<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>ars</author><text>And shutter lag. There is nothing worse than missing every single shot (or having them all blurry) because the shutter took too long.</text><parent_chain><item><author>vanderZwan</author><text>There&amp;#x27;s two things I care about in a digital camera: low light performance, and dynamic range. I don&amp;#x27;t care about how much megapixels you can cram in there - if your lens is pixel-perfect, 6 is enough for most purposes anyway. The only reason I might want to upgrade from my Canon 40D is a drastically improved dynamic range, a compacter size and the ability to shoot movies. So far it&amp;#x27;s all not quite there yet to be worth it, from my point of view.&lt;p&gt;Plus, I&amp;#x27;m having more fun developing my pictures taken with my Nikon FM2 anyway.&lt;p&gt;Ironically, recenty the Nokia approach with supersampling seems to have paid off most regarding low-light and dynamic range performance of phone cameras (especially dynamic range, which this article didn&amp;#x27;t address). I hope the others will catch up.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Smartphones versus DSLRs versus film: A look at how far we&apos;ve come</title><url>http://connect.dpreview.com/post/5533410947/smartphones-versus-dslr-versus-film/</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>higherpurpose</author><text>I doubt super-sampling beats Google&amp;#x27;s HDR+ [1] in either range or &lt;i&gt;speed&lt;/i&gt; (the 1020 takes about &lt;i&gt;4 seconds&lt;/i&gt; per &amp;quot;normal&amp;quot; picture). The 1020 does have much better details and such, but that&amp;#x27;s most likely due to a 4x bigger sensor and higher quality lens.&lt;p&gt;[1] - &lt;a href=&quot;http://googleresearch.blogspot.com/2014/10/hdr-low-light-and-high-dynamic-range.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;googleresearch.blogspot.com&amp;#x2F;2014&amp;#x2F;10&amp;#x2F;hdr-low-light-and...&lt;/a&gt;</text><parent_chain><item><author>vanderZwan</author><text>There&amp;#x27;s two things I care about in a digital camera: low light performance, and dynamic range. I don&amp;#x27;t care about how much megapixels you can cram in there - if your lens is pixel-perfect, 6 is enough for most purposes anyway. The only reason I might want to upgrade from my Canon 40D is a drastically improved dynamic range, a compacter size and the ability to shoot movies. So far it&amp;#x27;s all not quite there yet to be worth it, from my point of view.&lt;p&gt;Plus, I&amp;#x27;m having more fun developing my pictures taken with my Nikon FM2 anyway.&lt;p&gt;Ironically, recenty the Nokia approach with supersampling seems to have paid off most regarding low-light and dynamic range performance of phone cameras (especially dynamic range, which this article didn&amp;#x27;t address). I hope the others will catch up.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Smartphones versus DSLRs versus film: A look at how far we&apos;ve come</title><url>http://connect.dpreview.com/post/5533410947/smartphones-versus-dslr-versus-film/</url></story>