iPhone 7 Plus Low-Light Photo Capabilities Shown Off at U.S. Open

[JCrz]

What impossible criteria have I placed? I simply said a photo shot on 5s, 6 and 6s would have to be done in the same location and light as the 7, 7+ in order to be properly compared. You are trying to say a comparison from a googled photo taken years ago, in a different location and in different light is a proper comparison and claiming they would have taken exactly the same quality photo as what the 7 took based off something done in totally different conditions. You are seriously dense and have no grasp on logic in general.

It is NOT impossible to have a iPhone 6 in hand and an iPhone 7 in hand and take two photos of the same scene in the same light, milliseconds apart. THAT is what a fair comparison would be and would determine if your claim of the older phones could take exactly the same quality photo. What ISN'T a fair comparison is your claim that because you googled a photo taken years ago vs one today look similar, therefore means they have identical quality in taking photos is complete and utter BS and you have no idea at all what you're talking about.

By your logic there are now absolutes for camera settings in any given situation. Please use google and tell me the exact shutter speed, aperture and ISO that were used in the sample photos since there are no variables (according to your own logic) and please point me to this magical book that lists all these set in stone setting values for photos with sun, or cloudy or whatever. Spoiler, there isn't because there are far too many variables.

Anyone with a shred of common sense could look at photos shot with older iPhones (and other smartphones) shot in similar situations with similar settings can do a comparison. You, on the other hand, are so terribly desperate to win an argument that you place impossible demands. It doesn't take much work or intelligence to do "yeah, but" scenarios.

Plenty of people on here have the common sense to look at the vast number of past photos to compare for themselves. Obviously you don't have that ability so let's leave it at that.

 

[CarlJ]

can an app like snapseed (if google ported it to iOS) do wonders?

SnapSeed has been on iOS since long before Google bought it. No porting involved. Pixelmator is quite good, also.

 

[lagwagon]

Anyone with a shred of common sense could look at photos shot with older iPhones (and other smartphones) shot in similar situations with similar settings can do a comparison. You, on the other hand, are so terribly desperate to win an argument that you place impossible demands. It doesn't take much work or intelligence to do "yeah, but" scenarios.

Plenty of people on here have the common sense to look at the vast number of past photos to compare for themselves. Obviously you don't have that ability so let's leave it at that.

So taking two photos with two iPhones of the same scene and the same light is an impossible demand? How do all these camera review YouTube videos do it then? They all must have this space time tearing capabilities you claim are required of such a task.

You still don't grasp the entire concept of doing a fair comparison.

 

[Jsameds]

Yeah, cuz we all know how heavy those DSLRs can be... so cumbersome.. and all those dials and buttons to learn.. so much more professional showing up to a client with your camera in your back pocket.

They are compared to a smartphone.

 

[I7guy]

Anyone with a shred of common sense could look at photos shot with older iPhones (and other smartphones) shot in similar situations with similar settings can do a comparison. You, on the other hand, are so terribly desperate to win an argument that you place impossible demands. It doesn't take much work or intelligence to do "yeah, but" scenarios.

Plenty of people on here have the common sense to look at the vast number of past photos to compare for themselves. Obviously you don't have that ability so let's leave it at that.

That is not the way a comparison is done if you want a real comparison. If you want to throw random pictures up and then judge them as such feel free, but it is not a comparison. I don't know who the "plenty" is you are referring to.

 

[TT D'arby]

That is not the way a comparison is done if you want a real comparison. If you want to throw random pictures up and then judge them as such feel free, but it is not a comparison. I don't know who the "plenty" is you are referring to.

did you even bother to read other peoples' posts??? lots of people stated their opinion of the photos.....you can't state an opinion if you don't have anything to compare it to (duh)

 

[lagwagon]

did you even bother to read other peoples' posts??? lots of people stated their opinion of the photos.....you can't state an opinion if you don't have anything to compare it to (duh)

You can't do a proper comparison and review until you have both devices in hand. (Duh)

 

[JCrz]

So taking two photos with two iPhones of the same scene and the same light is an impossible demand? How do all these camera review YouTube videos do it then? They all must have this space time tearing capabilities you claim are required of such a task.

You still don't grasp the entire concept of doing a fair comparison.

Those YouTube reviews are all invalid by your definition, not mine. You said that it's impossible to compare anything unless a test is done with exactly the same conditions. Those YouTube reviews aren't always side-by-side comparisons and so, by your logic, they are invalid.

Keep grasping for straws again.

 

[TT D'arby]

You can't do a proper comparison and review until you have both devices in hand. (Duh)

you don't understand that your idea of PROPER comparison is merely your opinion and interpretation of a comparison

have you ever seen charts comparing different performance figures? many of those were done at different times. you can compare 0-60 times for a bunch of cars and see which one is faster.....are there variables? were they done at different times? of course.....but go tell everyone that they can't compare ANYTHING because test were done at different times

 

[lagwagon]

Those YouTube reviews are all invalid by your definition, not mine. You said that it's impossible to compare anything unless a test is done with exactly the same conditions. Those YouTube reviews aren't always side-by-side comparisons and so, by your logic, they are invalid.

Keep grasping for straws again.

No, they are invalid by some definition you made up and saying I made. I said to compare the two cameras in a fair comparison the photos would have to be done if the same scene and light (therefore taken a few seconds apart at most. Which is 100% possible and done ALL the time in comparison videos and does not break the laws of physics.) NOT your comparison of photos taken years apart in a different location, time and light.

You literally (for whatever reason in an attempt to back your claim) took that as me saying the two cameras would have to physically take the exact same spot and be triggered at the exact same millisecond.

You continue to ignore the English language of what a fair comparison means.
[doublepost=1473719077][/doublepost]

you don't understand that your idea of PROPER comparison is merely your opinion and interpretation of a comparison

have you ever seen charts comparing different performance figures? many of those were done at different times. you can compare 0-60 times for a bunch of cars and see which one is faster.....are there variables? were they done at different times? of course.....but go tell everyone that they can't compare ANYTHING because test were done at different times

Show me the chart then that proves the 5s, 6 and 6s performs and would take the exact same quality photo as to what JCrz claims in identical conditions.

And the concept of a fair comparison isn't just "my opinion", it's a fact.

 

[JCrz]

No, they are invalid by some definition you made up and saying I made. I said to compare the two cameras in a fair comparison the photos would have to be done if the same scene and light (therefore taken a few seconds apart at most. Which is 100% possible and done ALL the time in comparison videos and does not break the laws of physics.) NOT your comparison of photos taken years apart in a different location, time and light.

You literally (for whatever reason in an attempt to back your claim) took that as me saying the two cameras would have to physically take the exact same spot and be triggered at the exact same millisecond.

You continue to ignore the English language of what a fair comparison means.

Your words:
"...The only way to compare the 5s, 6 and 6s camera to the 7 and 7+ is to take photos of the same subject and the same time..."

Now you're just backpedaling and amending what you said. It doesn't work like that.

Also, we would need brand-new iPhone 5S, 6, and 6S running the exact same software; otherwise our testing wouldn't suit you and so there's no way to "properly" compare the iPhone 7 against them.

 

[TT D'arby]

Your words:
"...The only way to compare the 5s, 6 and 6s camera to the 7 and 7+ is to take photos of the same subject and the same time..."

Now you're just backpedaling and amending what you said. It doesn't work like that.

Also, we would need brand-new iPhone 5S, 6, and 6S running the exact same software; otherwise our testing wouldn't suit you and so there's no way to "properly" compare the iPhone 7 against them.

next time someone tells there iphone 6s camera is better then a flip phone's camera i will just tell them that lagwagon says they cannot say that unless they can do a side by side comparison of brand new models

hahahahahhaa

 

[JCrz]

next time someone tells there iphone 6s camera is better then a flip phone's camera i will just tell them that lagwagon says they cannot say that unless they can do a side by side comparison of brand new models

hahahahahhaa

And that's the only way to do a fair comparison. He said his definition of fairness is "fact".

 

[Bubble99]

I'm all for Tim getting excited and spotlighting these photos (along with the NFL pics).

But Apple needs to quit comparing cell phone cameras to DSLR's. There is no comparison.

These Photos are in HD!! What more do you want? 8K? or 12K? They way better than the Photos we had 6 hears ago.

 

[lagwagon]

Your words:
"...The only way to compare the 5s, 6 and 6s camera to the 7 and 7+ is to take photos of the same subject and the same time..."

Now you're just backpedaling and amending what you said. It doesn't work like that.

Also, we would need brand-new iPhone 5S, 6, and 6S running the exact same software; otherwise our testing wouldn't suit you and so there's no way to "properly" compare the iPhone 7 against them.

