PDA

View Full Version : Comparison of Cameras Across iPhone Generations




MacRumors
Oct 25, 2011, 11:01 AM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/10/25/comparison-of-cameras-across-iphone-generations/)


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


Lisa Bettany, one of the developers behind Camera+ (http://appshopper.com/photography/camera%C2%A0...the-ultimate-photo-app), has posted two interesting series of photos (http://campl.us/iPhone-Camera-Comparison) comparing the camera quality across all generations of the iPhone, as well as to Canon point-and-shoot and professional-level cameras.The iPhone 4S is dramatically clearer and sharper than previous iPhone versions. Using separate focus and exposure in Camera+ on the iPhone 4 & 4S significantly helped create a more balanced exposure. While it's not nearing the same quality as a professional level dSLR, it is comparable to a top of the line compact camera and even outshines it in some ways.PetaPixel has taken the images from the iPhones and presented portions of them side-by-side (http://www.petapixel.com/2011/10/24/a-look-at-how-much-the-iphone-camera-has-improved/) to provide the clearest example of how the iPhone's rear-facing camera has evolved over the years.

http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/10/iphone_cameras_skyline.png



Article Link: Comparison of Cameras Across iPhone Generations (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/10/25/comparison-of-cameras-across-iphone-generations/)



AAPLaday
Oct 25, 2011, 11:05 AM
The original and the 3g look like garbage. The dumb phone i had at the time was far better for photography use.

Autofocus really makes a difference

Tastydirt
Oct 25, 2011, 11:06 AM
Interesting, but we really need 100% crops to get a true comparison, and some night shots too.

flamejob
Oct 25, 2011, 11:10 AM
Interesting, but we really need 100% crops to get a true comparison, and some night shots too.

Look at the link in the post!

chrmjenkins
Oct 25, 2011, 11:10 AM
Interesting, but we really need 100% crops to get a true comparison, and some night shots too.


Here's some night shots from the original.

At the park
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

Having dinner
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

On the beach
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

dethmaShine
Oct 25, 2011, 11:10 AM
I am pretty sure iPhone3G wasn't that bad.

I used it for almost 2 years. It took pretty good pictures. I am not a photographer but they weren't as bad as the one shown in the first pic.

Silly stupid.

room237
Oct 25, 2011, 11:11 AM
The 4S looks like it brings out more of a magenta hue that I'm not so crazy about. Anyone else?

rdowns
Oct 25, 2011, 11:13 AM
Here's some night shots from the original.


Having dinner
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg





Mmmm, that looks yummy. Now I'm hungry.

justperry
Oct 25, 2011, 11:15 AM
Sharp but the colors are still of compared to the original (pro slr camera).
Look on their website there are better shots to compare.
But for an iPhone its not that bad at all, just have to adjust the colors afterwards.

jayducharme
Oct 25, 2011, 11:15 AM
I'm glad the article posts comparison images from "real" cameras. What amazed me is how much more I like the images from the iPhone 4. There seems to be a richer color in those versions. The 4S images seem over-exposed.

sevimli
Oct 25, 2011, 11:15 AM
I am pretty sure iPhone3G wasn't that bad.

I used it for almost 2 years. It took pretty good pictures. I am not a photographer but they weren't as bad as the one shown in the first pic.

Silly stupid.

They tested on a macro shot which original and 3g did not have that capability... Not fair at all...

mkrishnan
Oct 25, 2011, 11:15 AM
Interesting, but we really need 100% crops to get a true comparison, and some night shots too.

For the macro situation, you can pretty clearly see the difference without the 100% crop. The change over time is impressive -- the performance of the 4S is surprisingly close to the PowerShot. On the other hand, these are situations where camera phones do relatively better, vs. things like a portrait, where I think they're more noticably not as good as P&S's (and certainly not as good as dSLR).

andylyon
Oct 25, 2011, 11:15 AM
Interesting, but we really need 100% crops to get a true comparison, and some night shots too.

Haha night shots on the 2G, 3G and 3GS would just be a black rectangle!

EDIT: Damn, beaten to it!

cvaldes
Oct 25, 2011, 11:15 AM
On the beach
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg
Wow, that chick in the bikini is smokin' hot!

;)

BC2009
Oct 25, 2011, 11:27 AM
The original and the 3g look like garbage. The dumb phone i had at the time was far better for photography use.

Autofocus really makes a difference

That's standard apple operating procedure. They are cutting edge in some areas, but lag in others. Usually when they make up for the areas in which they are lacking they leap-frog the competition. Examples:

Bad Mobile Phone Camera --> Best Mobile Phone Camera
No MMS on iPhone --> Now you can iMessage/Tweet/MMS almost anything from any iOS device
No eSATA on Mac --> Now you get Thunderbolt
No Voice Recognition --> Now you get a personal assistant
No Copy/Paste on iOS --> Now the slickest select/copy/paste touch UI out there
No Multitasking on iOS --> Now smart Multitasking that saves your battery
No HDMI on iPhone/iPad --> Now you have HDMI/Composite/Component adapters + AirPlay
No Magazines on iOS --> Now you get Newsstand
No Third Party Apps --> Now App Store has more apps than Palm ever did
Poor Cloud Offering --> iCloud will effortlessly sync your stuff + 3rd party apps

Sure there are some things that Apple usually just does catch-up on. The "WiFi Hotspot" on iPhone was one example, but it was basically AT&T blocking that. Technically the iPhone 3GS was the first to offer tethering, but AT&T did not support it until iPhone 4 was almost out, so Apple did not bother with hotspot. And decent notifications were ultimately a cross between Web OS and Android functionality with some pretty UI and a nice sliding gesture to jump to the app and some widgets in the notification center. But Apple by and large does three things:

1) Completely change a market with a ground-breaking product introduction

2) Sit back and leap frog the competition once they feel they have something that is good enough or done right to fit with their road map

3) Produce a solid or above-average (or even best implementation) that is more or less a clone of the competition's offerings

What they don't do is:

1) Add a feature or product without extensively testing it internally

2) Add a feature or product just because the competition is doing it

3) Add something that is going to require more customer support and therefore lower customer satisfaction ratings

I don't doubt Apple's ability to add willy nilly features. Rather I suspect it comes down to internal prioritization and fitting those features into a road map that is already in place. Blu-Ray has never fit in Apple's roadmap since they want everything to be a download to a hard drive or be available in the cloud, so they will always leave that to third-party providers.

And YES, this can be frustrating when Apple's priorities don't match your personal individual priorities.

Norkusa
Oct 25, 2011, 11:29 AM
4S is definitely the sharpest but the white balance looks like it's off just a bit.

justperry
Oct 25, 2011, 11:45 AM
Wow, that black chick in the black bikini is smokin' hot!

;)

Fixed that for you.:)

ksgant
Oct 25, 2011, 11:46 AM
I'm sure the problem with the original iPhone and 3G models was that it couldn't focus that close. The normal pictures on those two models were fine as-is. It's just in this one demo showing they couldn't focus that close at all.

JusChexin
Oct 25, 2011, 12:07 PM
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/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

Maybe it's just me, but the quality of my 3GS camera shots are nowhere near the quality shown here :-/

John.B
Oct 25, 2011, 12:08 PM
Given the inherent auto-ISO/auto-WB limitations of any small sensor smartphone camera, I actually prefer the white balance on iPhone 4 better than the 4S. YMMV.

GoCubsGo
Oct 25, 2011, 12:10 PM
Here's some night shots from the original.


On the beach
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

What a nice evening. I can't believe all the stars.

Dcuellar
Oct 25, 2011, 12:21 PM
Here's some night shots from the original.

At the park
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

Having dinner
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

On the beach
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

LMAO

I can't stop laughing...

chimpboy74
Oct 25, 2011, 12:22 PM
Wow, that chick in the bikini is smokin' hot!

;)

look closer, if you zoom in the woman behind is topless!

Dr McKay
Oct 25, 2011, 12:35 PM
Here's some night shots from the original.


