PDA

View Full Version : Full Resolution Photos from the New iPhone 4S Camera




MacRumors
Oct 4, 2011, 08:41 PM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/10/04/full-resolution-photos-from-the-new-iphone-4s-camera/)


As part of their new iPhone 4S promotional web pages (http://www.apple.com/iphone/built-in-apps/camera.html), Apple has included several full-resolution sample shots for download.

We've included three of the shots here. Clicking on the image will download the full-size 2-3MB 3264x2448 pixel photos to your computer.

http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/10/4sa.jpg

(http://images.apple.com/iphone/includes/camera-gallery/downloads/IMG_0940.JPG)
http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/10/4sb.jpg

(http://images.apple.com/iphone/includes/camera-gallery/downloads/IMG_0945.JPG)
http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/10/4sc.jpg

(http://images.apple.com/iphone/includes/camera-gallery/downloads/IMG_1031.JPG)
Several other examples are available to download (http://www.apple.com/iphone/built-in-apps/camera.html) at the bottom of Apple's 4S camera page. Of course, these may represent ideal shots, but should give you something to analyze while you wait for the 14th.

(via TheNextWeb (http://thenextweb.com/apple/2011/10/05/you-need-to-see-these-high-res-photos-taken-with-an-iphone-4s/))

Article Link: Full Resolution Photos from the New iPhone 4S Camera (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/10/04/full-resolution-photos-from-the-new-iphone-4s-camera/)



danpass
Oct 4, 2011, 08:43 PM
for all the magic in this camera they forgot one critical aspect that makes all the difference .................... no wide angle :roll eyes:


and I was watching the keynote on the :apple: site ...... is it me or does that presenter not know much about cameras? The only other explanation I can think of is that he intentionally talked down the tech terms; like Dynamic Range; which seems to be the same as the current i4 camera (which is decent but no dSLR)

toddybody
Oct 4, 2011, 08:46 PM
Beautiful colors and definition. Im excited to see what fast motion capture looks like (they showed a teaser photo of 3 folks jumping on the promo vid).

wordoflife
Oct 4, 2011, 08:48 PM
Wow these pictures are much larger than I thought they would be, in comparison to my 3GS. Looks like i'll have to go 32GB.

BaronStein
Oct 4, 2011, 08:49 PM
for all the magic in this camera they forgot one critical aspect that makes all the difference .................... no wide angle :rolleyes:

They forgot to make iPad a widescreen device too according to your perspective, right?

danpass
Oct 4, 2011, 08:51 PM
They forgot to make iPad a widescreen device too according to your perspective, right?
so what you're saying is that you're not familiar with camera lenses?

toddybody
Oct 4, 2011, 08:57 PM
so what you're saying is that you're not familiar with camera lenses?

http://switchtomac.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/ohnoyoudidnt.jpg

danpass
Oct 4, 2011, 08:58 PM
Image (http://switchtomac.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/ohnoyoudidnt.jpg)

hot :D

Trauma1
Oct 4, 2011, 09:04 PM
Those eight pics are nice. But it doesn't really tell the whole story.

Show us some impressive low-light pictures, then we can talk.

backinblack875
Oct 4, 2011, 09:08 PM
for all the magic in this camera they forgot one critical aspect that makes all the difference .................... no wide angle :roll eyes:


and I was watching the keynote on the :apple: site ...... is it me or does that presenter not know much about cameras? The only other explanation I can think of is that he intentionally talked down the tech terms; like Dynamic Range; which seems to be the same as the current i4 camera (which is decent but no dSLR)

the bolded part is your issue right there. It's a phone.

danpass
Oct 4, 2011, 09:12 PM
the bolded part is your issue right there. It's a phone.
and it never will be (a dSLR)

but they try to play it up and compare

then again I'm an INTJ. Don't give me crap or fancy marketingspeak, just facts :D

I wanted to see a 24mm equivalent wide angle lens instead of this eternal 36mm and narrower stuff (heck 30mm would have been good)

SuperMacMan
Oct 4, 2011, 09:16 PM
Absolutely beautiful. These are miles better than what I can get on my point-and-shoot, and certainly better than what my parent's high-end point-and-shoot takes!

I cannot wait to get mine. Mum, who currently uses a Nokia feature phone, is even wanting one after seeing the Siri video and these pictures!

I, for one, am incredibly pleased with this new iPhone. Haters gonna hate.

nagromme
Oct 4, 2011, 09:16 PM
Those eight pics are nice. But it doesn't really tell the whole story.

