UKH

When the budget camera thread was running a while back, I thought it would be interesting to see some actual photos. So here we are - a few months later albeit - a thread to show off your best phone photography.

I'll open the batting with a few of my own personal favourites.

Not a thought out selection of "best" but just a random selection from 2018-2020 travelogue. Cairo, Florence, Hamburg, San Francisco  x2

Nice photos which just goes to show what some mobile phone cameras can do.

Personally, I like your sunset photos of the canal and L Morlich, but then I’ve always liked sunsets so biased! Can’t compete with yours though using a phone camera.

Most of my phone photos are in backup (pc died), but since I’ve had already had one to post yesterday, I’ll link to it meantime as a phone camera photo - https://www.ukhillwalking.com/forums/off_belay/blue_supermoon_-_bbc_bonkerness... . Was taken on a iphone camera in 2019 using the then standard Apple installed AI based software (and a bit over saturated given the thread title!).

Most easily accessible, this photo from a couple of years ago!

Love the Loch Morlich one.

Interesting to compare the model/price of the phone on this thread. Is a Google Pixel /iphone 14,15 whatever truly better than a £200 android job? Particularly in normal daylight conditions.

At the price point of £200, yes. There is this great misconception by loads of phone buyers that all phones are alike and paying more is a rip off. I deal with crappy cheap Android hardware every day at work, and it truly couldn’t be further from the truth, whether we’re talking about the camera optics, the sensors, the in-device processing, and all other hardware on the cheap POS phone as well. There is *far* less of a difference and in some cases no difference between mid-high end Android phones and the cutting edge however, a £500 Android phone can be stunning if you stay well away from Samsung and the like.

On the cheaper end of the market you can’t easily beat Huawei, and their western sanction dodging offshoot, Honor. Great cameras, great screens, great hardware in general.

My £9 per month Motorola android phone takes comically bad photos with its "AI Camera"🙂

The canal photos were both taken with a Pixel 2 (so not modern by any stretch of the imagination), and the Loch Morlich photo was taken with a Galaxy A8 (so not top-end by any stretch of the imagination).

I got the Pixel 2, refurbished, for £135 in 2020 - maybe the way to go is to get the previous generation's high-end phone rather than the current generation's basic phone?

A couple of my favourites.  Both taken on a first generation Google Pixel, from 2016.  I was amazed by how good the picture quality was at the time; still doesn't seem bad now.

Two from me of Zaragoza with a Samsung S22. Same scene different time of day!

mine were shot on an iPhone 7 

A recent snap of loch katrine from the Walter Scot.

I think phone good phone cameras do very well for most of my day to day stuff, often hard to justify carrying a proper camera now.

Some quick lucky dips from my phone

One from last weekend - looking back towards Loch an t-Seilich in the Cairngorms.

iPhone 11 Pro

Yes, 100%. Phones depreciate massively, and the hardware doesn’t get any worse* when they do. Just as an example of the differences off the top of my head, although this isn’t about the camera, the currently produced and sold Samsung Galaxy A11 utter POS phone has 1/5th of the CPU performance of the iPhone 6S, which was released in 2015. All the rest of the hardware, camera included, will be of similar quality. You can have the latter, and in fact much newer and better Android or Apple devices, for bugger all used.
 

* Provided the refurbishment has replaced the battery.

I love the one of Loch Morlich!

I'd agree with this, I bought a cheap Xiaomi redmi 11 after I cooked my old Honor 7x and the camera on the new phone is appalling compared to the old phone, almost to the point that I was considering sorting out the old phone and using it again. Only put off by the massive battery life and better screen of the new phone.

So my policy on this is to always stick to Google's Pixel phones (good cameras and vanilla android).  Whatever the current generation is, buy a used generation N-1.

When generation N+1 is released all the prices drop.  Some time after that, I sell the gen N-1 phone to CEX and use the voucher to buy gen N.  As CEX are quite generous with selling to them as long as you take the money in the form of a store voucher, the cost difference between buying and selling is relatively small. 

I have literally just sold my old Pixel 5 and bought a Pixel 6 for a total cost of £100.  That'll do for the next two years; my cost of ownership is more or less £1/week.

I backed up and cleared out my phone last week, but here are a nice couple I’ve taken since then. 
Four year old iPhone 11. 

I love this photo.

Here's a few more from the lesser-visited corners of my archive.

One from yesterday... Quarry Gutter

Awful resolution but ok if you dont zoom in

https://freeimage.host/i/J9Eo2Y7
 

Blue moon over the distant Falkenstein in Saxony. Completely unedited, fully automatic settings, and a car happened to drive past during the 2s exposure, illuminating the foliage of the tree.

