Would You Buy an Old Smart Phone Just for the Camera?

[Sir Topham Hatt]

I have a OnePlus 3T at the moment and in low light, the camera is just rubbish.

Even though I had it ages ago, I haven't had a phone since that had as good a camera as the Nokia Lumia 920.

 

So I am thinking, perhaps I should pick up a 920 (I sold mine :() for about £30 and have it purely to take photos if I'm going somewhere I don't want to take my SLR?

 

I know it seems a waste and I don't particularly have money to waste but I don't want to get another small camera.  I suppose I could look at a brand new phone (I know - no money!) but if it solves the problem, then it's a potential.  Not had the OnePlus for a year yet though (bought it last April) so seems silly to get rid of it.

 

Thoughts welcome.

[Xenon]

Sure why not. Right tool for the right job. 

[Biohead]

If you gives you the result you want, in the environment you don't want to risk your SLR - I would.

[The Evil Overlord]

Not really, even the old benchmark Nokia 808 PureView isn't worth it, modern smartphones have come a long way, but they're still crap while they're saving images at 72ppi.

So in a crunch, the camera on a mid range (not entry level) can suffice, the low light quality isn't all that bad, the Nokia 8 android smartphone for example.

 

But like you've mentioned yourself, they don't even compare to the cheap DSLRs.

[Jim K Global Moderator]

Hey... @Dot Matrix... what would you say?

 

I'm not familiar with cameras (with respect to quality per various models) ... but if the 920 did what you want in the past...and you can get one for cheap (with a proper working camera)... I wouldn't see any reason not to. 

[satukoro]

12 minutes ago, Sir Topham Hatt said:

 

So I am thinking, perhaps I should pick up a 920 (I sold mine :() for about £30 and have it purely to take photos if I'm going somewhere I don't want to take my SLR?

 

 

I have to say I was blown away by the camera when I bought my V20 (and my GF's G5).

Using Google Camera mod, I'm pretty impressed with the pictures I've been able to take.

 

I picked up the G5 for just over $200 and I picked up my V20 for just under $400 about three/four months ago.

[Dot Matrix]

On 1/18/2018 at 12:59 PM, Jim K said:

Hey... @Dot Matrix... what would you say?

 

I'm not familiar with cameras (with respect to quality per various models) ... but if the 920 did what you want in the past...and you can get one for cheap (with a proper working camera)... I wouldn't see any reason not to. 

I'm still on the prowl for a cheap Nokia 1020. 

 

But in regards to the OP, I still have my 920, though I still do most of my shooting with my 950.

[Sir Topham Hatt]

Maybe I should look at the 950...

[Dot Matrix]

9 hours ago, Sir Topham Hatt said:

Maybe I should look at the 950...

950 has a great camera on it - If you'd like to take a look at my gallery, these are most of my shots that I've taken with the camera: https://www.flickr.com/photos/101262365@N08/

[techbeck]

Cameras are improving each phone release.  So chances are a new phone will have a better camera than a 2+ year old device.   So no...I would not buy an old phone just for the camera.

 

[Steven P. Administrators]

31 minutes ago, techbeck said:

Cameras are improving each phone release.  So chances are a new phone will have a better camera than a 2+ year old device.   So no...I would not buy an old phone just for the camera.

 

https://www.neowin.net/news/nokia-faked-the-lumia-920-pureview-stills-too  

[+Fahim S. MVC]

Why not just buy a small cheap point & shoot camera? Or am I missing something fundamental here?

[Dot Matrix]

5 hours ago, techbeck said:

Cameras are improving each phone release.  So chances are a new phone will have a better camera than a 2+ year old device.   So no...I would not buy an old phone just for the camera.

 

Lumias can still shoot in RAW, where most phones today don't have that feature yet. 

[Astra.Xtreme]

4 hours ago, Fahim S. said:

Why not just buy a small cheap point & shoot camera? Or am I missing something fundamental here?

Exactly.  Even a mediocre point & shoot will be much better than a higher end smart phone.  Something nice from Canon will do the trick.  The lens, aperture, and zoom will be much much better.  A phone camera will always be junk in low light since the lens is so tiny.  You want as much light as possible to get to the lens, hence a point & shoot is the best answer.

[The Evil Overlord]

13 minutes ago, Astra.Xtreme said:

Exactly.  Even a mediocre point & shoot will be much better than a higher end smart phone.  Something nice from Canon will do the trick.  The lens, aperture, and zoom will be much much better.  A phone camera will always be junk in low light since the lens is so tiny.  You want as much light as possible to get to the lens, hence a point & shoot is the best answer.

