201–210 of 294 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
John Gruber and Matthew Panzerino have good reviews in this respect. Very regular shots. Panzerino does year on year comparisons at Disneyland with his family. https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/the_iphone_11_and_iphones... https://techcrunch.com/2019/09/17/iphone-11-pro-disney-after...
that's a nice grift to have a recurring tax deductible Disney trip for the family each year.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Stockholm Syndrome? But yes, it's good that you were able to see it. I find marketing unethical, most people don't even realize that they are being advertised to.
> I find marketing unethical That’s a strange view. Taken to an extreme, that would be a restaurant without an exterior sign, menus, or even a waiter explaining the food. You would literally know nothing about any product or service without marketing. Marketing is the act of “bringing a product to market.” Marketing isn’t advertising. A farmer displaying tomatoes on a table at a farmers market is marketing. A farmer…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So I want to throw out something quickly - just because someone claims a photo has been shot on an iPhone doesn't mean that they shot it in the same way as you or I would. Lots of people have special lenses that they attach in front of the iPhone camera lens to get a macro / wide angle view. They almost always shoot RAW with an app that supports this. They also use a mini tripod to stabilize the photo and use techniq…
> people have special lenses that they attach in front of the iPhone camera lens to get a macro / wide angle view To be fair, one of the things highlighted in this review is that the new iPhone has this functionality built in. Everyone (with this phone) has a wide angle view now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The key elements to these photos basically come down to dramatic lighting(dawn/dusk), leading lines(look at the bridge and waterway shots, your eyes are guided to the mountains and the horizon), and the rule of thirds(dividing your image up into quadrants, and keeping important subjects at their intersections). Basic stuff, but as always requires LOTS of practice and experimentation.
I recently got back home from a trip to Alaska. While I hauled a couple of SLR cameras, bag of lenses, and tripod, around with me, I also took a bunch of pictures with my iPhone XS. The iPhone pictures were pretty impressive, but for exactly the reason you suggest... being at some impressive-looking places at a good time. The iPhone is certainly a decent point-and-shoot camera.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ads don't have to be paid. Promo-for-product is still an ad - sometimes called an advertorial. It's unprofessional at best and dishonest at worst to pretend that this isn't just corporate PR. And ironically, the image quality really isn't all that amazing. It's +/- other phone cams - better in some conditions, not as good in others. And in absolute terms, these photos are nowhere close to the sharpness, dynamic range…
PR and advertising are not the same thing. Seeding review units to product reviewers is part of effective PR for consumer electronics. It isn't advertising, though. Standard practice (at least among Apple reviewers) is for the devices to be returned after some period of time.
A distinction without substance.
The photography in these kinds of reviews is amazing, and the camera looks pretty stellar compared to the XS, but I find myself reading them wondering if it will make my pictures any better. I'm a mediocre photographer at best, and I'm certainly not going to be able to capture many images like the ones in this review.
So I want to throw out something quickly - just because someone claims a photo has been shot on an iPhone doesn't mean that they shot it in the same way as you or I would. Lots of people have special lenses that they attach in front of the iPhone camera lens to get a macro / wide angle view. They almost always shoot RAW with an app that supports this. They also use a mini tripod to stabilize the photo and use techniq…
The pictures do look good, the colors are nice and the small image on the page is nice. But I haven't seen any 100% crops or full images. it's there that you'll see that the image is worse than a DSLR or another camera with a big lens and sensor. I can get nice pictures (= vibrant and nice colors) with any camera, what I can't get is a sharp image, with sharp edges. I went to a trip with my Android Phone and DSLR, an…
Most people don't zoom in on their photos. They look at them on their phones, full screen on their computers, or at best on a TV (1080p or maybe 4K, but sitting far away). This is what manufacturers optimize for. Getting great pictures for the 95%. Who cares if the hairs on the dog are blurry when you zoom in so much you can't see the rest of the picture? Well, Pros who might want to crop the photo later. And for the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
PR and advertising are not the same thing. Seeding review units to product reviewers is part of effective PR for consumer electronics. It isn't advertising, though. Standard practice (at least among Apple reviewers) is for the devices to be returned after some period of time.
> "PR and advertising are not the same thing." A distinction without substance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suggest you pick up an LG G3 and test it's capabilities out. It's not like HDR is some new invention that just came about in the smart phone space. It's been around forever. Yes, some of the algorithms have gotten better, and the HDR tonemapping has been improved, but I've taken thousands of HDR images with my G3 many years ago that looked great. Case in point - https://photos.app.goo.gl/RMMcJe9X6XjaEqcw7 > As to p…
I didn't say the G3 couldn't take good pictures. However saying "my G3 once took a good picture, therefore it's equivalent to this" isn't reasonable. Those are difficult scenes and unless you have a G3 to take a picture in the same lighting and conditions, your claim is baseless. Taking even current, top of the line smartphones and taking photos in perfectly equal conditions often yields significant differences in ou…
Talk about moving goalposts. What a bunch of baloney. Apparently now you can't argue any point without replicating exactly those specific images in the article. It isn't worth continuing a discussion since you don't have much constructive to add. I actually showed you a great example of a challenging HDR image snapped by a G3, which is more "proof" than anything you've provided so far.
Like I said in my original post, the iPhone 11 makes a great improvement in general. I pointed out that a lot of the excitement that the OP has about the wide-angle lens at the top of the article is justified in that wide-angle on smart phones is a lot of fun from a photography perspective (I've been able to enjoy it for several years already). But it has less to do with the wide-angle shots being miles superior than what has already been out there. No reason to take those observations so personally.
What I'd like to see is a direct comparison of an Xs running neuralcam and the 11 night mode. I've taken a couple of photos so far and the app has done wonders. https://imgur.com/a/BwvW6J8
Nice one, I’ve been looking for an app like that. The new iPhone does seem like it has a great camera but I wish Apple would bring “night mode” for all the other iPhones.