Moment Lenses
Here's a way more polished solution, with far better image quality.
http://momentlens.co
Here's a way more polished solution, with far better image quality.
http://momentlens.co
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.
ExoLens Review: Hands-On With a Professional Photography System for iPhone 6
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Now that the camera protrudes (I don't like that at all) Apple could use this, by making a mount out of it. Third party manufacturers could make different lenses more easily, they would be cheaper thus more popular.
And it would bring the iPhone even closer to Photography
And it would bring the iPhone even closer to Photography
ExoLens states, "All wide-angle and telephoto lenses are going to cause some bending or distorting of the natural world. The more powerful the lens the more the image will distort."
Ugh no, telephoto lenses are not supposed to bend or distort, they compress. If a telephoto lens distorts your image, there is something seriously wrong with it. While the wide-angle can be expected to distort (I was surprised it wasnt more), having it sharp across the frame is the big challenge. And it that regard, its pretty disappointing too.
The Moment lenses would be a much better option. Especially once they launch their shutter cases.
Ugh no, telephoto lenses are not supposed to bend or distort, they compress. If a telephoto lens distorts your image, there is something seriously wrong with it. While the wide-angle can be expected to distort (I was surprised it wasnt more), having it sharp across the frame is the big challenge. And it that regard, its pretty disappointing too.
The Moment lenses would be a much better option. Especially once they launch their shutter cases.
Any kind of clip on or additional lens is going to degrade image quality. This isn't the same as changing lenses on an interchangable lens camera. The iphone lens remains, and you are just throwing a chunk of glass (hopefully) of questionable quality in front of that lens.
However, it does change the fied of view, and that's how these should be marketed.
Marketing these things as some kind of "professional camera replacement" is just embarrassing. Especially when the people writing the "reviews" don't know the basics of photography (eg zoom vs telephoto).
Clip on / screw on lens modifiers have been around for decades. None have been very good. This is no different.
----------
To be worthwhile you would want the existing lens to come off before mounting the new one. Given the closed design of the iPhone, I can't see that happening.
However, it does change the fied of view, and that's how these should be marketed.
Marketing these things as some kind of "professional camera replacement" is just embarrassing. Especially when the people writing the "reviews" don't know the basics of photography (eg zoom vs telephoto).
Clip on / screw on lens modifiers have been around for decades. None have been very good. This is no different.
----------
To be worthwhile you would want the existing lens to come off before mounting the new one. Given the closed design of the iPhone, I can't see that happening.
Agreed 100%. I could bring out my old Pentax SLR film camera and take better pics than these examples.
All I can see are miserable lenses that make miserable photos. Look at the distortions and chromatic aberrations, these photos are completely useless. That has nothing to do with "professional". I wonder how ExoLens imagines to run a business with obviously no know-how whatsoever on board.
I wouldn't trust the images they put out themselves, especially after seeing what it does to telephoto which is worlds apart from what you would expect from such a lens.
Was just about to check this. Pretty shady. Looks like more overpriced crap.
Maybe someday scientists and engineers will find a way around traditional lens limitations and give us some amazing tiny module that can directly manipulate photons to give us incredible zoom ranges with massive creamy bokeh and incredible light sensitivity and resolution on the sensor, so that we have the ultimate camera in our pocket. Until then I'll keep dreaming. You still need big sensors and proper glass to play with the big boys and girls. Sure the iPhone takes good shots but you're just not going to get those breathtaking wildlife images, those tack-sharp creamy background sports photos, or any decent photos of the milky way or northern lightsjust to name a few examples. Mirrorless is getting closer but still not ideal. The camera that is always in your pocket is ideal. At least I'm young enough that I'll probably get to shoot with something like that someday, but for now the iPhone can't beat physics. Software might be able to.
Isn't this the same attitude put forward when 35mm cameras came out and started taking over from Roleiflex etc?
Photography is not a static thing, it moves on. Plenty of fantastic work being produced by iPhone users.
They used iPhone 6 for the shoot, small point.
While phones are replacing most small cameras purely for convenience, namely you always have a phone on you and can use it to edit it and upload to social media, not that they have better lenses or take better photos. No point even mentioning DSLRs or "Pro". You can get great results from an iPhone yes, Apple's processing is much better than on any other phone, regardless of hardware. But that doesn't negate physical limitations or laws of physics. Regardless of gimmicks to show off it's prowess in producing professional results, invariably strapped to equipment much more expensive and many times bulkier than the phone, it is not designed to compete with professional camera gear. Nokia has done some interesting things to show what you can do if you emphasise the camera portion at the expense of size, thickness and weight. And then there's the Galaxy camera with an Android device strapped to it's back. All very interesting in their own right as casual-use cameras.
I relented and got a 2ndhand Olloclip to play with. It's an interesting toy, and in the end I got myself a proper fisheye lens for my camera as I love playing with it (a manual Samyang 8mm). Quality difference is day and night. The samples above are much the same, it's an expensive toy producing mediocre photos good enough for Facebook, Instagram and the like for which it was meant.
I'm an enthusiast photographer, and I have several photog friends who have sold work they took with their iPhone. While I would never in my life buy this for my iPhone, consumers can produce really awesome images from the iPhone camera, sans this ugly accessory. I'd much rather pull out my DSLR or mirrorless camera if I needed something a wider angle than my iPhone could handle.
Having been on the scene not too long after 35mm really started taking off, I can answer your question.
No.
Looking for the article and quote now, as usual can't find something when you want it. But I've read some stuff from Lee Fiedlander and Capa about getting cr*p from the photojournalists of the time because they were using the then, new fangled 35mm Leicas. Same arguments put forth, small negative, lack of detail etc etc.
If I can track down the info again I'll post a link. We're talking about the period of the Contax I and II, Leica II, M3 etc, not SLR.
I know. I've seen a lot of those various works. Production used iPhone 4's in some filming aspects of the recent Robocop remake. I have one of the actual rigs used. The phone is mounted inside with a hot shoe on top and screw mount for lenses. It fits my Canon lenses, perfectly. The sample video and pictures that I tried came out not great but decent. Though, I haven't done any real testing.
My point is, I would rather pay a couple hundred more to get a dedicated compact camera rather than fuss with a phone adding an iffy mount and lens like this. Not to say there isn't a market but iPhones aren't designed with ad-on lenses in mind. I prefer a system that is designed to integrate lenses properly.
You'll never find a lens solution that allows the flash to work because of how close the flash is to the camera. If Apple moved the flash further away then it would be really easy to have a lens solution that doesn't cover the flash. Just sayin'.
I apologize for being so abrupt. Please post that link if you can find it, because I'm sure I'll find it interesting.
Back in the day, I sometimes had the use of a Rollei, a M3 Leica, and even, for a few days, the early Nikon rangefinder. I owned a (used) Hasselblad 1000F (which almost never worked right), an early fifties Japanese rangerfinder, the name of which I can't remember at all, an early Zeiss Contax with a fixed lens, a Kodak folding camera (or was it Zeiss? I can't remember) and the usual Hawkeyes and other Kodaks. I always wanted to try a Speed Graphic, but never was able to.
What I should have said more clearly was that, looking back, it seems to me that the pre-35mm cameras were severely limited in ways that the early 35mm cameras were not. So yes, you had those huge 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 negatives, but interchangeable lenses were expensive and rare, you had 12 exposures (and sheet film, I think, in the Speed Gaphics) and the 35s had 24 or 36.
So rather than seeing those early cameras as DSLRs in comparison to the newer iPhone cameras, I see the situation as the reverse. The old ones could make great images, but they were difficult to modify and expand, had slow lenses, couldn't fire off bursts and so on. But the early 35s were different, and could do all sorts of things that the older generation simply could not do.
So that's why I think that "Rollei et al = DSLRs" while "iPhone = early 35mm" fails as a comparison, unless what you're really talking about is what people were saying, in which case I won't argue at all.
And to comment on the topic of this thread -- I can't think when I've seen worse images come out of a camera that wasn't a toy than those being pushed.
I seem to remember 35mm film cameras being called "miniature cameras" The film used, of course, was just movie film, cut and re-spooled. Certainly doesn't seem like a high quality way to go to me!
