15 ms·

iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

377 points by dsego 7y ago

samvher 7y ago
These night mode shots are seriously impressive. This might give DSLR manufacturers something to catch up with.
- ansgri 7y ago
  DSLR manufacturers already have compact mirrorless to catch up with. Now only if the mirrorless moguls would recognize the potential of ehnancing their comparatively giant APS-C sensors with at least half the computational photography wits of modern camera phones, now that would be magnificent. Also, for me personally, the next waypoint for the phones should be the development of compact telephoto lenses -- it seems only Huawei got that right with their P30Pro.
  - dagw 7y ago
    I wonder why traditional camera manufacturers have been so reluctant to leverage the advances in computational photography that the mobile phone world has embraced. I mean I get why they want to have neutral default settings for people who want to do their own editing, but why are their 'scene' settings so crap when compared to mobile phones. Is it simply because they're worried that a sufficiently powerful processor is going to draw too much power?
    - willis936 7y ago
      Conservative management. What happens to those who don’t swim?
      - fock 7y ago
        I'm into taking photos to craft an image of reality. Myself. I couldn't care less for any AI crafting it's image of typical reality for me. I think that's quite set for anyone taking pictures for fun vs. admoney/instafame/...
        ansgri 7y ago
        There's still such thing as physically correct image reconstruction, i.e. removing technical limitations via computational means. Super-resolution, focus stacking, HDR (proper one, without fake colors), highlight color preservation (try to photograph light source while preserving color while not underexposing everything around). Basically, make images that are currently possible on $3000+ hardware, on $600 hardware. There's also such thing as perceptually correct image rendering, but that's a whole another can of worms (image appearance models and the like), it isn't scientifically ready just yet.
        fock 7y ago
        And you can do all of this with an ILC too and will profit from the fact that it has far less technical limitations. Basically most of the really "cool" applications center around using the electronic shutter which up to 2-3years ago none of the ILC-companies dared to offer for the masses because it has some shortcomings which the "hey I can finally shoot in the dark"-crowd might not notice/care about, but people buying an ILC will, even if they're not technical enough to understand that it's their own problem...
        ansgri 7y ago
        I was talking of compact ILCs specifically, that they would profit from this to become comparable with bulky 'pro' gear.
        fock 7y ago
        ah, but then if you look at µ4/3 it's already there (6k/30fps bursts with the electronic shutter for selection afterwards, pixelshift to improve resolution, ...)
    - KineticLensman 7y ago
      I can't speak for the manufacturers but as a DLSR user I love the total predictability (exposure, DoF, focus, etc) when it is in manual mode. I really don't want the camera to try to anticipate the type of picture I am aiming for. This totally applies to scenes. Portrait, sports, landscape, etc are all just different permutations of shutter speed, aperture and ISO.
  - charrondev 7y ago
    I’m not sure how it is at APS-C (I use a full frame DSLR) but I don’t think there’s much room in the workflow of a lot people using DSLRs for more computation I’m the camera itself. I know if I want a _great_ picture I - shoot raw. - shoot on manual mode (often still with auto exposure). - put the photo into Lightroom. With a huge sensor and a fast lens there’s no need for a lot of the computational photography phones are doing: - “portrait mode” - unneeded when you have a fast lens and can get more real bokeh than you could ever need. - “night mode” - with modern sensors you can get usable images even at 6400/12800 ISO. This lets you get a solid image even at a reasonable, handheld shutter speed. The real improvement other than sensor dynamic range and pixel count has been in autofocus. I still miss some some shots with my Canon because I didn’t react fast enough to nail my focus.
    - ansgri 7y ago
      It's exactly about rising the performance of current inexpensive APS-C cameras to the level of professional full-frame models. As an amateur photographer I'd never take with me a mammoth gear that is some Canon 5D mk3 w/ 70-200 F/4, yet I'm somehow pretty sure that some good processing would allow a compact like Sony a6000 w/ 18-135 F/5.6 get close to its performance in 90% of cases. The thing is, I sometimes can do that in Lr/Ps, but it's just much more work than I'd like to do for most of the photos.
    - prolepunk 7y ago
      Panasonic has really good image stabilization for MFT systems where lens stabilization and sensor stabilization system work in tandem allowing to take shots with up to 1 second exposure handheld. Basically it's like having gimble inside the camera. Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 (50mm f/3.5 equivalent full frame) is under $200 and is an excellent portrait lens. With initial release of GH5 autofocus was pretty bad, but with the last firmware upgrade apparently it's quite good now. I however cant yet justify upgrade from GH4, which doesn't have sensor stabilization.
  - jug 7y ago
    > would recognize the potential Oh I'm sure they've recognized the potential all right. But these smartphone manufacturers have massive software development departments with heaps of funds poured into AI research for multiple reasons other than this specific field, which is now really starting to benefit them. It's a different culture. And even if we assume a camera manufacturer would have the finances to build this culture on their home turf (a huge assumption to make), they then run into the next problem that their sensors are too big! They can't compete as strongly here because they capture much more information with their larger sensor sizes and even with tiny smartphone sizes, you need laptop level performance on a ~7-10 nm transistor scale and dedicated AI hardware to pull it off without destroying battery life. They're so far behind both in know how and difficulty of the problem that I'm not sure how they'll ever be able to do it in the foreseeable future at least with full frame cameras.
    - ansgri 7y ago
      > they capture much more information with their larger sensor sizes Most modern cameras are around 24 MPx irrespective of sensor size, this one is 3x12=36 MPx which is about the same total information content (or even less) given these 24 MPx have more bits per pixel. Another point in case is that one could implement more in-camera techniques for collecting raw data for further offline processing, like focus stacking or aperture simulation which today require external hardware and a decent amount of skill.
- oflannabhra 7y ago
  I would love someone to design and manufacture an enclosure for an iPhone that allowed for better ergonomics and controls. I think the Camera app is one of the pinnacles of Apple's software engineering, but sometimes shooting on my DSLR really makes me value how beneficial things like knobs and buttons. Obviously this might require using a 3rd party app as well, but I would gladly pay several hundred dollars for such a device.
  - coldtea 7y ago
    >I would love someone to design and manufacture an enclosure for an iPhone that allowed for better ergonomics and controls There are several third party solutions that offer just that, have been for years, e.g.: https://icdn9.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/pictar-iphone-camera-case-wm-5-1347x898.jpg https://icdn9.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/pictar-i... http://blog.incipio.com/home/incipio-focal-wireless-bluetooth-camera-case-for-iphone-55s.html http://blog.incipio.com/home/incipio-focal-wireless-bluetoot... and even more mainstream brands...
  - charlieegan3 7y ago
    I've thought about this a lot, it's certainly something I want too. I think a case with a dial in each corner for shutter speed, ev compensation, aperture and iso would be enough for me to consider selling my camera. Perhaps they could even be customised? For now, being able to quickly set one of these values depending on the scene is very important to me - so I keep the camera going for now...
  - pdpi 7y ago
    The next step over from that logic is Fuji's XT-3 (and other cameras in that line) that have brought back many of the physical controls that have been removed from newer DSLR cameras.
- elicash 7y ago
  I'm not a photo guy -- I have like 4 photos on my phone total (one for each of the people I care the most about -- but it seems to me like Apple should just create a DSLR camera. It doesn't seem any more out-of-place for them as the HomePod, the idea of which is to have a bigger device just for listening because there's a physics limit to just using a tiny device for outputting sound. They then combine that with super advanced software for something unique. Doesn't sound different from photography, to me. Why wouldn't Apple want to create the best camera in the world?
  - tyri_kai_psomi 7y ago
    Because it is much more lucrative for them to have a phone with the best camera in the world.
    - elicash 7y ago
      In some ways, this reminds me of the debate over whether it's "worth it" to make the Mac Pro. As a percentage of sales it's tiny. But there are other reasons they do it that aren't about the profit they get from that single device sold, other ways it impacts the company.
  - dagw 7y ago
    Why wouldn't Apple want to create the best camera in the world? To create "the best camera in the world" you have to be really really good at optics, sensor design and signal processing. Apples core strength using very clever software tricks to make pictures that look really good on a computer screen despite bad bad optics and sensors (in an absolute sense).
- fock 7y ago
  From a technical point of view I'm quite sure my >10 years old Rebel XSi will yield similar photos after editing the raw-file. If you are impressed by this you're probably not really following the tech, don't have any clue about image processing and are just blindly following what Apples advertising is selling you. Most of the "cool" iphone-pictures in non-optimal lighting are about 50% post-processing and they show (for example the linked pictures are about 1.5MP and while they have nicely matched colors, there's barely any texture left (it's the same for the ads on apple.com). This might be fine for viewing and even a small print but that's nothing a DSLR of yore couldn't do. And believe me, once you print a poster of the nice fisherman and compare image quality form the iPhone and a modern ILC you'll see that there's a lot to catch up for the iPhone. I'd take a typical ILC for ~300 USD over a iPhone everyday from a technical point of view (and so would most photographers if there wasn't the ad-money)
