Art and Photography

Locked: The Huawei Mate 20 Pro Takes Better Pictures Than a DSLR, Prove Me Wrong

  • Last Updated:
  • Jan 4th, 2019 7:58 pm
Jr. Member
Sep 3, 2007
159 posts
33 upvotes
JoeStale wrote:
Dec 26th, 2018 12:15 am
Also, I bet you wouldn't be able to spot smartphone bokeh from DSLR/mirrorless bokeh if you did a blindfold test like this article shows:

https://hackernoon.com/can-you-tell-pix ... 982a902dee
The smartphone's simulated blur is full of visually jarring errors. In the first one, there's a darker hard-edged rectangular blob in the bottom left corner of the doorway. The plant leaves in the upper left have areas that are blurred over but shouldn't be. One of the customers behind the top leaves has wildly inconsistent blur. The far away floor behind the ivy plant is not blurred to match the rest of the floor. The edge detection around the bottom left part of the terrarium is terrible, with a thin strip of in focus wodd following it around. Then there's the asymmetry of the blur on the wood table- the left side is in focus, but wood the same distance away on the right side is blurred.

If the above is the pinnacle of smartphone technology and it still screws up that much with crisply edged objects, it's not ready for prime time in my opinion.

However, if it meets your standards, then more power to you. There's no reason everyone should have the same quality requirements.
Deal Addict
Jul 13, 2009
2662 posts
491 upvotes
Uncle Chester wrote:
Jan 2nd, 2019 10:16 am
However, if it meets your standards, then more power to you. There's no reason everyone should have the same quality requirements.
Slow day in office, might as well feed the troll.

99% of images produced by the latest amazing smartphones are good enough for Instagram and sharing.

I have the Huawei P20 Pro and yes, best smartphone camera ever but not a replacement for a serious system for work, printing, or better creative control. Produces stuff good enough for instagram and not for pixel peepers.
Sr. Member
User avatar
Nov 28, 2011
787 posts
292 upvotes
Markham
bhrm wrote:
Jan 2nd, 2019 10:39 am
Slow day in office, might as well feed the troll.

99% of images produced by the latest amazing smartphones are good enough for Instagram and sharing.

I have the Huawei P20 Pro and yes, best smartphone camera ever but not a replacement for a serious system for work, printing, or better creative control. Produces stuff good enough for instagram and not for pixel peepers.
Pixel 3 is better, just sayin...
Deal Addict
Jul 13, 2009
2662 posts
491 upvotes
bartium wrote:
Jan 2nd, 2019 12:59 pm
Pixel 3 is better, just sayin...
Not when it comes to zoom and quite frankly, although fake, I love the "Leica" look.

Video is no go though, everyone else is better for video despite recent updates to improve on that. It feels video was overlooked and just released with fixes coming after. There's some awesome video features coming soon (I hope, last time i saw...)...
Sr. Member
Aug 1, 2010
954 posts
536 upvotes
Montreal
bartium wrote:
Jan 2nd, 2019 12:59 pm
Pixel 3 is better, just sayin...
I agree
Member
Nov 24, 2009
380 posts
39 upvotes
Ottawa
Uncle Chester wrote:
Jan 2nd, 2019 10:16 am
The smartphone's simulated blur is full of visually jarring errors. In the first one, there's a darker hard-edged rectangular blob in the bottom left corner of the doorway. The plant leaves in the upper left have areas that are blurred over but shouldn't be. One of the customers behind the top leaves has wildly inconsistent blur. The far away floor behind the ivy plant is not blurred to match the rest of the floor. The edge detection around the bottom left part of the terrarium is terrible, with a thin strip of in focus wodd following it around. Then there's the asymmetry of the blur on the wood table- the left side is in focus, but wood the same distance away on the right side is blurred.

If the above is the pinnacle of smartphone technology and it still screws up that much with crisply edged objects, it's not ready for prime time in my opinion.

