x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Options

Have smartphone cameras reached point-and-shoot quality?

0. phoneArena 04 Feb 2013, 09:51 posted on

The debate about the quality of smartphone cameras and whether or not they have reached point-and-shoot level has been current for at least a few years now, and while we're generally not the ones to say that they have, our opinion has recently started to change...

This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 10:00 36

1. cezarepc (Posts: 714; Member since: 23 Nov 2012)

My N8 puts traditional point and shoots to shame. Low-end point and shoots have low-quality optics which results to barrel distortion which is non-existent on my N8 (and even other smartphones like GS2, iPhone4/4S, GS3, etc). Processing is also better thanks to the continuous upgrades of socs and software.

Nokia even took it to another level and introduced Pureview.

Edit: Personally I use the xenon flash in Low-light conditions (e.g. parties, bars, etc). But manually configuring the ISO and exposure can give you decent images even without flash.

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 19:26 1

27. JWS65 (Posts: 32; Member since: 22 Jan 2013)

Maybe it wins to low end ones, but not against high end P&S I think. Can N8, 808 beat Canon S100, Lumix LX-7, Sony RX100? I doubt it.

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 20:03

28. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)

You nailed it, JWS. Sure, the iP5, L920 and GS III/Note II can be competitive with some P&S cameras, but NOT the high-end P&S cameras. There is the simple matter of the physics that are involved. For example, digital zoom will never compete with optical zoom.

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 20:46

31. -box- (Posts: 3991; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)

True, but those high-end P&S are around the same price as a new basic or last-gen midrange DSLR (granted with just the included lens with the body). With these smartphones one is getting a single device for almost all general occasions a normal consumer might encounter

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 22:49

34. JWS65 (Posts: 32; Member since: 22 Jan 2013)

Well only Sony RX100 is the pricey one a little above 600. The other two I mentioned above can be had well below 500. I don't think any smart-phone camera can touch them in image quality, performance and they are much more compact than DSLR.
When it comes to low light, action photography, the physics of small sensor in the phone simply don't work for it.

posted on 05 Feb 2013, 03:03 1

38. cezarepc (Posts: 714; Member since: 23 Nov 2012)

I agree 100%. No smartphone can compete with a full-pledged high-end DSLR/SLR. But you have to consider, these are smartphones were talking about. They're purpose is to serve as your PDA, phone, web-browser, GPS, and camera among others.

Going back to the article, have smartphones reached point-and-shoot quality? A solid yes. There are crappy camera phones and there are great camera phones much like how there are crappy point and shoots and great ones.

posted on 05 Feb 2013, 12:48 1

41. JWS65 (Posts: 32; Member since: 22 Jan 2013)

I didn't even bring up DSLR to the image quality comparison, just some high end P&S. Actually I think even some decent $300 P&S wins Nokia phone cameras.

The problem with the article is that it's misleading people to believe top quality phone cameras beat or reach all P&S cameras in image quality. Reached low end P&S quality? Yes. But from 300 and above, it's leaning backing to P&S.

posted on 06 Feb 2013, 03:46

44. cezarepc (Posts: 714; Member since: 23 Nov 2012)

Yup your right. Smartphone cams have already reached (only) low-end point and shoot quality. Though if we use $300 as the dividing line between good and bad point and shoots then it's a close fight since a lot of great camera phones are well below $300.

Also, since people who own high-end point and shoots are a minority among camera owners, IMO we can say that generally speaking top quality phones have indeed reached point and shoot quality.

posted on 05 Feb 2013, 01:04

36. haseebzahid (Posts: 1853; Member since: 22 Feb 2012)

if u want phones to beat a 400-600$ camera you got to be kidding for now

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 10:11 22

2. Nathan_ingx (Posts: 3605; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)

Excuse me sir...but isn't it already made clear that the phone in the thumbnail (up there in high resolution) has done that??

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 11:06 8

11. RaKithAPeiRiZ (Posts: 1488; Member since: 29 Dec 2011)

that phone right there can rival a mid range mirrorless camera

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 17:32 1

23. HDShatter (Posts: 1021; Member since: 17 Jan 2013)

No thanks, I buy cameras to use as cameras not phones. I don't care how many Megapixels it is this phone is destroyed by most actual cameras.

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 20:08 4

29. Nathan_ingx (Posts: 3605; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)

I agree...i want cameras to have a seperate feel...O, there are dedicated cameras for that, aren't there? Lol...
Jokes apart, cameraphones are mostly about accessibility and mobility. Imagine you're sitting in a car (not driving...please don't do this if you're driving :P) you have a phone in your hand with a capable sensor and a dedicated camera hanging by your neck. As you're passing through the highway 60mph, you see a girl standing at the roadside flashing (just an example) and you want to click it quick.
Would you use your phone to take the picture with the quick access it has with the shutter key?
Or would you fumble with your camera (open lens cover-turn it on-manual/auto adjust-she's about 15 feet gone)...?
But now you see, cameraphones have become more that just random clicking devices... Hence the article.

posted on 05 Feb 2013, 01:08

37. haseebzahid (Posts: 1853; Member since: 22 Feb 2012)

cams in phones are for portability for everyday use where u are not always taking ur cam with u unless ur pro photographer

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 20:09

30. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)

Yeah right. Sony RX100 runs away and hides while the Nokia is trying to produce a RAW image file with High Dynamic Range. It will be a cold day in Hell when the 808 lens can produce an image resolution in the 2,000 lines territory. LMFAO.

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 20:49 3

32. -box- (Posts: 3991; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)

Oh look, there's the point! You missed it.

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 10:13 1

3. N-fanboy (Posts: 543; Member since: 12 Jan 2013)

The question is now that its clear that we dont nead point and shoot cameras any more, what else will slowly become accomodated in to smartphones? I say laptops! Who needs 'em?

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 10:20

5. No_Nonsense (Posts: 826; Member since: 17 Aug 2012)

Ubuntu and the QNX based BB10 are a step in that direction.

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 10:55 2

9. Muhannad (Posts: 455; Member since: 20 Sep 2011)

You're looking at laptops from a certain angle, I'm telling you that there are a lot of PC gamers, myself included, who aren't willing to game on a tiny touch screen compared to desktops and laptops.

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 16:48

22. Zero0 (Posts: 592; Member since: 05 Jul 2012)

So then something like the Asus Padphone, where the phone would dock into a larger screen? It's a ways off before phone processors will hold a candle to even a half-decent laptop, but maybe in the distant future it could be realistic.

posted on 05 Feb 2013, 21:45

42. HDShatter (Posts: 1021; Member since: 17 Jan 2013)

Phones will never be better than a desktop/laptop, good luck encoding 1080p video on a phone/tablet or playing any games released in last 5 years.

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 10:17 10

4. No_Nonsense (Posts: 826; Member since: 17 Aug 2012)

Depends on the phone you are talking about. The 808 does it and sometimes even bests the P&Ses and if GSMArena's comparison is anything to go by, it performs well against an SLR as well. The N8 does it too. OIS in the 920 is a great step forward, but otherwise the 920 doesn't better or equal P&S cameras. Although, I'd say any other manufacturer bar Nokia is not doing this.

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 10:21 10

6. Cyan3boN (Posts: 444; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)

Nokia, god of all camera phones. If only they made point and shoots. maybe it's their backup plan!!

posted on 05 Feb 2013, 21:47

43. HDShatter (Posts: 1021; Member since: 17 Jan 2013)

If they made normal cameras that had improved versions of pureview and they cost like $50-$100 they would be rich.

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 10:33 13

7. Deaconclgi (Posts: 405; Member since: 03 Nov 2012)

No mention of the Nokia N8 in the atticle which STILL has a larger sensor than ALL other smartphones besides the 808. The N8 is entering it's third calendar year and the sensor is still larger than most point and shoot cameras.

Also saying that no one would like a phone as thick as the 808 is complete personal bias and if it is really about the camera then the picture quality is what matters the most in this discussion.

Cell phone cameras won't replace point and shoots until their hardware equals or exceeds them in sensor/optics and xenon flash which both the Nokia N8 and 808 have done.

Even the Nokia N82 was closing the gap back in 2008 but the level of optical and software in the N8 and 808 far exceeds that milestone and the 808 clearly trumps the competition and is a suitable replacement to a point an shoot.

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 10:41 14

8. Samsomesh (Posts: 195; Member since: 11 Jun 2012)

Nokia is the king...

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 11:00 6

10. Deaconclgi (Posts: 405; Member since: 03 Nov 2012)

The person thumbing down the comments about Nokia products must have some sad insecurity. An unbiased person just states what is factually correct. It is a fact that currently, Nokia makes the best camera phones with the largest sensors, best optics, larger than the sensors from all competitors and most point and shoot cameras. Why would you down vote that? Really, examine yourself and see what is your problem or bias? If another manufacturer makes better and larger sensors and cameras than Nokia then great! Are you going to down vote them as well.

I own a N8, iPhone 4S and various android devices and Nokia is the only manufacturer that have provided a complete camera package which includes the necessity of a powerful Xenon flash JUST LIKE point and shoots.

I'd like to have more options when it comes to having a point and shoot replacement in my cell phone so I hope other manufacturers do more in the area of optics, sensors and xenon capacitors and not have Nokia go at it alone.

Down voting facts is childish and if you got satisfaction from doing that then that says a lot about your personality.

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 17:53 6

24. Edmund (Posts: 656; Member since: 13 Jul 2012)

and that person is most likely darac, the undisputed android queen of phone arena.