  - nicoburns 7y ago
    You clearly didn't read the article (which covers the technical details of night mode). It's taking multiple exposures at different shutter speeds and combining together. Allowing you to take sharp photos with long exposure times, hand held. Your Rebel XSi (and even the latest Rebel) can't do that (although they have the advantage of a bigger sensor).
    - fock 7y ago
      Yeah I read the article alright, but what I see there is something you can do just fine "handheld" with any cheap(ish) ILC. Arguably the method is relatively irrelevant for such comparison.
  - samvher 7y ago
    Thanks for the kind words! I would honestly be curious to see a low light comparison with (older or newer) DSLRs. You might be right that the comparisons on this blog post exaggerate the performance because the XS is just terrible, but the process described in the post where a series of images are merged together in post processing and you can make long-exposure hand-held shots is just not something that's going to work in DSLRs easily. I can imagine that there are situations where this would make certain shots feasible that would have motion blur on a DSLR. Then again, I've imagined wrong before.
gniv 7y ago
Beautiful photos, but why is the Exif scrubbed? I would have liked to see details.
- henryaj 7y ago
  Good question. To remove GPS metadata perhaps?
  - DonHopkins 7y ago
    I always thought it would be safer to forge the GPS data so it points to a police station, instead of just removing it. Then your stalkers and thieves might be arrested for loitering and breaking and entering there, instead of at your own home.
    - zaroth 7y ago
      Which police station? What coordinates precisely? Could there be signs of which software you used to alter the data? All these things could leak bits of identifying information, which I think is strictly worse than the 1 bit of information leaked by removing EXIF entirely.
      - DonHopkins 7y ago
        One that will cost your enemies a lot of money to travel to, in a dangerous neighborhood, with a long record of police brutality and violence.
    - penagwin 7y ago
      > Then your stalkers and thieves might be arrested for loitering and breaking and entering there, instead of at your own home. So I have 0 experience as a stalker - but won't they put that data into Google maps, see it's a police station, and probably assume that isn't your home? You'd have to be really brave and stupid to loiter and break and enter a station thinking it was somebody's home.
- mrfusion 7y ago
jonlucc 7y ago
The photography in these kinds of reviews is amazing, and the camera looks pretty stellar compared to the XS, but I find myself reading them wondering if it will make my pictures any better. I'm a mediocre photographer at best, and I'm certainly not going to be able to capture many images like the ones in this review.
- philliphaydon 7y ago
  I think if you learn the rule of 2 thirds then it helps a lot. The few people I’ve taught that rule to are much happier with their photos.
  - jonlucc 7y ago
    Agreed. I took a photography class in college, and I've turned the guidelines on for previews. I still don't have the command of light and expertise with framing demonstrated here, and I'm not carrying a tripod with me anywhere.
    - scott_s 7y ago
      I've been taking pictures with my iPhone for years and I never knew about the guidelines as an option. (Or I did, and I turned them off many phones ago without realizing their benefit, forgot, and the settings have been dragged with me since.) Thank you.
    - penagwin 7y ago
      IMO the guidelines should be on by default. It's the first setting I change when I get a new phone or camera. Like you said even if you're not a "photographer" it can make a huge difference. EDIT: Also even if somebody has no clue what they're for, it can help keep the image level at the very least.
- graeme 7y ago
  John Gruber and Matthew Panzerino have good reviews in this respect. Very regular shots. Panzerino does year on year comparisons at Disneyland with his family. https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/the_iphone_11_and_iphones_11_pro https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/the_iphone_11_and_iphones... https://techcrunch.com/2019/09/17/iphone-11-pro-disney-after-dark/ https://techcrunch.com/2019/09/17/iphone-11-pro-disney-after...
familysized 7y ago
The fisherman seen in that photo is also in these very similar photos... http://davidbuddphotography.com/galleries/01-places/china/guilin-yangshou-comorant-fisherman/ http://davidbuddphotography.com/galleries/01-places/china/gu...
- coldtea 7y ago
  "Fisherman/men in a canoe like boat at dusk/night in asia" is such a cliche it should be forbidden... Knowing the journalist/fixer trade a little, this is some well known place/person, and photographers who go to China are taken by their local helpers (who know the drill) there to shoot "interesting" pictures. This fisherman guy probably makes (or could make) more money posing for tourists than fishing...
  - chapium 7y ago
    That photo is from guilin, and I have similar photos. The "fishermen" take people on raft (gondola) rides and will even sing to you in their local dialect. They also like to pick out the most foreign looking tourists and encourage them to sing as well. Guilin is amazing photography-wise, but the tourism there has a very manufactured feel to it, as it does in most of the very popular places to visit there.
  - PStamatiou 7y ago
    You can pay a photographer guide to help you get this exact shot. Author used this, as suggested by the footer perhaps: https://www.mercierzeng.com/guilin-photography-tours https://www.mercierzeng.com/guilin-photography-tours This kind of stuff exists for many popular shots with local photographers you can hire to take you and even have you get up close with locals.
- gregkerzhner 7y ago
  this guy runs a really popular tourist photography show in Yangshuo, China, which is one of the most popular tourist destinations within China both for local Chinese and foreigners. He uses a bird to catch fish for him. The birds throat is clamped so it cannot swallow the fish. I think it reflects an old way that fishing used to happen, but nowadays it’s purely a show for photographer tourists and you have to pay him some money for the show. (Shamless plug, but here is a video my wife and I made of our climbing trip to the region - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnlYUA-fmTE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnlYUA-fmTE)
dep_b 7y ago
Just wondering how much this is really just software performing the "upgrade"? The Pixel 3 camera app made every camera better in the end.
- ChuckNorris89 7y ago
  This! The sideloaded pixel camera app made me want to hold on to my 3 year old One Plus 3 for more years to come.
- decoyworker 7y ago
  The new iPhone camera looks pretty sweet but the part that I'm starting to disagree with is what they call, "semantic rendering." This is where the camera recognizes different things in the photo and treats them different like sharpening some areas, smoothing others, etc. To me this this aspect feels like basically an Instagram filter. Are we going for accuracy or how pleasing the photos are? They're definitely more pleasing but not an accurate representation.
  - erikpukinskis 7y ago
    There is no such thing as an accurate image. What your brain sees when it looks at an image is totally different from what it would see if it was standing in front of the lens. And what my brain would see is different still. Lenses are subjective. The question is: what do you want to see, and what lenses see that?
djschnei 7y ago
@Austin Mann, https://letsencrypt.org/ https://letsencrypt.org/
- egwynn 7y ago
  Looks like it’s on SquareSpace, which does their own cert provisioning. Maybe the author just hasn’t set that up or has it misconfigured.
irrational 7y ago
>We are truly in a golden age for taking pictures of dark shit with phone cameras. Apparently I take pictures of different things than the author. Different kinks for different folks I guess.
truth_seeker 7y ago
I recently started appreciating 60fps screen but, iPhone 11 came up with 240 fps Galaxy Note10+ came up with 960fps and now Huawei Mate 30 Pro with 7680 fps
- celeritascelery 7y ago
  At what point is it no longer noticeable?
  - beisner 7y ago
    120fps
    - samwhiteUK 7y ago
      Erm, the numbers he/she is quoting are video framerates
  - tasuki 7y ago
    Very early, but that's beside the point. The point is one can make a slow-motion video out of a high-fps one.
- saiya-jin 7y ago
  Those are video framerates, usable for slowing down things like jumps to water / with skis etc. No screen for general public has 7k+ framerate, would be completely useless waste of energy (and money for expensive research)
- Synaesthesia 7y ago
  That high FPS mode will be at a tiny resolution and need tons of light. Still interesting of course. Edit: I stand corrected it’s still 720p
jug 7y ago
I feel for the compact camera manufacturers. Smartphones killed the 2/3" sensor market. Now they've killed the 1" sensor market too. Micro 4/3 is stale with no major sensor advancements for years now. What's left, APS-C and up?
- criddell 7y ago
  I feel for all camera manufacturers. Why isn't there a Canon or Nikon or Sony cloud service where photos are sent to? Why haven't the big camera companies embraced computation in their cameras? Do DSLR bodies even have GPS capabilities for tagging photos? It feels like there's no innovation in the camera space outside of Apple and Google.
  - fock 7y ago
    I have an app on my mobile, where I can upload my pictures from the cam via Wifi and then share them if I feel the need. I'm fine with that and syncthing just get's away with the stuff. And yeah, DSLR bodies do have GPS but since they have a kind of "real" GPS it's more expensive and more power hungry, hence it's not really mainstream. (and about your phone's GPS: just enable flight mode and try to use it. Enjoy!)
  - freddie_mercury 7y ago
    What makes you think they haven't embraced computation in their cameras? https://www.sony-asia.com/microsite/assets/cyber-shot/2012h1/wx150/bionz/index.html https://www.sony-asia.com/microsite/assets/cyber-shot/2012h1...
    - criddell 7y ago
      Sony has the best chance of surviving IMHO. My #1 complaint about Sony is how awful they are at naming their stuff. Leica will survive too, but mostly because they are beautiful things.
  - jug 7y ago
    I posted about this in another thread here but I think it's basically about the larger sensor sizes causes ridiculous CPU demands. Consider how even on an iPhone 11 with a tiny sensor, you need a 7 nm CPU with dedicated AI circuitry to do it seamlessly and with maintained battery life. That feels like a mountain to climb for them, and then their sensor problem isn't even solved.
mtw 7y ago
I would love a high-resolution photos of these. The small size look amazing for phones like Huawei P30 Pro or Samsung Note 10, but then you realize that the full size version has blotched textures or excessive sharpness
