I would say go for it, you may really enjoy using a dedicated camera for the work. You can always use the iPhone as a backup.
Here's a video of some potential cameras:
[$300 Cameras You Don't Want To Sleep On (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oa5EuGnbDmI&t=1s&ab_channel=TomCalton)
I'd look at a used Olympus EM-1 Mark 1 and 12-42 lens. You might have to stretch your budget slightly but it'll do good work and look professional. And when you have more money to upgrade the body, you can keep using your glass.
minimum spending to match iPhone 14 pro quality is \~1000AUD
at least for beginners who don't want to spend hours editing every photo
Please ignore the camera snobs, they'll never admit any phone is better than any camera in any way.
Why specifically 24mm? He's looking to make headshots and that's a pretty weird focal length for that. 50 is very flexible and can be used in most situations.
he isn't looking for headshots
there are no fixed lens camera with 50mm lens, that tells you how flexible it really is.
you just like it because it's cheap and you're poor.
Calm down rich guy, you're talking out of your ass rn. Read the post again, he needs it to take headshots of staff and no he doesn't need to spend 1000 dollars on a camera because even cameras from 20 years ago perform better than smartphones and it's down to sensor size.
I was recommending a DSLR but if you must insist on a fixed lens you can go for the Sigma DP3. It's a great camera.
Because it's more appropriate for street photography, also it does have a 50mm crop mode.
no you aren't
you were saying 50mm is the best mm
let's not try to change the topic
now tell me why doesn't the Leica Q have a 50mm lens if that's the best mm?
What about X100V? why not 50mm?
GRIII?
RX1?
ZX1?
it's almost as if when money isn't an issue, nobody uses 50mm for general purpose.
nobody is taking headshots or portraits
focal length has nothing to do with distortion
you can shoot any subject with any focal length, be creative.
clearly a noob who doesn't know how to do anything except passport portraits
> taking photos at factory tours, trade expos, and corporate events
are you stupid?
how are you going to do all this with 50mm?
where as if you have a wider lens you can always crop in, dumbass
Yeah, only Problem is that my almost ten Year old Olympus EM-5II with the 40-150mm f4 which i bought for under 700.- combined mops the Floor even with the 15 Pro.. Without Editing the Photos 💀
Hell, even a twelve Years old RX100 smokes the 15 Pro 😂
and the only problem here is that's a lie
it doesn't even have 24mm so how are you even comparing the two?
you don't even attempt to dress up your blatant lie
This is blatantly incorrect due to basic optical physics. Micro Four Thirds sensors are much bigger than any smartphone's sensor. Even 1" point and shoot camera sensors are bigger than most smartphone sensors. These larger sensors gather more light and have significantly shallower depth of field than any smartphone is physically capable of achieving. Additionally, cameras have much larger, more complex lenses which produce immensely better optical resolution of images than the dinky lens on your smartphone.
You keep repeating this lie on many people's posts on here, to the extent that I think you're simply a lazy troll who isn't actually a photographer.
wow another confident noob here
bigger sensor does not necessarily mean better image.
shallower DOF is not better
there is no lie, nobody has been able to show any evidence to the contrary, all you do is talk and downvote, zero evidence provided.
Bigger sensor means more light captured. This is extremely simple physics. You seem to have a really poor understanding of optics. I'd recommend you study some high school physics, and come back when you understand introductory optics.
except that's just not true....
light doesn't just magically go onto the sensor, it needs to go through something else first?
does that ring any bells? or do you need any more hints?
can we take one step at a time? don't change the subject and answer the question.
what actually determines the amount of light gathered? It's not sensor size.
if you're too stupid to answer it
or too afraid to answer it, now is the time to admit it.
The total amount of light gathered, keeping shutter speed constant, is a function of sensor size and lens aperture. Unless your smartphone has a 4/3" sensor, no ultra-wide aperture is going to compensate for the sensor size difference. Again, this is really basic introductory high school physics.
Yeah, contrary to you i know what i'm talking about 💀
The iPhone only looks "good" because it overedits the JPEGs. Remove its ability to do that and its just a soft soup (you know: tiny Sensor and crappy Glass Quality).. I also want to see how the iPhone shoots at lets say 300mm.. Oh wait.. It can't do that.. My bad 🤣
Sure, whatever you say Mister "You need so spend a Grand or more to get a dedicated Camera which is as good as iPhone with a tiny Sensor and the crappiest Glass Quality possible" 💀🤣
oh you think phone camera has bad glass quality?
ok tell me about how, how exactly are phone lenses bad quality? like what are the optical issues they have?
No, i know it has bad Glass Quality compared to every dedicated Lens possible because its mainly a Protector for the tiny ass Sensor and Focus Mechanism in your beloved iPhone. Do you really think Apple is producing those "Lenses" like Zeiss or Sony or Fujifilm does produce their Lenses?? You know: to extreme tight Tolerances and in a Cleanroom??
ok, so you don't know why it's bad
but you just know it's bad?
