Smartphone took better pics than a Panasonic TZ70.....

[Justin Smith]

Apologies if this has been asked before,
My lad was at the awards social for his swimming club at the weekend and it was held indoors in relatively low light conditions. Thus I adopted my usual strategy of using "burst" mode (3 frames per sec) on my Panasonic TZ70 and that usually gets the odd good one (with less movement and therefore less blur) but hardly any were acceptable.
I just put it down to very poor conditions, but my mate next to me was using his smartphone and I was surprised to see his pics, although not all OK by any means, had a much higher percentage of acceptable shots. And I assume he was using digital zoom (i.e. cropping ? ) whereas the TZ70 obviously has an optical zoom. I could not understand it particularly as the lens on my TZ70 looked a lot bigger than that on his smartphone !
What is the explanation, and, as a supplementary question, is there a better strategy than using "burst mode" (to get shots which have a certain amount of erratic movement and in low light conditions) ?

 

[sirch]

Phones have really good software for low light conditions because people like to take selfies in clubs, photographing food in dimly lit restaurants, etc

That said the results often don't print well because there are lots of evident artefacts but for a quick snap in low light where you have no control over it then I often find the phone is better. I've even seen my phone out perform my Sony A7Riii in terms of getting a reasonably sharp grab-shot

 

[ancient_mariner]

Probably a combination of faster lens - many phones have a main lens of >f2 aperture, optical stabilisation and advanced image processing in the phone. TBH small-sensor compact cameras with long variable zooms were always poor in low light.

There's no strategy for getting great image quality of moving subjects in low light with a small sensor compact - just the wrong tool for the job.

 

[Nod]

Does have to be said that the TZ70 doesn't have the best low light performance.

On a phone's screen, a phone snap will often look nicer than a "real" camera's photograph but at any decent size, I'd almost always go for the camera shot over the phonetograph.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

It all depends what you want to achieve, I suppose.

This image of two pigeons "kissing" just wouldn't have been possible with a phone, as I'd never have got close enough, using anything much shorter than the TZ70's 720mm (equivalent) lens...

 

[ancient_mariner]

It all depends what you want to achieve, I suppose.

This image of two pigeons "kissing" just wouldn't have been possible with a phone, as I'd never have got close enough, using anything much shorter than the TZ70's 720mm (equivalent) lens...

View attachment 444415

I wonder how that would look if shot in low light?

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

I wonder how that would look if shot in low light?

Probably boring.

It was the backlit silhouette that caught my attention.

 

[ancient_mariner]

Probably boring.

It was the backlit silhouette that caught my attention.

And that was kind of the point. No super-telephoto is going to help if the light can't support it.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

No super-telephoto is going to help if the light can't support it.

I agree; we're always limited by the available technology.

However, we can often navigate around the limitations, depending on our intentions and our ingenuity. Whether we use a 'phone, a superzoom pocket camera or a full frame camera with top quality glassware, it is not the limitations of our cameras but the limitations of our imaginations that dictate whether we feel we have succeeded or failed in capturing what we wished to record.

 

[JohnMcL7]

There's a few downsides to the TZ70. The first is that it has a 1/2.3in sensor which is a similar size to mobile phone sensors (and in some cases a bit smaller) so it doesn't get an advantage in sensor size that some cameras have plus it's an old sensor now since the camera is over a decade old. Mobile phones usually do a lot more processing to the image by default and many use computational photography techniques to improve the image whereas dedicated cameras usually produce quite neutral images in comparison.

The lens can also be a downside as well. Generally the longer the zoom a lens offers, the worse the quality and usually they let less light in hence the best lenses are primes with no zoom followed by zoom lenses with a short range. Most mobile phones don't actually use a zoom lens (there are a handful that do) instead they use multiple sensors and fixed prime lenses instead which optimises the image quality and improves the ability to let light in. As an example if we took the same 24mm wide angle shot on your TZ70 and my phone, my camera is getting nearly four times as much light as your camera which means you need to increase the iso and this in turn degrades the image quality especially on a small sensor. However if we both wanted to take an image at the 720mm focal length, my phone would be utterly useless since I'd have to tightly crop an image from a 66mm lens which I doubt would be anything recognisable whereas you would be able to zoom your camera right in and take a much better quality shot which is the advantage of such a lens.

There's not really much you can do although taking burst shots gives you a better chance of getting a more usable image.

 

[LCPete]

Interesting thread
Made me think of the other day, I was at the Lion enclosure at the zoo watching the male Lion with a chap next to me taking pictures on his phone as well as me on my R5 and tele lens
The Lion turned and walked straight towards me and I was able to get a nice series of pictures as he walked towards me
Eventually he got too close for me as he came right to the fence , the chap with the phone was then able to get a nice photo too
My other half noticed his photo on the zoo facebook and she said she preferred the phone image to what i took, to me it was a little grainy and not quite sharp but the colours were bright the colours in mine were a bit more subdued

 

[sirch]

to me it was a little grainy and not quite sharp but the colours were bright

I suspect that a lot of what people like is based on what they are used to, most of the images we see now are phone shots so we have become familiar with soft, vibrant photos and that is what a lot of people expect to see

 

[ancient_mariner]

I suspect that a lot of what people like is based on what they are used to, most of the images we see now are phone shots so we have become familiar with soft, vibrant photos and that is what a lot of people expect to see

People also get excited by bright, punchy and colourful pictures. If they aren't familiar with photos then the visual wow factor often takes over, rather than evaluation based on content. About 20 years ago there was a site called Lightbox, for posting pictures and 'liking' pictures. After quite a short time it was obvious the most popular images were bright, punchy, striking and anything that was subtle, clever and detailed would quickly disappear.

It taught me to know my audience and to decide who I was shooting and processing (particularly) for.

 

[LCPete]

I suspect that a lot of what people like is based on what they are used to, most of the images we see now are phone shots so we have become familiar with soft, vibrant photos and that is what a lot of people expect to see

People also get excited by bright, punchy and colourful pictures. If they aren't familiar with photos then the visual wow factor often takes over, rather than evaluation based on content. About 20 years ago there was a site called Lightbox, for posting pictures and 'liking' pictures. After quite a short time it was obvious the most popular images were bright, punchy, striking and anything that was subtle, clever and detailed would quickly disappear.

It taught me to know my audience and to decide who I was shooting and processing (particularly) for.

Yes you’re both right I think, the phone processes the image a lot I guess
I did re edit the picture and warmed it up a bit my other half liked that one
The camera image was the most accurate as it was an overcast day so colours were a bit dull though, my favourite shots have been when there is a bit of sun on the Lion, he’s an awesome cat, mature with a big black mane, i’ll sort out an image to post on here later today

 

[swanseamale47]

I have the TZ80 and it's low light proformance isnt the best. I think the lens is around F 3.3 ish wide open. many phone have a faster lens.

 

[Justin Smith]

Thank you for your replies.