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.
A Look at iPhone 4's Camera Quality
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I can't comment on "8MP camera" but the words "1GHz Snapdragon Processor" and "512MB Ram" are used to market phones that FLY.
My Desire isn't slow. Ever.
Most compact point and shoots have a 2um Pixels to Apple's 1.75um. However, Apple is using the new backlight sensors, which get 40-50% more photon information. That coupled with Apple's expertise in compression technology should give us compact point and shoot quality. I'm really happy with this upgrade.
It will also make for much better video capture. All around a good fit.
I thought the 2nd picture looked familiar. I had my engagement pics taken there. Its the Hakone Garden in Saratoga, CA.
Here's a picture of the same bridge from almost the same vantage point. Found this on Flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/34463075@N00/1490956837/
Apple sample:
Looks like the Japanese Tea Garden in Golden Gate Park in San Francisco.
The beach picture is definitely Baker Beach just south of the Golden Gate Bridge.
I agree, and the fact that Nokia has a Xenon flash is not bargain since I don't believe it would help with video's. My only hope is that the rumors were true that the iPhones' LED flash is the Philips Luxeon flash, which is far superior to standard LED.
That's not exactly true. Without getting too technical, let me say that 30fps is just fine. Most stuff you see in the United States is 30fps or 24fps. (The p and i have to do with whether the frame is interlaced or progressive, and the iPhone will be progressive)
I thought the 2nd picture looked familiar. I had my engagement pics taken there. Its the Hakone Garden in Saratoga, CA.
Here's a picture of the same bridge from almost the same vantage point. Found this on Flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/34463075@N00/1490956837/
That's spooky. The clouds are in the identical position. Hmmmmm.
Here's a nice article/PR on a very similar spec'ed Sony back illuminated 1.75um pixel sensor:
Sony back illuminated cmos
What's interesting is that Sony designed this for their consumer camcorders. Makes sense for Apple's uses.
You know who I feel even more sorry for? People who miss that great picture because they didn't think to bring along their single-purpose camera. Most great personal pictures happen on the spur of the moment, not as the result of planned photo shoots. Almost no one carries even a point and shoot with them at all times.
Again, the best camera is the one you have with you.
This camera appears to have jumped over the dividing line between 'better than nothing' to 'good enough for most purposes.'
Here's a nice article/PR on a very similar spec'ed Sony back illuminated 1.75um pixel sensor:
Sony back illuminated cmos
What's interesting is that Sony designed this for their consumer camcorders. Makes sense for Apple's uses.
Interestingly enough, early rumors have suggested that Apple is already working with Sony for an 8MP camera for its "next" iPhone!
I guess you should fire up a false advertising claim then, because they are clearly labeled on the Apple site as 'unretouched'. Tell us how that works out.
Picture 1: A human face in the foreground. Smooth background. It should not be a problem for any mid-range camera to produce a good, but not impressive picture in this situation. The iPhone 4 does exactly that, but not more.
Picture 2: Most details are in the background. The foreground does not contain a lot of details. It should not be a problem for any mid-range camera to produce a good, but not impressive picture in this situation. The iPhone 4 does exactly that, but not more.
Summary: It is not difficult to produce these pictures, and they are choosen, so that they do not tell much about the quality of the iPhone 4 camera in RL situations.
HD Video on the iPhone: A great idea, but someone @ Apple did forget to increase the built in storage (32 GB or less).
HTC EVO 4G says hi with their SD memory card thats 32 gig and cost $200 bucks.
Oh wait...its the same size. ..... So whatever...you should be fine.
And thereby missing 90% of the great pictures in your life because you won't have that 'top notch' camera with you.
People are SO hung up on the technology over the content.
Some perspectives on photos
HAHA! You ain't kidding. My old, over the hill DSLR still blows away modern point and shoot (P&S) cameras in terms of smooth color gradients, dynamic range and the ability to use filters. The P&S have improved in terms of ISO and low light, but still fail in dynamic range and gradients and color reproduction. This is inherently the problem with tiny sensors. Compared to a PHONE? Ha!
To put it in perspective a DSLR will have has a pixel pitch of 6-8 µm pixel-pitch vs the iphone 4 pixel pitch of 1.75 µm.
