There does seem to a big shift once you hit a 1" sensor. The photos coming off Xiaomi and Oppo on their 1" sensors is impressive. You lose that crunchy over processed look you see often with Samsung, Google and Apple and get a much more natural look.Interesting, guess my 13PM will have to last another 2 years
But even a 18PM will never replace my DSLR …
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 18 Pro Rumored to Be More Like DSLR Camera With This Upgrade
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
DSLR? I wouldn’t go that far.
But it’s amazing the camera technology smartphone makers have been able to put in such a tiny lens. But it’s still a tiny lens. That’ll only get you so far.
But it’s amazing the camera technology smartphone makers have been able to put in such a tiny lens. But it’s still a tiny lens. That’ll only get you so far.
Exactly. This might be useful for filming to better control shutter speed but why not just use an electronic ND filter? Then you don't have moving aperture blades and you can still shoot video wide open.
Last edited:
To make an iphone like a DSLR or mirrorless (Nikon Z 8, Z 6 III etc) Apple would have to install a 24x36mm sensor in the phone with lenses to match. Doing this would make the phone as big as a DSLR, however, coz physics.
Comparing the 2022 iPhone Pro against the [superb] 2024 Xiaomi is a bit disingenuous, but certainly we agree that [all else equal] a bigger sensor is better. However IMO all else never is equal. I for one would not want the Xiaomi in my pocket replacing the iPhone PM, despite the great captures that the Xiaomi is capable of.
Note that a competent photog using an iPhone 16 Pro need never get "that crunchy over processed look you see often with Samsung, Google and Apple" if the photog simply shoots RAW and controls camera movement properly. I have made thousands of captures with each iPhone generation without ever getting the often-reported crunchy over processed look that you discuss. Not that I do not have many bad captures that get deleted, because I do. But none of my thousands of captures, including the hundreds of deleted pix, look crunchy and over processed.
My premise is that the crunchy over-processed look results when improperly thought out photos are attempted with poor camera control, poor lighting, etc.; then the iPhone creates a viewable capture with extreme computational adjustments. The solution is not new algorithms, the solution is users learning how to properly use a smartphone to capture images.
Last edited:
They mean "more DSLR-like" in how the camera lens of the iPhone will stick way out from the phone's body, just like a SLR camera. 😋
Last edited:
The iPhone just needs a bigger sensor as the pictures are grainy and not sharp like looking through your own eyes 👀
An iPhone has little in common with a phone in its original, or specific meaning. Language changes and takes on new meaning. DSLR means what you mean in specifics. In general use it's just become shorthand for a fancy pants camera.
f8, and being there. Hell, Ansel Adams used f64 and above (though that's more akin to f/11-16 on a 35mm).
Last edited:
Well what DSLR (or more appropriately in late 2024) or Mirrorless are we comparing to?
In 3rd Party RAW (Because the stock app is garbage), My iPhone (16 Pro) takes pictures that rival and often beat those from my old 7D MK1 (2009) in low light with even a 2.8 L lens. I would even argue this would be the case as far back as my 13 pro. So depending on what DSLR you compare against, mobile phones are coming up quickly. I also don't encounter purple fringing / chromatic aberration or other image artifacts like I do / would using a low quality or kit lens like I would with that camera. The same (in a notably lesser degree) can also be said with the 2014 MKII 7D.
Is the 16 Pro as good as my current Canon Mirrorless cameras? No, but the current iPhones are far closer to current high end cameras than when the first iPhone, or even the later 3GS was early in the smartphone days. Will the 16 Pro focus as fast and do sports as well as that 7D? No. Will it fire a speed light natively like my 7D? No! Will it take good portraits with as much DOF as a high end wide aperture lens on the 7D? no! All that said, the delta between those cameras (even 10yo 7D MKI) and the iPhone is getting narrower every year.
I keep reading the argument about sensor size, and agree 100% on principle simply due to the physics of capturing photons. However, the “never” argument assumes phone sensors will not ever increase in size, which is an incorrect assumption as we have already seen sensors increase in size since the introduction of camera phones. This is especially true with brands outside of Apple in recent years.
Now, am I saying that phones will surpass that of a Prosumer / Pro camera? Not likely, but not because it can't happen, mostly because it is a path of diminishing returns as device costs (to attempt that) would likely far exceed that of what consumers would ever want to spend on a consumer (even "pro") iPhone.
