Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Most folks will find that just taking lots of images and looking carefully at them will train their eyes/brain over time. Those who just glance at pix ("cute kitty") and do not really look/think about them may not train their eyes/brain over time.

Personally I recommend that folks pay attention, think, and learn. Digital photography being free means pretty much everyone can readily improve their photography. But it does require some effort.

That's outstanding advice and a great start in training one's eye, learning how to see, thinking about pleasing compositions, learning about different qualities of light, thinking about potential narratives a photo could release in a viewer's mind, etc.

Further along, I would suggest purchasing (a lot of) books of photographs by photographers whose work one admires, and is inspired by.

For me, when I was getting started, and was/is interested in photographing people, it was Robert Frank, Richard Avedon, Dorothea Lange, Manuel Alvarez Bravo, Daido Moriyama, Diane Arbus, Robert Klein, Arnold Newman, Graciela Iturbide, Garry Winogrand, Platon, and more.

For other kinds of photography there will be a similarly large number of well-known photographers to draw inspiration and knowledge from.
 
To be honest, maybe 1 in 100 of my pictures would benefit from a better zoom range. I'd rather see further improvement to sensor and stabilisation.

Obviously everyone is different and has different wants / needs, but I view the 10x periscopes as gimmicks. The image quality I've seen isn't anything to write home about, and I'd take quality over another zoom level.
Wow. I use the 14 Pro for real work every day, and my primary real camera is a Nikon D850, and I consider the image quality of the 13 Pro and the 14 Pro to both be spectacular given that they come from the tiny lenses in a cellphone.

I 100% disagree with your statement that "The image quality I've seen isn't anything to write home about." Perhaps try making an effort to hold your iPhone 14 camera more still while shooting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: citysnaps
We disagree. I assure you that every time I can present a superior final product starting from the 4x image data of the 14 Pro than starting from the 13 Pro. You personally may not always notice the difference, but some pix (heavily cropped, for instance) will be obvious to even less trained eyes/brains.
Nice. Keep up the good work.
 
The camera difference is barely noticeable in day-to-day use, but it's being marketed as groundbreaking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect
I’ve been watching quite a few comparison reviews and the differences seem to be very very subtle. Certainly not as big as Apple’s excitement at the keynote would suggest. Interesting to see the comparison between the 14 and 14 Pro too as that’s also very small. It seems to be sharpness is slightly better in certain scenarios, but nothing major.
 
View attachment 2083722
I took this using proraw at 48mp and edited with lightroom and back to jpg and the detail is epic, I’m a photographer using canon 5D mark iv and I’m so impressed, I do wish there was an option to take a raw and normal one at the same time like on dslr
Halide App lets you take jpg and Raw at the same time. on App store.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mainemini
That’s probably 95% or more of every iPhone user on the planet to be fair. I can’t remember the last time I downloaded a picture off my iPhone and printed it out on A2 for the wall.

Oh, I think it's much greater than that. A lot of people take their photography seriously and want higher resolution images.

And as the poster above said, a larger sensor that can be pixel-binned will produce superior images at night or in low light with faster shutter speeds.
 
Oh, I think it's much greater than that. A lot of people take their photography seriously and want higher resolution images.

And as the poster above said, a larger sensor that can be pixel-binned will produce superior images at night or in low light with faster shutter speeds.

I take my photography seriously and used to run a stock photography business online about 10 years ago but then I use a DSLR for anything I think i’ll need to export for print. The iPhone takes a nice picture on the whole but it’ll never compete with larger sensor cameras. I don’t think the majority of Pro iPhone users are serious photographers though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy
I take my photography seriously and used to run a stock photography business online about 10 years ago but then I use a DSLR for anything I think i’ll need to export for print. The iPhone takes a nice picture on the whole but it’ll never compete with larger sensor cameras. I don’t think the majority of Pro iPhone users are serious photographers though.

I don't think it needs to be a majority for Apple to market and sell a camera phone with a better sensor and camera.

Speaking for myself... I have an Arca-Swiss 4x5 and a few dSLRs and mirrorless cams going back.

Knowing that a compelling or strong photograph has little to do with camera gear, I prefer to shoot with an iPhone for the photographs I like to make (not take). Pretty much exclusively for the last 5 or so years, with lots of framed photographs in my studio. I have other photography friends that feel the same way and do the same.
 
Wow. I use the 14 Pro for real work every day, and my primary real camera is a Nikon D850, and I consider the image quality of the 13 Pro and the 14 Pro to both be spectacular given that they come from the tiny lenses in a cellphone.

