I'm not overly fussed about the single speaker, just as long as it's really loud
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.
Here Are 5 Smaller iPhone Air Details You Might Have Missed, Including Only a Single Speaker
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I do think you can shoot RAW with third party apps still, just not built in Photos.
Did you mean Apple's built-in Camera app? If so... Having used Apple's Camera app for so long, I'd rather stay with it. As I have with my previous Pro Max iPhones.
Hard to avoid compromises, I believe, given how it’s severely size-constrained.
I think it might rather come down in price, not dissimilar to “Air” MacBooks and iPad.
Potentially even replacing the standard iPhone model.
In other words: think of it more than glimpse, a sneak preview into the future of their standard phone - rather than an entirely new line of iPhones that’s for years to come.
I mean… just one camera. USB2. More focus on thinness than features? And accessory sales from battery packs?
I’m beginning to wonder how much it actually costs them to make these things. Now, I’m not sure about Titanium, but given how the backside ceramic shield is something I expect to trickle down to the “normal” iPhone eventually anyways:
👉 I wouldn’t be surprised if it costs them less to make “Air” iPhones than standard iPhone 17s.
Sure, maybe not today, but maybe in two years time. Once it’s been engineered and they’ve optimised and scaled up tooling.
👉 At that point, they’d selling a leaner (both literally and figuratively) iPhone that still looks modern and up to date. Basically giving consumers less for the same (or more) money. Tim Cook must love that.
Yes. Kind of perplexing though how they’ve given it a Pro chip.
The Hermès watch isn’t an engineered product in its own right though.
It’s basically a different box and wristband.
I have, since it was introduced (around 2017 ?). It was a decent step up from jpg. But... as soon as Apple introduced ProRaw (around 2020?) and really liking the results, I switched and never looked back. Thus I never did a careful HEIF - ProRAW comparison.
My *recollection*, going back five years, is that ProRAW had greater dynamic range than HEIF, when using Lightroom (which I've been using since around 2007).
I guess what I'm saying is I really want to stick with Apple's RAW. It just works so well post-processing in Lightroom. To the point my post-processing is something I don't have to futz around getting my images looking the way I want them. Seems to happen almost automatically from muscle memory (if that makes any sense).
Last edited:
makes total sense. I shoot in RAW with my Canon DSLR, on the iPhone, I tried ProRAW but couldn't bother with the post processing requirements I consider those photos more "snaps", though there have been occasions where in hindsight I wish I had turned ProRaw on.
The other reason to go with HEIC is file size, while I do copy all my iPhone photos onto my Mac and import them into LRC, I like to keep my iPhone photos on my iPhone "forever" as it is easy to scroll thru photos when family is around and such. And I've ordered my 17PM with 256GB (down from 512 on my 13PM) so keeping ProRaw on the iPhone will be a challenge rather sooner than later. And I searched for a tool that would let me convert ProRaw to heir on the phone (that ic Ould run after downloading to my Mac), but no, the conversion seems quite cumbersome ...
anyways, hopefully the next iteration of the iPhone Air will have improved camera capabilities, that is my main reason I didn't consider it in the first place
I can assure you... as a photographer, that if I cared about color and getting the most from my images, I would not use anything with a sensor smaller than 36mm x 24mm. Regardless of whether it's an iPhone or otherwise. So having RAW from a phone is like having RAW in a compact camera to me. Nice to have but absolutely not required.
Am I a sensor-size snob? Yes. Actually, I am a film snob. Digital sensors, while excellent these days, pale in comparison to the resolution and color depth that film could get way back in the days. Especially when it comes to bigger film sizes. So 36mm x 24mm (what people call "full frame" nowadays) is the absolute minimum for me.
Thus as a photographer, I really just want a phone that's...
1. Won't add any extra weight to the amount of stuffs I have to carry.
2. Won't make me think about having to process even more RAW files from another ecosystem.
3. Good enough for an occasional snapshot (hey, it's got a 48MP sensor).
4. Basically is just an accessory for my bigger camera.
iPhone Air is thus perfect for me.
Can I shoot professionally with an iPhone? Yes. Actually, I could. Would I? No. That would be unprofessional of me. Why? Because deep down, I know for a fact that the iPhone pales in comparison to my other cameras and even with RAW files from the iPhone, I'm missing details that may or may not be important to my client. If I've got the time to whip out the iPhone for a shot, I've also got the time to bring up the second/third camera I've already got on me.
Now if you're not someone who is fussy, and you're learning, then sure, having RAW access on an iPhone does allow you to get the most out of it. But just don't conflate having RAW files from an iPhone as having RAW files from say... a Hasselblad or any random Sony mirrorless cameras these days.
It’s thinner and it looks better. I’m not sure why you would think that people who value these attributes want to “show-off they have money” any more than those who would buy, say, the more expensive iPhone Pro.
Oh come on now. Very few people have even seen the Air in person so it's not fair to judge it's top leading protrusion. 😊 I mean most people that have put hands on the Air have actually been overly impressed with its design. In fact that aspect of there Air seems to be fairly universally positive. I have my own concerns and criticisms about the Air, mostly it's lack of a few features I really like and can't part with, but its design is not one of them.
"But just don't conflate having RAW files from an iPhone as having RAW files from say... a Hasselblad or any random Sony mirrorless cameras these days."
Of course not. I *never* made that claim.
