Is this even new information. I'm assuming the pictures are always compressed.
Yes, all pictures taken in jpeg format are compressed. The 6 and 6 plus over compress and have too much noise reduction.
Is this even new information. I'm assuming the pictures are always compressed.
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.
so we are saying the iPhone 6 is worse than all previous models?
Ya got my typo! It's MB, of course.Is it 3.8Gb PER photo? My DSLR takes 12mb RAWs in contrast.
The camera itself is fine/better. Its just the way the software is processing it that makes them worse depending on the situation.It was a question, not a statement.
I thought reviews confirmed that the iPhone 6 took better pictures. Hmm I'm not sold on this.
How can you have been here since 2008 and not know that most early reviews of Apple products are essentially puff pieces written by Apple PR? Or are you trying to make a joke?
Read thread title.
Had an interesting exchange with @ProCamera on Twitter.
Me: @ProCamera compared to the stock iPhone camera.app on the iPhone 6 how does this handle photos as it relates to original size? Upscale?
ProCamera: photos are the same pixel size (3264x2448) but can be larger in file size (MB) if you set higher quality JPEG save.
Me: @ProCamera right. Did that but are images coming off of the same iPhone 6 camera of higher quality than when using stock app?
ProCamera: no, all camera replacement apps are using the same source data from the camera.
Me: @ProCamera remind me again why I spent $3.99 on this? I want a higher resolution image…not more filters and manual controls.
ProCamera: we do not make that claim on AppStore. User control is our focus. You can request a refund from Apple https://t.co/Kq6ab1HbkW. A handful of apps like @CortexCamera have higher res by stitching multiple shots but require longer process & static subject
This proves my point. All the camera apps claiming to take better pics are wrong. Why even have the option to save as uncompressed TIFF when it is the exact same image as the stock camera app pic except it's 22mb!?
These apps can not produce uncompressed pictures or lessen the noise reduction or JPEG compression that happens in post processing. Apple won't give that access up.
So don't waste your money thinking you will be able to take any sharper or less noisy pictures with these 3rd party apps.
Cortex Cam can produce a slightly better pic by combing multiple frames into one picture. . It's only useful for subject that are still.
I'm not seeing "ALL" anywhere in the title.
It says previous models.