What? He made no such assertions. Projecting your views onto others is never a good idea.
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 13 Camera Comparison: If You Have an Older iPhone, It's Time to Upgrade
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What? He made no such assertions. Projecting your views onto others is never a good idea.
I will throw my two cents into this debate as an iphone 11 pro max user lol. Like others have said, I do feel like something is wrong with Macrumors iphone 11 in those pic comparisons. Also, the pictures they have don't state they are from the 11 pro it just says iphone 11. I can say my 11 pro max still takes great pics. I know the pics aren't as good as the 12 pro and 13 pro but I say they are still pretty good. I know Mac rumors is a Apple fan site ( we all are if we posting here lol). But upgrading or not depends on the person and their needs/ wants and budget. I don't think the article with meant to tick people off.
Pic I took from last week at a college football game with my 11 pro max. (Not me in the pic but a co worker I was training with for broadcast cameras )
These are some summer pics from my trip to Disney World with my 11 Pro Max
Pic I took from last week at a college football game with my 11 pro max. (Not me in the pic but a co worker I was training with for broadcast cameras )
These are some summer pics from my trip to Disney World with my 11 Pro Max
Last edited:
They're exactly the same cameras (except for the additional tele on the Pro models). This is what BTW made the iPhone 11 exceptional value back in time, unlike today with the 13 vs. Pro case, where the situation is just the opposite.
If the 11 really had this haze problem it would have been “Haze Gate” back when the 11 was new and all the reviewers were comparing it to the 10s. News websites will ravenously post any ”There’s something wrong with the new iphone!” article.
My iPhone X generated haze in certain strong off-axis out of frame sunlight situations due to lens flare caused by the protruding lens barrel and glass cover. My 12 pro has flare issues as well, but worse.
Last edited:
I know back in the day lifeproof cases put some type of plastic wrap over the camera lens which would ruin many camera shots. Not sure if they or any other brands are doing that today but it is something to consider.
I agree that the fact that I don’t see it doesn’t mean others don’t. I was responding to a post that said EVERYONE can see it. I cannot.
I don’t care if you believe me - I see no difference, and many other people have posted on here in the last few years saying they cannot either.
As for not owning a device, I own the 2018 12.9” ipad pro, and the iphone 13 pro max. I have shown pictures of these on here, proving I own them (by showing them with an unentered post here, which I then entered afterward ,proving that the person who posts here as cmaier must have the device in hand).
So now where’s your proof that *everyone* can see the difference?
This sure is the worst article this site has published. You don’t need to own a iPhone 11 to realize the comparison is all wrong.
I disagree. I also I don't own an iPhone 11 and still believe the comparison is not wrong. And that's from watching the video 5 or 6 times with an increasing critical eye each time.
The iPhone 11 has a lens flare profile very similar to my previously owned iPhone X, which is not surprising. See my SF Ocean Beach photo a few posts up above. Lens flare can produce artifacts in the shape of an arc as in a photo I posted earlier in this thread from my iPhone 12. This is due to the protruding lens housing that has a shiny from surface, and a protective glass cover with a chamfered (beveled) edge that sits proud of the housing close to a millimeter. That's a poor design letting off-axis out of frame unwanted strong light reflecting off the surface of the housing to entered the glass's chamfered edge and then into the lens housing.
Lens flare can also show up as patchy loss of contrast and/or haze in some areas of the image, and is caused by the same lens barrel and cover glass design. That's what is seen in the background of the beach photo I put up a few posts above. The Sun itself was far out of the frame, to the left, probably around 30 degrees above the horizon, off-axis, yet produced flare. The good news, in this particular case, is that haze looks like fine fog mist which still works OK for my photo.
I see nothing wrong or inconsistent with what Dan posted based on my extensive use of iPhones over the years making many thousands of photos. To suggest he's being shady and unethical trying fool MR readers as some have accused him of in this thread is just plain wrong.
Well, the shot at 1:34 (and, in the written version, the very first one) shows haze & smearing with no Sun directly shining on the iPhones. There surely is some sunhine but far-far away. What could have caused the haze, then?
1:54 "The iPhone 6 is producing darker images because it has a smaller sensor" - this casuality is completely wrong when speaking about daylight pics. (You don't need to push the ISO that strongly in daylight.) If that's were true, ALL tele or ultrawide shots on the multi-lens iPhones would be considerably darker than photos taken with the wide (main) lens on the same phone. Or, any point & shoot camera pics would be significantly darker (even ones in good lighting!) than the ones taken with large(r)-sensor cameras. It's mostly because of auto-HDR/SmartHDR later added by Apple lifting up the underexposed areas of the newer models' photos that they seem to be brighter, not because they have larger sensors.
