iPhone 11 Pro iPhone 11 Pro Ultra Wide Camera

[alFR]

the quality just doesn’t hold up in 2019.

It's a 13mm lens! On a phone! The sensor is smaller than my smallest fingernail! It's a miracle it works at all...

I’m not going to argue with people

"Hi. I'm going to say the camera quality isn't as good as it should be in 2019 but am not going to provide any evidence for that. Good day."

I think we need to keep a bit of perspective. The photos from any of the lenses are loads better than those from the film cameras I had when I was young (none of which had anything like as wide as a 13mm lens, by the way), plus they're in my pocket all the time. Are they as good as photos from a DSLR? No. Do I care? No, because my DSLR is not in my pocket all the time. For most people any modern smartphone photos are good enough (and, to be honest, probably have been for a couple of phone generations now).

Because Apple went 12 mp across the board (possibly so they could save money on both the camera lenses and by only providing 4GB RAM) then the ultra-wide starts with a quarter of the resolution of the standard wide. Add in no support for focus, stabilisation, and deep fusion, and it has no chance of competing.

You wouldn't put a 24mm prime on a DSLR and say it halved the sensor resolution vs a 50mm on the same camera. The ultra-wide is 12MP like the other two: the resolution is the same. Anything from 1m to infinity is in focus for the ultra-wide camera (confirmed by the developers of Halide), so apart from for close-ups (not the intended use of this lens) it doesn't need to focus anyway. Stabilisation is pretty much pointless for most applications on a lens that wide. The other two lenses don't have deep fusion yet either.

 

[adrianlondon]

... I was super excited when it was announced, but the quality just doesn’t hold up in 2019. I think Apple should have waited until 2020 for better tech.

I'd rather have an ultra-wide camera with some faults than no ultra-wide camera at all.

I think we need to keep a bit of perspective.

An ultra-wide one 😁

 

[Khedron]

It's a 13mm lens! On a phone! The sensor is smaller than my smallest fingernail! It's a miracle it works at all...

"Hi. I'm going to say the camera quality isn't as good as it should be in 2019 but am not going to provide any evidence for that. Good day."

I think we need to keep a bit of perspective. The photos from any of the lenses are loads better than those from the film cameras I had when I was young (none of which had anything like as wide as a 13mm lens, by the way), plus they're in my pocket all the time. Are they as good as photos from a DSLR? No. Do I care? No, because my DSLR is not in my pocket all the time. For most people any modern smartphone photos are good enough (and, to be honest, probably have been for a couple of phone generations now).


You wouldn't put a 24mm prime on a DSLR and say it halved the sensor resolution vs a 50mm on the same camera. The ultra-wide is 12MP like the other two: the resolution is the same. Anything from 1m to infinity is in focus for the ultra-wide camera (confirmed by the developers of Halide), so apart from for close-ups (not the intended use of this lens) it doesn't need to focus anyway. Stabilisation is pretty much pointless for most applications on a lens that wide. The other two lenses don't have deep fusion yet either.

Focus wouldn't be so important, but Apple says Deep Fusion is based on having 100% Focus Pixels, so it's presumably never coming to the ultra-wide. Which is a shame because the ultra-wide becomes noisy AF in anything less than perfect light. Same with stabilisation, could have been used to improve image quality rather than necessary for its own sake.

 

[Nikhil72]

Because Apple went 12 mp across the board (possibly so they could save money on both the camera lenses and by only providing 4GB RAM) then the ultra-wide starts with a quarter of the resolution of the standard wide. Add in no support for focus, stabilisation, and deep fusion, and it has no chance of competing.

what is it competing against exactly? seems a majority of phone based ultra wide cameras are of slightly lesser quality than their regular brethren.

 

[Khedron]

what is it competing against exactly? seems a majority of phone based ultra wide cameras are of slightly lesser quality than their regular brethren.

Well the new OnePlus 7T which costs half as much as the 11 Pro has more RAM, storage, and a better screen, and also throws in 48MP/16MP/8MP wide/ultra-wide/tele cameras compared to Apple's 12MP/12MP/12MP.

Apple still has generally better software than OnePlus, especially if Deep Fusion works.

