Taking on the 5G nutjobs

[bd139]

I mostly buy for the camera improvements these days. It's cheaper than having DSLRs as a hobby and hurts the shoulder less.

[Rx7man]

Anyone care to join me on this facebook ad? tons of nutters there, they can't differentiate between "nukular" radiation and electromagnetic radiation.
https://www.facebook.com/theradblockmeters/posts/223570452683894

[PlainName]

I am mostly happy with my A1 phone, but a critical issue is updates. Typically they are provided for 2 years, and then you're on your own with published exploits that you can't secure against.

[SilverSolder]

I mostly buy for the camera improvements these days. It's cheaper than having DSLRs as a hobby and hurts the shoulder less.

Hardly a replacement for a DSLR though - Unless you really didn't need a DSLR in the first place! 

(My DSLR is also collecting dust - you can do a lot with a phone camera - but DSLR still rules for low light sensitivity, long lenses, long exposures, etc.)

[CJay]

I mostly buy for the camera improvements these days. It's cheaper than having DSLRs as a hobby and hurts the shoulder less.

Hardly a replacement for a DSLR though - Unless you really didn't need a DSLR in the first place! 

(My DSLR is also collecting dust - you can do a lot with a phone camera - but DSLR still rules for low light sensitivity, long lenses, long exposures, etc.)

Was massively impressed with the quality from my first HTC smartphone and have been impressed by diminishing amounts at each incremental improvement but if I look carefully at the images my ancient D50 still holds its ground, even compared to the results from my partner's S10 or the iPhones I set up for users at work

[bd139]

Regarding low light sensitivity I disagree with DSLR requirement. The iPhone 12 I just bought really is top notch excellent and has OIS. You don't need a tripod to do really long exposures. The attached (scaled and processed - so will look more like ass here) was taken in the extreme condition of almost complete darkness with no flash held in hand as an example. You can also shoot RAW on the Pro devices as well if you want. And the third party camera apps have parity with some of the more advanced pro DSLR features.

Killer for DSLRs is lenses and if you need to print large format. Everything else, fuck it, not worth it now. Expensive, fragile large, heavy. A lot of the photography I do is out in nature which is a chore to lug another 2kg of crap around on a 20 mile hike into the middle of nowhere. Plus by the time you've got the thing out, the moment is gone.

[SilverSolder]

I mostly buy for the camera improvements these days. It's cheaper than having DSLRs as a hobby and hurts the shoulder less.

Hardly a replacement for a DSLR though - Unless you really didn't need a DSLR in the first place! 

(My DSLR is also collecting dust - you can do a lot with a phone camera - but DSLR still rules for low light sensitivity, long lenses, long exposures, etc.)

Was massively impressed with the quality from my first HTC smartphone and have been impressed by diminishing amounts at each incremental improvement but if I look carefully at the images my ancient D50 still holds its ground, even compared to the results from my partner's S10 or the iPhones I set up for users at work

If you like wide angle lens pictures, a smartphone does a decent job.  As soon as you use the zoom function, quality plummets quickly.  Closer lenses are the main advantage of DSLR.

[SilverSolder]

Regarding low light sensitivity I disagree with DSLR requirement. [...]

The ISO sensitivity of the iPhone 12 is about 5,000 - which is extremely good.

But the massively larger sensor in a modern full frame DSLR blows it away by an order of magnitude, e.g. Nikon D850 max ISO is 51,200 for comparison.

[...]
Killer for DSLRs is lenses and if you need to print large format. Everything else, fuck it, not worth it now. Expensive, fragile large, heavy. A lot of the photography I do is out in nature which is a chore to lug another 2kg of crap around on a 20 mile hike into the middle of nowhere. Plus by the time you've got the thing out, the moment is gone.

Agreed.  The best camera in the world is...   the one you have with you! 

I rarely take the DSLR out for a spin these days, the phone camera is "good enough" even in my lowly Galaxy S5.

The only issue is that as you zoom in with the phone camera, it is obviously digital zoom and quality plummets rapidly as you zoom.  The good news is that most photos in social settings benefit from the good wide angle performance of phone cameras, so it is rarely an issue.

 

[BravoV]

The only issue is that as you zoom in with the phone camera, it is obviously digital zoom and quality plummets rapidly as you zoom. 

Reason that for traveling, I carry my P&S with long optical zoom, quite compact sized, Panasonic made with 30X optical zoom at 720mm (35mm film cam. equiv.)

[bd139]

Regarding low light sensitivity I disagree with DSLR requirement. [...]

The ISO sensitivity of the iPhone 12 is about 5,000 - which is extremely good.

But the massively larger sensor in a modern full frame DSLR blows it away by an order of magnitude, e.g. Nikon D850 max ISO is 51,200 for comparison.