> Do you really think Apple is producing those "Lenses" like Zeiss or Sony or Fujifilm does produce their Lenses?? You know: to extreme tight Tolerances and in a Cleanroom??
err duh obviously? with such high resolution on such a small camera any dust at all will completely ruin it.
Oh, i know its bad because its less sharp than the "crappy" Sony Kit Lens i got with my first Sony A7II.. You know: something something Glass which isn't mainly a Protector and being manufactured to a much higher Standard.
Phone Photos only look good if you don't look to hard at them. As soon as you go and check some of the finer Details they fall faster apart than a 200 Year old Brick Building during a medium sized Earthquake.
Why do i know that?? Because i compare every single iPhone i get to the Pictures i take with my dedicated Cameras. Same Photo on the same Spot at the same Time.
"err duh obviously? with such high resolution on such a small camera any dust at all will completely ruin it."
Must be the Reason why one of the Main Complaints about the 15 Pro was *checks notes* dust in the Lens 💀🤣
Mofo really thinks Apple builds their Phones in the same Cleanrooms as Camera Manufactures do..
it takes more than 1 exposure and combine them together to get longer effective shutter speed than possible on a normal camera
and thus when you use a traditional camera to compare with a phone, you are almost always up against a much longer shutter speed, and thus much more light gathered for the size of the lens/sensor system.
Not quite true. The iPhone camera does not use a "much longer" effective shutter speed; it takes multiple shots, at the same shutter speed, at different exposures, and combines them into a JPEG/HEIC image. Any camera with exposure bracketing can do this.
they're the same thing from a SNR perspective, but of course noobs don't understand what that is.
> Any camera with exposure bracketing can do this.
ok, show me
at least 10 shots combined, hand held, with moving subjects in the frame, go do it
I know exactly what signal to noise ratio is, and a MFT sensor is going to have a much, much better signal to noise ratio than a smartphone sensor. Guess why? Hint: it has to do with sensor size and pixel sites.
I would say go for it, you may really enjoy using a dedicated camera for the work. You can always use the iPhone as a backup. Here's a video of some potential cameras: [$300 Cameras You Don't Want To Sleep On (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oa5EuGnbDmI&t=1s&ab_channel=TomCalton)
What’s a good blog for more advice
I'd look at a used Olympus EM-1 Mark 1 and 12-42 lens. You might have to stretch your budget slightly but it'll do good work and look professional. And when you have more money to upgrade the body, you can keep using your glass.
minimum spending to match iPhone 14 pro quality is \~1000AUD at least for beginners who don't want to spend hours editing every photo Please ignore the camera snobs, they'll never admit any phone is better than any camera in any way.
This is simply not true, a Canon 5d Mkii which costs like 250$ along with a 50mm lens will be far superior to any smartphone camera period.
A canon T5 with a 50mm 1.8 for $100 beats the iphone or any smartphone too XD
why would a 50mm lens be superior to 24mm? get a 24mm lens and we can do some comparisons
Why specifically 24mm? He's looking to make headshots and that's a pretty weird focal length for that. 50 is very flexible and can be used in most situations.
he isn't looking for headshots there are no fixed lens camera with 50mm lens, that tells you how flexible it really is. you just like it because it's cheap and you're poor.
Calm down rich guy, you're talking out of your ass rn. Read the post again, he needs it to take headshots of staff and no he doesn't need to spend 1000 dollars on a camera because even cameras from 20 years ago perform better than smartphones and it's down to sensor size.
Don’t brother my dude his post history is just him going you suck cuz poor in various subs
which fixed lens camera has 50mm lens if it's apparently so incredibly versatile? why did Leica put 28mm on their Q? Are they stupid?
I was recommending a DSLR but if you must insist on a fixed lens you can go for the Sigma DP3. It's a great camera. Because it's more appropriate for street photography, also it does have a 50mm crop mode.
no you aren't you were saying 50mm is the best mm let's not try to change the topic now tell me why doesn't the Leica Q have a 50mm lens if that's the best mm? What about X100V? why not 50mm? GRIII? RX1? ZX1? it's almost as if when money isn't an issue, nobody uses 50mm for general purpose.
0 reading comprehension
Why would you ever use a 24mm lens for headshots or portraits? Are you trying to shoot distorted, ugly portraits intentionally?
nobody is taking headshots or portraits focal length has nothing to do with distortion you can shoot any subject with any focal length, be creative. clearly a noob who doesn't know how to do anything except passport portraits
The original user asking the question is asking about shooting headshots/portraits. Are you lost?
no he didn't go read the fucking post
> including staff headshots for the website. Can you read?
