Sure. Then, you can avoid oversharpening too. See for example https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...heif-vs-12mpixel-raw-vs-48mpixel-raw.2361405/
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 14 Pro Max vs. iPhone 13 Pro Max
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You definitely got a dud. Mine has absolutely no problems.
Have you got the tags reversed? I like the left pics better - Is it just me??
I wonder how it would look on a DJI gimbal while runnin cinematic mode lol..... super smooth? or messed up.
Zooming in it's really noticeable- but in most shots (especially if doing landscape photography), would someone really notice the difference between ProRAW images from a 13 Pro and a 14 Pro?
Yet my 14 PM has been working perfectly since I received it two weeks ago. It's an outstanding phone.
In my testing, the major difference and improvement with the 14 Pro Max is in indoor and low light photos, especially with people. Whereas with the 13PM the exposure time used to be stretched out resulting in less than sharp images (a major disappointment compared to my previous pixel) - the 14PM takes them rapidly and thr images are sharp.
Also, there’s a middle ground for 48MP images if you dont want to post process ProRAW. Use Halide or Procam 8 and you can save a 48MP capture straight to HEIC. Image files are 3-5MB and significantly sharper/clearer in crops compared to the standard 12MP HEIC out of the native camera. I wish Apple added this as an option to the native camera.
Also, there’s a middle ground for 48MP images if you dont want to post process ProRAW. Use Halide or Procam 8 and you can save a 48MP capture straight to HEIC. Image files are 3-5MB and significantly sharper/clearer in crops compared to the standard 12MP HEIC out of the native camera. I wish Apple added this as an option to the native camera.
I’ve been using the action mode just to get 1440p. A resolution I’ve always wanted in there. It’s like 2 features in one.
Yes, but many people won’t, that’s why they won’t benefit the 48MP. I got plenty of friends who doesn’t even know what ProRAW is in their iPhone. I am sure they bought the new iPhone and expected the image to be 48MP right out of the box…..
yes of course, I for one got the 1TB.
Does not look like any dramatic improvement over the 13 Pro Max.
Upgrading from the 11 Pro (which I think was pretty solid camera) to the 14 Pro is an amazing jump! No need to change the phones every year, but a three year jump is pretty big!
Yup. However, for example panoramas have NOT been improved from the 11 series, despite the FAR more capable hardware
I've posted a LOT on these issues in these two threads:And now for some bad news guys: good-light panorama quality NOT AT ALL improved in the last three years - on the contrary: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...the-last-three-years-on-the-contrary.2361607/
Low-light panorama tests: iPhone 11 vs. iPhone 14 Pro (Max) - wellwellwell...: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...11-vs-iphone-14-pro-max-wellwellwell.2362051/
And in good light, the HEIC / JPEG output isn't better either. (But noone seriously shooting should use the oversharpened, cr@appy HEIC / JPEG output of iPhones...)
That's because they compared the default (non-48 Mpixel) output, in which indeed there's no much improvement.
I'm surprised how MacRumors compared the PQ between 13 Pro vs. 14 Pro;
there are a few points that need to be clear:
1. increasing the Megapixel DOES NOT improve the overall PQ. (megapixel is for corp and print image; the more megapixel, the larger print size allows without losing details.
2. there are multiple consideration factors to determine a PQ, not just looking at the color, contrast, etc. Taking a compressed pic and viewing it on a 6.1 or 6.7" screen is not a way to compare PQ; PQ should be considered in 100% resolution, then looks at the details, color, highlights, contracts, dynamic ranges, etc. There is no point comparing a compressed pic on a 6.1 or 6.7" screen; the details won't be viewable on that size without enlarging it.
3. the 48 megapixels taken in ProRaw format are not for the everyday user, especially the user taking a picture and then posting it on social media. The social media platform will reformat the pic quality to match their hosting/storage capacity. e.g. FB, you can upload a High Quality (resolution) pic to your page, but FB will compress it for optimized viewing. The target audience for using 48M pixel is photography that needs to edit the picture in Adobe suite and print it out.
Therefore, I am unsure of the purpose of comparing the camera and/or PQ difference. You will not be impressed by a picture viewing on limited screen size, and regardless of whether it is a 12M or 48M, or 100M, the details won't be noticeable.
there are a few points that need to be clear:
1. increasing the Megapixel DOES NOT improve the overall PQ. (megapixel is for corp and print image; the more megapixel, the larger print size allows without losing details.
2. there are multiple consideration factors to determine a PQ, not just looking at the color, contrast, etc. Taking a compressed pic and viewing it on a 6.1 or 6.7" screen is not a way to compare PQ; PQ should be considered in 100% resolution, then looks at the details, color, highlights, contracts, dynamic ranges, etc. There is no point comparing a compressed pic on a 6.1 or 6.7" screen; the details won't be viewable on that size without enlarging it.
3. the 48 megapixels taken in ProRaw format are not for the everyday user, especially the user taking a picture and then posting it on social media. The social media platform will reformat the pic quality to match their hosting/storage capacity. e.g. FB, you can upload a High Quality (resolution) pic to your page, but FB will compress it for optimized viewing. The target audience for using 48M pixel is photography that needs to edit the picture in Adobe suite and print it out.
Therefore, I am unsure of the purpose of comparing the camera and/or PQ difference. You will not be impressed by a picture viewing on limited screen size, and regardless of whether it is a 12M or 48M, or 100M, the details won't be noticeable.
I'm doing this on Halide on my 14 Pro. Some of the third party apps offer more options for using 48MP than the iOS native camera app.
I agree with everything you say which is why I returned my new and fancy 14 Pro Max and went back to my old but trusty XS-Max.
The battery life on the 14 Pro Max was horrible and I was constantly getting disconnected phone calls.
I couldn’t care less about the camera on the 14 and simply put, everything in the XS-Max just works.
I can’t even tell the difference between it and my wife’s 13 Pro photos.
Maybe the 15 will have fewer issues and I’m ready to switch phones but it won’t be until I see that I am clearly getting a better product than the XS-Max I currently have and use all day with no dropped phone calls and battery at 50-60% left when I got to bed at night.
Only think I miss from the 14 is the always on screen but I’ll survive.
I tried to do the same thing. T-Mobile said I have 14 days to return mine. Went back to the store two days later and they said they I can't get my old phone back and I can't return the 14.
I called Apple about this and they were perplexed why they couldn't give me my phone back. Now I'm stuck.
Odd. With my 14 PM I need to recharge after 2-3 days of regular use. On my 12 Pro it was every day.
My 14 PM is an outstanding phone. Rock solid phone calls, much better cameras, faster, greater battery capacity, and better sound.