Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras

candid9.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 519 posts

Re: iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras

#21

Post by Sayrus »

nixass wrote: post #10

I'm always sad when I pull up holidays photos on my monitor. Even though Pixels make great photos, they're great only on small OLED screens. Gonna clean the dust out of Nikon D3200 with proper lens and use that instead. Casual photos will be made byy wife anyway

On my Pixel, I'm always torn with using GCam or another camera app. GCam photos are definitely better on small screens, but every time you zoom in, you get AI artifacts, letters that shouldn't be here. It basically reconstructs the image from the original and blurrier photo. The other apps without these transformation lead to better quality on zoomed photos but the overall preview looks less good. This is especially true when digital zoom is involved.

Re: iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras

#22

Post by chimeracoder »

joelccr wrote: post #5
PaulHoule wrote: post #2

Shouldn't this be "bad"? BTW, as an independent photog I have been looking for something like this, even thinking about making it myself.

TFA has the title in quotes, as though it is a reply to someone saying it. Must have got lost on submission

Yeah, removing the quotes from the title in the submission (which may have been done automatically or by a mod) completely changes the meaning of the title as read.

Re: iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras

#23

Post by wat10000 »

throwaway314155 wrote: post #6

I honestly can't see much of a difference that couldn't be explained by the photos not being taken simultaneously. I definitely can't tell enough of a difference that I wouldn't put the photo in a frame on the wall (which people almost certainly do, despite the author's assertion that "you never see a smartphone photo printed and framed") Edit: Is this just a good bit of sarcasm/shitpost? If so, it's just a tad too s…

I have smartphone photos on my walls. They look damned good.

Is this person going around asking all of their friends what kind of camera they used to take the photos they have on display? Or are they just sure they can tell from looking?

Re: iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras

#24

Post by markhalonen »

quest88 wrote: post #14

The differences are subtle to me. I see them but it doesn’t prevent me or my family from printing and hanging iPhone photos. I want to hang fun photos from family vacation for the memories.

I was born in 95, so my childhood is well documented by my mothers digicam. When I look back at the photos, it is very obvious they are way better than iPhone photos that many parents are taking today.

Re: iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras

#25

Post by sturza »

Sayrus wrote: post #21
nixass wrote: post #10

I'm always sad when I pull up holidays photos on my monitor. Even though Pixels make great photos, they're great only on small OLED screens. Gonna clean the dust out of Nikon D3200 with proper lens and use that instead. Casual photos will be made byy wife anyway

On my Pixel, I'm always torn with using GCam or another camera app. GCam photos are definitely better on small screens, but every time you zoom in, you get AI artifacts, letters that shouldn't be here. It basically reconstructs the image from the original and blurrier photo. The other apps without these transformation lead to better quality on zoomed photos but the overall preview looks less good. This is especially…

Like this or worse? https://yager.io/comp/comp.html

Re: iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras

#26

Post by _fw »

breadwinner wrote: post #17

Most of the issues noted are because of the wide angle lens of the iPhone. The more expensive iPhones (the Pro models) have 3 lenses one of which can produce photos similar to a traditional camera.

This is exactly it. A lot of the author's comments about skin tone and 'flat' colour are spot on though.

To your point, take six steps back and use the 5x zoom on an iPhone Pro and you'll get a much better effect.

As they say, the best camera is the one you have in your pocket. Physics means it can never replace a large sensor with a large lens...

... But Danny Boyle (28 Days Later, The Beach, Trainspotting, 127 Hours) was quite happy to film 28 Years Later entirely on the iPhone 15 Pro Max [1].

[1] https://www.wired.com/story/28-years-later-danny-boyles-new-...

Re: iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras

#27

Post by datadrivenangel »

breadwinner wrote: post #17

Most of the issues noted are because of the wide angle lens of the iPhone. The more expensive iPhones (the Pro models) have 3 lenses one of which can produce photos similar to a traditional camera.

For mid to long ranges, a dedicated camera with A Big Lens is still the way to go, but for wide angle and landscapes the better iphone cameras are very competitive.

Re: iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras

#28

Post by atonse »

I just started looking at photos and videos we took on vacation. I have an iPhone 16 Pro.

And when I use the Photos app on my Apple TV to review a couple videos I took, I'm surprised at the weird, wavy quality I'm seeing in them. It's really strange.

I will compare this to the videos I took with my Sony a6700. But until then, I'm surprised at how odd the videos looked on a large OLED TV. Might be compression from iCloud or something. Can't quite explain it otherwise.

I have no shortage of friends who asked me why I bothered to buy a real camera, but if you're a hobbyist photographer, it's nice to use a real camera and have full control. There are apps that do let you do this on a smartphone, and it's definitely more convenient.

But there's something about the real photos (with real Bokeh) that still look much better to me.

Re: iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras

#29

Post by aosaigh »

These are some good examples. I'd love more on this.

I returned to amateur photography a few years ago (Fuji XT-4). I previously used a DSLR when I was younger (10+ years ago) but my camera was stolen at some point so I was left with just the phone.

I had started to think phone photography was catching up with amateur photography, as I saw friends getting great results with their phones on Instagram etc.

But I've come to the conclusion that once you start look closely there's absolutely no comparison.

One thing I've started doing is creating custom photo books from all my photos. It's really helped me focus my photography. When doing this though I've noticed how edited phone photos are, as well as how poor the quality actually is (particularly in low light).

The quality issue is understandable (it's physics). The editing issue is a bit more insidious I think.

All in all, if you just want to view phone photos on your phone, they look great. But if you're actually interested in photography and printing, you should get a dedicated camera.

Re: iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras

#30

Post by tylermw »

breadwinner wrote: post #17

Most of the issues noted are because of the wide angle lens of the iPhone. The more expensive iPhones (the Pro models) have 3 lenses one of which can produce photos similar to a traditional camera.

Yes, the distortion noted in the article is also seen in wide angle lenses on traditional cameras.
Post reply on HN