The funny thing is that most famous youtubers out there testing phone cameras they don't know anything about photography and can't distinguish a good photo from a bad one. And people believe them.
The facts is consumer are "consumer" they don't know or can't appreciate what a real interchangeable lens camera can bring to them. So even pro photographers doing consumers smartphone review even about the camera also need to do it in "consumer" way so that they understand what you talking about.
They barely know the fact that an interchangeable lens camera opens up endless possibilities and so as compacts as well, as long as they're a real and dedicated camera.
Yes, this five-year old Olympus camera has better image quality than the 64 MP smartphone. The E-PL7 was actually the first Olympus Micro 4/3 camera I bought; I have since also acquired two OM-D cameras. But one thing I don't think anyone pointed out is that the E-PL7, especially with a pancake lens, is smaller than the Poco smartphone! You can't receive or make calls on the E-PL7 though.
@William White Fair point. One of the driving forces for me when I upgraded my phone (to an iPhone X, still a mediocre camera but better than my old first-gen SE) was the camera. I always have it in my pocket and it takes OK shots in low light. It really makes me appreciate my M1 when I take that out though.
@William White because I don’t like using a phone except for a tool that is mostly work related and I want to separate the two when I enjoy photography. Anyways I do believe that small sensor and lens computation photography can only go so far and will never compete with a real camera not only in the quality of a photograph but in handling also.
The very best thing about smartphone cameras is that you (nearly) always have it at hand. I once interviewed a press photographer. He used a Hasselbald for 'serious work' (it was a long time ago), a Pentax for work on-the-move, and he had one of those Agfa thumbcamera's in his breast pocket - because the best picture is the one you take. That last camera would be his smartphone now :-)
I have that oly! I bought it almost 2 years ago second hand for about 240 euro with the lens. I love it :) It's pocketable and the pictures are pretty good for everyday shooting.
Excellent presentation of a very complicated subject. You mentioned the 1" sensor. Others have mentioned the issue of optics. I will add a third. The more complicated the software, the more powerful the processor required to drive it. The more work the processor does, the more heat it generates. The more heat that is generated, the more noise is introduced in the image, affecting IQ. So there are necessary compromises. The challenge for phone makers is to find a balance that yields acceptable IQ at an acceptable price point, where acceptable IQ is in the eye of the beholder, and also depends on the viewing device. If you're just looking at images on the phone screen, many would find them perfectly acceptable, while others including me would not.
Smartphone processor today is more powerful than camera sensor, on par with entry level laptop. plus the heat is less due to smaller SoC fabrication. The software is the main issue, with inferior smaller sensor.
Thanks Robin for a very interesting comparison! I've never considered camera quality when buying a smartphone. I only use the phone camera for quick snaps. For my personal photography I go with the em5 mk iii.
Interesting video Robin. Modern phones are amazing. They even do a half decent job on macro from what I’ve seen on FB and Instagram. But I can’t see them ever becoming sophisticated enough to give you great images of birds and other wildlife at a distance. Great session with Rob the other day. I hope you guys will do more of these. Take care x
I think it'd be possible actually with something like the Ulanzi DoF adapter which allows you to mount camera lenses to your phone. The issue, as Robin pointed out, is IS.
True, I think Lumix CM1 smartphone had a 1 inch sensor. Thatll be cool tho, but I hope the next smart phone wont put "128MP" but a traditional 12MP or even 8MP for low light as a prime lens.
I didn't ever had doubts about the results of interchangable lens camera and smartphone camera comparison. As you clearly show the results are indisputable. Artifacts, fringes, color shifts and so on. It's amazing how people dive in thousands lenses and cameras comparinsons, splitting hairs to establish the hardware championship and then pay hundreds bucks to buy phones as a route to happiness. I shot digital since 2006 and by phones since 2014, but I've never compared apples with oranges. Well done Robin. michele, florence, italy
There is (or was) already an idea smartphone camera, the Panasonic CM1. 1 inch sensor with Lecira lens. Too bad they don't make a CM2 so I had to retire mine.
I agreed that smartphone manufacturers should learn from camera manufacturers, but if they do so then maybe will end up selling to JIP. Sometimes facts are quite sad, average persons can't really understand or appreciate the high quality of images coming our from DSLR or DSLM. But they are happy with the user friendliness and usability, also what they shot are looks more pleasing than what they seen.
Olympus should've did something more usability in term of connectivity and improve their oi.share apps make it more intuitive. Consumers market and pro(enthusiasts, armature, professionals) would be most likely 2 total different market. For instance, consumer: shoot share in fb, insta, maybe those more serious 1 they maybe snapseed or any other editing tool then share. Pro: shot go back then LR, PS only submit their work. I know this because I was consumer and moving into amateur photographer my workflow totally changed. Eventhough I don't use LR I use olympus workspace, and GIMP.
Thanks again, Robin, for a lovely comparison video. The biggest advantage that I see using my Nokia 8.1 as an image capturing device is the availability. The phone is with me all the time (which is not the case with my FujiFilm X-E2s & a few lenses). But, whenever I had shot the same scene with both of them, the Fuji photos are way way way better as you have pointed out. Your videos are informative and educative and I love the way you present them. Lots of love and best wishes, Robin.
