Cheap Camera Challenge
So you want nicer images of squirrels than you can get from a phone?...
For me, the main reason to choose a dedicated camera over the one in your phone is 'subject isolation'. This is how much your subject stands out from the background due to shallow "depth of field" (DoF). Shallow DoF is a subjective effect, but if you like it and want to get more than your phone; Here are some camera setups that I would choose on a modest budget (in 2023). Since phone camera's sensors and lenses are tiny, they will not be able to do this optically and thus thy need to fake it, which mostly horrible (in my opinion). For real cameras; Choosing the largest sensor and lens entrance pupil* as possible will give you the greatest subject isolation. Full frame sensors are ideal for this (larger won't help due to slower lenses), but they will occupy the higher price tiers. The budgets for this article are:
-
All budgets include camera and lens
-
Prices are average second hand values
-
Prices in Euros (similar to £ GBP, or $ USD)
-
Phone comparisons shown at the end
-
See Notes concerning subject isolation
€100 : APS-C DSLR
Choosing Nikon's first ever small purpose build DSLR, allowed me to budget for an auto focus 50mm prime lens. This lens works out as a 75mm f/2.1 equivalent (field of view and depth of field) on this 21 year old, 6mp APS-C CCD sensor.
Nikon D100 - (€2000 in 2002) €25~
Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 AF-D - (2002) €75~
6mp APS-C | 50mm | f/1.8 | 1/320 | iso 400
I thought this was surprisingly usable today considering its age and speififcation, but you be the judge. This is a surprisingly nice camera to use today. It feels a bit flimsy compared to the newer D200, but it's still pretty tough, has a comfy grip and nice controls. You have to get quite close with the lens to get good subject isolation, but that's true for framing squirrels well anyway. Although an 85mm lens will give more effect and a better shooting distance you'll need to step up to the next budget tier for that...
Alternatives
Pushing your budget up a little to get a newer camera body will make a big difference here. Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Sony, Sigma and Fujifilm have a lot of capable DSLR models from 2004 to 2012. The newer the model the better the image quality will be (mostly). Also look out for features like a tilting rear screen, which could be great for classic lenses when used with live-view. Canon DSLRs can adapt to more mounts than others (Olympus OM, Nikon F, Pentax PK, M42, T2), although interestingly they cannot adapt to their own old FD mount (the one they used before switching to EF mount).
€200 : APS-C Mirrorless
Like the €100 DSLR, this small n light Sony mirrorless camera also uses an APS-C sized sensor. The 'N' variant improved the original NEX 5's resolution, dynamic range and noise performance while not costing much more today.
Sony NEX 5N - (€700 in 2011) €75~
Konica 85mm f/1.8 - (1970) €125~
16mp APS-C | 85mm | f/1.8 | 1/125 | iso 3200
The camera controls and menus are not as friendly as you'll find on a DSLR, but it has good image quality, a mount with tons of options and a very useful flip screen with touch controls. Using any old manual focus SLR lenses is cheap to adapt and relatively easy to focus. If you want something super small and light while providing Auto Focus the Samyang 75mm f/1.8 is a great option. Although it will cost a little more it also works on the full frame Sony's so offers a nice upgrade path too.
Alternatives
Other good mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras are the Samsung's NX and Canon's EOS M line. None of them are old enough to have terrible image quality. Autofous will likely be poor, but when adapting old manual vintage lenses it'll make no difference. Although classic lenses are quite popular at the moment and some of the prices are quite high there should still be some bargains to be had. The above camera and lens combo cost me only €120 for example, only slightly more than the 10 year older DSLR setup.
€400 : Full Frame DSLR
Nikon's first full frame sensor was first seen in the professional D3, but a year later was also used in the D700. Fifteen years on, we are still seeing 12 megapixel sensors used in new cameras (Sony FX3, ZV-E1, A7SIII).
