Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Give a good photographer a terrible camera, and they'll still probably take better pictures than you with a $5000 DSLR.
Camera phones aren't about taking "great" photos, they are about capturing the moment. When your phone makes even that difficult there is a problem.
 
This reminds me of the movie Night on Earth. Early 90's movie that I didn't see until a much later time but somehow could watch over and over.
 
See these cool, amazing, breathtaking ads... Runs to room to grab iPhone and take similar photos.. Only to realize how crappy and far from the truth these ads really are.. SMH... I Give Apple Cool points for trying tho...
Poor little no-talent whiner. boo-hoo-hoo.
[doublepost=1485800097][/doublepost]
Why don't they address the horrible sound quality with voice telephone calls?
Just get off of Verizon. Problem solved.
[doublepost=1485800318][/doublepost]
This reminds me of the movie Night on Earth. Early 90's movie that I didn't see until a much later time but somehow could watch over and over.
One of my favorite directors; though not one of my favorite films by him. (but it's 'good') "Mystery Train" still my favorite.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thasan and Zirel
Could you please explain in detail what the rest of the world is pushing boundaries for phones? I would love to read your response to that.

More megahurtz and SD cards.

That, and 2003-thickness phones in 2017.
[doublepost=1485802148][/doublepost]
See these cool, amazing, breathtaking ads... Runs to room to grab iPhone and take similar photos.. Only to realize how crappy and far from the truth these ads really are.. SMH... I Give Apple Cool points for trying tho...

Just because you have a Nikon, doesn't mean you shoot like Steve McCurry, or just because you have a Leica, you aren't as good as Henri Cartier-Bresson.

Yes, blame the camera... and the photos in the ad? All fake!
[doublepost=1485802923][/doublepost]
I wonder how successful these experiential advertisements really are. It seems since iPhone 7's launch, there's been lots of advertising, but uptake of the device hasn't matched or kept up this time round. Could pseudo iPhone 6SS be the actual problem? Bring on an all new ceramic glass iPhone. NOW!

I agree, if Samsung doesn't make a ceramic glass Galaxy, they are doomed, the S7 is completely different from the S6!
 
  • Like
Reactions: macTW
The iPhone 7 camera is remarkable enough to produce these types of photos. Clearly a DSLR is better, but for 99.9% of people, iPhone photos are beyond amazing.
 
Tastefully done.

But serious question, can't most high end smartphones accomplish this?
Is the camera what really separates iPhone 7 apart, or the slick advertising campaign.

It's the slick advertising campaign. Apple's camera's are in line with the rest of the top lineup of smartphone cameras. Nothing special, But nothing bad.

The top few camera's these days are all being rated within a few negligible percentage points of each other. It's like arguing over which student is stupid, the 98% or the 97.5% grades.

which means a lot of the "amazing-ness" in Apple's marketing is due to marketing and not any actual technical supremacy.
 
Brought to you by Starbucks....no matter what ads you see, you will always here that coffee shop music.
 
While I love the photos one thing puzzles me. I downloaded the photos from Apple, http://www.apple.com/newsroom/2017/01/behind-apples-new-campaign-one-night-on-iphone-7.html and they show up with a resolution of 6300 × 4725. Last time I checked, my iPhone 7+ did not have that resolution. Are these from iPhone 8 already?
Don't know where on the page you downloaded them from, but I only get 1142x1522 for the umbrella city lights shot

Update: I see, you downloaded the "album", not sure why they're higher resolution, the max resolution for a 12MP sensor is 4288x2848, so not sure why, maybe a photographer can explain
 
Last edited:
There is an over 65 page thread of frustrated iPhone 7 /7 plus users on the apple communities site that proves how very poor the photoquality is on the iPhone 7 / 7 plus when using the apple camera app. The photos look like oil paintings and skin tones are smeary. Shame on apple and their blind engineers. Here's the link. https://discussions.apple.com/message/31331500?start=0&tstart=0

Apples marketing is full of lies and BS.

Since Tim Cook is at the wheel, Apples focus Has shifted from making the best products to breaking sales records and fooling people into buying their buggy and unfinished products.
 
Last edited:
There is an over 65 page thread of frustrated iPhone 7 /7 plus users on the apple communities site that proves how very poor the photoquality is on the iPhone 7 / 7 plus when using the apple camera app. The photos look like oil paintings and skin tones are smeary. Shame on apple and their blind engineers. Here's the link. https://discussions.apple.com/message/31331500?start=0&tstart=0
It's actually just 42, but I do have to agree sometimes with these statements
99% of the time I can get a nice photo, but I took this one 3 weeks ago that looked like an oil painting, maybe the lightning wasn't as good as I thought it was, however it turned out awful, was pretty embarrassed to share it
 
There is an over 65 page thread of frustrated iPhone 7 /7 plus users on the apple communities site that proves how very poor the photoquality is on the iPhone 7 / 7 plus when using the apple camera app. The photos look like oil paintings and skin tones are smeary. Shame on apple and their blind engineers. Here's the link. https://discussions.apple.com/message/31331500?start=0&tstart=0

Apples marketing is full of lies and BS.

Since Tim Cook is at the wheel, Apples focus Has shifted from making the best products to breaking sales records and fooling people into buying their infantile products.

Infantile ? The Tim hate is so strong on this forum these days....which makes sense as he is the only real apple emplyee...
 
Your right that all cameras have a look. But smeared skintones and watercolor patterns are a bit extreme to be called a 'look'. This would be more like a filter.
 
Your right that all cameras have a look. But smeared skintones and watercolor patterns are a bit extreme to be called a 'look'. This would be more like a filter.

Was there enough light, was the subject moving, were you moving, did it have time to set up focus (which can be hard to do in low light). Got a Canon G7X and its pretty easy to take a bad picture in auto mode if any one of those things occur and that thing has a hell of a better sensor than any smartphone. Of course, what I consider low light with those cameras is much darker.

Low light pictures with smartphones best taken with tripod with manual settins, hands of steel when you have time to set up the shot, or prop up against something to lock down movement.

If the subject is moving then it becomes quite hard, then you'd better go in manual mode, bump ISO, shorten exposure time, don't shoot too wide open (so depth of field isn't too small making focus harder), follow the subject with a steady hand, introduce more light if you can without changing the shot too much especially on the thing you want most to be in focus (if its a controlled setting like a shoot it is possible).
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.