I am not surprised by the result . For now, some phones do a very good results on the go, and is the reason why my camera is still the best for photos . All things being equal, the camera wins out each time. A time may come when they draw equal and perhaps excel the camera . Great video - thanks once again
extraordinary robin, I really appreciate your very detailed explanation, this is also one of my concerns as a photography connoisseur who is very disappointed to see the advancement of smartphone camera technology that does not pay attention to the fine details of photo art, although this is considered normal by some laypeople, but I am personally addressed by your very intelligent and fair opinion. thank you robin 😊
It would be a challenge to fit a 1-inch sensor and matching hiqh quality lens into the thin form factor of a smartphone, even with a periscope type construction. Maybe a pop-out lens could do the trick, which would need to extend about 1 cm from the phone surface.
One area where I cannot imagine a smartphone camera ever being sufficient would be when it comes to wildlife and sports photography. I used my E-PL6 with an Olympus 75mm-300mm lens when I went to the San Jose Sharks game and got some great results. That is about the cheapest lens you can get of that type and I cannot imagine any smartphone camera ever being able to offer zoom anywhere close to that. Smartphones may have all but replaced point and shoot cameras, but I cannot imagine them replacing DSLRs or mirrorless cameras.
Great explanación, as always! I totally agree with you, we need bigger sensors in our smartphones to try to match real camera photos! Now we have one of the largest sensors with 108mpx and 1/1.33" from Samsung (used by Xiaomi too) which is quite capable, so the must link that with a right software processing to get the BEST results! Thanks for you great work! Greetings from Spain!!!
Another tidbit about low light performance is the slower shutter speeds required entirely strip away the phones’ advantage of stacking and merging multiple exposures. The only thing left is to make it as good as possible on a smartphone display. The problem with slapping a 1” sensor into a phone is the focal length for the standard wide 24mm equivalent will end at 8.8mm, which is thicker than the thickest point of many phones.
The problem with larger sensors is that you need a greater distance between the lens and the sensor to cover the frame, particularly at longer focal lengths. You'd end up with a fat camera that can make phone calls rather than a phone that takes pictures. I suspect the answer for phone manufacturers is the same as camera makers realised when they gave up on the megapixel race- reduce the pixel count, make the pixels larger. Sony had a great patent for microlenses on each individual pixel, this could also reduce the thickness issue. The crux of the issue is perhaps marketing- people are impressed by big numbers, so 64 megapixels *must* be better than 5 or 6, right? Photographers are less prone to this- that's why the Sony Alpha 7 S sells well with "only" 12 megapixels, but phone consumers are less well-informed bunch when it comes to the camera side of things. Good analysis Robin, I love how animated you got at the end!
I use my smartphone camera for casual shots when my Olympus Pen E-PL6 is unavailable, but the difference is night and day. That is one reason why I don't prioritize camera when I buy a smartphone, if I need a good camera; I would just use the E-PL6.
I'm excited to see advancements in smart phone camera technology, but I cannot see smartphone design compromising portability enough to give the immersive experience of a gripped viewfinder-equipped camera. I do no believe smartphone photography is the future. I highly doubt it will be a serious photographers first choice, ever.
Right now size is an issue. If you squeeze a 1" sensor in and you want IBIS too, that takes a lot of space. Maybe later when components can be shrunk down a bit more they will do it, let us see. For your tests why didn't you allow the X3 to do the pixel binning? You said that is what it is designed to do, it will be better. For increased low light performance maybe pixel binning could be used on M43? Could be an interesting option to have. I agree about HDR, in fact we have had that on cameras for years. Maybe for landscapes it could help. Maybe you have a video on that somewhere?
Robin, people using phones just want sleek slim lines and the only 1" sensor phone, from Panasonic had a BIG protrusion on the back. you need some physical space between the front of the lens and the sensor anyway and this increases with the size of the sensor. People using phones also want flexibility, the ability to zoom in and out without losing much quality, which you cannot easily do with a single focal length. IMO the 45° mirror which allows a periscope lens that increases the focal length while being contained in the phone body is genius. Finally, people using smarphones want HDR and processed jpeg to shoot at night and I must say my 2 years old P30 is no slouch if you just publish your picture at low res on social media given how small the sensor and le lenses actually are. I think Image processing is the future and what we see today is just a hint of what we will see in the future. Smartphones have much more powerful processors then cameras, updated each year compared to the 3-4 years cycle of current cameras and will have better capabilities next year and the year after that. I'm not saying Smartphone are the future and Cameras will die, because Physics is not there and a big large sensor will always have an edge, but I wonder how much subtle and advanced could image processing on our cameras be if they just opt to include some advanced AI to the camera we have now: imagine an Olympus camera with a 64MP sensor taking 16MP images (rather then the opposite) and combining them in real time to crazily improve dynamic range and detail recovering. I don't need crazy high resolution but I'd really appreciate a drastic reduction in noise at night.
No phone will ever be able to come even close to a real camera. The sheer physical size of the sensor is the main reason. The only phones that somewhat implemented a large sensor were Nokia Lumia 1020, Pureview 808 and Lumix CM-1. And they really did shoot way better images than modern flagships. Software can only do so much.
