iPhone 6 Camera worse than previous models?

[ApfelKuchen]

The iPhone shoots RAW images. The RAW files are running around 3.8 GB based on the shooting I've done so far. JPG processing is done on the output/export.

It's not a question of whether JPG compression is overly-aggressive in the camera, but it may be overly-aggressive when generating a JPG for output. Even then, without looking closely at each image for JPG artifacts, it's hard to judge "aggressive." It's not just a matter of compression, but the dimensions of the output file (X pixels by Y pixels). Two programs can very well output different dimension images as well as JPG compression, depending on the intended purpose of the output (small, medium, and large email, for example).

In comparing the iPhone 5/iPhone 6 shots, I see differences in white balance, which is not surprising. And since both cameras are making independent exposures, it's certainly possible, from one shot to the next, to see a difference between two different cameras, each with a different imaging engine. Difference, however, is not necessarily a measure of quality. The internal metering systems are one of the ways camera makers distinguish their products.

All I know is my own experience - the iPhone 6 camera has been producing great results for me. Sharp, well exposed, good contrast, low noise... It seems to beat every digital camera I've owned, except for my current MFT large-sensor baby.

 

[BuffordT]

Wow! That's a pretty big difference. Quick question, how are you pulling the images off? Are you using iPhoto? grabbing them directly from the phone (file system). I wonder why the big difference.

I am emailing them-full resolution. I think the native camera app is just compresing the jpg too much. That is why the file size is smaller on the native app than the 3rd party and than my iPhone 5. So we know it's not just IOS 8.02.

 

[appleii.c]

The iPhone shoots RAW images. The RAW files are running around 3.8 GB based on the shooting I've done so far. JPG processing is done on the output/export.

It's not a question of whether JPG compression is overly-aggressive in the camera, but it may be overly-aggressive when generating a JPG for output. Even then, without looking closely at each image for JPG artifacts, it's hard to judge "aggressive." It's not just a matter of compression, but the dimensions of the output file (X pixels by Y pixels). Two programs can very well output different dimension images as well as JPG compression, depending on the intended purpose of the output (small, medium, and large email, for example).

In comparing the iPhone 5/iPhone 6 shots, I see differences in white balance, which is not surprising. And since both cameras are making independent exposures, it's certainly possible, from one shot to the next, to see a difference between two different cameras, each with a different imaging engine. Difference, however, is not necessarily a measure of quality. The internal metering systems are one of the ways camera makers distinguish their products.

All I know is my own experience - the iPhone 6 camera has been producing great results for me. Sharp, well exposed, good contrast, low noise... It seems to beat every digital camera I've owned, except for my current MFT large-sensor baby.

This is what I was curious about. There seemed to be a big difference in the two apps, using the same hardware. I believe (don't have it in front of me now so I may be wrong) that iPhoto has an option to import the raw image instead of the jpeg. I wondered if the way the photos are being pulled off the phone are whats causing the difference.

 

[that be me]

Cortex supposedly upscales images to 13 megapixels for the 5s. Perhaps it is doing the same for the 6 and 6+ too. That might explain the difference in file sizes. Cortex also gets its images by taking multiple images of the subject and stitching them together to get a sharper image. I think it's just in how these apps process the raw data they're fed.

 

[appleii.c]

I am emailing them-full resolution. I think the native camera app is just compresing the jpg too much. That is why the file size is smaller on the native app than the 3rd party and than my iPhone 5. So we know it's not just IOS 8.02.

Could be, man. that was quite a difference in the two shots. I wonder what the difference is just pulling the two files out directly.

 

[BuffordT]

The iPhone shoots RAW images. The RAW files are running around 3.8 GB based on the shooting I've done so far. JPG processing is done on the output/export.

It's not a question of whether JPG compression is overly-aggressive in the camera, but it may be overly-aggressive when generating a JPG for output. Even then, without looking closely at each image for JPG artifacts, it's hard to judge "aggressive." It's not just a matter of compression, but the dimensions of the output file (X pixels by Y pixels). Two programs can very well output different dimension images as well as JPG compression, depending on the intended purpose of the output (small, medium, and large email, for example).

In comparing the iPhone 5/iPhone 6 shots, I see differences in white balance, which is not surprising. And since both cameras are making independent exposures, it's certainly possible, from one shot to the next, to see a difference between two different cameras, each with a different imaging engine. Difference, however, is not necessarily a measure of quality. The internal metering systems are one of the ways camera makers distinguish their products.

All I know is my own experience - the iPhone 6 camera has been producing great results for me. Sharp, well exposed, good contrast, low noise... It seems to beat every digital camera I've owned, except for my current MFT large-sensor baby.

It does appear the Cortex app is upscalling to 12mp(3072x4088). But even with the upscalling, wouldn't the compression be responsible for blurry edges and artifacts all other things being equal?

 

[iosuser]

The iPhone 6 JPEG engine is a big step back from iPhone 4 to 5s, using the stock camera app. Noise reduction way way too aggressive as is JPEG compression.

