iPhone 7 Plus Camera 'Ideal for Shooting Outdoor Adventures'

[Chupa Chupa]

They. Never. Did.

Of course they are. This very thread is about using the iPhone 7 for events one would normally take a DSLR. Companies, individuals, esp politicians!, make comparisons, communications that are not always direct or literal. Sometimes it's alluded to, implied, made for the target to infer so that the line is hugged, not crossed. The iP7+ camera is extremely nice, best in class, even better than 98% of pocket cameras, not that those exist much anymore. But every product has its limit and I think (personal opinion, as was my original post) that it's silly to suggest to take an iP7+ instead of an DSLR on a planned outdoor event if you have a DSLR.

 

[freeskier93]

I really don't see any oversaturated pictures here. There's definitely some saturation/vibrancy but nothing that leads to unnatural colors. Specifically looking at the hand holding the fish, there's no unanutal Oompa Loompa color.

What I do see is bad white balance, based on the burger picture, with the white balance shifted to warm.

 

[neutralguy]

The Verge review (by Nilay Chip-on-his-shoulder Patel) has a few comparison shots.

View attachment 651568 View attachment 651569 View attachment 651570

It's hard to judge from this tiny sample size, but overall I'd say the Note 7 camera and post-processing is quite impressive. Especially in the low light shot, where it seems the 7+ has struggled to get the correct exposure for the light.

But again, it's only one shot and this could vary greatly depending on the situation and the photographer. Even moreso if you consider the post processing opportunities afforded to you by shooting in RAW.

Never mind that only wide gamut displays can give the iP7 its wide colour edge.

IP7Plus lowlight picture in the sample looks horrible!

 

[eastcoastsurfer]

With the right lighting conditions and some photography knowledge I was able to capture some good looking pictures.

Cottage https://imgur.com/gallery/dVK9E

Nice pics, but with the right lighting conditions and some photography knowledge the camera does not matter very much

 

[Mac Fly (film)]

I'll take my NEX-5T over this. Is is not that much larger than a iPhone 7S.

How do the shots turn out without a lens attached? And the water-resistance? No one's saying the iPhone is a better camera than a DSLR, so let's not try to pretend a DSLR is not bigger than an iPhone. It was misleading to show it without a lens claiming it's not much bigger than an iPhone. People voting you up should know better. This forum.

 

[Tom-Helge]

Well, i had 3x optical zoom on a Samsung phone i had back in 2007-2008. Here is the phone i had back then: http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_g800_hits_it_officially-news-343.php and http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_g800-2145.php

And yes, that phone took some great photos from that time.

So, welcome after Apple. You are just 8-9 years late to the optical zoom game after Samsung here .

Anyways. Any modern smartphones today can take some photos that looks impressive in light conditions when they are downscaled to the same size as the pictures in this article is showing. So i don't see what's so special about those pictures from the iPhone 7 / 7 Plus here.

 

[Keirasplace]

taking pics of similar quality in such conditions *dont* require iphone7+

It does if you can't move to take the shot.
That's the main difference with other cameras with just one focal length.
If you can move, then you don't need the telephoto don't you...

 

[DevNull0]

You mean once you send your exploding one in and get a replacement, right? They actually asked if anyone had a note 7 on my flight yesterday so they could collect them and turn them off

You're still moving the bar. The article didn't mention a non-exploding camera.

More seriously though...You really need to keep bringing that up? In a month all the Note 7's will be replaced with non-exploding models but the iPhone 7's will still all be gimped trash.

 

[Keirasplace]

Well, i had 3x optical zoom on a Samsung phone i had back in 2007-2008. Here is the phone i had back then: http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_g800_hits_it_officially-news-343.php and http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_g800-2145.php

And yes, that phone took some great photos from that time.

So, welcome after Apple. You are just 8-9 years late to the optical zoom game after Samsung here .

Anyways. Any modern smartphones today can take some photos that looks impressive in light conditions when they are downscaled to the same size as the pictures in this article is showing. So i don't see what's so special about those pictures here.

I'm guessing there is a reason that didn't continue hey. Maybe it was broken all the time, Like most "me first" products from Samsung. Oh, and it was 19mm thick.... (12mm thicker than the Iphone and also 101 mm by 51mm and 140g (so heavier too), it was BIG) So, essentially the thickness of the compact pocket cameras of the time. So, not surprising it was essentially a camera + a phone put in one big package.

The reason there is no optical in smart phones is that they're very thin. If they were thicker, with those big screens, they'd be like big boxes you couldn't put it your pocket, weight a ton and also have zoom, no doubt about it!
[doublepost=1473879364][/doublepost]

"Over four days of in-the-field testing, I’ve found it to be the best small, lightweight camera you can get for the money, ideal for shooting outdoor adventures when you don’t want to lug around pounds of heavy equipment."

Damn autocorrect moment?

"The 7+ is huge and only cost more than most cameras as well"

Here are some photos from a camera that´s both smaller, cheaper, and better.

And its... A Camera, just a camera. So, what is your point? If a camera can be thicker, it will by default be better. But, will it integrate with all other smart phones and social media functions most people use their photos with: No.

 

[Wahlstrm]

I'm guessing there is a reason that didn't continue hey. Maybe it was broken all the time, Like most "me first" products from Samsung. Oh, and it was 19mm thick.... (12mm thicker than the Iphone and also 101 mm by 51mm and 140g (so heavier too), it was BIG) So, essentially the thickness of the compact pocket cameras of the time. So, not surprising it was essentially a camera + a phone put in one big package.