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 11:14 2

12. jaabubut (Posts: 13; Member since: 20 Jan 2013)

I own nokia n82 and it quality is on par with nokia n8

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 16:25 4

21. jiezel91 (Posts: 67; Member since: 28 Jul 2011)

I own the N82 too. And my sister has the N8. I must honestly say, the N8 is the absolute winner. The colors are very impressively natural-looking and very detailed too. But the N82 has a stronger flash though. But somehow, I have observed that in the output pictures, I don't see the difference in strength (based on the illumination of the scene) of the xenon flashes of both the N82 and N8.

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 11:37 2

13. wando77 (Posts: 796; Member since: 23 Aug 2012)

I'd happily buy a phone as thick as the 808 providing they put it on android with at least nexus 4 processor and ram

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 12:02 2

14. aco96 (Posts: 239; Member since: 12 Oct 2012)

There is one thing I don't understand: Why compaines avoid xenon flash? Only Nokia includes them. I remember phone like SE c901, c905, satio, LG Renoir etc. they all had xenon flash. But now only phone in 2012 which included it was 808 PW. How can a phone without xenon flash replace point-and-shoot camera?

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 12:38 5

15. ThePhenomenalOne (Posts: 6; Member since: 04 Feb 2013)

Proud owner of the Nokia N8 and 808 PureView.

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 13:40 4

16. tusshharish (Posts: 342; Member since: 23 Oct 2012)

nokia puts a best example of this competition by giving us pureveiw.....

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 14:19 2

17. darac (Posts: 2156; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)

I am really pleased with my S3' camera.

Took some HDR shots at night yesterday, they turned out amazing

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 14:58 2

18. surethom (Posts: 589; Member since: 04 Mar 2009)

Without a Xenon flash & without at least 3 x Optical zoom, then no.

Low light is a major fail on virtual all camera phones released today. (Nokia is the closest)

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 15:37 7

19. hrvoj15 (Posts: 3; Member since: 26 Sep 2012)

Never had a better camera or a camcorder than on my 808..don't care about a bulkiness..It's a Man's phone!...

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 15:54 5

20. ZiadMohamed (Posts: 21; Member since: 09 Jan 2013)

Without reading I just see the subject and...Definitely yes

I compared 808 pureview 38 mpx photo with 18 mpx Canon 550d (landscape photo) and asked my mother to tell me what picture is better at 100% crops and I really amazed when she tell me : this picture (808) is more pure!!! Hahaa and btw she didn't know any thing about the two devices.

but sure the canon 550d still better cause it's more professional ... it's DSLR!

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 18:02 1

25. jroc74 (Posts: 5980; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)

Thanks to Nokia and the iPhone...I would say yea. The hardware and software they used over the last few years has been great. HTC and Samsung have decent cameras too. Sony phones....dont really know.. They should...it is Sony after all....lol

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 21:06

33. -box- (Posts: 3991; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)

Not so much the iphone. It uses the same Sony camera module as many other phones in the market.

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 19:20 1

26. JWS65 (Posts: 32; Member since: 22 Jan 2013)

It came close or on par with to low end point& shoot but not high end ones above $300. The big flaw in this article is that Galaxy Camera is not representative of what decent point & shoot camera can do. It's more geared toward to wireless sharing than camera performance. But as camera Galaxy Camera is no contender to likes of say Canon SX260HS, Sony HX20V, Panasonic ZS20. I bet that those P&S cams blow away even Nokia, iPhone cameras easily.

posted on 05 Feb 2013, 04:55

39. jsdechavez (Posts: 721; Member since: 20 Jul 2012)

Agree. Just because the Galaxy camera uses Android doesn't mean it's the best and proper representative of point and shoots.. haha

posted on 04 Feb 2013, 23:13

35. nvrhde (Posts: 77; Member since: 10 Nov 2012)

Up to some level,
But for optical zoom PS Cam is the choice at the moment in my opinion.
But Smart phone definitely got a future.

posted on 05 Feb 2013, 11:46

40. tntwit (Posts: 43; Member since: 11 Sep 2012)

As noted, smart phones typically have a weak flash. Indoor pictures of anything that moves produces blurry photos because the shutter speed is way too slow. My G3 is typically at 1/15 of a second indoors and you typically need at least 1/60 to prevent blurs of anything that moves. You need much faster if it is moving quick.

So, if you can get people to pose, and you are right in front of them, you can usually get good photos, but for anything else, forget it. Kids and pets indoors are difficult to impossible with a smartphone indoors.

However, they are decent outdoors, and for static objects they can take some impressive photos given what they are, but they are far from a proper replacement at this point. That doesn't mean they won't, and haven't already, taken a chunk out of the P&S market, but that's because the average person (read - not a photo geek like myself) is perfectly happy with the limitations of current smart phones.

Also, as noted, Samsung isn't the best representative in the P&S market. While they are decent enough, they typically do not produce the best pictures. Even their mirrorless camera looked awful noisey from the images I have seen on DPReview, when compared to Panasonic and Olympus.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories