The Pixel 3 XL picture does indeed look better. My question is, if they are taken from the same spot with the same zoom, why are the subjects in the photo taken with the Pixel so far away in comparison?
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.
iPhone XS Max I don't get why a $1000+ phone takes such HORRIBLE pictures!
- Thread starter spinedoc77
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The Pixel 3 XL picture does indeed look better. My question is, if they are taken from the same spot with the same zoom, why are the subjects in the photo taken with the Pixel so far away in comparison?
Yep, I am loving my XS Max but I am finding low light pictures to be average at the very best, and so I have decided that when I know that I’ll be taking a lot of pictures I will have my Huawei P30 Pro in my pocket. There’s been a few times where I absolutely beat my self up for not bringing the P30 Pro, knowing I could zoom far more and take far clearer images in low light.
With the above said, in good light the iPhone absolutely demolishes my P30 Pro, but the lighting has to be REALLY good, like a clear day outside.
I’ll be skipping the iPhone 11 and hoping the 12 is the big leap we are all waiting for.
I was maybe 2-3 feet farther away when I took the pixel pictures. Just a different seat in the waiting area. Looking at the exif data the pixel pictures were actually zoomed in more than the iphone pictures (pixel also had less light!).
You are missing the entire point, just look at and compare the 2 pictures and THAT is the end of the story. NO ONE is expecting these cameras to match a dSLR camera, I don't know where you got that from as NO ONE including myself has stated this expectation. The expectation is that a $1000 phone should take somewhat serviceable pictures, not the absolute GARBAGE I'm getting from the iphone vs. the very serviceable picture from the Pixel 3. You say "Phone cameras take bad photos in bad lighting because they aren't capable of doing better.", but I've posted a picture from the pixel 3 that is pretty darn good in almost the same exact conditions which is completely at odds with your opinion. Stop making excuses for the iphone's camera, because that's really what it sounds like. I also disagree that the camera is not a selling feature, wtf kind of logic is that? Of course the camera is a selling point for some consumers.
[doublepost=1562166139][/doublepost]
I'm pretty happy with the pixel picture at 4x zoom, although I did that to mainly compare it to the iphone one. I agree and I will take your advice in the future.
It takes horrible pictures in certain lighting conditions because it is and remains ... just a phone
limited by its sensor size and more importantly by the lens
The picture taken by the OP seems to be quite challenging even for a DSLR as it seems to have a need for some zooming in combined with high shutter speed (due to high speed motion) and all of this in quite low light conditions ...
Iphones, under normal (lighting) conditions and with no particular need for special lens qualities tend to produce great pictures.
The picture discussed simply was out of reach of any (i)phone
limited by its sensor size and more importantly by the lens
The picture taken by the OP seems to be quite challenging even for a DSLR as it seems to have a need for some zooming in combined with high shutter speed (due to high speed motion) and all of this in quite low light conditions ...
Iphones, under normal (lighting) conditions and with no particular need for special lens qualities tend to produce great pictures.
The picture discussed simply was out of reach of any (i)phone
So you just ignored the reply from the OP? The Pixel 3's camera CRAPS all over the iPhone's and it's cheaper!
It doesn't seem the picture was too challenging for the pixel 3, even though it's "just a phone". While I won't argue that the light was optimal based on the exif data, I'm still really amazed that a big room, with 2 sides of bay windows, on a bright sunny day isn't good enough lighting to get even a halfway decent picture, at least for the iphone.
OP, I have both an iPhone XR (same camera as your XS Max minus the second lens) and a Samsung Galaxy Note 9. The Note's pics are significantly better, especially when zooming in on detail taken from the same position/lighting/angle on both. The XR can be horrible in this regard.
I used to work as a professional photographer so I'm not remotely expecting any phone to compare to a DSLR, never mind full-frame pro models. But the iPhone's pics don't stack up against many other decent smartphone cameras, simple as that. Does it still take good pics most of the time? Yes. But there's much better out there (often for less money).
I used to work as a professional photographer so I'm not remotely expecting any phone to compare to a DSLR, never mind full-frame pro models. But the iPhone's pics don't stack up against many other decent smartphone cameras, simple as that. Does it still take good pics most of the time? Yes. But there's much better out there (often for less money).