The reason there is no optical in smart phones is that they're very thin. If they were thicker, with those big screens, they'd be like big boxes you couldn't put it your pocket, weight a ton and also have zoom, no doubt about it!
[doublepost=1473879364][/doublepost]

And its... A Camera, just a camera. So, what is your point? If a camera can be thicker, it will by default be better. But, will it integrate with all other smart phones and social media functions most people use their photos with: No.

And.. If the quote where "best camera-in-a-phone" very few would argue..

But saying it´s the best -camera- you can fit in your pocket for under a $1000, is stretching the truth a bit..

 

[developer13245]

The guitar in the last photo is out of place.. Based on the POS car and "flyover country" setting, it should be a full auto rifle. BANG BANG...

 

[ke-iron]

I'll take my NEX-5T over this. Is is not that much larger than a iPhone 7S.

You're kidding right? This is way larger than an iPhone 7.

 

[Keirasplace]

And.. If the quote where "best camera-in-a-phone" very few would argue..

But saying it´s the best -camera- you can fit in your pocket for under a $1000, is stretching the truth a bit..

Yes, that I agree. My Canon G5X is certainly a much better camera and its small too.
It also depends on the definition of pocket...
If its my back pocket.... Well, my Canon's not fitting in that pocket EVER ;-).

 

[loybond]

For all the people saying the NEX camera is larger, not comparable etc... Yes, you're right, but don't forget that people like the ones who wrote the article that is linked in the OP are saying stupid things like it's the best camera for $1000 or whatever. It might be one of the best cell phones cameras, but this is all mostly marketing BS. The majority of people will noticed only an incremental improvemen.

The point of that photo is that there are cameras like the NEX that use fantastic Sony APS-C sensors with more than 14 stops of dynamic range, excellent colour bit depth (both better than the Canon 5d3) and are in a very small body, that can also be used with pancake primes.

 

[ohmyggg]

the new iPhone seems to have a hard time accurately showing blues and pinks in most of the photos posted

Could have something to do with those colors being out of gamut on the device/monitor you're using to view them. Remember, the new iPhone shoots in "wide color" (DCI-P3). Not exactly sure if P3 expands on blues and pinks (relative to sRGB), but it's a thought.
[doublepost=1473890245][/doublepost]

Could have something to do with those colors being out of gamut on the device/monitor you're using to view them. Remember, the new iPhone shoots in "wide color" (DCI-P3). Not exactly sure if P3 expands on blues and pinks (relative to sRGB), but it's a thought.

Actually, here's a graphic I pulled from the TechCrunch review showing expanded reds, greens, and blues, so yeah, P3 definitely includes more blues and pinks.

 

[ErikGrim]

Of course they are. This very thread is about using the iPhone 7 for events one would normally take a DSLR.

No. "Adventure camera" is not referring to DSLRs. It's referring to rugged point and shoots and GoPros.

Direct from Phil Schiller: "We are not saying to throw out your DSLRs".

 

[SeaFox]

Pictures are clearly oversaturated. I don't know how journalists can praise them and say this is the best mobile camera.

General news journalists don't know anything about photography. Heck, they barely qualify for the title "journalist" with the writing skills and fact checking they (don't) demonstrate now.

 

[MacOG728893]

How do the shots turn out without a lens attached? And the water-resistance? No one's saying the iPhone is a better camera than a DSLR, so let's not try to pretend a DSLR is not bigger than an iPhone. It was misleading to show it without a lens claiming it's not much bigger than an iPhone. People voting you up should know better. This forum.

Well said. First thing that came to my mind as well.

 

[I7guy]

Well, i had 3x optical zoom on a Samsung phone i had back in 2007-2008. Here is the phone i had back then: http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_g800_hits_it_officially-news-343.php and http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_g800-2145.php

And yes, that phone took some great photos from that time.

So, welcome after Apple. You are just 8-9 years late to the optical zoom game after Samsung here .

Anyways. Any modern smartphones today can take some photos that looks impressive in light conditions when they are downscaled to the same size as the pictures in this article is showing. So i don't see what's so special about those pictures from the iPhone 7 / 7 Plus here.

There's nothing special about pictures from ANY cell phone camera, is what you are really saying.

 

[SeaFox]

Actually if you consider that people are now comparing and critiquing the iPhone camera with stand alone cameras it shows just how good iPhone camera has gotten.

No, it just demonstrates how little the average person knows about correct photography. Same reason the "showroom mode" on an HDTV is entirely the wrong settings for a home theater setup. Joe Sixpack finds sharpness pleasing -- but can't recognize artificial sharpening or ringing. He like bright colors -- but doesn't know what oversaturation means until it starts looking unnatural on skin tones, or literally painful to stare at on objects. He likes crisp whites and rich blacks, but will many times call an image with too high contrast "good" because he likes the "pop" it has, completely missing the blown highlights and black crush.

The result is these people, many of whom have managed to become "tech journalists" through nothing more than their fetish for gadgets and knowing the right people in the industry, proclaim these photos to be Great Pictures, and lavish the "high quality" photographic abilities in a camera with a lens you can completely cover with one fingertip. Other people also talk about how great these pictures are (when they really mean that they personally like the style of the image, not that it's really realistic in being a reproduction of the scene -- what a camera is supposed to do), and compare them to photos taken with Canon DSLRs. When they prefer the (incorrect) enhancements by the smartphone's consumer-oriented image processing, they now claim that the iPhone's camera is "better" than the expensive DSLR.

That's how we arrive at people comparing the iPhone to regular digital cameras.