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

61–70 of 340 posts

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

#61

Post by 323 »

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?

For the same reason you can't upload to Instagram from your $2k camera - they know how to make hardware.

But the idea of enhancing filters or social media features is completely alien to them.

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

#62

Post by sudosysgen »

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?

What settings are you shooting? How do you edit your images?

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

#63

Post by refulgentis »

stu2b50 wrote: post #39
Mikeb85 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 OP didn’t say it was technically superior as a camera - they said it produced better photos. Which you can argue it does, with all the fancy post processing. The statement was only about the final result, which for the eyes for whom most peoples photos are presented to are excellent.

Idk man.

If I zoom out from parsing word by word...

...feels like I'm saying a Keurig "rivals and surpasses espresso machines" because it can produce a better espresso than an arbitrary espresso machine in arbitrary hands.

Yeah, true. Not very meaningful though.

There's probably a McDonald's hamburger analogy here that's better, but, here we are.

My challenge to an ambituous reader looking to comment: make that one work too.

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

#64

Post by [deleted] »

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?

[deleted]

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

#65

Post by bosie »

mkaic wrote: post #18
Mikeb85 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Phones don't rival or surpass DSLRs or any proper digital camera. They just have lots of fancy processing that makes quick snaps look better than the same amount of effort on a camera.

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?

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

#66

Post by GoToRO »

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?

Good looking != captures reality.

iPhones apply filters to make the photos look more vivid and to make them "ready to share". If a professional camera would do that, it would not be professional.

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

#67

Post by shishy »

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 doubt those iphone photos look the exact same as the nikon ones on a large display (i.e. anything bigger than an iphone...) It has not been the case for me.

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

#68

Post by foldr »

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 shooting a 50mm lens at f8 on a DSLR. That's an aperture of 6.25mm. A typical smartphone camera will have an aperture of around 3-4mm. In this scenario, then, the DLSR is getting about 3 times more light (or ~1.5 stops).

Of course you can use much wider apertures on DSLRs, but their use is more limited given the shallow depth of field that results. If you're shooting e.g. landscapes, then you're probably not going to use apertures much wider than f8 anyway.

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

#69

Post by SebastianKra »

chasd00 wrote: post #49
pigtailgirl wrote: post #29

-- anyone else find it annoying how protruded the lens is? --

yeah not a fan, my iphone12 mini is bad enough. I get that taking a photo and posting it to instagram is 95% of the use case for the iphone but i still don't like the way the camera lenses protrude.

Since the iPhone 11, the primary stated purpose of the Pro variants has been photography.

For users less interested in photography, the regular iPhones have a more subtle camera array.

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

#70

Post by sfmike »

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?

Apple and photography processing at this point is like TSMC and chips. They probably have a great deal of algorithmic knowhow that is in house and they're doing things that no one else is quite getting close to at any of the big camera brands. Maybe just Pixel phones have some clue in's on some of the post processing hacks. I'd guess in the dark ex apple helped consult.
Post reply on HN