I disagree. Sensor technology is constantly improving. When pro cameras were only 6MP, we were saying the same things... "digital will never match the quality/resolution of film", and yet here we are today with enormous resolution AND greater low light capabilities. One thing is certain... sensor quality of cellphones will improve. One day, they will match the level of quality of today's DSLRs.
@@StephenHampton_DesignDesk And how much have they actually improved? Megapixels upwards from 16Mpx really mean nothing. Samsung has 108mpx sensor whose photos are marginally better than on a 12mpx phone, but certainly way worse than on a 12mpx camera. Software has improved a lot, but there's only so much that software can do. Phones simply need physically bigger sensors in order to be able to capture such quality as in a real camera. Ps. 35mm film still has over 20 times more detail than 50mpx DSLR. So there's that.
I have the pocofone f1, and the original camera app gave really bad photos, just like your presentation. But I downloaded pixel 3 camera app, that you can get if you Google a bit, which turns your pocofone to a completely another level. Don't know if works with the latest pocofone though...
Cameras matter to photographers but not to non photographers. Yes the differences have been highlighted but non photographers don't care about those things. They are not printing, they are not cropped. Phone images still look snappy and colorful. Even for photographers if they are on holiday mood maybe many of them would find a phone sufficient also to record their memories. Myself included at times.
At one point you say that the phone has an “equivalent” 25mm f1.9 lens. Perhaps it’s worth noting that in terms of its light gathering ability, and ability to render(or not) a shallow depth of field, such a lens has equivalent performance to a ~f5.6 m43 lens or ~f11 full frame lens (because the sensor area is roughly 8 times smaller than that of a m43 sensor and 16 times smaller than a full frame sensor). While that’s a big handicap for many purposes, one should also note that the small amount of light such a lens collects is focussed on a small area. This means that the phone will usually/frequently be operating at much lower - perhaps 3 stops lower - ISO than the m43 camera under the same conditions and its “low light performance” will therefore be a lot better than one might otherwise expect.
@@Koji-888 I think you might be confusing light intensity- the light power per unit of area on the sensor - with total amount of light used to create the image - which is what I’m talking about. For example, a 25mm f/2 lens collects the same amount of light as a 50mm f/4 lens because the aperture is the same size. Further, depth of field - and the associated “bokeh” look - is also determined by the physical size of the aperture (only). Thus both the lenses I just cited will have essentially the same “bokeh”.
@@Koji-888 the video mentions sensor size a lot, and in order to explain why sensor size is the not the important thing one has to mention it. I do feel for consumers trying to compare the performance of different types of camera (I’m an optical instrument engineer). Camera company marketing departments spend a lot of effort “spinning” the performance of their products. When selling cameras (or phone cameras) with small sensors they claim that a small f-number is “the thing”, but in fact it’s the physical aperture size that matters. Similarly, when selling cameras with large sensors they tell consumers that high-ISO performance is synonymous with “low light performance” but fail to mention that large sensor cameras have to operate at higher ISOs than small sensor cameras when taking the same photograph. No wonder there is so much confusion!
Very interesting, thanks Robin.. Can you maybe review the Sony XPeria 1 II, not sure where you can borrow one, Sony no longer sells smartphones in Australia... I still use my Sony Xperia XZ Premium , it was good for its day. But I enjoy the images I get from my EM5 Mkii :)
Hi Robin! Great video! You told us that you would like to see smartphone cameras improved, but isn't that supposed to threaten MFT system even more than now? Please stop being so unfair to MFT! You shouldn't want those awful devices' cameras to be improved! :)))))
One of the major reason I bought a camera was because I cannot stand the picture quality and the price of a phone with good camera is about the same as a very good camera. Bought a camera, but then tempted to buy iphone 11 to add a good mobile camera.
Hey Robin, although I am with you in hoping smartphone cameras to improve, I have to disagree (partially) in the solutions you have proposed to achieve it. Hardware is almost in its maximum size right now. .If you put a bigger sensor in smartphones, you will also need more room for the optics (see how full frame lenses are in comparison to M4/3 which I love so much). It is difficult to go against physics. If you go that way, you`ll end up with a smartphone with the size of compact camera.
@@bengoey yes, exactly my point. If you take a look at the Panasonic CM1 its more like a compact camera than a phone. I don´t have anything against smartphones. I love small and compact cameras, that's why I end up with my Olympus. But again, optics and physics are impossible to avoid
I forget who did the video, Matthieu Stern (the offbeat lens guy) maybe, but he shows a test you can do to find how far a lens has to be from the film or sensor for it to focus. You hold it up near a flat surface, have a light source shining through it, and you can see the circle of light that has to cover the rectangle. So to cover a 1-inch sensor, you'd need a pretty fat cell phone. Unless the lens is mega-fisheye, and the camera has mega-fisheye correction software.
Trust me, if I can get my hand on loaner latest Pixel or iphone the results won't be far off. I can't justify spending money on such overpriced tech that produces inferior image output.
