[biz-engineer]

What I noticed about smartphone images, landscape images with clouds are often better exposed than with DSLR. DSLR either blow the highlight and if clouds are properly exposed then shadows must be pulled in the foreground. But I guess phones may split electronic exposures, such as bracketing and fuse them seamlessly for the user, so that tones in both sky and foreground are nicely recorded. I guess it is the same thing that Ricoh intends to do with their firmware ND filters on K1 II, but the difference with the phone is that phone sensor reads out much faster than full frame sensor. So with the DSLR you'll probably need to use a tripod for multi-exposures, whereas it's done hand held by the phone, for free, and automatically. I don't know how iphone works, but from the presentation of former google image scientist, the phone may take a bunch of images even before you take the picture and then boil down a few images together to produce the final image. You may be able to do the same as the phone with a DSLR in post processing, but that's a lot of efforts , no immediate, while the phone algorithm is doing it in real time without you even noticing what it's doing. Marc Leroy (former scientist for google pixel) explains how it's done:

You Tube

You Tube

---

Last edited by biz-engineer; 01-03-2023 at 02:14 AM.

[reh321]

Phone cameras have come a long way. They are very nice images, Norm.

The big challenge for me is battery life. Obviously, there are plenty of ways to charge a phone, but if you are out hiking, etc. you may not want to stop long enough to avail yourself of those methods. I guess I want my phone to be available to run apps and make calls and texts and so I'm a bit careful with how many photos I take with it.

(I only have an iphone 8, so not this level of quality either).

I have a USB-source powered by 3-AA batteries that I sometimes carry around in my pocket when I am concerned about ‘running out of juice’. I have found that most stores never run out of AA-batteries, so that has turned out to be good.

[reh321]

Images are great, when viewed at the right size, A3 or smaller. Smartphone image quality is equivalent to shooting a compact camera, iPhone is now a good replacement for a good compact camera, it will never be as good as large sensor cameras. Before using a Pentax DSLR , I used two compact camera from Nikon and Canon, pictures were great, and there are still good enough for making A4 or A3 prints, or display on 27" 4K display. Couple year ago , I reviewed my archive to see if some of these compact camera picture could be elected to make A2 or A1 prints, and I didn't find a single of these images good enough. K200D images made it to A2 prints , with lots of work if shot at other than base ISO. The K5 (16Mpixels) is the first camera that allowed me to print A2 without prints looking bad.

My iPhone produces 4000x3000 images, which is plenty if you view any image from ‘a respectful distance’ {where you can see the whole thing at once, as the artist intended} and don’t inspect it with a magnifying glass.

[biz-engineer]

My iPhone produces 4000x3000 images, which is plenty if you view any image from ‘a respectful distance’ {where you can see the whole thing at once, as the artist intended} and don’t inspect it with a magnifying glass.

That true. But I don't want to add a stick that sticks out of the middle of my A1 prints to prevent people from looking closer than the normal viewing distance .
Now, the vast majority of images are displayed either on 4K/UHD (or less resolution) electronic display, printed in magazines, calendar, books, no even covering the full area of a page, where 4K is plenty.

[normhead]

That true. But I don't want to add a stick that sticks out of the middle of my A1 prints to prevent people from looking closer than the normal viewing distance .
Now, the vast majority of images are displayed either on 4K/UHD (or less resolution) electronic display, printed in magazines, calendar, books, no even covering the full area of a page, where 4K is plenty.

The reason, I've never bought a iPhone is the lack of hi res. The Middle 24mm can be forced or may automatically select to shoot in 48 MP mode, producing an almost 300 MB tiff. That was a significant factor in me wanting this phone as opposed to previous iPhones (along with WP, built in Sat phone, GPS, and seamless lens changes.) 4k images for documentary shots I'll probably never print. A chance for 48 MB images. I need a nice bright day to be able to evaluate those images but so far. But bottom line 12 MP standard for everyday use, but I can still coax 48 MP if I have chance for high detail image. That makes it one of the most flexible, powerful convenience cameras ever.