- wrboyce 7y ago
  Gruber has the originals on his review: https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/the_iphone_11_and_iphones_11_pro https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/the_iphone_11_and_iphones...
  - sh-run 7y ago
    People have always questioned the usefulness of smaller sensor cameras (Ie M43) with the improvement in cellphone cameras, but it looks like I'll still carry my Olympus EM5.2 when I travel. The iPhone 11 gets great social media photos, but I wouldn't want to get any of those printed (at least not larger than 4x6). Of course the best camera is the one you have with you so I am still happy to see the improvements over my Xr and my wife's 8+.
    - pwython 7y ago
      M43 cameras are still relevant as the depth of field blur in these phone cameras is faked, sometimes with odd results. An f/1.8 aperture on most camera sensors translates to something like an f/8 full frame equivalent (for comparison, f/1.8 on M43 looks like f/3.6 on full frame). It still lets the same amount of light in, but there's no shallow depth/blur.
      - sh-run 7y ago
        Yeah, there's also the benefits you get from longer exposures and the ability to swap lenses. I carry an Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 and Panasonic 100-300mm f/4-5.6, which gives me a massive focal length range to play with in a relatively small package. For a hobbyist like me M43 is great and won't be replaced by a cell phone any time soon. And as much as I'd like an A7iii I can't justify the extra cost and lens size for what I do.
mewse-hn 7y ago
How could anyone read this without knowing it's an advertisement: "today I’m just as thrilled to be putting an entirely new Ultra Wide lens in my pocket. It gives us another format to tell the story, another perspective to visualize, and a better rounded tool for doing our best creative work."
- helpPeople 7y ago
  Stockholm Syndrome? But yes, it's good that you were able to see it. I find marketing unethical, most people don't even realize that they are being advertised to.
  - jacobush 7y ago
    If it's VERY CLEARLY shown, it's not too bad. But think for a moment if advertising only had access to one font, 1000 characters length of text, including spaces, and at most 15% of the ad real estate for images. Plus a warning sign, reminding everyone that repeated exposure to propaganda can change one's mind, even though one is aware. :-)
  - briandear 7y ago
    > I find marketing unethical That’s a strange view. Taken to an extreme, that would be a restaurant without an exterior sign, menus, or even a waiter explaining the food. You would literally know nothing about any product or service without marketing. Marketing is the act of “bringing a product to market.” Marketing isn’t advertising. A farmer displaying tomatoes on a table at a farmers market is marketing. A farmer buying billboard space with a photo of his tomatoes is advertising. There isn’t anything unethical about either practice. Communicating about the availability of a product shouldn’t be considered unethical. Lying about that product on the other hand..
    - helpPeople 7y ago
      >Lying about that product on the other hand.. What if things are not prove able? Like "most secure", but their metric is fastest patching. It's not actually secure, but they have logic. Technically true, but intentionally misleading. I don't suggest getting caught up in the Innocence of having a brick and mortar sign. This is not what we worry about. What do we learn from a beer commercial showing hot girls? Or a tech commercial showing people dancing. These are feelings unrelated to the product. These specific examples don't scratch the surface. The best marketing, you don't see.
todipa 7y ago
I have the Nikon full frame D850 along with the holy trilogy of lenses (14-24mm + 24-70mm + 70-200mm f2.8 zoom lenses). in 2018, for every picture I took with the D800/850, I took +200 iphone pictures. I still believe there is room for a high caliber camera but I don't want to own it anymore, I just want to rent whenever I need it.
- kalleboo 7y ago
  I want a high caliber camera but I never want to have to carry it around with me...
  - eatbitseveryday 7y ago
    If discouraged by the weight, but not the price, consider a compact Leica (e.g., the Q).
- stordoff 7y ago
  There's a common saying that the best camera is the one you have with you. We're getting to the point where the one you have with you is more than good enough for many situations anyway.
post_break 7y ago
What I'd like to see is a direct comparison of an Xs running neuralcam and the 11 night mode. I've taken a couple of photos so far and the app has done wonders. https://imgur.com/a/BwvW6J8 https://imgur.com/a/BwvW6J8
- Synaesthesia 7y ago
  Nice one, I’ve been looking for an app like that. The new iPhone does seem like it has a great camera but I wish Apple would bring “night mode” for all the other iPhones.
  - post_break 7y ago
    So far I like the app. It doesn't work miracles but definitely helps in low light situations. You have to hold it still while it does the work, and the best part is that it is all on the phone, no internet needed for it to work. I'm stingy but this is one app I actually bought and didn't feel ripped off.
_coveredInBees 7y ago
I think the iPhone 11 makes some good advances as outlined in the linked article, but a lot of the pictures didn't particularly wow me at all from a camera capabilities perspective. A bunch of the images at the top of the article are nice, but that is entirely due to the photographer's skill at composing aesthetically pleasing shots and have little to do with the actual capabilities of the iPhone 11. As someone who owned the LG G3 years ago, and absolutely loved the wide-angle lens on that phone, most of these pictures would look identical. I guess the point I am making is that while it's exciting to have a wide-angle lens on the iPhone 11, it doesn't in any way move the bar compared to what's been out there for a while. Where the iPhone 11 has improved drastically, is with night mode shots, and that's somewhere it has been lacking substantially compared to the competition. They've done a really good job catching up and maybe even surpassing the competition in some areas. Kudos to them for that. That being said, you aren't going to get great prints out of night mode images for anything much larger than post-card sized prints with the iPhone 11 (or any other smart phone camera to be honest). I love the image of the person in the boat at dusk, but even at the size displayed, you can see a bunch of artifacts from noise reduction. As much as everyone loves to hate on DSLRs these days, you are going to get much cleaner images in these light starved environments with a large sensor and good lens. I personally think it's absurd to make that comparison, but I just had to say this because every article about the latest smartphone camera ends up having a bunch of comments about how they are superior to DSLRs at this point (which they are on the computational photography side of things, but good luck getting clean, large prints out of a phone camera, especially in low-light situations)
- fock 7y ago
  thanks!
- frereubu 7y ago
  The original image of the person on the boat at dusk is 1000 x 667 pixels, so I'm pretty sure they cropped that. It's also being displayed at 1500 pixels wide, so it's being enlarged from the original. It's a Squarespace site, and I wouldn't mind betting that either Squarespace or the author did some compression on the photo before they uploaded it so the page wasn't slow to load too. I'm not sure there's much you can tell from the quality of that image.
Gravityloss 7y ago
I have two requirements for camera: fast startup time from a standby to taking photos, and working touch exposure control. The majority of phones I've tested do not provide these. For some reason, on Oneplus 5 it works. I tested a newer model and it was worse. Sure, on a newer phone the photos are better for example resolution wise, but that's usually not the limiting factor. I have some street photo / rangefinder hobby background where the idea is to not endlessly twiddle some knobs but be able to take technically decent enough photos quickly. No posing or setting up a still life but real events. When I carried a dedicated camera, it wasn't in a bag but in my neck, usually even without a lens cap. Fixed focal length lens, Canon Canonet or Panasonic GF. It's not necessary about automation or "AI" that helps you to be quick, but rather just less features and actual working interfaces.
- ricardobeat 7y ago
  > working touch exposure control what do you mean? A long press gives you immediate access to exposure on the iPhone. There are also dedicated photo apps (like Halide, mentioned in the article) that offer more advanced controls.
  - Gravityloss 7y ago
    Let's say I'm photographing someone who is backlit, against the sky. By default, the person looks like black silhouette since the camera chooses an exposure that doesn't make the sky completely white. I also don't want to have the person in the center of the frame, because that would be really boring framing. Photography 101. On my current phone I can do the framing how I want, then touch the person on the touch screen. The phone instantly readjusts the exposure upwards so that now the person is more properly exposed and the sky is overexposed. This is what I wanted. Then I continue on to take the photo. This doesn't seem to work on many other phones. I never enter any menus or do any wheel adjustments. It takes extremely little time and is a very natural workflow. On a rangefinder camera one would aim the center of the screen at the person, then hold the shutter halfway so it would pick the exposure from there, then frame (=aim somewhere else) and take the photo. If you have autofocus, it also focuses on the half-press. In neither case are there any manual adjustments or looking at any buttons. Your eyes are on the viewfinder / photo area all the time.
ioulian 7y ago
