Disappointed in 6+ camera

[Newtons Apple]

What was Apple thinking when they released the 6/6+ though? This is the first iteration of iPhone that is clearly inferior to the previous generation in some areas. I shouldn't have to find a 3rd party app to fix their crappy choice in camera hardware/software.

I find the 6 and 6 Plus images to be a little better than my 5/5S images without a doubt. Even if there were an app it is very possible that Apple would not allow it to change the stuff you need to change.

I have been a photographer for 25-30 years using Nikon and Leica and i seldom depend on my iPhone for anything except the most casual snaps.

 

[Gmcube]

The image that they used during the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus makes me laugh now cause we all know that photo wasn't really shot with an iPhone 6 or 6 Plus.

Do we? It looks to me like it was, its just been heavily edited.

 

[MarkCollette]

When taking your photo, first take a breathe, then hold it while you press the button. Take extra care that the action of pressing the button is not moving the camera. That's a very common problem. If you're holding the camera out in front of you, see if your arms are moving or shaking. If so, press your elbow against your stomach and use your body to steady your arm. This will only work if you're holding your breathe. Think of optical image stabilisation, and digital stabilisation as taking care of the tremors that you can't control, while the ones which you can control remain your responsibility.

When framing your shot, see what the focus square is on. In the shot with the two heads and the present being opened, the present is not actually the focal point, but rather the back of the head on the left. You can tap on the screen to set exactly what you want in focus. That will also ensure that specific point is well lit. Often I play with touching to set the focal point to control the lighting, when there is a range of low light and bright light in a scene, such as an indoor shot that includes a window, or a dim room with a lit Christmas tree.

Ideally, if there are regions of your frame with drastically different light levels, you can re-position yourself to re-frame the shot, to have a more consistent light level throughout the frame. For example, not having the window in the shot. Obviously you'll want to keep the Christmas tree in the shot, so maybe you can re-frame it to avoid the really dark areas.

Also, if you're trying to combine several subjects in one photo, try to reduce their relative distance from the camera's perspective, so that they'll all be in focus. With the photo of the two women, and the photo of the males and present, it seems that you're too close to them, and just another meter away would fix the focus problem. Think of it this way: if subject A is 1 meter away and subject B is 2 meters away, that's a 100% difference in distance. But if subject A is 2 meters away and subject B is 3 meters away, that's a 50% difference in distance. They are still in the same positions, relative to each other, but closer to each other from the perspective of the camera, just by moving back 1 meter. You can then later crop the photo so the subjects take up the whole frame, if you prefer.

 

[azhava]

What was Apple thinking when they released the 6/6+ though? This is the first iteration of iPhone that is clearly inferior to the previous generation in some areas. I shouldn't have to find a 3rd party app to fix their crappy choice in camera hardware/software.

If I were to hazard a guess, I'd say it's because around 99% of the people who take photos with their iPhone are not "serious" photographers and most of the complaints they were hearing centered around ISO noise/grain in low-light shots - so they jacked up the noise reduction in an attempt to solve the problem. Snapshooters who are just going to post their pics on Facebook/Instagram or text them to their friends couldn't care less about the "monet effect" and they're not going to pixel-peep their images looking for defects...they just don't want them to look like they shot through a handful of sand. I suspect that Apple was simply aiming to please the masses, be it right or wrong. I'm not defending or deriding their actions, just speculating what their thought process may have been.

Of course Apple hypes it as their "best camera ever" - and with the addition of focus pixels, OIS, etc., that may very well be true, at least in a technical sense. Hype is hype - just like golf companies who claim every year that the new model of their driver will give you "10% more distance!" - so in theory, if you'd bought 10 successive models of their driver, you should be hitting the ball 100% further than you were 10 years ago...yet I'm not seeing many 500-600 yard drives from amateur golfers. In the same vein, the iP6/6+ camera is not going to magically make hacks who don't know how to frame or expose an image into great photographers.

 

[zorinlynx]

Remember folks, even though there has been much improvement, you're still taking photos with a camera that you could probably accidentally swallow without noticing.

If you want to take amazing photos in dark conditions, you're going to need a larger camera with a bigger sensor and faster lens.

There's no way getting around the fact that a tiny sensor + tiny lens + low light == a big ton of noise. And because of all this being true, what the iPhone 6 camera DOES manage to pull off is downright magical.

 

[meistervu]

If you want to take amazing photos in dark conditions, you're going to need a larger camera with a bigger sensor and faster lens.