Show us some impressive low-light pictures, then we can talk.

The iPhone 4 is already great in low light—I use it that way all the time. The HDR feature helps, as does the Flash, but even unaided it’s better than the dedicated camera I used to love, and better than the pics other people are taking in the same locations. Definitely competitive with standalone cameras (the kind you leave home and get nothing from).

And the iPhone 4S should be even better than that in low light: 72% more light sensitivity than the iPhone 4.

P.S. For REALLY low light I 've downloaded a couple great long-exposure apps. Some more serious, some more for fun. And then there are apps like 360 Panorama. So easy! Let’s see a “real” camera do these things! And editing, and uploading and....

appleguy123
Oct 4, 2011, 09:20 PM
then again I'm an INTJ. Don't give me crap or fancy marketingspeak, just facts :D



I'm a fellow INTJ. We're clearly the best type!

pdqgp
Oct 4, 2011, 09:32 PM
Looks good. Especially for a phone. Good details and colors. Metering needs some work as the highlights blow out easily and while they mentioned DOF, the bokeh that is present is poor.

Trauma1
Oct 4, 2011, 09:34 PM
The iPhone 4 is already great in low light

I disagree. They may look ok on the phone itself, but once they are upload to a full-sized display, the weakness shows.

But I'm not complaining, because it is a phone.

WestonHarvey1
Oct 4, 2011, 10:18 PM
and it never will be (a dSLR)

but they try to play it up and compare


I thought they were comparing it to point-and-shoots.

DTphonehome
Oct 4, 2011, 10:31 PM
How the heck did they get so close to the squirrel??

smalltimewine
Oct 4, 2011, 10:34 PM
and it never will be (a dSLR)

but they try to play it up and compare

then again I'm an INTJ. Don't give me crap or fancy marketingspeak, just facts :D

I wanted to see a 24mm equivalent wide angle lens instead of this eternal 36mm and narrower stuff (heck 30mm would have been good)

It seemed pretty clear to me that they were making a comparison to P&S cameras, not DSLRs. The lead in slide was even a generic P&S icon.

Sure 24mm or wider is fun, but the average iPhone or any average photo taker is less interested in wide than tele. So, 36mm with a digital zoom is reasonable, considering the physics of such a small lens. To go wider, I'd guess that you'd start to run in to some serious distortion and loss of sharpness.

Like someone else said, it's a phone. You obviously have other equipment to use when you want to go wide.

ENTJ here.

MacDarcy
Oct 4, 2011, 11:21 PM
Will you be able to purchase the iphone 4S WITHOUT a contract like you can all the other iphones?

I travel alot, and dpnt need the phone, but sure would like the iphone 4S as a travel camera, skype, video recorder. Instead of lugging around a laptop and dslr....this would be a really compact nice alternative.

Even if its $600 or $700 unsubsidized, it'd be worth it for me considering dslrs cost alot more...and even a good point & shoot camera costs around $300 or so. And the iphone does so much more.

Not activating the phone part, but having it for travel woukd be sweet.

blue22
Oct 4, 2011, 11:34 PM
How the heck did they get so close to the squirrel??

Whoa, I know, that up-close pic of the squirrel is just nuts, both literally and figuratively. ;)

BiscottiGelato
Oct 4, 2011, 11:39 PM
for all the magic in this camera they forgot one critical aspect that makes all the difference .................... no wide angle :roll eyes:


and I was watching the keynote on the :apple: site ...... is it me or does that presenter not know much about cameras? The only other explanation I can think of is that he intentionally talked down the tech terms; like Dynamic Range; which seems to be the same as the current i4 camera (which is decent but no dSLR)

Seems like you are the one that is dropping the ball. With a fixed focal length lens, it's a mistake to leave it very wide. You have to balance both the tele and the wide side and choose a median ground. And as the other poster mentioned, reducing distortion and improving corner sharpness while fulfilling whatever cost restriction Apple has in place is also vital. This leaves anything too much on either the wide or tele side out of the question.

I'll leave my serious photo expeditions to my DSLR, 2.8 zooms and 1.4 primes. For everything else, the 4S camera sounds excellent. The Samsung Galaxy S 2 camera in my opinion only barely edged out the iPhone 4 even with the extra megapixel. The 4S camera probably will simply blows the competition away.

I still want my 4"+ screen tho... And from a market standpoint, making a phone that does not at all easily differentiation from their last generation might not be a good idea....

