ProJames-CHM, 16 Jan 2019I have an a6300 and there's no mobile phone coming close to that. Or a a6000, a5100 or Coolpix... moreI got a5000, also I know about difference in quality, I mostly worry about things phone gives you instead - big enough improvement in tech(imagine using them with sensor of that size), screen size(its heaven and hell difference in usage), same with controls, you can opt for some being auto other set manually pretty fast, on the other side, camera got multiple modes for that each with limited settings(what you can change and what not) and its pretty slow when you want to set it.
Also if you capture scene in which is a lot of blur in comparison to a phone(and you do not want that), by using small aperture, you get comparable quality if its not exactly sunny summer day.
McArra, 17 Jan 2019I have a Mate 20 Pro and it has nothing to do against my Sony Alpha 7iii. It's nowhere near. O... moreMy point is size and lens aside, full sized cameras are quite behind in providing similar quality and new tech in this field.
Nick Tagataka, 19 Jan 2019To summarise my points:
1. I personally think that the whole idea of computational photograph... moreI fully agree with your first point. Though compact cameras still outperform smartphone cameras, they can definitely improve their JPEG processing and smartphone/social media integration. Though many manufacturers seem to have moved in this direction with their compact cameras already.
As for your second point, I mostly agree with you again. But the mere fact that these professional cameras have very high bitrates with limited sensor readout times makes smartphone camera tricks harder to execute. But maybe we'll see it employed as soon as the readout rates reach a near-instant rate? I certainly hope so!
Nick Tagataka, 19 Jan 2019Google's and Apple's algorithms are smart enough to eliminate any possible ghosting from movin... moreNo, there is no algorithm "smart" enough to eliminate all possibilities merging errors or ghosting. Partially because it's IMPOSSIBLE to actually eliminate ghosting when merging several frames of moving subjects. The best you can do is delete information and replace it with false information. And I don't know any photographer that wants that while shooting raw. The other reason it's going to make errors is because it's an algorithm. It's essentially mathematical guesswork from a computer. It makes errors.
The HDR+ is not present in RAW capture. That's a JPEG post-processing method. And it's still only based on merging the information from several frames into one photo. A photographer will want to do that merging themselves on more powerful hardware with more reliable software using unedited RAW files that they can hand-pick.
As for the reason stand-alone cameras don't offer a multi-frame RAW capture is because it'd frankly be pointless. That's what the JPEG is for. Not to mention that the larger sensors, with higher bitrates and thus slower readout speeds make it finicky at best, with questionable use as the sensors already have a great dynamic range by default (unlike the tiny phone sensors).
And if you're looking for a compact camera that can shoot decent looking photos in auto, you haven't really looked. They're all capable of that. Models like the Sony RX100 still handily outperform smartphone cameras. Can the JPEG processing improve in them? Absolutely. But this discussion was about professional cameras and RAW capture, so it's a moot point.
Anonymous, 18 Jan 2019Are you... serious? Yes why not?
When Nokia started wuith pureview mark first cell phone with 40 mpix camera wasa phone with a higly acurate camera mounted in it.
The phone were awesome.
If that is possible then mounting a sim card to a proffesional camera and making few buttons for messages and making cals should be pretty easy.
FinnishInquisition, 19 Jan 2019That's not accurate though. The only thing the algorithms in Google's RAW capture does is merg... moreTo summarise my points:
1. I personally think that the whole idea of computational photography/imaging benefits compact cameras a lot more than it does DSLR/mirrorless, and I strongly believe that in future compacts with up to 1" sensor must have advanced algorithms in auto at least if they want to lose their market shares any further. They need to be attractive enough to not only professionals but average consumers as well so that those people will pick dedicated cameras over smartphones to take a photo. As for compacts with larger sensor and DSLR, I reckon it's good to have this kind of feature in auto but it's not absolutely necessary because many people shoot in RAW and edit their photos afterwards anyway.
2. In both DSLR and compact cameras, it would be nicer to have HDR+/SmartHDR-like advanced image stacking in manual mode as well, but of course with an option to save all individual frames and to completely turn the whole feature off as you say. If the scene is completely still this type of processing does far more good than harm, though if it's mature enough it can also work for moving object with no glaring issue.
FinnishInquisition, 19 Jan 2019That's not accurate though. The only thing the algorithms in Google's RAW capture does is merg... moreGoogle's and Apple's algorithms are smart enough to eliminate any possible ghosting from moving objects. Plus, I looked through hundreds of samples of from both Pixel 3 and iPhone XS and I have yet to see any "computational errors" in their photos. Those HDR, especially Google's HDR+ algorithm, do thousands more complicated stuffs than to simply "merge several frames into one".
"you want them all saved down separately"
Why not add an option for saving all frames AND the one that has been produced through multi-framing then, in case if there's any errors in image merging. OR just add a toggle for turning on/off this feature.
"Something no photographer desires."
You're only a representative of yourself. I've seen plenty of people in DPReview commenting that proper cameras should adopt some sort of computational photography/Google should make cameras for professionals. I'd be glad to buy a dedicated compact camera if either of them came true and I could shoot a decent looking photo in auto.
Nick Tagataka, 19 Jan 2019Well it depends on what you really mean by AI. If it's about the scene detection "AI" post-pro... moreThat's not accurate though. The only thing the algorithms in Google's RAW capture does is merge several frames into one. You would NEVER want that in a stand-alone camera. Partially due to computational errors and partially due to ghosting. If the shot has any of those errors in it, you can never save it in post as the raw sensor data is already overwritten. If the camera captures multiple frames (as in the bracketing I told you about), you want them all saved down separately.
