Smartphones and cameras

Hey lads, I hope this has more to do with Sup Forums than /p/ being about

I'm looking for a new smartphone, but I noticed that basically all of them have terrible wide angle front camera which fits the purpose of including as many things in the picture but also make the people look like deformed freaks with a noticeable fish eye effect.

This is true especially for my current phone, a Galaxy S6. I'd like to take selfies like a normie, but I don't want a phone that gives me a horseface, also see pic related for what I mean.

Does anyone have a phone with decent lens for taking people portraits, especially with front camera? I'd appreciate any advice, thanks. Forgot to mention I'd like to stay with android phones.

If you want to take nice pictures you buy a camera. Smartphones have cameras for selfies and scanning QR codes.

>t. you need $200k McIntosh system to truly appreciate music
Modern top smartphone cameras are more than enough for 95% of non-professional use cases.

Yeah, my whole point was finding a smartphone that can take decent selfies without deforming your face because of inadequate lenses. My S6 is terrible at that.

That's a nice dick length to potential gf cuteness chart.

Well, if you don't really care and just want an okay camera then you don't even have to ask this question. Any high-end (probably even mid-end) smartphone will do.

Adequate lenses don't fit in a smartphone. You'll need some fancy software to correct for that. That software probably exists in current smartphone but because literally no normies care it's not advertized in the specs.

>85mm
>adequate for a girl of that caliber
Thank the lord I'm 8 inches, though.

>9mm
>lol I'm okay

I looked for that. Apparently this is an hardware thing, there's not really much you can do with a software. You could work on the width of the picture, but as you can see in OP pic you'll still lose a lot of face because of the fish eye effect

It's all software. They call it a hardware thing only because it's in the camera's firmware. Of course reverting the fish-eye distortion isn't as good as a proper lens, but this is the only thing smartphone can do atm.

>girl of that caliber
It's a run-of-the-mill 6/10.
>I'm 8 inches
Won't be easy to convince girls of that when they actually see your 4" lipstick.

>more than 20mm

How do I know if I'm ugly or if it's just the camera lens?

Try a mirror. Wear eye protection.

1.
>Does anyone have a phone with decent lens for taking people portraits
Nobody does. The shallow DoF is essential for portraits, and you won't get this with a phone sensor size, regardless of f number. You still can make a good portrait without DoF with any camera though. It always depends on your skill and taste, your camera doesn't matter much.

2. Your picture is a myth/misconception. Perspective distortion doesn't depend on the lens equivalent focal length (24mm, 85mm etc) AT ALL. It only depends on the distance from the camera. Just take your portrait at 10-15m to the subject, not at 2m, then crop it if you have to, that's completely the same as shooting with a longer lens. (if you have to crop it from 24mm, you will need good resolution for that, which phones can't provide, regardless of their fake megapixels)

so that's why I haven't gotten any matches

aren't OP pics all taken at the same distance tough?

No. They are taken that the face would fit into the whole frame.

The distance is different. Cropping to zoom the picture is a typical way to compensate for lack of telephoto lens. It's impractical on a phone though, since you're losing quality and phones don't have it even at full size. You need some great gear for this, and even then it only works to some degree.

>Just take your portrait at 10-15m to the subject, not at 2m, then crop it if you have to
Isn't that a problem though? Especially if you are talking about taking the photo yourself.

50mm is human eye equivalent.
Funny how they crossed that out and only went for the tele look. So in a way they're saying she's butt ugly without massive trickery.

>she needs 200m optics to look like women at 50mm

That's the whole schtick of instagram whores, isn't it? Take a bunch of photos that look hardly like anything IRL so insecure people would fawn over them?

Yes. makeup, camera high angle and focal length (for the advanced thots)

stop being a faggot op

they are talking about quality portraits, not selfies
you need skills, proper lighting and preferably a good camera for that
good camera part isn't strictly required, but you're missing some expressive features like the shallow dof with a phone

with a phone, you can use a mini tripod (like a gorillapod) with a bluetooth button, or a mirror
anyway, there are 50mm lenses on phones now, so this isn't usually needed

Back in the day there was the myspace angle

lenses won't save you if your arm is 50cm. get a selfie stick or write a software that recognises the face and corrects the effect

50mm being the "human eye equivalent" is a dumb meme.
The only thing that actually determines perspective is distance.
Some people feel like 50 mm corresponds to their perceived view, but that isn't necessarily the case.
A portrait where the distance to the subject is really close is a bad idea, because you mostly don't look at people this up close.
A 85mm or so would feel much more natural.

>ywn have a 200mm gf

And you're an idiot because you don't know the difference between distance and focal length.