In the 50's and 60's I shot with a box camera (620 film) which seemed to do better using still camera film (Kodak Verichrome Pan) than I got with a hand-me-down Mercury II (post-WW2 "half frame" circular focal plane shutter) or Kodak RF (full frame range finder camera). I would buy Kodak Double X film in 100ft reels and load my own cartridges. Really the only thing the 35mm camera had going for it was the relatively small size.
Yes, I think you misinterpreted my original post. I have been looking and looking and just can't track down the article. The gist was that the early 35mm users were criticised because of the small size of the negative which is clearly inferior to the larger negative produced by plate cameras and Rolleiflex of the time. Of course 35mm quickly became the dominant format until the advent of digital cameras. I was trying to draw a parallel comparison to what is happening today with iPhones and mobile photography - quickly becoming the most popular format, or so we are told with flickr user statistics etc, despite the "quality" limitations of the sensors and lenses.
There really is some fantastic and very innovative work coming out of the mobile photography scene. We have had a cover of National Geographic magazine (taken by John Stanmeyer), Magnum Photos have taken on Michael Christopher Brown who shot the Libyan revolution on an iPhone, there are other working photojournalists who use the iPhone as their camera of choice (and I'm not talking about bloggers!), there is some fantastic Street and Documentary work coming out from all over the world. An interesting phenomenon is up and coming photographers who have never used a "traditional" camera, they have only ever used a cell phone camera. They have never had to learn aperture, shutter speed etc, they are able to work within the limitations of the cell phone, and only really have to think about composition!!
This doesn't mean all other formats are going to disappear, just like people continued to use large and medium format in the 35mm era, DSLR, Leaf backs, digital rangefinders, compacts, micro4/3 etc, will all continue to be used in the "mobile" era.
Last edited:
Those are good points.
In fact, today I used my iPhone 5's camera several times because I didn't want to drag along any other camera. And they were decent images, and for me the best part was that I immediately messaged them out to people who needed to see what we were doing. I can't do that with any other camera I own.
In fact, today I used my iPhone 5's camera several times because I didn't want to drag along any other camera. And they were decent images, and for me the best part was that I immediately messaged them out to people who needed to see what we were doing. I can't do that with any other camera I own.
[doublepost=1454466809][/doublepost]Many people here have mentioned the distorted images that these lenses produce. This can to some extent, be corrected in software, so this isn't my main gripe. My concern is that this system, like several others that I have tried, just isn't convenient to use.
Apple's iPhone has topped Flickr's list of the top mobile cameras for years, with Apple even surpassing Nikon to be the number 2 camera brand on the service earlier this year. Smartphone photography is booming and there has been no shortage of accessories to help users take even better pictures, and one of the latest entries in this category is the ExoLens system.
What's in the Box
The ExoLens system comprises two lenses -- a 3x telephoto lens and a 165º wide angle lens -- that screw into a machined aluminum bracket that slides onto an iPhone. The bracket has an integrated 1/4"-20 tripod mount, which will also work with some selfie sticks/monopods. Also included are lens caps, a lens hood for the telephoto lens, and a microfiber carrying pouch. ExoLens officially launches today for the iPhone 6 with a retail price of $129.95, with a model for the iPhone 6 Plus planned for release in May.
Click here to read more...
Article Link: ExoLens Review: Hands-On With a Professional Photography System for iPhone 6
I have rarely seen anybody carrying a mobile phone out of its case, so any accessory that requires a naked iPhone is really not going to be widely used. Furthermore carrying a few fiddly bits around in a soft pouch, virtually guarantees that the lens caps will come off in your bag or pocket, as they do in the case of several competitors. That usually means scratched glass at some point. Carrying the little bag also negates the convenience factor of using your phone to take pictures. I was carrying about a similar collection of bits, until I decided to just replace it with a little camera (Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ60). Its not the best, but I could afford it and it takes far better pictures, and is far more versatile than any phone. I have also looked at a few designs that include custom cases and found them all wanting.
I have to say that it would probably take manufacturers including an external lens mount in their devices, before any of these external lenses make sense. So for now, be satisfied with what an iPhone can do or use a separate camera. having said that, I will still occasionally take out my olloclip macro lens for the incredibly close shots it affords me, in such a small setup.
Last edited: