general interest in photography now than possibly EVER before, and SOME people are willing to learn and pick up a skill or two... But the snobishness they're likely to encounter at dedicated photography forums and sites is also likely to turn many off. Social networks like Flikr or Google+ are probably a better avenue. A smartphone site like AC running a few articles on core photography principles and how they relate to smartphones would probably pique some interest too.

Contrary to old school wisdom I'd probably start with the more artistic side of the equation and/or technique rather than the technical side of the exposure triangle (anyone that would shoot a phone in manual or fiddle with exposure probably already has enough interest to study this on his own)... Talk about composition, how to time yourself to hold a steady shot, distortion/perspective and how backing away can actually lead to a more flattering portrait, rule of thirds, etc.

Dunno if it'd have the click-thru worthiness of some of AC's more general guides, but the best part is that this info never gets outdated, it'd be just as useful in 5 years as it is now. Core photography concepts are mostly the same now as they were in the film days, things like stabilization and HDR help some but they don't change the basic principles.

 

[Impulses]

Gear lust and throwing money at the problem thinking it'll inherently get you better photos isn't unique to smartphone shooters btw, there's plenty of people doing the same thing with much pricier camera bodies and lenses on dedicated photography boards.

It's human nature to an extent... And yes, in many many cases they blame the camera too for things that aren't really it's fault or they just didn't comprehend prior to purchase.