Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iPhone 17 Pro Apple needs to make an iPhone with DSLR features

K

Konvictz

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jul 25, 2014
234
343
I think the latest iphones are getting better and better with image quality, yes they are using more and more digital processing but the masses are enjoying the picture/video quality.

For me the iPhone's picture quality is good enough but I know there's an entire market out there which film or take pictures with those big dslr cameras.

If they made an iphone with a huge lens in the back and add those detachable lens things (I don't know too much about this). Then a lot these photo and video enthusiasts would definitely buy this. They could keep it as a standalone product and only update it every couple of years (or every year like iphones).

It wouldn't be too thick in the base form, but with the detachable lenses it would add semi professional photo and video features.

Excuse the mockup.

2979e923-ea0c-42d4-952f-2bbcb7b1ff5a.png


5f84410c-41a2-41fe-a706-aad1c1be2adf.png
 

Attachments

  • 97d6054e-17eb-44fc-a28f-57878d567a62.png
    97d6054e-17eb-44fc-a28f-57878d567a62.png
    2.4 MB · Views: 104
Last edited:
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Deine Mudda, AAPLGeek, G3Blue and 13 others
Konvictz said:
I think the latest iphones are getting better and better with image quality, yes they are using more and more digital processing but the masses are enjoying the picture/video quality.

For me the iPhone's picture quality is good enough but I know there's an entire market out there which film or take pictures with those big dslr cameras.

If they made an iphone with a huge lens in the back and add those detachable lens things (I don't know too much about this). Then a lot these photo and video enthusiasts would definitely buy this. They could keep it as a standalone product and only update it every couple of years (or every year like iphones).

It wouldn't be too thick in the base form, but with the detachable lenses it would add semi professional photo and video features.

Excuse the mockup.

View attachment 2566217
Click to expand...

If you're going to have to carry around those big lenses, would it not make more sense to "buy a camera"?
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: teralpar, Deine Mudda, JemTheWire and 24 others
There are already lens kits that can be attached. The problem is you just can't beat physics and it's the reason I've switched to the Air. For 2 years I tried to use my 15PM in situations where a DSLR was better. The 5x photos, especially the baseball action photos I tried to capture, just weren't clear enough and worth the other tradeoffs for dealing with a large, heavy phone. My 5X photos were never as clear as the main lens, even in bright light.

So I'll be carrying my DSLR to all of my son's college baseball games and enjoying the Air as my daily phone. The Air takes fantastic photos and will be good for general snaps.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: smirking, leifp, marte91 and 3 others
I would certainly agree it would help if it had a better quality objective and a bigger sensor but the only reason to have a big objective is to collect light. As far as resolution goes, the further you get away from the centre the lower the resolution and the greater the resolution so those tiny plastic lenses already perform incredibly well.
When we were all using Ektachrome rated at 32ASA, then a really big objective was massively important but on a phone you can probably get to at least 200 without any noticeable noise at all and practically, even in low light you can probably use 800 and get excellent images.
The thing is, cameras have always been fairly dumb and therefore needed great glass but the eye is only an OK instrument with a fantastic processor on the back of it much more like the phone.
The retina only has about 7mp resolution but because it reacts incredibly quickly it has a composite resolution of well over 500mp
It has a dynamic range of about 20 stops but that can quickly change from the brightest spot in the room to the darkest and even interpret the missing pieces of information so it seems to be briliant
That's the way the phone has been going and should go.
A DSLR lens captures higher static detail in a single shot than the eye but the human eye–brain system wins in dynamic range, colour adaptation, and real-time processing. Cameras are better at freezing reality; eyes are better at interpreting it and so is the phone.
So, yes it could be a lot better and certainly I would like so to see a better range, but I really don't see the need for them to be huge objectives.
 
  • Like
Reactions: servenvolley, Shirasaki and Moreplease
Just today I discovered Caira. The website currently doesn't provide any specific information – you find more informations on internet, though, about the upcoming crowdfunding campaign.

It's more a reverse approach: a camera with an attached iPhone rather than an iPhone featuring DSLR features.
 
Despite the popularity, ‘proper photography’ is still a very niche area. Asking for interchangeable lenses on an iPhone (invalidating its IP rating) would sell less you’d think. There is also the lack of any sort of camera grip which if added at extra cost would mean you may was well buy a proper camera.

Despite the convergence of most gadgets into phones, a proper camera will always have the laws of physics on its side.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2ndStreet, TracerAnalog and Jumpthesnark
Konvictz said:
I don't know too much about this
Click to expand...

That much is clear.

The glass is part of the problem with smartphone photography, sure. But it's not the only problem or even the greatest problem. As others have mentioned, minuscule sensors that prioritize megapixels over photo receptor size is the real demon and why smartphones need to lean so heavily on computational photography to "solve" problems of physics. There's not really a point in trying to make a smartphone something it isn't—embrace its availability as "the camera that's always on you." When you're ready to graduate to better quality and more flexibility, you move on to purpose-built solutions, not Frankenstein's monster combinations.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Sad
Reactions: Runaway Train, 2ndStreet, Shirasaki and 5 others
I feel like this is a solution looking for a problem.