The pictures do look good, the colors are nice and the small image on the page is nice. But I haven't seen any 100% crops or full images. it's there that you'll see that the image is worse than a DSLR or another camera with a big lens and sensor. I can get nice pictures (= vibrant and nice colors) with any camera, what I can't get is a sharp image, with sharp edges. I went to a trip with my Android Phone and DSLR, and my GF has an iPhone 6. We took pictures with all 3 devices. When I looked at jpg photos from Android phone on my PC, they had all "perfect" (=vibrant and catchy) colors, but when you zoom in, it's all a blurry mess with no detail. The iPhone was nice and sharp (at least much sharper than the android pics). The DSLR was of course the sharpest one. Now on the android phone, I have a "pro" settings that captures RAW image. And it's incredibly sharp, the colors are bland of course, but the data is there and we can add/process the colors in post. But why is the image so much worse when using JPG. My idea it that normal jpg has HDR enabled and is being processed too much, thus losing a lot of detail. You don't get that loss when capturing RAW. What I'm afraid is that the new iPhone dark mode (or even the P30 Pro and other phones with post processing) will also process the images too much and stack them thus losing a lot of detail. When put on instagram or made smaller for Facebook/websites, you won't see the missing details, but the colors will be vibrant and that's "good enough" for most people. When I take a picture I rather have the real RAW data in the picture instead of processed jpg that I can't control. What do you guys think about the automatic post processing done by your device, that when done incorrectly, you'll lose a perfect picture because the implementation just lost you a lot of detail... I guess the post processing trend is there because you just can't make a good lens and sensor that small and still have nice results. The phone makers are just trying to fix this with post processing...
- wrboyce 7y ago
  FWIW there are multiple links to reviews with full-size images in these comments.
  - ioulian 7y ago
    Ok, just looked at these images: https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/the_iphone_11_and_iphones_11_pro https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/the_iphone_11_and_iphones... in full res and indeed, they are very blurry and the detail loss is still there: look at the hairs of the dog: https://daringfireball.net/misc/2019/09/iphones-11-review/mochi-portrait-1x-11pro.jpg https://daringfireball.net/misc/2019/09/iphones-11-review/mo... They are all blurry Is it possible to shoot RAW with iPhone?
bondolo 7y ago
Can it make and receive telephone calls?
dharma1 7y ago
How much better is the Pro camera than regular iPhone 11 camera?
- briandear 7y ago
  Cameras and chips are identical, however the Pro gives you the Telephoto lens. (That’s the “third” lens on Pro.)
  - pcl 7y ago
    Actually, it’s the ultra wide lens that is unique to the pro.
    - jvzr 7y ago
      No, it's the telephoto. The 11 has the ultrawide.
    - fetus8 7y ago
      No, briandear is right. The Pro has the telephoto, and the wide and ultrawide, where as the 11 just has the wide and ultrawide.
    - djrogers 7y ago
      No, you have it backwards - the 11 got the utlra-wide lens as it's second camera. [1] https://www.apple.com/iphone-11/ https://www.apple.com/iphone-11/
  - heyoni 7y ago
    Does the telephoto help at all with photos unless it's for zooming in and out?
anonu 7y ago
Its amazing to me that the smartphone wars are now just about cameras.... and more broadly content generation. It also amazes me that everyone's is wooed over these iPhone specs. I've had my OnePlus 7T Pro for a few months now. Most of the top-line specs match or beat the new iPhone. Nightscape on the OnePlus is also amazing - takes great low light photos. Seems like iPhone has been chasing some of the more advanced Android-phones for a few generations now.
- ngngngng 7y ago
  I hate my one plus 7 pros camera. It's terrible after a Pixel 2. I'm planning on getting my wife a Pixel 4 so one of us has a good camera.
- SamBam 7y ago
  What I want to know is whether there are any phone-sized stand-alone cameras that can compete with any of the modern amazing phone cameras. I love my Pixel 2's camera, it shoots gorgeous pictures, but I'm seriously considering downsizing my phone significantly. I'd love to have a nearly-dumb-phone but... can't give up the camera. If someone sold a standalone camera that is as portable and as good, I would take it and a dumb-phone in a minute.
  - petepete 7y ago
    It's not _quite_ as small but _way_ better than every smart phone camera on the market, the Ricoh GR3. http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/gr-3/ http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/gr-3/
- turtlebits 7y ago
  It's because processor performance and screens are already way past good enough. My phone is 2 generations old and is fast enough. The only thing I would possibly wish for is a better camera.
Abishek_Muthian 7y ago
Good to know that iPhone 11 Pro camera holds up to the expectations of a professional photographer. Now everyone else should aspire to be a professional photographer and buy iPhone 11 Pro according to Apple.
m0skit0 7y ago
I never considered the camera when buying a phone, and in fact would love a price discount in higher phone models with a cheaper or even no cameras. Question for professional photographers from someone that has no idea about photography: why would you use a phone when you can use your professional camera?
- gnomesteel 7y ago
  >why would you use a phone when you can use your professional camera? Most don't. Having a great smartphone camera is mostly about convince for pros. It's always there, and sometimes your pro camera isn't.
- throwaway2265 7y ago
  I’ve been doing professional photography for over a decade, having used a wide range of DSLR’s and mirrorless cameras. I really enjoy using my iPhone for photography when not working. It removes the friction of taking photos. I don’t have to carry a large camera while traveling, don’t have to charge extra things, it’s just overall easier. Whatever quality I’m losing is made up by simply capturing more moments than I otherwise would have if I was using my DSLR.
- sosborn 7y ago
  There is a wide range of professional photography and a good smartphone camera can fill some of those needs. Shooting for a magazine? You’ll want a dslr. Shooting for social media in a professional context? The phone is great.
joering2 7y ago
Still prefer how Pixel 3 photos look like on the phone that was released a year ago [1]. Interestingly I recall my first Android to be Samsung i977 some 9 years ago and photos were more vivid than iPhone X. However Pixel comes with unlimited (!!) photo and 4k video storage [2]. Apple cannot beat that. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_3 [2] https://store.google.com/product/pixel_3 https://store.google.com/product/pixel_3
- Diederich 7y ago
  > However Pixel comes with unlimited (!!) photo and 4k video storage [2]. Yup, this is why we switched to Pixel, back when the first version came out, and we haven't looked back.
rolltiide 7y ago
Its nice that his wishlist are all software ux tweaks I’ll be getting the Iphone 11 Pro for the camera technology and wide support, along with the dual SIM feature that I’d like to know more about
zihotki 7y ago
It would be interesting to see how it will score in DxOMark (the best unbiased source for comparing both mobile and standalone cameras) tests comparing to current top-players. This review feels biased.
mantoto 7y ago
Super weird to read this text. I just came home from our first Japan trip and we both had a DSLR with us and three lenses. Heavy to carry around. I expect 3-4k pictures from dslrs and 2k made by our smartphones. I'm really curious how our end result will look like. I expect 100-300 images but this is our first holiday where we took considerable amounts of pictures/snapshots by phone. At least on my Samsung s9 and my wives pixel 3a lots of those images look sharp.
shinyeyes 7y ago
I wonder when Apple will address the elephant in the room: "how can we keep our lens always clean like our SLR lenses?" iPhone is a good camera but I haven't found any good case to keep it dust-free. It's even worse nowadays with lens bumps.
La-ang 7y ago
I have a word for you Apple fans: H U A W E I
c0nsilienc3 7y ago
Exotic locations and good light make a better photo than simply having the newest iPhone--I think everyone here can agree. Brian Chen, whom I respect, from NYTimes reviewed the newest iPhone and compared all his notes, photos, and videos to his iPhone reviews in the past and said there was hardly a difference in quality and performance. I'm not saying the camera advancements aren't nice, but as a working photographer I have pretty strong opinions about some of the new features like night shot. There are already apps that exist for iOS that do this (take multiple photos and average them out to produce a brighter image with less noise). Also, I believe that if it's really too dark to take a good photo, it's not worth taking a photo at all because even the night shot image won't look that great (and of course they look great when you see them because they are side-by-side comparisons with the darker, more crappy photo, but as standalone photos they look like garbage). I'd rather find or make good light if I want to take a portrait.
Hamuko 7y ago
Does this mean that I can justify the staggering price of an iPhone 11 Pro by saying that I won't be needing a new camera? Not that I was really in market for a new point-and-shoot, but I feel like I need something to justify it.
kitchenkarma 7y ago
Can someone explain to me what is so special in those photos? These look like snapped on the phone...
ctdonath 7y ago
I want to see an app: full frame high rate recording with all cameras, marking "photos" as time & subframe. From there, be able to later roll individual "photos" forward/back in time, and shift/rotate/zoom/interpolate within that video space. When satisfied, dump the (massive) video and keep the selected photos. Likewise for sub-videos. I want to focus on getting photos without having to get it right at that moment. Get me ALL the image data, let me indicate what/when I want a picture of, and save details of framing & timing for later. Live Photos is just the smallest beginning of what we should be able to do with 3 60fps >4K cameras, a half terabyte storage, and an unlimited data plan.
Damogran6 7y ago
My DSLR is aging out...they've changed lens mounts (manufacturers seem to do that just long enough to blow the cost benefit of keeping lenses long term...I use my phone for 98% of my photos. The last one I actually printed out (a panorama) came from my iPhone XS Max. I just can't justify a $1200 camera purchase to replace my Sony A57...and I'm a little sad about it.
- iCarrot 7y ago
  It must have been the move to mirrorless that forced a mount change. Even Nikon abandoned their F mount line (which started in 1959) and introduced Z mount for their mirrorless. Also given how often Sony is churning out new cameras these days, going secondhand will save you serious dough.
  - Damogran6 7y ago
    I think you're right on all accounts. The adapter to let the old lenses work on the new bodies is the thickness of the pentaprism on the old camera. It's designed to keep the geometry of the stuff that got removed when they went mirrorless. A lightly used A-mount (like an A77) is an intriguing thought...if it had a kit lens, then my kids could keep using the a57 til it failed completely.
runjake 7y ago
For some perspective on this, go look at Austin's iPhone 6s camera review [1]. If you aren't shooting photos like his with your iPhone X, upgrading to an 11 series is not going to make much of a difference. 1. http://austinmann.com/trek/iphone-6s-camera-review-switzerland http://austinmann.com/trek/iphone-6s-camera-review-switzerla...

