Not exactly true. Ten years ago most of the compact cameras were bad, especially the cheaper ones. I recently found some old pictures a friend sent me from his Canon A530 and they looked really bad, much worse than a phone can do these days. And that camera was not exactly a cheap one.If IQ not matters, and a 28mm lens is needed, a phone will do the job. It's funny, 10 years ago, everybody upgraded from PS's to DSLR, today back to the phone which is roghly a PS without optical zoom. As long as people not understand the difference between, sharpness, sharpening, resolution everybody will be happy, except the manufacturers of non-phone devices.
For sure, this camera's will be way better than any phone, at least if one knows how to handle them and how to create a "film" from the "output"
It's not just IQ, it could be versatility (i.e. mic, lights, filters, etc.), zoom/focus control, longer video needs, learning to take videos with dedicated equipment, etc.If IQ not matters, and a 28mm lens is needed, a phone will do the job
Yes, just like any phone of today is miles better than any phone of ten years ago - technology improved a little in that time - and a today's compact camera offers far improved capabilities as well - not that of a cheap 5mpx camera from 2006.So i think today's best camera phones are miles better than 90 percent of compact camera from 10 years ago
My point was that while 10 years ago phones had unacceptable image quality for many, today they are good enough for most people, even photo enthusiasts, so they prefer convenience and won't purchase another compact for marginally better image quality.Yes, just like any phone of today is miles better than any phone of ten years ago - technology improved a little in that time - and a today's compact camera offers far improved capabilities as well - not that of a cheap 5mpx camera from 2006.
Pure "image quality" means little - the issue is usually to achieve a given image quality operating in given conditions. IMHO photo "enthusiast" soon feel constrained by the lack of control on images taken with phones, especially since phone makers look more and more oriented to copy Kodak's "you press the button, we do the rest" approach - which after all is what snapshot takers want. Really, no surprise the lower end cameras and camcorders can be fully replaced by phones.even photo enthusiasts, so they prefer convenience and won't purchase another compact for marginally better image quality.
The G50 is in the same series of XA 40-45 (smaller 1/2.3" sensor, 20x zoom, less bit rate)I am a little bit confused here....I didn´t see too much information about Canon Vixia G50 so far and this model i think it was anounnced in January and released in CES. So...I guess i am confused, Why Canon is going to launch a new camera in that line? Does it has several changes? Well if it does, it will kill the G50! Is it the same camera but with minor changes?
Thank you for the info bhf3737, it makes sense now this release. (At least according to the series.... )The G50 is in the same series of XA 40-45 (smaller 1/2.3" sensor, 20x zoom, less bit rate)
The G60 is in the same series of XA 50-55 (larger 1" sensor, 15x zoom, higher bit rate)
Therefore, there are 3 camcorders in each category, one without XLR, one with XLR and one with both 3G-SDI and XLR.
Problem is, without a flux capacitor his genius will never grace Canon's 1980s boardroom. So we shall never know. Alas, Canon is still doomed at #1 on Earth. Nikon still owns the moon. Just think of what could have been, but for a flux capacitor. Sony... meh.You should really offer to sit on Canon’s board. With you to advise them, I’m sure they’d be doing much better than #1 in several markets.