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

181–190 of 340 posts

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

#181

Post by alberth »

> “I think the 12 MP shooting default is a wise choice on Apple’s part, but it does mean that the giant leap in image quality on iPhone 14 Pro remains mostly hidden unless you choose to use a third party app to shoot 48 MP JPG / HEIC images or shoot in ProRAW and edit your photos later.”

This, 100%.

The massive difference in image quality is when shooting in RAW. That’s when you actually get the 48MP & the images are fantastic.

But that’s not the default. The default is 12MP.

That’s why reviewers are so torn on this camera system. If the default was a 48MP picture/quality, everyone would be praising it. But when the default is 12MP, it’s par for the course.

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

#182

Post by enw »

lemonberry wrote: post #117
theturtletalks wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple has always been about making the choice for it’s users. Jobs always thought giving users too many options was problematic.

While in training at my first restaurant job I asked a party where they would like to sit in the dining room. The owner pulled me aside and said to never give people a choice. They'll get confused and think that there's a "best" table and that their dinner could suffer if they feel like they didn't get it. I don't know if it's "real" or not but between work and my personal life I've got decision fatigue. Help make de…

It's definitely real! At least as far as my N=1 dataset is concerned. I dislike having to pick a seat when they're all kind of the same. Just tell me where to go, I have to make enough decisions at other times in life.

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

#183

Post by unethical_ban »

appletrotter wrote: post #26
mkaic wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until that same fancy processing is available on a DSLR, I think the comparison OP is making is valid. At the end of the day, what I as a consumer care about is "is photo look 1. pleasing, 2. accurate to my perception, and 3. easy to create?" and in those regards, the iPhone absolutely outperforms every DSLR I've ever used.

Which is why DSLRs are for hobbyists and professionals. It's more work, for a reward. Or for people shooting at night. The sensors are too small on phones to gather enough light to look decent.

Clearly, many people enjoy taking /good/ photos that look great /quickly/.

The point being made is, if Apple/Google can do that with a tiny sensor, why hasn't one of the remaining pro camera companies thrown money into similar work to be done on their cameras? I have an olympus e-om10 (I can't even remember the name format) and it has some filter settings, but nothing with the usability and quick results of Apple and Google regarding night shoots, etc.

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

#184

Post by pkulak »

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?

I guess if you like that look. I don't; not really. The photos from my phone are fine. If taken in really good light, they are actually pretty good. But they are always processed to within an inch of their lives.

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

#185

Post by rootusrootus »

stingrae wrote: post #12

Coming from a iPhone 12 to the 14, the aggressive switching between lenses is pretty annoying in close and far shots. The lens shift screws up framing and hits at unpredictable times.

Yeah the first time it did that to me when I was trying to use magnifier mode, I nearly threw the phone against the wall. Who the heck thinks it's a good idea to change cameras when trying to focus close-up? -poof- the thing you're pointing at disappears from the screen.

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

#186

Post by rootusrootus »

keepquestioning wrote: post #42
anotheryou wrote: post #15

Lol, nothing is better about the dark skyline image. It's a blurry noise canceled mess with bad white balance.

Reality Distortion Field.

Perhaps, but whose reality is it distorting? Apple enthusiasts, or haters?

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

#187

Post by astrange »

cthalupa wrote: post #143
astrange wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where it has more power, but lacks info like how the OIS was moving as the pictures were taken, so isn’t necessarily as good. And none of those products have nearly the sales of a smartphone to sustain R&D. Similar to how the headphone dongle of an iPhone is much cheaper and yet better quality than most audiophile equipment.

I would consider myself barely passable in skills compared to the average hobbyist photographer and have never seen in-phone computational work that I would take over what can be done manually in Lightroom, or if you want to go the automatic route, with Skylum's offerings.

The difficulty would be recreating Night Mode by yourself using phone raws as opposed to Sony a7s raws.

Or handheld HDR stacking but they're more able to deal with that.

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

#188

Post by astrange »

GoToRO wrote: post #165
astrange wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn’t do that unless you turn on vivid photographic styles. It’s tuned pretty much like a dedicated camera. This does annoy many people who then switch to Snow/BeautyCam to actually take their pictures since they want to look prettier.

By default, the pictures they take have nothing to do with reality. You can check it yourself by comparing the picture on the screen with the scene you pictured. Try it with some clouds f.e. This was my experience.

I think there is some sky recoloring, but eh, that's how camera AWB always works. Dedicated cameras try to make everything noon daylight if you leave them in auto mode; there are manual mode phone apps for this just like there's manual controls on the camera.

There seems to be an assumption here that dedicated cameras* always shoot in raws you can spend your time editing later, but that's not the case. If I shoot a concert or wedding and want to return the photos the next day, and in-camera JPEG or HEIF looks good, I'm shooting that.

* you can't make me say "DSLR", they aren't all DSLRs

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

#189

Post by amelius »

These relatively cheap tiny cameras would be so useful in so many other products, from medical to sports.

It is really a shame that most new consumer tech is locked behind the doors of large corporations these days, that will keep the tech from reaching its true potential in a myriad of products.

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

#190

Post by foldr »

azalemeth wrote: post #169
foldr wrote: post #68

The size of the sensor isn't as important as people think it is. What really matters is the diameter of the aperture (the absolute diameter, not the f number). Consider a cone of light for a given angle of view hitting a small sensor close to the aperture and a large sensor further from the aperture: o If you compare typical shooting apertures for DLSRs and camera phones, they're not radically different. Say you are…

This is related to the conservation of Etendue [1] in an optical system, which is basically a statement of conservation of power: you rightly point out that radiant flux is determined by the source and constant – and for that reason, the primary numerical aperture or f-number of the lens is ultimately what really matters – assuming, as you point out, that you want to use the narrower DoF that arises (in which case SN…

That is a good point that I hadn't considered, thanks.

Are smaller sensors also faster to read, given the lower capacitance? I wonder if that might give them an advantage when it comes to stacking and averaging images to reduce noise.

Post reply on HN