Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Welcome to our forums

Will a phone ever be anywhere as good as a DSLR?

That was 1999. From google: Along with these characters the movie is burdened by a general tone that’s directed at children and an over reliance on still developing CGI technology. It looks bad, it sounds bad

Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

My point was that just as the problems with diesel engines from Theilert and SMA pushed back the demand for diesel aircraft so too the Phantom Menace pushed back the enthusiasm for making all digital movies.
It took until 2016 for digital to begin to overtake film as the originating medium for movies..That about coincides to where you could get 5k or 6k digital cameras which is about where 35mm movie film sits in terms of resolution. But there are still many directors who prefer film.
Top Gun Maverick for instance was shot on 35mm film and after processing transferred to a 4K for editing.


So… An idea I didn’t quite get at first, was that there are now ‘serious’ cameras with fixed lenses. Examples would be the Leica Q series or the Fuji X100 series. The Leica Qiii has a full frame 60 megapixel sensor and an f1.7 28mm image stabilised, waterproof lens which is said to be magnificent.

My understanding of the philosophy is that the resolution is now so good that rather than changing to a short telephoto lens, you just take a wide angle shot and crop out the image you want. And still get better image quality than you would with anything but a high end SLR or mirrorless camera. The camera can be smaller and more waterproof.

I’m so used to ‘digital zoom’ being a shorthand for ‘good specs on paper; visible pixelation’ that the idea names me feel a bit queasy – but I can’t find anything fundamentally wrong with it.

Gosh, 8×10″ film has no DSLR equivalent (obviously) and probably no equivalent other than CCD sensors in telescopes. But it is also completely impractical. What would it be used for?

Well, the guy I bought it from used it for furniture advertising in magazines – you want straight lines there, too. I used it to quench my thirst for portraits done in the portrait format, due to the film having only panorama format. Remember, this was long before the advent of phone photography where everything ends up being badly framed wide angle portrait format.
Secondly, the insanely low depth of focus with a wide open 300mm F5.6, the ability to put the focus where I want it (Scheimpflug), the challenge and the glorious contact prints – and of course to impress the girls.

@gallois I used to work (in part) for Arri, so everything they had in their cellar 25 years ago. Usually 535B, 435, the 16mms, including the French one (can‘t remember the name…. damn), Moviecams, what have you – on one notable student film even the very Arri III used in „das Boot“ for the emergency dive scenes. A friend from my club is working in the industry and calls what I experienced „the golden area“, so I can’t even imagine what a mess this has become.

Berlin, Germany

@kwlf prime lenses were always more serious than even a good zoom can ever be. Alone the transmission and thus the narrow depth of focus are game changers. Today you can in post production just fine…

Berlin, Germany

In the past you might walk about with a number of primes though…

The idea of having a camera that is so overspecified with a wide angle lens that you have no need for any longer lenses is a paradigm shift. Not without precedent I’m sure, but new to those of us who just grew up with SLRs.

Last Edited by kwlf at 20 May 17:41

@Inkognito the French one was the Eclair but the closer relation to the Arri might have been the Aaton. They had what you might call cartridge backs before arri which had the film reel on top and then you had to thread it through the gate. Whereas the later ones like the Aaton and Eclair you could have 2 or 3 cartridges loaded and you just clipped them onto the front gate piece.
Personally over all I much preferred dealing with Arri to Panavision. You could never buy a Panavision camera whereas for a long series you could buy Arriflex equipment and resell at the end.

I also used to use the primes from the Arri 35 mm range on the Super 16mm. Super at drawing the eye where you want it to go.
I still have a couple of Bolex 16mm and their lenses are not only small (you can fit a set of primes in jacket pockets) but they were also optically top. Swiss engineering again.🙂
Cinematographer Vittorio Storaro was a master of using depth of focus to great effect.
@Kwif if you really like experimenting build yourself a pin hole camera from an old shoe box and get some sheet Polaroid film.
No lenses needed. It will teach great deal about photography.🙂
SLRs digital and smartphone cameras and digital editing have brought many new tools but whilst the technology has changed the principles and many of the basics remain the same as in the days long before they existed.
Peter I didn’t start a new thread, I didn’t think anyone would be interested.

Sign in to add your message

Back to Top