So for people who don't want to use computers. I cannot work with a tablet or phone. I need a computer.
People pretend this is a perfectly acceptable workfow. It is not.
The pictures would have to be dramatically better than those made by phones. They are not.
I shoot, review on the much larger phone screen, click share and chose from countless options to publish immediately. OR edit it a bit and enjoy the same.
I also never consciously bring the phone, it's just there in my pocket. Interesting things happen, you unholster it and start shooting. The real camera is more like guard duty. You sit there waiting for the interesting shot. Sometimes that works out and some of those times the extra quality is actually visible and some of that time it is totally worth it. The rest of the time I wonder what it is I think I'm doing.
Or open the app on your smartphone (https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=jp.co.canon.ic...), connect to the camera through WiFi, and copy the photos directly.
It's just a plain worse experience to just some extremely good phones like the iPhones with pro camera apps
I want dedicated cameras to offer a superior experience. In stead it is quite bad.
In order to publish one should first disconnect the internet?
I have to put down the camera and pick up the competing device?
My absolute favorite annoyance with my cameras is the lack of charging over USB. After taking a good amount of pictures I have to guess if there is enough battery left to transfer the images to the computer.
Not that PCs or laptops offer very good charging power. This because there is little demand.
It seems in order to make the superior experience the camera maker should also make phones and/or laptops? I have no idea really.
All I know is that my phone has 100W charging. I can almost immediately return to the front. The camera does have swappable batteries going for it but that I have to remove it from the tripod to reload it won't win the war.
The multiple lenses and the processing power make smartphones wildly better than almost any consumer camera, particularly for someone without professional photography skills. A professional camera in the hands of a professional photographer can do better, but that means the market has changed from "consumers buy consumer cameras, professionals buy professional cameras" to "consumers use the camera that's always in their pocket and get surprisingly good results, professionals buy professional cameras".
There are benefits to larger sensors, but the best camera is the one you have in-hand.
Apple’s camera(s) and color science is fantastic. The black magic app in particular shows off their capability.
Not sure what I'd want more from an iPad.
It is true that it has slightly more apps, but realistically all I need is there.
I agree in several cases, but the question here wasn't "are they better than PC equivalents", it was "are they better than what's available on Android"
By that token, touchscreen laptops will replace the iPad any day now.
I think the preeminent issue is that touch-native UIs are very imprecise and clunky by nature. The iPad makes a great MIDI controller; it's an awful mixer or plugin host compared to a regular laptop running regular PC plugins. Buying a mouse or keyboard won't port Omnisphere or the U-He plugins to iPad. I doubt the market will ever "catch up" in that regard.
Almost all of the prosumer apps on iOS offer a consistently better experience. This is maybe less relevant on phones than on tablets, but music production, video editing, digital painting and drafting, etc...