However, if it meets your standards, then more power to you. There's no reason everyone should have the same quality requirements.
I'm nowhere near pro (just a hobbyist), but even to me, simulated bokeh are quite obvious. They still can't get it right when it comes to determining objects on a focal plane. Some objects are in focus and yet others are not even when they are on the same plane. I agree that smartphone/AI have advanced significantly in recent years, but my cellphone is still not a replacement for my a7iii.
Deal Addict
Dec 28, 2005
2386 posts
740 upvotes
AncasterRFD wrote:
Dec 29th, 2018 11:25 pm
Yes, if you love your hobby and take it to the level of a professional, it far surpasses what an everyday Joe can do with a smartphone. It does not need to be a large scale business. People have home studios, do weddings, portraits, newborn photography etc, and it's not their primary job. They become great at Photoshop, make large prints and canvases, know how to flatter people with posing, invoke natural expressions, there's just so much more to photography than big sensor ILC vs phone advances. And these people are not selling images from their phones. There's so many genres out there where many started out as a hobby.
Exactly. Our previous CEO's hobby was photography and quite a bit of his shots were purchased, featured in magazines and art gallery exhibits (http://www.tedwitek.com/).
[OP]
Deal Addict
Jan 16, 2015
1909 posts
842 upvotes
Cochrane, AB
AncasterRFD wrote:
Jan 3rd, 2019 12:26 pm
Kaitlyn use to work here on RFD, you can't get this shot on a phone, something I would frame large print, gorgeous
https://500px.com/photo/219593233/that- ... r_id=82770
Looks too unnatural. The whole sky has been photoshopped. And here the previous posters were complaining about artificial bokeh, lol. If we Photoshop photos so much, whether something is artificial or not is really a moot point. All pro photos are faked or artificial to one degree or another.
Deal Addict
Feb 16, 2006
3704 posts
875 upvotes
Vancouver
bahahahahah damn, started laughing while drinking my morning coffee. It's everywhere and amazingly 3D in texture.

This thread is very entertaining. I think some people here have debate team backgrounds.

.
Sr. Member
Aug 1, 2010
954 posts
536 upvotes
Montreal
JoeStale wrote:
Jan 3rd, 2019 1:08 pm
Looks too unnatural. The whole sky has been photoshopped. And here the previous posters were complaining about artificial bokeh, lol. If we Photoshop photos so much, whether something is artificial or not is really a moot point. All pro photos are faked or artificial to one degree or another.
Haha... ... no

Deal Addict
Jul 13, 2009
2662 posts
491 upvotes
JoeStale wrote:
Jan 3rd, 2019 1:08 pm
Looks too unnatural. The whole sky has been photoshopped. And here the previous posters were complaining about artificial bokeh, lol. If we Photoshop photos so much, whether something is artificial or not is really a moot point. All pro photos are faked or artificial to one degree or another.
IIRC Kaitlyn's not a big photoshopper at all, but is geared up well. That photo was done on a tripod, shot 25 seconds. She probably used a polarizer filter, plus picked a perfect time of day in the morning.

That same shot, you cannot do on a Mate 20 Pro.
[OP]
Deal Addict
Jan 16, 2015
1909 posts
842 upvotes
Cochrane, AB
bhrm wrote:
Jan 3rd, 2019 2:47 pm
IIRC Kaitlyn's not a big photoshopper at all, but is geared up well. That photo was done on a tripod, shot 25 seconds. She probably used a polarizer filter, plus picked a perfect time of day in the morning.

That same shot, you cannot do on a Mate 20 Pro.
I still don't believe it wasn't done with some Photoshop help. And videos can similarly can be edited.

Of course you can do the same shot on a smartphone. The Mate 20 Pro has a wide angle lens and can do long exposures with the stock camera app. Put it on a tripod and a polarizing filter on front and the result would be the same.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Apr 23, 2006
2481 posts
360 upvotes
Toronto
JoeStale wrote:
Jan 3rd, 2019 3:05 pm
I still don't believe it wasn't done with some Photoshop help. And videos can similarly can be edited.

Of course you can do the same shot on a smartphone. The Mate 20 Pro has a wide angle lens and can do long exposures with the stock camera app. Put it on a tripod and a polarizing filter on front and the result would be the same.
Ya gotta stop contradicting yourself. On one hand you're calling Kaitlyn out on photoshopping, on the other hand you are saying the Mate 20 Pro can produce the same image with the same equipment.

You are making the claim that the Mate 20 Pro can produce the same photo as a $4000 DSLR + $1.5k lens + photoshop? Stop the madness.
Deal Addict
Jul 13, 2009
2662 posts
491 upvotes
JoeStale wrote:
Jan 3rd, 2019 3:05 pm
I still don't believe it wasn't done with some Photoshop help. And videos can similarly can be edited.

Of course you can do the same shot on a smartphone. The Mate 20 Pro has a wide angle lens and can do long exposures with the stock camera app. Put it on a tripod and a polarizing filter on front and the result would be the same.
...ok not sure if you're trolling or serious now.

Mate20 Pro uses pixel binning method to look "good" and to boost pixel detail (RGB-k) but in no ways a replacement for a 5dmkIII. It could come close but once you print it poster size, there's no way it will compare. The methods boost but there's just the physical limitation of a pixel, plain and simple. Mate20 uses a ton of pre and post processing to correct as much as possible, distortion, colour, image stabilization...

For web/instagram, yes it will look fine. But for 8 pages of trolling, seriously...a Mate20 Pro is not the same as a full setup.

However, the Mate20 Pro is great and perfect if you know nothing about photography and cannot appreciate a full gear set up.

/endthread.

Top