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

231–240 of 340 posts

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

#231

Post by mkaic »

unethical_ban wrote: post #183
appletrotter wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

This was exactly the point I was trying to make. If a "real camera" manufacturer like Canon, Nikon, BlackMagic, etc. stepped up and added Apple-tier processing as an option to their cameras, I'd choose that over an iPhone any day. It frustrates me that the best computational photography in the world is being done using small sensors and tiny lenses, but since no DSLR manufacturer has matched Apple's computational witchcraft, I'll (sadly) be sticking with my iPhone for shooting all my short films. For the price it's easily the best combo of quality and convenience.

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

#232

Post by mkaic »

Mikeb85 wrote: post #22
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.

I didn't say a phone camera isn't better for the average consumer... I use my phone camera far more often than my actual camera... But there's no world in which it's technically superior to a real camera, especially one with in-camera processing or in the hands of a professional with access to and skill with professional post-processing software.

The world where it's superior is when I'm making a short film and want to be able to shoot it without a camera rental budget. As a low-budget filmmaker, my options for cameras are

1.) My old Canon 80D. One time purchase, decently compact, short battery. Produces an okay-ish image with moderate effort.

2.) Renting something nicer than my Canon 80D. Bulky, requires lots of know-how to operate, expensive if I break it. Have to use special cords, cards, lenses, mounts, etc. Produces a top-of-the-line image with high effort.

3.) My iPhone 12 Mini. One time purchase, very compact, multi-hour-battery. Works indoors, outdoors, day or night. Plug-n-play, extremely user friendly. Produces a darn-good image with minimal effort.

I fully understand that it's not the best camera out there—but it seriously competes with everything up to fairly expensive professional cameras. I would not hesitate to use my iPhone for professional photography and videography if the client never found out about it (or was okay with it). At the end of the day, the ratio of quality to convenience it provides is simply higher than any other offering.

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

#233

Post by mkaic »

bosie wrote: post #65
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.

Couldn't you take those photos and apply it back on the computer? Yet when i try to do HDR with 5 shots in Lightroom, it takes 10s of seconds or even minutes. It seems computer haven't caught up either?

Yes and no, Apple's models operate on the raw sensor data as far as I understand, and take advantage of hardware acceleration in the A-series chips' Neural Engine specifically designed for computational photography. Furthermore, Apple's models are proprietary—if you could access them, you could probably run them on your computer and get the same result, but you unfortunately can't access them.

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

#234

Post by ethbr0 »

maxgashkov wrote: post #225
kybernetyk wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Nikon does minimal post processing. The iPhone throws a metric shit ton of algorithms at the image data to make it passable. For normal people the iPhone output is good enough - though it often looks very over-processed. Nikon just expects you to handle that post processing part that your iPhone is doing for you. In exchange you get way more control over the final image. Both devices are aimed at different people…

I wouldn’t have gone on the hiking trip if I had to lug fullsize camera with me ;)

^ Obviously not Les Stroud

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

#235

Post by ska »

city17 wrote: post #152

The funny thing is that for all the amazing technological improvements discussed, all the pictures in the article actually show that A. having a photographer who knows how to frame things, and sees the right moment to capture an image, and B. having a subject worthwhile photographing, are way more important than having a top tier quality camera.

This has always been true.

Most of what professional cameras and lenses get you is the ability to get shots you otherwise couldn't - lower light, further distance, faster action, etc. Particular effect in DOF of flattening. Nothing that makes a good photo.

Without an eye, it's all wasted. But a good eye will see shots that can't be made; more of them if the camera at hand is limited.

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

#236

Post by ska »

xdfgh1112 wrote: post #199
city17 wrote: post #152

The funny thing is that for all the amazing technological improvements discussed, all the pictures in the article actually show that A. having a photographer who knows how to frame things, and sees the right moment to capture an image, and B. having a subject worthwhile photographing, are way more important than having a top tier quality camera.

Well yeah but it doesn't hurt to make photography more accessible to everyone.

It was always pretty accessible, at least since 35mm was developed.

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

#237

Post by nsriv »

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?

Nikon Z9 eliminated it this past year, my understanding is that going shutterless is largely a function of having fast enough readout over a large sensor size to mitigate rolling shutter.

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

#238

Post by ska »

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?

This is probably the wrong way to think of it. Especially at screen sizes, there are certain photos your iphone 13 can take that are comparable to what you would get with your nikon gear. However there are photos you can get with that 1.8 that won't work at all on your phone.

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

#239

Post by solardev »

fumar wrote: post #176
solardev wrote: post #123

Coming from a Pixel 5 to the iPhone 14 Pro, I gotta say I'm pretty disappointed. The pictures are mediocre at best, and just plain bad in dim light especially. Google's computational photography is years ahead. The latest Pixel has better sensors too.

Do you have examples to share? I am interested as I shoot with film, mirrorless, and on iPhones.

Not my gallery, but a good side by side: https://imgur.io/a/vG6Yskx

Other comparisons: https://www.phonearena.com/news/Pixel-7-Pro-vs-iPhone-14-Pro...

https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/iphone-14-pro-vs-google...

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

#240

Post by neverartful »

sumedh wrote: post #230
city17 wrote: post #152

The funny thing is that for all the amazing technological improvements discussed, all the pictures in the article actually show that A. having a photographer who knows how to frame things, and sees the right moment to capture an image, and B. having a subject worthwhile photographing, are way more important than having a top tier quality camera.

A photographer friend of mine always used to get comments like you can take such awesome shots because you are using a DSLR (this was 10 years back). So he started taking two pictures one with DSLR and one with a mobile cameras at that time. He would still get the awesome shots comments even with the pics he took with the basic mobile camera and shared them on social media.

That's not surprising. I'd put my money on a good photographer with a crummy camera rather than a crummy photographer with a good camera any day of the week. The biggest part of photography is being able to 'see' the photos before you even raise the camera.
Post reply on HN