[dham]

For the same price you can get a nice DSLR and the iPhone SE 2. That's what I did. Heck even my Nikon D70 from 2008(bought it used in 2011) can still run circles around even the most expensive phones for pictures. Best camera is the one you have on you, well when you have kids you haul the DSLR around anyway. Sorry.

[PragmaticPulp]

> For the same price you can get a nice DSLR and the iPhone SE 2.

DSLR vs. iPhone is apples and oranges. Two devices with completely different use cases.

If your primary goal is to buy a no-compromise device for photography, obviously you should get a full size camera.

But 99% of the time, you're going to have an iPhone in your pocket and no camera on hand. That's why it's great to have an excellent camera in your phone. You can always augment with a DSLR for special occasions, but it's not like a DSLR and iPhone are interchangeable.

[comeonseriously]

The iPhone SE 2020 arguably has an excellent camera. It certainly exceeds most users ability.

[buryat]

DSLR/mirrorless is way too big and very slow to operate if you want to send photos to someone or post them somewhere. D70 also doesnt record video

[dham]

Yea D70 is just for pictures. I have Sony a6400 as main camera and to be honest I can turn it on and record a video faster than I can with my iPhone, mainly because the dedicated buttons. I also don't think it's that much of a hassle. It has Wifi to get data off. It's pretty easy actually. It's worth spending and extra 2 minutes to do it so in 30 years I have nice video and pictures of family.

[kyriakos]

Most new cameras have WiFi capability syncing to your phone. It's an extra step but it's not as bad as it used to be. Finally snapseed and lightroom for Android are good enough for basic editing in the field. At least that's what I do and I'm quite satisfied. With the resolution Facebook and Instagram presents photos the phone apps are more than sufficient at raw processing.

[y2bd]

> it's not as bad as it used to be

I can only talk to Panasonic (GX8) and Fujifilm (X100F, XE3), but for both of those it's still pretty awful. Transfers are very slow, especially if you want full resolution, and it's always frustrating to just connect my phone to the camera--the apps are slow and clunky, setting up the adhoc network is flaky, and often times even after connecting it'll suddenly just disconnect for no reason. The XE3 supposedly supports a persistent, bluetooth connection that'll auto connect and auto transfer photos, but every time I've tried to set that up, it sends like the first two photos along and then doesn't work anymore.

I've moved to just using an SD card reader.

[ogre_codes]

Maybe you haul a DSLR around everywhere, I find it a bit of a PITA to haul a 5+ pound camera kit/ bag when I'm mountain biking or hiking in the woods.

[ValentineC]

> Best camera is the one you have on you, well when you have kids you haul the DSLR around anyway.

I don't have kids, but wouldn't Live Photos be a better feature for reliving moments with your kids? A DSLR will never be able to do that, because the mechanical shutter prevents it from doing so.

[sgt]

So I am not the only one keeping my D70 around! Sensor size is still truly impressive if you're coming from the phone world. My photo hardware currently is just the iPhone XS, a Fuji X100S, and an old Nikon D70 with some telelenses.

[bradlys]

I disagree. I have an A9 + GM glass. I'm constantly surprised by what a modern smartphone can take compared to what I get out of my camera. Yes, you can get way better photos if you do everything right with a traditional camera (and certainly much more real bokeh) but that usually involves a lot more editing than you have to do with an iPhone 12 Pro or similar.

For the amount of time it takes - the iPhone 12 Pro and similar can really outperform a camera. One you get a snapshot you'd be okay with sharing with others immediately - with the other, you're like, "Yeah, the exposure is a little off but maybe that's just because of the dynamic range limitations? And I need to adjust the contrast, maybe sharpen a little bit, colors aren't really there, and it would've been great if I had done bracketed exposures because the sky is just too blown out to recover properly..." A lot of that stuff is gone with smartphones because they do it all for you.

It's what annoys me about modern cameras - they don't have any of that built in as an option. You have to do all the work by yourself and bracketing is just way too much of a PITA for me to deal with for most photos. Computational photography is a huge breakthrough that many cameras just don't utilize almost at all.

[dingaling]

> For the amount of time it takes - iPhone 12 Pro and similar can really outperform a camera

It's not the camera that makes the difference but the lens. And a smartphone just can't make up that difference with software tricks.

A smartphone will be fantastically practical and convenient as a camera in a specific set of use-cases. Outside those it's pretty useless.

[bradlys]

I'd argue it's the photographer beyond all else that makes the picture good. Camera vs lens - who cares. The lenses and sensors are good enough on these smart phones for their use case. They aren't meant to replace pro gear.

That's why I think smartphones are great. They lower the barrier for taking pretty good pictures. You don't have to worry about balancing exposure or figuring out how to merge multiple photos into one - etc. The smartphone does it all for you. It's an automated photo editor with some intelligent tricks that are very hard (or impossible) to do on a traditional camera.

No one is saying a smartphone is going to replace a pro-camera. If you want to do birding with a 1200mm equivalent, you're going to have a hard time doing that with a smartphone. But if you know the limitations (in the same way that all cameras have limitations) then it can do really well in those parameters.. and I find those parameters are more than enough for 90%+ of consumers out there.

Most people are fine with zooming with their feet.

[jdxcode]

I would guess that camera manufacturers can't afford computational photography—certainly not in the same way Apple, Samsung, and Google can.

[panpanna]

This is about to change.

Sony and Samsung have already started using much beefier hardware, now that their custom Asic is falling behind.

[fomine3]

Intelligent Auto Mode isn't enough?

[wffurr]

Does the DSLR automatically upload photos to iCloud or your photo stream?

Looks like EyeFi (WiFi-equipped SD cards) isn't a thing anymore: http://www.eyefi.com/ "Welcome to nginx!"

[r00fus]

EyeFi never worked for me. Poor purchase on my part.

[mleo]

I had good success with EyeFi back in the day and used it across a couple generations and cameras. Unfortunately, WiFi on a camera is a feature, not a product. Between phones eating cameras and WiFi getting built-in, it really wasn’t a company built for longevity.

[flucivja]

The best camera is that one you have with you :)