iPhone 8 or a cheap digital camera?

[brannsiu]

I am thinking, whether I should get an iPhone 8 or a cheap digital camera ~USD 300-400
because I'd get only either one. If I get an iPhone, I will not think about a digital camera.
If I get a digital camera, I will give up the iPhone.

I want to take some "better" pictures. However, I think I wouldn't invest more than USD 500
to buy a digital camera because I am not an enthusiast.

Somebody said a low grade digital camera ~USD 300- 400 would not take photos much
better than an iPhone 7/8 so it's of better value to get an iPhone 7/8 because I can enjoy
both the mobile funciton and taking photos at the same time.

However, I really want to validate what he says --- "a low grade digital camera ~USD 300- 400 would not take photos much better than an iPhone 7/8 " Is it true?????

If a low grade digital camera will take pictures much better than an iPhone 7/8 I will certainly get a
cheap digital camera instead.

Thanks for all comments and advice.

 

[The Paladin]

"its a phone Jim - not a slr digital camera"
just saying.

the iPhone take clear images, but far from it to take good high speed images. good for selfies, crap for anything moving faster than 1mph. and a slr camera can do far more many image manipulation before taking the picture that your iPhone cannot handle.

a phone is a phone, a camera is a camera. I dont care what the apple tell you.

 

[drkatz42]

carrying an iphone is typically much more convenient than carrying a camera. if you're looking for more than taking selfies and spur of the moment pics, get a digital camera. More pixels, longer zoom etc.

https/www.switchbacktravel.com/best-cameras-under-500

 

[Adinathjuparkar]

As you said that you are not an enthusiast. Buy a iphone.

 

[SoggyTissue]

dont they still sell second hand lumia 1020 camera phones? thats if you can put up with a windows os. 41 mega pixel ... makes todays smartphone pixel count look 1980's.

well you want a camera with phone, thats the best you can get.
if you want a phone with camera, thats something else completely.

its like buying a tablet and exclaiming you got a computer .... technically you did, but no sir you did not.

read reviews, do not be fooled by screen images .... some swanky phone with 4k display will show the photos a lot clearer than a 1080p display ... tricking you into believing the 4k screen phone took the better picture. and no sir, it did not (probably).

 

[sizzling]

For me the big difference is optical (camera) verses digital (iPhone) zoom. If you will be using any type of zoom a camera should be better, if not an iPhone is more convenient.

As pointed out there are other phones with better pixel rates & lenses than any iPhone.

 

[brannsiu]

dont they still sell second hand lumia 1020 camera phones? thats if you can put up with a windows os. 41 mega pixel ... makes todays smartphone pixel count look 1980's.

well you want a camera with phone, thats the best you can get.
if you want a phone with camera, thats something else completely.

its like buying a tablet and exclaiming you got a computer .... technically you did, but no sir you did not.

read reviews, do not be fooled by screen images .... some swanky phone with 4k display will show the photos a lot clearer than a 1080p display ... tricking you into believing the 4k screen phone took the better picture. and no sir, it did not (probably).

I don't necessarily need an iPhone. I have a functional smartphone already.

However, I want to take better pictures than that I can do with the cameras of most smartphone. That's why I am thinking about getting a low price digital camera ~USD300-400

But some said a low price digital camera ~USD300-400 will not take photos much better than an iPhone 7/8. I want to know if it's true.

If it's the fact, I would rather get an iPhone 8

If a low price digital camera ~USD300-400 will take better pictures than an iPhone I'll avoid iPhone

iPhone is not necessary. But I'd not spend the iPhone price for a digital camera alone because it's too expensive for me in that case.

 

[brannsiu]

For me the big difference is optical (camera) verses digital (iPhone) zoom. If you will be using any type of zoom a camera should be better, if not an iPhone is more convenient.

As pointed out there are other phones with better pixel rates & lenses than any iPhone.

For example? What's the smartphone that takes better pictures than an iPhone?

Please advise a couple of models for me to look into them. Thank you!

 

[SoggyTissue]

most of the old nokia lumina series will take pictures better than any phone you can buy today, but they were discontinued a few years back (noone buys windows phones) so you can only get them second hand now ... but for a lot less than a new phone ofc.