The Pixel 4 coming in a few weeks could blow the 11 Pro out of orbit in both camera hardware and software.

 

[Khedron]

I'd rather have an ultra-wide camera with some faults than no ultra-wide camera at all.

Some chance for a great shot is better than zero chance by not having it.

IMO the problem is how quickly Apple abandons hardware.

People say Apple supports their phones for years, but in practice all that means is making sure your OS is updated so you can keep signing up for Apple subscriptions.

All the fuss they made last year about the neural engine and AI. But the XS has been instantly abandoned for Deep Fusion.

This is because Deep Fusion needs Focus Pixels which the XS doesn't have, but the exact same thing will happen next year when Apple announces a new high quality ultra-wide system and everyone with an 11 Pro is left with photos that look like total garbage in comparison.

 

[Markgnyc2]

Some chance for a great shot is better than zero chance by not having it.

IMO the problem is how quickly Apple abandons hardware.

People say Apple supports their phones for years, but in practice all that means is making sure your OS is updated so you can keep signing up for Apple subscriptions.

All the fuss they made last year about the neural engine and AI. But the XS has been instantly abandoned for Deep Fusion.

This is because Deep Fusion needs Focus Pixels which the XS doesn't have, but the exact same thing will happen next year when Apple announces a new high quality ultra-wide system and everyone with an 11 Pro is left with photos that look like total garbage in comparison.

That's not abandoning hardware, that is constantly developing hardware. And they will continue to support the hardware you already have. Could you imagine if next year had no camera improvements at all? Then it would be "Apple can't innovate". And they wouldn't sell phones, which wouldn't make Wall Street happy. Next year will always be something better, enjoy what we have now.

 

[Khedron]

That's not abandoning hardware, that is constantly developing hardware. And they will continue to support the hardware you already have. Could you imagine if next year had no camera improvements at all? Then it would be "Apple can't innovate". And they wouldn't sell phones, which wouldn't make Wall Street happy. Next year will always be something better, enjoy what we have now.

Google's computational photography even improves non-Google phones. Apple's software is now so garbage they can't even make XS's with the amazing A12 Bionic chip do any better and they have to buy their "innovation" from hardware vendors like Samsung.

 

[Nikhil72]

Some chance for a great shot is better than zero chance by not having it.

IMO the problem is how quickly Apple abandons hardware.

People say Apple supports their phones for years, but in practice all that means is making sure your OS is updated so you can keep signing up for Apple subscriptions.

All the fuss they made last year about the neural engine and AI. But the XS has been instantly abandoned for Deep Fusion.

This is because Deep Fusion needs Focus Pixels which the XS doesn't have, but the exact same thing will happen next year when Apple announces a new high quality ultra-wide system and everyone with an 11 Pro is left with photos that look like total garbage in comparison.

your entire argument is predicated on comparisons to future devices that better improve on their predecessors or we have a problem. I make annual purchases fully knowing next year’s model will be better. As for Android devices, I’m not sure they matter to me if I’m happy with my Apple ecosystem? A solid camera that keeps up beautifully and continues the ecosystem I’m accustomed to is great. And price isn’t a concern for me, and if it were, I’d happily grab an 11.

 

[Markgnyc2]

Compare the XS's photos to any phone from a few years ago and it blows it away. Hardware and Software are constantly developing.

 

[Khedron]

your entire argument is predicated on comparisons to future devices that better improve on their predecessors or we have a problem. I make annual purchases fully knowing next year’s model will be better. As for Android devices, I’m not sure they matter to me if I’m happy with my Apple ecosystem? A solid camera that keeps up beautifully and continues the ecosystem I’m accustomed to is great. And price isn’t a concern for me, and if it were, I’d happily grab an 11.

Good for you, life's easy when you follow simple rules like "just buy the newest and most expensive Apple device". I'm interested in the best mobile camera so am happy to wait a couple of weeks for the Pixel 4 to launch, especially since Apple shipped the iPhone 11 with Deep Fusion not even working. Plus the current portrait mode is broken AF.

