Venix:

People are so passionate about cameras on phones etc, and here is me wishing flagship phones had a version with a basic camera .... Nexus 6 on 399 with killer specs and a bleh camera was awesome! Personally i have to take a picture with my phone over a year ...well a picture with anything really 😛 . I will be also interested in a phone that is camera free !

i actually didnt care much about smartphone or camera, as both have their on features, and camera obviously wont obsolete anytime soon its just schmidtbag missed the point on my reply to silva and dragging pointless discussion i never think and said smartphone camera is enough for ALL people when i said smartphone camera is enough for MOST people, that also based what i am seeing in our world now, It is not my preference, go ask world why people using smartphone camera nowdays ? lol so yeah "fanbois" can turn someone like that, become mindless-human anyway in ur post, camera free mean phone without camera? if yes, why? interesting u asking opposite things

slyphnier:

many wrong things, are u living in cave? how about showing 1000euro vs 200euro phone pictures comparison ? high-end phone camera already reaching entry-DSLR camera quality nowdays also lets be real with real camera, u paid for 800euro ... then u need lens, it will be more than 1000euro 800euro say skip lens u buy mirrorless like sony A6400 then : in real-world most people wont bringing REAL-camera every day around.... you bringing extra 1.8pounds camera everyday ? everywhere ? one thing again not every people need high-end, mid-phones enough for most people with mid phone camera also good enough, so why not ? replacing phone battery is easy, many DIY kit available on market... tons of guide on ifixit/youtube afraid doing urself, any phone service center, 3rd party or authorize service center will do it for samsung, iirc replacing battery is like $25 after warranty period (free within warranty period) u also get free battery replacement if replacing display so really no excuse for the battery either

LOL where did you get this wild idea? I was charged 80 bucks to get my battery replaced for my s6 edge after the warranty expired. Fixing it self? Good luck getting the phone back together. I fixed several GBA's and gamecube controllers but fuck me phones are a different level especially for regular people who aren't used to these kind of repairs.

CalculuS:

LOL where did you get this wild idea? I was charged 80 bucks to get my battery replaced for my s6 edge after the warranty expired. Fixing it self? Good luck getting the phone back together. I fixed several GBA's and gamecube controllers but frack me phones are a different level especially for regular people who aren't used to these kind of repairs.

where u get ur battery replaced ? last year for S8 is 3000yen, i forget if i paid for service(work)fee https://sea.pcmag.com/smartphones/2875/heres-how-much-a-samsung-galaxy-s6-replacement-battery-costs --> this said $45 http://www.samsungparts.com/Products/Parts_and_Accessories/PID-GH43-04419C.aspx?oldpart=GH43-04419A&model= -> this cost $33 the battery itself should cost around that, but yea i know some places takes high service fee for DIY, do u know for now that even like pre-cut adhesive strip, something like this available https://www.amazon.com/HDCKU-Battery-Replacement-Kit-Galaxy/dp/B07H8TZ7VB or this https://www.ifixit.com/Store/Android/Galaxy-S6-Replacement-Battery/IF302-012?o=4 blackglass replacement isnt that much either edit : i look around abit, yeah seems around basically $25 is the cost for the battery, most place with charge again service fee https://www.bestbuy.com/site/geek-squad/samsung-authorized-service-provider/pcmcat1476123982741.c?id=pcmcat1476123982741&intl=nosplash -> bestbuy replacing battery for $50 but its not as high like urs place

slyphnier:

everyone can choice what they want, so why i should telling other what they should do ? what the benefit for me anyway ? Get your mind open

Get my mind open? I'm the one saying people can buy whatever they want. You are the one who criticized someone's decisions. That's why we're here.

"buying an overpriced piece of tech for 1000€ that does the same as a cheap phone but could never take the same pictures a dedicated camera does.

