Photography - dumbed down

So sad to hear about your Mum's attitude to photos. It's very common though. I can understand why you scan everything now

---

Bodies: 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Smeggy's Forum and Pics

I'm actually a fan of shallow DOF photography and use most of my lenses wide open 99% of the time.

however it's a bit unfair to blame phone cams for the sharp from front to back syndrome as plenty of DSLR users are obsessed with that sharp from front to back.

I agree with the poster above who says the Best camera is the one you have with you. I carry my little Sony TX-5 everywhere.

My next camera will be the Nokia 808 phone.

check out the pics it can take

http://product.it168.com/detail/doc/460851/5444876/1/1/piclist.shtml

Yes the gallery is in Chinese, but click on the thumbs and then click on the fullsize icon, top-right, of medium size pic. Impressive

also you say "As a result of this the general public has no idea on how to take a good photograph"

At least the quality of mobile phone cams is getting to a standard where it will likely inspire people to take photography further.

I have to agree with John's comments in this thread.

---

Bodies: 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Smeggy's Forum and Pics

The more people there are out there taking bad pictures on tiny-sensored phones, the better my pictures look in comparison.

Every photographer needs to discover photography somehow, and a phone is as good a place to start as any.

---

K200D, BG3, O-ME3; 645, SP1000, KX, MX, ME Super, P30, P30N
Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, DA 35mm f/2.8 LTD, DA 21mm f/3.2 LTS, DAL 35mm f/2.4, FA 50mm f/1.7, DA 55-300, DA 18-55WR
Many K, M, A & M42 manual lenses from Pentax & third parties

Another ad to "prove" my point is the current one for HTC mobile phones. It shows a professional photographer doing a freefall jump from an aircraft shooting a fashion shoot on his mobile! That is the only time you will be pleased with the results from a mobile?

---

Pentax K5, MZ6
Pentax Lenses 28-80 F, 18-55 WR DA, 50-200 WR DA, 300 DA*, 80-200 F, M 20, 35 F2.4 AL, M50 F1.7
ONE UNITED Member

Everyone has to start somewhere. I have only in the last 12 months purchase my first DSLR and before then only had a compact or camera phone. I've had an interest in Photography since I was a teen. Had a quick look on-line to define it and found a few but have this link link adverts have always been misleading in some way. Photography has many levels of experience within it. I could not find anything that says if you use a camera phone then you can't be a photographer. I have a degree in IT and many people I work with don't the still work in IT and are better at some things than I am. I'm a beginner photographer who has started using a DLSR. I could be an artist whether I used a pencil or paint. Someone has already said if someone wants to use poorer technology then it will hopefully make my images look better. Sorry for the rant but I've also been driving since 95 and give learners plenty of space and patience.

Will

---

Pentax K-x, DAL f3.5-5.6 18-55mm,Pentax-A 50mm f2, DAL f4-5.6 50-200mm, FG360FGZ

Why should we care whether it is being 'dumbed' down, we don't have to follow suit.

As for an advertising "puff" showing how a professional 'might' use the phonecam it's highly unlikely Joe public will be able to copy/verify this anyway.

If mobile phones had predated photography, quite feasible if the science of Chemistry had dramatically lagged Physics, then we might be asking why do we need big black/white/silver boxes with huge lenses when we already have 'perfectly good' image takers.

Thanks Smeggy, your comments appreciated. The other sad thing is children doing much the same when parents/grandparents are gone.

regards
Bernard

This argument can be applied to a lot of things. I love music and there is nothing to beat live opera in a concert hall. When I'm at home I'm happy with my CDs. They are convenient and (with a decent stereo system) sound very good. When I'm on the bus or train or when I'm at work then I use my MP3 player. It's simply too inconvenient to get a whole opera company in a bus! The quality isn't as good but it's the best I can do, and it is good enough.

The reason 99%+ or people take photographs is for fun or for memories. And who are we to spoil that?

EDIT: It took me a while to find it. This shows how powerful and significant shots taken on a mobile phone can be: link

---

My Photobucket

Proves my point exactly, as photographs they are c**p, no where for the eye to rest, i.e. no central point, everything either sharp or fuzzy, but that is ok because you are pleased to accept c**p!

Sorry for any offence taken.

---

Pentax K5, MZ6
Pentax Lenses 28-80 F, 18-55 WR DA, 50-200 WR DA, 300 DA*, 80-200 F, M 20, 35 F2.4 AL, M50 F1.7
ONE UNITED Member

I think under the circumstances they were taken quality and composition have to have lower priorities. He did have a proper camera with him but discretion proved a better survival tactic. This was not, after all, a sunny day with joyous people.

regards
Bernard

If its c**p or nothing then c**p is better!

Not everyone can afford an SLR. Are you saying that if someone can only afford a camera phone that they should not use it?

---

My Photobucket

Actually I think the composition of many of the pictures is superb - they tell the story very vividly and are deeply moving. There is much more to a 'good' photo than technical quality. And it is not unknown for photographers to make a virtue out of technical limitations (coarse grain anyone??)

---

Tony Milner
Super A, ME Super, MZ6, K7 & lenses from 10-500mm
www.amilner.org

I'm not offended, but you're getting unnecessarily angry on other people's behalf. As Frogherder says "why should we follow suit?" Are all the crap photos out there forcing you to shoot crap?

I don't understand why you are that bothered? Unless you are projecting some issues with your own photography?

---

Bodies: 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Smeggy's Forum and Pics

I'm pleased you said that, I might publish some of mine taken at iso 1600, light source a tilley lamp, location deep in a cave, when the camera showed "battery exhausted" when deploying the pop up flash

---

Regards
Stan

To My Snaps...

PPG

Tell that to a photographic judge at a camera club competition. I believe he would slate them for the reasons I have stated. From a newsworthy point of view I agree with you but most of us, espcially Pentaxians these days, do not work for a living off our cameras. Though there are a few who do.

---

Pentax K5, MZ6
Pentax Lenses 28-80 F, 18-55 WR DA, 50-200 WR DA, 300 DA*, 80-200 F, M 20, 35 F2.4 AL, M50 F1.7
ONE UNITED Member

Sorry, I'm not going to continue this pointless and ridiculous discussion.

---

My Photobucket