Seriously, it's not that big at all. I jumped from an iPhone 6 and 2014 Moto X to a Nexus 6, which has a 1.3" larger display than the iPhone 6, yet it's not huge at all. I got used to it within a day or so. Now it just looks normal sized and anything less looks and feels tiny.Dude it's not that big. As a 6+ user I'm telling you it's not that big of a phone. I have regular size hands
I'll setting for RX100-like (1" sensor) but it's not going to happen. I suppose if one is gonna hype up something, go all the way. Someone somewhere will believe it.lol at
'DSLR-Like'
Why do I need to get a phone that's way too big for me in order to get the improved camera?
meh, new cameras on iPhones never really excite me.. and i never purchase a new phone because it has a better camera.
It's possible that when the comparison photo shoot was done, the iPhone 5s was the current phone. If the iPhone camera has improved over time, it stands to reason that the cameras used in the dual unit have ALSO improved over time.oh course it looks better...comparing it to an iPhone 5 and 5s![]()
I only care about the selfie camera...
I'm sure the camera aficionados were all over that line. I have been in that engineering environment and it has some of the most critical QA feedback I have ever seen. It was more intense that feedback from motorcycle enthusiasts.I think people should stay away from phrases like "DSLR like quality" because thats not going to happen simply because the sensor is so much smaller and the optics are so much smaller too. Noise will be higher and so resolution achievable lower simply due to refraction and photon noise.
Having said that I totally believe that the quality will be very high as it is already today very good.
The best part is when the idiots who fall for that PR see my pictures (shot with a D90 from 2008) and ask me where I got them printed because they came out so much sharper than their iPhone prints.
But then you have people in the photo forum here who insist their iPhone is as good as an SLR and show side-by-side pics under ideal lighting to prove it. When you suggest they try shooting in dimmer light or compare crops so you can really see sharpness at print resolution, they never seem to notice those posts.
meh, new cameras on iPhones never really excite me.. and i never purchase a new phone because it has a better camera.
If I see the words "SLR[-like] quality" and "phone" in one sentence one more time...
That some of the biggest PR bull ever and most of the media outlets chime right in.
Glassed Silver:mac
I could work with that. Let see what really come out next Sept.Well.... looks like a drastically improved camera is on the way.... Sweet.
If I see the words "SLR[-like] quality" and "phone" in one sentence one more time...
That some of the biggest PR bull ever and most of the media outlets chime right in.
Glassed Silver:mac
Though I understand what you mean and I don't think your perspective is wrong per se, but I'm willing to give a pass on that kind of thing. If it gives something that at a glance might be DSLR when the light is good...then that's good enough for me to accept the label. It's likely that at least in my lifetime a DSLR will get you better pictures when it's important. But when it's not important, then close is good enough.The best part is when the idiots who fall for that PR see my pictures (shot with a D90 from 2008) and ask me where I got them printed because they came out so much sharper than their iPhone prints.
But then you have people in the photo forum here who insist their iPhone is as good as an SLR and show side-by-side pics under ideal lighting to prove it. When you suggest they try shooting in dimmer light or compare crops so you can really see sharpness at print resolution, they never seem to notice those posts.