6S display still 326 PPI

[Andres Cantu]

OK here we go:

From: http://mobilesyrup.com/2015/09/22/iphone-6s-and-iphone-6s-plus-review/

But Apple did regress in one area: low-light performance. Because the 12 megapixel sensor in the new iPhones is roughly the same size as the 8 megapixel sensor in the previous versions, the pixels themselves are smaller (1.22 microns versus 1.5 microns). And despite reduced cross-talk between them, which purportedly lowers noise levels in low-light shots, it’s evident when comparing photos of the previous generation to this one that both of the newer models, the iPhone 6s especially, has to compensate by ratcheting up the light sensitivity, allowing grain and noise to creep in.


iPhone 6s low light


iPhone 6s Plus low light


iPhone 6 low light


iPhone 6 Plus low light

The differences are subtle, but it’s clear that the iPhone 6 Plus captures the best photo. Its optical image stabilization allows the shutter to stay open a quarter of a second, the same length as the iPhone 6s Plus, but the newer phone ramps up the light sensitivity to compensate for the reduced light available to its pixels, increasing the grain. The same thing can be seen between the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6s, though arguably the 6s takes a cleaner photo due to the improved noise handling through the A9’s updated image signal processor.

-----------

Don't get me wrong. I'm sure the new sensor is "better." But the question is whether it's better in a meaningful way for the audience that Apple caters for? For FaceTime front camera, absolutely. For the rear camera for 4K, yes. For actual photography.. a small amount, and for low-light photography - unfortunately it looks like no. I personally would rather have kept an 8MP sensor but improved that low-light ability. But... the world does not revolve around me.

A better aperture would have helped. I wish they would have gone with at least an f/2.0.

 

[jerwin]

Which is the better lens?

or this?

 

[WilliamG]

Which is the better lens?

or this?

Mmmm... tasty Leicas... drool... 0.95 aperture on an iPhone? YES PLEASE.

 

[jerwin]

Why? Why do you prefer the ultrafast lens to the ultrasharp lens?

Is it because you like to shoot in the dark? Wouldn't a more sensitive sensor package solve your issues?

Or is it because you like the shallow depth of focus that wide open apertures provide?

That sort of effect becomes easier to control and exploit with really large sensors-- the leica m series is, of course, "full frame."

 

[WilliamG]

Why? Why do you prefer the ultrafast lens to the ultrasharp lens?

Is it because you like to shoot in the dark? Wouldn't a more sensitive sensor package solve your issues?

Or is it because you like the shallow depth of focus that wide open apertures provide?

That sort of effect become easier to control and exploit with really large sensors-- the leica m series is, of course, "full frame."

On the iPhone cameras, Look at the history of their apertures. The iPhone 4 had f/2.8, for example. Variable apertures? A man can dream..

Yes, a more sensitive sensor package would solve a lot of the low-light issue, but it's clear Apple didn't go for that this year in any meaningful way. I should perhaps credit them for moving from 8MP to 12MP without impacting low light performance TOO negatively (but it's still a downgrade), and I'm certainly not seeing a real-world meaningful difference in terms of IQ moving to 12MP. I just wonder if Apple had kept the sensor at 8MP, implementing their new sensor tech at that number of MP... I think that might have been more meaningful to us, perhaps.

I'd like to see some really amazing shakeup in the phone camera world. The last time that happened for me in any camera was Sony RX-100's introduction. That really shook up the compact camera world. Got one of those in for review, and I had to buy one afterwards. But even Sony has sat back a little since then, and the MK IV isn't really a huge improvement over the MK III. Shame.

That said, for a phone, the new iPhone 6s camera is obviously great. I just wait for the day where we don't have to say, "for a phone...". You're never going to get the image quality a good DSLR with a stunning lens will bring you, but sensor technology can definitely be improved, and that's where we'll see better resolution/low light etc on the iPhones in the future. Give it time..

 

[orangezorki]

Which is the better lens?

or this?

Money no object, I'd get the Summicron first, but would probably get the Noctilux too. Never really got the point of super-large aperture M-mount lenses when the cameras they are designed for will be out of focus without you knowing if you cough at the rangefinder. They don't even give you a brighter SLR viewfinder image because there ain't one.

Of course, I'm not the Sultan of Brunei, so I actually have a Fuji X-pro 4-lens kit that gives me a similar experience with live view and autofocus for a similar price to just one of the lenses you have pictured.

