There is now no need to spend 1000's on that wide aperture for great bokeh. The new s8 can do that all for you. And if Im being honest do a much better job in the editing process.
Mobile phones are the way forward and i predict in a few years will be competing with/ surpassing mid range DSLRs
Check the video for proof.
https://youtu.be/g6ASzDd-_JM
lol wut
>>3146569
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring to as bokeh, is in fact, depth of field, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, depth of field plus bokeh. Bokeh is not a photographic look unto itself, but rather another component of a look made by the lens design, numerical aperture and focal length comprising a full picture.
Many photographers make pictures with depth of field every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, this look which is widely used today is often called “bokeh”, and many photographers are not aware that it is basically the depth of field, caused by the wide aperture. There really is bokeh, and there are photographers using it, but it is just a part of the image they make.
Bokeh is the quality of the depth of field: the specific way an optical formula renders out of focus areas. Bokeh is an essential part of a photograph, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete composition. Bokeh is normally used in combination with the depth of field: the whole look is basically depth of field with bokeh added, or DoF/bokeh. All the so-called “bokeh” are really variations of DoF/bokeh.
>>3146569
no one. unless some instagram model, will take you seriously with phone photography
>>3146659
Which the s8 can do flawlessly. You can even add the bokeh; or if youre trying to be a smart ass.. dof; after taking a picture thats sharp from corner to corner. And vice versa.
Yes for years the camera has been leading the way and the mobile phone has been lacking behind. But its 2017. Technology has advanced. Dof/bokeh is just an optical illusion that can now be recreated with in phone editing.
Ive seen sample pictures and comparing the bokeh of sony gm 24-70mm lens on sony a7rii to the samsung s8. If it wasnt for the higher res of the camera you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
1. My $400 Oppo R9s has literally the same camera 'pro' functionand a larger sensor with a wider aperture. As did the R9 and R7 2 years ago.
2. When your background is 30 times further from the lens than the subject, you're just adding in extra steps. Your phone should take the shot with an out of focus background in its normal mode.
3. The Google lens blur app is legitimately the best smartphone app in the world for DoF. Records distances subjects are when you take the shot so you can take them as quick as you normally would and then add DoF later. And it's been around for years.
>>3146673
>replying seriously to a pasta
I am loling at your life
>>3146659
you just fucking KNOW that copy pasta came from Reddit.
>>3146692
Is reddit a 4chan but child friendly?
>>3146692
dude, that's the Stallman Interjection from the usenet times.
How can you not know that?
>>3146569
>There is now no need to spend 1000's on that wide aperture
because f1.8 primes can be bought for less than $200 new, not because some cellphone added a fake bokeh slider
>competing with/ surpassing mid range DSLRs
they're not even at the point of competing/surpassing entry level, forget midrange
>>3146673
Okay then you go buy the cellphone. I'm not gonna. I'm still gonna use a real camera that does bokeh optically, and have a sturdy cheap phone like Moto G5.
It's a Samsung, dude, it will break.
>>3146692
>/g/ meme
>must be Reddit
No, I made it up on the spot you fucking /p/leb.
There is more to large aperture than a large depth of field.
>>3146569
that shit is just a Gaussian blur. any photographer would notice the blur is fake
>>3146790
You are right, of course - increased light hits the element, which is ideal for video in low light/shutterspeed considerations, etc etc - but try not to make reductionist statements, as you risk looking like a pompous, pretentious cunt.
Also, people are specifically talking about a large aperture and shallow depth of field.
>>3146830
I was thinking this too, but it's hard to tell since they conveniently never actually fully show the final photo and instead just show video of it on the phone, which leads me to believe it looks like shit.
>>3146569
enjoy your sensorlet casualfag image processing.