And as I said a bajillion times, it does the same thing and more. It's not the same. Stop saying it is. Even if it is, that's not your loss if that's what he wants to buy.

i suppose u agree with number 2 , so did i, but saying smartphone camera never take same pictures also can different in some cases, as we know the picture quality now getting better so how about rest , just answer that first, and give me the proof

It won't take the same pictures. In specific situations, a phone will get close enough and yield more than good-enough results. But... 1. "More than good enough" isn't great/best 2. Outside of those specific situations, you need something else. Those are the 2 reasons you buy another camera as an amateur. Most people don't care; they'd rather have a better phone camera and don't need anything else; that's perfectly fine - I totally get that. This isn't rocket science. I already gave you the proof, basically an infinite page of it. And... I even linked to 2 specific photos. EDIT:

addition : that single photograph wont be a comparrison proof and what i am asking is a comparrison ok u simply said that nothing in smartphone cant produce those nat.geo photograph but how about for example close up insect photograph, that maybe can shoot good enough to match nat.geo photos?

The context was "prove to me what a smartphone can't do". Those pictures are both things a smartphone can't do. You can't compare something when the other isn't even in the competition. That's like telling someone to do a 0-100 test in a Yugo 45 - it probably can't even reach 100kph, let alone have enough runway to try. As for the spider, you could probably get close results with a phone but you'll fall short. You have to get way too close, which will spook it. The background blur will be less prominent. Most importantly, the sharpness will be gone, especially if you keep your distance. The more you zoom into a phone camera's photo, the more it looks like a water painting.

schmidtbag:

Get my mind open? I'm the one saying people can buy whatever they want. You are the one who criticized someone's decisions. That's why we're here. And as I said a bajillion times, it does the same thing and more. It's not the same. Stop saying it is. Even if it is, that's not your loss if that's what he wants to buy. 1. "More than good enough" isn't great/best 2. Outside of those specific situations, you need something else. Those are the 2 reasons you buy another camera as an amateur. Most people don't care; they'd rather have a better phone camera and don't need anything else; that's perfectly fine - I totally get that. This isn't rocket science.

That answer is what u should said, because that what i critizing in first place and yeah that answer reasonable enough And i can agree with what u saying, so basically not all his saying right, but its his choice u have ur opinion, and i have mine so fair enough so why with this stupid camera nonsense discussion ? why u think by saying his saying not right then all sudden his choice also become bad choice ? i mean really dude... i dont even know him, why should i care his choice ? we are in forum, and what i want to know is simply if someone saying whether is valid or just bs ... and thats it U concluding other-critics urself in your mind. Rather than look at the point i am critizing, u stick ur mind to ur stupid conclusion i am replying/critizing his(silva) idea about smartphone because smartphone nowdays from what i see is more capable in many ways AND again i talk about smartphone ONLY, NONE about camera NEVER in my mind i undermining other people choice, they have their own choice that work best for them. I DO telling other what i know, for sake information/comparison and thats it So where in my post i am saying anything about camera ? or undermining camera? in my post, i showing how smartphone camera improved So why not get good smartphone camera ? and obviously there nothing wrong to buy/have camera either why all of sudden u concluding because 1 hi-end smartphone then no need camera ? when i am saying that ? same to what i said, most people wont bring camera everyday everywhere and many people use less camera nowdays, thats simply what we are seeing in our world now. but then why u concluding that "i am sort-of saying camera is just waste money" ? did u realize, i post something, u read my post then u get conclusion for urself and u critizing ur conclusion, not what i posted and those all camera talk, u are the one dragging me to those talk which to me, its not my concern as i am not talking about tried to explain u many times, yet u insist with ur conclusion, telling other ignortant/clueless/arrogant but never look into self

slyphnier:

That answer is what u should said, because that what i critizing in first place and yeah that answer reasonable enough

I did say that before... Many times.

so why with this stupid camera nonsense discussion ?

Because you made a nonsense blanket statement about how a phone camera is good enough. That's not for you to decide.

why u think by saying his saying not right then all sudden his choice also become bad choice ?

I didn't say it's a bad choice... I'm validating that his choice has good reasons.

i mean really dude... i dont even know him, why should i care his choice ?

GREAT question! That's exactly why I replied to you - because you made a fuss over what his choice was.

Rather than look at the point i am critizing, u stick ur mind to ur stupid conclusion

Which conclusion is that? That a more expensive camera warrants a higher price? That you shouldn't criticize people for their shopping decisions when there are good reasons for their decision?