Thank you, I took a look at those pixel 3 pictures
quite nice for a phone under those conditions
I hear you. I use one of the 1" pocketable cameras like the RX-100, while keeping an ultracompact CCD camera in the trunk of my car for emergencies. (The older CCD based cameras had 6x the low light performance of modern CCD cameras of similar sensor areas.) And then, if all those things fail, I do the best I can with my phone. But to date I haven't taken any *important* photos on a smart phone, although I'm getting lazier, and for outdoor daytime shots with lots of daylight, the phone images are passable.
Remember, the sensor in the iPhone XS is just ~20 mm^2, and it's a CCD. Even a 1" sensor pocket camera (the smallest sensor I'd use in CCD) has 5x the area of the iPhone. Sure, they can try software magic, but that's how you got all those artifacts around fire detector. Your point is other phones can do much better. I can't comment, because I don't have them, but I'd be surprised if their sensors were much larger.
[doublepost=1562174077][/doublepost]
Finally, I'd debate your logic about "class leading, $1000+, etc, etc." The money in the iPhone mostly goes into software development. The money on the Android phones goes primarily into hardware. There's really no basis for saying Apple is trying to push the envelope in hardware, or that it could put that $1,000 into hardware like Samsung can. Most likely the iPhone hardware has to be under $300, so they can pay for all the other stuff.
Well it would be pretty hard to have even a 1" camera while I'm wearing a Gi! But I hear you, what I'm doing is just taking the Pixel 3 with me when I know I have to take nice pictures. But that still leaves me with all the other times when I only have my iphone on me.
I'd also debate your logic about the money that goes into a phone. The pixel 3 (and the pixels before it) are getting a ton of press in regard to their superior cameras. Even Huawei has had some good press on this, at least for those of us who read tech. You can see that Google, in particular, uses this as a main selling point in much of their advertising, and rightfully so. I'm not saying Apple is trying to push the hardware envelope, if anything I'm saying the opposite that they aren't, at least in relation to the camera. Although as I've said before in perfect lighting the iphones take really nice pictures. I'd say most likely the iphone hardware has to be less expensive to make to create a higher profit. The kicker is that cheaper phones like the pixel 3 and a few of huawei's phones have such superior performance.
I use the Halide app on my XS Max, shoot in RAW and it takes a version without the awful filter Apple automatically puts on to the original shot, then process with Lightroom for the best results!
it’s a phone with a camera
And while the quality is that of a DSLR camera it’s not a Nikon or Leica which objective is to take professional pictures and has many adjustments and settings to it
Basically a phone camera is good for everyday photography in normal lighting conditions
And while the quality is that of a DSLR camera it’s not a Nikon or Leica which objective is to take professional pictures and has many adjustments and settings to it
Basically a phone camera is good for everyday photography in normal lighting conditions
Is the iPhone XS ISO invariant? An interesting strategy might be to shoot raws at ISO 50 (or below) and correct "in post".
I will have to give that a try. I did previously try Night Camera, which everyone raves about in the reviews. But I found on both auto settings and also playing around with ISO, shutter speed, etc. that low light pictures were not much better, and still nowhere close to the pixel. I will keep playing around, but the tweaking is way beyond my expertise or desire.
Actually, with all due respect, those images are not taken from the same spot. In the first one, the people are much further into the interior of the room. I'm not saying this from just a perspective issue, but if you count the lines on the mats, in the first image, they are only one mat away from the wall. In your second image, they are three mats away from the wall. In terms of lighting, this is a huge difference, and is part of the inverse square law. Photographers use this as a way of making an otherwise "well lit" room fall into black/darkness behind their subjects. While our eyes can see a huge dynamic range of light and our brains will adjust for the light, a camera cannot do this automatically. Your subjects in the second image are much closer to the light, and therefore better exposed within the limits of the camera and sensor. They are also a smaller percentage of the overall frame, decreasing the dynamic range within the image, which helps the whites not to blow out.
I am not making any excuses for the iPhone camera. Personally I rarely use mine. The point that people (including me) have been trying to make with comparing any phone camera to a dSLR is that you keep repeating that the Pixel takes "good" quality images. You admit they aren't gallery quality, but want "better" photos. You also admit that you are unwilling to shoot raw and that "the tweaking is way beyond my expertise or desire." For those of us who are photographers, the difference in your two phone camera images is negligible and not what any of us would consider "good."
