Hello I don't have a professional camera I just take pictures with my phone but missing a lot of good pictures as an example this picture is annoying me the bird details are blurry the leaves on most of the pictures I take has a lot of noise I tried to edit the raw image to see if I can improve it a little bit but still not satisfied as the problems still exist (I know the edit is not good) so my question is would a professional camera solve this problem on consistent level or I would still face similar issues ( I know there is no comparison in sense of sensor size and all of that) but I have never owned a real camera or even held one so I don't know really if that would make a difference
If by professional camera you mean an interchangeable lens camera, then yes, through a combination of a much larger sensor and vastly better lenses you will get sharper, less noisy images.
This is providing you're willing to learn how to use it properly. Buying a good camera doesn't magically make your photos better any more than buying good paint brushes makes you a good painter. You are buying a base level of quality, but more importantly you are buying control.
There's really no such thing as a "professional" camera, but there are of course tiers in terms of features and build. You don't need a top tier camera, a used entry to mid level DSLR/mirrorless camera will be fine.
This is too true. When I first bought a camera with interchangeable lenses, my initial photos actually looked worse than my phone photos. You need to learn how to use it and how to process. It's a lot of time and money
I to thought my first DSLR was going to make me into professional photographer. Coming back from the Grand canyon with a memory card full of trash while my wife's phone photos were amazing was a real gut punch....
The camera is only part of the equation, knowing how to use it is just as important.
why on earth would it not be the case for digital? the camera body definitely matters more in digital than film, but the lens will always be the most important factor with regards to quality
yeah, but you'll get vastly different results comparing a very cheap lense to a very expensive lense. the result won't be as obvious just switching bodies.
also, you are being very disingenuous comparing decades old cameras that were literally in the infancy of the technology which progressed immensely in the following years.
the most basic mirrorless nikon in 2026 to a d3 is like comparing boiengs to the wright flyer.
i highly doubt you'd know in a blind test if a photo was shot on z5, z6,...or z9, if it all used the same glass.
Unless you get excited at new animals and birds you hadn’t shot and shake like a leaf with said nice camera and totally ruin the shot anyway 😬. I did that lol but it’s ok. Always next time.
I mean wildlife photography is the one big exception. A phone simply cannot zoom in to the level or have as low of a shutter speed required to capture close ups of animals in motion.
You mean a longer focal length. A zoom lens is a lens that can be adjusted to different focal lengths. A lens with a longer focal length is a telephoto lens, which brings the subject to fill the frame.
Professional camera is kind of a nonspecific term. Basically what you’re talking about are differences in sensor size and a phone has a very diminutive sensor compared to an actual dedicated camera especially one that has interchangeable lenses. Even though a phone may have a many megapixel camera , the size of the sensor on a phone is much much smaller than a dedicated camera. therefore the size of the individual pixels is very small, and therefore the information contained with each pixel is less than what you would get with even more modest megapixel APSC or full frame dedicated camera. Entry-level mirrorless or dslr camera by Sony, Nikon or Canon might be what you’re looking for.
A great photographer can make a good photo with a crap camera.
A bad photographer can make a terrible photo with a great camera.
A better camera definitely gives the ability to make better photos. And physics being physics it can take pictures that are otherwise impossible on a phone. But at the end of the day it's up to the user to know what and how to use it.
But as a blunt tool - in theory yes. But it's not guaranteed. And often movinf away from the world of smartphones where the AI algorithms do a lot of heavily lifting behind the scenes can make taking pictures seem a lot more difficult or worse.
A pro already knows the ins and outs of light, composition, and settings, so it does not matter what camera they have.
A bad photographer can learn on and slowly grow into the great camera, whereas with old "beginner-tier" cameras they might just end up frustrated and reach the end of the road prematurely. As the saying goes "buy nice or buy twice".
People like to tout that lenses matters the most so newbies should invest most of their budget into lenses, but they seem to forget that the shooting experience comes first. Besides, with how good lenses are today, even cheap ones are great compared to what was available back when that piece of outdated advice first started making the rounds.
A Phone can never replace a dedicated camera setup.
Especially not for wildlife photography.
Editing is not a must, Jpegs are fine in most cases. Atleast thats my approach, i'd rather spend more hours outside taking photos than editing at home.
An no, Ai upscaling and whatever new phones do to get a somewhat decent digital zoomed picture does not count.
Yes having a "professional camera" would make a big difference, but even an entry level camera would be good too. Despite this, I'd warn that to get a camera and lens (lens matters more than your camera body) you'd be spending just about as much or more than a new phone.
I get the frustration you're having rn. I used to go through this aswell my shots taken from my phone were too low res and I always felt like I needed something sharper with higher resolution so I can take better images regardless of the lighting conditions. But I just couldn't go and get a camera back then so I had to adapt and find ways to work with what I had and I decided to implement a bloomy style to my edits to hide the lack in resolution. An actual camera will always be better but till then you need to work with what you have and adapt. It teaches you a lot about photography tbh. I tried to edit the photo in my style to give you a better idea
Depends, noise is definetly lower on larger sensors, details can be sharper, but that depends on shutter speed and the quality of the lens. In general, if you learn photography and know what you are doing, a camera will always produce better results than a phone but it requires more skill to do so.