377 points by dsego 7y ago

samvher 7y ago

These night mode shots are seriously impressive. This might give DSLR manufacturers something to catch up with.

ansgri 7y ago
DSLR manufacturers already have compact mirrorless to catch up with. Now only if the mirrorless moguls would recognize the potential of ehnancing their comparatively giant APS-C sensors with at least half the computational photography wits of modern camera phones, now that would be magnificent. Also, for me personally, the next waypoint for the phones should be the development of compact telephoto lenses -- it seems only Huawei got that right with their P30Pro.
- dagw 7y ago
  I wonder why traditional camera manufacturers have been so reluctant to leverage the advances in computational photography that the mobile phone world has embraced. I mean I get why they want to have neutral default settings for people who want to do their own editing, but why are their 'scene' settings so crap when compared to mobile phones. Is it simply because they're worried that a sufficiently powerful processor is going to draw too much power?
  - willis936 7y ago
    Conservative management. What happens to those who don’t swim?
    - fock 7y ago
      I'm into taking photos to craft an image of reality. Myself. I couldn't care less for any AI crafting it's image of typical reality for me. I think that's quite set for anyone taking pictures for fun vs. admoney/instafame/...
      - ansgri 7y ago
        There's still such thing as physically correct image reconstruction, i.e. removing technical limitations via computational means. Super-resolution, focus stacking, HDR (proper one, without fake colors), highlight color preservation (try to photograph light source while preserving color while not underexposing everything around). Basically, make images that are currently possible on $3000+ hardware, on $600 hardware. There's also such thing as perceptually correct image rendering, but that's a whole another can of worms (image appearance models and the like), it isn't scientifically ready just yet.
        fock 7y ago
        And you can do all of this with an ILC too and will profit from the fact that it has far less technical limitations. Basically most of the really "cool" applications center around using the electronic shutter which up to 2-3years ago none of the ILC-companies dared to offer for the masses because it has some shortcomings which the "hey I can finally shoot in the dark"-crowd might not notice/care about, but people buying an ILC will, even if they're not technical enough to understand that it's their own problem...
        ansgri 7y ago
        I was talking of compact ILCs specifically, that they would profit from this to become comparable with bulky 'pro' gear.
        fock 7y ago
        ah, but then if you look at µ4/3 it's already there (6k/30fps bursts with the electronic shutter for selection afterwards, pixelshift to improve resolution, ...)
  - KineticLensman 7y ago
    I can't speak for the manufacturers but as a DLSR user I love the total predictability (exposure, DoF, focus, etc) when it is in manual mode. I really don't want the camera to try to anticipate the type of picture I am aiming for. This totally applies to scenes. Portrait, sports, landscape, etc are all just different permutations of shutter speed, aperture and ISO.
- charrondev 7y ago
  I’m not sure how it is at APS-C (I use a full frame DSLR) but I don’t think there’s much room in the workflow of a lot people using DSLRs for more computation I’m the camera itself. I know if I want a _great_ picture I - shoot raw. - shoot on manual mode (often still with auto exposure). - put the photo into Lightroom. With a huge sensor and a fast lens there’s no need for a lot of the computational photography phones are doing: - “portrait mode” - unneeded when you have a fast lens and can get more real bokeh than you could ever need. - “night mode” - with modern sensors you can get usable images even at 6400/12800 ISO. This lets you get a solid image even at a reasonable, handheld shutter speed. The real improvement other than sensor dynamic range and pixel count has been in autofocus. I still miss some some shots with my Canon because I didn’t react fast enough to nail my focus.
  - ansgri 7y ago
    It's exactly about rising the performance of current inexpensive APS-C cameras to the level of professional full-frame models. As an amateur photographer I'd never take with me a mammoth gear that is some Canon 5D mk3 w/ 70-200 F/4, yet I'm somehow pretty sure that some good processing would allow a compact like Sony a6000 w/ 18-135 F/5.6 get close to its performance in 90% of cases. The thing is, I sometimes can do that in Lr/Ps, but it's just much more work than I'd like to do for most of the photos.
  - prolepunk 7y ago
    Panasonic has really good image stabilization for MFT systems where lens stabilization and sensor stabilization system work in tandem allowing to take shots with up to 1 second exposure handheld. Basically it's like having gimble inside the camera. Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 (50mm f/3.5 equivalent full frame) is under $200 and is an excellent portrait lens. With initial release of GH5 autofocus was pretty bad, but with the last firmware upgrade apparently it's quite good now. I however cant yet justify upgrade from GH4, which doesn't have sensor stabilization.
- jug 7y ago
  > would recognize the potential Oh I'm sure they've recognized the potential all right. But these smartphone manufacturers have massive software development departments with heaps of funds poured into AI research for multiple reasons other than this specific field, which is now really starting to benefit them. It's a different culture. And even if we assume a camera manufacturer would have the finances to build this culture on their home turf (a huge assumption to make), they then run into the next problem that their sensors are too big! They can't compete as strongly here because they capture much more information with their larger sensor sizes and even with tiny smartphone sizes, you need laptop level performance on a ~7-10 nm transistor scale and dedicated AI hardware to pull it off without destroying battery life. They're so far behind both in know how and difficulty of the problem that I'm not sure how they'll ever be able to do it in the foreseeable future at least with full frame cameras.
  - ansgri 7y ago
    > they capture much more information with their larger sensor sizes Most modern cameras are around 24 MPx irrespective of sensor size, this one is 3x12=36 MPx which is about the same total information content (or even less) given these 24 MPx have more bits per pixel. Another point in case is that one could implement more in-camera techniques for collecting raw data for further offline processing, like focus stacking or aperture simulation which today require external hardware and a decent amount of skill.
oflannabhra 7y ago
I would love someone to design and manufacture an enclosure for an iPhone that allowed for better ergonomics and controls. I think the Camera app is one of the pinnacles of Apple's software engineering, but sometimes shooting on my DSLR really makes me value how beneficial things like knobs and buttons. Obviously this might require using a 3rd party app as well, but I would gladly pay several hundred dollars for such a device.
- coldtea 7y ago
  >I would love someone to design and manufacture an enclosure for an iPhone that allowed for better ergonomics and controls There are several third party solutions that offer just that, have been for years, e.g.: https://icdn9.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/pictar-iphone-camera-case-wm-5-1347x898.jpg https://icdn9.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/pictar-i... http://blog.incipio.com/home/incipio-focal-wireless-bluetooth-camera-case-for-iphone-55s.html http://blog.incipio.com/home/incipio-focal-wireless-bluetoot... and even more mainstream brands...
- charlieegan3 7y ago
  I've thought about this a lot, it's certainly something I want too. I think a case with a dial in each corner for shutter speed, ev compensation, aperture and iso would be enough for me to consider selling my camera. Perhaps they could even be customised? For now, being able to quickly set one of these values depending on the scene is very important to me - so I keep the camera going for now...
- pdpi 7y ago
  The next step over from that logic is Fuji's XT-3 (and other cameras in that line) that have brought back many of the physical controls that have been removed from newer DSLR cameras.
elicash 7y ago
I'm not a photo guy -- I have like 4 photos on my phone total (one for each of the people I care the most about -- but it seems to me like Apple should just create a DSLR camera. It doesn't seem any more out-of-place for them as the HomePod, the idea of which is to have a bigger device just for listening because there's a physics limit to just using a tiny device for outputting sound. They then combine that with super advanced software for something unique. Doesn't sound different from photography, to me. Why wouldn't Apple want to create the best camera in the world?
- tyri_kai_psomi 7y ago
  Because it is much more lucrative for them to have a phone with the best camera in the world.
  - elicash 7y ago
    In some ways, this reminds me of the debate over whether it's "worth it" to make the Mac Pro. As a percentage of sales it's tiny. But there are other reasons they do it that aren't about the profit they get from that single device sold, other ways it impacts the company.
- dagw 7y ago
  Why wouldn't Apple want to create the best camera in the world? To create "the best camera in the world" you have to be really really good at optics, sensor design and signal processing. Apples core strength using very clever software tricks to make pictures that look really good on a computer screen despite bad bad optics and sensors (in an absolute sense).
fock 7y ago
From a technical point of view I'm quite sure my >10 years old Rebel XSi will yield similar photos after editing the raw-file. If you are impressed by this you're probably not really following the tech, don't have any clue about image processing and are just blindly following what Apples advertising is selling you. Most of the "cool" iphone-pictures in non-optimal lighting are about 50% post-processing and they show (for example the linked pictures are about 1.5MP and while they have nicely matched colors, there's barely any texture left (it's the same for the ads on apple.com). This might be fine for viewing and even a small print but that's nothing a DSLR of yore couldn't do. And believe me, once you print a poster of the nice fisherman and compare image quality form the iPhone and a modern ILC you'll see that there's a lot to catch up for the iPhone. I'd take a typical ILC for ~300 USD over a iPhone everyday from a technical point of view (and so would most photographers if there wasn't the ad-money)
- nicoburns 7y ago
  You clearly didn't read the article (which covers the technical details of night mode). It's taking multiple exposures at different shutter speeds and combining together. Allowing you to take sharp photos with long exposure times, hand held. Your Rebel XSi (and even the latest Rebel) can't do that (although they have the advantage of a bigger sensor).
  - fock 7y ago
    Yeah I read the article alright, but what I see there is something you can do just fine "handheld" with any cheap(ish) ILC. Arguably the method is relatively irrelevant for such comparison.
- samvher 7y ago
  Thanks for the kind words! I would honestly be curious to see a low light comparison with (older or newer) DSLRs. You might be right that the comparisons on this blog post exaggerate the performance because the XS is just terrible, but the process described in the post where a series of images are merged together in post processing and you can make long-exposure hand-held shots is just not something that's going to work in DSLRs easily. I can imagine that there are situations where this would make certain shots feasible that would have motion blur on a DSLR. Then again, I've imagined wrong before.