 

[macduke]

I could barely notice a difference when going from an iPhone 5 to 6 Plus. Most of the improvements were contrast and color related. I often switch between my iPad Air 2 and my 6 Plus and it doesn't bother me. So I'm pretty sure I won't really notice the 19% decrease in PPI and I'm a web and app UX/UI designer and pixel-peeping photographer. It's just not significant enough to worry about from typical viewing distances. If anything it will be nice to have better performance. My 6 Plus would get pretty laggy, especially when trying to rotate videos. The scaling it does slows things down. I'm sure the 6S Plus hardware can handle it, but after a year of dealing with it I'm glad to be rid of the stuttery UI, scaling and associated crashes. Although iOS 9 has improved things a bit for me.

 

[iamMacPerson]

Personally, I have the 6 Plus and compared to my brother's 6 I do see a difference. It's not HUGE like some people here make it seem, but if you have good eyes you can see the difference. Next to my iPad though, you can see the difference. Compared to other phones however, I don't see very much, if any, difference in the clarity. The only reason the displays in the Samsung phones make the 6s/6s Plus look bad is because Samsung over-saturates the colors to death whereas the iPhone is sRGB accurate. Clarity wise, I didn't noticed a difference between my iPhone and Samsung devices I was looking at in Best Buy (notably the S6 Edge+/S6+ Edge/whatever the name is).

This isn't to say I wouldn't welcome I higher resolution iPhone with open arms, but I don't see 4K displays on phones making a big enough difference compared to something like 2K. I don't see Apple bringing 2K or 4K to the iPhone for a while, until the can make the GPU powerful enough to do it and conserve battery life, nor would I want them to. Maybe next year the 7 Plus will be bumped to 1242x2208 so the GPU doesn't have to downsample like it has to with the 6 Plus and 6s Plus, but that's all I see happening. If that's the case, keeping with the 5.5" screen, would put the 7 Plus in the neighborhood of 460PPI (versus 401 on the 6 Plus/6s Plus).

 

[nickchallis92]

It's not about aesthetic... It's about the materials used. A typical Samsung phone ...

It uses the same materials as an iPhone? You've become a parody of yourself. Jesus

 

[RetiredInFl]

As Steve pointed out at the Retina keynote there is literally no point in having any more.

"Steve" also said no one needs or wants a larger screen. Even @TheRealGod can sometimes be wrong (He allowed wars & McDonalds McRib)

 

[Poochi]

Yeah, it's disappointing. The screens are a joke compared to the newest Samsung devices, but overall the iPhones are better. I'm holding out for the iPhone 7.

everything's got compromise in one way or another, if screen is the deal breaker for you, buy the Samsung phone

For me, although not happy with some components if were to break them down spec by spec, I am happy with the overall package iPhone offers.

 

[Poochi]

"Steve" also said no one needs or wants a larger screen. Even @TheRealGod can sometimes be wrong (He allowed wars & McDonalds McRib)

Steve is a marketer, he can swing to the other side just as quick when he's trying to sell you an Apple device.

No point quoting whatever he said in the past, it's past, let it be.

 

[MarkCollette]

I'll do that for you tonight. No problem. The difference is DPI, period. Text looks sharper, less pixelated etc on the 6 Plus. It's crazy to me that people tell me (and zillions of other people) that they're not seeing that.

...

It is particularly important to have as many pixels as possible when digitally rescaling images from their native resolution to the display that they are being viewed on. Most images require rescaling and most rescaled images (from either higher or lower resolutions) with fine text and graphics look noticeably to considerably better in side-by-side comparisons on the iPhone 6 Plus with 2.1 Mega Pixels compared to just 1.0 Mega Pixels on the iPhone 6. Twice as many pixels to work with makes a noticeable visual difference.

Ok, no photo, but no worries, real life should take precedence over Internet debate. When I get a chance to look at the new iPhones, I'll try to take a peak of the 6s and 6s+ side by side.

I'm not disputing that you can see a difference, but for me I have to hold the phone within 7 inches from my face and carefully examine the rounded parts of letters to see it not perfectly smooth. That's not how I'd actually use it though, I just read, not stare and focus on a single letter at a time.

But I wonder how much the large display appears to look better simply because it effectively zooms in more, as the same source image is stretched over a larger surface, requiring less eye fatiguing squinting. If it had retained the same DPI, but kept that larger dimensions, how much that would look worse, or the same as, the 6(s)+.

 

[WilliamG]

Ok, no photo, but no worries, real life should take precedence over Internet debate. When I get a chance to look at the new iPhones, I'll try to take a peak of the 6s and 6s+ side by side.

