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

Apple Debuts iPhone 17

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 290 posts

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#101

Post by runjake »

dingaling wrote: post #99
giancarlostoro wrote: post #8

I have a 12 Pro, I am definitely going to be upgrading, I've had my phone for 5 years now (since 2020) that's actually longer than I've owned any other cell phone without upgrading. I think I could probably squeeze more life out of my phone, but the 17 has a nicer camera, me and my wife are noticing our relatives with newer iPhones have photographs that look slightly (I meant to write NOTICEABLY here) better. As we r…

> As we raise our first child, having a quality camera is definitely important to us. A phone camera isn't really a camera, it's a digitally-airbrushed impression of reality. There just isn't enough light hitting the tiny sensor through the tiny lens. I have 20 year old 5MP DLSR portrait photos that are still better than what a 120MP phone can produce, because it's the lens that counts.

My ancient Canon Rebel camera, I think a T3i, takes stunningly detailed photos against even my iPhone 15 Pro.

But, I never have my Canon and it's too bulky to carry around everyday. I do carry my iPhone everywhere I go. And so, the capabilities of my iPhone camera are more important.

I imagine this is the same for the overwhelming majority of people.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#102

Post by ihuman »

losvedir wrote: post #93
ihuman wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The air and the non-pro 17 have ProMotion

Right! That's why I said this might be the one to finally get me, since I'm not interested in Pro, other than ProMotion.

Sorry, I misread your comment and thought you thought it was still exclusive to the pro

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#103

Post by Hamuko »

linkage wrote: post #59

It's odd that the Air has 4 GB more RAM than the regular 17 even though it's meant to replace the Plus models from previous years (same specs, same difference in price point, etc.)

The iPhone 17 Air has the Pro SoC in it. It's sort of a in-between model between the base iPhone 17 and the luxury iPhone 17 Pro. Pro performance, base camera.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#104

Post by ethbr1 »

BurningFrog wrote: post #37

Each new model has an asymptotically smaller feature bump. In 10 years we may have converged on the complete cell phone. Maybe the recent introduction of foldable phones indicates the opposite. Is it the final blip, or will something similarly disruptive happen every 5-7 years? Discuss.

Imho, there are only two unsolved problems in mobile devices: (1) maximizing screen size (in a portable form factor) and (2) input method.

Anything else on the hardware side is mostly noise.

If I had to futurism bet, it'd be on eyeglass AR + pocket device being the next major change. With input method for that still tbd.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#105

Post by runjake »

mandeepj wrote: post #83

I recently started studying metal, so I was watching their metal choices with a bit of curiosity. Apple switched iPhone 17 Pro from Titanium (used in earlier versions) to aerospace-grade Aluminium for Superior Heat Dissipation. But for the iPhone Air, they are using Titanium because it's lightweight, strong, and durable. Aluminum is definitely a softer metal, so using aerospace-grade aluminum makes sense. So, is Tita…

Aluminum conducts heat about 10 times more effectively than titanium.

Phone material choices come down to which compromises you will settle for.

There are similar compromises with types of glass chosen. One type is more scratch resistance, but more prone to shatter from falls, and vice versa.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#106

Post by mschaef »

dingaling wrote: post #99
giancarlostoro wrote: post #8

I have a 12 Pro, I am definitely going to be upgrading, I've had my phone for 5 years now (since 2020) that's actually longer than I've owned any other cell phone without upgrading. I think I could probably squeeze more life out of my phone, but the 17 has a nicer camera, me and my wife are noticing our relatives with newer iPhones have photographs that look slightly (I meant to write NOTICEABLY here) better. As we r…

> As we raise our first child, having a quality camera is definitely important to us. A phone camera isn't really a camera, it's a digitally-airbrushed impression of reality. There just isn't enough light hitting the tiny sensor through the tiny lens. I have 20 year old 5MP DLSR portrait photos that are still better than what a 120MP phone can produce, because it's the lens that counts.

I have a couple DSLR's and a large frame compact, and I wholly get your point. The image quality on even an older DSLR is better, mainly due to the physics of the optics - there's nothing like a high quality lens dumping a bunch of light on a large sensor.

However.... it's really hard to overstate the workflow and convenience aspects of shooting with a phone. (Particularly as a parent, and even moreso when I was a new parent of a small child.) The phone has the twin benefits of 1) being present almost always and 2) being immediately able to process and transmit an image to the people you might want to see it. For the 99% case, that's far more useful than even a very significant improvement in image quality. For the 1% where it matters, I can and do either hire a professional (with better equipment than my own) or make the production of dragging out my DSLR and all that it entails. This is like so many other cases where inarguable technical excellence of a sort gives way to convenience and cost issues. IOW, "Better" is not just about Image Quality.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#107

Post by runjake »

kingsleyopara wrote: post #13

Surprising there’s no matte-black iPhone 17 Pro - dark, low-reflectance finishes are standard in pro video kit because they minimise specular reflections and stray highlights; keeping a shiny silver finish and skipping a subdued matte black feels like a strange choice and undercuts the “Pro” claim.

Movie people don't normally care about the finish of the iPhone they are using. And the ones that do, use a case.

I've seen all sorts of non-black (let alone matte black) iPhone rigs used for motion pictures, including white and natural titanium colors. Eg. 28 Years Later used a variety of iPhone configurations and colors.

But yeah, I'm surprised there's no black/space gray option this year. Some consumers won't buy any other color.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#108

Post by [deleted] »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #58
kingsleyopara wrote: post #13

Surprising there’s no matte-black iPhone 17 Pro - dark, low-reflectance finishes are standard in pro video kit because they minimise specular reflections and stray highlights; keeping a shiny silver finish and skipping a subdued matte black feels like a strange choice and undercuts the “Pro” claim.

These have never been actual pro devices. Arguably not even prosumer. You probably don’t want scorched earth ai processing done on your photos as a pro but that is what the iPhones have been doing as of late. Most damning is no way to turn that off.

[deleted]

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#110

Post by trymas »

xenonite wrote: post #95

Camera lens angles of the 17 Pro seem strange to me. Either too wide (1x) or too narrow (4x), as seen in the live stream video, which was recorded with the iPhone 17 Pro. I am currently on the 13 Pro, I find the 3x mode ideal for portrait photos and videos. Is it only me with this impression? Could someone help me to jump back into Apple's reality distortion field?

Same. Because zooming from 1x to 3.99x is digital zoom - IMHO too much quality is lost.
Post reply on HN