NEVER in my mind i undermining other people choice, they have their own choice that work best for them.

Then mind explaining the first sentence in your response to Silva? How is that not undermining?

So where in my post i am saying anything about camera ? or undermining camera?

Where did I say you were?

in my post, i showing how smartphone camera improved

Yes, they are improving. That doesn't make them all-purpose or a better choice than a discrete camera. So if someone wants a discrete camera, that's probably because a smartphone isn't good enough.

So why not get good smartphone camera ? and obviously there nothing wrong to buy/have camera either why all of sudden u concluding because 1 hi-end smartphone then no need camera ?

You can get one, and I never said otherwise. If you have the money, get both. I said several times already that a good smartphone camera is all that the average person needs. But sometimes someone wants/needs a better camera than what a phone has to offer, and sometimes such a person doesn't have the budget to buy 2 really expensive devices.

same to what i said, most people wont bring camera everyday everywhere and many people use less camera nowdays, thats simply what we are seeing in our world now.

I really have a hard time understanding why you keep bringing this up. It contributes nothing of meaning to the conversation.

but then why u concluding that "i am sort-of saying camera is just waste money" ?

In what way did I ever conclude that? I never said or implied that. Not even a little bit.

tried to explain u many times, yet u insist with ur conclusion, telling other ignortant/clueless/arrogant but never look into self

wtf are you talking about? I didn't call you ignorant, clueless, or arrogant. And you're telling me to look at myself? The best word I can use to describe you right now is an ass.

Tilting camera to take selfies, and random Facebook stuff, or whatever app is hip with the youngsters these days.

schmidtbag:

Because you made a nonsense blanket statement about how a phone camera is good enough. That's not for you to decide. GREAT question! That's exactly why I replied to you - because you made a fuss over what his choice was. Which conclusion is that? That a more expensive camera warrants a higher price? That you shouldn't criticize people for their shopping decisions when there are good reasons for their decision? Then mind explaining the first sentence in your response to Silva? How is that not undermining? Where did I say you were? Yes, they are improving. That doesn't make them all-purpose or a better choice than a discrete camera. So if someone wants a discrete camera, that's probably because a smartphone isn't good enough. You can get one, and I never said otherwise. If you have the money, get both. I said several times already that a good smartphone camera is all that the average person needs. But sometimes someone wants/needs a better camera than what a phone has to offer, and sometimes such a person doesn't have the budget to buy 2 really expensive devices. I really have a hard time understanding why you keep bringing this up. It contributes nothing of meaning to the conversation. In what way did I ever conclude that? I never said or implied that. Not even a little bit. wtf are you talking about? I didn't call you ignorant, clueless, or arrogant. And you're telling me to look at myself? The best word I can use to describe you right now is an ass.

i dont decide how good phone camera, but many reviews, user said been praising phone camera, i did tried some and edit those pictures, and i also see improvement even that not apply to everyone, why its wrong to say its good ? there must be reasonable level to say whether is good or bad u are the one fussing everything, i never made a fuss over what his choice was. u urself saying, that not all his saying is correct, and that what i been talking/pointing about. Which conclusion is that? That a more expensive camera warrants a higher price? That you shouldn't criticize people for their shopping decisions when there are good reasons for their decision? ↑who saying this ? dont u realize its urself saying this. copy paste where i arguing above ? Your mind up-side-down or what? who undermining smartphone thus i questioning about it ? i DID NOT questioning his choice neither camera capabilites ... so from where i undermining camera like u said? anyway if u still enjoying to continue arguing this go ahead BUT first put aside camera-talk out of your mind+post,as we are not talking about real-camera i clearly said that we are talking about smartphone and its camera since the beginning the only part that related to camera is the part smartphone-is-not-good-as-camera, and the subject is smartphone not the dedicated camera afterall this post news is about smartphone camera patents agree with it and go ahead continue the talk, but back to camera-talk again, means u only insisting your idea and ignoring else, which mean no point in having discussion well u have brain to think, speaking of it, we really way out of topic... gladly guru3d mod is kind enough not remove/ban those OOT post and i read back ur post, u did mention clueless, arrogant but not really directly to me, i missed that point, so apologize for saying those

slyphnier:

even that not apply to everyone, why its wrong to say its good ? there must be reasonable level to say whether is good or bad

It isn't wrong to say they're good. They are good; in some situations, very good. I didn't say otherwise. But they're limited, and they're not great.

u are the one fussing everything, i never made a fuss over what his choice was.

