How does the iPhone 4S camera stack up against other cameras?
campl.us
campl.us
Look, the iPhone 4s processes images with in-camera software and does it aggressively so images look pretty to the average user. They are over-saturated and over-sharpened. And the lack of detail captured by the small sensor all but negates the possibility of any REAL post processing.
I get it. The consumer doesn't care. They just know the pictures look pretty. The practicing photographer knows better.
The video comparisons are even more futile. The depth of field, flexibility, and low light performance of the 5D Mark II is so far beyond the iPhone 4s it makes my head spin.
We are headed into exciting times when a device smaller than a deck of cards will replace a device the size of a toaster. I know. But we aren't there yet. Really, we aren't even close.
annoying ain't it :-)
But most importantly, this comparison is just bad. The key picture is taken differently with different light and different settings even on the camera
they're doing their best to hide the reality: a DSLR, even on all auto is far better than the 4S or any other phone, and its easy to see, on "regular" pictures, even for novices, the difference is huge.
Artistic interpretation of images is great. But the display of a phone (especially a smaller display as on an iPhone) just doesn't let you do it effectively. Between the low resolution, and the fact that you're probably in an environment that makes it all but impossible to accurately judge contrast, sharpness, and color, the results are pretty much guaranteed to be garbage.
If you want to do this kind of thing, go ahead. But to do so, put it on a real monitor so you can see what you're doing.
It doesn't bother me nearly as much as poorly done High Dynamic Range images. . .
1- The normal enhancements you are not supposed to hear. Maybe a bit of reverb or compression. For these effects, in my experience, the proper way to tune it is to turn the knob until you hear it, and then turn it back half ways.
2- The exceptional strong effect that is part of the sound. Here, you should turn knobs to their max, it will make a different sound.
The "instagram" plague looks to me like if everyone in every music would suddenly add 150% of one type of reverb, and everyone would blindly think it is great, and in two years none of these will be heard (seen) without laughing.
The 5DMKII only resolves about 560 to 600 lines of resolution and interpolates them to 1080p. Source: http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/article.php/20 Source: My eyes
So while the still images of the 5D are several orders of magnitude better than a 5D at resolution, I'd guess the true 1080p resolution of the iPhone 4S is probably slightly better than the 5D -- baring control of DOF.
The best camera is the one you have with you.
I, for one, don't carry my DSLR with me everywhere, but I almost always have my phone. I'd like to know that I'll be able to get something when that one-in-a-million shot presents itself.
For me, I take my DSLR out when it's my intent to do photography. When I'm doing something where I think something might present itself (e.g., on my bike), I carry a compact camera if I've got room and won't endanger the camera too much. But I'll almost always have a phone with me.
Taking a photo of something close up looked terrible, like the key does in the photo. I'm guessing they optimized the fixed focus to an object much further away from the camera.
So you can get a few great shots (good for ads / PR), but most will be pretty crummy unless you get used to picking the right distance.
f2.8 on a cameraphone =/= f2.8 on an SLR =/= f2.8 on a Medium format camera.
Read up on it here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aperture
And the F-number is not the focal length. It's the ratio of focal length to absolute effective aperture size.
I should use that idea with promoting my apps!
If the S95 was set to "Vivid" in the color settings, I think the result would be very similar to the iPhone 4/4S.
The other interesting thing...
According to the EXIF, the iPhone was shot with an ISO of 60. The S95 EXIF reports 20,480. That sounds strange to me... And possibly purposefully misleading.
The iPhone's software, on the other hand, is doing some auto-adjustment before the file hits the SD card. It's optimized for a decent photo without any manual steps.
Also, notice the distortion in the iPhone photo: the buildings "lean" towards each other. The Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 is a _nice_ piece of glass, and is worth every penny of its $1500 asking price.
tl;dr: Take the 5D shot (in RAW, hopefully) and let a pro have a shot at it in Lightroom. That's a fair comparison.
The iPhone 4S's camera is a fixed focal length while the Canon lens they used is a zoom lens. Zoom lenses trade certain attributes for the flexibility of being able to zoom, one of which is corner softness at wide open apertures. The 24-70 is a decent all-around lens, and I have used it extensively, but I have never encountered a zoom lens that reaches the same image quality as a fixed lens for the same focal length.
