iPhone > Nikon?

[pdqgp]

I've both seen and taken photos that look indistinguishable from your example photos above. Considering the apps I use, I'd say my phone would have performed better in all of the above conditions.

I'm sure others would be as interested in seeing your photos showing off the various aspects I discussed as I am. Please link us to them.

pdqgp, while I'm sure you mean well, showing us beautiful pics from a P&S and saying "The iPhone 4S can't do this." doesn't really show us anything.

I do mean well and am a bit confused when you say I'm not "showing" you anything when I am actually showing you photos from various P&S cameras and outlining exactly what it is to look at when comparing them. What am missing that you're looking to see?

Put them both in the same position and take a side-by-side comparison (using the best app appropriate for the shot) if you really want to show us something.

Better yet, feel free to knock yourself out and compare them all you wish. The work has already been done.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

Personally, I don't need to as I shoot enough to know exactly what to look for and feel I know the 4s and my gear well enough to let you do the comparisons. No need to take my word for it. Like I said, I use the 4s too but if you want to compare images, I'm open to viewing them.

Look at the various aspects of gear and output and you decide. The 4s has lots going for it but it isn't without tons of drawbacks when stacking it up against cameras with better sensor technology, superior len design, and way better in camera jpeg processing.

You'll find everything I've "shown" you above is true and I'm not slamming the camera on the 4s, just keeping it real as a fan and user of this device. It has decent resolution, processing of jpegs is a predictable high saturation and contrast to give it's images that "punch" people tend to look for but by doing that they hurt other characteristics of quality images and limit the camera in many ways. Colors for one are over boosted and unnatural. Click on the link I provided you and check out the Canon ELPH 100 HS and compare it's colors. Here's Apples own image. Way over saturated and over sharpened to the point that there's digital noise on ISO 64. WOW! http://images.cyberimg.com/iphone/2011/10/09/16.jpg

The dynamic range is very limited mostly in part to the way it processes images. You'll be lucky not to blow highlights on sunny days and when it doesn't the range on both sides of the histogram is far less than even yesterdays P&S. Check out Apple's own image: http://images.cyberimg.com/iphone/2011/10/09/17.jpg

The resolution is good but it's 8mp's are not equal to the 8mp sensors found in the larger sensor P&S Cameras. MP ratings mean nothing by themselves, as you have to take into account the entire design of the sensor and the per pixel quality. At 1/3.2" diagonal (4.54 mm x 3.42 mm) it's a gnat's ass compared to even a P&S. Compare the 4s to the Canon A800 or others and see for yourself.

DOF is near non existent unless you're focusing up close and framing a shot with plenty of background. Even then, that's not a characteristic feature of the camera but rather just optics 101.

You can't creatively control DOF as there's no zoom nor is the sensor size conducive to it. What DOF results has The 4s has horrible bokeh. I don't have to beat that horse but I can if you wish.

Control wise, the 4s is extremely crippled when compared to P&S Cameras. You can't zoom optically, you can't control ISO, you can't control Exposure Value's, you can't properly control white balance, you can't select different types of scenes even. ALL very, very basic stuff in low end P&S Cams.

The flash is an LED so while it's better than nothing, it's not anywhere near as quality or capable as a low end P&S offers. There too, you have little to near no control over it. Flash exposure value is critical outdoors where flash units built into small cameras were meant to be used. Try it with the 4s and you'll really over expose and hit limits mentioned above.

It does perform well up to ISO 800 but you can't push it above that and even then, performance of the newer P&S Cams is still far better in low light, including ISO 800. When shooting in low light it's not all about noise, but again, dynamic range and color intensity. The photons on the 4s Sensor are only 1.4 microns, so they do very poorly in low light.

The 4s doesn't even offer removable media and thus it's limited on storage space. I could go one but why? You mention in camera apps. and they are cool, but in the end, everything that apps do and more is offered in basic post processing and just like the phone comparison, Photoshop far out performs any of the apps out there.

 

[pdqgp]

I've both seen and taken photos that look indistinguishable from your example photos above. Considering the apps I use, I'd say my phone would have performed better in all of the above conditions.

I'll lead off the comparison with Bokeh. Here are some examples of the 4s and it's bokeh. If you know anything about photography, you'll know bad bokeh vs good bokeh. This is bad.

Here's an even stronger example and it's from Apples own 4s gallery of images. Nasty. Not something you will change on your 4s so don't even worry about this area of debate. I will however show you how to fix it with Photoshop. Not those cheesy inaccurate bokeh apps out there that simply blurr parts of the images but fix it with realistic bokeh affects applied. (see my last image below)

Another that's not my image. Same, very harsh nasty bokeh.