I'm really not. I'm just saying there's nothing wrong with wanting a worse phone in favor of a better camera.

↑who saying this ? dont u realize its urself saying this. copy paste where i arguing above ?

I'm saying those things. Those are my arguments. Anything else you think I'm saying is your own misinterpretation.

Your mind up-side-down or what? who undermining smartphone thus i questioning about it ? i DID NOT questioning his choice neither camera capabilites ... so from where i undermining camera like u said?

Is your mind upside down? Where did I say you're undermining smartphones? Do you have no recollection at all of your first post? It's basically a tirade that could be summed up as "why would you rather do that? Smartphone cameras are just as good as DSLRs".

i clearly said that we are talking about smartphone and its camera since the beginning

Yes, you said that it's all-purpose and comparable to a DSLR as a way to undermine Silva's preferences. Hence me being here. I bring up the technical details of what separates the cameras to show that no, in fact they're not at all similar. Why else did you say what you said to him? You claim to know why a discrete camera is better, yet you posted a video comparing one to an iPhone to say "they're basically the same" (I'm paraphrasing here, I know you didn't literally say that). You claim you're open-minded to people's preferences, yet you actively challenged his.

schmidtbag:

It isn't wrong to say they're good. They are good; in some situations, very good. I didn't say otherwise. But they're limited, and they're not great. I'm really not. I'm just saying there's nothing wrong with wanting a worse phone in favor of a better camera. I'm saying those things. Those are my arguments. Anything else you think I'm saying is your own misinterpretation. Is your mind upside down? Where did I say you're undermining smartphones? Do you have no recollection at all of your first post? It's basically a tirade that could be summed up as "why would you rather do that? Smartphone cameras are just as good as DSLRs". Yes, you said that it's all-purpose and comparable to a DSLR as a way to undermine Silva's preferences. Hence me being here. I bring up the technical details of what separates the cameras to show that no, in fact they're not at all similar. Why else did you say what you said to him? You claim to know why a discrete camera is better, yet you posted a video comparing one to an iPhone to say "they're basically the same" (I'm paraphrasing here, I know you didn't literally say that). You claim you're open-minded to people's preferences, yet you actively challenged his.

i say silva undermining smartphones thus i criticize him this discussion in short is this silva: "smartphone camera sucks, i prefer dedicated-camera" then i am critizing : its just u think that way, many dont think smartphone camera sucks with providing some evidence -> then you suddenly "he decide that way with his camera, so let it be" its like LMAO... i questioning smartphone and u defending camera ? what i want is answer why he think smartphone camera sucks, NOT other else do i even saying anything about dedicated-camera? cmon u are smart, yet u still missing the point ? lol I did provide some video to show that current smartphone been improving to that level IF i dont provide some evidence that smartphone camera now worth enough to consider, then what the reason i criticize him in first place ? Yea i open my mind, people have their own preference and also their reason why the choice that way and i want to know their reason, is that wrong ?

slyphnier:

i say silva undermining smartphones thus i criticize him

Kinda; I see your point, but he's not wrong.

its like LMAO... i questioning smartphone and u defending camera ?

You're still not seeing the connection here? You basically said "smartphone cameras don't suck" by comparing it to a legit camera. Except the evidence you provided was pretty much the only situation a phone camera really shines in performance. That's why I said it wasn't a good comparison, because it doesn't address the slew of shortcomings a phone camera has. Those shortcomings are why Silva made his point. It's not that I'm defending discrete cameras (not at this point anyway), but I'm trying to show how they're not really comparable.

what i want is answer why he think smartphone camera sucks, NOT other else

And I gave you reasons why it sucks (though, I'd say that's too negative of a word, they're not that bad). Of the reasons I provided, you interpreted them as "you're defending discrete cameras". I have to give the technical reasons of discrete cameras in order to show why phone cameras aren't good enough [for some people].