I genuinely laughed out loud. Good show sir.

daxomni
Oct 25, 2011, 12:48 PM
This thread does a great job of reminding folks that not ever component Apple chooses is great. Or even good. Or even worth using at all.

That's standard apple operating procedure. They are cutting edge in some areas, but lag in others. Usually when they make up for the areas in which they are lacking they leap-frog the competition.
No eSATA on Macbook Pro --> Now you get ThunderBlunder!
No USB3 on Macbook Pro --> Now you get ThunderBlunder!
No HDMI on Macbook Pro --> Now you get ThunderBlunder!
No ExpressCard on Macbook Pro --> Now you get SD Card Slot?!

And what's with only two ancient decade-old USB2 ports on a thousand plus computer in 2011?

Sometimes Apple gets it very right but other times Apple just plain screws up.

bpeeps
Oct 25, 2011, 02:48 PM
LMAO

I can't stop laughing...

Neither can I.

Sardonick007
Oct 25, 2011, 02:55 PM
Ok, that's just funny.

[QUOTE=chrmjenkins;13719936]Here's some night shots from the original.

At the park
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

----------

While this is a decent representation of sharpness and overall difference between the cams, it's really not empirical evidence of the quality just because everyone's monitor can play a big role in what they see in terms of color, saturation, and even focus. Not to mention there is a major difference in a trained eye vs a layman. Still, it's a good description of how they have improved/changed and that's clearly what the article is about.

britboyj
Oct 25, 2011, 03:22 PM
No eSATA on Macbook Pro --> Now you get ThunderBlunder!
No USB3 on Macbook Pro --> Now you get ThunderBlunder!
No HDMI on Macbook Pro --> Now you get ThunderBlunder!

Please explain why an Intel-developed technology capable of doing ALL OF THE THINGS YOU SAID is "blunder?" Proprietary adapter? That has yet to be seen.

No ExpressCard on Macbook Pro --> Now you get SD Card Slot?!

Fair point.

John.B
Oct 25, 2011, 03:35 PM
This thread does a great job of reminding folks that not ever component Apple chooses is great. Or even good. Or even worth using at all.


No eSATA on Macbook Pro --> Now you get ThunderBlunder!
No USB3 on Macbook Pro --> Now you get ThunderBlunder!
No HDMI on Macbook Pro --> Now you get ThunderBlunder!
No ExpressCard on Macbook Pro --> Now you get SD Card Slot?!

And what's with only two ancient decade-old USB2 ports on a thousand plus computer in 2011?

Sometimes Apple gets it very right but other times Apple just plain screws up.
Yeah, how completely asinine for Apple to have the new MacBook Air, mini, and iPhone 4S be Bluetooth 4.0 ready (i.e. Bluetooth Smart) before any products ship for it. Who would want to be out in front of standardized low-power connectivity for consumer devices?

/sarcasm

Kissaragi
Oct 25, 2011, 04:06 PM
Here's some night shots from the original.

At the park
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

Having dinner
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

On the beach
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

Post of the year!

daxomni
Oct 25, 2011, 04:10 PM
Please explain why an Intel-developed technology capable of doing ALL OF THE THINGS YOU SAID is "blunder?" Proprietary adapter? That has yet to be seen.
Look, I was never crazy about the original Display Port. It's not like Apple couldn't fit a full HDMI connection on a MBP. IIRC they used to have a full sized DVI connection in a similar footprint. No external device I currently own or probably will ever own is likely to support my Mini Display Port natively but Apple has adapters right, so no biggie. The only problem is that the adapters don't always work well and no matter if you choose cheap or expensive adapters eventually something breaks or gets crimped or whatever and the connection gets flaky and you have to buy another one to get back in business. I suppose if you never move your laptop from your desk then maybe the adapters never break, but I take my hardware everywhere. It's gotten to the point that I need to carry backup adapters for when the current adapter fails somewhere other than around the corner from an Apple store during business hours. But I lived with it and waited for improvements.