Here it is fixed with Photoshop:

 

[DodgeV83]

I'm sure others would be as interested in seeing your photos showing off the various aspects I discussed as I am. Please link us to them.



I do mean well and am a bit confused when you say I'm not "showing" you anything when I am actually showing you photos from various P&S cameras and outlining exactly what it is to look at when comparing them. What am missing that you're looking to see?



Better yet, feel free to knock yourself out and compare them all you wish. The work has already been done.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

Personally, I don't need to as I shoot enough to know exactly what to look for and feel I know the 4s and my gear well enough to let you do the comparisons. No need to take my word for it. Like I said, I use the 4s too but if you want to compare images, I'm open to viewing them.

Look at the various aspects of gear and output and you decide. The 4s has lots going for it but it isn't without tons of drawbacks when stacking it up against cameras with better sensor technology, superior len design, and way better in camera jpeg processing.

You'll find everything I've "shown" you above is true and I'm not slamming the camera on the 4s, just keeping it real as a fan and user of this device.

The dynamic range is very limited mostly in part to the way it processes images. You'll be lucky not to blow highlights on sunny days and the range both directions is far less than even yesterdays P&S.

The resoultion is good but it's 8mp's are not equal to the 8mp sensors found in the larger sensored P&S Cameras. MP ratings themselves mean nothing by themselves, as you have to take into account the entire design of the sensor. Compare the 4s to the Canon A800 and see for yourself.

DOF is near non existent unless you're focusing up close and framing a shot with plenty of background. Even then, that's not a characteristic feature of the camera but rather just optics 101.

You can't creatively control DOF as there's no zoom nor is the sensor size conducive to it. What DOF results has The 4s has horrible bokeh. I don't have to beat that horse but I can if you wish.

Control wise, the 4s is extremely crippled when compared to P&S Cameras. You can't zoom, you can't control ISO, you can't control Exposure Value's, you can't properly control white balance, you can't select different types of scenes even. ALL very, very basic stuff for even low end P&S Cams.

The flash is an LED so while it's better than nothing, it's not anywhere near as quality or capable as a low end P&S offers.

You don't have removable media and thus limited on storage space. I could go one but why? It does perform well up to ISO 800 but you can't push it above that and even then, performance of the newer P&S Cams is still far better in low light.

You mention in camera apps. and they are cool, but in the end, everything that apps do and more is offered in basic post processing and just like the phone comparison, Photoshop far out performs any of the apps out there.

Unfortunately, the imaging-resource site, which I love btw doesn't compare dynamic range, nor DOF.

While you can't directly control ISO, you can control exposure values, choose white balance, choose one point for exposure and another for focus, take some pretty incredible low-light shots, and take better HDR photos than I've seen in any camera (instead of simple bracketing, it analyzes the dark/light points and intelligently chooses 3 photos that fit the range).

We may have to disagree on the post processing point. Opening an app on the same device for 30 seconds of quick edits (to add more dof for example) is not the equivalent of connecting your P&S to a computer, uploading to the hard drive and loading the photo into a professional editing software that costs more than the iPhone + P&S together. After all, if photoshop is an option for P&S, it's an option for iPhone photos as well

We do agree on a few points though. The flash sucks and the sensor isn't as big. Fortunately, the low light apps I use are good enough that I can't remember the last time I used the flash. The only time I use a flash anymore in photography is my big external on the DSLR that bounces off the ceiling

I'll see if I can take some quick shots for you tomorrow.

 

[DodgeV83]

I'll lead off the comparison with Bokeh. Here are some examples of the 4s and it's bokeh. If you know anything about photography, you'll know bad bokeh vs good bokeh. This is bad.

Here's an even stronger example and it's from Apples own 4s gallery of images. Nasty. Not something you will change on your 4s so don't even worry about this area of debate. I will however show you how to fix it with Photoshop. Not those cheesy inaccurate bokeh apps out there that simply blurr parts of the images but fix it with realistic bokeh affects applied. (see my last image below)

Another that's not my image. Same, very harsh nasty bokeh.

Here it is fixed with Photoshop:

I tried spending 60 seconds in one of my 99cent apps (may have been closer to 2 minutes), and you're right. I could not duplicate the results from Photosop. I never really noticed the DOF however. Even on my 50mm 1.8 prime lens, the quality of the circles never meant that much to me. I was commenting on the DOF, not brokeh. I agree, the brokeh looks nicer in the photo you posted.