I took this with a Pixel 7 in Poland.

Some impressive pictures here. I'm not a professional photographer, and I don't have the skill or dedication to be one, but I do wonde how this technology affects the practice of what has up to now been regarded as serious photography.

Specifically, I wonder to what extent the capabilities of phone cameras now allow a pro or semi-pro to work without owning the obligatory bag of expensive bodies and lenses? I guess I'm thinking of eg landscape or architectual photography, and people who either capture images for sale or as part of an activity like fine art / coffee table books.

Is this something that happens now? And if so, to what extent is it admitted to?

For close up clinical work inside nothing beats a large MP SLR or modern mirrorless equivalent with dedicated ring flash system. For lots of other things I do use my phone.

Been happening for many years. First one I read about, some five or so years ago, that really blew my mind was a professional wedding photographer using an iphone for a large multi day traditional wedding. He even had a backup mobile phone to use but also, as it was his first use of an iphone for professional wedding shots, he employed two professional dslr photographers to take shots.  Apparently the iphone photos were so good and accepted by the wedding couple those were the ones used in the albums and not the dslr ones.

There are now many professionals using smartphone cameras for all or most of their work in a variety of genres, including landscape, conceptual architecture, street, art, portraiture, weddings, but probably by now every photographic genre.

Even documentaries nowadays are done with smartphone cameras. One article I read by a professional documentary maker was that smart phones allowed him to capture events in an unobtrusive and unthreatening way not possible with a large dslr and big lenses. As he said smartphones are common place and are generally accepted as being carried so not really noticed.

Of course they will be exceptions, as even at my hobby level, a smartphone can’t capture some of the things a “proper” camera and lenses can with any degree of quality. Maybe not fair though as you can’t expect a smartphone capture say a bird at a distance of 100m in any quality compared with a hugely expensive camera lens. Wait till smartphone AI gets better  ……!

Very interesting! Thanks for taking the time to write that.

Joe Cornish has a whole section of his gallery in Northallerton that are iPhone pics. From memory all generally smaller prints but nonetheless I am sure he won't be alone in doing that now..

There is a dedicated photocomp for iphones where the photo and all editing can only be done on the phone. Some amazing work there.

I recently shot an event as a paid gig, the weather was terrible but it was a charity event and they wanted to generate publicity, what ended up happening is I was taking group pictures of the  participants with their own phones that they could then upload to SM straight away and to be honest the pictures were as good if not better than my mirror less system with expensive lenses for that particular scenario.

All taken with an IPhone 13Pro.

While I can't imagine ever getting much pleasure from the actual process of taking photos with a phone rather than the tactile experience of a "proper" camera with a good viewfinder, I am often impressed by the quality of photos other people get on their phones in less tricky light (my own phone camera is a cheap crappy thing which I only use for disposable whatsapp shots!).

So I do sometimes wonder why a proper camera with a so much bigger sensor and so much more space inside for electronic wizardry, can't, by using the amazing technology now in phones, completely outclass phones. Or maybe they do in anything but good light and small print or screen size?

On the other hand, Robert, you could argue that taking photos on a phone is something of a return to the essence of photography, as Cartier Bresson saw it, for example. It’s so fast and so easy that one is definitely relating more directly with the landscape and human events going on around you. The iPhone camera’s main limitation is in bright light, when you can’t see the picture properly … then I just tend to go by getting the ‘balance’ of the picture to seem roughly right, and shoot a bit wide. You can always tart up the composition later. 

In short, though, I think an iPhone bypasses many of the limitations of photography with a ‘proper’ camera, as you call it.

(I say all this as someone who as a professional photographer always used very ‘proper’ medium and large format cameras, using film, and have been more or less completely won over by the phone camera.)

What do you see as these limitations? Actual theoretical limitations in the photos you can get or the bulk to carry around?

More directly perhaps, but less intimately?

The bulk you have to carry around. Also, tecnically, no fast film stocks that I know are as good in very low light as my iPhone. One of the few advantages of a conventional camera is that you can play around with depth of field and shutter speed effects.

No, I think more intimately. Once you disappear behind a viewfinder, or worse, under a black cloth, you become very detached from them. The subject becomes a composition in a black rectangle, or square frame, and the concentration is purely on the aesthetics of the photograph and not on the person. For this reason, when taking portraits on e.g. a Hasselblad, I would always have the camera locked off on a tripod, and stand beside it using a cable release, while talking directly to the person.