Cameras are made for photographers, smartphones for the masses who have no knowledge of the subject and have no interest in it, have eyes but see nothing, if the sea in the photo leans to the right they will not notice. The important thing for them is connectivity, letting friends know that they are on the toilet... a narcissist selfie and they are in heaven ... It is not them who will clutter up art exhibitions, museums or bookstores ...
I don't think I got the main thrust of this video. My take away is that the POCO takes amazing photos - almost as good as a M43 Olympus camera. Honestly, if these pics weren't side-by-side being pixel-peeped, no-one would be able to tell which camera produced the pics. Sorry. I know everyone was hoping the Olympus would blow the cellphone away with quality, but for a dedicated optical tool with huge lens and sensor in compareson, I'm a bit disappointed. If you're taking pics for Instagram, the Poco is equal to the Olympus. If you're a professional photographer, you won't use this Olympus camera. This is why the entry-level cameras are no longer selling and being discontinued. (As a personal experience, my daughter has a Canon IXUS 190. Her entry level Samsung cellphone takes better quality photos despite it being a dedicated camera made by one of the best camera manufacturers around.) Good bye point and shoots... you were fun.
The poco looked bad to me. I'm watching on a 27 inch 1440p screen though. I have a nova 5t and i see these weird looking greens in my pics and also blurry looking leaves all the time. The colour is personal taste if accuracy isn't important but fine details are a mush which really stand out as a camera owner. In bright sun or at night using night mode it can take amazing photos but mostly i just find it inferior. Which is understandable as camera's are designed to take photo's.
@@letni9506 I'm viewing on a 24" 1080p screen. I think reviewers need to realise that viewers can't see the original, zoomed footage in their uncompressed glory, and should make allowance for this. Perhaps zoom compared footage to a higher 200% to exaggerate the differences. Also, consider the rest of my statement... if the final pictures will be used on social media, fine details are irrelevant when used crunched down to 1280 pixels wide. Any other compareson is a purely intellectual debate with no bearing on real world application. I really don't see a place for MF sized sensors in the near future. The line up is going to look like this (From lowest to highest): - Cellphone (Happy-snaps & Always on hand) - APS-C (Amateur & Hobbiest) - Full-frame (Pro-sumer & Professional for field work) - Full frame (Professional for studio work) Where would you squeeze a 16MP MF camera body with a $400-$1000 price tag into this line up?
@@yonseimatt Yes its great,picked up a zenit with a Helios 58mm and optimax 300 mm for £6 from the second hand shop. And bought an adapter to fit the lenses. A zenit was my first camera back in the 80's followed buy an OM 1. Its a pity the epl1 hasn't got simple manual control knobs for speed and aperture like the OM 1.
The funny thing is that most famous youtubers out there testing phone cameras they don't know anything about photography and can't distinguish a good photo from a bad one. And people believe them.
This! I see it all the time and honestly its quite infuriating
The facts is consumer are "consumer" they don't know or can't appreciate what a real interchangeable lens camera can bring to them. So even pro photographers doing consumers smartphone review even about the camera also need to do it in "consumer" way so that they understand what you talking about.
True! That's why they 'review' gear...
They barely know the fact that an interchangeable lens camera opens up endless possibilities and so as compacts as well, as long as they're a real and dedicated camera.
Nahhh theyre okay because they represent the majority aka laymen.
I *love* the form factor of the E-PL7. Seriously underrated as a fun pocketable/handbaggable camera, imho.
Yes, this five-year old Olympus camera has better image quality than the 64 MP smartphone. The E-PL7 was actually the first Olympus Micro 4/3 camera I bought; I have since also acquired two OM-D cameras. But one thing I don't think anyone pointed out is that the E-PL7, especially with a pancake lens, is smaller than the Poco smartphone! You can't receive or make calls on the E-PL7 though.
Oh god I hope I’m long dead before cell phones are the future of photography!
Careful what you wish for 😂😂
@William White Fair point. One of the driving forces for me when I upgraded my phone (to an iPhone X, still a mediocre camera but better than my old first-gen SE) was the camera. I always have it in my pocket and it takes OK shots in low light. It really makes me appreciate my M1 when I take that out though.
In GOOD light sorry, in low light it's crap!
@William White because I don’t like using a phone except for a tool that is mostly work related and I want to separate the two when I enjoy photography. Anyways I do believe that small sensor and lens computation photography can only go so far and will never compete with a real camera not only in the quality of a photograph but in handling also.
@@RTFM70 oh boy! Lol!
The very best thing about smartphone cameras is that you (nearly) always have it at hand. I once interviewed a press photographer. He used a Hasselbald for 'serious work' (it was a long time ago), a Pentax for work on-the-move, and he had one of those Agfa thumbcamera's in his breast pocket - because the best picture is the one you take. That last camera would be his smartphone now :-)
I have that oly! I bought it almost 2 years ago second hand for about 240 euro with the lens. I love it :) It's pocketable and the pictures are pretty good for everyday shooting.