 

[pdqgp]

Unfortunately, the imaging-resource site, which I love btw doesn't compare dynamic range, nor DOF.

DOF is pretty easy to see though as is the bokeh. If you understand photography, Just click off a few shots and you'll see. Dynamic Range is easy too. Again, just compare two shots. Even in the shots I've posted from Apple, the highlights clip a lot.

While you can't directly control ISO, you can control exposure values, choose white balance, choose one point for exposure and another for focus,

I use those apps too, but you can' specify -1EV or set WB to Shade nearly as accurately or easily. Perhaps better than other phones, but I'm not sure.

take some pretty incredible low-light shots, and take better HDR photos than I've seen in any camera (instead of simple bracketing, it analyzes the dark/light points and intelligently chooses 3 photos that fit the range).

The iPhone 4 and 4s HDR helps about 50% of the time but it also tends to be very limiting. Outside on a nice day it tends to gray out the skin tones. Again, a nice feature but one that's meant to help alleviate the lack of metering and processing power most P&S cameras have. You have to be mindful of shutter speeds when using it. Thus another reason it would have been nice for apple to have included that basic concept or at least offer scene modes.

We may have to disagree on the post processing point. Opening an app on the same device for 30 seconds of quick edits (to add more dof for example) is not the equivalent of connecting your P&S to a computer, uploading to the hard drive and loading the photo into a professional editing software that costs more than the iPhone + P&S together. After all, if photoshop is an option for P&S, it's an option for iPhone photos as well

I agree to disagree. In fact I never initially mentioned PP'ing. My points as related to all my images are referencing in camera abilities only. The reason I brought it up is that you mentioned using apps to tweak your images to come close to mine in all situations. My point was that you won't be able to as apps can't make up for what the camera isn't delivering in the images to begin with. My DOF and corresponding bokeh is from the camera as is the metering/dynamic range and other settings.

We do agree on a few points though. The flash sucks and the sensor isn't as big. Fortunately, the low light apps I use are good enough that I can't remember the last time I used the flash. The only time I use a flash anymore in photography is my big external on the DSLR that bounces off the ceiling

In terms of photography, the large external bounced is great. You certainly need it at night, however, use the on camera and even the large external outside. Most people people don't realize the capabilities of DSLR's in that environment. It pretty much kills me to see users snapping pics outside without even using their onboard flash for fill / catch light creation. Read up on fill flash outdoors and you'll change the quality of your shots moving forward.

Even on my 50mm 1.8 prime lens, the quality of the circles never meant that much to me. I was commenting on the DOF, not brokeh. I agree, the brokeh looks nicer in the photo you posted.

Nikon makes a decent lens in the 50mm 1.8. The circles aka bokeh are key. Even on a good P&S they are key. Lens design is what it's all about. Bodies don't matter hardly at all. I shoot with a number of bodies including a 10yr old DSLR's and you'd never know it even in challenging situations.

Many people don't notice bokeh or the other items discussed here which is exactly why this thread is so important. So many that say the iPhone is a great replacement for P&S and I'll most certainly agree on that in terms of convenience. However, in terms of the other factors, it gets the job done, but not nearly as well as it just can't deliver like a real camera can.

Thanks for the great discussion. I hope no one feels I'm bashing the 4s. Again, I use it daily and love it. I just want to insure that all the factors are considered in threads like this. If all that comes from it is that you or others notice bokeh and what it is then that's a good thing as the thread has then delivered.

I look forward to seeing some great shots!

 

[Tea-Aholic]

Want a phone really focused on photography?

Panasonic's P-02D made for the Japanese market (NTT) or 001P (SoftBank)

Waterproof
13.2 MP CMOS
Auto-focus
28mm wide-angle lens
18 scene modes
Face-detection

There's an EXILIM made by Casio and also SHARP makes AQUOS SHOT models with a CCD sensor.

 

[Sylon]

Unfortunately, there is a balance that cell phone makers haven't quite found when making a cell phone/camera. They either focus more on the phone-part, or the camera-part, but haven't found that happy middle. Either camera phones are great at being phones, lousy at being a camera, or vise versa. Companies are certainly getting closer and closer to that happy middle, but we are still a little ways away from it, even with the iPhone 4S. Its just not quite there yet. One of the main issues is that the tech isn't there. The ability to make an optical zoom on a cell phone and still keep it super thin is tough. Sure, there are cameras that are as thin as an iPhone, but those are just cameras, it doesn't have all the cell phone tech built into it, so it has a little more room in its housing than an iPhone would.

