Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPhone 5s Camera Improvements: Slo-Mo Mode, 'True Tone' Flash and Better Low-Light Performance
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Skill is the most important thing, no doubt. If you've got it, you don't have to have a DSLR to take beautiful pictures. If you know how to frame up a shot, look for the best lighting conditions, and tweak the hell out of RAW files, you could take an award winning picture with even an older iPhone. Buying an expensive camera doesn't suddenly make you a great photographer, same as having a bad camera doesn't mean you can only take crappy pictures.
But a DSLR does give you so much more flexibility to take even better shots if you know what you're doing. In certain situations, there are some pictures you flat out can't take with a camera phone that won't present any problem with a DSLR.
As much as I hate to agree with SockRolid, he is right about one thing. Unless you're blowing up photos to poster size, more megapixels doesn't automatically mean better pictures.
Think of it like this. You've seen a ton of nice looking digital shots by now, I'm sure. Did you know that as far as raw detail and resolution is concerned, there isn't a single consumer grade digital camera that compares to bog standard 35mm film on a purely technical scale? For a digital camera to match the resolution of oldschool analog film, you'd have to have one capable of producing (roughly) 95MP shots. And even then, you still wouldn't get the same amount of detail because they interpret each pixel on an RGB scale, rather than the nice pixel free blend of interpolated colors analog gives you.
So now that you know this, are you suddenly finding yourself thinking that digital cameras suck? Probably not. Because, like I said above, it only matters if you're blowing up your photos to massive sizes. For just about everyone, 6-12MP is about all you'd need. That'd be enough to nearly match 35mm in quality up to certain sizes.
i understand. but if you take what apple is doing with the current camera, and also add more pixels, it'd be even better.
It'd look about the same if you're viewing them on your monitor. You'd only notice more detail when zooming in on tiny objects way off in the background.
As long as the resolution of a photo at least matches the pixel count of your monitor, you wouldn't notice any huge differences.
Like I'm assuming you've got a retina iPad, right? I'm sure at some point you've gone looking for some nice 2048x1536 wallpapers. You probably came across a few that looked absolutely amazing. Sharp, crisp, great colors...
...and all of them are only 3MP.
There are situations where the more megapixels you've got, the better off you are, but for computer wallpapers, stuff you post up on your flickr account, or even a physical 16x20, 5-6MP is usually more than enough. What's more important is the skill of the person taking the shot.
You're in a nightclub, your friends pose for a photo and you "reach for your canon" which you happen to have tucked away in your back pocket...
Image
I think you're missing the point.. ..
Dude, I ALWAYS have my DSLR tucked away in my back pocket.
iPhone probably has the best camera in the market, and we will be able to test it from tomorrow onwards as the sale of the iPhone starts
No, it's not just a phone, its a smartphone. And stick to talking for yourself only, since you obviously have no clue what other people care about.
Yeah, I know it's a year ago..