When the "improvements" finally came it wasn't in the form of any of the widely supported connections like USB3 or HDMI that I can use natively with my current (and future) hardware and cables. It was in the form of a faster and fancier Mini Display Port called ThunderBolt. My displays, my drives, and my peripherals still require external hubs and adapters just like before. Nothing had improved for me. Same old story. Yes, there is a thousand dollar display and a hub or two and a handful of pricy RAID devices. None of that benefits me or millions of other people who buy off-the-shelf hardware from manufacturers who aren't focused on Apple. I don't like feeling as though I'm just a pawn in some pissing contest between Apple and any of a dozen other standards they don't agree with for whatever reason.

I'm paying between one and two thousand dollars for an Apple laptop so I don't think it's completely irrational to expect Apple to pony up whatever it costs them to include things like native USB3 and HDMI. I don't expect Apple to support everything under the sun. Nobody does. Steve and company were even able to convince me that the low level security requirements for supporting Blu-ray exceeded what Apple could reasonably be expected to provide. But not everything Apple does seems to have their users or even their own best interests at heart. Lack of several widely supported connections in native form (and with enough built-in ports to actually connect everything) is one area where I feel Apple needs to back down and let the users choose the port they want and use standard cables without having to resort to purchasing fragile external adapters for conventional hardware. I think we all know that any port which requires a $50 cable for native transmission isn't going to become a widespread phenomenon at the consumer level. Well, everyone except Apple I guess.

markie
Oct 25, 2011, 06:17 PM
ThunderBolt was, like USB, an Intel developed standard Apple adopted in it's early days. Look how well that worked out with USB. I'm sure some questioned it too at first.

Intel will work to bring down ThunderBolt costs over time I'm sure. Remember what it's basically giving you is DisplayPort and PCI Express (two busses of PCI Express at that on some machines!) on a portable tiny connector.

The potential is amazing. The cost, is not - yet.

szolr
Oct 25, 2011, 06:26 PM
That's standard apple operating procedure. They are cutting edge in some areas, but lag in others. Usually when they make up for the areas in which they are lacking they leap-frog the competition.

You are so right. In all aspects of that post actually, but I thought it'd be a long quote xD

Kwill
Oct 25, 2011, 06:41 PM
Great. Now someone do that with the iPad. :rolleyes: Oh, wait...

----------

Here's some night shots from the original.

At the park
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

Having dinner
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

On the beach
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

Thanks for sharing. The lack of noise and aberration suggests these images were significantly retouched. :)

GekkePrutser
Oct 25, 2011, 07:00 PM
Here's some night shots from the original.
[...]

LOL!!! Sorry for the redundant reply but I just had to thank you for making me laugh for 5 minutes!

It's so funny because it's so true. I'm still using my iPhone 2G to this day, and I'm still surprised sometimes how bad it is in low light.

Yvan256
Oct 25, 2011, 07:10 PM
Here's some night shots from the original.

At the park
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

Having dinner
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

On the beach
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

That's still better than these photos taken with my 1st generation iPod touch:

Park
http://www.yvan256.net/pictures/iPod-touch-photo1.jpg

Restaurant
http://www.yvan256.net/pictures/iPod-touch-photo2.jpg

Beach
http://www.yvan256.net/pictures/iPod-touch-photo3.jpg

sshhoott
Oct 25, 2011, 08:28 PM
Full size of these comparison images:

http://campl.us/iPhone-Camera-Comparison

Rodimus Prime
Oct 25, 2011, 08:55 PM
ThunderBolt was, like USB, an Intel developed standard Apple adopted in it's early days. Look how well that worked out with USB. I'm sure some questioned it too at first.

Intel will work to bring down ThunderBolt costs over time I'm sure. Remember what it's basically giving you is DisplayPort and PCI Express (two busses of PCI Express at that on some machines!) on a portable tiny connector.

The potential is amazing. The cost, is not - yet.

no they did not really question it at the time.

At the time there was not any plug like it that could perform those function universally. You had printer cables (bulky as hell) tons of com ports device that yessed used large bulky plugs.

Thunderbolt really does not bring much new to the picture. It is massive over kill for most devices that could use it. So much over kill that it is not worth the cost to build devices for it.

