Live data from Hacker News

iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

austinmann.com

131–140 of 153 posts

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#131

A lot of comments seem to be picky with the photo of the lady in the parka. As I mentioned in another comment, I read the article itself and that photo in particular was a hand-held 3-second long exposure in near-complete darkness. It was a test of the Night Mode for portraits. It was literally just to see how the new LIDAR stuff can help with a nearly impossibly dark shot. Of course a DSLR/mirrorless with proper lig…

Agreed; the apples-to-(heh)-apples comparison would be that photo against a hand-held DSLR 3-second exposure, or a shorter exposure with the ISO maxed out, and even them I'm fairly certain the DSLR image would be barely usable.

A handheld MILC with a stabilized f/1.2 or f/1.4 lens at a 0.5sx3 stacked exposure would be the proper comparison, and it would be more than usable.

Modern cameras can take video with nothing but moonlight, let alone photography.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#132
post #94
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the photo of the woman is terrible. I don't blame the phone for it, its very hard to achieve with small sensors, and the iphone is probably the best of the bunch. But it doesn't make the picture quality near "good-enough" for that scenario. With slightly better lighting it can be "good enough" to be hard to distinguish from a bigger sensor camera for "web" where "web" really means ~6inch phone display - and t…

> I think the photo of the woman is terrible. On any normal camera that photo would be a complete blur. Impossible. It's a hand-held three second exposure.

You don't need a three second exposure with a modern camera and a fast lens. F/1.2 or f/1.4 with low-light stacking at 1/10 to 1/2 will more than do it for moonlight.

Plus, it has artifical light, a phone screen, so even less than that would be useful.

As for AF, the obvious solution is to simply have a light in the camera. Mine does, it works fine even in complete darkness. I've actually gone and took a photo of a subject lit only with a phone screen, in perfect darkness, at around 2 meters.

Result? F2.8, 1/10x3 (stacking), ISO6400 actual, ISO2066 effective.

Very, very far from a challenging situation. Actually, quite easy.

With my F/1.4 lens, a cellphone screen provides enough light to illuminate a wooden plank to a shutter speed of 1/25 at ISO4000. More than serviceable. Especially with stabilization, where I can in reality get away with 1/2.

You know, dedicated cameras also evolved. A lot.

At the issue of this expriment, I can be confident that my camera can take pictures of much higher quality in the same conditions, at a higher resultion with much less noise and more detail, and all that at half of the price. Indeed, an a6000+EF-speedbooster+Tamron28-75 2.8 EF will run you 600$ tax included, for a higher performance, and will last you a decade or more.

EDIT: for some reason, I can't answer since I'm rate limited, but I can actually do a 3 second exposure, hand held, with my camera, and get a sharper result that that. Especially if I'm tipsy. Here's how I do it - I put my camera in image stacking mode, set the shutter speed to 0.8 seconds, and fire the shutter.

My camera will then take 4 pictures with IS on for 0.8 seconds in each of them, recenter IS in the few milliseconds between them, then warp and shift the images together and stack them. Bam, 3(.2) second exposure. It's not always the sharpest on the first try, but it's a hell of a lot sharper than whatever is in the picture there. Also, the iPhone is rejecting quite a few images there, so it won't be 3 seconds and more like 1.2 seconds.

Especially at the wide focal lengths equivalent to an iPhone. It's not very hard. I was at 1/20 before to ensure maximum sharpness, but if I'm willing to either stack in post or take 2-3 shots, more than possible.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#133
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the photo of the woman is terrible. On any normal camera that photo would be a complete blur. Impossible. It's a hand-held three second exposure.

You don't need a three second exposure with a modern camera and a fast lens. F/1.2 or f/1.4 with low-light stacking at 1/10 to 1/2 will more than do it for moonlight. Plus, it has artifical light, a phone screen, so even less than that would be useful. As for AF, the obvious solution is to simply have a light in the camera. Mine does, it works fine even in complete darkness. I've actually gone and took a photo of a s…

Unfortunately it's too late to edit my comment now but yes, I should have been clearer that what I meant was taking a hand-held three second exposure with another camera, not that that specific photo itself would be impossible.