Excellent presentation of a very complicated subject. You mentioned the 1" sensor. Others have mentioned the issue of optics. I will add a third. The more complicated the software, the more powerful the processor required to drive it. The more work the processor does, the more heat it generates. The more heat that is generated, the more noise is introduced in the image, affecting IQ. So there are necessary compromises. The challenge for phone makers is to find a balance that yields acceptable IQ at an acceptable price point, where acceptable IQ is in the eye of the beholder, and also depends on the viewing device. If you're just looking at images on the phone screen, many would find them perfectly acceptable, while others including me would not.
I think smartphone processor nowadays is powerful enough
Smartphone processor today is more powerful than camera sensor, on par with entry level laptop. plus the heat is less due to smaller SoC fabrication. The software is the main issue, with inferior smaller sensor.
Dude! You are a real rockstar! Best comprison! 👏🏼 thank you! 🙏🏻
Thanks Robin for a very interesting comparison! I've never considered camera quality when buying a smartphone. I only use the phone camera for quick snaps. For my personal photography I go with the em5 mk iii.
and in particular the em5mkIII !
Interesting video Robin. Modern phones are amazing. They even do a half decent job on macro from what I’ve seen on FB and Instagram. But I can’t see them ever becoming sophisticated enough to give you great images of birds and other wildlife at a distance. Great session with Rob the other day. I hope you guys will do more of these. Take care x
I think it'd be possible actually with something like the Ulanzi DoF adapter which allows you to mount camera lenses to your phone. The issue, as Robin pointed out, is IS.
True, I think Lumix CM1 smartphone had a 1 inch sensor. Thatll be cool tho, but I hope the next smart phone wont put "128MP" but a traditional 12MP or even 8MP for low light as a prime lens.
I didn't ever had doubts about the results of interchangable lens camera and smartphone camera comparison. As you clearly show the results are indisputable. Artifacts, fringes, color shifts and so on. It's amazing how people dive in thousands lenses and cameras comparinsons, splitting hairs to establish the hardware championship and then pay hundreds bucks to buy phones as a route to happiness. I shot digital since 2006 and by phones since 2014, but I've never compared apples with oranges. Well done Robin. michele, florence, italy
There is (or was) already an idea smartphone camera, the Panasonic CM1. 1 inch sensor with Lecira lens. Too bad they don't make a CM2 so I had to retire mine.
I agreed that smartphone manufacturers should learn from camera manufacturers, but if they do so then maybe will end up selling to JIP.
Sometimes facts are quite sad, average persons can't really understand or appreciate the high quality of images coming our from DSLR or DSLM. But they are happy with the user friendliness and usability, also what they shot are looks more pleasing than what they seen.
Olympus should've did something more usability in term of connectivity and improve their oi.share apps make it more intuitive. Consumers market and pro(enthusiasts, armature, professionals) would be most likely 2 total different market. For instance, consumer: shoot share in fb, insta, maybe those more serious 1 they maybe snapseed or any other editing tool then share. Pro: shot go back then LR, PS only submit their work. I know this because I was consumer and moving into amateur photographer my workflow totally changed. Eventhough I don't use LR I use olympus workspace, and GIMP.
Thanks again, Robin, for a lovely comparison video. The biggest advantage that I see using my Nokia 8.1 as an image capturing device is the availability. The phone is with me all the time (which is not the case with my FujiFilm X-E2s & a few lenses). But, whenever I had shot the same scene with both of them, the Fuji photos are way way way better as you have pointed out.
Your videos are informative and educative and I love the way you present them. Lots of love and best wishes, Robin.
That's why I bought the Ricoh GR...not as small as an smartphone, but fits in my pocket
Please. No. The future cannot be just smartphones. Oh god Jesus. No.
I am not surprised by the result . For now, some phones do a very good results on the go, and is the reason why my camera is still the best for photos . All things being equal, the camera wins out each time. A time may come when they draw equal and perhaps excel the camera . Great video - thanks once again
extraordinary robin, I really appreciate your very detailed explanation, this is also one of my concerns as a photography connoisseur who is very disappointed to see the advancement of smartphone camera technology that does not pay attention to the fine details of photo art, although this is considered normal by some laypeople, but I am personally addressed by your very intelligent and fair opinion. thank you robin 😊
Thanks Robin, really enjoyed your articles on Ming's website and just happened upon your YT channel, quality content!
It would be a challenge to fit a 1-inch sensor and matching hiqh quality lens into the thin form factor of a smartphone, even with a periscope type construction. Maybe a pop-out lens could do the trick, which would need to extend about 1 cm from the phone surface.
The colour range is definitely richer in transitions on the olympus cam.
This an extremely easy to follow and detailed review :D Thank you for posting! Makes me feel like my Olympus pen 8 purchase was completely worth it :D
even if smartphone will have picture like m4/3, camera will still have better ergonomics, many buttons, hot shoe and many lenses to change)))
totally agree...I have to struggle to avoid letting my Samsung Note on the floor each time I shot a photo
One area where I cannot imagine a smartphone camera ever being sufficient would be when it comes to wildlife and sports photography. I used my E-PL6 with an Olympus 75mm-300mm lens when I went to the San Jose Sharks game and got some great results. That is about the cheapest lens you can get of that type and I cannot imagine any smartphone camera ever being able to offer zoom anywhere close to that. Smartphones may have all but replaced point and shoot cameras, but I cannot imagine them replacing DSLRs or mirrorless cameras.
