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

iPhone 14 Pro Camera Review: Scotland

austinmann.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 229 posts

Re: iPhone 14 Pro Camera Review: Scotland

#11

Post by seanp2k2 »

yodsanklai wrote: post #7

I wonder if it's because I'm getting old and jaded, but I really fail to get excited by this continuous flow of new devices (and "stuff" in general). I could get a new iPhone from my company, but I don't even see the point.

As a ~normal person who uses their phone at least 4 hours per day, it's the single most important tech device in my life. I enjoy getting the best thing out there every upgrade cycle (2 years). The progress feels incremental, but going back and using an n-1 gen phone reminds me how much slower things were. All of those extra half-second waits between interactions add up, and I enjoy having a quality camera with me wherever I go. There are also things like phone speaker quality that while hard to objectively measure and promote, have really improved over the years to the point where I don't hate doing things like watching educational or fun YouTube videos in bed in the morning.

Re: iPhone 14 Pro Camera Review: Scotland

#12

Post by modernpink »

yodsanklai wrote: post #7

I wonder if it's because I'm getting old and jaded, but I really fail to get excited by this continuous flow of new devices (and "stuff" in general). I could get a new iPhone from my company, but I don't even see the point.

No post body was provided.

Re: iPhone 14 Pro Camera Review: Scotland

#13

Post by gpt5 »

supernova87a wrote: post #8

I would appreciate if articles reviewing cameras did a better job of explaining why the pixel count is just a single (and highly manipulable) measure of imaging merit. For all the pixel count, no company ever talks about pixel size (physical) and the noise characteristic as a result or the effective resolution. The imaging chip has not gotten physically larger between iPhones, I assume, so the pixels are just dividin…

I'm not sure you are right here. The sensor size (and the lens speed) has been one of the key things Apple marketing has been leaning towards in the last few generations. Tech reviewers tend to repeat it back to their audience, which eventually lead to general consensus of Apple's camera system being superior.

Re: iPhone 14 Pro Camera Review: Scotland

#14

Post by gordon_freeman »

n8cpdx wrote: post #9
yodsanklai wrote: post #7

I wonder if it's because I'm getting old and jaded, but I really fail to get excited by this continuous flow of new devices (and "stuff" in general). I could get a new iPhone from my company, but I don't even see the point.

Coming from a still enthusiastic tech person who loves iPhone, I don’t think it’s a you problem. This is clearly another S revision in all but name, for the second year in a row. I want to be excited but there’s nothing particularly compelling unless you’re coming from pre-2020 (or maybe pre-2019). I’m still loving my 12 mini and will probably use it for at least another year, maybe two. Compelling upgrades would be:…

I have iPhone 11 and I still don't think it is worth upgrading to 14 or 14Pro yet. I consider myself tech savvy person but I don't see a point to buy a new phone if my current phone takes good enough pics for myself and my family and friends to enjoy. Also if the speed of browsing web and opening and using apps is still good enough then what's the point of buying a new phone and polluting environment? As I see it, the latest iPhones are capable of at least 5 years of use and only may need to do is replace the battery once in that life span and I am happy with this approach.

Re: iPhone 14 Pro Camera Review: Scotland

#15

Post by iLoveOncall »

supernova87a wrote: post #8

I would appreciate if articles reviewing cameras did a better job of explaining why the pixel count is just a single (and highly manipulable) measure of imaging merit. For all the pixel count, no company ever talks about pixel size (physical) and the noise characteristic as a result or the effective resolution. The imaging chip has not gotten physically larger between iPhones, I assume, so the pixels are just dividin…

The article is very explicitly aimed at photographers, it's on a photographer's website, it's a review about only the camera, the conclusion is titled "buying advice for photographers", etc.

If he was to explain what determines image quality, why not also demand that he explains aperture, focal length, etc.? It's just not aimed at that public.