I did provide some video to show that current smartphone been improving to that level IF i dont provide some evidence that smartphone camera now worth enough to consider, then what the reason i criticize him in first place ?

I completely understand what you're saying there, but you're effectively cherry-picking results. This is a tech enthusiast forum - you know very well what happens when someone picks the best-case scenario as a way to promote something.

and i want to know their reason, is that wrong ?

It isn't wrong, but your attitude from the beginning didn't sound like you were open to reasons. When I provided reasons, you just saw it as "I questioning smartphone and you defending camera". In other words: my defenses of discrete cameras were the reasons.

@slyphnier No friend, I'm not living in a cave. I read allot and watch informative videos to base my argument. Saying that a premium phone can capture the same image as an entry level DSLR is just delusional: it can't. Can it do a good enough job considering the application involved is favourable? Yes. Most phones don't give you control over ISO, shutter speed or aperture. And no phone on the market will accept filters, really important if you need to shot in bright sunlight or want to get creative. You can get amazing cameras with a lens for less than 800€: canon M50 is around 500/600€ with lens; Nikon 3500 is less than 400€, if you want to reserve some budget for extra lens (that you don't actually need as 18 to 55 covers most people needs). You're trying to sell the phone argument and show me a video were the quality of the A6400 is way superior over the dreadfull 2010 iphone 11 quality? You're joking, right? The iphone doesn't even focus on his face, it's focused on the mac behind him... *facepalm* In the real world the best camera is the one on your pocket. If someone is planing shooting something, they'll bring their camera with them. Canon M50 is extra small, that can fit on any jacket pocket. If you find yourself without your camera, a phone will always beat not having any camera. No friend, replacing phone batteries aren't easy and there's no warranty. You could easily brick the phone doing a repair like that. Iphones are infamous for needing new glass covers or getting stuff broke because everything is glued, not screwed. Try shooting pictures of the night sky with a phone, shooting concerts with a phone and over all: try editing your raws pics from your phone. PS: I'm still laughing over that video, really? ahahah

schmidtbag:

Kinda; I see your point, but he's not wrong. You're still not seeing the connection here? You basically said "smartphone cameras don't suck" by comparing it to a legit camera. Except the evidence you provided was pretty much the only situation a phone camera really shines in performance. That's why I said it wasn't a good comparison, because it doesn't address the slew of shortcomings a phone camera has. Those shortcomings are why Silva made his point. It's not that I'm defending discrete cameras (not at this point anyway), but I'm trying to show how they're not really comparable. And I gave you reasons why it sucks (though, I'd say that's too negative of a word, they're not that bad). Of the reasons I provided, you interpreted them as "you're defending discrete cameras". I have to give the technical reasons of discrete cameras in order to show why phone cameras aren't good enough [for some people]. I completely understand what you're saying there, but you're effectively cherry-picking results. This is a tech enthusiast forum - you know very well what happens when someone picks the best-case scenario as a way to promote something. It isn't wrong, but your attitude from the beginning didn't sound like you were open to reasons. When I provided reasons, you just saw it as me going off-subject.

why u so sure, u like u are silva himself ? Obviously i intepreted you as defending camera, simply because since beginning i dont comparing the smartphone to camera i just talk about smartphone so logically, using smartphone as subject would be way better to interpreter whole things so ok let say that the reason why he choice that way, that dedicated-camera is way above smartphone level still that doesnt mean what he said is valid and applies to everyone so thus i am critizing it ... we agree with this ? last what the benefit i get from promoting something here? now say that u make camera the best-case-scenario, will it make people change their mind ? and all of sudden people using camera ?