I'm not disputing that you can see a difference, but for me I have to hold the phone within 7 inches from my face and carefully examine the rounded parts of letters to see it not perfectly smooth. That's not how I'd actually use it though, I just read, not stare and focus on a single letter at a time.

But I wonder how much the large display appears to look better simply because it effectively zooms in more, as the same source image is stretched over a larger surface, requiring less eye fatiguing squinting. If it had retained the same DPI, but kept that larger dimensions, how much that would look worse, or the same as, the 6(s)+.

Apologies. I didn't set up my equipment to do a proper photo comparison. That's my bad - figured the discussion was over.

Look at your second paragraph. 7 inches you say. Is it possible that for some of us that 7 inches is 10 inches, or 12 inches? None of us is saying the 6 is ugly to look at, it's just not as nice as the 6 Plus, that's all. I don't even have to stare to see the difference. I used the desktop site of nyt.com as an example, where small text favors the 6 Plus dramatically (to my eyes). If you don't see it, that's great for you. Being picky makes life a lot harder!

 

[bhayes444]

Apologies. I didn't set up my equipment to do a proper photo comparison. That's my bad - figured the discussion was over.

Look at your second paragraph. 7 inches you say. Is it possible that for some of us that 7 inches is 10 inches, or 12 inches? None of us is saying the 6 is ugly to look at, it's just not as nice as the 6 Plus, that's all. I don't even have to stare to see the difference. I used the desktop site of nyt.com as an example, where small text favors the 6 Plus dramatically (to my eyes). If you don't see it, that's great for you. Being picky makes life a lot harder!

I agree completely. For me I can tell the difference at my normal viewing distance (about 10 inches or so), just by looking at the cell signal dots. I can see more jaggedness on the 6 than the 6+. I think a few posters on here have it correct in saying that this whole debacle is pretty much due to how well you can see. I'm not saying that the people who can't tell are blind, but nobody's vision is exactly like another's so why would people expect it to be? It makes no sense. It's just like asking two people to judge an orchestral performance, one being a full time composer, the other being an average person from the street. There's gonna be some different opinions there.

 

[Max(IT)]

It uses the same materials as an iPhone? You've become a parody of yourself. Jesus

Not even close... A joke of a phone, like any Samsung high end product...

 

[WilliamG]

I agree completely. For me I can tell the difference at my normal viewing distance (about 10 inches or so), just by looking at the cell signal dots. I can see more jaggedness on the 6 than the 6+. I think a few posters on here have it correct in saying that this whole debacle is pretty much due to how well you can see. I'm not saying that the people who can't tell are blind, but nobody's vision is exactly like another's so why would people expect it to be? It makes no sense. It's just like asking two people to judge an orchestral performance, one being a full time composer, the other being an average person from the street. There's gonna be some different opinions there.

It was the same thing with the 5K iMac release. Some people (like me) blown away by the huge difference at beyond normal seating distance, and others saying they had to squish their face up against the glass to tell a difference. I couldn't go back to a 1440p display now after experiencing 2880p. That's how that is.

 

[MarkCollette]

I used the desktop site of nyt.com as an example, where small text favors the 6 Plus dramatically (to my eyes). If you don't see it, that's great for you. Being picky makes life a lot harder!

I was totally blown away that with the page not zoomed in at all, and letters being only around 1mm wide, I could somehow read that site on my phone! Very fatiguing on the eyes though. For sure, I could see how more DPI could help with that, but I think I'd have to be 10 years younger to not go blind in the process

 

[WilliamG]

I was totally blown away that with the page not zoomed in at all, and letters being only around 1mm wide, I could somehow read that site on my phone! Very fatiguing on the eyes though. For sure, I could see how more DPI could help with that, but I think I'd have to be 10 years younger to not go blind in the process

Hah. I'm in my mid 30s, and I love small text still. I'll be sad the day that changes. PPI for the win!

 

[haruhiko]

Building from my slightly briefer but more to-the-point reply. I am fairly happy with having a resolution where it is crystal clear and is above the 320 PPI Human-limit. As Steve pointed out at the Retina keynote there is literally no point in having any more.

As for resolution, the problems with the new z4 4K is an example of why Apple has not gone there, but I believe I read somewhere that Apple is moving to have 4K panels in one of the next two devices years. Anyhow, we can shoot 4K videos and have been able to view them since the iPhone 6. Source: http://www.techradar.com/news/phone...t-but-the-iphone-6-can-play-4k-videos-1274313

326 ppi is not the human eye's limit.