Fortunately a forum member mentioned the 645 Pro camera app. It allows total control of th camera, including different JPEG quality up to TIFF.

Well worth $4. Have a look at the difference.

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/20016247/

Heres a sample of the horrific JPEG processing from the iPhone 6 posted by another member.

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/20010325/

 

[lke]

I think that some people have issues with the photos of their iphone 6 because they download them with different software. I always use iphoto to transfer pictures.

I have checked some photos of my iphone 6 with iphoto of my mac and I see that they go from 1.6mb to 3.8mb of size.

Try transferring your photos with other software because they quality of the iphone 6 photos is great.

 

[BuffordT]

I think that some people have issues with the photos of their iphone 6 because they download them with different software. I always use iphoto to transfer pictures.

I have checked some photos of my iphone 6 with iphoto of my mac and I see that they go from 1.6mb to 3.8mb of size.

Try transferring your photos with other software because they quality of the iphone 6 photos is great.

The file size depends on the amount of information in the picture. A picture of a white piece of paper will have a smaller file size than a colorful bowl of fruit.

Yes, you can shrink the image size when emailing but sending actual size or pulling it off via lightning cable will yield the same full resolution size.

 

[terraphantm]

It does appear the Cortex app is upscalling to 12mp(3072x4088). But even with the upscalling, wouldn't the compression be responsible for blurry edges and artifacts all other things being equal?

That sure does make it seem like the smudging is due to Apple's JPEG algorithm. Hopefully it'll be fixed in an update.

 

[Zxxv]

The iPhone compresses the pictures because when it up loads to iCloud Photo stream it drains the battery too much. Apple did this on purpose to speed up the iPhone and save battery life.

If you use ProCamera 7 and save the photos as uncompressed TIFF files when they are uploaded to photo stream your battery just goes right down quick. and I mean quick. You can avoid this by saving them to the light room and then only uploading the ones you want or transferring them to your Mac.

 

[BuffordT]

Here is another example. Cropped.

Left is native camera, right is Cortex.

I am not sure if Apple thought smaller, more highly compressed pictures is what we all wanted, but I sure as heck don't.

 

[vanitytriplex]

How so its duller in color?

Sweetie you expect anything less from fan boys ?

 

[Gincoma]

Sweetie you expect anything less from fan boys ?

What the hell is a fan boy??? Seriously you and other posters throw that name out like candy on halloween. I like apple over android am I a fan boy??? No offense

 

[BuffordT]

What the hell is a fan boy??? Seriously you and other posters throw that name out like candy on halloween. I like apple over android am I a fan boy??? No offense

An apple fan boy is someone who is blindly in love with Apple. Any defect in an Apple product is blamed on the user by the fan boys. They can not think objectively. I would say half off all users here are AFB's.

 

[Gincoma]

An apple fan boy is someone who is blindly in love with Apple. Any defect in an Apple product is blamed on the user by the fan boys. They can not think objectively. I would say half off all users here are AFB's.

Good point, there is always going to be fan boys to any brand why does everyone fight it though, its weird.

 

[BuffordT]

Are there any other camera apps that allow you to choose the compression or file format of the pics?

 

[ddublu]

I emailed original pics yesterday and 5 of them ended up being 6mb, total. That seems so low. The pics were of sunset at the Huntington Beach pier in California. Plenty of data in each pic and just before loss of light. Does Camera+ treat pics pretty well? For some reason, I used the stock app for these pics yet I normally use Camera+. ~1mb per pic won't cut for canvas 16x20's, I don't think.

 

[ToddH]

Here are two pictures. One one the left is taken with my 6, the one on the right is taken with my iPhone 5. The 6 appears duller and the file size is 1.1mb. The picture taken with the 5 has more vivid colors and is 1.7mb. Any reason the 5 picture file size is 50% larger than the 6?

I don't think that it is worse. You have to remember that the iPhone will expose the area of the screen that you touch so you might want to take a photograph without touching the screen so that the iPhone will not sample the exposure in that area. The darker one may be a result of that camera trying to meter the white background. Also I think you should try a photo with HDR on. You did not specify if it was used or not. For example, check this photo out. It is nice and clean for the new iPhone camera!

 

[BuffordT]

I don't think that it is worse. You have to remember that the iPhone will expose the area of the screen that you touch so you might want to take a photograph without touching the screen so that the iPhone will not sample the exposure in that area. The darker one may be a result of that camera trying to meter the white background. Also I think you should try a photo with HDR on. You did not specify if it was used or not. For example, check this photo out. It is nice and clean for the new iPhone camera!

It was taken without touching the screen. The 6 pictures come out darker. Even when focusing on the exact spot, the 6 consistently produces slightly darker images. HDR was not used.

Where is the exif data on that picture?

----------

I emailed original pics yesterday and 5 of them ended up being 6mb, total. That seems so low. The pics were of sunset at the Huntington Beach pier in California. Plenty of data in each pic and just before loss of light. Does Camera+ treat pics pretty well? For some reason, I used the stock app for these pics yet I normally use Camera+. ~1mb per pic won't cut for canvas 16x20's, I don't think.

