After reading the article I might dust off my DSLR, however the fact that I have my iPhone with me most of the time will never change - so more than 99% of my photos/videos will be captured by that thing.
iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras
261–270 of 519 posts
Re: iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras
#262Earlier quoted context omitted.
100% agree. I went on holiday at the start of this year and took my iPhone 15 Pro with me. I bought a mirrorless camera and went back because I was that disappointed with it. No joke. I regret using a phone for most of my family photos for the last 10-15 years and should have just used my old D3100 instead.
I think the processing is getting worse. I look at photos I took with my Nexus 6P and they look much nicer than my Pixel 7/9Pro photos. At some point everybody decided that the most important thing about photos is preserving as much dynamic range and having no noise. This makes the photos look fake and unpleasant.
Yeah agree with that. I’ve got a backup pixel 7A. That does some horrible things to photos.
Re: iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras
#263To me, the "hotdog skin complexion" aspect is a dead giveaway for when a photo was taken on an iPhone. It's so over the top and unrefined that I wonder how not only Apple let it happen, but seemingly entertain it/make it worse over generations of devices? Certainly such photos won't "age well"? And it's not like it has to be this way because of technological limitations, take Pixel photos, for instance, they get thei…
Same with Pixel, which actually did it years before I'd presume.
I'm white as ghost. Pixels are determined to make me looked tan for absolutely no reason. I mean, maybe I look 'better', arguably, but it's not me. Is that what people want?
I bought the kid some newfangled Polaroid type thing, and she uses that way more than phones anymore for photos. Maybe the kids will be ok.
Re: iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think these are good points. It boils down to: are you interested in photography or do you just want to have photographs? If it's the former, get a camera. If it's the latter, stick with the phone.
I differentiate between photos for memory and records, and Photos for Photography as an art form.
I get what you’re saying, but I was a wedding photographer for ten years and that’s a job where ideally you’re doing both. That carried over to my personal life.
Not that I don’t ever take snapshots - I do - but instead of just taking a picture of your kid from eye level, you can get down on their level and wait until their head is turned so they’re shortlit from light from the window.
Of course, in that job you also quickly learn that the moment trumps everything. A technically awful photo of a great genuine smile or someone falling in the lake or whatever is usually better than an incredibly composed and lit photo of a person just sitting there…usually.
Re: iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras
#265Earlier quoted context omitted.
100% agree. I went on holiday at the start of this year and took my iPhone 15 Pro with me. I bought a mirrorless camera and went back because I was that disappointed with it. No joke. I regret using a phone for most of my family photos for the last 10-15 years and should have just used my old D3100 instead.
It’s really a night a day difference once you spend just a little amount of time learning your camera. I always show people the difference in quality with two photos of my wife and kids during Fourth of July. One shot is with my iphone15, the other with my Fujifilm xt5. It’s such a stark difference
Do you show them on a monitor or large prints or on your phone?
I’ve long thought the main “issue” with people not realizing the difference is that they’re just looking at photos on their phones, where the images are so small it’s harder to appreciate the difference. I rarely try to take photos apart from snapshots with my phone because I’ll invariably be really disappointed when I view them on my monitor.
Re: iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras
#266I see iPhone pictures posted on walls all the time, because most people aren't pretentious. The iPhone photo of the golf players is better than the "photographer" shot in every way that actually matters; the guys are more comfortable and they have natural smiles, whereas the other photo is full of grimaces and frowns. Why that might be is hard to guess, but I'm pretty sure it had something to do with the photographer…
How else to justify spending thousands on a device that can only shoot pictures?
> a 2004 Sony Digicam with a paltry 5.1 MP
thousands rubbles?
Re: iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras
#267> Ever wonder why you never see a smartphone photo printed and framed on the wall?
I stopped reading here. Every photo on the walls in my house came from some smart phone.
Re: iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras
#268This is a great article, thank you for this. I will save it as a reference. I usually get unsolicited advice from people when I use my Fujifilm camera's about how a smartphone would shoot better. Even though I own one of the latest iPhone's, there's no comparison between the two. I don't mind the comments but there's always someone. There's also people with the latest phones who come and brag about their photo qualit…
> Next time someone is coping from Big Tech marketing about the camera on their smartphone, I'll show them this.
I'm not sure anything good will come of showing them this article.
Just say "yeah" and move on.
Re: iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras
#269Earlier quoted context omitted.
The non-iPhone pictures are probably also in-camera jpegs so they are also 'opinionated', not RAWs.
I would go so far as to say: if you're using in-camera JPEGs, you would probably be better off with a cellphone.
That's a very contemptuous thing to say.
Even if one is using in-camera JPEG and does not want to spend 1hr/picture in Darktable, they can still play with many more objectives, exposure, shutter time, physical zoom, aperture, etc.
I'd even go the other way around: if you just bought a camera, just use in-camera JPEGs for the first months and familiarize yourself with all the rest (positioning, framing, understanding your camera settings, etc.) before jumping into digital development.
Re: iPhone 16 cameras vs. traditional digital cameras
#270Why can’t the fisheye distortion be removed with software?
It can, but the result of doing that is not a rectangular picture. You can crop it again, but then you lose a big part of the edges.
Anyone out there feel like making an app that fixes the distortion and then fills in the missing edges of the rectangle with generative ai? I’d sure enjoy using such an app.