Do you realize that the iPhone 6/6+ F2.2 lens is faster than virtually all SLR lenses? Most people (90%+)who owns SLRs don't own a lens faster than F2.2.

The fact of the matter is, for dark condition as an amateur you are better off with a recent iPhone camera than with a typical SLRs. Most amateur photographer can't afford to buy expensive SLRs lenses, so they tend to end up with a kit lens like a 18-55 (about 28-88mm equivalence) f/3.5-5.6 with slower focusing than the iPhone 6/6+. SLR sensors are larger so you tend to end up with less noise, but you have to deal with a slower lens. The other thing that works in the iPhone favor here is that due to the smaller sensor, the depth of field is greater, which means your subjects are more likely in focus. This is not to say that greater depth of field is always a plus, but for a wide angle shot it is desirable.

The iPhone camera is a leap and bounce over what point and shoot cameras were a few years ago, which is quite amazing. I got into SLRs because I could not stand how distractingly bad point and shoot digital cameras were. I am happy with the noise level in my iPhone 6. In my opinion, the photos I can take with my iPhone 6 are amazing compared to 35mm film cameras.

If you are an amateur photographer, trust me. You can take great photos with the 6/6+. What you can improve on is your skills, and with the iPhone it's fun and easy to learn. Don't get suck into the comments of people who say that there is this or that problem with the iPhone camera. The have been great photographers with lesser equipment than yours.

 

[Bahroo]

I actually have seen some posts on here with people testing out iOS 8.2 betas and reporting NR has been toned down slightly, not sure though how accurate they are but

 

[teknikal90]

Do you realize that the iPhone 6/6+ F2.2 lens is faster than virtually all SLR lenses? Most people (90%+)who owns SLRs don't own a lens faster than F2.2.

The fact of the matter is, for dark condition as an amateur you are better off with a recent iPhone camera than with a typical SLRs. Most amateur photographer can't afford to buy expensive SLRs lenses, so they tend to end up with a kit lens like a 18-55 (about 18-88mm equivalence) f/3.5-5.6 with slower focusing than the iPhone 6/6+. SLR sensors are larger so you tend to end up with less noise, but you have to deal with a slower lens.

The iPhone camera is a leap and bounce over what point and shoot cameras were a few years ago, which is quite amazing. I got into SLRs because I could not stand how distractingly bad point and shoot digital cameras were. I am happy with the noise level in my iPhone 6. In my opinion, the photos I can take with my iPhone 6 are amazing compared to 35mm film cameras.

If you are an amateur photographer, trust me. You can take great photos with the 6/6+. What you can improve on is your skills, and with the iPhone it's fun and easy to learn. Don't get suck into the comments of people who say that there is this or that problem with the iPhone camera. The have been great photographers with lesser equipment than yours.

+1. and if you want to look for inspiration, check instagram and look for 'iphone only photographers'.
some of these shots from the iphone are amazing.

the few that I know and love - benjhaisch , withhearts , iamshpak , kevinruss , corinaesquivel and sonofnasser

 

[lrsone]

Do we? It looks to me like it was, its just been heavily edited.

No way it could have been taken with the 6 or 6 Plus. They zoomed in on it and it was a lot more clear than anything the iPhone 6 or 6 Plus takes. Even if it was heavily edited.

 

[cababah]

If I were to hazard a guess, I'd say it's because around 99% of the people who take photos with their iPhone are not "serious" photographers and most of the complaints they were hearing centered around ISO noise/grain in low-light shots - so they jacked up the noise reduction in an attempt to solve the problem. Snapshooters who are just going to post their pics on Facebook/Instagram or text them to their friends couldn't care less about the "monet effect" and they're not going to pixel-peep their images looking for defects...they just don't want them to look like they shot through a handful of sand. I suspect that Apple was simply aiming to please the masses, be it right or wrong. I'm not defending or deriding their actions, just speculating what their thought process may have been.

Of course Apple hypes it as their "best camera ever" - and with the addition of focus pixels, OIS, etc., that may very well be true, at least in a technical sense. Hype is hype - just like golf companies who claim every year that the new model of their driver will give you "10% more distance!" - so in theory, if you'd bought 10 successive models of their driver, you should be hitting the ball 100% further than you were 10 years ago...yet I'm not seeing many 500-600 yard drives from amateur golfers. In the same vein, the iP6/6+ camera is not going to magically make hacks who don't know how to frame or expose an image into great photographers.

