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

iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

austinmann.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 153 posts

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#61

Post by sgt »

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.

So I am not the only one keeping my D70 around! Sensor size is still truly impressive if you're coming from the phone world. My photo hardware currently is just the iPhone XS, a Fuji X100S, and an old Nikon D70 with some telelenses.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#62

Post by buryat »

ciarannolan wrote: post #7

I wish these reviews would post the full res images. I clicked "View Image" on a few of these to see just the photo but they're all cropped and compressed. Almost any flagship phone can produce similar pics to the ones in this article. The devil is really in the details now.

that's not true, the night mode on 12 pro is way better than other phones like 11 pro that they showed in comparison

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#63

Post by numpad0 »

sudosysgen wrote: post #30
crazygringo wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really see the point. Things like low-light photography has always been available on DSLR's, like SLR's long before it, since you've always been able to control shutter speed, aperture, and ISO. And all the extra software magic can already be done on your laptop on RAW files, where you've got enough space on your screen for all the sliders -- and a large enough screen to see the difference it makes in the det…

The big issue that's missing are stacked exposure RAW files with gyroscope and accelerometer data. When that becomes available, then yes the possible processing on a computer will match and exceed what can be done on a phone. If any camera would be able to do it, I'd bet on the Sony A9iii or A7iv.

What about multi focal aspects of smartphone triple/quad cameras? Aren’t they supposed to add some sort of data points?

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#64

Post by buryat »

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.

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

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#65

Post by traceroute66 »

crazygringo wrote: post #22
ponker wrote: post #3

Imagine if Apple or Google shipped a digital SLR with all of their software magic onboard (or executed on a paired phone).

I don't really see the point. Things like low-light photography has always been available on DSLR's, like SLR's long before it, since you've always been able to control shutter speed, aperture, and ISO. And all the extra software magic can already be done on your laptop on RAW files, where you've got enough space on your screen for all the sliders -- and a large enough screen to see the difference it makes in the det…

> These days, pretty much the only people shooting with DSLR's are the people who want/need that fine-grained manual control anyways.

Or people who shoot journalism, sports, conferences or other live events.

I don't care how damn good smartphones are (or will become). DSLRs will forever rule the roost in fast paced environments, smartphones are just too fiddly and there's nothing the manufacturers can do, the hinderance is not software, its form-factor.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#66

Post by throwawaywindev »

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…

I went from an X to a 12 Pro and love it for the camera upgrade. I’m trying to force myself to take more video/live photos than stills, and the 12 Pro’s HDR video is a major improvement so far.

I’m considering getting rid of my Nikon Z6 since I rarely actually use it due to the size and weight. Its still image quality is still noticeably better than the phone, especially with my Nikon f1.8 50 mm lens, but the iPhone wins for video and Live Photo’s.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#67

Post by crazygringo »

sudosysgen wrote: post #30
crazygringo wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really see the point. Things like low-light photography has always been available on DSLR's, like SLR's long before it, since you've always been able to control shutter speed, aperture, and ISO. And all the extra software magic can already be done on your laptop on RAW files, where you've got enough space on your screen for all the sliders -- and a large enough screen to see the difference it makes in the det…

The big issue that's missing are stacked exposure RAW files with gyroscope and accelerometer data. When that becomes available, then yes the possible processing on a computer will match and exceed what can be done on a phone. If any camera would be able to do it, I'd bet on the Sony A9iii or A7iv.

Ah, that's a great point.

It does seem like it's high time for there to be some kind of RAW-over-time standard, e.g. a single file with 2 hours of exposure that Photoshop would have built-in tools to manage -- and even the ability to handle matrix transformation movement over time, e.g. to photograph stars over 5 minutes.

I wonder how useful it would be to embed gyroscope/accelerometer data with it though? Everything I imagine having to do with long/stacked exposures involves a tripod.

Motion data actually seems like it would be more useful to embed in regular-exposure RAWs, since it could help build a deconvolution kernel to undo motion blur.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#68

Post by dham »

buryat wrote: post #64
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.

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.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#69

Post by jonplackett »

buryat wrote: post #62
ciarannolan wrote: post #7

I wish these reviews would post the full res images. I clicked "View Image" on a few of these to see just the photo but they're all cropped and compressed. Almost any flagship phone can produce similar pics to the ones in this article. The devil is really in the details now.

that's not true, the night mode on 12 pro is way better than other phones like 11 pro that they showed in comparison

Only on the super wide though. Night mode on normal lens is the same and already very good on 11.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#70

Post by renewiltord »

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.
Post reply on HN