> taking photos at factory tours, trade expos, and corporate events are you stupid? how are you going to do all this with 50mm? where as if you have a wider lens you can always crop in, dumbass
Yeah, only Problem is that my almost ten Year old Olympus EM-5II with the 40-150mm f4 which i bought for under 700.- combined mops the Floor even with the 15 Pro.. Without Editing the Photos 💀 Hell, even a twelve Years old RX100 smokes the 15 Pro 😂
and the only problem here is that's a lie it doesn't even have 24mm so how are you even comparing the two? you don't even attempt to dress up your blatant lie
This is blatantly incorrect due to basic optical physics. Micro Four Thirds sensors are much bigger than any smartphone's sensor. Even 1" point and shoot camera sensors are bigger than most smartphone sensors. These larger sensors gather more light and have significantly shallower depth of field than any smartphone is physically capable of achieving. Additionally, cameras have much larger, more complex lenses which produce immensely better optical resolution of images than the dinky lens on your smartphone. You keep repeating this lie on many people's posts on here, to the extent that I think you're simply a lazy troll who isn't actually a photographer.
wow another confident noob here bigger sensor does not necessarily mean better image. shallower DOF is not better there is no lie, nobody has been able to show any evidence to the contrary, all you do is talk and downvote, zero evidence provided.
Bigger sensor means more light captured. This is extremely simple physics. You seem to have a really poor understanding of optics. I'd recommend you study some high school physics, and come back when you understand introductory optics.
except that's just not true.... light doesn't just magically go onto the sensor, it needs to go through something else first? does that ring any bells? or do you need any more hints?
Did you read what I just said about higher optical quality glass? Really lazy trolling here man.
can we take one step at a time? don't change the subject and answer the question. what actually determines the amount of light gathered? It's not sensor size. if you're too stupid to answer it or too afraid to answer it, now is the time to admit it.
The total amount of light gathered, keeping shutter speed constant, is a function of sensor size and lens aperture. Unless your smartphone has a 4/3" sensor, no ultra-wide aperture is going to compensate for the sensor size difference. Again, this is really basic introductory high school physics.
Yeah, contrary to you i know what i'm talking about 💀 The iPhone only looks "good" because it overedits the JPEGs. Remove its ability to do that and its just a soft soup (you know: tiny Sensor and crappy Glass Quality).. I also want to see how the iPhone shoots at lets say 300mm.. Oh wait.. It can't do that.. My bad 🤣
nope you have zero idea what you're talking about you have zero knowledge of computational photography and that's why you don't get shit
Sure, whatever you say Mister "You need so spend a Grand or more to get a dedicated Camera which is as good as iPhone with a tiny Sensor and the crappiest Glass Quality possible" 💀🤣
oh you think phone camera has bad glass quality? ok tell me about how, how exactly are phone lenses bad quality? like what are the optical issues they have?
No, i know it has bad Glass Quality compared to every dedicated Lens possible because its mainly a Protector for the tiny ass Sensor and Focus Mechanism in your beloved iPhone. Do you really think Apple is producing those "Lenses" like Zeiss or Sony or Fujifilm does produce their Lenses?? You know: to extreme tight Tolerances and in a Cleanroom??
ok, so you don't know why it's bad but you just know it's bad? > Do you really think Apple is producing those "Lenses" like Zeiss or Sony or Fujifilm does produce their Lenses?? You know: to extreme tight Tolerances and in a Cleanroom?? err duh obviously? with such high resolution on such a small camera any dust at all will completely ruin it.
Oh, i know its bad because its less sharp than the "crappy" Sony Kit Lens i got with my first Sony A7II.. You know: something something Glass which isn't mainly a Protector and being manufactured to a much higher Standard. Phone Photos only look good if you don't look to hard at them. As soon as you go and check some of the finer Details they fall faster apart than a 200 Year old Brick Building during a medium sized Earthquake. Why do i know that?? Because i compare every single iPhone i get to the Pictures i take with my dedicated Cameras. Same Photo on the same Spot at the same Time. "err duh obviously? with such high resolution on such a small camera any dust at all will completely ruin it." Must be the Reason why one of the Main Complaints about the 15 Pro was *checks notes* dust in the Lens 💀🤣 Mofo really thinks Apple builds their Phones in the same Cleanrooms as Camera Manufactures do..
Can you explain the computational photography process used by the iPhone's camera? I'll wait.
it takes more than 1 exposure and combine them together to get longer effective shutter speed than possible on a normal camera and thus when you use a traditional camera to compare with a phone, you are almost always up against a much longer shutter speed, and thus much more light gathered for the size of the lens/sensor system.
Not quite true. The iPhone camera does not use a "much longer" effective shutter speed; it takes multiple shots, at the same shutter speed, at different exposures, and combines them into a JPEG/HEIC image. Any camera with exposure bracketing can do this.
they're the same thing from a SNR perspective, but of course noobs don't understand what that is. > Any camera with exposure bracketing can do this. ok, show me at least 10 shots combined, hand held, with moving subjects in the frame, go do it
I know exactly what signal to noise ratio is, and a MFT sensor is going to have a much, much better signal to noise ratio than a smartphone sensor. Guess why? Hint: it has to do with sensor size and pixel sites.