I 100% disagree with your statement that "The image quality I've seen isn't anything to write home about." Perhaps try making an effort to hold your iPhone 14 camera more still while shooting.
I think you've replied / quoted the wrong post! :)
 
The 48MP ProRaw images have made me see why people buy cameras like the 45MP Canon R5. I always thought they were overkill. Being able to zoom in so much and retain such detail is kind of magical. With the iPhone though, it's a little mushy. The sensor being so small and all.
Well also if you want to print anything bigger than 11”x14” you’ll need the extra pixels.
 
Honestly the differences even comparing the 12 Pro to the 14 Pro seem pretty slight. Here’s hoping the periscopic zoom rumors are for next year.
 
View attachment 2083722
I took this using proraw at 48mp and edited with lightroom and back to jpg and the detail is epic, I’m a photographer using canon 5D mark iv and I’m so impressed, I do wish there was an option to take a raw and normal one at the same time like on dslr
Congrats on having the first sensible, non whiny, non opinionated post with evidence. Was that taken with a tripod or handheld?
 
This is what I think lots of people are missing -- it's not that a ProRAW photo will necessarily look better at first (in fact, it may look worse b/c it is unprocessed), but rather that you can do a ton with that extra detail once you sit down with good software.

This may be the iPhone version where "Pro" actually refers to professional use (or users who want to do that extra work), while ordinary users may be better off with the non-Pro (or prior) model.
If the sensor captures more information, processed in the pipeline or not, it’s going to be better. I’m still considering whether I wait for the USBC, periscope 15/16, or upgrade from my 13 max In the meantime 🤷
 
Not really. The issue you call much more like marketing than reality is really less competent photogs failing to grasp what to do with These days the camera improvements bandied about at iPhone.
Hi, do you consider the change in the primary lense from a 1.5 on the 13 promax to a 1.78 to be an issue? Less light getting in on the 14 promax. Combined with the smaller pixels on the 14 even though there are more of them, when I took pictures side by side of the same thing I did not notice much difference. Occasionally the 14 seemed brighter but that was probably software post image processing. The detail of the image, even when zoomed in, seemed to vary as to which was better. I think with the faster lense it may have been better.. but Personally I wish they just increased the sensor size, kept the 1.5 lense. Just curious your thoughts. I am torn as to whether to upgrade.
 
Hi, do you consider the change in the primary lense from a 1.5 on the 13 promax to a 1.78 to be an issue? Less light getting in on the 14 promax. Combined with the smaller pixels on the 14 even though there are more of them, when I took pictures side by side of the same thing I did not notice much difference. Occasionally the 14 seemed brighter but that was probably software post image processing. The detail of the image, even when zoomed in, seemed to vary as to which was better. I think with the faster lense it may have been better.. but Personally I wish they just increased the sensor size, kept the 1.5 lense. Just curious your thoughts. I am torn as to whether to upgrade.
IMHO, if you'd welcome a LOT more details with the 1x lens and are ready to spend time on semi-auto RAW conversion (I do it with MacOS' own Preview app), the 14 Pro [Max] has a WAAAY better 1x camera than anything else officially available outside China. (Yes, even most if not all Android phones. Surely all the Samsungs are much worse, wide camera detail level-wise.)

If on the other hand you woudln't want / use 48 Mpixels, then, don't bother upgrading - the HEIF / pano shots are not really better.
 
If the sensor captures more information, processed in the pipeline or not, it’s going to be better.
Not necessarily. See for example the case of panoramas. They are only a little bit better than those of even the 3-year-old iPhone 11, and only in very low light. (See my dedicated comparisons here at the iPhone forum.)
 
When viewed on an iPhone SE almost all of the 14's photos look worse (darker, blurrier, greyer)
No way, just about every single photo linked in that video looks better on the S22. Colors are more vibrant, indoor photos are brighter and more realistic - doesn’t even come close. The latest Pixel devices have also surpassed the iPhone camera. It just isn’t that great anymore, Apple has completely lagged behind what is possible.

I mean, just look at the difference here. It is almost embarrassing - iPhone 14 to the left.

View attachment 2083974View attachment 2083976View attachment 2083978View attachment 2083980View attachment 2083982

“The iPhone is equipped with a 3x optical zoom lens while the Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra has both 3x and 10x optical zoom on board.

It's really no contest here; 10x optical zoom is simply better in any number of different applications. From scenery to school recitals, to sports photography, the closer you can get to your subject, the better. Put simply, in the 3x image above (on the left), the iPhone 14 Pro will tell you there's a bell in the tower. The Galaxy s22 Ultra's 10x zoom (below) will let you count the rivets in it.”

Read More: https://www.slashgear.com/1020433/i...ootout-battle-of-the-best/#?utm_campaign=clip

Had some downtime at work. My friend had an S22.
There was no comparison, the S22 blew away my iPhone 14pm. Not but a little either.
It was so embarrassing. I have a genius appt to have the camera checked out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bawstun
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.