iPhone Camera?

[Signals]

So I have some relatives and the whole family are a bunch of techies. Well, for some strange reason they all own iPhone 4's

They recently had a big reunion and took a lot of pics with their iPhone's and are slowly uploading the pics they have taken to FB.

Is it just me or do the iPhone camera's really just suck?

I suppose that the whole family could be a little off in their photography skills but I don't think so.

Anyone else here think the iPhone camera's stink?

 

[SaltwaterServr]

So I have some relatives and the whole family are a bunch of techies. Well, for some strange reason they all own iPhone 4's

They recently had a big reunion and took a lot of pics with their iPhone's and are slowly uploading the pics they have taken to FB.

Is it just me or do the iPhone camera's really just suck?

I suppose that the whole family could be a little off in their photography skills but I don't think so.

Anyone else here think the iPhone camera's stink?

All cameras built into phones suck, it's just a matter of to what degree.

 

[ZBTHorton]

All cameras built into phones suck, it's just a matter of to what degree.

It's actually pretty crazy how bad they are. Much better cameras have been available in Japanese phones forever, yet they continue to inch along in the US so they can string us out as long as possible.

 

[theogt]

The 4 is a two year old phone at this point. The iPhone 5 camera is spectacular. I don't think I'll ever use another camera.

 

[Meat-O-Rama]

Have yet to be impressed with the camera in any of the iPhones I've owned. Though I do appreciate the HDR abilities to capture subjects in low light.

But I'm also a right tool for the job kind of guy. I don't expect the pictures from my phone to be great, and I don't expect the phone calls from my DSLR to be great either.

 

[tomson75]

My 4s is capable of producing photos comparable to most DSLRs. So no, they don't suck. At all.

 

[Cowboys&LakersFan]

Yes they do. The iPad camera is far better.

 

[Signals]

My 4s is capable of producing photos comparable to most DSLRs. So no, they don't suck. At all.

Do you mind posting a couple of your best iPhone pic's here?

 

[Hoofbite]

If it's a iPhone 4, they could have a scuffed lens.

I used to carry my phone without a case. I didn't really care if the back was scratched, it's a phone. I had a product similar to Invisible Shield on the front to keep the front looking good but the back was bare.

One of Apple's weird design flaws is that the camera lens sticks out like ever-so-slightly and when the phone is placed on the back, it's the part of the phone that makes contact. As a result, the thing takes a beating.

After about 6 months, the camera in the phone was useless. The lens had become so scratched that every single photo was blurred and had a halo effect to it. I didn't really care because I never take photos for any sort of remembrance purposes. Sometimes I photo funny stuff and send it to people as a text but that's about it.

Took it to the Apple store and they replaced the back. Cost me $25-$30, I think. Only did it because I found a case for it that is incredibly thin. Almost like it isn't even there at all, thin. Made by elago (I think it's probably the best case I've ever had. It's not gonna protect it like an OtterBox will but it's so small that it's unnoticeable and that's all I care about). Anyway, found a case and figured I might as well get the back replaced if I am going to case the thing up.

Here's a picture I took from the phone after a thunderstorm in Kansas a few years ago.

http://i5.***BLOCKED***/albums/y188/thehoofbite/A4gFcusCcAAmVFN_zps5edd468d.jpg

Here's another picture I took when I still had the case on it. Toured the Coors factory and afterward a buddy of mine wanted to hunt down "The 7 Minute Pour". I think it's called Barmen. Literally takes like 7 minutes to pour a glass because the head builds up so much.

http://i5.***BLOCKED***/albums/y188/thehoofbite/A4gJ-ukCUAAYNAZ_zpscb80a56b.jpeg

I think they look good. Certainly not going to win any awards with it but good enough for what I use it for.

But, then the case came off and things went to hell.

Here's one I texted to a friend of mine who loves this beer. Probably 9 months after having the phone, only a couple months after I quit using a case. If you know anything about this beer, you'd know that a lemon shouldn't even be near it. I had this beer for the first time in Brussels after getting laughed at for pronouncing the name wrong. They probably would have asked me to leave had I asked for a lemon. Felt a little let down when a place that advertises it's own beer brought the lemon with the beer.

http://i5.***BLOCKED***/albums/y188/thehoofbite/A4gFsR6CUAAgtJp_zps76a01ca2.jpg

You can see the beginning of the end. Upper left corner just looks blurry. It progressively got worse and eventually the whole picture would be hazy like that.