Also, when I think how much easier it would be now to take climbing pictures on an iPhone rather than a medium-fomat camera, while hanging on a static line in a sit-seat, or on an abseil rope, the mind boggles.

But what about a digital camera with a big sensor?

I get that for people, but for landscape I want to "see" the photograph I'm trying to take and I find a viewfinder pretty much essential for that.

I've recently upgraded my compact camera for climbing and one of the things I wanted was a tilting screen so that I can hold it out from a belay and still see what I'm getting (one of the few times I don't use a viewfinder!). Also I'm often horrified at the risks people take with dropping phones while climbing!

Well, yes, but again, nothing like as compact. Another gadget to carry.

There's a cheap gag in there about fondling your telescopic zoom lens I'm sure, but I will rise above. It did make me think though how "serious photography" seems utterly dominated by men. I know from climbing and mountaineering it is, but I get the impression that with more general wildlife and landscape photos it is still very male dominated. Perhaps with fashion and portrait photography there are more women? But I don't actually know.

But I'm sure camera phones have led to far more women taking photos and enjoying it. My partner never showed the slightest inclination to use our first digital compact camera, let alone my DSLR a bit later, even when our older kids were still little and were quite cute in photos (before phone cameras were any good). But she takes pictures now for her (private) Instagram, and I think she has a consistently excellent eye for photos - often making mundane views or objects looks beautiful or interesting. 

Yes, if I was to go back to professional landscape photography again, I would definitely shell out on a good digital camera. Probably a Sony.

Yes, one of the problems with an iPhone is that it’s very sleek and slippery. Probably deliberately to increase your chances of losing it and having to buy a new one

I did once slip this photo into a slideshow I did for a club on climbing and wildlfe in Namibia with the comment: "Just when I was getting over the big lens envy". I don't think I offended too many people.

Oh my! I know very little about elephant anatomy but I hope that elephant gentleman is a little excited?! He can't have that swinging around all the time can he?!

And to keep on thread - did you snap that on your phone or your Sony RX-thingy?

It was just wandering off after a rather touching sort of trunk-rubbing encounter with another male at a waterhole. No obvious reason for it!

All taken with my Fuji X-T2 and various lenses.

My mate bought a case for his iPhone on the way to Orco this summer - specifically because it came with a neck lanyard. Dave's opinion was that it worked excellently and he took plenty of nice pics without ever having to take the phone strap off from around his neck. I actually adapted the armoured case of my old phone to be able to attach a lanyard the evening before we did Dream of the White Horses - definitely encouraged me to snap away more than perhaps I would have been brave enough to do otherwise!

It occurs to me that a wedding photographer turning up with just a pair of iPhones might be met with a sceptical reaction from the couple concerned - who are probably paying and who are certainly anticipating quality results. Whether that scepticism is justified or not, it might be an obstacle.

Or, as its a while since I've been to a formal wedding, I might be out of date.

I renember reading reading about a wedding photographer who used a big Canon full frame camera for weddings rather than their Fuji mirriorless only because the expectation was for a professional with a big bulky camera. So a phone would be a massive step away from expectations.

That’s a good tip. I’ll look for one of those.

Yes Gordon. But trying to actually discern any image on a bright sunny day on a phone screen, to check focus, framing, etc, and no control over exposure. I could go on and on. Most good photographs need to be planned, involve some hard work, the right camera/lens for the task in hand, experience, and a good degree of luck. The I-phone and similar are just an extension of the old Kodak Instamatic. Instant click and minimal thought for the vast majority that actually use them in preference to a proper camera. perhaps good for memories but not much besides. Of course the pros can get a good image from such devices but it still requires skill, brains and creativity. Your quality pic of Joe Brown on the Right Unconquerable would be difficult to obtain on an I-phone. I would worry about dropping the thing in the first place. At least your SLR has a strap!

I’m still out of date being older, but times change!

Do you think anyone (non commercial aside) would ever ask a professional photographer what equipment they will use and then decide on that basis? Oh you use a Canon, no thanks, I want someone with a Nikon. It’s the end results that matter and whether they can meet the expectations of, in this example, the wedding couple.

Reputation, recommendations and demonstrable examples of same genre past works are more important to most, if not all, looking for a professional photographer I would expect. Those smart phone photographers however will probably be already well known nowadays particularly if it is by recommendation.

The article I read about was of course different as it was his first with an iphone so I guess was fully discussed with the couple and agreed, hence two dslr photographers also being present.

