iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review • Hacker News Board

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#141

Post by berryjerry » Tue, Oct 27, 2020, 4:31 AM UTC

vladvasiliu wrote: post #44

BigBubbleButt wrote: post #19

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…

What do you mean by "slightly superior sensor"? Do you assume that there exist (or someone could produce with today's technology) sensors that are "objectively" better that the current phone sensors? In my opinion the limiting factor in phone cameras is the size. Of course, for a given size a cheap, crappy sensor will give crappy results. But I wouldn't be surprised that sensors used in flagship phones are actually p…

I think it's a great idea to have a camera that is also a phone, rather than the other way around. I wouldn't care if it was an inch thick instead of a quarter inch if it had the actual best camera built in.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#142

Post by berryjerry » Tue, Oct 27, 2020, 4:34 AM UTC

renewiltord wrote: post #70

Most of these photos are remarkable but the woman-in-parka shot looks heavily ... airbrushed. Maybe one of the blur filters got turned on or something? Composition-wise it's good and all that, not insulting the subject or the photographer, but the software appears to have applied quite a bit of blur.

yea it's a '3 second handheld exposure' like are you kidding, in a camera review?

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#143

Post by ksec » Tue, Oct 27, 2020, 5:00 AM UTC

BigBubbleButt wrote: post #19

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…

Tldr: Because Camera alone doesn't sell.

The Long answer. Adding a decent camera sensor also requires you market the crap out of it. And as shown by Huawei and Samsung, longer Zoom sells better than better sensor or image quality. For 90% of customers Flagship Smartphone Camera quality is good enough or fast approaching good enough. Zoom level makes lots of difference.

And that is assuming Sony's Smartphone overall are anywhere as good as its competitor such as Samsung and Huawei. I have no idea whether that is the case, but Sony's Smartphone sales are dismal in numbers. [1]

And finally, as far as I can tell, both Sony and Samsung are innovating like crazy to produce the best small sensor. There just isn't a super great small sensors sitting there waiting for others to pick up for additional $20 more. And if Sony decade to withhold those tech from Apple, Samsung will capture those market shares.

[1] If you look at overall annual shipment, Huawei, Samsung, Apple, Chinese Brands ( Xiaomi, Oppo, OnePlus, RealMe, Vivo etc.. ) They are 90+% of the market.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#144

Post by flucivja » Tue, Oct 27, 2020, 9:10 AM UTC

dham wrote: post #57

pgib wrote: post #15

I got the iPhone 12 Pro after using my iPhone X for the last three years. I was mostly excited about a big camera upgrade, and there are definitely some big improvements from what I have been using. But I'm not 100% sure if I'm going to keep it. I'm not sure I'm blown away enough for just shy of CDN $2,000. Even though it's almost the same size, it feels considerably bigger than my X, and I'm not a fan of the matte b…

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.

The best camera is that one you have with you :)

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#145

Post by jonplackett » Tue, Oct 27, 2020, 9:54 AM UTC

herpderperator wrote: post #112

> Stop and consider that for a moment... because of Night mode and computational algorithms we went from "completely unusable dark frame" to "I want that on my wall." No mention of whether or not the photo was handheld or how long the exposure time was. If the photo they were referring to was handheld, I guess I agree. However, the subsequent photo which is the same landscape is captioned "on tripod" so it's not clea…

I think the point he's making is that night mode was not available on the wide lens on the 11. So you can't so a long exposure at all, hence the frame of nothingness.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#146

Post by comeonseriously » Tue, Oct 27, 2020, 3:21 PM UTC

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #86

dham wrote: 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.

> For the same price you can get a nice DSLR and the iPhone SE 2. DSLR vs. iPhone is apples and oranges. Two devices with completely different use cases. If your primary goal is to buy a no-compromise device for photography, obviously you should get a full size camera. But 99% of the time, you're going to have an iPhone in your pocket and no camera on hand. That's why it's great to have an excellent camera in your ph…

The iPhone SE 2020 arguably has an excellent camera. It certainly exceeds most users ability.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#147

Post by comeonseriously » Tue, Oct 27, 2020, 3:26 PM UTC

mrits wrote: post #126

valuearb wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m thinking the author knows just a bit more about it than you.

Possibly. But the inability to properly configure a TLS connection gives me doubt.

Hmmm... there's a logical fallacy in there somewhere.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#148

Post by sudosysgen » Tue, Oct 27, 2020, 4:12 PM UTC

Nition wrote: post #133

sudosysgen wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Most cameras can't, I agree, but mine does. It has a 4 exposure stacking mode, but only in JPEG mode, and the stabilization is sufficient that I can get quite sharp images at 0.8x4 handled, especially at the 35-28mm equivalent focal lengths of an iPhone.

I can share some pics, if you want. It does require a steady hand.

But then again, the iPhone doesn't really do a 3 second exposure, it rejects a lot of frame so it's more like 1.5-2 seconds, which I can do reliably.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#149

Post by panpanna » Tue, Oct 27, 2020, 5:13 PM UTC

jdxcode wrote: post #105

bradlys wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I would guess that camera manufacturers can't afford computational photography—certainly not in the same way Apple, Samsung, and Google can.

This is about to change.

Sony and Samsung have already started using much beefier hardware, now that their custom Asic is falling behind.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#150

Post by sudosysgen » Tue, Oct 27, 2020, 5:57 PM UTC

snowwrestler wrote: post #128

frostburg wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IBIS and a f/0.95 lens would get you there (or a flash, which phones mostly can't synch to).

That shot is testing the low-light autofocus with no modelling light, which I think is a test that any f/0.95 lens/body combo on the market right now would fail?

Most modern cameras can autofocus in perfect darkness using a small AF light. Especially at f/0.95!

But really, I recreated the shot, in a perfectly dark room with a phone light as the only light source, and it focused adequately and the image came out more than adequate at 1/20x ISO 2066 @ f/2.8, or 1/30 ISO2400 f/1.4, all with good AF.