The article says nothing about post processing

Are you trying to say that people only post process phone camera images, because that is definitely not the case.

People always downvote these types of comments, but it’s true. I had one of the first generation consumer digital cameras (Sony F717), and I could only rarely get a decent photo out of it. I never once got a “wow” shot or anything worth printing.

A few years later with a Nikon D90 it was possible to get amazing, print-worthy shots by accident… through the window of a moving car!

There is obviously the right tool for the right job, ie. Moving car and you're looking for a clear photo you need a camera that can shoot at a high ISO and produce little noise. But the reality is you are either a poor or lazy photographer. Part of being a good photographer is working within the constraints of the tool that you have at the time.

I had an olympus C-2 Zoom which was dramatically worse than the Sony and it captured many great photos. I can see some good sample photos here ofthe F717 https://onfotolife.com/camera_sample_photos?camera_id=4527&p...

Those are amazing locations in bright sunlight. Most of those pictures are also edited to death. None make me say “wow”.

I had the same experience. At gorgeous locations in good light I could get okay photos — but only with a lot of editing.

Looking through some sample photos [1], I would say the biggest issue with the F717 is the inability to blur the background and isolate the subject. That's more a limitation of the lens than the camera - but since the lens is integrated in the F717 it's totally fair to say it's a limitation of the camera too.

I had a similar issue with a Panasonic micro four-thirds camera where I was just never happy with the photos I got out of it. I much prefered the results I got with my prior inexpensive Canon APS-C DSLR, and the Sony Full Frame mirrorless camera I upraded to afterwards. No doubt a better photographer than myself could have gotten some great photos out of the Panasonic - but yeah for me just upgrading the camera made a big difference in both my own satisfaction and also the feedback I was getting from others.

[1] https://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/dscf717

Camera does indeed matter a lot more with digital cameras. It matters less so with film cameras in my opinion. I've used all kinds of film cameras and have taken nice photos on virtually all of them.

> poor image quality automatically makes it look bad.

I don't think this is always true, depending on what you're going for, but once again this is something analog photography gives a lot more leeway on.

Poor example maybe - you can't buy an iPhone 4 anymore. Maybe camera quality mattered when it was current because there were lots of bad cameras around, but now the range is more from "good enough" to "great" and so it doesn't matter so much.