jra wrote:Guest wrote:jra wrote:Guest wrote:jra wrote:
I doubt it, regarding the lens. It's no doubt too small for decent light gathering in difficult photography conditions.
And I told you before IIRC, a camera isn't just about how good the sensor is. There is more to it than just megapixels. Like the quality and size of the lens aperture, the amount of flexibility e.g. auto, manual, shutter priority, aperture priority, plus the ability to use a proper tripod, have a decent camera grip etc.
You won't see a professional photographer using a smartphone to take decent photographs. Smartphones are generally for bog standard photos and selfies.
Depends on how serious you are regarding quality of your pics. I would say the size of the sensor is one of the most important factors when choosing a camera, affects so much - dynamic range, diffraction etc.
Well, I didn't want to make a career out of it.
My general experience is the average photo taken by a bridge camera/DSLR is usually better than one by a smartphone, aside from it being difficult to justify spending £500-1000 on what is essentially a phone. The clue is in the name 'smartphone', not 'smartcamera'.
Nobody mentioned a career. You don't need to have pro aspirations to want good quality photos. I was addressing your opinion regarding sensor, which I disagreed with.
You've never heard the expression 'making a career out of something', i.e. not wanting to go into too many technical details. Photography is an art form, not an exact science.
Like I said I was addressing your sensor comment.
You don't need to know too many tech details to get a decent image. I don't know many techie details about my DSLRs but get pretty good images.
I also don't have to take multiple images in the hope of getting one decent shot. I don't personally know anyone else who does either.