You don't need to be a professional photographer to notice how bad some of the indoor pictures taken with the 6/6+ turn out (especially in low light). On the relatively small displays of the phones, the pictures may look acceptable but viewing them on a larger display such as an iPad will cause them to look terrible.

Sure, Focus Pixels is great but if the end result picture looks like crap because of the overactive noise reduction, then it's a wasted feature.

 

[meistervu]

You don't need to be a professional photographer to notice how bad some of the indoor pictures taken with the 6/6+ turn out (especially in low light). On the relatively small displays of the phones, the pictures may look acceptable but viewing them on a larger display such as an iPad will cause them to look terrible.

Sure, Focus Pixels is great but if the end result picture looks like crap because of the overactive noise reduction, then it's a wasted feature.

I disagree with that.

Take the photo I posted on this thread. Sure, it's not as clean as another ISO 1000 photo from say a recent entry level Canon SLR, but compared to an older Canon D60 from about 10 years ago, it's better. I shot a wedding in the church using that camera, and some of the shots with no flash. The photos were noisier than the photo of the stairs I posted on this thread. But they were considered to be very acceptable, and I felt that I was pushing the envelop of what can be done with available light then. The stairs shot I posted here was quite a bit darker.

I looked at the stairs shot on my iPad Air and as expected there was noise. But the noise was not distracting; it blended in quite well with the rest of the scene. As critical as I am when it comes to image quality, I find that level of noise acceptable as it doesn't negatively affect the mood.

One thing I do when I shoot a dark scene is to make sure that I expose the scene according to how my eye see it. Leave it to the camera and you would end up with a photo that is a lot brighter than what the scene appears to the naked eyes. By doing so, I end up with a shorter exposure time which often translates to less noise and a more realistic photo.

If your photos for dimly lit scenes are not what you want, compare them to the lighting level of the actual scene. Chances are they are too bright. Turn down the exposure a bit.

But if you are shooting a crime scene photo for evidence then you would want longer exposure. Then again you would turn on the light instead.

 

[lakaiordie]

I think it's decent

 

[Bearxor]

I confess myself disappointed in the 6+ camera.

Actually thinking about alternatives like the Galaxy Zoom or the successor to the Nokia 1020.

 

[lordofthereef]

Truth be told, my lumia 1520 took much better photos than this 6+.

The high end Lumias all take phenomenal pictures in VERY low light conditions. It's also a huge selling point on the devices, and the camera modules are much larger.

 

[Badrottie]

If you are a lousy photographer means you are making bad photos.

----------

If Nokia Lumia 1520 makes excellent photos then how come they are not selling very well?

 

[Bahroo]

Using the built in post processing actually helps a ton, I use Shadows specifically alot with darker/low light photos , even some daytime photos too

 

[lordofthereef]

If Nokia Lumia 1520 makes excellent photos then how come they are not selling very well?

Because photo quality is likely not the number one deciding factor in buying a phone for most people. While WP 8.1 has come a long way, it still has a long way to go, especially in the apps category.

 

[Shanghaichica]

 

[Anonymous Freak]

However, hype has led me to believe the 6+ has a completely automatic, idiot-proof camera that takes phenomenal pictures in all conditions.

No camera meets that expectation. None.
There are completely automatic cameras.
There are idiot-proof cameras.
There are cameras that take phenomenal pictures in {most} conditions.

There are no cameras that meet all three. My expensive camera takes "pretty darned good" pictures on completely automatic/idiot proof mode. But not "phenomenal". And even with a variety of lenses, it can't (yet, I need more lenses,) take phenomenal pictures in all conditions.

In low light conditions, the photos are grainy, lots of noise, motion blur, etc.

And that is true of every phone camera. Sensor just isn't big enough, lens isn't big enough, to get truly good low-light photos. Period. Some of the oddball "monster lens on a phone" cameras will get close to "low end point and shoot camera" in quality, but there's only so much you can do. There's a reason good low-light cameras are big - the need a big sensor with a big lens to be good in low light.

I like this phone otherwise. I am just tired of all phone manufacturers hyping the new cameras and making me think, just maybe, this one will take good photos for me.

You might want to consider Sony's QX line of "digital camera that snaps on to your phone" cameras.


Lastly, though. "Phenomenal" pictures is mostly a subjective thing, having more to do with composition of the photo than the technical details. Take a photography class to learn how to take photos better - it will improve ALL your photos, even the ones taken with a crappy phone camera. (I have perfectly decent photos taken with my original iPhone. Because I knew the limitations of the phone's camera, and took measures to mitigate them - or not use the phone camera at all when I knew I couldn't get a good picture.)