It's a phone so I don't know what people expect from the beginning. Certainly I think the pictures I took before taking the case off look good. I guess If I wanted anything more I'd probably look into making photography a hobby and purchase a device made specifically for taking pictures. Some of the cameras out there are pretty nuts. I was at a family gathering not too long ago and one of my relatives is big into photography. He brought two cameras with him to show a couple of my younger relatives some options they could go for if they wanted to get serious about photography. He's toting around this camera with what looks like the Hubble Telescope hanging off it. I joked with him a bit and then he pulled out some of the pictures he has. Unreal. Live action still shots of some sort of stage production his daughter was in, from half the room's distance away and in dark lighting. Said he didn't really adjust for much, just snapped it. The picture was unreal and he zoomed in like 500% before it started to appear even the slightest bit grainy. I was impressed for a few seconds.

Long story short, have them check the lens for scuffing if the photo looks hazy or blurry.

 

[SaltwaterServr]

My 4s is capable of producing photos comparable to most DSLRs. So no, they don't suck. At all.

No, it isn't.

There isn't a phone on the market that can touch the average DSLR made even 7 or 8 years ago unless by comparable you mean they are both captured still images that are digital in nature. You'd have to dial back the settings on a current generation consumer level DSLR, shoot garbage third party glass, under the best natural lighting conditions, and not look at anything but the screen on the back of the DSLR for comparison to even get close. Even with everything weighted to the camera phone's advantage, you'd still end up with an inferior product.

Other than that, no. They are not capable in any regard to producing photos comparable to any DSLR unless you go back a decade or more in the camera world.

I'm thinking maybe the best camera phone out there could maybe, maybe, hold its own against the first generation Nikon and Canon consumer (not pro level) DSLR's with equally consumer level lenses in the hands of an amateur. And even with those stipulations, I think the camera phone's inferior quality would fall apart when you went above a 5x7 print.

In short call me when a camera phone can do this:

You have to be honest with yourself. The sensor size is nowhere near the same as a DSLR. You'll never get anywhere near the same picture quality out of a $300 phone as you will out of even a cheap kit lens combo when you compare the two final images side by side at the same resolution.

He's toting around this camera with what looks like the Hubble Telescope hanging off it.

If it was a Nikon, I'd be willing to bet it was a 70-200mm f2.8. It looks monstrous in person. It has a great range on a full-frame sensor.

It's a great lens and it produces great images all the way around. Also runs $2300.

 

[Hoofbite]

Have yet to be impressed with the camera in any of the iPhones I've owned. Though I do appreciate the HDR abilities to capture subjects in low light.

But I'm also a right tool for the job kind of guy. I don't expect the pictures from my phone to be great, and I don't expect the phone calls from my DSLR to be great either.

Totally need to go for the DSLR that has 4G in it.

 

[Hoofbite]

No, it isn't.

There isn't a phone on the market that can touch the average DSLR made even 7 or 8 years ago unless by comparable you mean they are both captured still images that are digital in nature. You'd have to dial back the settings on a current generation consumer level DSLR, shoot garbage third party glass, under the best natural lighting conditions, and not look at anything but the screen on the back of the DSLR for comparison to even get close. Even with everything weighted to the camera phone's advantage, you'd still end up with an inferior product.

Other than that, no. They are not capable in any regard to producing photos comparable to any DSLR unless you go back a decade or more in the camera world.

I'm thinking maybe the best camera phone out there could maybe, maybe, hold its own against the first generation Nikon and Canon consumer (not pro level) DSLR's with equally consumer level lenses in the hands of an amateur. And even with those stipulations, I think the camera phone's inferior quality would fall apart when you went above a 5x7 print.

In short call me when a camera phone can do this:

You have to be honest with yourself. The sensor size is nowhere near the same as a DSLR. You'll never get anywhere near the same picture quality out of a $300 phone as you will out of even a cheap kit lens combo when you compare the two final images side by side at the same resolution.

Damn, that is impressive.

You've got a camera that can water vegetables.

 

[SaltwaterServr]

Damn, that is impressive.

You've got a camera that can water vegetables.

The iPhone can do it too, just as long as you download the iWater app. :

 

[Signals]

The iPhone can do it too, just as long as you download the iWater app. :

 

[TheCount]

Not the best camera in the world and it needs a lot of life to get good pics. That being said, as far as phone cameras go, it's still tops for that generation.

 

[theogt]

No, it isn't.

There isn't a phone on the market that can touch the average DSLR made even 7 or 8 years ago unless by comparable you mean they are both captured still images that are digital in nature. You'd have to dial back the settings on a current generation consumer level DSLR, shoot garbage third party glass, under the best natural lighting conditions, and not look at anything but the screen on the back of the DSLR for comparison to even get close. Even with everything weighted to the camera phone's advantage, you'd still end up with an inferior product.

Other than that, no. They are not capable in any regard to producing photos comparable to any DSLR unless you go back a decade or more in the camera world.

