3 ms·

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 s

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?
        user-the-name 5y ago
        Because, again, the kinds of feature I talk about can not be done in software on your desktop. They need to run in realtime on the camera, interacting with its image sensor and other sensors.
  - numpad0 5y ago
    Worth 1k words: Electronic video stabilization on Foxconn/Sharp Aquos R6 smartphone[1] 1: https://twitter.com/sm_hn/status/1394210048318971908 https://twitter.com/sm_hn/status/1394210048318971908
- numpad0 5y ago
  Maybe on an oldies like Nikon F6 with 35mm but not like D6 with 85mm, worst case the twitch from clicky shutter button on low end mirrorless are enough to shake resulting picture, you just don't notice at low(in relative terms) resolution

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?
      - user-the-name 5y ago
        Because, again, the kinds of feature I talk about can not be done in software on your desktop. They need to run in realtime on the camera, interacting with its image sensor and other sensors.
- numpad0 5y ago
  Worth 1k words: Electronic video stabilization on Foxconn/Sharp Aquos R6 smartphone[1] 1: https://twitter.com/sm_hn/status/1394210048318971908 https://twitter.com/sm_hn/status/1394210048318971908
numpad0 5y ago
Maybe on an oldies like Nikon F6 with 35mm but not like D6 with 85mm, worst case the twitch from clicky shutter button on low end mirrorless are enough to shake resulting picture, you just don't notice at low(in relative terms) resolution