Summary
I don’t know about you, but I don’t actually use every camera on my phone. Sure, a telephoto, ultra-wide, and macro sound impressive on paper, but in practice, I almost never switch away from the main camera. So why is it so hard to find a new phone without them?
I Rarely Use the Secondary Cameras on My Phone
While I’ve taken thousands of photos in my life, I’ve never been particularly interested in photography. I simply want to preserve meaningful or memorable moments. Whether it’s a quiet Saturday walk in a local forest or highlights from my wedding.
In most situations, the main camera on my phone is enough to get the job done. It offers the best image quality, so, of course, I prefer using it over secondary lenses like the ultrawide, for instance.
That is one of my main issues with secondary cameras: they often deliver inferior results. Yes, the ultrawide lens helps fit everyone into a group photo, but its drawbacks—inferior colors, worse dynamic range and sharpness, and even worse image processing compared to the main camera—outweigh the benefit of a wider field of view.
This quality gap exists because manufacturers concentrate the camera budget and software optimization efforts on the primary camera. It also helps that it has a much larger sensor that captures more detail, especially in low-light scenarios.
Another lens that I rarely use is the telephoto. It allows for zoomed-in shots of distant subjects, thanks to its longer focal length. However, in practice, unless I’m taking a photo of something I can’t approach, such as a moving car or wildlife, I can just walk closer and use the main camera.
Another common addition in multi-camera setups is the macro lens. My phone actually uses its ultrawide in place of a dedicated macro for macrophotography; it’s a common trick that many manufacturers use. While the resulting images can look decent, I rarely find myself wanting to take extreme close-ups of fabrics, insects, flowers, or random objects. That kind of photography simply doesn’t appeal to me, though I can completely understand why others enjoy it.
Ben Lovejoy / How-To Geek
This general disinterest applies to all secondary cameras on my phone. The only time I use them is when I first buy a new phone. After the initial excitement wears off, I rarely use them again.
In fact, I’ve found that most non-enthusiasts feel the same way. When I asked my parents and wife whether they used the different cameras on their phones, the answer was a unanimous no—unless their phone automatically switches lenses without them realizing.
One Good Camera Can Do It All
A single high-quality camera is a jack of all trades that can outperform multi-camera setups in many everyday scenarios. Its larger sensor captures significantly better photos than an ultrawide lens, so if I want to include more of a scene, I’d rather just take a few steps back.
Even the telephoto zoom can be replicated. If moving closer isn’t an option, I can digitally zoom in with the main camera and, if necessary, useAI upscalingto transform the blurry result into a usable image. While this isn’t perfect, it’s enough for my needs.
In fact, many phones already rely on the main camera for zoom up to 2x or 3x before switching to the telephoto lens. And while the telephoto does offer better clarity at high zoom levels, how often do I actually shoot heavily zoomed-in photos? Personally, almost never.
Beyond replacing the secondary lenses, the main camera excels at handling a range of scenarios, such as landscapes, portraits,night, and even close-ups that resemble those from a macro lens.
Take Google’s Pixel phones, for example. They’re known for their consistently excellent cameras and have been considered the best in the industry for years. Yet, both their flagship model, thePixel 9, and its more budget-friendly counterpart, thePixel 9a, feature just two lenses: a main camera and an ultrawide.
Google Pixel 9a
The latest Pixel has high-end cameras, great battery life, and is the most durable model yet—all for $499.
Pixel’s success shows that quality is more important than quantity when it comes to smartphone cameras, and I’d love to see other Android smartphone manufacturers adopt this strategy.
I Can Always Add a Lens to the Main Camera
If you’re serious about photography, you probably already own a dedicated camera—and if you don’t, it’s something worth considering, since no phone can completely replace one.
For everyone else who just wants to have fun experimenting with different lenses on a budget, a phone with a single great camera and a few clip-on lens accessories could be a more flexible option than relying on the built-in cameras.
Clip-on lenses offer a wide variety of options, such asfisheye,macro and wide angle, andtelephoto. Admittedly, the image quality doesn’t always match that of dedicated built-in cameras, but they’re good enough for casual use.
This approach could help keep smartphone costs down. And unlike built-in lenses, clip-ons stay with you when you upgrade your phone. If I ever changed my mind and decided to try my hand at wildlife photography using a telephoto, I’d much rather buy a clip-on telephoto than pay for a multi-camera setup I might never use on every new phone I buy.
Clip-on lenses aren’t significantly more inconvenient than the built-in ones, as they’re small and easy to carry in a separate pocket or backpack. Plus, having them with you can serve as a physical reminder to actually use them more often.
Multi-Camera Setups Should Be Exclusive to High-End Phones
Since multi-camera setups often add little value, especially onbudget phones, and can divert resources from more important features, it might make more sense to reserve them for “Ultra” models, where the higher cost and expectation can justify their existence.
I mentioned the Pixel 9 and 9a as examples of phones with good two-camera setups, but Google also offers a higher-end version, thePixel 9 Pro, which upgrades the ultrawide’s hardware and adds a telephoto.
This premium model is more expensive, but the higher budget gives the manufacturer room to design and optimize the secondary cameras, bringing their quality closer in quality to the main shooter. That’s the kind of multi-camera setup that actually makes sense.
While we can’t know exactly how much extra we’re paying for these multi-camera setups, it’s safe to assume they’re not free. Personally, I’d rather see that cost go toward a single high-quality camera or even to something else entirely, like a more powerful SoC or better display.
A good example of a phone that misses on both fronts is theMotorola Razr 2025, which has a Mediatek chip instead of theSnapdragon 8 Eliteand two mediocre cameras. I’m not saying it needed to deliver both flagship-level performance and amazing cameras at its $700 price point, but delivering either would’ve been preferable to compromising on both.
Motorola Razr 2025
The Moto Razr 2025 refines the popular foldable clamshell design with key upgrades for enhanced durability and performance. It features a robust titanium-reinforced hinge and an improved IP48 rating for dust and water resistance, making it more resilient for daily use.
Multi-camera setups have become far too common on smartphones, and honestly, most of us would be better off with a single high-quality camera and a lower price tag.
For photographers, there should be a non-ultra flagship or a mid-range phone that truly nails the multi-camera setup, even if it means sacrificing other elements like top-end processing power or high-refresh OLED displays. Think of it as a Pixel 9a, but with more lenses and even bigger focus on photography. Smartphone manufacturers, please make it happen!