 

[meistervu]

A sharp crappy photo taken by an expensive camera is worse than a blurry crappy photo taken by a phone because at least if the photo is blurry, you leave room for the imagination

I used to contribute to a very popular photography forum. There were people I called technologists who hobby was to own the most advanced cameras and lenses that they could afford and spent a lot of time pixel peeping (scrutinizing every pixels). More often than not, they spent an inordinate amount of time taking photos of rulers and brick walls to analyze focus and color.

Then there were a few who post their photos taken with point and shoot camera and their results were amazing, noise and all.

When your equipment meets some minimum requirement (for some people it's a pinhole camera), photography is more about your skills and your creativity and your ability to recognize the situation than the equipment itself. With the iPhone you have what it takes to take great photos with you don't make excuses about your equipment.

 

[azhava]

...I used to contribute to a very popular photography forum. There were people I called technologists who hobby was to own the most advanced cameras and lenses that they could afford and spent a lot of time pixel peeping (scrutinizing every pixels). More often than not, they spent an inordinate amount of time taking photos of rulers and brick walls to analyze focus and color.

Then there were a few who post their photos taken with point and shoot camera and their results were amazing, noise and all...

I'm pretty sure I know exactly which photography forum you're talking about. I call those people "gearheads", and the threads there bear a close resemblance to the threads here where people spend more time fondling, scrutinizing and obsessing over every minute detail of their phone than actually using it. Endless versions of "Is my lens sharp?" or "Did I get a good copy of this lens?", with sample photos of batteries, brick walls, test patterns, etc. Pixel-peeping every photo at 10x magnification looking for sharpness, moire, CA/fringing, or whatever else they can find to convince their obsessive minds that they got a bad copy and need to exchange it. People who go through 5 copies of a lens, only to find that every one of them works exactly the same as the last one and it's only their minds convincing them that there's something wrong when there really isn't. People who are convinced that unless you have the latest full-frame body and a bag full of 'L' lenses, you won't be able to take a single photo worth looking at.

...and at the other end of the spectrum from the "gearheads" are the "shooters" - as you said, the ones who take what they have and go shoot with it. Because they're out shooting and learning about light, composition and technique instead of being locked up in the house with a tripod and remote release shooting pictures of 6 AA batteries spaced precisely 4.25" apart at a 45-degree angle, they turn out great, enjoyable images. And they don't worry about whether they've got a "good copy" of their lens, or whether they're using a crop or full-frame sensor. Instead, they're looking at how the light is hitting something, thinking about what angle they should shoot it from and how they should position it in the frame for the best shot, what depth of field they want, whether the shutter speed is going to affect their ability to handhold the shot...things that actually matter in taking good photos. The best camera/lens money can buy doesn't matter if you've got a crappy eye for light/composition and don't know how to properly expose the shot - the camera can't fix that.

 

[TroyBoy30]

Tell me what I am doing wrong.

Your cropping areas out of your photos. Stop pixel peeping. Problem solved

 

[hausjam]

I keep thinking about one of those Sony QX. But I know we wouldn't carry it around any more than our Nikon 1.

 

[meistervu]

I'm pretty sure I know exactly which photography forum you're talking about. I call those people "gearheads", and the threads there bear a close resemblance to the threads here where people spend more time fondling, scrutinizing and obsessing over every minute detail of their phone than actually using it. ...

The best camera/lens money can buy doesn't matter if you've got a crappy eye for light/composition and don't know how to properly expose the shot - the camera can't fix that.

Yes, it's deja vu all over again

 

[reery]

The reality is that iPhone to iPhone, there's virtually no real blow-me-away difference in picture quality.



At the end of the day the camera on a phone is still just a crappy phone camera to take passable photos.



I say that as someone who was once bigtime into photography and used to shoot a 40D and L series glass.

I'm also using a 40D and L lenses for years and say that the iP6 camera rocks.

First thing I learned is that the photographer and his knowledge composes the photo, second thing that the lens is more important than the camera/sensor. The lens is making 95% of the picture, the sensor just needs decent dynamic range and low noise on high ISO.

If you don't mind carying a bulky and 2+ pounds heavy camera, then a DSLR will outshine the 1000 times lighter and 50 times smaller iP6 camera. Just don't expect to outshine it by factor 50.