Question..

Does a camera exist that has some sort of Bluetooth pairing available?

 

(So in theory, could a user take a picture using a lower end digital camera, and the camera will Bluetooth the image to a phone?)

[The Evil Overlord]

22 minutes ago, Dot Matrix said:

Lumias can still shoot in RAW, where most phones today don't have that feature yet. 

I wouldn't go that far, if memory serves one of my old samsmugs and my old HTC did

[Astra.Xtreme]

3 minutes ago, The Evil Overlord said:

Question..

Does a camera exist that has some sort of Bluetooth pairing available?

 

(So in theory, could a user take a picture using a lower end digital camera, and the camera will Bluetooth the image to a phone?)

A lot of them have Wi-Fi or NFC for that sort of thing.  I'm assuming you could transfer to a smart phone that way.

 

For example:

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/products/details/cameras/point-and-shoot/slim-stylish-cameras/powershot-elph-360-hs

[dead.cell]

We did this at work for our QC department, as cheap phones were easier for them to manage than cameras.  They also liked the ability to upload them directly to the network over WiFi. Only reason we ditched Windows Phones was because the application we used was no longer supported, which made installation of the app difficult for newer phones we bought, aside from numerous other problems we had with them. I think they were Nokia 620 or 630? Can't remember.

 

Using Samsung J3 now which work decently enough, but I don't know what your requirements are regarding photo quality.

[The Evil Overlord]

4 minutes ago, Astra.Xtreme said:

A lot of them have Wi-Fi or NFC for that sort of thing.  I'm assuming you could transfer to a smart phone that way.

 

For example:

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/products/details/cameras/point-and-shoot/slim-stylish-cameras/powershot-elph-360-hs

Ty

[Rippleman]

There are many reasons why one would buy a smartphone as a camera instead of a point and shoot. 

 

1) Slim enough to fit in pocket - many point and shoots are not.

2) Easy wifi ability - while some cameras have them, most do not.

3) Geo-tagging for location - very rare in cameras.

4) Direct upload to any support app - this can include facebook, snapchat, instagram, but most importantly youtube and Google Photos.

5) On device editing and filters. 

6) Specific app ability like photoshpere and other 360 degree apps.

7) Password protected

8) Automatic backups to cloud provider of your choosing.

9) Bigger viewfinder then almost all cameras.

10) Easier interface, usage. 

[rsrcomp]

I use my old phones as emergency (No SIM) phones and keep one in the car. Emergency calls, Flashlight, Camera. 

Probably you can think of many more uses for a No SIM phone. I keep the phone and a 22k battery in case i ever get stuck.

[Draconian Guppy]

sell current phone, buy new phone with better camera

[Brandon H Supervisor]

Nokia's teamed back up with the same group who did the cameras on the Lumia series so I'd be watching the new Nokia releases to see if any deals come about

[Astra.Xtreme]

1 hour ago, Rippleman said:

There are many reasons why one would buy a smartphone as a camera instead of a point and shoot. 

 

1) Slim enough to fit in pocket - many point and shoots are not.

2) Easy wifi ability - while some cameras have them, most do not.

3) Geo-tagging for location - very rare in cameras.

4) Direct upload to any support app - this can include facebook, snapchat, instagram, but most importantly youtube and Google Photos.

5) On device editing and filters. 

6) Specific app ability like photoshpere and other 360 degree apps.

7) Password protected

8) Automatic backups to cloud provider of your choosing.

9) Bigger viewfinder then almost all cameras.

10) Easier interface, usage. 

There are some pros and cons of each, but the item of importance seems to be quality.  A point & shoot will trample all over a smart phone camera, especially in low light and zooming.

Many of the items in your list are also available on a point & shoot, and when you factor in that you can easily transfer from the camera to a phone, the other items become negligible.

[Rippleman]

1 hour ago, Astra.Xtreme said:

There are some pros and cons of each, but the item of importance seems to be quality.  A point & shoot will trample all over a smart phone camera, especially in low light and zooming.

Many of the items in your list are also available on a point & shoot, and when you factor in that you can easily transfer from the camera to a phone, the other items become negligible.

while i can only speak for me, there is NO way you get use a traditional point and shoot over a cell phone unless needing high performance low light/night time shots. Other then that, I am cellphone (good one) camera all the way, too many conveniences.