DSLR killer!

So I prepared the promised comparative tests of the Samsung Galaxy S10 smartphone and two Canon 350D and Canon 6D DSLRs. I decided to put the old budget SLR camera, full frame SLR camera and premium smartphone camera in the same shooting conditions. The conditions are simple - handheld shooting at night in low or street lighting in JPEG and RAW formats.

With the help of an experiment, I want to try to find out whether it is worth carrying heavy equipment for photographing a city night landscape in low light or is it enough for a smartphone that fits in your pocket. I adjusted all the trials to my projects and genres, which I use. My projects, which I shoot only at night, are Courtyard Spaces and Dilapidated Housing.

Also, with the help of these comparative tests, someone can find the answer to the question of whether to buy an old SLR camera or is it better to buy a new premium smartphone. And finally, the main criterion remains the use of photographs for Internet resources, and not for large format printing (everything is clear here - only high-quality professional photographic equipment). After all, a huge share of the photos used is social networks that are not demanding on the quality of photos, photos are automatically compressed in size when uploaded. Often it’s hard to understand which camera the picture was taken on.

Technical characteristics of the cameras you can find on the Internet in the public domain. I will not explain many photographic terms in detail, the article will be designed for those photographers who have basic knowledge.

First hand shot. The smartphone wins right away! Well worked out shadows, almost no overexposure. The luminous sign is best worked out in detail, and in general the details are not bad. Of the minuses - the smartphone has the most noise in the sky. 6D handled the noise best of all (the noise reduction worked for jpeg by default).

If we take and process the RAW of SLR cameras and compare them with the same frame on a smartphone, we will get about the same result in highlights and shadows. The large 6D matrix in this case coped better with the dynamic range, but lost in detail due to the shallower depth of field due to the same big matrix size.

At first glance it is difficult to determine what these photos were taken by, but with a small increase, the S10 slightly wins in detail. The reason is the same: a smaller matrix gives a greater depth of field. Plus, on SLR cameras, I had to do several takes to get a sharp shot. On the smartphone, I managed to make a sharp shot the first time. Let me remind you that the maximum ISO of the 350D is 1600! At 6D, I lifted the ISO value to 8000. The aperture is 3.5-4.5, depending on the lighting. At such exposure values, shutter speed on SLRs reached a second.

More interesting! The lighting in this place is good enough. Again ahead of the smartphone! All details in highlights and shadows are worked out better than all tested competitors. I did not process all the photos in jpeg format with any of the cameras.

The white balance also picks up the smartphone better. This is exactly what is most suitable for one of my projects "Courtyard Spaces", where I do not have to bother with processing photos from my SLR camera taken with hands. I’m not talking about a tripod yet. Everything is considered with hands!

I’m pretty sure why the smartphone has better jpeg - the in-camera processor handles them better than in SLR cameras. But how can such a small matrix produce such a dynamic range? A few words about the old man 350D: it’s generally impossible to take pictures by it in the dark. It affects the maximum ISO threshold, a weak noise matrix, a dark kit lens during the test. The frames on it are blurry or dark.

But miracles end if you resort to RAW processing! Here physics comes into force, namely: pixel size, physical matrix size, optics quality. Plus, it’s not clear why RAW was shoved into the Samsung Galaxy S10, if after processing the photos turn out worse than in the usual “Night mode”.

The dynamic range of SLR cameras after processing is higher than that of a smartphone. At S10, when approaching, the details are poorly distinguishable, at 350D you can read some large advertising headlines on the window, and at 6D you can even see small details on the window of the kiosk.

Well, let's take heavy artillery called a tripod! Here, at first glance, there is no winner: the noise level is about the same for everyone, but the detailing of the smartphone suffers. ISO50, 30 sec for S10, ISO800, 30 sec for 350D - the same for 6D. In detail, the diaphragm decides, which for SLR cameras was closed until 9-11, and the smartphone remained 2.4.

What conclusion can be drawn from all of the above? The very first thing I want to say is to wait a little longer! After a couple of years, smartphones will completely catch up on the quality of SLR cameras. Today, the quality of the pictures issued by smartphones is very high, but still does not reach professional cameras. While physics is dominant.

About 350D and other old budget SLRs. They are worth buying (and it’s better to think a hundred times and not buy) for daytime portrait shooting on a fast lens and for leisurely shooting of daytime and night landscapes exclusively in RAW. Moreover, it should be borne in mind that such cameras are very limited in the possibilities of settings and hellishly noisy during any attempt to pull something out during processing. They are very cheap (350D was bought second-hand 5 years ago for $100, now you can find half the price).

About 6D and other old full frames. These cameras take decent photos, which can then be printed in large size, but new ones are expensive. These cameras need heavy and large-sized lenses, which can sometimes cost several times more than the camera itself. If you have developed an optics park over the years, then you can safely switch from an old camera to a newer one. If you start from scratch, it will come out a more expensive. To make a high-quality night shot, you need to carry a whole backpack and tripod in addition. Night photography is required in RAW. For reportage photography, it’s enough to shoot in jpeg, but behind the back there will still be the same backpack. More modern cameras have a Wi-Fi function, with which you can transfer photos quickly to a smartphone, and then upload to the Internet. In the secondary market, a full-frame SLR will cost from $250. If you take into account 6D, then prices beginning $500 for a body with high mileage. About shutter count: it seems to me that my worker 6D mileage went in the second round.

About S10 and other top smartphones. It is amazing how literally over the past year the quality of the photos issued by these gadgets has jumped! But many nuances that are very important for any photographer have not yet been resolved. This is the battery charge, this is a shooting RAW with tripod...and the price. Yes, top-end smartphones cost more than full-frame SLR cameras with low mileage. But at the same time, you are buying a universal device, not a highly specialized one.

I can safely say that the Samsung Galaxy S10 is suitable for me to shoot yard spaces and dilapidated housing. But I still prefer a SLR camera and a tripod...for now. Let's see what will happen next. If you make a choice, subject to handheld shooting without further processing, the smartphone wins against SLR cameras! As soon as it comes to shooting in RAW and post-processing, DSLRs are clearly superior here.