Nikon D700 - (€2600 in 2008) €250~
Nikon 85mm f/1.8 - (1987) €150~
12mp FF | 85mm | f/1.8 | 1/125 | iso 1600
This one had phenominal noise perfomance for the time and it even holds up pretty well today. Paired with the earlier f/1.8 portrait lens can keep this combo down to a very reaonable level. These cameras are a bit on the bulky side compared to mirrorless, but they have great ergonomics, controls and battery life.
Alternatives
The original Canon 5D sensor (2005) is rather noisy by today's standards, but if you get a bargain on the body to afford a better lens it could be a nice option. The 5D mkII can be gotten for similar money to the D700 and also shoots decent video. Another nice benefit of the Canon EF mount is its short flange distance allows for far greater flexibility with adapting vintage lenses. Nikon F, Olympus OM, Pentax PK, T2 and M42 can all work in manual focus with relatively cheap adaptors. The Nikon D600 will cost a little more than the D700, but its 24mp sensor is a lot newer and better so probably represents some of the best value for full frame. Other manufacturer's full frame options are harder find a this price point unfortunately. The Pentax is too new. You might be lucky and find one of the Sony DSLRs (A800, A900), but this is mostly a Canon / Nikon game.
€500 : Full Frame Mirrorless
The Sony A7 was the first full frame mirrorless camera with an interchangeable lens mount in 2013. Its 24mp sensor was extremely good for the time and is still competative today. Its relatively low price, small size, light weight and most easily adaptable lens mount made it very popular.
Sony A7 - (€1300 in 2013) €375~
Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 - (1969) €125~
24mp FF | 85mm | f/1.8 | 1/100 | iso 1600
The Sony A7's price hasn't dropped much over its decade of service and that is mostly a testament to it's image quality. I chose a different classic 85mm lens here compared to the NEX 5 (above), but they are both great. The Konica's relaitive rarity keeps the price high at the moment, if you can't find it for a good price this Nikkor is a fine alternative, but there are lots of options here.
Alternatives
This one is tricky. There aren't any other full frame mirrorless cameras around this price. Sony were so many years ahead of the competition. The Canon EOS R is probably the next from another manufacturer, but that is much newer and will set you back more than twice as much as the A7. The Sony A7II will be the next best option. It only costs a little more than the original, although the image quality, autofocus and battery life are pretty much identical too. It does have a slightly better grip and adds image stabilization, so has some improvements, but I would still mostly recommend it for adapting old manual focus lenses.
NOTES: Isolation
As with all photography; Lenses are everything! and there are three main elements that dictate how much subject isolation you can acheive from them.
-
Entrance Pupil; This describes how large your aperture appears when viewed through the front elements of the lens. This is how much light is coming into the camera (how much hits the sensor is the t-stop, rather than f-stop). You can work out this size by dividing the focal length by the f-stop (for example 50mm f/1.2 = 42mm). I will add a chart that includes some common lenses so you can see which are better at a glance.
-
Sensor Size; Although not strictly part of the lens, what the light is projected on to will effect the depth of field you can achieve... Using the same lens, larger sensors will mean you get closer to your subject to frame it the same. Equally, smaller sensors require you to be further away. It's this distance element (in relation to the entrance pupil) that controls the depth of field and not the sensor size itself. Since larger than full frame sensor cameras are stuck with lenses that have smaller entrance pupils, they don't provide an advantage here and thus are not recommended. We don't even need to discuss how huge, heavy and expensive they are (which also disqualifies them from this article).
-
Distances; As mentioned above; The closer you are to your subject (focus distance) the more you will isolate it from the background. However, this is also relative to the distance your subject is from the background. If your subject is against a wall there will be no isolation effect. So: Get as close to your subject as you can while leaving as much room behind it as possible.
Really long lenses can be much bigger here (300mm f/2.8), but they are massive, heavy and expensive so not for this article...