gniv 7y ago

Beautiful photos, but why is the Exif scrubbed? I would have liked to see details.

henryaj 7y ago
Good question. To remove GPS metadata perhaps?
- DonHopkins 7y ago
  I always thought it would be safer to forge the GPS data so it points to a police station, instead of just removing it. Then your stalkers and thieves might be arrested for loitering and breaking and entering there, instead of at your own home.
  - zaroth 7y ago
    Which police station? What coordinates precisely? Could there be signs of which software you used to alter the data? All these things could leak bits of identifying information, which I think is strictly worse than the 1 bit of information leaked by removing EXIF entirely.
    - DonHopkins 7y ago
      One that will cost your enemies a lot of money to travel to, in a dangerous neighborhood, with a long record of police brutality and violence.
  - penagwin 7y ago
    > Then your stalkers and thieves might be arrested for loitering and breaking and entering there, instead of at your own home. So I have 0 experience as a stalker - but won't they put that data into Google maps, see it's a police station, and probably assume that isn't your home? You'd have to be really brave and stupid to loiter and break and enter a station thinking it was somebody's home.
mrfusion 7y ago

jonlucc 7y ago

The photography in these kinds of reviews is amazing, and the camera looks pretty stellar compared to the XS, but I find myself reading them wondering if it will make my pictures any better. I'm a mediocre photographer at best, and I'm certainly not going to be able to capture many images like the ones in this review.

philliphaydon 7y ago
I think if you learn the rule of 2 thirds then it helps a lot. The few people I’ve taught that rule to are much happier with their photos.
- jonlucc 7y ago
  Agreed. I took a photography class in college, and I've turned the guidelines on for previews. I still don't have the command of light and expertise with framing demonstrated here, and I'm not carrying a tripod with me anywhere.
  - scott_s 7y ago
    I've been taking pictures with my iPhone for years and I never knew about the guidelines as an option. (Or I did, and I turned them off many phones ago without realizing their benefit, forgot, and the settings have been dragged with me since.) Thank you.
  - penagwin 7y ago
    IMO the guidelines should be on by default. It's the first setting I change when I get a new phone or camera. Like you said even if you're not a "photographer" it can make a huge difference. EDIT: Also even if somebody has no clue what they're for, it can help keep the image level at the very least.
graeme 7y ago
John Gruber and Matthew Panzerino have good reviews in this respect. Very regular shots. Panzerino does year on year comparisons at Disneyland with his family. https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/the_iphone_11_and_iphones_11_pro https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/the_iphone_11_and_iphones... https://techcrunch.com/2019/09/17/iphone-11-pro-disney-after-dark/ https://techcrunch.com/2019/09/17/iphone-11-pro-disney-after...

familysized 7y ago

The fisherman seen in that photo is also in these very similar photos... http://davidbuddphotography.com/galleries/01-places/china/guilin-yangshou-comorant-fisherman/ http://davidbuddphotography.com/galleries/01-places/china/gu...

coldtea 7y ago
"Fisherman/men in a canoe like boat at dusk/night in asia" is such a cliche it should be forbidden... Knowing the journalist/fixer trade a little, this is some well known place/person, and photographers who go to China are taken by their local helpers (who know the drill) there to shoot "interesting" pictures. This fisherman guy probably makes (or could make) more money posing for tourists than fishing...
- chapium 7y ago
  That photo is from guilin, and I have similar photos. The "fishermen" take people on raft (gondola) rides and will even sing to you in their local dialect. They also like to pick out the most foreign looking tourists and encourage them to sing as well. Guilin is amazing photography-wise, but the tourism there has a very manufactured feel to it, as it does in most of the very popular places to visit there.
- PStamatiou 7y ago
  You can pay a photographer guide to help you get this exact shot. Author used this, as suggested by the footer perhaps: https://www.mercierzeng.com/guilin-photography-tours https://www.mercierzeng.com/guilin-photography-tours This kind of stuff exists for many popular shots with local photographers you can hire to take you and even have you get up close with locals.
gregkerzhner 7y ago
this guy runs a really popular tourist photography show in Yangshuo, China, which is one of the most popular tourist destinations within China both for local Chinese and foreigners. He uses a bird to catch fish for him. The birds throat is clamped so it cannot swallow the fish. I think it reflects an old way that fishing used to happen, but nowadays it’s purely a show for photographer tourists and you have to pay him some money for the show. (Shamless plug, but here is a video my wife and I made of our climbing trip to the region - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnlYUA-fmTE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnlYUA-fmTE)

dep_b 7y ago

Just wondering how much this is really just software performing the "upgrade"? The Pixel 3 camera app made every camera better in the end.

ChuckNorris89 7y ago
This! The sideloaded pixel camera app made me want to hold on to my 3 year old One Plus 3 for more years to come.
decoyworker 7y ago
The new iPhone camera looks pretty sweet but the part that I'm starting to disagree with is what they call, "semantic rendering." This is where the camera recognizes different things in the photo and treats them different like sharpening some areas, smoothing others, etc. To me this this aspect feels like basically an Instagram filter. Are we going for accuracy or how pleasing the photos are? They're definitely more pleasing but not an accurate representation.
- erikpukinskis 7y ago
  There is no such thing as an accurate image. What your brain sees when it looks at an image is totally different from what it would see if it was standing in front of the lens. And what my brain would see is different still. Lenses are subjective. The question is: what do you want to see, and what lenses see that?

djschnei 7y ago

@Austin Mann, https://letsencrypt.org/ https://letsencrypt.org/

egwynn 7y ago
Looks like it’s on SquareSpace, which does their own cert provisioning. Maybe the author just hasn’t set that up or has it misconfigured.

irrational 7y ago

>We are truly in a golden age for taking pictures of dark shit with phone cameras. Apparently I take pictures of different things than the author. Different kinks for different folks I guess.

truth_seeker 7y ago

I recently started appreciating 60fps screen but, iPhone 11 came up with 240 fps Galaxy Note10+ came up with 960fps and now Huawei Mate 30 Pro with 7680 fps

celeritascelery 7y ago
At what point is it no longer noticeable?
- beisner 7y ago
  120fps
  - samwhiteUK 7y ago
    Erm, the numbers he/she is quoting are video framerates
- tasuki 7y ago
  Very early, but that's beside the point. The point is one can make a slow-motion video out of a high-fps one.
saiya-jin 7y ago
Those are video framerates, usable for slowing down things like jumps to water / with skis etc. No screen for general public has 7k+ framerate, would be completely useless waste of energy (and money for expensive research)
Synaesthesia 7y ago
That high FPS mode will be at a tiny resolution and need tons of light. Still interesting of course. Edit: I stand corrected it’s still 720p

jug 7y ago

I feel for the compact camera manufacturers. Smartphones killed the 2/3" sensor market. Now they've killed the 1" sensor market too. Micro 4/3 is stale with no major sensor advancements for years now. What's left, APS-C and up?

criddell 7y ago
I feel for all camera manufacturers. Why isn't there a Canon or Nikon or Sony cloud service where photos are sent to? Why haven't the big camera companies embraced computation in their cameras? Do DSLR bodies even have GPS capabilities for tagging photos? It feels like there's no innovation in the camera space outside of Apple and Google.
- fock 7y ago
  I have an app on my mobile, where I can upload my pictures from the cam via Wifi and then share them if I feel the need. I'm fine with that and syncthing just get's away with the stuff. And yeah, DSLR bodies do have GPS but since they have a kind of "real" GPS it's more expensive and more power hungry, hence it's not really mainstream. (and about your phone's GPS: just enable flight mode and try to use it. Enjoy!)
- freddie_mercury 7y ago
  What makes you think they haven't embraced computation in their cameras? https://www.sony-asia.com/microsite/assets/cyber-shot/2012h1/wx150/bionz/index.html https://www.sony-asia.com/microsite/assets/cyber-shot/2012h1...
  - criddell 7y ago
    Sony has the best chance of surviving IMHO. My #1 complaint about Sony is how awful they are at naming their stuff. Leica will survive too, but mostly because they are beautiful things.
- jug 7y ago
  I posted about this in another thread here but I think it's basically about the larger sensor sizes causes ridiculous CPU demands. Consider how even on an iPhone 11 with a tiny sensor, you need a 7 nm CPU with dedicated AI circuitry to do it seamlessly and with maintained battery life. That feels like a mountain to climb for them, and then their sensor problem isn't even solved.

