Phone cameras

[overthepass]

After many years resistance, I'm reluctantly contemplating the purchase of a new smartphone. Really don't like the things, especially now that they're so large, so my inclination is to go for a smaller, lighter and not hugely expensive one, with fairly basic camera. However, I wonder whether I might be missing a trick by not going for one of the ones with all-singing, all-dancing cameras with telephoto capabilities and bits of software wizardry which promise to turn photographic base metal into gold. Although I wouldn't view that as a substitute for a dedicated camera, it does occur to me that it might be a useful adjunct for one.

Anyone got recent experience of using any of these newer souped-up ones, or other relevant comments?

[Padfield]

The camera(s) on the iPhone 15 Pro are quite amazing. I'm told there are equally good cameras on Samsung et al, but as I've only ever owned an iPhone I can't speak from experience. Here are some of the big pluses:

HDR: very much better than a compact or bridge camera can provide. I use my phone for almost all scenery shots these days.
Night exposures: you can take a three-second exposure, hand-held, and the phone stacks it automatically. This is outstanding for star shots, for example, as well as dimly lit street scenes, evening on the beach, clouds in front of the moon &c.
Time travel: in 'live' you record from 1.5 seconds before you click the 'shutter'. This means that you can catch lightning in the act, or photograph that butterfly just as it takes off, even if you click after it has taken off. To use this feature to maximum effect, you have to take advantage of the in-phone editing, which enables you to choose the frame you want from the three-second video.
GIFs: turn any live photo into an animated GIF.
Telephoto: My iPhone 15 Pro has a 3x optical zoom (with good digital beyond this). The Pro Max has 5x optical zoom.

For butterflies, as you say, a phone is not a good substitute for a dedicated camera; but it works, when necessary. Years ago, I accidentally went off to the Simplon without my camera and managed to get a decent shot of Cynthia's fritillary even so (that was with my old iPhone 6 Plus, I think). It is particularly useful for catching a flight shot, because you can then select the frame with the best wing angle.

Guy

EDIT: This GIF is an example of a photo I simply couldn't have got with my normal camera. I waited for the lightning, clicked as soon as I could when I saw it, then extracted three frames to make this composite:

[David Lazarus]

I’ve been using an iPhone 11 plus to record sightings for the last two years. It produces remarkably good quality images. The benefits of a good mobile camera, 11 plus upwards or equivalent Samsung, is they are at hand, in your pocket at all times, lightweight- practical. The downside is that you need to be patient, close to your object, and rely on auto-focus which is really frustrating when you’re set up for the perfect shot but it will not focus for that wonderful sharp shot. And then the butterfly flies away before you get it. The mobile is obviously no good for long shots. However, it is an excellent aid to confirm identification particularly for Small and Essex Skippers, for instance.
If you are a photographer- as an extra only.
If you are a recorder - I personally think it is a must in conjunction with iRecord Butterflies app. and keeping an instant backup on iCloud while in the field.

Regards,

David

PS I have posted some of my images on the Favourite posts - see Silver-washed Frillary as an example of the quality of image from an iPhone. The more recent models, particularly iPhone 15 will be even better but costs £1,000 plus.

[Padfield]

The downside is that you need to be patient, close to your object, and rely on auto-focus which is really frustrating when you’re set up for the perfect shot but it will not focus for that wonderful sharp shot.

But note that you can touch the screen to choose where the camera focuses. Apart from that, I agree with David.

Guy

[David Lazarus]

But note that you can touch the screen to choose where the camera focuses. Apart from that, I agree with David.

Unfortunately Guy, I’ve found that it’s not quite that simple, at least on my iPhone, particularly when the sun is in the wrong direction, there are grass stems or other plant material in shot, or even particular species such as Small Copper and Common Blue, touching the screen to focus fails to work. I’ve also found that stretching forward to take the photo one-handed is best and moving a second hand to touch the screen often is just a little too much movement and the butterfly flies.

The information you have added Guy is excellent. More advanced than I have attempted. I’ve managed inflight shots but more by luck than technical prowess. I will definitely be using these additional techniques this year.

Thanks for that,

David

[Jack Harrison]

I'm not into Smart Phones - far too technical for me and moreover a tiny screen.

But, I know that the cameras in many phones are superb. This taken yesterday over Scotland by my daughter from an Airbus co-pilot's seat.
Click on image to see full size.

Is it possible to get a SmartPhone deal just for the camera but not for use as a phone?

Jack

[overthepass]

Many thanks for all the comments - that's very helpful. Must admit that I'm feeling tempted in the light of all that to extend the budget somewhat, but will have to decide whether I can justify the additional outlay.

One further question, if I may. I sometimes take a lot of photos out of the car window. (Not whilst driving, I should add - although I have got a few funny looks when doing this in continental Europe, from drivers who hadn't twigged that I was in a right-hand drive car.) It may be thought a bit naff, but it does help to capture some memories which would otherwise go unrecorded. With a Canon DSLR, I've found that there's generally no problem doing this using autofocus, and of course if the autofocus does get confused, it's easy to switch to manual. However, when using a bridge camera (Panasonic Lumix FZ200) a while back, I found it was near-impossible, because the autofocus obviously couldn't cope with the fact that the camera was itself moving, and there's effectively no manual option (well, nominally there is, but of no use at all in this situation). Given that smartphone cameras are autofocus-only, does anyone have any experience/ knowledge of how well they would cope with taking photos from a moving car? I've never tried it using the very basic camera on my current phone, but that's so old it's hardly a reliable point of reference anyhow. Guess it might depend on how smart the camera is?

[Padfield]

IPhones cope brilliantly with moving objects and moving observers. I’ve taken loads of pictures from trains and buses (and planes - but nothing as spectacular as Jack’s daughter’s photo!).

If you do go down the iPhone route, you can expect the device to last many years. My old 4 GS (from 2010) still works, as does my 6 Plus (2014). My 8 Plus probably still works, but it was stolen in Málaga in 2021, so I don’t know. I made the mistake of replacing it with a 12 Mini - a brilliant phone but with very poor battery life: I had to carry a charger everywhere with me. That’s why I bought the 15 Pro last year, which I hope I’ll still be using in 10 years’ time (I use the 12 Mini for my UK sim card and expect to be using that in 10 years’ time too). My point is: if you can afford to, buy high-spec, preferably the latest model, and look after it. Spread over its lifetime, I think the extra expense is worth it. I still teach with the original iPad Pro I bought when it came out, in 2015.

Guy

[overthepass]

Thanks very much for that, Guy. Definitely feeling tempted...