As a photographer, I also have so-called "real cameras." An Arca-Swiss F-Field 4x5 (not something you want to casually carry around with a sturdy Gitzo tripod and Arca-Swiss ballhead), a couple of Sony cams (A7RV, A7CII), a couple of compact Sony and Fuji cams, etc. And loads of other cameras over the years that I no longer have.
They're all great and produce great results.
But... as it turns out, some of my best/compelling photographs I've made were with iPhones as I don't carry my "real" cameras with me 24/7.
My various iPhones shooting in RAW have filled that need as I never know when I'll come across a scene that's worthy of making a photograph.
I don't. Typically leave it in the car, or at home...no point, anyway, as the trails I typically run don't have cell service.
I think this is a good point that will probably translate to consumers that want to see/hold the device in store before buying. I’ve seen a lot of tech reviewers that usually aren’t big Apple fans find the form factor pretty impressive.
It’s difficult but I don’t think it’s impossible. The Samsung s25 edge (albeit a little thicker) manages to squeeze a bit more hardware in; 6.7” screen, bigger battery, ultra wide camera.
Omg… that’s… concerning…
So basically Apple wants to tell us: buy bricks from us or you won’t get all the latest features of your latest devices. I guess there are engineering considerations prompting the change of PD protocol but still.
And since this is a brand new PD protocol, older devices won’t benefit from it as they don’t have the battery control board to understand it, meaning it is practically useless for faster charging for older devices.
Saving some money for me I guess.
I mean eventually there will be other PD 3.2 devices that are third party, they’re just not out yet. Not a huge loss IMO to just keep going with standard 30W charging via cable anyway… most times my charging is 25W MagSafe.
But I swear when I use laptop charger my iPhone charges faster compared to… oh, oh I see. So 20W I think vs 30W.
Even so, unless older devices can be updated with firmware to support newer PD protocols which I doubt, my iPhone would forever be stuck at 30W fast charging. Not bad by any means but it does suck.
I’ve never seen a charging brick that can update to a newer PD spec. So I think you’re right, until you get a new charger with the new spec, you will stick at the “slower” 50% in 30 minutes speed.
I wonder if the developers of Halide, say, might be able to provide RAW support in their own crafty fashion. The current Mark II version of the app seems to be able to sneak into the photo-capturing process before it gets to the multi-exposure, computational-photography stuff, in their "Process Zero" mode, which gives you a single exposure at full resolution. Maybe this sort of wizardry will be available for the Air.
I guess this is a matter of perspective.
I won't comment on your use case any more then, since it's clear the iPhone is well suited for that. For me, it's not sufficient. Aside from RAW files not having enough dynamic range, there are other issues such as:
1. It's very hard to pre-set exposure (ISO, shutter speed, white balance) for instant snap.
2. Also equally hard is to pre-set focus. Autofocus is basically required.
3. Some apps may be able to solve the above 2 problems but I can't adjust an app without seeing the screen. And to see the screen, I have to wait for Face ID to unlock. It's too slow.
4. I guess this is kind of an adjacent issue with RAW: HDR output is now always on and cannot be turned off. If I'm sending a photo I took from an iPhone to someone else who doesn't have an iPhone, the output is remarkably different. I always have to use Photomator now to re-export a photo to non-HDR first. It's not ideal if I want to take a photo of someone and then send it over to them.
From my perspective, iPhone is more of a videography tool. There are more controls for videography and more features to support videography. It's only missing pre-applied LUT. For photography, maybe it works for simpler use cases, but advanced use cases that require more controls are still too slow to even be "reasonable", and image quality IMHO is not up to par.
Again, to each his own. I'm glad it works for you. Unfortunately, I still find myself needing a separate camera, and the iPhone to me is thus just a phone.
I don’t think you struggle to understand you’re just trying to bait me into some type of argument. But I’ll keep it simple. And if I see you try to bait me into something I’m gonna stop responding to you.
More women then men historically enjoy jewelry and the new iPhone air aesthetically will appeal to those who will see it like jewelry. That’s it.
My perspective is... the strength of a photograph and its ability to communicate to viewers has little to do with gear and has much more to do with the photographer, his/her eye, ability to quickly read light, ability to compose and determine what should be in or out of the frame, ability to create mystery (if desired) by letting some elements drop into the shadows, a photographer's life experiences fostering the ability to help create a narrative (any narrative) to tickle a viewer's imagination by determining what should be in or out of the frame, and on and on and on. All within a very short period of time.
I've seen so many people starting in photography getting wrapped up in believing having the best camera gear is what makes great photos. Which is a real shame since compelling photographs are conjured by the photographer (from the above) and not having the best gear. That's OK, if that's what one wants their photography to be about. I'm much more interested in *making* photographs that have something to say and communicate to the viewer.
BTW... I never use the phrase "taking photos." For me it's *making photos*, taking what I wrote about above as to how that's done. But that's just me, and as you say, to each his own.
I'll summarize it like this then: you seem to not care about the gear. That's one way to look at it. But please don't speak from the perspective of someone who does in fact care about the gear.
I'm among those who know they cannot achieve their vision with an iPhone. "It's more about the photographer" are just pretty words that cannot lift the limitations of the sensor size and lack of manual controls. Ultimately, "the right tool for the right job" is more appropriate here. I personally do not find an iPhone to be the right tool for my photography. It's just that simple.