Prodo123
Oct 4, 2011, 11:55 PM
Great detail, awesome photos.
Would prefer RAW or at least PNG, though. Lossy JPEG? Seriously? It kinda ruins the purpose of an 8MP camera.


*everybody rages over RAW part of the comment and ignores the PNG part*

MacinDoc
Oct 5, 2011, 12:18 AM
Great detail, awesome photos.
Would prefer RAW or at least PNG, though. Lossy JPEG? Seriously? It kinda ruins the purpose of an 8MP camera.
I don't think I've ever had a phone or a point and shoot that produced RAW images. How much more memory do RAW images require?

----------

How the heck did they get so close to the squirrel??
Some sort of time delay aperture control, and put some food next to the phone, maybe?

Prodo123
Oct 5, 2011, 12:18 AM
I don't think I've ever had a phone or a point and shoot that produced RAW images. How much more memory do RAW images require?

----------


Some sort of time delay aperture control, and put some food next to the phone, maybe?

http://teavuihuang.com/dng/

Anonymous Freak
Oct 5, 2011, 12:21 AM
As for action shots, look at the (on the Apple page,) "crashing wave" picture. That's ISO 64, f/2.4, 1/824 second exposure. Yes, it's bright daylight, but that's pretty darned fast. Good looking pic, too.

Would have been nice for their example gallery to have a few lower-light pictures, though.

rocknblogger
Oct 5, 2011, 12:39 AM
http://teavuihuang.com/dng/

Note: A 1.3MP image takes approximately 4MB of storage space, and ~40 seconds of processing time.

This is why it's not feasible on a phone. With 8 MP the size of each image would be approximately 12-14 MB and it would take over ten minutes to process.

smalltimewine
Oct 5, 2011, 01:16 AM
I deal with RAW daily, and I have little desire to do so with my phone. Just give me a solid JPG profile, and I'm good. I'm not sure why the poster believes that the need for RAW follows from an 8MP sensor. There are plenty of great P&S rigs out there that do 10+MP (albeit mostly for marketing purposes) that produce great JPGs. Hell, most of the A-list production guys I've worked with fall back to paired RAWs maybe 10% of the time, if that even. All in all, I'd venture that there would be little increased range found in the RAW vs. Apple's JPG, not even considering additional time to post.

Now, what might be more useful is more creative control on capture with manual WB. Make it a "pro" toggle in settings like the HDR + standard pairing. It'd also be nice to tweak the JPG profile. Then, I just remember that this is a phone camera aimed at mass consumption. Though, it's a very good one.

Edit: add 2:3 to the "pro" settings wish list.

DrDomVonDoom
Oct 5, 2011, 02:39 AM
I particularly enjoy the squirrel in the background staring down the camera man. I think I found a new background fir my iPad :)

Ramsos
Oct 5, 2011, 03:25 AM
Those Squirrels have to be stuff no way they got that close to a live one.

----------

Impressive images from a phone either way. :apple:

fdv
Oct 5, 2011, 03:38 AM
How the heck did they get so close to the squirrel??
Taxidermy?

Pegamush
Oct 5, 2011, 03:44 AM
4:3 photos look stupid..
if you want to take nice and well proportioned pictures you have to use 2:3 aspect ratio (some would also like 1:1).
why don't make a pre-shot crop tool?

djrod
Oct 5, 2011, 04:12 AM
http://teavuihuang.com/dng/

Note: A 1.3MP image takes approximately 4MB of storage space, and ~40 seconds of processing time.

http://americanvision.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/most-boring-day.jpg

andylyon
Oct 5, 2011, 04:49 AM
How the heck did they get so close to the squirrel??

It's a cardboard cut-out. :D

sexualchocolate
Oct 5, 2011, 04:57 AM
How the heck did they get so close to the squirrel??

Like others have argued, the "S" in 4S obviously stands for squirrel. So I guess one of the main features is that you can get close to them now and they will accept you as one of their own.

japanime
Oct 5, 2011, 05:27 AM
Those eight pics are nice. But it doesn't really tell the whole story.

Show us some impressive low-light pictures, then we can talk.

I totally agree.

Plus, show us some photos taken in rooms with fluorescent lights so we can see if the pics have large blue-green splotches smack in the middle. That's a problem that plagues the iPhone 4 camera.

OttawaGuy
Oct 5, 2011, 05:53 AM
Hi,
Has anyone found any 1080p video samples we can download and check out?
Thanks.

edit
Found it, never mind.

http://www.apple.com/iphone/built-in-apps/hd-video-recording.html#video-hdvideo

MagnusF
Oct 5, 2011, 05:57 AM
I totally agree.