The iPhone 12 Pro Max will have IBIS! Should be interesting to see how good it is.
Great comparison Robin! The E-PL7 seems very capable.
And costs more than a flagship full frame camera lol 🤣🤣🤣
Hi Robin good to see you with Rob Trek on Sunday stay well. Thanks for your video, I will stick to my epl8 for my carry about camera.
Anyway, I love your videos and the way you explain everything. Keep up the good work...you have a very loyal followers (like me)
Well done Robin. Us camera guys are reassured for the moment..
Great explanación, as always! I totally agree with you, we need bigger sensors in our smartphones to try to match real camera photos! Now we have one of the largest sensors with 108mpx and 1/1.33" from Samsung (used by Xiaomi too) which is quite capable, so the must link that with a right software processing to get the BEST results! Thanks for you great work! Greetings from Spain!!!
Another tidbit about low light performance is the slower shutter speeds required entirely strip away the phones’ advantage of stacking and merging multiple exposures. The only thing left is to make it as good as possible on a smartphone display.
The problem with slapping a 1” sensor into a phone is the focal length for the standard wide 24mm equivalent will end at 8.8mm, which is thicker than the thickest point of many phones.
Pen + Prime Lens can compete with a dedicated full-frame camera with a kit lens. And M43 has a lot of compact and cheep prime lenses like 14mm F2.5.
Excellent, bravo!!!! Finally someone has spoken!!!
computational photography is great and all. but there's no replacement for good glass
The problem with larger sensors is that you need a greater distance between the lens and the sensor to cover the frame, particularly at longer focal lengths. You'd end up with a fat camera that can make phone calls rather than a phone that takes pictures. I suspect the answer for phone manufacturers is the same as camera makers realised when they gave up on the megapixel race- reduce the pixel count, make the pixels larger. Sony had a great patent for microlenses on each individual pixel, this could also reduce the thickness issue. The crux of the issue is perhaps marketing- people are impressed by big numbers, so 64 megapixels *must* be better than 5 or 6, right? Photographers are less prone to this- that's why the Sony Alpha 7 S sells well with "only" 12 megapixels, but phone consumers are less well-informed bunch when it comes to the camera side of things.
Good analysis Robin, I love how animated you got at the end!
I use my smartphone camera for casual shots when my Olympus Pen E-PL6 is unavailable, but the difference is night and day. That is one reason why I don't prioritize camera when I buy a smartphone, if I need a good camera; I would just use the E-PL6.
I'm excited to see advancements in smart phone camera technology, but I cannot see smartphone design compromising portability enough to give the immersive experience of a gripped viewfinder-equipped camera. I do no believe smartphone photography is the future. I highly doubt it will be a serious photographers first choice, ever.
Right now size is an issue. If you squeeze a 1" sensor in and you want IBIS too, that takes a lot of space. Maybe later when components can be shrunk down a bit more they will do it, let us see.
For your tests why didn't you allow the X3 to do the pixel binning? You said that is what it is designed to do, it will be better.
For increased low light performance maybe pixel binning could be used on M43? Could be an interesting option to have.
I agree about HDR, in fact we have had that on cameras for years. Maybe for landscapes it could help. Maybe you have a video on that somewhere?
10-40Megapixel is enough for Photography,But if you have a bigger sensor thats gonna make some improvement on your picture
This guy explains very well 👏
Robin, people using phones just want sleek slim lines and the only 1" sensor phone, from Panasonic had a BIG protrusion on the back. you need some physical space between the front of the lens and the sensor anyway and this increases with the size of the sensor.
People using phones also want flexibility, the ability to zoom in and out without losing much quality, which you cannot easily do with a single focal length. IMO the 45° mirror which allows a periscope lens that increases the focal length while being contained in the phone body is genius.
Finally, people using smarphones want HDR and processed jpeg to shoot at night and I must say my 2 years old P30 is no slouch if you just publish your picture at low res on social media given how small the sensor and le lenses actually are. I think Image processing is the future and what we see today is just a hint of what we will see in the future. Smartphones have much more powerful processors then cameras, updated each year compared to the 3-4 years cycle of current cameras and will have better capabilities next year and the year after that.
I'm not saying Smartphone are the future and Cameras will die, because Physics is not there and a big large sensor will always have an edge, but I wonder how much subtle and advanced could image processing on our cameras be if they just opt to include some advanced AI to the camera we have now: imagine an Olympus camera with a 64MP sensor taking 16MP images (rather then the opposite) and combining them in real time to crazily improve dynamic range and detail recovering. I don't need crazy high resolution but I'd really appreciate a drastic reduction in noise at night.
10:15 It was done (Panasonic CM-1), but nobody cared, even the new 1" smartphones (Sharp R6 / Leica Leitz 1, Sony 1 pro) got bad reviews...
No phone will ever be able to come even close to a real camera. The sheer physical size of the sensor is the main reason. The only phones that somewhat implemented a large sensor were Nokia Lumia 1020, Pureview 808 and Lumix CM-1. And they really did shoot way better images than modern flagships. Software can only do so much.