It's a reasonable separate point to make that a "proper" camera wouldn't need such a long exposure for the same amount of light.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#134
post #118

Just since it's sponsored, Airstream is one of the shittiest luxury products I can think of and owning one of the bigger mistakes I've ever made. The quality is the same as any other RV, so you are paying a huge premium for the aluminum shell which looks cool but not nearly as trouble free as the marketing leads one to expect. You can basically own 3-4 trailers from any other manufacturer for the same cost, and would…

Thanks for this insight, they do look cool, so i can see making a emotional purchase rather than logical one.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#135
post #68
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DSLR/mirrorless is way too big and very slow to operate if you want to send photos to someone or post them somewhere. D70 also doesnt record video

Yea D70 is just for pictures. I have Sony a6400 as main camera and to be honest I can turn it on and record a video faster than I can with my iPhone, mainly because the dedicated buttons. I also don't think it's that much of a hassle. It has Wifi to get data off. It's pretty easy actually. It's worth spending and extra 2 minutes to do it so in 30 years I have nice video and pictures of family.

[deleted]

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#136

A lot of comments seem to be picky with the photo of the lady in the parka. As I mentioned in another comment, I read the article itself and that photo in particular was a hand-held 3-second long exposure in near-complete darkness. It was a test of the Night Mode for portraits. It was literally just to see how the new LIDAR stuff can help with a nearly impossibly dark shot. Of course a DSLR/mirrorless with proper lig…

Agreed; the apples-to-(heh)-apples comparison would be that photo against a hand-held DSLR 3-second exposure, or a shorter exposure with the ISO maxed out, and even them I'm fairly certain the DSLR image would be barely usable.

Worth to check A7S3

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need a DSLR. A regular point-and-shoot[0] which costs $100, fits in your pocket and has an electronic retractable lens (and many times optical zoom) is going to blow away anything recent phone cameras can do (photography wise), bar handheld night photos where the additional processing does help even out blurriness. If you can remember to bring your phone, you can remember to bring a point-and-shoot, and the…

I'd be very surprised if this were true. My iPhone 11 goes head-to-head with my mid-range mirrorless camera setup in most shooting conditions. Modern phone cameras are surprisingly good, really.

Really? I've done comparisons with my GR3 and my iPhone and even when browsing thumbnails it gets pretty obvious which is which quality wise. When I start looking at the photos on my desktop or iPad it becomes even more evident. It might be the kit lens your using or your taking pictures in bright sunlight only, which at that point the camera doesn't matter that much anymore.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#138
post #83
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the same price you can get a nice DSLR and the iPhone SE 2. That's what I did. Heck even my Nikon D70 from 2008(bought it used in 2011) can still run circles around even the most expensive phones for pictures. Best camera is the one you have on you, well when you have kids you haul the DSLR around anyway. Sorry.

I disagree. I have an A9 + GM glass. I'm constantly surprised by what a modern smartphone can take compared to what I get out of my camera. Yes, you can get way better photos if you do everything right with a traditional camera (and certainly much more real bokeh) but that usually involves a lot more editing than you have to do with an iPhone 12 Pro or similar. For the amount of time it takes - the iPhone 12 Pro and…

Intelligent Auto Mode isn't enough?

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#139

I've always found it odd nobody, specifically Samsung or Sony (since Sony already makes their own high-end CMOS sensors), doesn't ship a phone with a slightly superior sensor? Yes, I get the unit economics of it (at least I think I do, I've never worked in the phone industry so that could easily be hubris on my part), but if you can spend an extra few dollars or even tens of dollars on your BOM for something that is…

Huawei was a leader to put larger sensor.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even without the full resolution images, some of the samples seem to exhibit serious sharpness problems. One example: https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/50730c37e4b03a... If that's the output I can expect, I don't know why I'd even bother taking the picture. The image is a mess. On the basis of this article, my conclusion is if you want to share or view the images on anything other than a mobile device, yo…

I mean.. that file is only 2048x935. It's a little hard to tell without the full res version.

That photo is insta-delete in my book at any resolution. I think it's just a bad scene all together but also nothing is sharp at any distance from the camera and colors look washed.
Post reply on HN