5 ms·

The things new iPhones do with software and camera is both absolutely revolutionary and completely unheard of in the world of big cameras.

Kye 5y ago
My point was the in-camera software doesn't matter for my use case as long as it stays out of the way. The person I replied to didn't specify what kind of camera. The brands in the list implied non-phone cameras to me.
- user-the-name 5y ago
  The point is, there is a LOT more the software can do for you than "stay out of the way". The software can do massive things for your image quality and assisting you in bad conditions. But big cameras do not even try.
  - Kye 5y ago
    I don't want them to try. I don't care if the features are there as long as I can turn them off, but I don't want it. The things I can do off-camera will always be far ahead of whatever's inside. Capture One/Lightroom and Affinity Photo/Photoshop will have those features with higher quality long before they reach non-phone cameras. They work with the raw data right off the sensor. Nothing done with the limited power of an on-board processor will beat a good raw processor in pulling a good photo out of subpar conditions.
    - user-the-name 5y ago
      You absolutely can not do the kinds of things the iPhone does off-camera. The iPhone can do three-second exposures free-handed, and have them come out pretty sharp without even trying to hold the phone still. That is not something you do in postprocessing.
      - Kye 5y ago
        I can absolutely do three-second exposures free-handed. It takes a lot of practice and isn't very consistent. But why in the world would I do that? I can get as much light in one as an iPhone can fake in three, and I can always get a pocket tripod or monopod if I really need three seconds. You're inventing problems with better cameras to make the things you have to do to overcome the limitations of a smaller sensor sound impressive. That's really the point. If all I had was a phone camera, I would be glad for all this software support. For all the times I have my DSLR, the 10x bigger sensor obviates the need for all of that.
        user-the-name 5y ago
        It takes zero practice or effort on an iPhone. You don't even have to hold the phone particularly still. Like, you're literally describing all the extra effort and gear you have to have to do this on your camera. Wouldn't it be better if you just... didn't need any of that?
        Kye 5y ago
        You seem to be under the impression the only thing people care about with "big cameras" is image quality. Yes, it would be great if I could do everything with an iPhone, but until it has the same ecosystem of add-ons and tools, it just isn't going to work. I've only mentioned image quality because that was the focus of the thread, but that isn't everything. I've seen some of the absurd lengths people go attaching things to their iPhones just to reach parity with an entry-level DSLR and a few attachments that cost less than the iPhone rig with the cost of the camera included. I looked into the lenses on the 12. The longest is a 35mm equivalent of 85mm. I would need a grip add-on and a lens clip with no image stabilization just to approach the stability and reach of my 70-300mm lens on an APS-C sensor. That's just for wildlife photography, and not even the longest lens. Most serious wildlife photographers go for a full frame and 600+mm primes. And that's just one use case served by the photography platform that "big cameras" are. You don't know what you don't know and it shows.
        5y ago
brokenmachine 5y ago
Meh. It's just lipstick on the pig of a tiny lens.
- esyir 5y ago
  Until said tiny lenses start demolishing the market is the bigger lenses. Thus the death of the low end and mid end cameras.
  - Kye 5y ago
    It's not really about the lens. Phones already have solid quality lenses. The sensor is what matters. Nothing you can do with the product of a small sensor will beat the worst you get from even an APS-C sensor. ML can make guesses about what the tiny sensor can't capture. A big sensor just captures it.
- user-the-name 5y ago
  It is far more than that. It is getting amazing results out of that tiny lens. Why would you not want the same to be applied to a bigger lens?
  - brokenmachine 5y ago
    What's so great about what the iphone camera does specifically?
    - user-the-name 5y ago
      The night mode especially is beyond anything seen in a full-size camera. It can take fairly sharp three-second exposures free-handed.
      - brokenmachine 5y ago
        OK, but it's worth noting that a full-size camera wouldn't need to take a three-second exposure though. I would like to see a full-size camera with some extra smarts though.

Kye 5y ago

My point was the in-camera software doesn't matter for my use case as long as it stays out of the way. The person I replied to didn't specify what kind of camera. The brands in the list implied non-phone cameras to me.

user-the-name 5y ago
The point is, there is a LOT more the software can do for you than "stay out of the way". The software can do massive things for your image quality and assisting you in bad conditions. But big cameras do not even try.
- Kye 5y ago
  I don't want them to try. I don't care if the features are there as long as I can turn them off, but I don't want it. The things I can do off-camera will always be far ahead of whatever's inside. Capture One/Lightroom and Affinity Photo/Photoshop will have those features with higher quality long before they reach non-phone cameras. They work with the raw data right off the sensor. Nothing done with the limited power of an on-board processor will beat a good raw processor in pulling a good photo out of subpar conditions.
  - user-the-name 5y ago
    You absolutely can not do the kinds of things the iPhone does off-camera. The iPhone can do three-second exposures free-handed, and have them come out pretty sharp without even trying to hold the phone still. That is not something you do in postprocessing.
    - Kye 5y ago
      I can absolutely do three-second exposures free-handed. It takes a lot of practice and isn't very consistent. But why in the world would I do that? I can get as much light in one as an iPhone can fake in three, and I can always get a pocket tripod or monopod if I really need three seconds. You're inventing problems with better cameras to make the things you have to do to overcome the limitations of a smaller sensor sound impressive. That's really the point. If all I had was a phone camera, I would be glad for all this software support. For all the times I have my DSLR, the 10x bigger sensor obviates the need for all of that.
      - user-the-name 5y ago
        It takes zero practice or effort on an iPhone. You don't even have to hold the phone particularly still. Like, you're literally describing all the extra effort and gear you have to have to do this on your camera. Wouldn't it be better if you just... didn't need any of that?
        Kye 5y ago
        You seem to be under the impression the only thing people care about with "big cameras" is image quality. Yes, it would be great if I could do everything with an iPhone, but until it has the same ecosystem of add-ons and tools, it just isn't going to work. I've only mentioned image quality because that was the focus of the thread, but that isn't everything. I've seen some of the absurd lengths people go attaching things to their iPhones just to reach parity with an entry-level DSLR and a few attachments that cost less than the iPhone rig with the cost of the camera included. I looked into the lenses on the 12. The longest is a 35mm equivalent of 85mm. I would need a grip add-on and a lens clip with no image stabilization just to approach the stability and reach of my 70-300mm lens on an APS-C sensor. That's just for wildlife photography, and not even the longest lens. Most serious wildlife photographers go for a full frame and 600+mm primes. And that's just one use case served by the photography platform that "big cameras" are. You don't know what you don't know and it shows.
        5y ago

brokenmachine 5y ago

Meh. It's just lipstick on the pig of a tiny lens.

esyir 5y ago
Until said tiny lenses start demolishing the market is the bigger lenses. Thus the death of the low end and mid end cameras.
- Kye 5y ago
  It's not really about the lens. Phones already have solid quality lenses. The sensor is what matters. Nothing you can do with the product of a small sensor will beat the worst you get from even an APS-C sensor. ML can make guesses about what the tiny sensor can't capture. A big sensor just captures it.
user-the-name 5y ago
It is far more than that. It is getting amazing results out of that tiny lens. Why would you not want the same to be applied to a bigger lens?
- brokenmachine 5y ago
  What's so great about what the iphone camera does specifically?
  - user-the-name 5y ago
    The night mode especially is beyond anything seen in a full-size camera. It can take fairly sharp three-second exposures free-handed.
    - brokenmachine 5y ago
      OK, but it's worth noting that a full-size camera wouldn't need to take a three-second exposure though. I would like to see a full-size camera with some extra smarts though.