FL / f-stop / [Entrance Pupil]]
-
iPhone 15 Pro
-
50mm
-
85mm
-
100mm
-
50mm
-
50mm
-
105mm
-
75mm
-
85mm
-
85mm
-
135mm
-
50mm
-
100mm
-
50mm
-
135mm
-
75mm
-
85mm
-
135mm
-
200mm
-
85mm
-
100mm
-
135mm
-
105mm
f/1.8
f/2.8
f/2.8
f/1.4
f/1.2
f/2.5
f/1.8
f/2.0
f/1.8
f/2.8
f/1.0
f/2.0
f/0.95
f/2.5
f/1.25
f/1.4
f/2.0
f/2.8
f/1.2
f/1.4
f/1.8
f/1.4
[<4]
[28]
[30]
[35]
[36]
[42]
[42]
[42]
[43]
[47]
[48]
[50]
[50]
[53]
[54]
[60]
[61]
[68]
[71]
[71]
[72]
[75]
[75]
Phone vs Camera
To demonstrate why a dedicated camera gets nicer subject isolation than a phone let's look at what causes the effect. As mentioned above; It's Primarily driven by the size of the entrance pupil. More light coming into the lens allows it to bend around your subject. Being projected to a larger sensor (larger image circle) allows you to get closer to your subject with the same framing and this amplifies the effect from the entrance pupil. Wider focal lengths help you frame your subject, but they tend to have smaller entrance pupils, so longer focal lengths will be needed. This is where the main tradeoff happens due to usability, size, weight and cost.
As you can see a phone is limited by every element that allows good subject isolation due to its size. The best we can hope for is that one day they might be able to fake it really well. That would take very high resolution sensors that can capture hyper accurate depth information for every single pixel That's a lot to ask, but I guess it could happen. For now we will be stuck with some pretty lackluster fake results like the phone samples you see below...
Asus Zenphone 9 (July 2022)
Sensor size: 1/1.56" (8.2x5.1mm)
Entrance pupil size: 2.9mm
Lens (actual): 5.46mm f/1.9
Lens (equivalent): 24mm f/8.4
This is a very common hardware combo which doesn't provide very much subject isolation, even for a phone. Its modest size sensor combined with a small entrance pupil and a wide lens is unfortunately a perfect storm of mediocrity. Most frustrating is the auto focus, which refuses to focus on squirrels 80% of th time (even if you click on them or if they're filling the frame).
The portrait mode (fake blur) is so unreliable I wouldn't recommend touching the function to avoid frustration and missed opportunities. It cannot mask subjects properly, produce much blur or a pretty rendering.
ZTE Axon 40 Ultra (May 2022)
Sensor size: 1/1.7" (7.4x5.6mm)
Entrance pupil size: 4.6mm
Lens (actual): 6.5mm f/1.9
Lens (equivalent): 35mm f/6.5
This is an unusually long focal length for a standard camera lens. It's what you get on the popular Fuji X100, which many people (including me) love for general photography. This is about the best optical subject isolation you can get from a phone at the moment. As impressive as this is, it's only one tenth the 'width' of the blur you can get from a real 85mm f/1.8 lens (see examples above).
The portrait mode (fake blur) is interesting here. The masking is not bad at all, although of ourse it cannot handle the intricate detail of hair/fur. The amount of blur is not very high and the quality of blur is especially disappointing, which is a shame as this is one of the better portrait modes I have seen due to its mask. The fake blur seemingly simulates a range between f/3.5 - 6.5, although the stated range is a impossibly laughable f/1.0 - f/16.
iPhone 15 Pro (Sept 2023)
Sensor size: 1/1.28" (9.8x7.3mm)
Entrance pupil size: 3.6mm
Lens (actual): 6.53mm f/1.78
Lens (equivalent): 24mm f/6.5
Although this is a nicely large sensor, the field of view is unfortunately rather wide to get much subject isolation here. The 77mm equivalent tele lens is capable of focusing close enough to shoot squirrels, which the ZTE could not do.
The portrait mode (fake blur) required actually selecting the mode, it did not auto detect squirrels like it does with humans and pets. Being able to control the amount of depth and focus point in post was really nice (which I'm told the Samsung phones do as well). The amount and quality of blur was really nice here, but there were times when the bokeh was bigger at f/4.5 than f/1.4, so it's a little buggy. The mask a focus transition were quite well done, but still not when it comes to hair/fur.