Thunderbolt is looking to be like firewire and we all saw how firewire worked out.

marcusj0015
Oct 25, 2011, 09:34 PM
No ExpressCard on Macbook Pro --> Now you get SD Card Slot?!

And what's with only two ancient decade-old USB2 ports on a thousand plus computer in 2011?

Sometimes Apple gets it very right but other times Apple just plain screws up.

Check the MacBook Pro 17'' bro...

marcusj0015
Oct 25, 2011, 09:48 PM
no they did not really question it at the time.

At the time there was not any plug like it that could perform those function universally. You had printer cables (bulky as hell) tons of com ports device that yessed used large bulky plugs.

Thunderbolt really does not bring much new to the picture. It is massive over kill for most devices that could use it. So much over kill that it is not worth the cost to build devices for it.

Thunderbolt is looking to be like firewire and we all saw how firewire worked out.

Except that now it's possible to have an external storage server, with transfer speed as fast as an internal drive.

kjs862
Oct 25, 2011, 10:55 PM
in my opinion the 3gs had the first usable camera on an iPhone.

daxomni
Oct 25, 2011, 11:21 PM
ThunderBolt was, like USB, an Intel developed standard Apple adopted in it's early days. Look how well that worked out with USB. I'm sure some questioned it too at first.
Everyone was deeply suspicious of a cheap and simple USB port replacing all their legacy PS2's and DB9's and DB25's and bulky Centronics cables. Oh, wait, never mind. Everyone was happy to have access to a fast hot-swap port that worked with nearly everything and didn't require $50 cables or only connect with a handful of thousand dollar devices. The problem with FireWire wasn't that it was developed by Apple. FireWire was technically superior to USB by all accounts and found a strong following in professional markets. The problem with FireWire was that few commodity manufacturers were willing to use it and it remained too expensive to become a universal port. If it had been developed by Intel that wouldn't have changed anything.

FX120
Oct 25, 2011, 11:29 PM
Meh, I'm still not overly impressed with any cell phone camera. While they're certainly encroaching on the performance of low end point and shoots, they still have miserable dynamic range.

Except that now it's possible to have an external storage server, with transfer speed as fast as an internal drive.

That has been possible for many years, and is common in professional media environments.

alphaod
Oct 26, 2011, 12:31 AM
That's still better than these photos taken with my 1st generation iPod touch:

Park
http://www.yvan256.net/pictures/iPod-touch-photo1.jpg

Restaurant
http://www.yvan256.net/pictures/iPod-touch-photo2.jpg

Beach
http://www.yvan256.net/pictures/iPod-touch-photo3.jpg

I don't think your pictures are that bad. Could just be shaky hands or other factors.

suniil
Oct 26, 2011, 01:10 AM
not much difference between iP4 and iP4S camera!

fatboyslick
Oct 26, 2011, 02:23 AM
What a load of rubbish - the original and 3G cameras were no way that bad and there's no way Apple would allow such a shoddy camera out there.

Christ, even a old-skool windy film camera that costs 99p takes better pictures

mbhebsgaard
Oct 26, 2011, 06:56 AM
Nice comparisons - a good excuse to upgrade the 3Gs to 4S :)

benpatient
Oct 26, 2011, 09:49 AM
Except that now it's possible to have an external storage server, with transfer speed as fast as an internal drive.

hmn. I built a 5-drive external SATA array for a PowerMac G5 back several years ago. Regular transfer speeds in excess of 250MB/sec when writing large (multi-GB) files.

It cost 250 dollars (external case, sata cables & PCI-E card), plus the cost of the actual drives, which I don't remember.

----------

What a load of rubbish - the original and 3G cameras were no way that bad and there's no way Apple would allow such a shoddy camera out there.

Christ, even a old-skool windy film camera that costs 99p takes better pictures

They put the keys inside the minimum focus distance of the first iPhones on purpose, to make the results for the newer ones look better.

They also messed with the canon 95 to make it look less-than-ideal.

The whole "comparison" is bogus and flawed.