mtw 7y ago

I would love a high-resolution photos of these. The small size look amazing for phones like Huawei P30 Pro or Samsung Note 10, but then you realize that the full size version has blotched textures or excessive sharpness

wrboyce 7y ago
Gruber has the originals on his review: https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/the_iphone_11_and_iphones_11_pro https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/the_iphone_11_and_iphones...
- sh-run 7y ago
  People have always questioned the usefulness of smaller sensor cameras (Ie M43) with the improvement in cellphone cameras, but it looks like I'll still carry my Olympus EM5.2 when I travel. The iPhone 11 gets great social media photos, but I wouldn't want to get any of those printed (at least not larger than 4x6). Of course the best camera is the one you have with you so I am still happy to see the improvements over my Xr and my wife's 8+.
  - pwython 7y ago
    M43 cameras are still relevant as the depth of field blur in these phone cameras is faked, sometimes with odd results. An f/1.8 aperture on most camera sensors translates to something like an f/8 full frame equivalent (for comparison, f/1.8 on M43 looks like f/3.6 on full frame). It still lets the same amount of light in, but there's no shallow depth/blur.
    - sh-run 7y ago
      Yeah, there's also the benefits you get from longer exposures and the ability to swap lenses. I carry an Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 and Panasonic 100-300mm f/4-5.6, which gives me a massive focal length range to play with in a relatively small package. For a hobbyist like me M43 is great and won't be replaced by a cell phone any time soon. And as much as I'd like an A7iii I can't justify the extra cost and lens size for what I do.

mewse-hn 7y ago

How could anyone read this without knowing it's an advertisement: "today I’m just as thrilled to be putting an entirely new Ultra Wide lens in my pocket. It gives us another format to tell the story, another perspective to visualize, and a better rounded tool for doing our best creative work."

helpPeople 7y ago
Stockholm Syndrome? But yes, it's good that you were able to see it. I find marketing unethical, most people don't even realize that they are being advertised to.
- jacobush 7y ago
  If it's VERY CLEARLY shown, it's not too bad. But think for a moment if advertising only had access to one font, 1000 characters length of text, including spaces, and at most 15% of the ad real estate for images. Plus a warning sign, reminding everyone that repeated exposure to propaganda can change one's mind, even though one is aware. :-)
- briandear 7y ago
  > I find marketing unethical That’s a strange view. Taken to an extreme, that would be a restaurant without an exterior sign, menus, or even a waiter explaining the food. You would literally know nothing about any product or service without marketing. Marketing is the act of “bringing a product to market.” Marketing isn’t advertising. A farmer displaying tomatoes on a table at a farmers market is marketing. A farmer buying billboard space with a photo of his tomatoes is advertising. There isn’t anything unethical about either practice. Communicating about the availability of a product shouldn’t be considered unethical. Lying about that product on the other hand..
  - helpPeople 7y ago
    >Lying about that product on the other hand.. What if things are not prove able? Like "most secure", but their metric is fastest patching. It's not actually secure, but they have logic. Technically true, but intentionally misleading. I don't suggest getting caught up in the Innocence of having a brick and mortar sign. This is not what we worry about. What do we learn from a beer commercial showing hot girls? Or a tech commercial showing people dancing. These are feelings unrelated to the product. These specific examples don't scratch the surface. The best marketing, you don't see.

todipa 7y ago

I have the Nikon full frame D850 along with the holy trilogy of lenses (14-24mm + 24-70mm + 70-200mm f2.8 zoom lenses). in 2018, for every picture I took with the D800/850, I took +200 iphone pictures. I still believe there is room for a high caliber camera but I don't want to own it anymore, I just want to rent whenever I need it.

kalleboo 7y ago
I want a high caliber camera but I never want to have to carry it around with me...
- eatbitseveryday 7y ago
  If discouraged by the weight, but not the price, consider a compact Leica (e.g., the Q).
stordoff 7y ago
There's a common saying that the best camera is the one you have with you. We're getting to the point where the one you have with you is more than good enough for many situations anyway.

post_break 7y ago

What I'd like to see is a direct comparison of an Xs running neuralcam and the 11 night mode. I've taken a couple of photos so far and the app has done wonders. https://imgur.com/a/BwvW6J8 https://imgur.com/a/BwvW6J8

Synaesthesia 7y ago
Nice one, I’ve been looking for an app like that. The new iPhone does seem like it has a great camera but I wish Apple would bring “night mode” for all the other iPhones.
- post_break 7y ago
  So far I like the app. It doesn't work miracles but definitely helps in low light situations. You have to hold it still while it does the work, and the best part is that it is all on the phone, no internet needed for it to work. I'm stingy but this is one app I actually bought and didn't feel ripped off.

_coveredInBees 7y ago

I think the iPhone 11 makes some good advances as outlined in the linked article, but a lot of the pictures didn't particularly wow me at all from a camera capabilities perspective. A bunch of the images at the top of the article are nice, but that is entirely due to the photographer's skill at composing aesthetically pleasing shots and have little to do with the actual capabilities of the iPhone 11. As someone who owned the LG G3 years ago, and absolutely loved the wide-angle lens on that phone, most of these pictures would look identical. I guess the point I am making is that while it's exciting to have a wide-angle lens on the iPhone 11, it doesn't in any way move the bar compared to what's been out there for a while. Where the iPhone 11 has improved drastically, is with night mode shots, and that's somewhere it has been lacking substantially compared to the competition. They've done a really good job catching up and maybe even surpassing the competition in some areas. Kudos to them for that. That being said, you aren't going to get great prints out of night mode images for anything much larger than post-card sized prints with the iPhone 11 (or any other smart phone camera to be honest). I love the image of the person in the boat at dusk, but even at the size displayed, you can see a bunch of artifacts from noise reduction. As much as everyone loves to hate on DSLRs these days, you are going to get much cleaner images in these light starved environments with a large sensor and good lens. I personally think it's absurd to make that comparison, but I just had to say this because every article about the latest smartphone camera ends up having a bunch of comments about how they are superior to DSLRs at this point (which they are on the computational photography side of things, but good luck getting clean, large prints out of a phone camera, especially in low-light situations)

fock 7y ago
thanks!
frereubu 7y ago
The original image of the person on the boat at dusk is 1000 x 667 pixels, so I'm pretty sure they cropped that. It's also being displayed at 1500 pixels wide, so it's being enlarged from the original. It's a Squarespace site, and I wouldn't mind betting that either Squarespace or the author did some compression on the photo before they uploaded it so the page wasn't slow to load too. I'm not sure there's much you can tell from the quality of that image.

Gravityloss 7y ago

I have two requirements for camera: fast startup time from a standby to taking photos, and working touch exposure control. The majority of phones I've tested do not provide these. For some reason, on Oneplus 5 it works. I tested a newer model and it was worse. Sure, on a newer phone the photos are better for example resolution wise, but that's usually not the limiting factor. I have some street photo / rangefinder hobby background where the idea is to not endlessly twiddle some knobs but be able to take technically decent enough photos quickly. No posing or setting up a still life but real events. When I carried a dedicated camera, it wasn't in a bag but in my neck, usually even without a lens cap. Fixed focal length lens, Canon Canonet or Panasonic GF. It's not necessary about automation or "AI" that helps you to be quick, but rather just less features and actual working interfaces.

ricardobeat 7y ago
> working touch exposure control what do you mean? A long press gives you immediate access to exposure on the iPhone. There are also dedicated photo apps (like Halide, mentioned in the article) that offer more advanced controls.
- Gravityloss 7y ago
  Let's say I'm photographing someone who is backlit, against the sky. By default, the person looks like black silhouette since the camera chooses an exposure that doesn't make the sky completely white. I also don't want to have the person in the center of the frame, because that would be really boring framing. Photography 101. On my current phone I can do the framing how I want, then touch the person on the touch screen. The phone instantly readjusts the exposure upwards so that now the person is more properly exposed and the sky is overexposed. This is what I wanted. Then I continue on to take the photo. This doesn't seem to work on many other phones. I never enter any menus or do any wheel adjustments. It takes extremely little time and is a very natural workflow. On a rangefinder camera one would aim the center of the screen at the person, then hold the shutter halfway so it would pick the exposure from there, then frame (=aim somewhere else) and take the photo. If you have autofocus, it also focuses on the half-press. In neither case are there any manual adjustments or looking at any buttons. Your eyes are on the viewfinder / photo area all the time.

ioulian 7y ago

The pictures do look good, the colors are nice and the small image on the page is nice. But I haven't seen any 100% crops or full images. it's there that you'll see that the image is worse than a DSLR or another camera with a big lens and sensor. I can get nice pictures (= vibrant and nice colors) with any camera, what I can't get is a sharp image, with sharp edges. I went to a trip with my Android Phone and DSLR, and my GF has an iPhone 6. We took pictures with all 3 devices. When I looked at jpg photos from Android phone on my PC, they had all "perfect" (=vibrant and catchy) colors, but when you zoom in, it's all a blurry mess with no detail. The iPhone was nice and sharp (at least much sharper than the android pics). The DSLR was of course the sharpest one. Now on the android phone, I have a "pro" settings that captures RAW image. And it's incredibly sharp, the colors are bland of course, but the data is there and we can add/process the colors in post. But why is the image so much worse when using JPG. My idea it that normal jpg has HDR enabled and is being processed too much, thus losing a lot of detail. You don't get that loss when capturing RAW. What I'm afraid is that the new iPhone dark mode (or even the P30 Pro and other phones with post processing) will also process the images too much and stack them thus losing a lot of detail. When put on instagram or made smaller for Facebook/websites, you won't see the missing details, but the colors will be vibrant and that's "good enough" for most people. When I take a picture I rather have the real RAW data in the picture instead of processed jpg that I can't control. What do you guys think about the automatic post processing done by your device, that when done incorrectly, you'll lose a perfect picture because the implementation just lost you a lot of detail... I guess the post processing trend is there because you just can't make a good lens and sensor that small and still have nice results. The phone makers are just trying to fix this with post processing...