Plus, show us some photos taken in rooms with fluorescent lights so we can see if the pics have large blue-green splotches smack in the middle. That's a problem that plagues the iPhone 4 camera.

Remember the sushi pic? That did not have the green blob problem.

BornAgainMac
Oct 5, 2011, 07:20 AM
I was wishing the iPhone camera would support RAW images so I am also disappointed in that regard. I am excited about having 1080p video capture on the iPhone.

kalsta
Oct 5, 2011, 07:50 AM
Metering needs some work as the highlights blow out easily

The blown out highlights were what I couldn't help noticing during the presentation too. I was hoping it was due to the limitations of filming a projected screen or something, but even on their new promo video (http://www.apple.com/iphone/#video-4s) for the iPhone 4S, it's there. If you didn't spot it, pause the promo video at 3:06 and have a look at the highlights on the girl's skin. You can see it on the squirrel photo too.

Some people are complaining here about JPEG compression. Really? If no one told you, would you be able to spot the compression artefacts on these images? But to me, those blown out highlights are really obvious, and once you lose the detail in the highlights, no amount of correction in Photoshop can ever get them back.

My fear is that Apple has set image processing to produce photos that look punchy on screen, but in so doing have sacrificed detail in the highlights. That would be a real shame for what looks to be amazing optical hardware by consumer standards.

nostresshere
Oct 5, 2011, 08:01 AM
Will you be able to purchase the iphone 4S WITHOUT a contract like you can all the other iphones?

I travel alot, and dpnt need the phone, ...

Sure, Apple will sell if for $600 or whatever it is. Might just as well get a nice point and shoot for that.

Kissaragi
Oct 5, 2011, 08:07 AM
Apple have certainly come a long way from the pretty dire 3GS camera, these look really good.

organerito
Oct 5, 2011, 08:47 AM
How the heck did they get so close to the squirrel??

I don't know why but squirrels in Warsaw's parks are very social. You can even feed them by hand! Perhaps!

mixel
Oct 5, 2011, 08:50 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A5313e Safari/7534.48.3)

Those Squirrels have to be stuff no way they got that close to a live one.

----------

Impressive images from a phone either way. :apple:

There are loads of places where squirrels will get that close. In York here in the UK they'll climb all over you to get to your food. :)

*LTD*
Oct 5, 2011, 10:51 AM
The iPhone 4 camera is already quite impressive (save for certain low light conditions and zoom function.) Throw in a few photo apps (e.g., Camera+ and Hipstamatic) and you've got it made as fas as smartphone cams go.

Any improvements to it are most welcome, and will certainly cause me to use my Canon point-and-shoot even less.

madmaxmedia
Oct 5, 2011, 11:05 AM
Dynamic range is my biggest complaint about cell phone cameras, its inevitable due to their small sensors. Other aspects are nice, but it really limits the versatility of these phone cameras if you are used to using a premium compact (something with a 1/1.8" sensor).

Being able to adjust exposure compensation and/or contrast would help. I'm sure contrast is pumped up to give images more punch, reducing contrast would help (slightly) with dynamic range.

The squirrel shot is nice and sharp, but has a lot of blown highlights.

A lot of the time when people think they are seeing JPEG compression, they are actually seeing the effects of automatic noise reduction.

The blown out highlights were what I couldn't help noticing during the presentation too. I was hoping it was due to the limitations of filming a projected screen or something, but even on their new promo video (http://www.apple.com/iphone/#video-4s) for the iPhone 4S, it's there. If you didn't spot it, pause the promo video at 3:06 and have a look at the highlights on the girl's skin. You can see it on the squirrel photo too.

Some people are complaining here about JPEG compression. Really? If no one told you, would you be able to spot the compression artefacts on these images? But to me, those blown out highlights are really obvious, and once you lose the detail in the highlights, no amount of correction in Photoshop can ever get them back.

My fear is that Apple has set image processing to produce photos that look punchy on screen, but in so doing have sacrificed detail in the highlights. That would be a real shame for what looks to be amazing optical hardware by consumer standards.

psac
Oct 5, 2011, 11:59 AM
My biggest complaint is still lack of a physical zoom. If my two year old Sony Cybershot, which is slightly thicker than my iPhone 4 can have a 4x zoom that doesn't extend out of the body, why not get to at least a 2-3x zoom? It would make a world of a difference.

apu1234
Oct 5, 2011, 12:34 PM
4:3 photos look stupid..
if you want to take nice and well proportioned pictures you have to use 2:3 aspect ratio (some would also like 1:1).
why don't make a pre-shot crop tool?