I'm thinking maybe the best camera phone out there could maybe, maybe, hold its own against the first generation Nikon and Canon consumer (not pro level) DSLR's with equally consumer level lenses in the hands of an amateur. And even with those stipulations, I think the camera phone's inferior quality would fall apart when you went above a 5x7 print.

In short call me when a camera phone can do this:

You have to be honest with yourself. The sensor size is nowhere near the same as a DSLR. You'll never get anywhere near the same picture quality out of a $300 phone as you will out of even a cheap kit lens combo when you compare the two final images side by side at the same resolution.



If it was a Nikon, I'd be willing to bet it was a 70-200mm f2.8. It looks monstrous in person. It has a great range on a full-frame sensor.

It's a great lens and it produces great images all the way around. Also runs $2300.

I think what he means is that for candid point and click photos in average lighting current iPhone cameras are comparable to DSLRs. And he's right. There are tons of reviews out there comparing them and the DSLR photos are only marginally better.

But, yeah, stick a $2000 lens on a high end DSLR and stage a cool photo in perfect lighting and well duh.....

 

[TheCount]

I think what he means is that for candid point and click photos in average lighting current iPhone cameras are comparable to DSLRs. And he's right. There are tons of reviews out there comparing them and the DSLR photos are only marginally better.

But, yeah, stick a $2000 lens on a high end DSLR and stage a cool photo in perfect lighting and well duh.....

Anything is "comparable" to something else of similar purpose. A Pontiac Aztek is comparable to a Bentley Continental. :laugh2:

I think the point of comparisons like that is not that the iPhone is capable of taking modern DSLR quality photos (I don't think it is), but that it's capable of taking photos of high enough quality for personal use and it's always available.

I don't know anyone that takes a DSLR everywhere they go, and I know a few people that make their living as photographers.

 

[theogt]

Anything is "comparable" to something else of similar purpose. A Pontiac Aztek is comparable to a Bentley Continental. :laugh2:

I think the point of comparisons like that is not that the iPhone is capable of taking modern DSLR quality photos (I don't think it is), but that it's capable of taking photos of high enough quality for personal use and it's always available.

I don't know anyone that takes a DSLR everywhere they go, and I know a few people that make their living as photographers.

Comparable I'm this context means similar quality. Thought that was obvious.

 

[TheCount]

Comparable I'm this context means similar quality. Thought that was obvious.

I was afraid that's what you meant.

The term "similar" is about as descriptive as "comparable" btw, aren't you a lawyer or something? :laugh2:

 

[SaltwaterServr]

I think what he means is that for candid point and click photos in average lighting current iPhone cameras are comparable to DSLRs. And he's right. There are tons of reviews out there comparing them and the DSLR photos are only marginally better.

But, yeah, stick a $2000 lens on a high end DSLR and stage a cool photo in perfect lighting and well duh.....

The image I posted could be shot in all kinds of lighting, with a $200 zoom lens with macro ability. The DSLR has the settings to adjust to get the image, a camera phone does not.

Which is like taking an F1 racing car, putting it against a dune buggy, and telling the drivers that they can only drive on knee deep loose sand. In that regard, they're both comparable.

Marginally better? Not hardly. Even in Hoof's photos you can see the obvious grain and noise that is signature of a camera phone rudimentary quality picture.

Put a 50mm f1.8 on a low end DSLR and it'll out shoot any camera phone on the market. Try to print out the exact image from both and you'll see the camera phone's rendition of eyelashes. Oh wait, they won't be there, they'll be smudges. This isn't a high end lens either, just a basic entry-level portrait lens.

As I said, you'd have to dial back a DSLR to the most basic settings, again miring a F1 in a mud bog, for a camera phone to have any kind of chance to be close to it. Even then you'd have to view the images in very small format to halfway camouflage the deficiencies of a camera phone image. Having thought about it, you'd have to take the tires off of the F1 to make the comparison apt.

I did run across a piss-poor attempt to compare a 4s to a Canon 5D. The author showed a crop out of both impages to compare the quality. Buried in the comparison he/she stated that the 5D image file size had been altered to be the same size of the 4s. In effect, the author stripped down the image quality, depth, and range in order to get it to be even slightly comparable to the 4s. In essence you'd have to take the absolute worst settings for image quality to get a comparable file size, and then the 5d was still a better overall image.

Another point not yet mentioned is the horrible flash you get on a camera phone, and there's nothing you can do about it. Hell, can you even set the flash response in regards to when the image is produced? Metering? RAW format? More than one shot every few seconds? Dynamic range? ISO? Shutter speed? f stop?

Camera phones are what they are, convenience items on a telecom device whose product is never meant to be viewed in print or at any size larger than the average playing card.