[...]
Killer for DSLRs is lenses and if you need to print large format. Everything else, fuck it, not worth it now. Expensive, fragile large, heavy. A lot of the photography I do is out in nature which is a chore to lug another 2kg of crap around on a 20 mile hike into the middle of nowhere. Plus by the time you've got the thing out, the moment is gone.

Agreed.  The best camera in the world is...   the one you have with you! 

I rarely take the DSLR out for a spin these days, the phone camera is "good enough" even in my lowly Galaxy S5.

The only issue is that as you zoom in with the phone camera, it is obviously digital zoom and quality plummets rapidly as you zoom.  The good news is that most photos in social settings benefit from the good wide angle performance of phone cameras, so it is rarely an issue.

Exactly the point with the camera you have with you. Worth checking the optics on smartphones now. They have optical zoom. Periscope lenses are coming too. It's quite frankly amazing what you get for your cash.

Another opportunist shot on an older XR while I was out running (impossible with a DSLR unless you want to get bruises  )

[SilverSolder]

That is a nice shot! - and as you said, you won't get bruised...

A DSLR is still a big step up in performance, though -  you do get something for the $$$ there as well!

[bd139]

I like that - very nice shot and that and certainly demonstrates the capabilities of a DSLR. I never seem to land anywhere there's decent winter colour contrasts like that annoyingly. Perhaps I need to move somewhere colder 

Prior to the phones, I had a modest Nikon D3100 but I sold it when my wife (now ex) got seriously ill to cover expenses.   That was fairly decent for an entry level camera. Shot attached. This was taken ankle deep in goose shit at Kew Gardens.

[SilverSolder]

That is a beautiful shot.  Obviously you get no bokeh at all with a phone camera, unless you try REALLY hard! 

The cold is a b!tch but does have some compensating qualities - rarely, though!

[james_s]

There's no question that a DSLR is superior to a smartphone camera, if you have it with you. That is the fundamental problem, I rarely have a camera with me, I virtually always have my phone though.

[CJay]

There's no question that a DSLR is superior to a smartphone camera, if you have it with you. That is the fundamental problem, I rarely have a camera with me, I virtually always have my phone though.

As someone else said, the best camera is the one you have with you and yes, the smartphone cameras are damned impressive these days, but there are days where I would plan to have a DSLR with me.

 

[boffin]

More importantly, does your DSLR use 5G ?

[bd139]

My phone camera does 

No extra eyes developed or black helicopters buzzing me yet.

[SilverSolder]

Speaking of conspiracy theories, James Murdoch came out yesterday and admitted that spreading conspiracy theories via news channels and social media is damaging society, saying:

"Those outlets that propagate lies to their audience have unleashed insidious and uncontrollable forces that will be with us for years."

and

"Spreading disinformation — whether about the election, public health or climate change — has real world consequences"


Can it really be true - they are starting to get a clue?

[PlainName]

Can it really be true - they are starting to get a clue?

James Murdoch has split from the rest of his family, which is how come he is speaking out. They already had a clue and didn't give a toss, so why would they change now?

The only real question is whether they truly didn't care or whether they deliberately manipulated things to get a specific result. Either way, they weren't, and aren't, naive about this.

[TimFox]

As an educated American, I used to think that the conspiracy theories spread by Fox News (absolutely no relation to me), etc., and believed by the deplorables were amusing, but my attitude changed recently.

[Terry Bites]

Leave them be. Nature will take care of them.
Take a 5G antenna and grind it in a blender add 10million litres of deionised water.
Now shake vigorously at 50.005Hz for 0.004 seconds. Repeat 7 times and dilute with 1 million litres of holy water.
Place in plant mister and puff spray over sweetener tablets.
Take one a day. It'll be ok. If you have already used 3G or eaten meat I cant help you and your life is ruined.

[james_s]

The internet has done as promised and given a voice to marginalized people and groups. Now a few people are finally starting to realize that some of those people are probably better left marginalized. Which ones depends on who you ask though. One groups heroes are another groups war criminals, it's all a matter of perspective.

[SilverSolder]

The internet has done as promised and given a voice to marginalized people and groups. Now a few people are finally starting to realize that some of those people are probably better left marginalized. Which ones depends on who you ask though. One groups heroes are another groups war criminals, it's all a matter of perspective.

I guess a "conspiracy theory" could be thought of as something similar to a computer virus, i.e. software that makes the host computer malfunction in some way.

So are we talking about "marginalising" or "disinfecting" people and groups?

All of the above assumes that we are only discussing unfounded outright crackpot conspiracy theories here.

[james_s]

People who believe in and push such theories are marginalized. In the past it was fairly isolated, some nutty eccentric guy ranting and raving or holed up in a cabin out in the woods somewhere, they could largely be ignored and written off as crazies. Now those nutty guys have a worldwide voice, and an easy way to congregate with other like minded people and reach others who can be swayed in that direction.

[bd139]

Indeed. All it takes is an authoritative sounding snake to get buy in from morons. Actually has anything really changed?