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.
View attachment 846531 View attachment 846532
