I heard on another board that the Lumia Pureview can easily compete with the most serious Point & Shoots in the $5-600 range.
My interest is different. Let's take a decent recent Point & Shoot for around $100. How about the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH10 and Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH5? (Can be another brand but just like the Panasonics for this example).
Rough specs include:
- 28 mm wide lens (similar on a phone). We can forget about the optical zoom to be on the same level as a phone.
- Now mainstream CCD sensor (might compete with the cheaper CMOS) sensors on today's phones?
- Aperture starts from 2.8-3.2. (On a phone you can get brighter lenses: from around 2.0-2.4 aperture.)
- ISO up to 6400(? What do you get on a phone?)
- 14-16 megapixels. (Do megapixels today still matter? I dont know.)
This topic is not intended for debate or speculation, nor a shopping guide but rather to have an answer based on facts, namely: in today's technology for what price and with what specs can the phone industry produces camera phones which are comparable to the performance of today's $100 Point & Shoots, technically speaking? (Hint: you can wait for tomorrow's Mobile World Congress for your answers.)
Edit: it's interesting to see the comment by papillon_65 here: Confessions of a camera snob. No permalink so I quote: By papillon_65 (1 day ago) I can tell you for sure that I can take photo's with my Nokia 808, and with 2 mins processing you would be swearing they were taken with a DSLR, in fact it will beat plenty of DSLR/lens combinations in terms of resolution.
Dpollitt down the road answered me that the iPhone 5, a $650 phone might be of similar quality than a $100 point and shoot if I understood him correctly. But for the same $650 you can get the Nokia Pureview 808 which, according to many competes even with DSLRs. But in this topic I'm looking for a cheaper camera phone option which only competes with the $100 point and shoots, so if you can get DSLR quality for $650, you might get the $100 P&S quality for much cheaper in a phone.