I don't want to bother explaining things too much to an idiot like you, but I am right and you are wrong.
If you want to learn more and stop being an idiot, I advise you to do some google searches, or read wikipedia.
Perspective is only dependent on distance.
Focal length together with the sensor size determines the framing.
To get the same framing with different focal lengths, you have to change the distance to your subject, which in turn changes the perspective.
Think about it some more, and maybe then you will get it.

>I don't want to bother explaining things too much to an idiot like you, but I am right and you are wrong.
Pack your things my dudes, this guy just won this internet fight

No, OP. It's just physics. There are limits to what the optics of a pocketable slim computer can do.

If you want good pictures, you need to use something bigger than a phone. Bigger camera --> bigger optics --> more light gets captured and it gets captured more correctly, without distortions or any trade-offs, like in a phone.

Simple as that. You could check out some mirrorless cameras if you want something that has a pocketable body. But you'll need a case for the lenses.

Phones are for shitty facebook pics, not for serious quality images.

Is there any point to a crop sensor for pro use? I'd love to see a fair comparison between full frame and crop and see whether or not the difference is massively noticeable for something such as photogrammetry. I had access to a Canon 5D Mark 3 iirc and -while I'm no pro in getting the right settings- the output was beautiful. But all the full frame DSLRs are a bit too expensive for me.

Smartphones under 360 USD with best camera?

...

>tfw your gf has a 200mm penis

>the more tele the flatter things get

So people who say 2D > 3D are right in the end?

Top fucking lel

3DPD

t. film photographer

Depends on what kind of effect you are looking after. For photogrammetry, a full-frame would be better.

There are some entry-level full-frames, like the Canon 6D, which can be found for a bit above $1000 (body only).

>hold phone far away from myself to compensate for distortion
>use optical zoom lens instead of digital to compensate for distance
>???
>enjoy decent quality selfies with low lens distortion.

The most noticeable difference is the bokeh strength. If you want really blurry backgrounds with the same lens, use a full frame sensor. Not very useful with photogrammetry I guess.

All external phone lenses have horrible artifacts though, due to the way they work.

So? You're never going to get a perfect picture with a cell-phone, but you can get a better one if you try than you would otherwise.

>Selfie with a 200mm focal length on a phone sensor

Well they are all bad even for a smartphone. You can take acceptably looking classic portraits with a phone if you get the composition/lighting/emotion, but additional lenses are almost guaranteed to ruin them. Not to mention there are internal 50mm lenses in some phones already.

just buy this

This, matterfact it's more likely 40mm i believe

>I don't want to bother explaining things too much to an idiot like you, but I am right and you are wrong.
>proceeds to explain things because he's assblasted

tha fukk is that kojima

70mm is the sweet spot I'd say.
It's a good mixture of depth in the face to distortion, 200mm is very flat.

Wildlife photographers often use crop sensors because of the free magnification, also they tend to take photos in better light conditions so the low light performance of full frames aren't as necessary.

There are some very good crop sensor cameras out there, and you can almost always use full frame lenses on them, so if you decide to go full frame in the future you don't have to replace all your glass.

...

Can you read? Try again. The part you ignored is:
>too much
I didn't explain _why_ it is this way.
This part he has to figure out himself.

fuck. now normies will fall for "200mm SelfieLens®" marketing. even Sup Forums is dumb enough to have a thread about it, normies don't stand a chance.

kek

Literally betacuck turns into chad

>the virgin 20 mm
>the chad 200 mm

>longer focal length makes the subject smile
seems legit

Fun fact: after 50mm they look pretty much the same.

If pic related is true (I know the lens effect is true, but I mean the distance) then the distance at which you should take selfies (extended hand) is ok and you should just stop bitching about your horse face.

>btw, have you ever looked yourself at the mirror at 2cm?

Anything you can write software for you can make a circuit that does the same thing and vice versa.

>even Sup Forums

What do you think this place is, exactly? Its another now normie infested shithole of retards, this place is barely even a tech board. The vast majority of posts are incredible dumb, no one here knows anything but video games and putting cute girly things on a Linux distro.

What is the CHEAPEST camera i can possible buy? No matter if it's a smartphone camera, a normal camera, or anything else

...

...

...

how the fuck McIntosh is related with this shit?
are you retarded?

>let's purposefully take different looking pictures for a comparison compilation-picture
fucking brainlets with cameras

24mm = jew

...

under rated

That would be valid for portrait photography.

PS has a lens correction filter you could use. I believe it can even auto correct for some camera models.

this is why i just switched to the 6s, perfectly fine phone idc, OP is right

Also Adobe teased an app for this specific purpose a couple months ago. Don't remember the name though.

85mm is perfect
>falling for the Big Black Compression meme

>PS has a lens correction filter you could use.
Perspective distortion != lens distortion. It cannot be corrected.

Field of view and as close as possible representation to how human eyes see things.