Silva:

@slyphnier No friend, I'm not living in a cave. I read allot and watch informative videos to base my argument. Saying that a premium phone can capture the same image as an entry level DSLR is just delusional: it can't. Can it do a good enough job considering the application involved is favourable? Yes. Most phones don't give you control over ISO, shutter speed or aperture. And no phone on the market will accept filters, really important if you need to shot in bright sunlight or want to get creative. You can get amazing cameras with a lens for less than 800€: canon M50 is around 500/600€ with lens; Nikon 3500 is less than 400€, if you want to reserve some budget for extra lens (that you don't actually need as 18 to 55 covers most people needs). You're trying to sell the phone argument and show me a video were the quality of the A6400 is way superior over the dreadfull 2010 iphone 11 quality? You're joking, right? The iphone doesn't even focus on his face, it's focused on the mac behind him... *facepalm* In the real world the best camera is the one on your pocket. If someone is planing shooting something, they'll bring their camera with them. Canon M50 is extra small, that can fit on any jacket pocket. If you find yourself without your camera, a phone will always beat not having any camera. No friend, replacing phone batteries aren't easy and there's no warranty. You could easily brick the phone doing a repair like that. Iphones are infamous for needing new glass covers or getting stuff broke because everything is glued, not screwed. Try shooting pictures of the night sky with a phone, shooting concerts with a phone and over all: try editing your raws pics from your phone. PS: I'm still laughing over that video, really? ahahah

edit : i need to add few things i think many high-end smartphone have those ISO/shutter option source: https://www.samsung.com/au/support/mobile-devices/galaxy-s10-pro-mode-camera/ Manually adjust settings such as ISO, shutter speed and exposure levels, express your own style with filters, or adjust the white balance settings to accommodate different lighting conditions. https://www.iphone-fotograaf.nl/en/iphone-shutter-speed-and-iso/ phone filter : https://photoswithphones.com/smartphone-camera-lens-filters-guide/ https://www.cinema5d.com/sandmarc-lenses-filters-iphone-11-pro-max-11-pro-iphone-11/ phone lens:https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/buying-guides/best-add-on-lenses-for-iphone-and-android-phones u said u look alot, and never find those ? that price is over the budget then u said before ? i'd rather buy a REAL camera for 800€ and a phone for 200€ other been asking same things about battery, for samsung https://www.bestbuy.com/site/geek-s...982741.c?id=pcmcat1476123982741&intl=nosplash -> bestbuy replacing battery for $50 u live in euro? did u ever check how much carphonewarehouse quote u ? for iphone well most like u pay more, but i still believe it under $100 anyway why iphone needing new glass-cover ? for iphone, you open with display casing from front : https://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/mUeYVxc6UX3Stc2g.huge ok night sky how bout this : [youtube=00iCB3Cea8w] there bunch vids with "milky way with smartphone" keywords https://petapixel.com/2015/02/20/smartphone-astrophotography-how-i-capture-the-moon-and-planets-with-my-phone/ while obviously not on same level if u go with right lens , but considering how compact its, not bad eh ?

@slyphnier No its not, the budget was 1000€ and I gave two camera examples under 800€: Canon M50 for under 600€ or Nikon 3500 for under 400€. Obviously you could have any camera up to 800€, there are plenty, and they all have lens included. Phones for me need to be at least octa core, a quad core will struggle with apps and I can't stand a sluggish phone that feels old when new. They start at 160/180€ I believe, keeping my budget. You only talk about samsung batteries and services, but they're not the only players. My last samsung phone is from 2012, has removable battery and my mom is using it. My current phone is Huawei P8 Lite 2017, no battery service. Other brands exist obviously. I paid 140€ for this phone new, do you think even paying under 100€ for a battery change is good value? I rather replace the phone for a new better one. Cool video, considering you have no control over the phone camera like a dslr or mirrorless and he has to use 3rd party apps to serve as intervalometer, it's not user friendly. If you like phones, cool: use them to your heart and desire. They will never be better than cameras because of physical limitations. You can't expect a phone sensor to be as good as a camera one. A bigger sensor captures more light, it's physics you can't change. it also has more bokeh under the same f/stop. https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-de59d641fcb2cb69218544a36119d7da

slyphnier:

i just talk about smartphone so logically, using smartphone as subject would be way better to interpreter whole things

The smartphone is the item with less features, fewer capabilities, and lower quality. The only way to prove how it could be better is to exemplify something that is better.

still that doesnt mean what he said is valid and applies to everyone so thus i am critizing it ... we agree with this ?

Yes.

last what the benefit i get from promoting something here?

Good question. Why do fanboys/fangirls exist? All the time, people defend a specific brand or product like it's their family.

now say that u make camera the best-case-scenario, will it make people change their mind ? and all of sudden people using camera ?