 

[Nikhil72]

Good for you, life's easy when you follow simple rules like "just buy the newest and most expensive Apple device". I'm interested in the best mobile camera so am happy to wait a couple of weeks for the Pixel 4 to launch, especially since Apple shipped the iPhone 11 with Deep Fusion not even working. Plus the current portrait mode is broken AF.

portrait mode looks improved and pleasing to my eye 😊 options are fabulous, aren’t they? Your approach to tech doesn’t obviate others, especially if your critique is based on conjecture.

 

[Lee_Bo]

The camera on the Pro Max is only 12mp. I say "only" because the Canon EOD 50d (which I use for landscape photography) is 15.1mp, while my Canon EOS 5D Mark IV (for portrait and sports photography) is a 30.4mp camera. While I think the images posted here look good, I also don't think that the images look the same posted here as they do on the actual phone or in iCloud Photos. I've posted a few that I took woth my Max on my IG account and thought it looked fuzzy, then compared it to the actual photo and there is a difference. I personally thin the camera on the Max is really good and takes great photos on all 3 settings. However, my 7 Plus took some amazing photos too. I also rarely use the stock camera app.

Any image zoomed in is going to appear grainy and noisy. That's just the law of physics.

 

[I7guy]

That's your pure speculation. Reviews I've seen all comment on the relatively low quality and provide original files to download. They're there for all to see.

Hopefully the next version includes a proper focus system and maybe some stabilisation.

The noise levels make the photos borderline unusable beyond Instagram style viewing in a small window.

Pretty much not speculation that the forum software compressed the jpgs. Instead of commenting about artifacts in a compressed jpg, please provide some links to uncompressed jpgs that include the competitors UW and let’s see who beats the laws of physics.
[automerge]1570028078[/automerge]

Good for you, life's easy when you follow simple rules like "just buy the newest and most expensive Apple device". I'm interested in the best mobile camera so am happy to wait a couple of weeks for the Pixel 4 to launch, especially since Apple shipped the iPhone 11 with Deep Fusion not even working. Plus the current portrait mode is broken AF.

Bully for you. Buy what you want and what works for you. And hope you have a stellar experience where everything works properly the first time.

 

[s54]

The photo of the building is the perfect example of how grainy the ultra wide lens is. Maybe you cannot see it, but it was extremely noticeable for me. These are NOT good examples.

exactly

 

[zorinlynx]

The camera on the Pro Max is only 12mp. I say "only" because the Canon EOD 50d (which I use for landscape photography) is 15.1mp, while my Canon EOS 5D Mark IV (for portrait and sports photography) is a 30.4mp camera. While I think the images posted here look good, I also don't think that the images look the same posted here as they do on the actual phone or in iCloud Photos. I've posted a few that I took woth my Max on my IG account and thought it looked fuzzy, then compared it to the actual photo and there is a difference. I personally thin the camera on the Max is really good and takes great photos on all 3 settings. However, my 7 Plus took some amazing photos too. I also rarely use the stock camera app.

Any image zoomed in is going to appear grainy and noisy. That's just the law of physics.

iOS and MacOS is guilty of this too. A lot of times I export a photo and it gets scaled down to a lower resolution. I find that I have to go out of my way to export on my Mac, directly from Photos, at "original resolution" to guarantee I'm not losing pixels.

 

[Markgnyc2]

These are great examples. These are photos that would have never been captured, if not for the Ultra Wide Lens in our pockets. I am 46 years old, when I was a teen we had film cameras and of course we never had them with us. To take a photo like that was near impossible. The first camera phones were horrible, but at the time they were great because we had a camera with us at all times to capture memories. That's the beauty of today, iPhone or any phone. Arguing about a little grain if you zoom in on a beautiful photo is pointless. The photo was captured. That is the beauty of technology.

Edit: We all have our photo library from the beginning of our digital lives. If you look at old photos, enjoy the memories, don't zoom in and look for every imperfection.

 

[Harthag]

Well the new OnePlus 7T which costs half as much as the 11 Pro has more RAM, storage, and a better screen, and also throws in 48MP/16MP/8MP wide/ultra-wide/tele cameras compared to Apple's 12MP/12MP/12MP.

Apple still has generally better software than OnePlus, especially if Deep Fusion works.