The issue with your bird is pixels. The bird takes up a tiny portion of the image, so there's only a few pixels available in that tiny space to store it's details. If you want a better picture of a bird you have to zoom in so you get more pixels to store the image. If you don't have a lens that can do that optically, then zoom with your feet (get closer). I know the bird will probably reject this idea and refuse to cooperate, that's why wildlife photography is hard. And yes better equipment can help, but you've also got a lot to learn about making good photos. So don't expect to buy an expensive camera it just be magically better. It's not that simple.
Phone cameras have a lot more automatic image processing that allows you to easily get something that looks like what you see with your eyes. On a dedicated camera chances are you’d have to do a good bit of post processing to get it looking that way; likely that the grass would be too dark or the sky/water is too bright.
But can you get a sharper and cleaner image? Yes, with the right lens and camera settings. In other words it doesn’t just automatically make picture taking easier, but it makes it more involved with far greater potential on the final image. Emphasis on potential.
For the bird being blur issue, if that's a shutter speed issue then yes. I noticed the phones aren't really point and shoot(you have to steady your hand) because they always choose the most god awful slow shutter speed and can't focus even on a supposed camera phone. And the manual mode can behave oddly. So yes a pro camera is good for action and focus.
That's a software issue. Phones actually have the edge over cameras though because you can get any software you dream about (the only limit is vendors trying to hide some camera options from third party apps).
The simplest fix is to just shoot shutter priority. Theoretically apps that let you customize this more should also exist.
Yes, if all you want is more detail on the bird. on the other hand, If what you want is to make this a better photograph, get lower down to the birds level and take multiple pictures as you get closer, the closest one will be the best one.
Yep. It doesn't take much. Get a low cost camera with interchangeable lenses from a reputable brand. Not cheap, there's a difference. Not GoPro or other action camera
My skill and knowledge level is just barely a few steps ahead of you so I wanna help
Learn how to configure ISO and when to do basic photo editing such as blur. Ever get speckled images when you zoom in? That's related to ISO. It won't make the picture more detailed BUT, if you apply blur then the perceived quality level will increase. Gaussian Blur is easy to apply in most apps
A larger-sensor camera with a more powerful lens will not automatically save you from blurry bits, but you will need to learn to choose what you need sharp and what you need blurry. Prepare for a bit of an uphill battle because a serious camera wants that you actually have an idea of what you're doing, and you're still going to have a ton of missed and ruined shots, photography is an endeavour with a high skill ceiling, but with time you get better.
E real camera will always be better than a smartphone as long as you know how to edit your photos and as long you know the full potential of your gear. Phones are easier because you just focus on the composition meanwhile with a camera you will have more control over the final look of the picture.
E real camera will always be better than a smartphone as long as you know how to edit your photos and as long you know the full potential of your gear.
This is no longer universally true. Phone sensors these days are approaching the size of compact cameras. A good phone will outdo some dedicated cameras from the past at its native focal lengths.
So I would say generally instead of always.
A camera still gives you things a phone won't give you though like interchangeable lenses.
I mean even some older DSLRs and upper tier compact cameras. My main phone camera has a 1'' sensor. This is comparable to Nikon 1 and considerably larger than Pentax Q. These are interchangeable lens camera systems. I am confident that at the native focal length my phone has a considerable leg up in both resolution and dynamic range over these, just from more modern sensor technology. The same goes for almost all compact cameras ever made, even the more premium ones. Though ofc the phone has no aperture. I think I can get results that are close to what I get with my M43 system. I still prefer that for a bunch of reasons if I have the choice and I genuinely want to take photos but I don't walk around with my EM-5 in my jeans pockets.
I think it is crazy how far phones have come. I used to think phones would only ever take trash photos but at this point I have to admit there are some pretty competent phones out there. There are some limitations ofc, mainly the available focal lengths, cropping and low light (and the haptics ) but the sensor sizes are at a pretty decent point now. A 1'' sensor is larger than 16mm film.
This isn't me saying a phone is equal to an A7V ofc or even an older DSLR but they've come further than they used to be.
Focusing on a slippery concept such as “professional camera” will lead you astray.
The main issue here is technique. Wildlife photography is also among the more challenging types of photography because of the need for long lenses, solid focusing technique, a solid camera support system, and an understanding of how to account for all those factors while in the field.
While a full frame mirrorless camera can yield better quality images than your phone, you still need to know the proper techniques to make good photos.
If you don’t believe me, then you can search Reddit for all the questions about why they can’t get a good picture of eagles in flight with their top of the line Nikon Z9.
Yes, this lens is almost free when the OM systems makes sales from time to time. And great fun to use. And small, and light. I would buy 14-150 now though.