When you plug your phone into your computer and pull the pics off that way, are they the same size?

Most of the pics taken on my 6 are 1.1-1.7mb each. My iPhone 5 were usually 2-3.5mb.

The 6 really compresses the heck out of the pictures. No, it won't look good blown up beyond a 5x7 I would say.

 

[hernan1304]

1) regarding email compression, here's a picture from my 6+ emailed ('actual size') vs uploaded to dropbox. I don't really see a difference, and the file sizes are identical.

2) This is a very challenging lighting situation, with no HDR. I was thinking (before I checked) that this was a pretty good result because the phone probably had to use high ISO and there's only so much that can be expected from a small sensor. HOWEVER, this is the EXIF data:

1/500 sec at f/2.2, FL 4.15mm, ISO 32

Obviously the fact that this could be shot at ISO 32 is great and credit probably goes at least somewhat to the optical IS (and the large aperture), but if it was shot at such low ISO, how is it possible that the photo has so much noise? The pavers in the bottom right are completely washed out!

Anyone have any thoughts?

 

[BuffordT]

The iPhone 6 JPEG engine is a big step back from iPhone 4 to 5s, using the stock camera app. Noise reduction way way too aggressive as is JPEG compression.

Fortunately a forum member mentioned the 645 Pro camera app. It allows total control of th camera, including different JPEG quality up to TIFF.

Well worth $4. Have a look at the difference.

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/20016247/

Heres a sample of the horrific JPEG processing from the iPhone 6 posted by another member.

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/20010325/

No go on the 645. It simply enlarges the standard picture to tiff, etc. The quality is almost identical to the native app. Waste of money.

----------

1) regarding email compression, here's a picture from my 6+ emailed ('actual size') vs uploaded to dropbox. I don't really see a difference, and the file sizes are identical.

2) This is a very challenging lighting situation, with no HDR. I was thinking (before I checked) that this was a pretty good result because the phone probably had to use high ISO and there's only so much that can be expected from a small sensor. HOWEVER, this is the EXIF data:

1/500 sec at f/2.2, FL 4.15mm, ISO 32

Obviously the fact that this could be shot at ISO 32 is great and credit probably goes at least somewhat to the optical IS (and the large aperture), but if it was shot at such low ISO, how is it possible that the photo has so much noise? The pavers in the bottom right are completely washed out!

Anyone have any thoughts?

Very nice. It seems from the posts, the 6+ doesn't suffer from the same jpeg compression artifacts and noise reduction issues as the 6.

BTW, emailing the largest-full resolution image, taking off via cable and computer is the same. It only shrinks the picture when you choose to do so.


Could you take some pictures of a well lit subject? Id like to see if the water color effect is happening with the 6 plus.

 

[FrankieTDouglas]

The 6+ camera has some weird things going on in it. Most importantly, it seems to exhibit way more noise compression artifacts than I'm used to seeing in iPhone photos. To the point that it makes me hesitate even using it in certain interior situations.

Also, someone earlier in this thread says the iPhone shoots RAW photos (I'm assuming they're meaning it also saves them). I'd love to know where they got that info, and why they won't inform camera developers so I could actually process RAW files rather than crunched up JPG files from this device. (all cameras technically shoot in RAW, but only certain cameras actually save the data captured in a RAW format, rather than tossing all of the unused data and compressing to a JPG instantly).

 

[hernan1304]

Could you take some pictures of a well lit subject? Id like to see if the water color effect is happening with the 6 plus.

Here's a more colorful (lamp-lit, sorry it's nighttime) photo. This is 1/4 sec at f/2.2 and ISO 64, on the 6+. Still not terribly happy with the noise... On the upside, no watercolor effect.

 

[BuffordT]

Here's a more colorful (lamp-lit, sorry it's nighttime) photo. This is 1/4 sec at f/2.2 and ISO 64, on the 6+. Still not terribly happy with the noise... On the upside, no watercolor effect.

Thanks. That's not bad. It's still too much compression IMO but looks decent.

----------

The 6+ camera has some weird things going on in it. Most importantly, it seems to exhibit way more noise compression artifacts than I'm used to seeing in iPhone photos. To the point that it makes me hesitate even using it in certain interior situations.

Also, someone earlier in this thread says the iPhone shoots RAW photos (I'm assuming they're meaning it also saves them). I'd love to know where they got that info, and why they won't inform camera developers so I could actually process RAW files rather than crunched up JPG files from this device. (all cameras technically shoot in RAW, but only certain cameras actually save the data captured in a RAW format, rather than tossing all of the unused data and compressing to a JPG instantly).

There are no apps that can access the raw picture(even if the phone saved the images this way). 645 Pro MK app claimed to be able to take uncompressed TIFF files but it's not true. It's just the same picture upscaled. Same quality. Same watercolor effect, etc.