Note the lack of 100% crops anywhere, which would show you how these cameras really differ.

Juventino
Oct 26, 2011, 09:54 AM
i've never had an iPhone but even the 3GS photo looks better than the photos taken by my htc wildfire. they use sucky lenses in their phones.

tbrinkma
Oct 26, 2011, 11:21 AM
Wow, that chick in the bikini is smokin' hot!

;)

:eek: No, you twit! She's on *fire*. The smoke is just blocking the picture. :p

tbrinkma
Oct 26, 2011, 11:32 AM
no they did not really question it at the time.

At the time there was not any plug like it that could perform those function universally. You had printer cables (bulky as hell) tons of com ports device that yessed used large bulky plugs.

Thunderbolt really does not bring much new to the picture. It is massive over kill for most devices that could use it. So much over kill that it is not worth the cost to build devices for it.

Thunderbolt is looking to be like firewire and we all saw how firewire worked out.

Everyone was deeply suspicious of a cheap and simple USB port replacing all their legacy PS2's and DB9's and DB25's and bulky Centronics cables. Oh, wait, never mind. Everyone was happy to have access to a fast hot-swap port that worked with nearly everything and didn't require $50 cables or only connect with a handful of thousand dollar devices. The problem with FireWire wasn't that it was developed by Apple. FireWire was technically superior to USB by all accounts and found a strong following in professional markets. The problem with FireWire was that few commodity manufacturers were willing to use it and it remained too expensive to become a universal port. If it had been developed by Intel that wouldn't have changed anything.

Clearly you two are suffering from nostalgia-vision. I worked retail when the iMac and USB on Windows hit the scene, and it was a royal pain for customers early on. The plethora of adapter cables to let your old printer run off a USB port, or to run a USB printer off a parallel port. Mouse and keyboard conversion dongles. They didn't all work with all device/computer combinations, either, so good luck finding the right one.

Back then a base-line USB keyboard ran $35+, and a basic USB mouse was $45+. Those fancy new USB printers? They didn't come with a USB cable for some unfathomable reason, so you had to buy one along with it, typically $25 or so for a 6' cable. Need something longer? Good luck, and pull out the credit card.

USB *got* cheap and ubiquitous, it certainly didn't start out that way, and on the Windows side it certainly didn't start out problem-free either.

akbarali.ch
Oct 27, 2011, 01:36 AM
Hi guys as we all know iphone4S's camera is way better than iphone4. Recently i went on to GSMarena to compare camera (They have nice webpage Tool (http://www.gsmarena.com/piccmp.php3?idType=3&idPhone1=4212&idPhone2=3275&idPhone3=3621) ). To my surprise it seems iphone4 take sharper images than iphone4S.

Can someone conform this please, if it is, then its big let down. A very important factor for my decision to get iphone4S.

marcusj0015
Oct 27, 2011, 05:28 PM
What about a control pic from a very high quality camera? becasue tbh, the 4S even looks a bit off.

akbarali.ch
Oct 28, 2011, 01:05 AM
What about a control pic from a very high quality camera? becasue tbh, the 4S even looks a bit off.

I dont have any other Camera besides iphone3gs, iphone4 and samsung galaxy 2 (before someone picks at me for having 3 phones, i use i4 and 3gs & sg2 are use by 2 brothers)

But is'nt it surprising about the camera. Can please anyone conform this. I dont have iphone4S, if someone has both 4 & 4s it would be good to do some real world testing, but carefully done so.

markie
Oct 28, 2011, 01:58 AM
Hi guys as we all know iphone4S's camera is way better than iphone4. Recently i went on to GSMarena to compare camera (They have nice webpage Tool (http://www.gsmarena.com/piccmp.php3?idType=3&idPhone1=4212&idPhone2=3275&idPhone3=3621) ). To my surprise it seems iphone4 take sharper images than iphone4S.

Can someone conform this please, if it is, then its big let down. A very important factor for my decision to get iphone4S.