Why do you want to crop the photo before taking the shot? If the image sensor is 4:3 it doesn't make a difference whether you crop it before or after taking the shot.

pdqgp
Oct 5, 2011, 01:19 PM
As for action shots, look at the (on the Apple page,) "crashing wave" picture. That's ISO 64, f/2.4, 1/824 second exposure. Yes, it's bright daylight, but that's pretty darned fast. Good looking pic, too.

Would have been nice for their example gallery to have a few lower-light pictures, though.

Good looking pic in what way? The highlights are blown out all over. I'm confused.

Are you seeing something presented that eludes to better low light shots? These 6500k daylight exposed shots are showing noise and compression from the NR already. That's not going to bode well for low light. My guess is that's why they don't show any.


My fear is that Apple has set image processing to produce photos that look punchy on screen, but in so doing have sacrificed detail in the highlights. That would be a real shame for what looks to be amazing optical hardware by consumer standards.

I agree, they punched up the processing. Optics wise though, I'm not really that impressed. Distortion or lack of is good but the bokeh present shows the weakness of the optics for sure.

Why do you want to crop the photo before taking the shot? If the image sensor is 4:3 it doesn't make a difference whether you crop it before or after taking the shot.

Exactly. Leave the 4:3 Ratio and crop afterwards. It's especially handy for when you decide to crop a landscape shot into a portrait. Evey pixel counts at that point and I'd rather have a taller image to work with.

supenakrisnadi
Oct 5, 2011, 01:25 PM
Well, in my opinion, please consider this is a camera on a telephone... (main function is to communicate)
Given credit that apple effort to spesifically design special cmos and include HDR in a smartphone cam I think is already a good starting point...

I think if the purpose is to take more professional quality photos seriously (TIFF, RAW), of course the options is better to get separate dedicated good DSLR camera with several sets of good quality lens.

We may still not in the era to have all the best gadgets capability in only one small device...even I believe some vendors will try to produce tons of additional attachable lens conversion kit for the wider / tele angled like they did with the 4...

xSPRINTERx
Oct 5, 2011, 02:52 PM
I'm a fellow INTJ. We're clearly the best type!

Im with you but an ESTJ....

AndyUnderscoreR
Oct 5, 2011, 03:01 PM
Whoa, I know, that up-close pic of the squirrel is just nuts, both literally and figuratively. ;)

Nope, Chuck Testa

aliensporebomb
Oct 5, 2011, 03:13 PM
How the heck did they get so close to the squirrel??

They put it in a case that made it look like a bag of peanuts that said "free to squirrels".

nsayer
Oct 5, 2011, 03:25 PM
How the heck did they get so close to the squirrel??

Squirrel?

NOPE! Chuck Testa!

RobertDobbs
Oct 5, 2011, 03:56 PM
Does it have a flash?

pdjudd
Oct 5, 2011, 04:16 PM
Does it have a flash?
As the last iphone did YES!

appleguy123
Oct 5, 2011, 04:37 PM
Im with you but an ESTJ....

Vote in my poll? http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1232021&highlight=. Your type is pretty under represented. :)

Prodo123
Oct 5, 2011, 05:58 PM
This is why it's not feasible on a phone. With 8 MP the size of each image would be approximately 12-14 MB and it would take over ten minutes to process.

Note: A 1.3MP image takes approximately 4MB of storage space, and ~40 seconds of processing time.

Image (http://americanvision.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/most-boring-day.jpg)

I guess you missed the PNG part of my comment.
I swear I spend too much time removing JPEG artifacts in Photoshop because of this.

Westacular
Oct 5, 2011, 09:11 PM
Dynamic range is my biggest complaint about cell phone cameras, its inevitable due to their small sensors. Other aspects are nice, but it really limits the versatility of these phone cameras if you are used to using a premium compact (something with a 1/1.8" sensor).

Being able to adjust exposure compensation and/or contrast would help. I'm sure contrast is pumped up to give images more punch, reducing contrast would help (slightly) with dynamic range.

The squirrel shot is nice and sharp, but has a lot of blown highlights.

A lot of the time when people think they are seeing JPEG compression, they are actually seeing the effects of automatic noise reduction.

And a lot of the time when people request RAW support, it's got nothing to do with avoiding JPEG compression. That's actually are rather minor piece of the puzzle.

