Why do I need a camera when I’ve got a cameraphone?

It depends whether you want to take snaps (still or video) and send them instantly, for which camera phones are pretty good, or whether you want to take higher-quality photographs and video, for which cameras are much better. I’ve just replaced our 10 year old Pentax (5X zoom, 5Mp) with a Panasonic bridge FZ72 – 16Mp, 60X zoom – I don’t think a camera phone will touch its performance – unless someone knows better?! Still fairly inexpensive. Horses for courses.

If I go out for the day I usually have a compact camera on my belt. It takes much better photos than my cheap phone. If phones become cheaper and compact cameras increase in price due to lack of demand I may switch to using a phone instead of a camera.

We sacrificed sound quality in moving from CD to MP3, FM to DAB and CRT TV to flat-screen TV, but gained in other ways. I can see that the same applies in replacing compact cameras with phone cameras.

I wonder if there is a market for a DSLR that makes phone calls. 🙂

Agree with all that’s been said. In film days you’d never have compared instamatics or disposables with SLRs. They were meant for different jobs and its the same with camera phones now.

I have a ‘phone with camera, a compact digital camera and a DSLR. Which one I use depends on the sort of photographs that I want. If quality and/or flexibility are required then it’s the DLSR every time. The compact is the next choice with the ‘phone just for quick snaps. Both the ‘phone and the compact suffer the same problem: actually framing the photograph in bright sunlight – many the occasion when it has been a case of point and hope!

I should have also commented that I have not entered a vote in the survey above because it is meaningless. Which of my cameras I prefer depends on what I am doing, as mentioned in my previous post. It is simply not possible to give a single answer as required.

“It’s a synch to text and email pictures to friends”

Either this was a pun or the word “cinch” has disappeared!

As for cameras I now use compact ultrazooms originally a Olympus with the equivalent of an 850mm SLR range , at under £200. An excellent performer apart from no viewfinder meaning glare can sometimes render the back screen tricky to use. We had hoped to rely on a small compact and a smart phone on a trip to Brazil rather than lug kilos of 35mm kit around but a lack of a serious zoom is crippling and we bought the Olympus in Portugal on the way out.

Astonishing value for what the camera can do. I showed some photos from our trip to a young friend back from a months holiday in Borneo and he and his girlfriend were kicking themselves for the shots they could have had compared to what their phones and compact had allowed them to take.

Will be taking a Canon 50x zoom, equivalent to a 1200mm SLR lense, on our next holiday together with the Olympus. The Canon does have a viewfinder and some useful abilities with the zoom process but it does cost just over £300. To some it may sound expensive but if you realise a 35mm lense at1200mm is tens of thousands of pounds …….
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-1200mm-f-5.6-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

If you are trying to relate binocular magnification to these zoom lengths my research found no direct answer on the Web but I have deduced that the 1200mm is roughly 24 magnification – with built in stabilisation!