I disagree. Sensor technology is constantly improving. When pro cameras were only 6MP, we were saying the same things... "digital will never match the quality/resolution of film", and yet here we are today with enormous resolution AND greater low light capabilities. One thing is certain... sensor quality of cellphones will improve. One day, they will match the level of quality of today's DSLRs.
@@StephenHampton_DesignDesk And how much have they actually improved? Megapixels upwards from 16Mpx really mean nothing. Samsung has 108mpx sensor whose photos are marginally better than on a 12mpx phone, but certainly way worse than on a 12mpx camera. Software has improved a lot, but there's only so much that software can do. Phones simply need physically bigger sensors in order to be able to capture such quality as in a real camera.
Ps. 35mm film still has over 20 times more detail than 50mpx DSLR. So there's that.
very good video! Thanks for making it! Well done!
I have the pocofone f1, and the original camera app gave really bad photos, just like your presentation. But I downloaded pixel 3 camera app, that you can get if you Google a bit, which turns your pocofone to a completely another level. Don't know if works with the latest pocofone though...
Cameras matter to photographers but not to non photographers. Yes the differences have been highlighted but non photographers don't care about those things. They are not printing, they are not cropped. Phone images still look snappy and colorful. Even for photographers if they are on holiday mood maybe many of them would find a phone sufficient also to record their memories. Myself included at times.
At one point you say that the phone has an “equivalent” 25mm f1.9 lens. Perhaps it’s worth noting that in terms of its light gathering ability, and ability to render(or not) a shallow depth of field, such a lens has equivalent performance to a ~f5.6 m43 lens or ~f11 full frame lens (because the sensor area is roughly 8 times smaller than that of a m43 sensor and 16 times smaller than a full frame sensor). While that’s a big handicap for many purposes, one should also note that the small amount of light such a lens collects is focussed on a small area. This means that the phone will usually/frequently be operating at much lower - perhaps 3 stops lower - ISO than the m43 camera under the same conditions and its “low light performance” will therefore be a lot better than one might otherwise expect.
@@Koji-888 I think you might be confusing light intensity- the light power per unit of area on the sensor - with total amount of light used to create the image - which is what I’m talking about. For example, a 25mm f/2 lens collects the same amount of light as a 50mm f/4 lens because the aperture is the same size. Further, depth of field - and the associated “bokeh” look - is also determined by the physical size of the aperture (only). Thus both the lenses I just cited will have essentially the same “bokeh”.
@@Koji-888 the video mentions sensor size a lot, and in order to explain why sensor size is the not the important thing one has to mention it.
I do feel for consumers trying to compare the performance of different types of camera (I’m an optical instrument engineer). Camera company marketing departments spend a lot of effort “spinning” the performance of their products. When selling cameras (or phone cameras) with small sensors they claim that a small f-number is “the thing”, but in fact it’s the physical aperture size that matters. Similarly, when selling cameras with large sensors they tell consumers that high-ISO performance is synonymous with “low light performance” but fail to mention that large sensor cameras have to operate at higher ISOs than small sensor cameras when taking the same photograph. No wonder there is so much confusion!
Thank you for making this vdo❤ is very useful
Very interesting, thanks Robin.. Can you maybe review the Sony XPeria 1 II, not sure where you can borrow one, Sony no longer sells smartphones in Australia... I still use my Sony Xperia XZ Premium , it was good for its day. But I enjoy the images I get from my EM5 Mkii :)
It would be nice Fotokamera Producer would learn how a Camera Can be used as Phones :-) Not the other way round. May be an idea
Hi Robin! Great video! You told us that you would like to see smartphone cameras improved, but isn't that supposed to threaten MFT system even more than now? Please stop being so unfair to MFT! You shouldn't want those awful devices' cameras to be improved! :)))))
Great comparison 🔥🔥🔥
Excellent professional way explained
Great video. Thanks!
One of the major reason I bought a camera was because I cannot stand the picture quality and the price of a phone with good camera is about the same as a very good camera. Bought a camera, but then tempted to buy iphone 11 to add a good mobile camera.
liked last live show & this one too
I hope smartphones will never replace "real" cameras. I prefer to use cameras for serious photography.
Whats a better camera Olympus E-PL7 or a pixel 6?
Hey Robin, although I am with you in hoping smartphone cameras to improve, I have to disagree (partially) in the solutions you have proposed to achieve it. Hardware is almost in its maximum size right now. .If you put a bigger sensor in smartphones, you will also need more room for the optics (see how full frame lenses are in comparison to M4/3 which I love so much). It is difficult to go against physics. If you go that way, you`ll end up with a smartphone with the size of compact camera.
They have made 1 inch sensor smartphones before. It isn't new. It is all about cost.
Well, maybe, but I really don't think its only about the cost. It is about size too.
Panasonic CM1 with 1 inch sensor is not that big, it is thicker of course.