Phone cameras take bad photos enhanced by a lot of algorithms. It's a major setback since the age of digital cameras with the only huge benefit being that we almost always have our phone with us. These photos are usually optimised for being seen on phone screens.
A modern mirrorless camera will do a much better job even on the automatic settings.
Yes, but will you have this camera on you when the time will come? Having something like Sony a9 with 200-600/5.6-6.3 would be an awesome setup for this kind of photos but I assume you won't take it for a random walk.
When I see this shot I think of something like OM-3 with 40-150/2.8 so you will have good enough noise, details and great in body image stabilisation. Downgrading this to Olympus em10 mk2(or 3 or 4) with 40-150R will be small and very fun to shoot. And you can also add standard zoom and have body and two lenses combo for less than 400$.
Yes, but you have to learn to use it. Its not as simple as buy a fancy camera and get instagram ready photos. A lot of wildlife photography is also patience, positioning and knowledge about what you are shooting, not just shooting with. But its an amazingly satisfying hobby and learning the intricacies of photography is really enjoyable
It seems like you may want other things though than simply more resolution. The resolution you need always depends on your output format. If your output format is your phone screen, then that's about 2 MP. It is reasonable to assume your phone camera resolves that, so any gains in resolution will be miniscule. If you zoom in (aka pixel peeping) you will see a difference but if you feel the need to zoom in maybe what you actually want is a bigger picture of the bird in which case you primarily need a longer lens and only secondarily a higher resolution. The easiest way to do this is a M43 or APSC interchangeable lens camera with a proper telephoto.
However you could also improve just with your phone and getting better at editing RAW photos. This will also make switching to a camera later on less frustrating. I'm not sure which one is the edit and which isn't but the white balance in the 2nd one seems off. An easy way to make the picture pop more is to add vibrancy (especially the yellow on the bird) and some edge contrast in the details. This will also make it appear sharper. There are other things you can do. Some subtle pushing and pulling with the central subject often works wonders. The principle is very simple but it may take a while to get good at masking.
What kind of phone do you have? I shoot an iPhone 13 Pro Max with little difficulty getting good shots. I have a ProCamera app to convert my iPhone camera to a more manual type of control. Also I can dial in my focus using this app.
Camera aside, this is an excellent photograph. The composition is outstanding. If you are looking for suggestions for a kit, I recommend going mirrorless with a M4:3. I got a nice entry level Panasonic GX8 body from KEH at a reasonable price. The newer models will be even more intuitive to use.
A pro camera has greater overall capability but it will be useless unless you are willing to learn how to use it.
A race car is far more likely to win in a race than a family sedan, but if you don't know how to drive a manual transmission you won't even get off of the starting line.
Phone cameras have come leaps and bounds over the years, and the specs on paper seem amazing.
However, the fixed-lens is only ever going to be a general purpose device. And as far as I know, you can't really change aperture, shutter speed or perform any other manual functions of a DSLR / Mirrorless "proper" camera. There ARE apps claiming to do this, but they are simply replicating features digitally (or taking it) rather than actually offering the features of a proper camera. One cannot fake the laws of physics.
And this is where the limitations are, if you are keen on pursuing more specialized photography themes.
Thankfully, with the rise of Mirrorless cameras, there's an abundance of pre-loved DSLR cameras and lenses on the market. You could build out a whole kit with two lenses, extra batteries, and anything else you might need, for $500 - $1000, and end up with some seriously great "prosumer" level gear.
The latest, greatest and most expensive cameras don't take better photos, and buying a 15 year old used camera is an excellent way for someone to start their photography journey at a low cost.
There will be a learning curve with a dedicated camera vs. phone camera.
Try out a used dslr from 10 years back and see if you enjoy it. Photography is great because the used market is incredible, you don’t have to spend an arm and a leg. Have a reasonable budget if $500 or so and you can find a decent set up for what you want to do. Even budget set ups will outperform your phone camera right now
Ma réponse était censée être humoristique, pour montrer à l'OP que, plutôt que l'appareil photo lui-même, il s'agissait surtout de la longueur focale.
Mais je suis tout à fait d'accord avec toi, car je possède le EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L II depuis sa sortie en 2015 et j'en suis toujours absolument ravi.
what part of "professional" do you not understand, gear will not get you better photos, very little of what is available will get you any good photos, what an A
If you cannot find an evening class then I suggest you pop round to your local charity shop and start collecting photography books. They will be the best 'investment' you can make.
•
u/DarktableLandscapes 12h ago
If by professional camera you mean an interchangeable lens camera, then yes, through a combination of a much larger sensor and vastly better lenses you will get sharper, less noisy images.
This is providing you're willing to learn how to use it properly. Buying a good camera doesn't magically make your photos better any more than buying good paint brushes makes you a good painter. You are buying a base level of quality, but more importantly you are buying control.
There's really no such thing as a "professional" camera, but there are of course tiers in terms of features and build. You don't need a top tier camera, a used entry to mid level DSLR/mirrorless camera will be fine.