RAW means recording the actual data recorded by the sensor, rather than the noise-reduced, demosaiced, white-balanced, reduced-bit-depth version that is then JPEG compressed. People who actually know what they're talking about who want RAW desire it for the additional latitude this extra data -- data that is lost even before the JPEG compression -- gives them in post-processing.

The camera's preset or automated parameter selection for all the processing needed to turn the raw sensor data into an image isn't always perfect, and storing that data means you're free to recreate the process and experiment with custom-tuned values later, at home, when the situation isn't time-sensitive.


That said: Apple's image processing tends to be very good, and there's limitations as to what a sensor that size can do, so I'm somewhat skeptical that one could do much more using a RAW from an iPhone than with the corresponding JPEG. Also, the proprietary tricks Apple uses to capture their HDR photos are probably incompatible with a RAW workflow, and just fundamentally goes against their philosophy when it comes to consumer tools and software. So I'm not holding my breath.

----------

How the heck did they get so close to the squirrel??

Download the full-size photo and check the EXIF. It's all intact, including GPS:

The photo was taken with normal, automatic settings, in Yosemite National Park, near one of the densely-touristed campground areas. The squirrels there are quite used to a heavy human presence, and being frequently fed by humans, and as a result they're relatively tame and friendly.

peperoni
Oct 6, 2011, 06:10 AM
Dynamic range is my biggest complaint about cell phone cameras, its inevitable due to their small sensors. Other aspects are nice, but it really limits the versatility of these phone cameras if you are used to using a premium compact (something with a 1/1.8" sensor).

Those sensor sizes are not only available to premium compacts. N8 saying hello with it's 1/1.83" sensor. :)

Stampyhead
Oct 6, 2011, 09:11 AM
Those are quality snapshots. I can't wait to try this camera/phone out for myself.

djrod
Oct 6, 2011, 09:55 AM
Nope, Chuck Testa

I lol'd :D

gregnazvanov
Oct 6, 2011, 10:21 AM
The graphics make me angry as I don't have anything close to this on my latest Blackberry. Having built several free financial mobile apps for our biz http://inkom.com.au/mobile-financial-apps it is clear to me know that we should start converting all of them to iPhone. Is there an easy way to go about it?


Image (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/10/04/full-resolution-photos-from-the-new-iphone-4s-camera/)


As part of their new iPhone 4S promotional web pages (http://www.apple.com/iphone/built-in-apps/camera.html), Apple has included several full-resolution sample shots for download.

We've included three of the shots here. Clicking on the image will download the full-size 2-3MB 3264x2448 pixel photos to your computer.

Image (http://images.apple.com/iphone/includes/camera-gallery/downloads/IMG_0940.JPG)


Image (http://images.apple.com/iphone/includes/camera-gallery/downloads/IMG_0945.JPG)


Image (http://images.apple.com/iphone/includes/camera-gallery/downloads/IMG_1031.JPG)


Several other examples are available to download (http://www.apple.com/iphone/built-in-apps/camera.html) at the bottom of Apple's 4S camera page. Of course, these may represent ideal shots, but should give you something to analyze while you wait for the 14th.

(via TheNextWeb (http://thenextweb.com/apple/2011/10/05/you-need-to-see-these-high-res-photos-taken-with-an-iphone-4s/))

Article Link: Full Resolution Photos from the New iPhone 4S Camera (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/10/04/full-resolution-photos-from-the-new-iphone-4s-camera/)

MacNut
Oct 7, 2011, 03:04 AM
Great detail, awesome photos.
Would prefer RAW or at least PNG, though. Lossy JPEG? Seriously? It kinda ruins the purpose of an 8MP camera.Why do you want RAW on a tiny camera phone lens. Get a real camera to shoot RAW. A cell phone camera is still just to take a quick shot not meant for professional wedding pictures.

neutrino23
Oct 7, 2011, 07:18 PM
and it never will be (a dSLR)

but they try to play it up and compare

then again I'm an INTJ. Don't give me crap or fancy marketingspeak, just facts :D

I wanted to see a 24mm equivalent wide angle lens instead of this eternal 36mm and narrower stuff (heck 30mm would have been good)

You can get a simple slide on wide angle attachment.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/patricko/olloclip-iphone-4-quick-change-camera-lens-system?ref=live

Personally, I'd rather have something a little longer. It seems I'm always getting really close to things to get the picture I want.