But honestly, the reason in this particular scenario that the Pixel outperformed the iPhone is simply because your subjects were much closer to the windows.
The pixel picture was taken about 2-3 feet farther away, I was in a different seat in the waiting area. I doubt that makes much of a difference, but if it did it would be in favor of the iphone. The pixel was actually zooming in more than the iphone, again in the iphones favor. Lighting is actually slightly less with the pixel if you look at the exif data, so once again this is in favor of the iphone. They are not that much closer to the windows in the pixel pictures, if you count the floor mats they are between the 3rd and 4th floor mats in both pics, with them being slightly closer to the windows in the pixel picture (distance between the center of the 3rd mat and where the 3rd and 4th mats meet), it seems your perspective is off if you are looking at the wall mats, otherwise you can't count. Sounds like a lot more excuses to me.
I also don't get your 2nd paragraph. Once again my expectations are NOT dSLR quality pictures. I do want "better" pictures than the iphone camera, but have said I'm quite satisfied with the Pixel 3 pictures being they came from a smartphone. Yes I'm unwilling to shoot raw, or tweak settings, etc because I've found I don't have to go through all that. To call the difference in those 2 pictures "negligible" doesn't make any sense, they are day and night difference. The iphone one has so much graininess it might as well be a TV screen with no signal. I call complete and utter BS on the difference between those pictures being "negligible". Which argument is it? Is it that the pixel picture is better because they are better lit (they are not)? Or is it that the quality between the pictures is negligible?
Comparing these 2 crops it's clear how "negligible" the difference in pictures is:
Last edited:
I'm not sure how you are counting mats, but I am counting from the left hand wall. The light is coming from the right side of the frame. I have overlaid your iPhone photo onto your Pixel photo, matching up the mats on the back wall. The Pixel photo has the subjects MUCH closer to the window side. You can't rely on Exif data for this as the light will change day to day, and even a difference of 10-20 minutes the light can change drastically (clouds, sun, etc.).
I personally feel the quality difference between the two photos is negligble, but then again I wouldn't rely on a phone camera if I wanted good photos. Your mileage may vary on that. I get that you only want to carry one device. That makes sense. I also am NOT saying that the iPhone photo is better than the Pixel photo. I AM saying that I believe the difference in lighting and positioning of the subject accounts for the lesser quality iPhone photo. There are also things like jpeg rendering and software smoothing that likely account for some of the difference as well. It's known that Apple software aggressively smooths images (resulting in a loss of quality). One way to combat for that is to shoot raw and do your own editing in post. You say you are unwilling to do that. I also understand that.
But the fault here is not SOLELY on the camera/phone. These photos, while taken in the same room, have different lighting scenarios, if for no other reason that the subjects are closer to the windows.I promise you, I am not arguing, I am trying to help you understand why the photos are not the same.
I'm not sure how you are counting mats, but I am counting from the left hand wall. The light is coming from the right side of the frame. I have overlaid your iPhone photo onto your Pixel photo, matching up the mats on the back wall. The Pixel photo has the subjects MUCH closer to the window side. You can't rely on Exif data for this as the light will change day to day, and even a difference of 10-20 minutes the light can change drastically (clouds, sun, etc.).
I personally feel the quality difference between the two photos is negligble, but then again I wouldn't rely on a phone camera if I wanted good photos. Your mileage may vary on that. I get that you only want to carry one device. That makes sense. I also am NOT saying that the iPhone photo is better than the Pixel photo. I AM saying that I believe the difference in lighting and positioning of the subject accounts for the lesser quality iPhone photo. There are also things like jpeg rendering and software smoothing that likely account for some of the difference as well. It's known that Apple software aggressively smooths images (resulting in a loss of quality). One way to combat for that is to shoot raw and do your own editing in post. You say you are unwilling to do that. I also understand that.
View attachment 846507
I promise you, I am not arguing, I am trying to help you understand why the photos are not the same.
