iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review • Hacker News Board

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#211

Post by lern_too_spel » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:27 PM UTC

jankyxenon wrote: post #191

delfinom wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, alot early reviewers have perverse incentive to give good reviews to continue receiving early units and getting that as revenue first.

I think Apple has plenty of incentive not to yank reviewable units from people who've gotten them early in the past, when/if they get a bad review. Taints the whole point of doing reviews.

> Taints the whole point of doing reviews.

It certainly does, which is why you can never trust an early review of an Apple product. https://www.cultofmac.com/255618/how-apples-blacklist-manipu...

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#212

Post by la_barba » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:28 PM UTC

criddell wrote: post #43

jug wrote: post #35

I feel for the compact camera manufacturers. Smartphones killed the 2/3" sensor market. Now they've killed the 1" sensor market too. Micro 4/3 is stale with no major sensor advancements for years now. What's left, APS-C and up?

I feel for all camera manufacturers. Why isn't there a Canon or Nikon or Sony cloud service where photos are sent to? Why haven't the big camera companies embraced computation in their cameras? Do DSLR bodies even have GPS capabilities for tagging photos? It feels like there's no innovation in the camera space outside of Apple and Google.

I haven't seen any innovation from Apple or Google because all they're doing is catching up to DSLRs which are still hundreds of miles ahead in picture quality. For amateur use, the iphone can certainly satisfy, or so can pretty much any camera made within the last 10 years.

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#213

Post by lern_too_spel » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:30 PM UTC

scarface74 wrote: post #163

extesy wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And now if he doesn't write a glorious review then he won't be ever contacted by Apple again in the future. Really hard to trust objectivity of his review in these circumstances.

The review by John Gruber of the Touch Bar based MacBook was critical of the feel of the keyboard - this was before the actual reliability problems came up. He along with everyone else was critical of the first Apple Watch. https://daringfireball.net/linked/2016/05/03/patel-apple-wat... Seeing that he still not only gets review units every year, he gets the prime live interview every year after WWDC with top Apple ex…

Those two bloggers will only criticize Apple products in comparison to other Apple products. They will never say a competitor's product is better even if most other reviewers say so.

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#214

Post by la_barba » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:32 PM UTC

jonlucc wrote: post #4

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.

A newer camera will only help if you were actually limited by the previous camera. If you consider photography to be art, then to an extent the camera is just a tool to express your creativity. Different cameras/tools have different limitations, and certain things are impossible without the right tool - you can't get the oil painting look using watercolor, etc.

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#215

Post by lern_too_spel » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:32 PM UTC

mcphage wrote: post #168

m000 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, it's not an ad. It's an advertorial. Happy now? And he's just beating the strawman with his review. - Did we need a "review" to learn that the new iPhone can shoot better pictures than previous iPhones? - Where are all the full-resolution pictures–especially from the night shots? Everything looks nice and sharp if you scale it to 750x560. Even for the single lens camera of my 3 years-old android. - Would it break…

> Would it break Apple's heart to include a comparison of their "pro camera" with a real professional camera? Even a low-end one. Why would they? That's not who they're competing against.

He doesn't even compare it to non-Apple phone cameras. Only to previous generation Apple cameras. That's one tipoff that the article is a submarine.

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#216

Post by la_barba » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:34 PM UTC

sh-run wrote: post #135

wrboyce wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gruber has the originals on his review: https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/the_iphone_11_and_iphones...

People have always questioned the usefulness of smaller sensor cameras (Ie M43) with the improvement in cellphone cameras, but it looks like I'll still carry my Olympus EM5.2 when I travel. The iPhone 11 gets great social media photos, but I wouldn't want to get any of those printed (at least not larger than 4x6). Of course the best camera is the one you have with you so I am still happy to see the improvements over…

Olympus also makes great weather sealed bodies. My iphone overheated a few times this summer when I was traveling in utah. My dslr just kept ticking along. People who are new to cameras, don't actually know what hidden features real cameras provide...

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#217

Post by pastor_elm » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:35 PM UTC

dpeck wrote: post #186

graeme wrote: post #8

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.

Also, an easy way to 'hire' your kids, pay them, and give them a near tax free income.

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#218

Post by baddox » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:36 PM UTC

mewse-hn wrote: post #41

How could anyone read this without knowing it's an advertisement: "today I’m just as thrilled to be putting an entirely new Ultra Wide lens in my pocket. It gives us another format to tell the story, another perspective to visualize, and a better rounded tool for doing our best creative work."

Well, I'm not sure how to answer the "how," but I was certainly about to read it and not think it's an advertisement. Unless of course by "advertisement" you mean any review written by someone who is experienced with Apple products and has done other paid work for Apple in the past.

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#219

Post by baddox » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:39 PM UTC

s9w wrote: post #129

mewse-hn wrote: post #41

How could anyone read this without knowing it's an advertisement: "today I’m just as thrilled to be putting an entirely new Ultra Wide lens in my pocket. It gives us another format to tell the story, another perspective to visualize, and a better rounded tool for doing our best creative work."

The replies to this observation are hilarious. The "article" is as marketingy as it gets. It's blatantly obvious. But noo, "I don't know what you mean", "you sound mad" haha.

It's very unlikely that this article was written with any direction, payment, or remotely direct incentive from Apple. This is how the author writes, and anyone familiar with the author's work (he has written many iPhone camera reviews) will find this to be not at all unusual.

You can say the language is "marketingy," sure, but it is extremely unlikely that the author is involved in or paid by Apple's marketing or advertising team.

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#220

Post by baddox » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 5:41 PM UTC

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #180

dadarepublic wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The assertion by the original commenter was that this article was an "advertisement" - meaning paid. While the article may well serve as a function of marketing because some pro photographer got a loner from Apple and wrote up a gushing review. I don't believe the word "advertisement" holds water. I think this comment said it best: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21016402

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…

> Promo-for-product is still an ad - sometimes called an advertorial.

Are you suggesting that Apple gave or lent the author products with a contractual obligation that the author write a positive review? I think that is extremely unlikely, and I believe anyone familiar with how Apple works with reviewers/influencers/content producers would agree. I would need to see compelling evidence to change my mind.