In 3rd Party RAW (Because the stock app is garbage), My iPhone (16 Pro) takes pictures that rival and often beat those from my old 7D MK1 (2009) in low light with even a 2.8 L lens. I would even argue this would be the case as far back as my 13 pro. So depending on what DSLR you compare against, mobile phones are coming up quickly. I also don't encounter purple fringing / chromatic aberration or other image artifacts like I do / would using a low quality or kit lens like I would with that camera. The same (in a notably lesser degree) can also be said with the 2014 MKII 7D.
Is the 16 Pro as good as my current Canon Mirrorless cameras? No, but the current iPhones are far closer to current high end cameras than when the first iPhone, or even the later 3GS was early in the smartphone days. Will the 16 Pro focus as fast and do sports as well as that 7D? No. Will it fire a speed light natively like my 7D? No! Will it take good portraits with as much DOF as a high end wide aperture lens on the 7D? no! All that said, the delta between those cameras (even 10yo 7D MKI) and the iPhone is getting narrower every year.
I keep reading the argument about sensor size, and agree 100% on principle simply due to the physics of capturing photons. However, the “never” argument assumes phone sensors will not ever increase in size, which is an incorrect assumption as we have already seen sensors increase in size since the introduction of camera phones. This is especially true with brands outside of Apple in recent years.
Now, am I saying that phones will surpass that of a Prosumer / Pro camera? Not likely, but not because it can't happen, mostly because it is a path of diminishing returns as device costs (to attempt that) would likely far exceed that of what consumers would ever want to spend on a consumer (even "pro") iPhone.
For me, there are discernible improvements annually in the iPhone camera system. My old eyes are perhaps not as sharp as the younger folks, but I am happy with the new images with every new iPhone I buy.
When was the last time you pulled a photo album off of a shelf to look at pictures?
I think most of ours are in some storage box someplace. The few important images that we printed and framed of family members are on a shelf in the living room.
We took literally thousands of photos on our seven week trip in seven countries in South Africa. I have only a few as screen savers or home page. The rest are "stored" on our laptops as the Leica and Canon photos were not uploaded to the iDevices and we still have the "film" cards.
What is most important to me is the iPhone works as a phone and now even has emergency satellite communications capability.
I marvel at the size and weight as compared to the heavy as a brick and huge size early mobile devices. It has more computing power than all the computers together that put a man on the moon.
I marvel at my Apple Watch that can make and receive calls just like used in the Dick Tracey cartoon strip of the 1950s.
I am thankful for all the improvements and recognize there are some I personally do not care for, but progress has never been in a straight line, there has always been a few hiccups along the way.
When was the last time you pulled a photo album off of a shelf to look at pictures?
I think most of ours are in some storage box someplace. The few important images that we printed and framed of family members are on a shelf in the living room.
We took literally thousands of photos on our seven week trip in seven countries in South Africa. I have only a few as screen savers or home page. The rest are "stored" on our laptops as the Leica and Canon photos were not uploaded to the iDevices and we still have the "film" cards.
What is most important to me is the iPhone works as a phone and now even has emergency satellite communications capability.
I marvel at the size and weight as compared to the heavy as a brick and huge size early mobile devices. It has more computing power than all the computers together that put a man on the moon.
I marvel at my Apple Watch that can make and receive calls just like used in the Dick Tracey cartoon strip of the 1950s.
I am thankful for all the improvements and recognize there are some I personally do not care for, but progress has never been in a straight line, there has always been a few hiccups along the way.
Maybe for non-action shots. Try indoor high school basketball with a 70-200 f/2.8, 1/250th shutter, ISO 3200, f/2.8 ... the 7D1 can pull that off no problem. Any iphone will be a joke in those conditions. All the iPhone photos will be nothing but smeary blur. Check the exif for any iPhone night shot: almost always like 1/30th second or so.
All of my San Francisco and other photo projects were done with one lens, a 35mm f/1.4. There is one exception, and that was with using my iPhone.
The Nokia N86 featured a variable aperture and mechanical shutter on a smartphone back in 2009....
Yes, low light shots on a newer (eg my 13PM) are quite good, but that is not so much due to the HW, it’s the SW that does it.