The file size on my computer before reduction was 8000x 6000 Pixels, big enough for 1:1 8k TV.


Here is a crop to 4k, so 25% the size of the original. You can still count the pine needless, but definitely a little diffracted. I'm hoping that will disappear in better light.


Displayed at 200 DPI, that's a 40 inch print. AT 100 dpi an 80 inch print. Even at close to 300 dpi a 30x20 canvas or glossy is possible. It's my highest res camera. That was part of the appeal, along with all the other goodies. When I buy something new, I like to get something the old camera didn't have. This fits the bill.

[normhead]

We seem to be getting days and days of cloud... I'm not getting the opportunities to test the camera against my other cameras in good light. So, I'll probably stay out of the thread for a while, so unless there are any questions I can answer, I'll probably start this up with a new title when better weather comes. A couple of things in parting
Over on flicker, where I try and judge camera popularity, the iPhone 14 pro has only 17 members in its group. So, not a lot of interested people...
and DxO has rated the iPhone 14 pro #1 in it's cell phone camera and video ratings.
Apple iPhone 14 Pro Selfie test - DXOMARK

[gatorguy]

and DxO has rated the iPhone 14 pro #1 in it's cell phone camera and video ratings.
Apple iPhone 14 Pro Selfie test - DXOMARK

Overall they rate the Pixel 7 Pro's camera #1, with the iPhone 14 ProMax hot behind at number 2. Note these are rankings for phones available in the US. Worldwide the Huawei Mate 50 Pro gets the top spot and the Pixel 7 Pro falls to 2nd. The iPhone Pro Max slots in at #4. The rankings are so close to each other that it's almost a coin flip.

Anyway, I'm with you Norm, and offered much the same opinion a couple of weeks ago. My Pixel 7 Pro fills out the need for an "always with me" camera fit-for-purpose in the same way your iPhone does. It also negates the need for video functions on my DSLR's as both of our smartphones would do video better than even most mirrorless, at least for the typical enthusiast photographer. Where they fall short is action, wildlife, and professional needs (ie weddings, product shoots, runway/model). For the very few times I need video my smartphone handles it with aplomb.

Between a Pentax still's camera (or two) and a flagship smartphone my needs are covered. Very well AAMOF.

---

Last edited by gatorguy; 01-05-2023 at 08:06 AM.

[Jonathan Mac]

What I noticed about smartphone images, landscape images with clouds are often better exposed than with DSLR. DSLR either blow the highlight and if clouds are properly exposed then shadows must be pulled in the foreground. But I guess phones may split electronic exposures, such as bracketing and fuse them seamlessly for the user, so that tones in both sky and foreground are nicely recorded. I guess it is the same thing that Ricoh intends to do with their firmware ND filters on K1 II, but the difference with the phone is that phone sensor reads out much faster than full frame sensor. So with the DSLR you'll probably need to use a tripod for multi-exposures, whereas it's done hand held by the phone, for free, and automatically. I don't know how iphone works, but from the presentation of former google image scientist, the phone may take a bunch of images even before you take the picture and then boil down a few images together to produce the final image. You may be able to do the same as the phone with a DSLR in post processing, but that's a lot of efforts , no immediate, while the phone algorithm is doing it in real time without you even noticing what it's doing. Marc Leroy (former scientist for google pixel) explains how it's done: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7lbnMd56Ys

They do the same for backlit portraits or where the human subject is in the shade and there's a bright area behind them so when people want shots like that I often just use my phone and the SOOC results are significantly better. You need to take care to centre people though, or they'll be distorted by the 24mm-ish lens that phone makers regard as "normal".

[normhead]

Overall they rate the Pixel 7 Pro's camera #1, with the iPhone 14 ProMax hot behind at number 2. Note these are rankings for phones available in the US. Worldwide the Huawei Mate 50 Pro gets the top spot and the Pixel 7 Pro falls to 2nd. The iPhone Pro Max slots in at #4. The rankings are so close to each other that it's almost a coin flip.