The issue you face will be the fact that smart phones will have an average pixel count of 15 mega pixels (cameras normally 20+) which is fairly good, BUT its the lens ... if noone talks about lens then they only supply half the information.

the lens that a smart phone gets (whoever they claim it was made by) will be an average 'standard' that is most suitable for all conditions - eg it wont give fantastic images for the cmos to capture, but it will deliver good images in most conditions. ...
this is why a lot of digital slr cameras come with 2 or 3 lenses (or a set of lenses you buy separately): a standard, a zoom, and a specialty (generally the reason you bought the camera - fishbowl, tunnel, polorised, etc).

the thing to note is this: smartphones can host software to edit pictures to get a close approx. to an image you could capture with a real digital camera. where-as cameras dont tend to come with any software to edit pictures, you have to go home and load them onto your computer. also note: good digital cameras allow you to take RAW pictures ... RAW is a file that is not compressed like jpg/bmp/png/etc. RAW holds the most amount of data for pictures, it allows you to do some funky editing without losing picture quality. where-as a phone cam is basically what you see = what you get.
also note that you need a proper photo editor to open and edit RAW file photos.

so onto phones that take pictures better than an iphonney (disregarding the displayed image and going straight for what you can actually print out), google most say the google and sony are high on the list. but do your own research into what features you want, how heavy the phone is, etc. not everyone will agree with eachother.

so i can almost certainly say that a reasonable digital(slr) camera that can take RAW images will always trump/beat a phone camera (unless its a camera phone like lumina).

footnote: from your price listing, i assume you are looking at bridge/slr digital cameras, because basic digital cameras (the useless ones that are probably as good as a phone cam) are under $150.

 

[brannsiu]

most of the old nokia lumina series will take pictures better than any phone you can buy today, but they were discontinued a few years back (noone buys windows phones) so you can only get them second hand now ... but for a lot less than a new phone ofc.

The issue you face will be the fact that smart phones will have an average pixel count of 15 mega pixels (cameras normally 20+) which is fairly good, BUT its the lens ... if noone talks about lens then they only supply half the information.

the lens that a smart phone gets (whoever they claim it was made by) will be an average 'standard' that is most suitable for all conditions - eg it wont give fantastic images for the cmos to capture, but it will deliver good images in most conditions. ...
this is why a lot of digital slr cameras come with 2 or 3 lenses (or a set of lenses you buy separately): a standard, a zoom, and a specialty (generally the reason you bought the camera - fishbowl, tunnel, polorised, etc).

the thing to note is this: smartphones can host software to edit pictures to get a close approx. to an image you could capture with a real digital camera. where-as cameras dont tend to come with any software to edit pictures, you have to go home and load them onto your computer. also note: good digital cameras allow you to take RAW pictures ... RAW is a file that is not compressed like jpg/bmp/png/etc. RAW holds the most amount of data for pictures, it allows you to do some funky editing without losing picture quality. where-as a phone cam is basically what you see = what you get.
also note that you need a proper photo editor to open and edit RAW file photos.

so onto phones that take pictures better than an iphonney (disregarding the displayed image and going straight for what you can actually print out), google most say the google and sony are high on the list. but do your own research into what features you want, how heavy the phone is, etc. not everyone will agree with eachother.

so i can almost certainly say that a reasonable digital(slr) camera that can take RAW images will always trump/beat a phone camera (unless its a camera phone like lumina).

footnote: from your price listing, i assume you are looking at bridge/slr digital cameras, because basic digital cameras (the useless ones that are probably as good as a phone cam) are under $150.

OK, thank you very much for the very informative details.

How about SONY DSC-RX 100 First generation (~USD 300 here) compared to an iPhone 7/8?

Does the SONY one take much better photos than an iPhone?

Because I have a preference for SONY, and I have a preference for lower budget. However, if it does NOT take photos MUCH better than an iPhone. I'd rather get an iPhone instead of something that is too MONO-functional (taking only pictures)

 

[SoggyTissue]

captures in raw and raw with jpg, fine and standard .... it will definitely make an iphone picture look schoolboy (once its on computer / remember the iphone display on the phone will make the picture look a lot better than what the camera will show you)

anything that can capture in RAW compression will make the iphone look bad.

anything refering to the past 10 years, i wont stake my name on old old stuff.