Raw, as in straight from the camera. Not RAW as in a digital negative.
At least that's what I think the waloshin meant.
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
Raw, as in straight from the camera. Not RAW as in a digital negative.
At least that's what I think the waloshin meant.
wow steve jobs is such a hypocrite, he goes on and on about how the the iphone will NEVER get flash. Well it got a flash 
As a semi pro my guess is that you dont have many glasses that are cheaper than the iphone so I'll be surprise to a camera phone stock up to your slramac4me said:
Who knows? No one.
It is very dependent on the rate of compression in use.
In other words... it depends.
It is very dependent on the rate of compression in use.
In other words... it depends.
My wife owns a Nexus One. I have an iPhone 3gs. Clearly you've never taken pictures with both phones under a multitude of conditions.
As a fairly serious photographer, I will happily tell you that megapixels mean very little. I have used many 10+ megapixel cameras that were simply horrid... and quite a few 3 mp cameras that take wonderful photos.
If you take photographs and make any camera buying decisions based on megapixels, then you're not discerning, and you'll be happy with anything.
Each camera has its own attributes depending on conditions. In which conditions does the Nexus One excel over the 3gs?
Well, that's not what the dude was talking about. It was a string of trolls commenting on another phone, like the Evo's storage has anything to do with the iPhone's camera.
Alright, you got me on shooting, mostly 24p whether film or digital, I believe. But I did say broadcast. And the watching stage of the tech is what most people would be able to reference.I get it from several years as a professional editor, working on many things broadcast on television.
A TV show like Lost, for example, is shot and edited 24fps. Your TV might display it 60i (if shown from a DVD, for example) but it is doing what's called a 3:2 pulldown - for each frame, 3 fields, then 2, then 3, etc. This gets it to 60 fields, or 30 frames per second.
As I said, without getting too technical, most stuff in the United States is 30fps or 24fps.
You have that right! Unless you have a very specialized application, going over 4 megapixels is about as bad as those that were talking about how many watts their stereo received used to have.
I have a 10 megapixel camera connected to my 150 watt receiver. Wank wank wank!
I'm pretty impressed with the image quality, it's a camera phone after all, so what we're seeing is great =)
Only thing we don't have is the bragging rights for 'most megapixels in a phone'
HAHA!
Only thing we don't have is the bragging rights for 'most megapixels in a phone'
wow steve jobs is such a hypocrite, he goes on and on about how the the iphone will NEVER get flash. Well it got a flash
HAHA!
thanks, and oh yea, it definitely works really well on sunny day, or with good lighting general. I'm excited about iP4's new hardware though!
I'm kinda one of those people...before yesterday I didn't really know, but I really never take pictures. I don't own a camera and have probably taken about 40 pictures over the almost 3 years I've had iPhones. To the average consumer who isn't photo savvy the thing that is given the most attention is megapixels.
However, the people that look at posts by people who obviously know what they're talking about and still hate on the iPhone's camera without ever using it just bc it's 5 not 8 are just ignorant, can't solve that issue with educating them since they'll just ignore it lol.
Higher MP = more noise, bigger file sizes, slower transfers, slower editing, wasted storage, and a nice bullet point for an ad
I’ll take improved optics and electronics over megapixels any day. And I do NOT want to be storing 8MP images for no reason. (5MP is already huge and detailed—far bigger than most people view photos, or need for the sake of printing even.)
Totally agree. And, just to highlight, the file size issues with little quality benefit have a lot to do with sensor size, as Jobs highlighted. You briefly mention more noise, but I don't think a lot of people realize how big a deal this is because they are wowed by the MegaPixel Myth.
When sensors are crammed on the chip, their ability to detect light cleanly without creating noise / artifacts in the image is greatly reduced. You can end up with a much worse image than if you had a lower pixel count. What's the point of some greater detail, when you can't see it because of the extra color artifacts and it starts to feel like you are looking at a 3D image without the 3D glasses (when you see red and blue outlines around everything).
Once you get to about 5MP on a compact camera, then going up from there is pretty pointless. I always read this about compact cameras -- how much more true would this be of mobile phones where the chip is even smaller?
On an SLR, the chip is much larger, and on the high-ends it is about the same size as the 35mm film frame would be on an analog camera. That is one of the significant advantages of an SLR, even if you don't use all the features.
And I think that the manufacturer of the camera chip makes a difference too... who is making the chips for some of these multi-MP cameras in other mobile phones? I might trust Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, Minolta, let's say, but not HP or some company like that. There is color processing and all kinds of technologies at work in the chip/chipset. Some manufacturers simply do it better than others and have much more relevant experience.
And in a non-camera context (though Apple does have some camera experience of its own), ColorSync has always rivaled Adobe color processing, and Apple excels at rendering pixels on screen (I mean, how do you even know if you are taking a good shot if the screen is crappy); so all the way around, I would put Apple way ahead of other phone makers regardless of the specs on the spec sheet.
