My iPhone 4 has suppressed my desire to get a new digital camera. I only take picture to capture the moment of something good, not really in nearly the same fashion as a photographer would with a professional camera. My 3mp digital camera does get shots anyway, so this new iPhone 4 camera + video is everything I need all in one. This is a huge bonus because half the time when something happens that is warrants snapping a picture, I don't have a legitimate camera available, but I pretty much carry my phone everywhere with me. I love my new iPhone.
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 4's Camera Capabilities Evaluated
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
24 vs 30 fps
generally, higher-end video cameras shoot at 24fps (the rate used in theatrical movies etc) or at 30 and lower-end cameras shoot only at 30fps (the rate used for television broadcasts).
There's some tricky math involved, but you can approximate that the shutter speed is 1/(frame rate * 2) meaning 24fps has 1/50th second exposures and 30fps has 1/60th. All else equal, the faster (shorter) exposure will freeze motion better, but be darker/ have more noise.
generally, higher-end video cameras shoot at 24fps (the rate used in theatrical movies etc) or at 30 and lower-end cameras shoot only at 30fps (the rate used for television broadcasts).
There's some tricky math involved, but you can approximate that the shutter speed is 1/(frame rate * 2) meaning 24fps has 1/50th second exposures and 30fps has 1/60th. All else equal, the faster (shorter) exposure will freeze motion better, but be darker/ have more noise.
There's no reason Apple couldn't allow raw capture... what a great combo with iPhoto or Aperture. Maybe we should send Jobs a note?
Apple should again start making dedicated Cameras and Camcorders. Maybe they will in the future
They have done so in the past, but I think you already knew that!
In any case, the market for dedicated cameras (exclude DSLRs) is declining. People can get good quality pictures from their smartphones. Cameras aren't cheap. A good point and shoot will run you upwards of $200. And you have to worry about things like battery, charger, etc. when traveling. It's also easier to upload pictures and videos from a smartphone to Flicker, Photobucket, etc. than a regular camera.
Well I think it is a non issue like he said. My new phone came this morning, yes I ordered a bumper for it at the same time. Bumper on the phone, no problems, the signal is much better than it was on my 3GS. And the bumper will stop the corners/edges getting scuffed.
And back on topic, the pictures I have been taking with this things today are just amazing!!!!!!
I have never been bothered about my phone having a camera but in February I was was having dinner in The London in NYC (Gordon Ramseys place) with my wife and kids and sister in law. No camera apart from my 3GS, pics we awful because no flash. But now, no worries!!!!!!!! Woo Hoo
I'd like to see this as well, but I'm pretty sure no one picking up an iphone in the first 2 days (other than the guys who demolish them) are going to try the drop test on purpose.
"Sweetie, what are you doing?"
"I just got my iPhone bumper, and I'm seeing how high it bounces, why?"
I posted the link to the PC World article in the iPhone forum. It looked at the same phones; it's probable the two did the testing together.
Even if the Boy Genius report wasn't available, it doesn't mean the Macworld comparison was any less legitimate.
Even if the Boy Genius report wasn't available, it doesn't mean the Macworld comparison was any less legitimate.
For the low end market of video cameras, 30fps is better. People just want less jittery videos. No one that works in high end video will even think about considering a phone for their film.
"supporting Apple's claim that pure megapixel count is not a sufficient measure of image quality"
Yeah, apple was the first to ever say this. This has been a fact of the industry for years. But that's the way advertising goes. Nothing better then being the field and have someone ask you about your DSLR while they are holding a point and shoot and they feel good because "theirs take better pictures because they have more megapixels".
Yeah, apple was the first to ever say this. This has been a fact of the industry for years. But that's the way advertising goes. Nothing better then being the field and have someone ask you about your DSLR while they are holding a point and shoot and they feel good because "theirs take better pictures because they have more megapixels".
No where did anyone say Apple was the first to make this claim. Apple just made a claim. And tests/experiments have proved it to be true. Nothing was said about who made it first.
you're talking about two separate issues. The yellow tint IS a manufacture default that resolves it self once the bonding agent has a chance to set. Steve's "non-issue" comment was towards the "grip of death" that everyone has suddenly taken issue with; presumably because apple was bold enough to take a new approach to the cellphone antenna. No other company has really made mention of steps they were taking to improve performance, therefore no one's thought to see if the issue occurs with other devices. And why did we begin testing the issue with other devices? Because Steve said other devices have the same issue.
People need to stop ripping apple whenever something doesn't work 100% of the way they'd expect it to.
The reason that droid video is so soft is because the iPhone is too close to the lens for it to focus. Every lens has what's called "close focus distance," and it's the minimum distance that an object needs to be from the lens for the lens to be able to focus. (Poor man's test: hold a finger up in front of you and bring it slowly close to your eye... at some point you won't be able to see it clearly). You've exceeded that range, which is why the focus looked fine outside and you're unable to obtain a "lock" on it inside.
I don't have a dog in this race, but if you're trying to do "apples to apples" (well, you know what I mean!) then you should do a better test... or at least know what you're doing first.
I don't have a dog in this race, but if you're trying to do "apples to apples" (well, you know what I mean!) then you should do a better test... or at least know what you're doing first.
Photographers have known for years that -
High Megapixels + Tiny Sensor = Noisy Pictures
Give me a good quality 5MP sensor any day!
Go check out Canon's newest flagship P&S S90, It forgoes the 12MP sensor used in many of their cheaper units for a 10MP and F2.0 lens. I has me shelving my D300 most of the time as it is the most amazing pocket camera I have ever used.
High Megapixels + Tiny Sensor = Noisy Pictures
Give me a good quality 5MP sensor any day!
Go check out Canon's newest flagship P&S S90, It forgoes the 12MP sensor used in many of their cheaper units for a 10MP and F2.0 lens. I has me shelving my D300 most of the time as it is the most amazing pocket camera I have ever used.
Wow, am I the only one who thinks the Droid X video sample (outdoors) looks way better than the iPhone 4 sample? I watched it first without the audio and I assumed the first half was iPhone 4 and the second half Droid, but turns out it was the opposite. I agree the Droid stuff looks a little over saturated, but the iPhone video looks washed out and blurry by comparison with lots of exposure hunting. Not impressed.
That's true, but the focus is tied to the exposure. It would be nice to set the exposure without having to focus on a particular object. I don't think it would be too tough to incorporate a slider to adjust
exposure independently of focus. Just an
idea.
It's not just you, Android phones a cheap disposable garbage. The iPhone is a masterpeice as where the Android phones are just a price of crap.
Considering those lists include REAL point and shoot cameras, as well as a standalone HD video camera, I'm not surprised that they are not the top of the lists.