Folks passionate about photography and/or film or professionals will get the gear they like or need to get the job done. As pointed out, why settle for a (physics-wise) disadvantaged solution when you can get better results with "tools" made for the job?

For folks who do choose to use their iPhone for film, sufficient solutions are already available (Have a look at SmallRig for example).

As for myself, air show photography is my - very niche - hobby. I like using the camera + lens as a piece of gear, it's part of the process and experience. Besides the fact that it is hard (if not impossible) to get the results I get with my DSLR and mirrorless with an iPhone, I also like that I am actually spending a couple days without holding a phone (as I am sure many of us do most of the time).

Just my opinion :) have a great weekend y'all!
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheRoxyTheatre and Shirasaki
As I have often stated here (MacRumors), at what point is Apple selling a camera that has phone features, instead of a phone that has camera features?

Lots of people want a phone that can also be a great camera it seems - but few actually want to get a real camera to actually do what they want a phone's camera to do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shirasaki and cateye
Konvictz said:
Lol thanks(!).
Click to expand...

Wasn't a criticism. We're all here to learn a little something. It's frankly amazing what the tiny little sensors and size-compromised lens systems in smartphones can accomplish. But the limitations of physics are real. The missing quality is fundamental to the form factor and is not easily or even possible to solve completely.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shirasaki
cateye said:
Wasn't a criticism. We're all here to learn a little something. It's frankly amazing what the tiny little sensors and size-compromised lens systems in smartphones can accomplish. But the limitations of physics are real. The missing quality is fundamental to the form factor and is not easily or even possible to solve completely.
Click to expand...

No it's all good. It is amazing what they are doing year on year, of course every year there's more digital/ai processing to make the images look better. Somehow they slightly close the gap between dslr and iphone photography every year.

It's a bit like nvidia dlss, it's upscaling/ai tech which takes a lower resolution image and makes it higher res. It was okay at the start but it's gotten so good that most people can't tell the difference now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cateye
oy, nasally fitted fire again (reference to bbc tv version of life, the universe and everything)
 
Echoing what cateye said, this isn't going to happen because of physics quite frankly. The sensors in the iphone are TINY and the huge ones that you get on APS-C and full frame cameras are required to capture enough photons to give you the dynamic range to compose a decent image. On top of that the glass in front of that is as important and you literally can't build a lens into a phone that is practical that isn't compromised.

What we have on the iPhone 17 pro which can be considered at least state of the art, is three tiny sensors, three extremely compromised prime lenses and a hell of a lot of post processing to get anything usable out of them. This is a remarkable feat but still does not touch an ass end 15 year old entry level DSLR on image quality.

Image quality in this sense is irrelevant to megapixels, the common selling point, but is a combination of distortion, dynamic range, colour reproduction and the capability of the glass in front of the camera sensor. The glass and geometry of the optical path defines a lot of the artistic control you have like depth of field/aperture.

---

However, if you want to take photos buy a camera. If you want to record your life, a phone is probably fine.

---

Straight out of a 2013 Nikon D3100 with 18-55mm kit lens, no post processing at all...

1760115604010.jpeg


And a more modern Z50ii with 18-140mm lens...

1760115702948.jpeg


Good luck getting even 25% of the way there in a phone package.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: iGeek2019, Runaway Train, 2ndStreet and 8 others
I’d never buy this as apple would no doubt gimp the software, hiding away useful functions for no reasonable reason & forcing users to use an App Store style with subscription models for features that are standard with a dslr.

Updating every year horrifies me purely from pov of wasted rare earth materials.

Today’s generation seems to have no concern about these large companies stripping the planet for profit. It’s unsustainable practice
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: 2ndStreet, uacd and Shirasaki
Earlier this year I decided I wanted a bit more from/than my phone camera, so I bought a "real" mirrorless camera (the exact same model and lens setup as @cjsuk posted in the second photo, above). My Nikon and 16PM each serve a particular purpose, and I have no desire to overbuild a phone that slips into my pocket so it can approach more (but not all) of the capabilities of a standalone camera system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: uacd, cjsuk and ignatius345
Konvictz said:
No it's all good. It is amazing what they are doing year on year, of course every year there's more digital/ai processing to make the images look better. Somehow they slightly close the gap between dslr and iphone photography every year.
Click to expand...
Not really. It's not like DSLRs (or, mirrorless digital cameras at this point) are just standing still. They're packing more advanced processors and better sensors all the time. So while undoubtedly phone cameras are improving every year, so are digital cameras.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 2ndStreet, maerz001, Shirasaki and 1 other person
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back