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

iPhone 14 Pro camera review: A small step, a huge leap

lux.camera

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 340 posts

Re: iPhone 14 Pro camera review: A small step, a huge leap

#101

Post by emkoemko »

criddell wrote: post #87
formerly_proven wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The computational photography for those is done on a computer.

A phone can do on-camera stuff or capture RAW and let you mess with it on your computer. Are there any big sensor cameras that give you those same options? I’m not aware of any and it baffles me that the camera companies feel so little need to innovate. I kind of wish Apple would do a dedicated big-sensor camera. Also, are you saying you could reproduce any of the on-phone stuff easily on your computer? I’m thinking…

innovate what? what pro needs in camera processing? when you can process on a computer that is way more powerful and better UX for processing a large number of images?

Re: iPhone 14 Pro camera review: A small step, a huge leap

#102

Post by emkoemko »

nop_slide wrote: post #90
nicolashahn wrote: post #13

These pictures are fantastic. For anyone but professionals the reasons to buy a DSLR or mirrorless are virtually gone.

I disagree and as a n00b/amateur I recently picked up my first "real" camera, a Fujifilm x-t20. I've managed to take some amazing photos that simply wouldn't have turned out as good on my iPhone 12. I was sick of the smudgy look that happened often on the iPhone when the lighting wasn't perfect, and also there is a unique "look" that the Fuji mirrorless cameras spit out due to their x-trans sensor[1]. In my short 2 w…

that smudgy, painting look on phones is the phone trying to remove noise in the image

Re: iPhone 14 Pro camera review: A small step, a huge leap

#103

Post by jsmith99 »

sys32768 wrote: post #47

I am still not understanding why my iPhone 13 landscape photos look as good as those from my $900 Nikkor Z 24mm f/1.8 S prime lens with its superior optics on a $2k DSLR body. If the reason is fancy post-processing, then why can't Nikon have a tiny lens like the iPhone 13 and just add fancy post-processing to it?

The Nikon photos will be under sharpened because it's so easy to apply sharpening in post, and the amount of sharpening is very dependent on the size and format of your desired output. Also, in ideal conditions (medium sized, evenly and brightly lit, static subject a moderate distance away) practically all cameras will give good results: try comparing in less ideal circumstances like a darkish area indoors.

Re: iPhone 14 Pro camera review: A small step, a huge leap

#104

Post by dylan604 »

majormajor wrote: post #75
sys32768 wrote: post #47

I am still not understanding why my iPhone 13 landscape photos look as good as those from my $900 Nikkor Z 24mm f/1.8 S prime lens with its superior optics on a $2k DSLR body. If the reason is fancy post-processing, then why can't Nikon have a tiny lens like the iPhone 13 and just add fancy post-processing to it?

Mine don't (iPhone 13 Pro Max, Fuji XT-2 and various lenses). They do in daylight, sure, but things like sunrise/sunset or unusual colors throw them off like crazy. Textures can also throw them off - "amplification" of the texture effect, almost. They also suffer a bit zoomed in. The post-processing fixes a lot of problems of older phone cameras but it has its limits. On good camera hardware there's very little that…

I hate when you get one of those amazing sunsets where the whole sky changes color, but the phone auto-correct removes/corrects the color tone.

Re: iPhone 14 Pro camera review: A small step, a huge leap

#105

Post by packetlost »

sys32768 wrote: post #47

I am still not understanding why my iPhone 13 landscape photos look as good as those from my $900 Nikkor Z 24mm f/1.8 S prime lens with its superior optics on a $2k DSLR body. If the reason is fancy post-processing, then why can't Nikon have a tiny lens like the iPhone 13 and just add fancy post-processing to it?

Try zooming in, even a little bit. You'll notice squiggly oversharpening artifacts pretty quickly. Yes they probably look fine on a phone screen, but blow them up at all and they start to show their weaknesses

Re: iPhone 14 Pro camera review: A small step, a huge leap

#106

Post by FireBeyond »

adrr wrote: post #74
sys32768 wrote: post #47

I am still not understanding why my iPhone 13 landscape photos look as good as those from my $900 Nikkor Z 24mm f/1.8 S prime lens with its superior optics on a $2k DSLR body. If the reason is fancy post-processing, then why can't Nikon have a tiny lens like the iPhone 13 and just add fancy post-processing to it?

Never got why camera manufactures never followed the phones. Like Live photo,and automatic hdr. Can we get rid of the shutter?

> Can we get rid of the shutter?

That's a challenge, I think. Take an R5 (only because I'm most familiar with it).

47 megapixels, 12 bpp 211.5MB, maximum shutter speed of 1/8000. In other words, you need to be able to pull data off the sensor (and to be clear, there's parallelization available, I just don't know what) at a global rate of 1.6TB/s.

Re: iPhone 14 Pro camera review: A small step, a huge leap

#108

Post by ghaff »

sys32768 wrote: post #77
majormajor wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mine don't (iPhone 13 Pro Max, Fuji XT-2 and various lenses). They do in daylight, sure, but things like sunrise/sunset or unusual colors throw them off like crazy. Textures can also throw them off - "amplification" of the texture effect, almost. They also suffer a bit zoomed in. The post-processing fixes a lot of problems of older phone cameras but it has its limits. On good camera hardware there's very little that…

This is true. I should have added "in good light". The DSLR images also retain much more detail in cropping.

And even moderate optical telephoto lenses are pretty powerful tools as well—especially in poorer light.

Re: iPhone 14 Pro camera review: A small step, a huge leap

#109

Post by stetrain »

willis936 wrote: post #6

The 48 MP bayer mode is indeed impressive, but it does not increase the spatial frequency response. I recently used it to document some color transition errors on LG OLED displays and even with the 48 MP "RAW" mode there are artifacts from the limited spatial resolution. One of the images properly captures the display sub-pixel layout, but that is taken closer to the display. Enabling/disabling "RAW" did not change t…

I've been using the Halide app to take most of my daylight shots in 48mp HEIC mode (which has the benefit of being 5-15kb per photo).

The main advantage to me is that the result is much less affected by Apple's always-on edge-sharpening processing. The effective "resolution" of the processing artifacts is higher.

In previous iPhones if you take a photo of a bunch of leaves on a tree it's almost like it tries to draw a little sharpened outline around each one, which looks like a watercolor mess if you zoom in at all and doesn't capture what your eye sees.

With the 48mp compressed shots I find landscapes and trees look much more natural and in general you can crop and zoom into photos further before the detail is lost in the processing mess.

Re: iPhone 14 Pro camera review: A small step, a huge leap

#110

Post by reedf1 »

sys32768 wrote: post #47

I am still not understanding why my iPhone 13 landscape photos look as good as those from my $900 Nikkor Z 24mm f/1.8 S prime lens with its superior optics on a $2k DSLR body. If the reason is fancy post-processing, then why can't Nikon have a tiny lens like the iPhone 13 and just add fancy post-processing to it?

It really won't beat modern fast lenses. Try a lowlight situation. You will not be able to beat a larger aperture for light collection, it's simply how many photons you can catch.
Post reply on HN