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

81–90 of 153 posts

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#81

Post by ogre_codes »

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.

Maybe you haul a DSLR around everywhere, I find it a bit of a PITA to haul a 5+ pound camera kit/ bag when I'm mountain biking or hiking in the woods.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#82

Post by asdfasgasdgasdg »

huangc10 wrote: post #75
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.

I think the whole point of these reviews are...how will the images look on Instagram not necessarily for pixel peepers. I agree with you completely, that when it comes down to the full image, the results are usually grainy and pixelated. That's why I'm sticking with my Sony camera.

> not necessarily for pixel peepers.

TBH, I think some of these photos look a little muddy and noisy even at 4x6 dimensions. Even some of the ones taken in daylight. Maybe there was an issue with the post-processing, but I wouldn't characterize someone who wants to print a 4x6 as a pixel peeper..

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#83

Post by bradlys »

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.

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 similar can really outperform a camera. One you get a snapshot you'd be okay with sharing with others immediately - with the other, you're like, "Yeah, the exposure is a little off but maybe that's just because of the dynamic range limitations? And I need to adjust the contrast, maybe sharpen a little bit, colors aren't really there, and it would've been great if I had done bracketed exposures because the sky is just too blown out to recover properly..." A lot of that stuff is gone with smartphones because they do it all for you.

It's what annoys me about modern cameras - they don't have any of that built in as an option. You have to do all the work by yourself and bracketing is just way too much of a PITA for me to deal with for most photos. Computational photography is a huge breakthrough that many cameras just don't utilize almost at all.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#84

Post by billforsternz »

asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #73
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.

Even without the full resolution images, some of the samples seem to exhibit serious sharpness problems. One example: https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/50730c37e4b03a... If that's the output I can expect, I don't know why I'd even bother taking the picture. The image is a mess. On the basis of this article, my conclusion is if you want to share or view the images on anything other than a mobile device, yo…

It looks like a perfectly nice photo to me.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#85

Post by whoisburbansky »

spike021 wrote: post #77

A lot of comments seem to be picky with the photo of the lady in the parka. As I mentioned in another comment, I read the article itself and that photo in particular was a hand-held 3-second long exposure in near-complete darkness. It was a test of the Night Mode for portraits. It was literally just to see how the new LIDAR stuff can help with a nearly impossibly dark shot. Of course a DSLR/mirrorless with proper lig…

Agreed; the apples-to-(heh)-apples comparison would be that photo against a hand-held DSLR 3-second exposure, or a shorter exposure with the ISO maxed out, and even them I'm fairly certain the DSLR image would be barely usable.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#86

Post by PragmaticPulp »

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.

> 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 phone. You can always augment with a DSLR for special occasions, but it's not like a DSLR and iPhone are interchangeable.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#87

Post by bydo »

jonplackett wrote: post #69
buryat wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The 12 Pro does Night Mode on all three lenses. The 11 Pro only does it on the "regular" wide.

The 12 Pro's "regular" wide also has a larger aperture to improve low light capture, so Night Mode can stack fewer / shorter exposures for the final image.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#88

Post by crazygringo »

traceroute66 wrote: post #65
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…

> 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 hindera…

But what computational photography aspects that only Apple/Google provide are going to be useful for journalists or sports photographers?

That was the original question, and I'm not seeing it.

Obviously they're using DSLR's for the manual controls and lenses. But my point stands: if they need advanced image processing for something they're going to publish... they need to adjust it on a large screen. Not on-camera.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#89

Post by asdfasgasdgasdg »

billforsternz wrote: post #84
asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even without the full resolution images, some of the samples seem to exhibit serious sharpness problems. One example: https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/50730c37e4b03a... If that's the output I can expect, I don't know why I'd even bother taking the picture. The image is a mess. On the basis of this article, my conclusion is if you want to share or view the images on anything other than a mobile device, yo…

It looks like a perfectly nice photo to me.

I'm glad for you, but it looks very poor to me. I would be unhappy if I got home and this were the only image I had of this scene. For any given image, you'll be able to find someone who likes it or thinks it looks good enough. If that's your standard, then this camera might be great for you. But if you have a higher standard, then you might not be satisfied.

I'd also ask what kind of screen you're looking at the image on. This image looks fine on my phone, but its screen is barely as large as a 3x5, which is essentially the lowest common denominator for printing -- the McDonald's hamburger of photo rendition. The image looks bad on my monitor, and would look awful if printed on 8x10.

Re: iPhone 12 Pro Camera Review

#90

Post by ecf »

bradenb wrote: post #49
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'm still rocking an X. I thought whatever the 12 was would end up being my replacement. But I am just not impressed enough and your summary makes me feel good about not jumping on it. The X is still going strong. I get > 1 day battery life (which is all I need) and although I do notice the occasional stutter, it is still very very good.

These comments can be tedious, but same! Been using this X for a few years now and would rather purchase a battery replacement.

The one feature to make me upgrade is a high refresh rate screen. I switched from 60hz to 120hz on my main monitor a few years ago and I can’t go back. I imagine the same would happen with my phone since it’s mainly used to reading articles like this one.

Post reply on HN