So the raw capture you're talking about isn't raw sensor data but instead processed data saved into a RAW format. Something no photographer desires.
Anonymous, 18 Jan 2019if you are talking about compact camera , yeah you can be right.. but if you are talking like... moreI never stated smartphone cameras are even remotely closely close to DSLR/Mirrorless in terms of image quality or a capability as a camera, all I'm saying is that proper cameras would be able to have a boost in image quality if they had advanced algorithms like current smartphones. Gosh, why don't some people read an actual comment before replying to it..
FinnishInquisition, 18 Jan 2019No, the post-processing methods "AI" use cannot be applied to RAW. RAW format is meant to be u... moreWell it depends on what you really mean by AI. If it's about the scene detection "AI" post-processing that Samsung and many Chinese companies use, then yeah I wholeheartedly agree. But if you're talking about the machine learning algorithm that companies like Google and Apple use to improve the quality of RAW image, it is incorrect to say that it cannot be applied to RAW. So yeah, I'm NOT talking about how advanced algorithms can bring advanced JPEG processing to the proper cameras, but rather about how it can help increase the flexibility of RAW images coming out of sensors.
iwantsmallscreen, 17 Jan 2019Sony cameras have the worst IQ of all brands. My Sony rx100m1 is stupid as it can be. Shutter ... moreI also have the RX100 MKI, as well as A6000. I don't have the same issue as you with my RX100.
However let me share with you a "fun story" that took place just a few weeks ago, with my A6000.
We were gathered at my relatives and we were four generations, my son, myself, my father and grandmother, and it was my grandmother's wish to take a photo of the four of us, so I asked my brother to take the photo. Everything on auto, and the flash angled up against the roof for bounce flash. The pictures came out horrible. There was motion blur and they were exremely yellow. So I tested just to be sure, and the photos came out flawless.
So I asked my wife instead.
The photos again did not look too good. There wasn't any motion, but just a bit dark and hint of yellow. And for the life of me I could not understand, so I asked my uncle, and finally, the pictures looked great.
So even in auto, there's still a thing called the photographer that makes the difference, at least if handheld.
Don't blame the camera, blame yourself.
If you consistently get incorrect white balance, why not shoot in apeture priority and set white balance yourself? Or shoot RAW then you can set white balance yourself when converting to JPEG, PNG or whatever you prefer.
Nick Tagataka, 18 Jan 2019You're right, some professional cameras do employ great tracking autofocus mechanism for fast ... moreNo, the post-processing methods "AI" use cannot be applied to RAW. RAW format is meant to be untouched sensor information. If you're modifying that information, that completely ruins the point of having raw sensor data. That's what the JPEG is for.
I wholly agree that the compact camera market is dying due to smartphones now being "good enough" for the masses though. The sales numbers have echoed this attitude for years. Anyone who wants to benefit from a stand-alone camera is better off using interchangeable lenses and large sensors (micro 4/3 or bigger), and nobody is going to carry around a bulky separate camera unless the difference is night and day.
The point I was making in my first comment was that these professional/prosumer cameras are entirely sensor and capture focused, not post-processing focused. As such, JPEG processing is unimportant. It's only the process to get the image, and capture as much information as possible via lens and sensors that matter.
iwantsmallscreen, 17 Jan 2019Sony cameras have the worst IQ of all brands. My Sony rx100m1 is stupid as it can be. Shutter ... moreyour comment is proof you never following the news or anything related..
sony a series one of best IQ out there, and the top series is the only one comparable in Nikon D850 in term IQ
Nick Tagataka, 18 Jan 2019You're right, some professional cameras do employ great tracking autofocus mechanism for fast ... moreif you are talking about compact camera , yeah you can be right..
but if you are talking like mirrorless a series or whatever equivalent, still smartphone can never over "real" camera.. physical size of sensor cant lie, capability to switch lens, quality of best lens and etc..
Nikon D3500 cost 499 and Nikon D3400 can be bought for 300-350 so this is complete waste of money.
As long as we cant put sim card inside and make a calls i am not interested.
FinnishInquisition, 17 Jan 2019Professional or 'prosumer' cameras like these are not meant for taking quick snaps and instant... moreYou're right, some professional cameras do employ great tracking autofocus mechanism for fast moving animals/humans. However, I believe smartphone manufacturers are actually catching up in this area pretty quickly. For instance Pixel 3 has a feature called Motion Autofocus that keeps focusing on a moving subject very accurately using machine learning, and Huawei phones that has a SoC with built-in NPU come with 4D Predictive Autofocus, which essentially guesses in which way the subject will move in the frame and makes sure the camera won't lose focus on it.
Also, machine learning algorithms that Google uses can help you shoot better quality RAW images(and technically Apple's as well, if they allowed app developers to use proprietary camera API for SmartHDR). All phones with modded Google camera apps are capable of outputting RAW images that looks significantly better than the ones coming out of their stock camera apps, with much less noise and higher dynamic range.
DSLR won't be threatened by the smartphone cameras any time soon, but compact cameras definitely are. More and more people are buying high end smartphones over compacts because for them smartphones can take "good enough" in auto, and soon it will be difficult to continue the compact camera business without appealing it to mass consumer. Small sensor compacts pretty much died out because it couldn't compete with smartphone cameras(apart from those with high magnification zoom), and premium compacts with 1" sensor might follow the same suit if phone manufacturers start using 1/1.7" sensor or larger.
Anonymous, 17 Jan 2019The eye AF is enhanced. It is now always on. No need to press a button to activate. Makes a wh... moreEyeAF is just a toggle in present models. You flick between Auto Focus\Manual Focus and AEL (EyeAF) with the hardware switch. It's not a button. It's Always-On if you decide to.