Anyway, I'm with you Norm, and offered much the same opinion a couple of weeks ago. My Pixel 7 Pro fills out the need for an "always with me" camera fit-for-purpose in the same way your iPhone does. It also negates the need for video functions on my DSLR's as both of our smartphones would do video better than even most mirrorless, at least for the typical enthusiast photographer. Where they fall short is action, wildlife, and professional needs (ie weddings, product shoots, runway/model). For the very few times I need video my smartphone handles it with aplomb.

Between a Pentax still's camera (or two) and a flagship smartphone my needs are covered. Very well AAMOF.

To me, the phones have improved to the point, I think all serious photographers will add one to their camera line-up. They are a long way from replacing ILCs completely, but they can certainly take over a lot of every day photography where a 24 or 36 MP camera is overkill. Now if only it had a tilting back screen.... come on, I'm just kidding.
I can hear everyone groaning "Don't start that $#!^ again." from here.
I have had numerous occasions where I went into a setting I wasn't aware of taking the phone out of my pocket. You end up thinking, "How the heck do I get out of this feature", or conversely, "that's really cool, I wonder how I did that."

I have ordered a tripod mount and remote for mine, my big fat fingers are just too clumsy for something this delicate. I think I'm the king of unintentional swipes, pokes, and other unintended actions. I discovered "Burst mode" (hold and drag the shutter release) completely by accident. These phones may compete charge the way we operate cameras. The phone companies have obviously reinvisioned photography from the ground up. Digital SLRs even Mirrorless are based on the way we used to do things. Phones are based on a completely digital paradigm not based on film cameras.

[biz-engineer]

To me, the phones have improved to the point, I think all serious photographers will add one to their camera line-up.

I think I'm a serious photographer , and I use my smartphone to relieve my DSLR of having to do the lowly boring chores and to make sure (Huawei) smarphone shots don't mix and don't spoil my DSLR shots in the image library.

[gatorguy]

I have ordered a tripod mount and remote for mine, my big fat fingers are just too clumsy for something this delicate. I think I'm the king of unintentional swipes, pokes, and other unintended actions. .

That would run counter to the reason I'll often go with my smartphone camera as good-enough. Once I have to resort to taking along a smartphone tripod, setting it up, installing the phone-mount, lining up the camera shot and pairing the remote then the convenience factor is gone. Convenience and simplicity are the two primary reasons to choose my phone over my Pentax. It's not for better quality, even if under certain circumstances such as dark-city the Pixel probably captures a usable image better.

[normhead]

That would run counter to the reason I'll often go with my smartphone camera as good-enough. Once I have to resort to taking along a smartphone tripod, setting it up, installing the phone-mount, lining up the camera shot and pairing the remote then the convenience factor is gone. Convenience and simplicity are the two primary reasons to choose my phone over my Pentax. It's not for better quality, even if under certain circumstances such as dark-city the Pixel probably captures a usable image better.

I'm always thinking how do I get the maximum performance, which for the 48 MP main camera, could be useful. Still easier than carrying and setting up DSLR or Mirrorless cameras. At this point, I'm thinking K-3 for telephoto, K-1 for high dynamic range images, sunsets, sunrises etc. iPhone for everything else. As you point out there are things it does better than my traditional cameras. I don't plan to use the tripod for the 12 MP settings, unless for macro, and I use tripods for macro on my K-3 and K-1.

[biz-engineer]

He made a large print from a phone photo.

You Tube

You Tube

[ThorSanchez]

So does anyone ever use the RAW function of your phone camera? I've toyed around with it once or twice, but I found it loses the computational magic and all those advantages you get from the SOOC jpg. But I'll admit I've rarely even tried, so perhaps I'm missing something.


For me it's completely the opposite of my DSLRs where I shoot RAW nearly 100% of the time.

[normhead]

I always shoot raw when possible, but as you say, for certain effects it automatically switches out of raw.