And my 6DII “only” has 24MP, but the sensor is still far more capable than the 48MP on the latest iPhone…
Smartphones have put cameras in billions of hands, most of those billions would have never bought a dedicated camera. Photo sharing has become so popular on social and have driven social media to where it is today.
I welcome every improvement that we will continue to see on smartphone cameras, but it will never replace a DSLR/mirrorless, at least not in my lifetime
Smartphone cameras are the modern-day 110 format.
In the 1970s, they had Kodak 110 cameras (the "iPhone camera" of that era.) And in the 1970s they also had 35mm SLRs (the DSLR/pro-mirrorless of today.)
As Talking Heads said, "same as it ever was."
No smartphone in 2024 is as good as the Nikon F3 35mm SLR, a camera that was designed in the late 1970s.
The smartphones are literally 44-plus years behind pro cameras.
In the 1970s, they had Kodak 110 cameras (the "iPhone camera" of that era.) And in the 1970s they also had 35mm SLRs (the DSLR/pro-mirrorless of today.)
As Talking Heads said, "same as it ever was."
No smartphone in 2024 is as good as the Nikon F3 35mm SLR, a camera that was designed in the late 1970s.
The smartphones are literally 44-plus years behind pro cameras.
Attachments
Last edited:
But the 35mm Film type cameras of that era have mostly gone to digital formats and they still will not fit into a normal pants pocket. The Instamatics and iPhone could and do fit into normal pocket.
Jobs said so correctly, "you take the picture with the camera you have with you". I don't walk around with my Leica around my neck very often but the iPhone is always with me.
So, the iPhone camera gets incrementally better nearly every year because of the newer technology the year before.
I think my V-LUX Leica camera is still a great camera. However, this model has been discontinued by Leica.
Every year Apple comes out with a new iPhone and I can decide if the feature change in the overall device is worth the now over $2,000 acquisition cost. Lately, the changes were not that material that the one change could entice me to upgrade.
Due to the environment changes we see coming, we thought to upgrade all our Apple gear before that option might not be there.
Jobs said so correctly, "you take the picture with the camera you have with you". I don't walk around with my Leica around my neck very often but the iPhone is always with me.
So, the iPhone camera gets incrementally better nearly every year because of the newer technology the year before.
I think my V-LUX Leica camera is still a great camera. However, this model has been discontinued by Leica.
Every year Apple comes out with a new iPhone and I can decide if the feature change in the overall device is worth the now over $2,000 acquisition cost. Lately, the changes were not that material that the one change could entice me to upgrade.
Due to the environment changes we see coming, we thought to upgrade all our Apple gear before that option might not be there.
Yes I agree the smartphone camera is the best camera for 95 percent of folks.
A few years ago my mom asked me for advice on a camera for a trip.
I told her, "just use your phone."
For _snapshooters_ the smartphone cameras are ideal.
If you're not a snapshooter, the smartphone cameras are the worst cameras available. And I can prove that statement. Just ask yourself a question: "I am a 'serious' photography enthusiast or professional photographer. If I, hypothetically speaking, wanted a camera *worse* than the camera on the iPhone 16, what camera would I buy?"
And the answer is: It's hard to buy a worse camera, coz the smartphone cameras are pretty much at the very bottom of the bucket. It's true. Worse than pretty much every Micro four-thirds camera, worse than every single APS-C camera. Worse than every 36x24mm format camera. In total there's got to be a hundred M43, APS-C and 36x24mm format digital cameras available new on the market these days.
The smartphone cameras have teensy, noisy sensors. No lens options other than the pitiful ones that come built-in. No real flash options (weak LED "flashes" do not count.) No comfy grips; severely limited autofocus capabilities. The phones have comically optimistic megapixel counts (for marketing purposes).
Last edited:
You're not wrong, but your argument relies on throwing away form factor. It's like saying everyone who dismissed the iPad as just a big iPhone. If your goal is to take photos of the world around you, the iPhone is the best camera for most people (even serious enthusiasts or professionals), most of the time.
All the people saying “never never never” here ought to watch a little film called An American Tail.
The algorithms are iOS based so I’ve not seen any worthwhile improvement as the OS has progressed.
14 PM, iOS db18.3.x