Re: iPhone 14 Pro Camera Review: Scotland

#16

Post by dividedbyzero »

saurik wrote: post #4
iLoveOncall wrote: post #2

Quite impressive when they shot at 48MP, but the pictures taken at 12MP just look like your bad, few generations old, non-pro iPhone photo. As a very amateur photograph that doesn't want to carry his DSLR all the time I considered getting it for the 48MP but after reading the review and seeing what would be most of the pictures I would take (the 12MP ones), it's a hard pass.

Yeah... I love my iPhone XS Max, partly because it has 2x telephoto--not 2.5x, not 3x or 4x of all the ridiculous things: just a good 2x--and I essentially use that 2x telephoto lens every chance I can. They finally have come up with an iPhone that has brought back 2x telephoto... but as a digital simulation from 1x and thereby only at 12MP, and so it isn't fundamentally different than my existing phone :/. (I do app…

What's wrong with the 3x ones on the 13 and 14 Pros?

Re: iPhone 14 Pro Camera Review: Scotland

#17

Post by r00fus »

yodsanklai wrote: post #7

I wonder if it's because I'm getting old and jaded, but I really fail to get excited by this continuous flow of new devices (and "stuff" in general). I could get a new iPhone from my company, but I don't even see the point.

My family is excited for it simply because of the hand-me-down supply chain - someone gets a new phone, someone else a few hops down gets a gently used iPhone X and we donate/sell a still functional iPhone6s.

Re: iPhone 14 Pro Camera Review: Scotland

#18

Post by mensetmanusman »

modernpink wrote: post #12
yodsanklai wrote: post #7

I wonder if it's because I'm getting old and jaded, but I really fail to get excited by this continuous flow of new devices (and "stuff" in general). I could get a new iPhone from my company, but I don't even see the point.

Quoted post unavailable.

Maybe he is here to be curious about why other people get excited…

I know I am excited for when stable diffusion/DALLE level manipulation is built into the photo app and iMovie to compile cinema level clips while I sleep.

Re: iPhone 14 Pro Camera Review: Scotland

#19

Post by orbital-decay »

gpt5 wrote: post #13
supernova87a wrote: post #8

I would appreciate if articles reviewing cameras did a better job of explaining why the pixel count is just a single (and highly manipulable) measure of imaging merit. For all the pixel count, no company ever talks about pixel size (physical) and the noise characteristic as a result or the effective resolution. The imaging chip has not gotten physically larger between iPhones, I assume, so the pixels are just dividin…

I'm not sure you are right here. The sensor size (and the lens speed) has been one of the key things Apple marketing has been leaning towards in the last few generations. Tech reviewers tend to repeat it back to their audience, which eventually lead to general consensus of Apple's camera system being superior.

Sensor size in smartphones is also "highly manipulable", because the smartphones are very flat and have serious angle of incidence issues as the lens is too close to the sensor. If consumers demand larger sensors, sure it can be done - but it will reduce the amount of light that reaches the edges of the sensor, eating the possible increase in image quality. Smartphone cameras are limited by thickness, not by sensor sizes.

Re: iPhone 14 Pro Camera Review: Scotland

#20

Post by MBCook »

saurik wrote: post #4
iLoveOncall wrote: post #2

Quite impressive when they shot at 48MP, but the pictures taken at 12MP just look like your bad, few generations old, non-pro iPhone photo. As a very amateur photograph that doesn't want to carry his DSLR all the time I considered getting it for the 48MP but after reading the review and seeing what would be most of the pictures I would take (the 12MP ones), it's a hard pass.

Yeah... I love my iPhone XS Max, partly because it has 2x telephoto--not 2.5x, not 3x or 4x of all the ridiculous things: just a good 2x--and I essentially use that 2x telephoto lens every chance I can. They finally have come up with an iPhone that has brought back 2x telephoto... but as a digital simulation from 1x and thereby only at 12MP, and so it isn't fundamentally different than my existing phone :/. (I do app…

But the sensor the 2x crop is taken from is better than the old real 2x camera. So it should still be better.
Post reply on HN