Citation from the article: "The iPhone 11 Pro has some haze issues that tend to affect most photos, and it's more noticeable at night and in the afternoon when the sun is low." - noticed the word "MOST"? He's not speaking about 1% of the photos where the sunlight reflection could indeed cause problems but MOST. And he even mentions the haze is visible when there's no Sun at all. Again, I point you to the very first photo in the comparison. No direct light sources directly shining on the iPhone lens - nevertheless, the photo is still hazy. I've seen such cases several times on different cameras - when my lens was dirty. (Or on absolutely low-quality, at least 15-year-old cameras by default. Which the iPhone 11 is definitely NOT.)
That is, his article / video is full of complete misinformation. Again, again and again, he states the haze is visible in most iPhone 11 pictures. He's completely wrong.
I really hope the MR folks learn something about photo- & videography before stating absolutely wrong stuff like the "a smaller sensor always results in darker pictures" stuff above, LOL.
And again, again and again, I challenge anyone to point me hazy images from my photo albums of thousands of iPhone 11 shots.
Last edited:
Why do I say the MR folks don't know much about videography either: it was the same MacRumors that just blindly repeated what Tim Cook stated in the iJustine ad, excuse me, 'interview':
"In the nearly 15 minutes' long interview, Cook describes the new camera features of the iPhone 13, specifically Cinematic Mode, as a "mindblowing" addition to the iPhone that places it on par with professional high-end video equipment."
Noone knowing anything about videography would have stated such a BS. It's just impossible to properly emulate for example focus racking or bokeh with computational photography. Stuff like hair will always (or, at least, currently still does) cause problems. And almost all Cinematic Mode reviews mention this very problem. So much for the iPhone 13 being "on par with professional high-end video equipment".
They should have at least added "we do have serious doubts about his statement" instead of reciting Cook's blatant marketing BS / lie without any comment. Or, at least, wouldn't have repeated Cook's lie at all. Anyone knowing about anything videography would have chosen NOT to repeat Cook's lie, or at least not without a "fact checking" additional comment.
Last edited:
Yup. However, MR should have at least added a "fact check" comment on Cook's blatant advertising / marketing lie instead of telling the same lie as truth. We all know fact checkers were in abundance a year ago - I should have expected some kind of fact checking with regards to Cook's lies, excuse me, "facts" too.
All this assuming MR did at all spot Cook's lie, of course; which I sincerely doubt, given the major factual mistakes in their current, related-field (photography) article certainly showing they don't really know much about the field.
Thanx for the heads-up - I'm going to cancel my iPhone 13 order. Stat. I thought for sure it would compete with the $98K Arri Alexa LF I had my eye on.
Regarding lens flare... I don't have any photos with lens flare on my website gallery other than the one above where it adds to the image. Why? Because I don't post photos with defects. They get culled.
Last edited:
commercial puffery is not lying. Just like drinking Bud Light won’t make bikini-clad women appear in your living room with a party dog.
Cook should have added the word "almost". His statement indeed came over as "the iPhone is indeed equivalent to a Hollywood rig" - this is why MacRumors has also interpreted and recited his statement ("[that places it] on par with professional high-end video equipment."). This is indeed misguiding prospective buyers who don't know it's in no way true and with the present state of computational videography in 13 Pros it's just impossible to produce artefact-free cinematic videos - videos that Hollywood rig would indeed produce. A single "almost" word (like in "[that places it] almost on par with professional high-end video equipment.") would have sufficed. But it's nowhere to be found. This is why I consider this a lie (on Cook's part) in order to increase sales.
I use Flickr as a dumping place for my iPhone shots because I don't have the time to go over them and keep the best / remove the bad ones. I only do this with shots with quality gear (Sigma Merrill cameras etc.) This is why I've invited anyone to check out my iPhone11 photo albums and show me photos with haze. There may be several misfocused / shaky photos there but I can guarantee very few hazy ones because, as opposed to what the current "review" states ("The iPhone 11 Pro has some haze issues that tend to affect most photos, and it's more noticeable at night and in the afternoon when the sun is low."), the iPhone 11 does NOT tend to be hazy, only in really extreme cases (say, 1%) caused by direct light sources entering the lens.
Considering well-known filmmakers have made feature films (including Sean Baker's "Tangerine" and Steven Sodebergh's "Unsane") even without this "cinematic" feature\, people need to get past the gear p**n and go out and tell compelling stories. The camera to do it, depending on the story, is there for them right now.
