Thanks Qalupalik, Peter
Obviously I used photos that came out well (and didn’t leave the lens cap on) 
Ted wrote:
but always distinguishable for the real thing
Read the below link with the question: Which looks better? in mind: before you get to the spoiler
https://www.cnet.com/news/iphone-x-and-a-dslr-have-more-in-common-than-we-thought/
That’s a very useful comparison.
Obviously the Iphone-X pics look better than the DSLR pics if you look at the way the faces (skin tones etc) look. Apple have some good software for making faces look good, whereas a DSLR has… exactly none. But a DSLR owner has lots of options for tweaking, and I bet most of those who haul ~1.5kg of metal and lenses will be using Lightroom as a default process…
But it’s not the same market and IMHO we are not seeing a convergence in image quality. What we are seeing is a phone which does a great job for the vast majority of people, who were never interested in carrying even a pocket camera and who take pics mainly for social media. The image is still 12 megapixels and you still need decent light. My Samsung S7 probably manages something very similar (if you use RAW → Lighroom which is nearly all I do with it) and I am sure the new Iphone achieves what I get straight out of the stock camera app, plus it does the adjustable depth of field bit which is nice if shooting close-up pics of people (not all people appreciate that, BTW, especially the slightly more mature ladies 
)
If you want to look for a convergence between a phone and a DSLR then the Huawei P20 Pro is the one to look at. It is impressive. The stock camera app doesn’t do the “Samsung look” which is nice, you get 40MP but with a good (well, for a phone) low light performance, and I bet the RAW images will be quite usable.
I don’t think you need an electron microscope to spot the Iphone foreground object boundary identification problem
It won’t be visible unless one is zooming or cropping, which is fine for the principal target application.
I have a Canon 5d with some wonderful lenses. I had an iPhone 6, played with the Xs and immediately bought it. I don’t really care if it’s the hardware or the software, to be honest: for portraits, the iPhone gives my DSLR a run for its money, even in very low light conditions. It cannot do anything good against longer lenses however (which I find are great for natural light portraits too). But that’s a very specific situation. As far as I’m concerned we’ve reached the tipping point for good.
This picture was taken at night in the private room of a trendy (i.e. with almost no light) restaurant
This was taken from a pressurised aircraft (admittedly in perfect conditions, sunset right after the passage of a storm…
I haven’t downloaded the two pics to analyse them in photoshop but both appear to have areas which are completely washed out
This is not a comment on the content, which in “modern photography” is a different topic The sunset is, of course, spectacular. This is the issue with posting photos. I sometimes read a Pentax forum (my DSLR is the K1 and I do have a couple of nice lenses; a Zeiss Milvus 18mm, and a Pentax 24-70 f2.8) and they have a thread where people post their K1 pics. I reckon almost every single one of them – obviously, not long-lens shots – could have been shot with any phone made in the last few years, suitably photoshopped of course. And all of them have been photoshopped, of course
This one was done in crap light, S7, and you can see it in the blur of the rotating flywheel
Ultimately the best camera is the one you have with you. I went to one of David Pllummer’s evenings the other day:
Cool. Amazing eh.
Peter wrote:
But it’s not the same market and IMHO we are not seeing a convergence in image quality.
Halide have added a ‘smart RAW’ function in their app that compensates and restores ‘original RAW’ quality.
Another feature that gives the DSLR a run for its money is ‘zero shutter lag’
“the iPhone Xs’ camera app is always shooting images — when it’s open, of course. Those images get sent to a buffer then instantly deleted — unless you tap the shutter, in which case they’re saved.” (time)
“Smart HDR combines nine photos taken in succession at different exposures and takes the best parts of each. The clever part is, even though it shoots multiple images, you will never notice any lag or time delay taking your photo.” (link)
From here
I just suck at taking pictures. Never had any interest in photography either. From time to time, I take pictures with my phone. In a shaking aircraft with canopy glare and a phone that is far from ergonomic (and used for SD as well), maybe 1 out of 100 turns out “usable”.
What is the best and easiest way for a non interested person like me to take pictures when flying? A digital camera? handheld or fixed? an action cam? something else?
Any current phone of a few hundred € will do good pics. And if you can install a camera app which produces RAW (usually .dng files) then you can get even more out of the camera it has.
You just need to adjust a few things in the way it is used.
Minimise reflections. Bare legs are a problem (only on a male ) etc so bring a black cloth, preferably in a fleece type material which is not shiny, and spread it over those items.
Clean the windows and shoot through the parts with fewest scratches.
Avoid touching any part of the camera on any airframe parts (vibration, or scratching the window).
Shoot with sun behind you if possible, unless you want “special effects”
Pick good scenery 99% of European flying scenery is boring. As one famous photographer said: “if you want good pics, buy an airline ticket” [travel to scenic places]. Hence most iconic landscape photos were taken in places which are basically inaccessible to most normal people.
Norway should be pretty amazing on a nice day.
For videos, same applies but editing is critical. If the prop is to be shot through then you need a semi pro camcorder with a manual shutter to fully suppress it. The sound track also matters, and the choice of music is always controversial…
I was thinking more in terms of not using my phone. It’s too fiddly one handed, and I use it for other stuff. On the other hand, I have no interest in anything big, bulky either.
In that case your next best option is to buy a “compact camera”.
Due to the smartphone, the market for compacts has been shrinking for many years – discussed around here. Not much R&D is going into this market now. But if you pay a few hundred you get one which in favourable conditions (basically good light) is practically indistinguishable from a DSLR (which is much bigger/heavier).
The main decision is whether it has to fit into a pocket.
For pocket-sized, the Sony RX100 series is a popular choice and has been around for a while. These have a decent optical zoom which is a massive bonus over any mobile phone, for shooting out of a plane.
Today I would require a camera which can produce RAW files, because one can extract much better photos from these, especially in marginal conditions, with photoshop etc.
The lower end of the compact market is mostly crap.
You can also pick up a used Canon S95 or similar on Ebay, and (I have one) this will produce pics matching any current phone.
One final comment to bear in mind: phone pics are processed by the phone to look good on social media (which is where perhaps 99% of phone pics go, if they go anywhere). Samsung does this more strongly than Apple, although the two are narrowing. Better cameras like what I mention above don’t do that, so the photos look less exciting (more natural).