It would be nice if Apple would add a way for third parties to add attachment lenses. Simply putting a small steel ring around the lens would allow for magnetic attachment.

I find I can take decent photos of small objects by hand holding a loupe next to the iPhone. Hard to do that and click the button on screen to shoot the photo.

Another INTJ here. ;)

Prodo123
Oct 7, 2011, 09:09 PM
Why do you want RAW on a tiny camera phone lens. Get a real camera to shoot RAW. A cell phone camera is still just to take a quick shot not meant for professional wedding pictures.

Again, you're ignoring the PNG part of the comment...
seems like everyone is

danpass
Oct 7, 2011, 09:20 PM
The blown out highlights were what I couldn't help noticing during the presentation too. I was hoping it was due to the limitations of filming a projected screen or something, but even on their new promo video (http://www.apple.com/iphone/#video-4s) for the iPhone 4S, it's there. If you didn't spot it, pause the promo video at 3:06 and have a look at the highlights on the girl's skin. You can see it on the squirrel photo too.

Some people are complaining here about JPEG compression. Really? If no one told you, would you be able to spot the compression artefacts on these images? But to me, those blown out highlights are really obvious, and once you lose the detail in the highlights, no amount of correction in Photoshop can ever get them back.

My fear is that Apple has set image processing to produce photos that look punchy on screen, but in so doing have sacrificed detail in the highlights. That would be a real shame for what looks to be amazing optical hardware by consumer standards.
I often have to play with the tap-to-meter part of the focus function to recover highlights (or sacrifice them). The HDR function helps with creating a compromise but doesn't work for movement.

----------

You can get a simple slide on wide angle attachment.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/patricko/olloclip-iphone-4-quick-change-camera-lens-system?ref=live

Personally, I'd rather have something a little longer. It seems I'm always getting really close to things to get the picture I want.

It would be nice if Apple would add a way for third parties to add attachment lenses. Simply putting a small steel ring around the lens would allow for magnetic attachment.

I find I can take decent photos of small objects by hand holding a loupe next to the iPhone. Hard to do that and click the button on screen to shoot the photo.

Another INTJ here. ;)
interdasting :D

MarkBMW
Oct 8, 2011, 06:53 PM
here are the real camera details:

20 percent better color accuracy
35 percent better low light sensitivity

1.4 x 1.4 micron pixel size (iPhone 4 has 1,75 x 1,75 micron pixels)

BUT, when it comes to overall pixel light sensitivity in normal daylight
it has 35 precent less performance.
but with the lager aperture lets in more light and an 45 precent improved full well capacity this "problem" is fully solved and at the end, it has about 13 precent real better light performance.
in low light conditions it still has the 35 percent better performance.


it is able to do 1080p video at 60fps (without image stabilization, with 30 fps)
but apple only give us 30 fps with it.

720p with stabilization at 60 fps but apple will give us only 30 fps here too.

full 8mp 4k video at 24fps... but apple don't offer it to us
6mp video at 30 fps ... apple don't offer

same energy consumption as iPhone 4 camera (8 mp 4k video at about 340 mW)
a special shutdown mode with only 10 microwatt (iPhone 4 camera only offers a standby mode with 40 microwatt consumption)


next iPhone:

1.1 micron pixels
20 precent thinner
comparable image quality (little less)
less light sensitivity
only 4,7 mm high (6,5 mm is the iPhone 4 and 4s one)
8 MP, same video capabilities
80 mWatt less energy consumption at 8mp 24fps video.

adildacoolset
Oct 9, 2011, 05:25 AM
Good looking pic in what way? The highlights are blown out all over. I'm confused.

Are you seeing something presented that eludes to better low light shots? These 6500k daylight exposed shots are showing noise and compression from the NR already. That's not going to bode well for low light. My guess is that's why they don't show any.




I agree, they punched up the processing. Optics wise though, I'm not really that impressed. Distortion or lack of is good but the bokeh present shows the weakness of the optics for sure.



Exactly. Leave the 4:3 Ratio and crop afterwards. It's especially handy for when you decide to crop a landscape shot into a portrait. Evey pixel counts at that point and I'd rather have a taller image to work with.


Very impressive analysis, you must be a professional photographer. But what about for a forklift truck driver?

Four oF NINE
Oct 9, 2011, 06:18 AM
I hope this will be superior to the camera on my original release date iPhone 3G,.. It's a hassle to drag out the the big Nikon DSLR when I want a photo, but I've been underwhelmed with the quality from the camera in the iPhone 3G. (yeah, I know.. I'm waaaay overdue for replacement, dealing with it now with a white 64 gig iPhone 4S to be delivered Friday :) )

The BEST camera is the one you have with you!