@@bengoey yes, exactly my point. If you take a look at the Panasonic CM1 its more like a compact camera than a phone. I don´t have anything against smartphones. I love small and compact cameras, that's why I end up with my Olympus. But again, optics and physics are impossible to avoid
I forget who did the video, Matthieu Stern (the offbeat lens guy) maybe, but he shows a test you can do to find how far a lens has to be from the film or sensor for it to focus. You hold it up near a flat surface, have a light source shining through it, and you can see the circle of light that has to cover the rectangle. So to cover a 1-inch sensor, you'd need a pretty fat cell phone. Unless the lens is mega-fisheye, and the camera has mega-fisheye correction software.
what do you have test vivo x50 pro? that good enough to use instead compact camera like lumix tz220 or sony hx99
Olympus color is good. E-PL7 is my best friends!
I will keep my Olympus E3 and 14-54 and 50-200.
I use a camera to take pictures. My phone is a phone. I won't pay more than $50 for a phone.
Thanks!
I'll never give up my mirrorless cameras.
What is Pixel Count in the menu ?????
I think 1 inch sensor in smartphone will coming soon..and the price?
If you need put setting on 64 mpix means the sensor is not 64 mpix.
They make a electric vf for the 7
Hi, robin... please what can you tell me about olympus stylus one?? thanks.
I think it's a 1/2.3" sensor, so basically a smartphone sized sensor but with a decent zoom lens, so better pictures.
Mattias Burling has a video about that camera. I've kept half an eye out for them on eBay, and they don't sell very often.
@@wadelapan5756 thank you. I saw it. I got one "One"! it´s superb...
@@yonseimatt thanks
Only gcam 64mp option will bring more details
Trust me, if I can get my hand on loaner latest Pixel or iphone the results won't be far off. I can't justify spending money on such overpriced tech that produces inferior image output.
With google camera it's amazing in poco x3 ...
Link
?
Cameras are made for photographers, smartphones for the masses who have no knowledge of the subject and have no interest in it, have eyes but see nothing, if the sea in the photo leans to the right they will not notice. The important thing for them is connectivity, letting friends know that they are on the toilet... a narcissist selfie and they are in heaven ... It is not them who will clutter up art exhibitions, museums or bookstores ...
Aren't we just pixel peeping here? Not much difference from the shots actually .......
I don't think I got the main thrust of this video. My take away is that the POCO takes amazing photos - almost as good as a M43 Olympus camera.
Honestly, if these pics weren't side-by-side being pixel-peeped, no-one would be able to tell which camera produced the pics.
Sorry. I know everyone was hoping the Olympus would blow the cellphone away with quality, but for a dedicated optical tool with huge lens and sensor in compareson, I'm a bit disappointed.
If you're taking pics for Instagram, the Poco is equal to the Olympus. If you're a professional photographer, you won't use this Olympus camera. This is why the entry-level cameras are no longer selling and being discontinued. (As a personal experience, my daughter has a Canon IXUS 190. Her entry level Samsung cellphone takes better quality photos despite it being a dedicated camera made by one of the best camera manufacturers around.) Good bye point and shoots... you were fun.
The poco looked bad to me.
I'm watching on a 27 inch 1440p screen though.
I have a nova 5t and i see these weird looking greens in my pics and also blurry looking leaves all the time. The colour is personal taste if accuracy isn't important but fine details are a mush which really stand out as a camera owner.
In bright sun or at night using night mode it can take amazing photos but mostly i just find it inferior. Which is understandable as camera's are designed to take photo's.
@@letni9506 I'm viewing on a 24" 1080p screen. I think reviewers need to realise that viewers can't see the original, zoomed footage in their uncompressed glory, and should make allowance for this. Perhaps zoom compared footage to a higher 200% to exaggerate the differences.
Also, consider the rest of my statement... if the final pictures will be used on social media, fine details are irrelevant when used crunched down to 1280 pixels wide. Any other compareson is a purely intellectual debate with no bearing on real world application.
I really don't see a place for MF sized sensors in the near future. The line up is going to look like this (From lowest to highest):
- Cellphone (Happy-snaps & Always on hand)
- APS-C (Amateur & Hobbiest)
- Full-frame (Pro-sumer & Professional for field work)
- Full frame (Professional for studio work)
Where would you squeeze a 16MP MF camera body with a $400-$1000 price tag into this line up?
I can only afford a cheap Chinese phablet for a phone. My £60 olympus EPL1 is a much better camera.
I loved my PL1, it's what got me into micro 4/3! Hope you have fun with it :-)
@@yonseimatt Yes its great,picked up a zenit with a Helios 58mm and optimax 300 mm for £6 from the second hand shop. And bought an adapter to fit the lenses. A zenit was my first camera back in the 80's followed buy an OM 1. Its a pity the epl1 hasn't got simple manual control knobs for speed and aperture like the OM 1.
Bigger sensor baby 💪
Good video
Que buen video!!!😍
l get better images with my old Nikon D40 than any phone l've ever had.
M getting good photos 🙂 in poco x3
Watching on poco x3
Which phone has 108mp? ..... Compare with the GFX 100)) let's laugh wildly over the shovel)))
Iphone 12 pro MAX VS EM1 Mark 3 ^^^
Like the comparison but you should make video while your eyes opened ...its disturbing for me coz u r talking and your eyes were closed
It is more disturbing how racist you are