wrboyce 7y ago
FWIW there are multiple links to reviews with full-size images in these comments.
- ioulian 7y ago
  Ok, just looked at these images: https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/the_iphone_11_and_iphones_11_pro https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/the_iphone_11_and_iphones... in full res and indeed, they are very blurry and the detail loss is still there: look at the hairs of the dog: https://daringfireball.net/misc/2019/09/iphones-11-review/mochi-portrait-1x-11pro.jpg https://daringfireball.net/misc/2019/09/iphones-11-review/mo... They are all blurry Is it possible to shoot RAW with iPhone?

bondolo 7y ago

Can it make and receive telephone calls?

dharma1 7y ago

How much better is the Pro camera than regular iPhone 11 camera?

briandear 7y ago
Cameras and chips are identical, however the Pro gives you the Telephoto lens. (That’s the “third” lens on Pro.)
- pcl 7y ago
  Actually, it’s the ultra wide lens that is unique to the pro.
  - jvzr 7y ago
    No, it's the telephoto. The 11 has the ultrawide.
  - fetus8 7y ago
    No, briandear is right. The Pro has the telephoto, and the wide and ultrawide, where as the 11 just has the wide and ultrawide.
  - djrogers 7y ago
    No, you have it backwards - the 11 got the utlra-wide lens as it's second camera. [1] https://www.apple.com/iphone-11/ https://www.apple.com/iphone-11/
- heyoni 7y ago
  Does the telephoto help at all with photos unless it's for zooming in and out?

anonu 7y ago

Its amazing to me that the smartphone wars are now just about cameras.... and more broadly content generation. It also amazes me that everyone's is wooed over these iPhone specs. I've had my OnePlus 7T Pro for a few months now. Most of the top-line specs match or beat the new iPhone. Nightscape on the OnePlus is also amazing - takes great low light photos. Seems like iPhone has been chasing some of the more advanced Android-phones for a few generations now.

ngngngng 7y ago
I hate my one plus 7 pros camera. It's terrible after a Pixel 2. I'm planning on getting my wife a Pixel 4 so one of us has a good camera.
SamBam 7y ago
What I want to know is whether there are any phone-sized stand-alone cameras that can compete with any of the modern amazing phone cameras. I love my Pixel 2's camera, it shoots gorgeous pictures, but I'm seriously considering downsizing my phone significantly. I'd love to have a nearly-dumb-phone but... can't give up the camera. If someone sold a standalone camera that is as portable and as good, I would take it and a dumb-phone in a minute.
- petepete 7y ago
  It's not _quite_ as small but _way_ better than every smart phone camera on the market, the Ricoh GR3. http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/gr-3/ http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/gr-3/
turtlebits 7y ago
It's because processor performance and screens are already way past good enough. My phone is 2 generations old and is fast enough. The only thing I would possibly wish for is a better camera.

Abishek_Muthian 7y ago

Good to know that iPhone 11 Pro camera holds up to the expectations of a professional photographer. Now everyone else should aspire to be a professional photographer and buy iPhone 11 Pro according to Apple.

m0skit0 7y ago

I never considered the camera when buying a phone, and in fact would love a price discount in higher phone models with a cheaper or even no cameras. Question for professional photographers from someone that has no idea about photography: why would you use a phone when you can use your professional camera?

gnomesteel 7y ago
>why would you use a phone when you can use your professional camera? Most don't. Having a great smartphone camera is mostly about convince for pros. It's always there, and sometimes your pro camera isn't.
throwaway2265 7y ago
I’ve been doing professional photography for over a decade, having used a wide range of DSLR’s and mirrorless cameras. I really enjoy using my iPhone for photography when not working. It removes the friction of taking photos. I don’t have to carry a large camera while traveling, don’t have to charge extra things, it’s just overall easier. Whatever quality I’m losing is made up by simply capturing more moments than I otherwise would have if I was using my DSLR.
sosborn 7y ago
There is a wide range of professional photography and a good smartphone camera can fill some of those needs. Shooting for a magazine? You’ll want a dslr. Shooting for social media in a professional context? The phone is great.

joering2 7y ago

Still prefer how Pixel 3 photos look like on the phone that was released a year ago [1]. Interestingly I recall my first Android to be Samsung i977 some 9 years ago and photos were more vivid than iPhone X. However Pixel comes with unlimited (!!) photo and 4k video storage [2]. Apple cannot beat that. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_3 [2] https://store.google.com/product/pixel_3 https://store.google.com/product/pixel_3

Diederich 7y ago
> However Pixel comes with unlimited (!!) photo and 4k video storage [2]. Yup, this is why we switched to Pixel, back when the first version came out, and we haven't looked back.

rolltiide 7y ago

Its nice that his wishlist are all software ux tweaks I’ll be getting the Iphone 11 Pro for the camera technology and wide support, along with the dual SIM feature that I’d like to know more about

zihotki 7y ago

It would be interesting to see how it will score in DxOMark (the best unbiased source for comparing both mobile and standalone cameras) tests comparing to current top-players. This review feels biased.

mantoto 7y ago

Super weird to read this text. I just came home from our first Japan trip and we both had a DSLR with us and three lenses. Heavy to carry around. I expect 3-4k pictures from dslrs and 2k made by our smartphones. I'm really curious how our end result will look like. I expect 100-300 images but this is our first holiday where we took considerable amounts of pictures/snapshots by phone. At least on my Samsung s9 and my wives pixel 3a lots of those images look sharp.

shinyeyes 7y ago

I wonder when Apple will address the elephant in the room: "how can we keep our lens always clean like our SLR lenses?" iPhone is a good camera but I haven't found any good case to keep it dust-free. It's even worse nowadays with lens bumps.

La-ang 7y ago

I have a word for you Apple fans: H U A W E I

c0nsilienc3 7y ago

Exotic locations and good light make a better photo than simply having the newest iPhone--I think everyone here can agree. Brian Chen, whom I respect, from NYTimes reviewed the newest iPhone and compared all his notes, photos, and videos to his iPhone reviews in the past and said there was hardly a difference in quality and performance. I'm not saying the camera advancements aren't nice, but as a working photographer I have pretty strong opinions about some of the new features like night shot. There are already apps that exist for iOS that do this (take multiple photos and average them out to produce a brighter image with less noise). Also, I believe that if it's really too dark to take a good photo, it's not worth taking a photo at all because even the night shot image won't look that great (and of course they look great when you see them because they are side-by-side comparisons with the darker, more crappy photo, but as standalone photos they look like garbage). I'd rather find or make good light if I want to take a portrait.

Hamuko 7y ago

Does this mean that I can justify the staggering price of an iPhone 11 Pro by saying that I won't be needing a new camera? Not that I was really in market for a new point-and-shoot, but I feel like I need something to justify it.

kitchenkarma 7y ago

Can someone explain to me what is so special in those photos? These look like snapped on the phone...

ctdonath 7y ago

I want to see an app: full frame high rate recording with all cameras, marking "photos" as time & subframe. From there, be able to later roll individual "photos" forward/back in time, and shift/rotate/zoom/interpolate within that video space. When satisfied, dump the (massive) video and keep the selected photos. Likewise for sub-videos. I want to focus on getting photos without having to get it right at that moment. Get me ALL the image data, let me indicate what/when I want a picture of, and save details of framing & timing for later. Live Photos is just the smallest beginning of what we should be able to do with 3 60fps >4K cameras, a half terabyte storage, and an unlimited data plan.

Damogran6 7y ago

My DSLR is aging out...they've changed lens mounts (manufacturers seem to do that just long enough to blow the cost benefit of keeping lenses long term...I use my phone for 98% of my photos. The last one I actually printed out (a panorama) came from my iPhone XS Max. I just can't justify a $1200 camera purchase to replace my Sony A57...and I'm a little sad about it.

iCarrot 7y ago
It must have been the move to mirrorless that forced a mount change. Even Nikon abandoned their F mount line (which started in 1959) and introduced Z mount for their mirrorless. Also given how often Sony is churning out new cameras these days, going secondhand will save you serious dough.
- Damogran6 7y ago
  I think you're right on all accounts. The adapter to let the old lenses work on the new bodies is the thickness of the pentaprism on the old camera. It's designed to keep the geometry of the stuff that got removed when they went mirrorless. A lightly used A-mount (like an A77) is an intriguing thought...if it had a kit lens, then my kids could keep using the a57 til it failed completely.

runjake 7y ago

For some perspective on this, go look at Austin's iPhone 6s camera review [1]. If you aren't shooting photos like his with your iPhone X, upgrading to an 11 series is not going to make much of a difference. 1. http://austinmann.com/trek/iphone-6s-camera-review-switzerland http://austinmann.com/trek/iphone-6s-camera-review-switzerla...