Looking forward to ProRaw being enabled in non-Pro iPhones via Jailbreak in the not too distant future.
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.
Camera Comparison: iPhone 12 Pro vs. iPhone 11 Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Because that’s not the kind of photos people fill their iCloud photo libraries with.
Subtle but interesting improvement. Both are just really good to my eyes.
What amazes me more is the repeated comments questioning posting a photo with children. I mean seriously? What on earth is wrong with some people. Do you just want to hide children away? I see children, and people of all ages when walking around, going shopping, at work, and so on. Absolutely nothing wrong with it.
What amazes me more is the repeated comments questioning posting a photo with children. I mean seriously? What on earth is wrong with some people. Do you just want to hide children away? I see children, and people of all ages when walking around, going shopping, at work, and so on. Absolutely nothing wrong with it.
It has improvements in the details that are captured, but I agree with many posters here that the 11pro photos look better in terms of color.
Both iPhones make fantastic shots and the kid is great as he is.
I 100% agree, as long as it looks good to my eye's then it's perfect as far as I'm concerned
I’d be curious about the raw capability and the colour accuracy over pleasantness.. as warmth can be added really easily, as a batch process even, image quality can’t.
It’s difficult to gauge which of the two colour casts is more accurate, having not been there at the time. I remember seeing 11pro photo comparisons with other manufacturers flagship handsets and they showed it across the board slightly different looking, so I expect they’ve just toned it back and it is actually more accurate now.
Saying that, it’s such a small, easily fixable, subjective difference it doesn’t really matter?
Exactly this. For most of these they could put the phone on a jig and make sure that the light and angle are the same before capturing the image. Even turning your head in a photo can affect the lighting.
lol
iPhone 11 Pro actually do better color on daylight images. No doubt.
haha, that is not progressing at all...
iPhone 11 Pro actually do better color on daylight images. No doubt.
haha, that is not progressing at all...
I would expect the bigger sensor size being a difference. Love light should certainly be improved without question.
Yes, this is a sad true! One of the reasons I don’t have either. No one really cares, apart from a close circle of family and friends, what you ate, where you went , how you feel, how your kids have grown up, etc etc. Too much information which some times is a waste, sometimes is dangerous. You also compromise others people‘s privacy when you post photos they are included in, without their permission... the tech is there (eg blur faces, that you did not tag or got approval), but who wants blurred photos on their Facebook wall, right?
I can’t imagine a decade or so ago, when I was coming back from holidays with friends and we met at e.g. a coffee shop with them and other friends that for one reason or another hadn’t joined us in our vacation, to look at the photos we took during our vacation together and laugh, tease each other, etc , to then start passing these photos to strangers in nearby tables in the shop to have a look at them! What did they care and why to do that?!?! But now a similar thing seems normal. It also is the case that there is not enough room in a coffee shop to fit a few thousands of our Facebook “friends” now...
Anyway, off topic.
Last edited:
Why? I've looked at both video and photos on a 70" 4K TV, and they look quite nice.
If we're talking about stills resolution, it's well above 4K, so you could even crop slightly and lose no detail whatsoever as long as the photo was taken in good light. If we're adding quality to that metric, again, stills taken in decent light are quite good.
If you're talking about video, again, 4K60p, so the resolution is perfectly sufficient, and while the dynamic range and color depth isn't going to compete with a pro video camera, it's demonstrably good enough for many uses, and looks better than the prosumer $1000 HD video camera we got at work a few years back.
I'd like to see a standard test pattern as well, but it's fair to say that when so much of the work is being done in the AI, the test pattern is only really telling you what the noise levels of the sensor and resolving ability of the lenses are.
This is a very good point. It's certainly possible that the "better color" image is actually less accurate. Maybe the iPhone 12 image is closer to the kid with the leaf's actual skin color, for example.
In some cases you could make the argument that the AI should do a better job of making the image look "better" even if it's farther from reality, but better is pretty subjective, and can change from shot to shot.
I'm reminded of a relative I went on vacation with who had his DSLR set to "vivid" mode or something like that. 5% of his photos looked really gorgeous, if not really accurate--ultra-blue sky, vivid green foliage, colors that "popped". 60% of them looked artificial, oversaturated, and mild-to-moderately off. 35% looked like some kind of crazy neon Lomo thing and were awful. Basically more than half his shots you didn't even want to look at them due to hideous colors.
I had my ILC set to neutral the whole time. 5% of my photos looked dull and drab compared to his. 60% of my photos looked dull and better than his. 35% of my photos looked so much better than his people actually laughed when we put them side by side.
And all of my photos could be adjusted to look like hyper-saturated neon after the fact if I really wanted, while none of his were salvageable.
Am I the only one who hates portrait mode??? Maybe its just me but the "digital" bokeh is just horrible...believe its the problem of some of us who are into photography.
It's not the same as "real" bokeh, but it's getting much closer and probably already passes the casual observer test. I've gotten a few pics with digital bokeh that I'm actually quite happy with (along with many that don't particularly work).
I think portrait mode takes incredible photos 30% of the time, and more "fake" looking bokeh the rest of the time. If I have good lighting and it's pictures of people, I'll typically try portrait first, b/c the processing that goes into the portrait shots makes the faces look so good and clear IMO. But it's a fine line where it ends up looking like forced bokeh, instead of more natural...
Can you elaborate on this? How is that possible? The shot clearly isn't a pitch black shot given the sunset, but the night mode photo makes it look as such?
Edit: Or am I missing being trolled...
Image comparisons are useless.
They might be done well and correctly, but it depends 100% on the integrity of the person who chooses which images to use and which not to. Otherwise it's no better than any "With THIS camera, with competitors camera" comparison.
I bet, that I could take 20 photos with 12-Pro, and 20 with 11-Pro, and find 10, where the 11-pro gives the best result
They might be done well and correctly, but it depends 100% on the integrity of the person who chooses which images to use and which not to. Otherwise it's no better than any "With THIS camera, with competitors camera" comparison.
I bet, that I could take 20 photos with 12-Pro, and 20 with 11-Pro, and find 10, where the 11-pro gives the best result