3 ms·

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 assistin

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.
        user-the-name 5y ago
        You seem to be thinking that I am arguing that you should use an iPhone instead of a DSLR. Not sure where you are getting this idea from. The argument is that DSLR software is lagging far behind what an iPhone can do. The point is that DSLR software needs to improve, not that you should use an iPhone.
        Kye 5y ago
        Again: it doesn't matter how much the on-board software improves. It will always lag behind desktop software that's not power constrained. I have the screen on maybe 30 seconds for every 200 photos for checking exposure and using the very well-designed settings screen. Why would I want to use battery draining software that will never match what I can do once I offload photos to a real computer?

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.
      - user-the-name 5y ago
        You seem to be thinking that I am arguing that you should use an iPhone instead of a DSLR. Not sure where you are getting this idea from. The argument is that DSLR software is lagging far behind what an iPhone can do. The point is that DSLR software needs to improve, not that you should use an iPhone.
        Kye 5y ago
        Again: it doesn't matter how much the on-board software improves. It will always lag behind desktop software that's not power constrained. I have the screen on maybe 30 seconds for every 200 photos for checking exposure and using the very well-designed settings screen. Why would I want to use battery draining software that will never match what I can do once I offload photos to a real computer?