Yeah and that's exactly what I'm saying. The two photos from the two cameras in order to do a fair comparison between the two would have to take a photo of the same scene, in the same light. That is not backtracking at all of what I said. Same time didn't literally mean the exact same, right down to the millisecond time. You can't be that ignorant. (But then again you continue to argue it and claim I would require to tear space and time)

 

[TT D'arby]

These Photos are in HD!! What more do you want? 8K? or 12K? They way better than the Photos we had 6 hears ago.

lagwagon ...not me..... says this is fact:

The only way to compare the 5s, 6 and 6s camera to the 7 and 7+ is to take photos of the same subject and the same time and do a side by side.

did you do side by side comparisons with 6 year old phones to prove that they are worse?

 

[Bubble99]

lagwagon ...not me..... says this is fact:

The only way to compare the 5s, 6 and 6s camera to the 7 and 7+ is to take photos of the same subject and the same time and do a side by side.

did you do side by side comparisons with 6 year old phones to prove that they are worse?

None of the older phones took pictures in HD.

The resolution was much lower than HD. Most phones did not even have retina display.

 

[s1m]

Hmm

Apple posts pics from new camera.

Response - Ah but the real test is low light.

Apple posts pics in low light

Response - ah but that isn't the sort of low light I meant

Apple posts pics in the "right sort of low light"

Response - ah but I wanted an action shot, or still life, or a selfie or some other ridiculous criteria that proves the new camera isn't as good as the old camera...

Meh, it's not a big deal to catch photo like this with old 5S. By low light I mean room with single bulp or street after sunset.

 

[Bubble99]

I've got my 7+ on order. The new dual camera setup was one of the biggest reasons I am upgrading from the 6s+
I have a nice Canon DSLR camera and it is amazing to watch how more and more of the features from that camera are finding their way into smart phones. The 6s+ already has exceeded what I thought would ever be possible in terms of image quality from a smart phone. I can't wait to get my hands on the 7+

The DSLR camera normally do hell lot better at taking pictures in low lighting condition than smartphones.

But looks like it is getting better now at taking pictures in low lighting condition.

 

[ErikGrim]

Yeah.

And they need to change the name of it from "Portrait" to "Bokeh", something like that. People who don't know much about this will think the phone needs to be in portrait mode!!

I'm pretty sure the average joe will associate the word portrait with a photograph rather than screen orientation.

 

[s1m]

The DSLR camera normally do hell lot better at taking pictures in low lighting condition than smartphones.

But looks like it is getting better now at taking pictures in low lighting condition.

I use both my iPhone and my DSLR for photos for different reasons. I mostly use my DSLR for sports photos - either my son's footy team or at the AFL. My iPhone can not compete with the DSLT - nor would i expect it to. The fact that the iPhone camera is improving so much is great but I don't expect it to replace the DSLR - as that will also improve over time.
[doublepost=1473721484][/doublepost]

I'm pretty sure the average joe will associate the word portrait with a photograph rather than screen orientation.

I would disagree - the number of vertical videos I see tells me that the average Joe is not that smart.

 

[ErikGrim]

None of the older phones took pictures in HD.

The resolution was much lower than HD. Most phones did not even have retina display.

HD? Please stop using meaningless terms in relation to photography.

 

[Bubble99]

What do you want? A 4K camera? May be in two or three years Apple will bring out camera that can take photos in 4K.

But keep in mind with 4K camera you will need lots of storage.
[doublepost=1473721824][/doublepost]

HD? Please stop using meaningless terms in relation to photography.

What do you mean by meaningless terms in this sense? I'm going by spects the camera can take picture base on what apple posting is saying.

It makes no sense to take 4K picture if the phone cannot display 4K.

 

[44267547]

I'm excited for the capabilities of the 7s Plus camera. So far, so good.

 

[lagwagon]

What do you want? A 4K camera? May be in two or three years Apple will bring out camera that can take photos in 4K.

But keep in mind with 4K camera you will need lots of storage.

Cameras have taken "4K" photos for many years already. You only need between 8-10 megapixels to equal 4K resolution. The video resolutions have no relation to photo resolutions.

Canon 1D Mark III from 2007 takes photos at 3888 x 2592 (10 megapixel)

Canon 5Ds/5Dr from 2015 takes photos at 8,688 x 5,792 (50 megapixel)