IPhone Killed The Camera Star

This statement, and the frequency it appears, bugs me. To some extent it's a bit of tautology (a camera you've got with you is going to get a better photo than one you don't have with you - you don't say).

But whenever it's used, it's almost always in a context that seems to suggest "there's little advantage in having a different camera with you, as you've already got one in your phone". And depending on what type of photos you're trying to take, that's simply not true. I love my iPhone camera, and I take tonnes of (in my view) perfectly adequate photos on it. But that's not really impacted on when/how I use my DSLR.

If you're after a reasonable snapshot of a famous building, or of your mates down the pub, then sure your iPhone camera is going to do the job fine. But you never needed a DSLR to take those types of photo either. Digital compacts, and before them film-based compacts, have been more than adequate for the vast majority of those kinds of photos for a very long time.

The SLR, and cameras like the OM-D, can be used for those shots obviously. But the real reason for them is to get more control - in terms of aperture/shutter speed, choice of lens etc - or to get access to things like higher quality lenses. And particularly in the control area, smartphone cameras simply can't compete. I've lost count of the amount of times I've been out somewhere and seen something that I've thought would make a fabulous photo with my SLR, but becomes utterly uninteresting as an iPhone shot. I can't frame it properly (at least without doing a quality-sapping digital zoom), or I can't control the dof, or whatever. If you're trying to do decent arty shots, it's usually pretty much down to luck as to whether your smartphone is going to help you take them.

tl;dr - the people stopping using their DSLRs because they now have an iPhone should probably have bought a cheap compact instead of their DSLR in the first place.