I suppose it might give the impression of being a cheapskate to have a wedding photographer with a phone camera. 

Without doubt; it certainly could be a shock to some guests. Your earlier post is understandable that the photographer themselves felt it necessary to have a big bulky camera and a lot of customers/clients may still like to see that. Suited them though from their business point of view I assume.

Folk are often set in their ways for many things and I include myself in that. Would I personally employ a photographer with just an iphone; would certainly have to think about it first and be convinced by their portfolio!! On the other hand I would expect to see the portfolio anyway no matter what equipment they were going to use.

Edit: Just remembered another article I read where the photographer said that without a big camera he couldn’t keep control of photographing the couple and guests as others were pushing in for photos with their mobiles not realising he was “the” wedding photographer. He was just one of the crowd holding a phone and it caused him problems so he reverted back to a big camera or at least carried one.

My goodness, that is quite the tripod.

Well, I made the point earlier about the huge limitation an iPhone has on a sunny day, in not being able to see the screen properly. The medium format camera I used for that shot of Joe on RU was the Fuji GA645, the neatest and most compact of my cameras, but even so it was quite a handful, because I think i had opted to use it manually, for various reasons (particularly to reduce depth of field and throw the background out of focus), and probably had my spotmeter with me as well. 

Two other points. I could only shoot 16 frames (i wasn’t going to have time to change the film while hanging on that fixed rope.) Though I may have had the Hasselblad with a wideangle lens with me in my backpack as an emergency backup - I can’t remember.) I could hardly ask Joe to pause mid climb. Second, the expense. The photography (film and lab costs) on each of my four photographic mountain books was hugely expensive - I think something in the region of £5000 per book, and that was back in the early 90s. And of course all the camera gear I had (5 cameras!)

One of the advantages of a big camera is that it makes the guests take the formal group shots more seriously, have more of a ‘sense of occasion’. Of course, for a wedding you have to do both formal and informal shots. For the former I used either a 690 or even a 5 x 4 view camera; for the latter, a Nikon FM2 with a motor drive.

Sorry Gordon, I missed that point about bright sun problems with a mobile. Regarding you JB shoot on RU, just think that today with a modern SLR with 45mps+ with definition that would far surpass the former medium format cameras. Something such as the new Nikon Z9. In some ways it has all become too easy. And as for lugging a plate camera into the hills (I started my own photography journey with a Gondolphi) like the Abrahams and Vittorio Sella. Real dedication. 

On your last point, using a tripod, especially at a formal function such as a wedding sets the photographer aside as a professional, which might not actually be the case. We'll at least people give you space.

Indeed the definition with a modern SLR would have been much greater. I think the fact that it’s all become so much easier is actually a good thing, in that people can concentrate on the subject matter and not be distracted by technicalities.

I first had an MPP plate camera, then a much nicer rosewood Wista. The huge problem with mountain landscapes then, with such a big camera on a tripod, was wind - one was typically in an exposed position on some elevated bluff. Even a slight breeze could be a problem. So I had a huge windshiled made: it was actually like half a tent’s flysheet, but tailor-made so that I could just stand up inside it with the plate camers. But what a hassle!! And of course it only worked if the wind was behind you.

God bless your naivety.  Many males (elephant and otherwise) find a trunk-rubbing encounter with another male quite, erm..  stimulating.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals#Elephants

That's interesting. I've certainly seen some such behaviour such as trunk entwining, but this seemed very chaste. They arrived separately at the waterhole and then approached slowly and just stood motionless with their trunks touching for about ten minutes before slowly moving apart and wandering off separately. The "third leg" only emerged afterwards as it walked away. We assumed that they were related solitary makes just saying hello in their elephant way.

Tonight's aurora borealis - not a great photo of an aurora, but this was taken of an aurora not visible "by-eye" with a hand held device the size of a packet of cards without a tripod.  Tell that to someone 15 years ago and they'd think you mad.  

It's really interesting to look at how the technical side of photography on mobiles is developing.  

Was in That London this weekend, and saw this amazing light thing, with the sun reflecting off this building into the passing clouds. 

And a few black and whites from my phone 

Few days ago. I’ve got a knackered back, and I really like how my phone allows me to not have to bend down so much to get upward pointing shots. 

A climate change bonus for Pennington Flash?

To be fair though Senja would look good if you photographed it with a fischer price camera.

Makes me miss my huawei just a little.

Arthur's Seat the other evening.

I think this one illustrates the camera software enhancing things quite a bit. (iPhone 12)