You can see there's a little less blowout on the shiny roof with the 5D, and quite a bit more detail in the shadowed city streets. Certainly a higher color temperature, probably more accurate. But the 4S is quite impressive nevertheless. No apparent vignette issues.
These photos are not useful for assessing high ISO noise/grain...
One advantage of a DSLR is that you can get a sharper photo with less light and a shorter exposure time. On web-sized photo, taken on a sunny day, you just can't see the difference. If you take a photo at night even a complete amateur like me can tell the difference.
A DSLR isn't like a Ferrari, which blows the competition away in favorable conditions. It's like a Four wheel drive that can be used anywhere.
For example, the 4S photos are highly saturated (known to be a trait of the iPhone) and sharpened (whereas the S95 and 5D shots do not appear to have had any sharpening). In the first set of photos, the iPhone shots have a completely different DOF to that of the two cameras (and not even shot from the same position).
The "4S versus 5DMkII" video comparison going around conveniently ignores the little footnote in the accompanying description where the tester states that he "adjusted the 5D settings down to match the 4S options available", i.e. "4S video matches highly handicapped 5D video"...
No doubt, the 4S has impressive still and video functionality, but you're looking at a couple of lenspieces smaller than a penny versus 12+ pieces of glass in an L lens...
iPhone 4S has no chance against 5D mk II.
It feels so weird to defend Canon... I'm a Nikon man all the way.
Does it matter these days? My impression for the last couple years has been that more or less any dSLR will work very well for the vast majority of what most people do. When people ask me about photography, I by and large say, "Get whatever your friends are using and/or whatever is cheap."
I own a Pentax, but would never choose this company (not hardware) if I was any serious about photography.
Oh, you're the other one. Glad to meet you :)
(FWIW, I chose Pentax because of on-board image stabilization. That should allow me to save money by not paying for it in every lens (as Canon and Nikon do). However, it seems to turn out that the big names get enough economy of scale that the lens price isn't better for Pentax anyway.)
A shame the selection of lenses seem to be that limited, many times with one type of make/model for given parameters only.
I was genuinely expecting a detailed breakdown of the lenses and hardware. Instead what we got was a comparison of images from each camera. And an ad for a camera app.
Why do so many (most) high end smartphones have no lens covers? It's the first think I would add to a smartphone I design, and yet, I am obviously completely wrong.
See for example http://kurtmunger.com/dirty_lens_articleid35.html
OTOH, the surface area of the lens he damaged is enormous compared to the tiny little lens on my phone....
Connect with the subject (not necessarily emotionally) and portray things as you see them. Ie. it's not the tool that matters that much, it's the result/the content and how it speaks to us.
They used this little test rig (look at the size difference!)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/67369108@N02/6248202568/in/phot...
I'm a 4S owner and can definitely see that it's better. Obviously you could say Camera+ want the iPhone camera to get better as their photos will be better and they'll sell more apps but at the same time it's impressive.
I did not find this article hard to believe; nor was it so-extraordinary-as-to-seem-impossible. While both reactions might have been experienced first-hand had it been shown to a pre-iPhone self, I have experienced this gradual revolution first hand—over a period of four years.
These photographs were interesting and informative. The progression of camera quality and the extrapolation of future camera quality (that I found hard not to make) was Illuminating.
I could not have drawn these conclusions had the site and the photographs not been totally credible.
2) A lot of people still aren't buying smart phones because they're really expensive. It looks like U.S. smartphone penetration in general is around 50%: http://www.google.com/search?q=smart+phone+penetration+unite... , and most of them don't have cameras nearly this good and won't for a while. People who can afford a $50 – $200 pocket camera might not want to pay more than $100 a month for a smartphone data plan.
3) That being said, the smart money is definitely on the low-end pocket camera going away over time.
4) High-end cameras, even pocket ones (think the Canon S95 or S100 class) are going to be around for a long time. Ditto dSLRs. Until the laws of physics get violated, dSLRs are going to take vastly better pictures than camera phones. Which doesn't matter to most people but does to a substantial minority.
Will that happen? Seems likely, given current trends - phone cameras like the 4S are (nearly?) good enough now, I think.