Probably not. Most people prefer convenience over quality, and phone cameras are really convenient. That's why things like Netflix are so successful compared to Blu Ray, despite the fact the quality is noticeably worse and you don't actually own anything. Mirrorless cameras are substantially smaller than DSLRs, but they're still too bulky and expensive for the average person. Point-and-shoot cameras are a good mix of excellent quality, portability, ease-of-use, and affordability. But since PaS cameras (like smartphone cameras) are built for general-purpose use, most people prefer the convenience of their phone over the improved quality of a PaS. As I said before though, popularity has nothing to do with whether a camera should be considered or not. To Silva's point, your devices shouldn't be an indicator of social status.

Silva:

@slyphnier No its not, the budget was 1000€ and I gave two camera examples under 800€: Canon M50 for under 600€ or Nikon 3500 for under 400€. Obviously you could have any camera up to 800€, there are plenty, and they all have lens included. Phones for me need to be at least octa core, a quad core will struggle with apps and I can't stand a sluggish phone that feels old when new. They start at 160/180€ I believe, keeping my budget. You only talk about samsung batteries and services, but they're not the only players. My last samsung phone is from 2012, has removable battery and my mom is using it. My current phone is Huawei P8 Lite 2017, no battery service. Other brands exist obviously. I paid 140€ for this phone new, do you think even paying under 100€ for a battery change is good value? I rather replace the phone for a new better one. Cool video, considering you have no control over the phone camera like a dslr or mirrorless and he has to use 3rd party apps to serve as intervalometer, it's not user friendly. If you like phones, cool: use them to your heart and desire. They will never be better than cameras because of physical limitations. You can't expect a phone sensor to be as good as a camera one. A bigger sensor captures more light, it's physics you can't change. it also has more bokeh under the same f/stop. https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-de59d641fcb2cb69218544a36119d7da

phone-service-center/shop should be everywhere, considering everyone have phone, so that is big market so whatever brand u using, if u look ur neighborhood u should can find phone-service-shop that do their job considering you have money to investing into camera, why so stingy to phone ? isnt that better have good phone even say u have camera for photo ? i agree that phone will never be better than cameras because of physical limitations but that also what amaze me,considering the size of that sensor, and how far they got improved each year

schmidtbag:

The smartphone is the item with less features, fewer capabilities, and lower quality. The only way to prove how it could be better is to exemplify something that is better. As I said before though, popularity has nothing to do with whether a camera should be considered or not. To Silva's point, your devices shouldn't be an indicator of social status.

I think that what make we have different idea since the beginning since start, when i talk about the smartphone, i see whole feature in smartphone not just for camera camera is indeed one of main-feature in smartphone, but IF we only talk about that compared to dedicated-camera that created for specific-purpose then its obviously we know that not even needed for talk. Thats why i am asking is "cheap phone is same to high end phone" we know basic-features is same, and high-end is just "more" like u said. But isnt it same to our PC? and for IT people in here, the reason or why we wanting for latest tech So yeah that experience (based my personal experience) when using flagship smartphone compared to cheap one, its really different, on cheap phone where the processing often become slow then when opening few-apps it become sluggish, freezing etc indeed from mid-phone to flagship those experience gap not really visible, well its just similar to PC, how good hi-end PC compared to mid or low. for this "best-case scenario as a way to promote something." i personally dont see any benefit for both of us.. in the end its just like u said, everyone make their own choice, beside most people wont even bother read our discussion As I said before though, popularity has nothing to do with whether a camera should be considered or not. To Silva's point, your devices shouldn't be an indicator of social status. ↑ for my point, smartphone is convenient + u using all day, so why not get the better one ? anyone still saying a high-smartphone is social status nowday ? a $1000piece = social status ? LMAO well i myself didnt have idea bragging social status... not if i just can buy branded goods or high-end gadget ....its might be different if i have one of like this house : [youtube=iVQhkDZS_Tk]

@slyphnier yes i would not mind if the phone has no camera or a bare basic 1-2 mp camera ... is simple ... i almost never take pictures ...and the few ones i took ... i pretty much never even back up .. i guess i do not care to take pictures at all

slyphnier:

I think that what make we have different idea since the beginning since start, when i talk about the smartphone, i see whole feature in smartphone not just for camera camera is indeed one of main-feature in smartphone, but IF we only talk about that compared to dedicated-camera that created for specific-purpose then its obviously we know that not even needed for talk.