Cut the crap, stop trying to make a deceptive overlay. You simply need to count the mats. In the iphone picture the center of the subjects is on the 3rd mat, in the pixel picture the center of the subjects is right where the 3rd and 4th mat meet. If you'd like I can measure this next time I'm in class, but I'd estimate it's probably about 2-3 feet at the most, or 1/2 to 3/4 of a mat. Subjects were also closer to the far wall, giving them less light as well in the pixel picture, as well as being farther away from the side bay windows where I was taking the picture, and being more hidden behind a solid wall further blocking light from those side bay windows. As noted the pixel camera was farther back, zooming more (approx 19% more zoom) and had less light (approx 11% less light), giving the iphone multiple advantages. You are just grasping at straws now to prove your point when in reality the distance is "negligible" as you say. I've roughly drawn where the mats are, you can see the seams so there is no cheating. I also can't see why I can't rely on the exif data if that was the data representing what the brightness was at the moment the picture was taken, not sure what 10-20 minutes has to do with it.
As for viewing the pictures as negligible I can't argue with you there, I'll simply let those cropped pictures I posted before speak for themselves. If they were "negligible" then you would not be able to tell them apart, which is painfully and obviously not the case. Your relying on a smartphone camera for good pictures has nothing to do with this, simply put for $1000+ the iphones pictures should AT LEAST be as good as the pixel's, and arguably better since the pixel is cheaper. That is subjective and how I perceive the value for my purchase and I don't blame you if you disagree as we are entitled to our own perception of value. How you cannot see that insane level of graininess is beyond me, although the pixel does have some blur on close inspection there is very little graininess. Heck you can barely make out the instructors hand or my daughters head because of the graininess.
Look, I understand you are trying to "educate" me, but you are incorrect. Not for what you are describing, I'm not arguing that and am not disagreeing, but you are dead wrong in the difference in quality of the pictures. If you want to say both pictures are not good then I can't argue with your opinion, and yes most likely both pictures are "bad", but to say there is negligible difference in quality is just sheer dishonesty, you just need to open your eyes. What's most telling is that your 2 arguments strangely cancel each other out. If the lighting makes one picture better then it's not a negligible difference, you are perceiving a difference in quality, and vice versa. I don't have an issue laying a bit of blame on the lighting, but I could also lay blame for a lot of other things like the pixel having more of a zoom, less light, farther away, etc. If I were to go in and stage everything 100% to your satisfaction I'll bet the pixel picture would STILL trounce the iphone picture, but then you would concoct some theory about the position of the moon or how the angle of the feet changes the lighting. But it all boils down to just nitpicking little things to make your point. Conversely instead of throwing minutiae and excuses I simply have posted the pictures and let them speak for themselves, no argument really required.
Last edited:
This was take from my iPhone 4
And these were from my iPhone 6s
These flagship phones have incredible cameras given their size. The iPhone 4 came out 9 years ago and the 6s almost 4 years ago. Pretty Impressive what they can do. It’s all about getting the right lighting and not zooming in so it takes digital shots. You need to use the natural optical lens and they can take incredible detail. Look at the 6s camera. I have told people those were XS max pictures and they had no idea. Just goes to show how minimal camera upgrades can be and how much impact marketing can have. Also goes to show that Apple doesn’t put cheap cameras in their phones. Your 1000$ phone DOES have an amazing camera. You just need to make sure you’re using it properly. It’s not a DSLR.
And these were from my iPhone 6s
These flagship phones have incredible cameras given their size. The iPhone 4 came out 9 years ago and the 6s almost 4 years ago. Pretty Impressive what they can do. It’s all about getting the right lighting and not zooming in so it takes digital shots. You need to use the natural optical lens and they can take incredible detail. Look at the 6s camera. I have told people those were XS max pictures and they had no idea. Just goes to show how minimal camera upgrades can be and how much impact marketing can have. Also goes to show that Apple doesn’t put cheap cameras in their phones. Your 1000$ phone DOES have an amazing camera. You just need to make sure you’re using it properly. It’s not a DSLR.
Wipe the back lens with a wipe for eyeglasses before taking a picture!
If your photos are blurry on your iPhone and everyone else’s iPhone takes good photos...just saying.
If your photos are blurry on your iPhone and everyone else’s iPhone takes good photos...just saying.