Did anyone notice that 13P main camera photos are actually softer than the ones in the previous iPhones? This is also visibile in these macrumors samples. For example in the rocks, or foliage. My iPhone 8 in good light is always sharper.
It's not my 13P which is faulty, because I've seen similar threads on dpreview forum and elsewhere, and I can see it from samples of others too. They look all like this. Don't know why but it's like that. Maybe the bigger lens / pixels reduce the DOF. But I'm not sure it's that. HDR and noise is clearly better. But if you check up close maybe photographing text the slightly out of focus / less detail is clearly visible compared to previous phones. Tele lens seems very good instead.
It's not my 13P which is faulty, because I've seen similar threads on dpreview forum and elsewhere, and I can see it from samples of others too. They look all like this. Don't know why but it's like that. Maybe the bigger lens / pixels reduce the DOF. But I'm not sure it's that. HDR and noise is clearly better. But if you check up close maybe photographing text the slightly out of focus / less detail is clearly visible compared to previous phones. Tele lens seems very good instead.
You mean https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4601849#forum-post-65514319 ? I think this explanation has hit the nail on the head:
"Maybe the aperture has gotten too large? With standalone cameras, stopping down the lens usually improves sharpness across the frame, but unfortunately you can't do anything about the aperture on an iPhone. Even great cameras like the Fuji X100 series tend to be soft when shot wide open, so I imagine designing an f1.5 lens on such a small scale would be a challenge."
I remember some years ago some dual-aperture Samsung(?) high-end phone delivered significantly worse results at f/1.5 vs. its other, f/2.8 aperture settings for exactly the same reasons.
BTW, this doesn't bode well for the rumoured 48 Mpixel lens, assuming it will also support native-res and/or 8k video shooting (as opposed to plain pixel binning to 12 Mpixel photos and 4k videos). That is, the sensor just won't be able to resolve that many pixels because of the soft(ish) lens not providing even 12 Mpixels of resolution.
===
BTW, this DPR post may also provide at least part of the explanation WRT QA and the like: "It still captures great photos but probably this is a result of bigger pixels and less DOF. Or maybe a slight but very diffused manufacturing defect. Who knows. If it is I don't think things will get better in production for several months, looks like the camera module in Vietnam is the bottleneck in the supply chain right now and I don't expect the quality control to be super tight."
Last edited:
Alas, it might be.
It's not out of focus, it's the effect of a cheap lense wide open. I'm looking at RAW shots of the 13 and the 8 and the lack of detail of the 13 is there. Looking at HEIC the difference is sometimes less obvious, but because the iPhone 13 Pro applies very aggressive sharpening. Probably only a photographer would notice, and most people won't. Quite sad honestly, but it's true that everything else, color balance, noise levels etc. are better on the 13
Oh, yeah, that last post is mine 😆
Anyway I'm looking at these samples https://www.hardwarezone.com.sg/fea...21-review-singapore-price-specs/photography-2 and the 13 and 13 mini are a tad sharper than the Pros, especially visible with text. But all have a little "halo" around text. I'm sure an older iPhone would appear sharper in the same conditions
You mean the halos in the pics at https://assets.hardwarezone.com/img/2021/09/iphone13promax-wide1.jpg and https://assets.hardwarezone.com/img/2021/09/iphone13-wide1.jpg ? The Pro seems to have stronger halos (meaning stronger sharpening applied to the JPG / HEIC file), but this can at least partly be caused by the iPhone 13's pic being a bit brighter, which somewhat reduces the visibility of halos.
However, I really wouldn't be surprised if this softness was caused by the too-bright lens + too large sensor combo in the Pro. We've seen cases like this in even the smartphone scene, starting with even the Nokia 808 with its gigantic (1/1.2") sensor.
Yes I was referring to those. I can easily get the same on my photos, and the 8 in comparison is always sharper without halos.
And yeah, also thanks to you (I must have overlooked that comment) I think I'm reaching the same conclusion. Every sample I see is like this so it must be a specificity shared between all the 13 line and worse on the 13 Pros which have an even bigger aperture. Lenses too big and too fast are great for low light photography and less noise, but with fixed aperture it all comes at the expense of sharpness. Hence the super aggressive sharpening hoping that people would not notice (to be fair you won't notice until you zoom in on the photos). It's no secret I love the tele lens, and the wide lens. I'll keep my 13P as I have little use of the 1x lens, but it's a little sad anyway. Thanks for bearing with me.