Looking at their comparison tool, the iPhone 4S is a clearly superior image. The iPhone 4 looks artificially sharp (too much sharpening, which can be done in software) - but there's more DETAIL in the iPhone 4S images. Detail is what counts.

P.S. I found part of what's going on. Looking at pictures from other cameras - even the reference cameras- that "color poster" image looked like junk compared to EITHER iPhone image. It just is a bad image that the iPhone's sharpening and noise characteristics make look better. Switch to looking at the ISO chart. MUCH more realistic example of what's going on...

davegoody
Oct 28, 2011, 06:09 AM
Here's some night shots from the original.

At the park
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

Having dinner
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

On the beach
http://www.hdgamewall.com/wallpaper/black-2.jpg

Reminds me of the old "Paris by night" all black postcards.

TBH the iPhone 4 VIDEO is great, but photos are not so much.... Get my iPhone 4s today, so will hope that the photos are better. Either way I shoot on pro-level SLRs most of the time, so a phone cam is never going to be anywhere near as good.

akbarali.ch
Oct 28, 2011, 06:21 AM
Looking at their comparison tool, the iPhone 4S is a clearly superior image. The iPhone 4 looks artificially sharp (too much sharpening, which can be done in software) - but there's more DETAIL in the iPhone 4S images. Detail is what counts.

P.S. I found part of what's going on. Looking at pictures from other cameras - even the reference cameras- that "color poster" image looked like junk compared to EITHER iPhone image. It just is a bad image that the iPhone's sharpening and noise characteristics make look better. Switch to looking at the ISO chart. MUCH more realistic example of what's going on...


Here's another part of the image, i grabbed after i posted the last one. This again clearly shows details that iphone4 got but iphone4S seems to have smudged. As you say, software can be used to sharpen images, can you use photoshop and sharpen iphone4S slide and manage to get the details thats there in iphone4 slide.
(It might also a possibility that GSMArena guys did not take photos carefully enough from iphone4S, its just a thought)
Waiting....

markie
Oct 28, 2011, 05:14 PM
Here's another part of the image, i grabbed after i posted the last one. This again clearly shows details that iphone4 got but iphone4S seems to have smudged. As you say, software can be used to sharpen images, can you use photoshop and sharpen iphone4S slide and manage to get the details thats there in iphone4 slide.
(It might also a possibility that GSMArena guys did not take photos carefully enough from iphone4S, its just a thought)
Waiting....

As I noted, something is WRONG with the "color poster" image. Look at the ISO chart. The iPhone 4 image of the "color poster" looks better than the image from a DSLR... that obvious indicates a test problem (or a weird condition the iPhone 4 works well in) - presumably a lack of actual detail in the poster combined with possible lighting and autofocus issues.

Click on the ISO chart and look at their comparison tool with that and you'll clearly see the difference...

akbarali.ch
Oct 28, 2011, 09:15 PM
As I noted, something is WRONG with the "color poster" image. Look at the ISO chart. The iPhone 4 image of the "color poster" looks better than the image from a DSLR... that obvious indicates a test problem (or a weird condition the iPhone 4 works well in) - presumably a lack of actual detail in the poster combined with possible lighting and autofocus issues.

Click on the ISO chart and look at their comparison tool with that and you'll clearly see the difference...

Yeah, i guess their test itself is broken it seems, at certain point iPhone4 seems to beat even DSLR!, thats just not possible. I think they should've done it more carefully. Anyway thanks.

markie
Oct 28, 2011, 09:58 PM
Yeah, i guess their test itself is broken it seems, at certain point iPhone4 seems to beat even DSLR!, thats just not possible. I think they should've done it more carefully. Anyway thanks.

Exactly, but they also have images of an ISO test chart. Those results "feel" far more valid to me. But yes, the color poster image at least is a screwed up test. It's obvious the results aren't valid to more general photography. My guess is the lighting rig or finish of the poster or something is throwing off most of the cameras in a way it's not the iPhone 4...

P.S. in case you don't see the link - http://www.gsmarena.com/piccmp.php3?idType=1&idPhone1=4212&idPhone2=3275&idPhone3=3621

The results on that test image seem much more accurate.