That is a much bigger photo bucket on a DSLR -> less noise -> better gradients -> more dynamic range.
That said, Apple is clearly thinking things through by opting for a better pixel-pitch than other smartphones.
So I did take a look at the iphone 4 samples, and compared it to samples from my DSLR (good lighting) and from my Olympus P&S and a couple other smart phones.
While it aint' replacing the DSLR the iPhone 4 is looking pretty good for a frackin' phone with a small sensor. If I have my DSLR ISO set to 800-1600 it is some what comparable in terms of noise level - recall its an 6 year old DSLR - the noise level is similar although the noise on the DSLR looks more WAY better and more film like.
Continuing my pixel peeping on the iPhone samples, the noise looks less film like and there was some evidence of lost detail (makes the detail look a bit like a painting) due to what I suspect is the noise reduction algorithm. Also the gradients at the high ISO still look better.
Compared to other smartphone it was looking quite damn good. Compared to last generation P&S it is looking non-too-shabby.
You have to put it in perspective. You can only expect so much out of a phone, but I wouldn't hesitate to snap away with it, if the samples are indicative to production quality and you have it on you - the biggest draw back of DSLR's.
Thank you Apple for not simply stuffing the specs table. Queue the Android fans to crap on my head.
HAHA! You ain't kidding. My old, over the hill DSLR still blows away modern point and shoot (P&S) cameras in terms of smooth color gradients, dynamic range and the ability to use filters. The P&S have improved in terms of ISO and low light, but still fail in dynamic range and gradients and color reproduction. This is inherently the problem with tiny sensors. Compared to a PHONE? Ha!
To put it in perspective a DSLR will have has a pixel pitch of 6-8 µm pixel-pitch vs the iphone 4 pixel pitch of 1.75 µm.
That is a much bigger photo bucket on a DSLR -> less noise -> better gradients -> more dynamic range.
That said, Apple is clearly thinking things through by opting for a better pixel-pitch than other smartphones.
So I did take a look at the iphone 4 samples, and compared it to samples from my DSLR (good lighting) and from my Olympus P&S and a couple other smart phones.
While it aint' replacing the DSLR the iPhone 4 is looking pretty good for a frackin' phone with a small sensor. If I have my DSLR ISO set to 800-1600 it is some what comparable in terms of noise level - recall its an 6 year old DSLR - the noise level is similar although the noise on the DSLR looks more WAY better and more film like.
Continuing my pixel peeping on the iPhone samples, the noise looks less film like and there was some evidence of lost detail (makes the detail look a bit like a painting) due to what I suspect is the noise reduction algorithm. Also the gradients at the high ISO still look better.
Compared to other smartphone it was looking quite damn good. Compared to last generation P&S it is looking non-too-shabby.
You have to put it in perspective. You can only expect so much out of a phone, but I wouldn't hesitate to snap away with it, if the samples are indicative to production quality and you have it on you - the biggest draw back of DSLR's.
Thank you Apple for not simply stuffing the specs table. Queue the Android fans to crap on my head.
By chance were they DSLR photos resized to 2 MP (1600x1200)? Because that would be a 2 megapixel image.
If you look in this screenshot from the website, you can see they've placed the flash on/off toggle in the top left corner. I'm sure you just toggle it on and off as you please.
I said I don't care about the quality of the camera. I grew up with a crappy 110 film camera that produced the worst pictures ever. If I want a camera just to take 'snaps' then the one in my 3G is good enough.
Like I said, it's a point-and-shoot camera and people should stop expecting more from a phone. And no matter what the Mp of other phones and what sensor size etc, this makes really no difference if the lens is rubbish.
If you look in this screenshot from the website, you can see they've placed the flash on/off toggle in the top left corner. I'm sure you just toggle it on and off as you please.
And I think there is a choice for Auto. Now if only they had made the volume down button the shutter button when in camera mode, as had been rumored, we would be all set!!
Perhaps. But you have to remember that pixels are not bad either. Given the same lens, sensor type and processor, more pixels are better as long as the density doesn't increase too much. It's not a quantity problem; it's that little greek letter µ that causes all the fuss.
Now, if anybody can get at the raw file from the iPhone, then we can start comparing.
Lol the link and the picture shown are the same. Compare that picture to the one on page one of this thread
haha.