That very much depends on your definition of "quality." I have found that I produce better images on film, but that is more because of intent rather than quality of materials/equipment. I use digital for fast subjects that I'm just trying to get a look at. I use film when I want to take the time to create a photograph. I'm not saying that this is correct, but it's how my mind works.
That very much depends on your definition of "quality." I have found that I produce better images on film, but that is more because of intent rather than quality of materials/equipment. I use digital for fast subjects that I'm just trying to get a look at. I use film when I want to take the time to create a photograph. I'm not saying that this is correct, but it's how my mind works.
It might be more obvious if one was shooting exact same scene with both. If I use phone to record a scene shot on film, I don't pay attention to the phone one all that much as it is just for record keeping. If I use phone as an actual camera, then it's a different story, and do it partly for convenience, partly because not always do I have camera with me, but phone pretty much so. In the latter case I usually am quite satisfied with what I get, and I know many times I would not be able to get it with a film camera, if for no other reason, for how inconspicuous small phone is.
Now is phone camera same as using a digital camera? Yes to me, not to many.
Depends on how you look at it, the distinction being in the "vs." bit, and how that's being treated. Once it becomes a confrontation, it's a done deal.
Circumstances and desired photographic result and and intended usage determine the equipment selection. Just like which saw gets used to cut wood, or which hammer gets used to drive nails.