[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.