Alright - I think I'm starting to understand you better now. You're saying that a phone is more than just a camera, and some of what you're paying for are those other things. So, calling it an "overpriced piece of tech" because the camera is inferior isn't a good way of looking at it. Does this sound right to you?

Thats why i am asking is "cheap phone is same to high end phone" we know basic-features is same, and high-end is just "more" like u said. But isnt it same to our PC? and for IT people in here, the reason or why we wanting for latest tech So yeah that experience (based my personal experience) when using flagship smartphone compared to cheap one, its really different, on cheap phone where the processing often become slow then when opening few-apps it become sluggish, freezing etc indeed from mid-phone to flagship those experience gap not really visible, well its just similar to PC, how good hi-end PC compared to mid or low.

Here too I'd say things are starting to click. I think you made good points there. So here I think the point you were trying to convey was "paying less for the phone doesn't just mean a worse camera, it means the whole device is worse. Are you willing to make that sacrifice?". Does this sound right to you? If so, you need to understand that I and others here didn't interpret it that way, when most of what you talked about in your first reply was about the camera.

i personally dont see any benefit for both of us.. in the end its just like u said, everyone make their own choice, beside most people wont even bother read our discussion

Agreed, but, our discussion hasn't gone totally ignored, and every little difference counts. Others get to reflect upon their own thoughts and decisions based on the arguments we made.

↑ for my point, smartphone is convenient + u using all day, so why not get the better one ?

THAT is a point that I think makes sense, not sure why you didn't say it so clearly earlier lol. But there are answers to that: 1. In this context, there's a desire for another expensive device. Not everyone has the budget for a $1000 phone and a $1000 camera. Not everyone has a budget half that amount either. For people like Silva or myself, a better camera is a higher priority than the phone. 2. Personally, I find a lot of the features in high-end phones to be either gimmicky or detrimental. They tout their skinniness, but all that does is make them easier to break and offer crappier battery life. You can put a protector on them but then that defeats the skinniness. They have better performance, but if all I really want to do is google search something real quick, play a round of a simple game, and text+call people, those beefier specs are just needlessly burning watts. This is especially true for phones with high refresh rates. Yeah, the smoothness is very satisfying, but is it worth the shortened battery life and more expensive hardware? Not in my opinion. The displays are made of glass, touted for their hardness and scratch resistance, but they're still not scratchproof and they're prone to shattering; cheap phones are basically shatter-proof and a cheap protector will spare you from scratches. Personally, I don't use any protection on my phone at all; I'm not a klutz and if a major drop were to break my phone, fine, I'll buy a new one. The speakers are often really nice but NOBODY likes the guy who blasts his music as he walks around in public - put on a pair of headphones. My crappy $40 has speakers that are loud enough where I can listen to podcasts while doing the dishes and hear what's going on without any distortion. There's not a lot of depth to the sound, but it's adequate, especially for the price. To me, any display over 4 inches is too big. You need both hands to effectively use it, and that's just plain inconvenient to me. And then there's the whole issue of having it fit in your pocket comfortably. I care more about portability and being able to use my phone entirely with a single hand. Typically, you have to buy cheaper phones for something smaller. The thing about phones is you pay exponentially more money for incremental improvements. I'd say most people shouldn't go as cheap as I did, but, I put a lot less dependence on my phone than most people. I don't want to be on my phone all day, so, having one that is frustratingly slow is a good way to stop using it lol.

anyone still saying a high-smartphone is social status nowday ? a $1000piece = social status ? LMAO well i myself didnt have idea bragging social status... not if i just can buy branded goods or high-end gadget ....its might be different if i have one of like this house :

Sadly, yes. But now that Apple is slipping in popularity and Samsung keeps releasing unpolished flagships, having the best phone doesn't mean as much as it used to. The fact it ever meant anything at all is a bit ridiculous IMO.