AdrianK
Oct 9, 2011, 07:27 AM
then again I'm an INTJ. Don't give me crap or fancy marketingspeak

Holy superiority-complex, batman!

Mr Bigs
Oct 9, 2011, 07:59 AM
I don't think I've ever had a phone or a point and shoot that produced RAW images. How much more memory do RAW images require?

----------


Some sort of time delay aperture control, and put some food next to the phone, maybe?If they were in a park the squirrels are very friendly and will take the food out of your hands.

Anonymous Freak
Oct 10, 2011, 02:44 PM
My biggest complaint is still lack of a physical zoom. If my two year old Sony Cybershot, which is slightly thicker than my iPhone 4 can have a 4x zoom that doesn't extend out of the body, why not get to at least a 2-3x zoom? It would make a world of a difference.

Because all of the internal space for your Sony is dedicated to being a camera. Your Sony has a small battery (comparatively,) that only has to power the camera "on" for a couple hours at most. The iPhone needs a large battery (more than 50% of the internal space) to power a computer with a radio in it for eight-plus hours of usage.

Your Sony can dedicate 10% or more of its internal volume to that lens. The iPhone can dedicate maybe 2% of its internal volume to the camera. Assuming you're talking about the same style of Sony I'm thinking of, the "lens" actually extends a decent way *DOWN* toward the bottom of the camera, with a 45-degree mirror right behind the outer lens. The zooming is going on by moving the sensor and lens assembly vertically up and down inside the camera. Find me room for that in the iPhone.

Ah, here you go:
http://guide-images.ifixit.net/igi/BgXGWuSlZ5dDDE34.large
That's the DSC-T1, Sony's first internal-zoom compact camera. That large black module that has just been removed is the lens-and-sensor assembly. I'm sure they've shrunk it a little since that camera, but not by much.

Here's the similar Nikon CoolPix S51c. Again, pretty darned big lens/sensor assembly:
http://guide-images.ifixit.net/igi/6o3vkExXM13i1N2i.large

By comparison, here is the lens-and-sensor assembly of the iPhone 4:
http://guide-images.ifixit.net/igi/YJLZ65WWLGtCugsU.large

Xian Zhu Xuande
Oct 13, 2011, 05:44 PM
Again, you're ignoring the PNG part of the comment...
seems like everyone is
Saving photographs taken with the device as raw PNG-24 graphics would roughly triple file sizes and significantly slow down elements of the photography process. That said, it isn't a very bad way of pushing through uncompressed photos without completely blowing out file sizes (although ~10 MB photographs will chew through disk storage nicely as well).

If discussed, I suspect it probably just came down to being fairly obscure, providing a bad user experience (for people who don't understand what would be happening in the background), unexpected file types in various applications, and a minimal improvement in quality for the associated cost. When you factor in iCloud there's a whole new layer of factors to consider.

I'm not too surprised they didn't do something like this.

As for your original thought of RAW, that would be horrific on a smartphone. Aside from the mess that would be associated with processing and user experience, storage would be an incredible mess. I suspect, for the time being, that anyone who cares about RAW for good reasons (rather than simply wanting it because it seems more professional) has the appropriate options to turn to when their photographs absolutely must be at their best.

DaffyDuck
Oct 17, 2011, 11:36 AM
I'm somewhat skeptical that one could do much more using a RAW from an iPhone than with the corresponding JPEG.

You shouldn't be. I have a Canon point and Shoot with RAW ability and I've seen huge improvements with the RAW processed with Photoshop VS the JPG. The problem is that the in camera processing is necessarily unsophisticated due to processor limitations, and even though the new iPhone certainly has a better processor than my digicam, I feel certain that we could get much better photos if we could save RAW files with the 4S.

What appear to be blown highlights may in fact not be but we'll never know or be able to fix them.


significantly slow down elements of the photography process.

Not necessarily. I have a Canon 1D MarkII that is now 6 years old. It can shoot 8.5 FPS RAW @ 8MP. The chip required to do that processing would be much smaller and cheaper than 6 years ago and therefore could possibly be doable in a phone at a lower speed, say 1-2 FPS. Also, storage would not be a mess. I still use a 4GB compact flash card in my 1D Mark II and I've got more space free on my 4S than that.

yetieater
Oct 17, 2011, 06:57 PM
Dude, how did they get those shots of the squirrels?