The Pixel 4 coming in a few weeks could blow the 11 Pro out of orbit in both camera hardware and software.

Isn't / wasn't the OP7 Pro camera considered to be "trash"? I had the phone and sold it, I am not a photo buff but even I could tell it didn't hold a candle to even my Pixel 3a.

Sounds like you should buy the Huawei P30 Pro and call it a day? I'm thoroughly enjoying my casual shots on my 11 Pro Max. Excellent phone and great camera for my needs.

 

[Super Spartan]

In low light environments, the OPs comments are true.

For outdoor daytime shots and well lit indoors, I completely disagree. I’ve found myself using the ultra-wilde more and more, and been very impressed with the image quality. I agree it doesn’t compete with the other two lenses, but it certainly not a “complete failure” as the OP suggests. For landscape shots, it’s fantastic.

Here’s a photo I shot over the weekend using the ultra-wide....

Wow that photo is just stunning man!

 

[zorinlynx]

These are great examples. These are photos that would have never been captured, if not for the Ultra Wide Lens in our pockets. I am 46 years old, when I was a teen we had film cameras and of course we never had them with us. To take a photo like that was near impossible. The first camera phones were horrible, but at the time they were great because we had a camera with us at all times to capture memories. That's the beauty of today, iPhone or any phone. Arguing about a little grain if you zoom in on a beautiful photo is pointless. The photo was captured. That is the beauty of technology.

Edit: We all have our photo library from the beginning of our digital lives. If you look at old photos, enjoy the memories, don't zoom in and look for every imperfection.

This photo of me taken in 1999 would not exist if my friend hadn't been carrying around what was, at the time, an expensive digital camera. The photo is priceless to me, no matter how grainy it might be.

We can now take photos any time anywhere with a device that's always in our pocket. If you NEED the best quality, get an SLR or mirrorless. But the fact that we now always have an amazing camera with us is indisputably awesome. Quibbling about how the quality of the ultra wide lens not being perfect is ridiculous; we didn't HAVE that lens before without having to carry around an additional device!

 

[Markgnyc2]

This photo of me taken in 1999 would not exist if my friend hadn't been carrying around what was, at the time, an expensive digital camera. The photo is priceless to me, no matter how grainy it might be.

We can now take photos any time anywhere with a device that's always in our pocket. If you NEED the best quality, get an SLR or mirrorless. But the fact that we now always have an amazing camera with us is indisputably awesome. Quibbling about how the quality of the ultra wide lens not being perfect is ridiculous; we didn't HAVE that lens before without having to carry around an additional device!

View attachment 865777

Exactly my thoughts. And that is a great pic.

 

[eyeseeyou]

no chance of competing.

Competing with who? DSLR’s?
[automerge]1570033962[/automerge]

This photo of me taken in 1999 would not exist if my friend hadn't been carrying around what was, at the time, an expensive digital camera. The photo is priceless to me, no matter how grainy it might be.

We can now take photos any time anywhere with a device that's always in our pocket. If you NEED the best quality, get an SLR or mirrorless. But the fact that we now always have an amazing camera with us is indisputably awesome. Quibbling about how the quality of the ultra wide lens not being perfect is ridiculous; we didn't HAVE that lens before without having to carry around an additional device!

View attachment 865777

The other part of this discussion is that historically a “high quality” picture’s main output was for print. I’m not sure the UW lens was meant to produce pictures meant for print although if one were to print these “bad pictures” in a standard size they’d be perfectly fine for non professional use.

maybe the op is complaining the UW lens does not produce professional quality pictures.

 

[Khedron]

Competing with who? DSLR’s?

Competing with the standard wide lens.

Phone cameras use computational power to overcome the limitations of the lenses and sensors. But Apple's new Deep Fusion method is only designed to work with the wide lens, so it's like they've already abandoned the ultra-wide at launch so they can sell a better version next year.

 

[Nikhil72]

Again, fun to use in its current iteration. And yes this is compressed.

 

[Super Spartan]

sorry for the dumb question but this is my first iPhone. How to switch between lenses and more importantly, how to switch between wide angle lens ultra wide lens?