The size – and brand – of the lens and image sensor is what counts, not the specified/advertised number of mega pixels. At least for a cell phone camera. Not to mention storage, which is still way too limited for large pictures on the iPhone.
The main problem is that cell phone vendors, like Apple, are trying to sell you their race car products... with a street legal engine in it. And they do this because they can get away with it.
But since my pictures are more than specifications, and I for one wouldn't want to miss one single shot when I leave my Hasselblad at home. That to me would be a missed opportunity, and thus I accept a lower quality to capture events that could become 'a once in a life time'.
Anyway. Thanks for this great (camera) update Apple!
The main problem is that cell phone vendors, like Apple, are trying to sell you their race car products... with a street legal engine in it. And they do this because they can get away with it.
But since my pictures are more than specifications, and I for one wouldn't want to miss one single shot when I leave my Hasselblad at home. That to me would be a missed opportunity, and thus I accept a lower quality to capture events that could become 'a once in a life time'.
Anyway. Thanks for this great (camera) update Apple!
wow steve jobs is such a hypocrite, he goes on and on about how the the iphone will NEVER get flash. Well it got a flash
Lol
I am still not quite satisfied
I may be too used to overporcessed picture but...
iPhone camera looks
a)washed out(color wise)
b)edges not sharp and objects does not stand out
Both issues still seem to be present in iPhone 4G(looking at the sample). I think better optic will fix b) at least. Unless it can be fixed by modifying the image processing scheme.(I kind of doubt it though...)
I still think my old N73 took better picture. Every now and then, this phone amazed me with some great looking photos but I always find myself wanting more from iPhone photos.
I may be too used to overporcessed picture but...
iPhone camera looks
a)washed out(color wise)
b)edges not sharp and objects does not stand out
Both issues still seem to be present in iPhone 4G(looking at the sample). I think better optic will fix b) at least. Unless it can be fixed by modifying the image processing scheme.(I kind of doubt it though...)
I still think my old N73 took better picture. Every now and then, this phone amazed me with some great looking photos but I always find myself wanting more from iPhone photos.
I don't know what the indoor and bar / club / night shots will be like but for a basic camera phone - that's still pretty darn good - and looks much better than the 3GS.
We'll see, because thinking about it, if you take a 3GS outside - hold it dead still and take a snap - it doesn't take too bad aphoto in the light.
Fingers crossed that little flash helps for those silly drinking at the bar pics!
We'll see, because thinking about it, if you take a 3GS outside - hold it dead still and take a snap - it doesn't take too bad aphoto in the light.
Fingers crossed that little flash helps for those silly drinking at the bar pics!
Hmm I agree that megapixels arent everything...
But everyone trying to console themselves "5mp is all you need"... I mean come on we ALL know you will be bouncing off the walls in couple years, when phones are at 12mp... and jobs upgrades to 8mp.
Then it will be 'oh wow so much clearer!'.
Also when they upgrade from LED to Xenon for better night shots it will be the same.
If MP dont matter why isnt the iphone stuck at 3mp? I mean thats 'fine for a phone' right?? Why did it just get a bump?
The reason it is 5mp, and not up to 8mp, is becuase thats where Apple draw the line... FROM A BUSINESS STANDPOINT ie. max profits. Its not because its 'Camera's done right'.
That is all.
For me the real innovation will come when somebody puts an OPTICAL zoom, on a camera phone... and that will be real quality.
Also, what lenses are being used? I mean Apple only puts in the best stuff right...that gives users optimal quality?
But Isnt Carl Zeiss like the best? Why didnt they talk about their lense? I suppose its not about lense quality then
I think 5MP-7MP is the sweet spot for a phone with limited storage. I have a Nikon D70 (6MP) dSLR which takes MUCH better photos than a good 12MP Canon IXUS and my Cybershot 7.2MP ultra-compact. I have no interest in upgrading the camera body either, despite the newer models taking much higher resolution pics.
Extra resolution is only worthwhile if you have a use for it all - if you're going to be doing lots of cropping, etc. Otherwise it really is nothing more than a waste of space and a way of adding more noise to the photo. Anyone actually leaving a 12MP phonecam at it's highest resolution setting - that seems pretty silly to me without a particular need for hyper-highres pics.
Extra resolution is only worthwhile if you have a use for it all - if you're going to be doing lots of cropping, etc. Otherwise it really is nothing more than a waste of space and a way of adding more noise to the photo. Anyone actually leaving a 12MP phonecam at it's highest resolution setting - that seems pretty silly to me without a particular need for hyper-highres pics.
saturated
Wow, those images are WAY too saturated, but I don't think the camera does that, this looks like post processing, because even in the keynote, the color was much more subtle.
I HOPE the 4 is not tuned to take photos like these, but knowing Apple's attention to detail, I doubt it.
Wow, those images are WAY too saturated, but I don't think the camera does that, this looks like post processing, because even in the keynote, the color was much more subtle.
I HOPE the 4 is not tuned to take photos like these, but knowing Apple's attention to detail, I doubt it.