 

[mrbutters]

The Galaxy SII has one of the best cameras of any phone with tons of features. Control over ISO, scene modes, White balance setting, shooting modes, even blink detection. The photos look pretty good too.

 

[gngan]

iPhone is definitely taking some market for those pocket camera but i would not say iPhone>Nikon. There are lots of people that don't really care about the setting of a camera and own an iPhone. There are even people that uses an iPad to take photo which proves that they won't care much of the quality or setting.

I have a DSLR, Sony's waterproof pocket camera (TX-10) and an iPhone/iPad2 but my iDevices will never replace my DSLR or TX-10. They all serve difference purposes..

 

[416049]

snip

Maybe something that would be easier would be to have canon/nikon work together with apple and other mobile phone manufacturers to create the next cameras for the phones.

 

[SR45]

One of the biggest selling points for the iPhone is the quality of it's camera. I hope that apple continues to focus on this in the iPhone 5 and onwards. I am somewhat surprised that Nikon or Canon has not come out with a phone that focuses on having a quality camera first and phone second. I know many people that no longer use a camera because smartphone cameras have gotten so good, but there still is a lot of room for improvement.

I was looking to buy a new point and shoot such as the Canon ELPH 300, but instead I am waiting for the iPhone 5 to see what it has to offer. The convenience of being able to send photos directly from the iPhone is a huge bonus. Serious photographers will probably continue to use DSLR cameras, but they are really bulky. It's much easier to pull out your phone and take a photo.

Bought a Nikon 5100 series DSLR and now I wished I hadn't. Spend money on a nice iPhone 4s and eliminate the large carry of a DSLR is what I should have done, but that's water under the bridge now. Perhaps follow on iPhones will have and even better camera, and that is what I will be looking at. DSLR's are nice, but now days those cell phone camera's are better than ever. Nice camera, nice GPS, and a phone all wrapped up in one. Win, win in my opinion

 

[BiggAW]

It seems you have grown to like the live view mode, but it's mainly there for the integration of video that is still in the "neat" new feature set for DSLR's. The downside to using live view on the 5100 and many others is that the focus speed suffers greatly thus I don't think you'll be shooting much action videos with it. Still shooting with it is really hampered by not having a live histogram. I still don't understand Nikon's thinking there. The whole point of live view is missed. Ironically, that 11 yr old Sony I used above, has live view with an active histogram.

The speed in general suffers a lot. I found myself not using it that much today when I was in Boston, but it was useful for a few awkward shots where the camera either had to be up high or at a weird angle- where the D5100's screen helps a lot. Nice option to have, shouldn't be the primary mode of use. Haven't tried video mode, I've heard these DSLRs are putting out some serious video quality.

 

[throAU]

horses for courses

the iphone 4-s camera, whilst good for a point and shoot is nowhere near a DSLR if you use your DSLR as more than a point and shoot.

the 4-s is subjectively "better" in some ways however because it is always with you. and yes, for a phone camera it is pretty amazing.

but, if you're willing to actually use a DSLR as intended (manual exposure, focus, etc) there's no way you can get anywhere near close with an iphone or any other point and shoot camera. it is simply way too constrained with its lens - there's no optical zoom, no manual focus, no manual exposure... which means in low light situations you have no option but for the thing to rachet up ISO and then you're in speckle city. or, you deal with the spectacularly useless flash (no, i don't want white light reflecting off everything in shot!).

but again - its always with you. which means you can capture things you weren't specifically going out with your DSLR to photograph.

 

[pdqgp]

Not a truly scientific test but I was wrapping up the day and had my phone in my pocket and a freshly charged 11yr old 5mp P&S in my hand.

They don't need to be perfectly lined up to see the drawbacks to the iPhone.

• What jumps out first to me is the lack of DOF. No surprise.
• Poor bokeh; nothing new here but man is it bad.
• Highlights clipped. Again, I've said it all along. No surprise.
• Noise and artifacts. What I'd expect from such a small sensor and knowing the processing of the images. However, an 11yr old camera beats it at a 2/3 stops higher.
• Lack of dynamic range. Dark areas are much darker. Again, no surprise.

100% Crops

 

[BiggAW]

If you're looking for that kind of an effect, get out the DSLR and the appropriate lens. For clear snapshots to upload to Facebook, the iPhone is sufficient.

 

[pdqgp]

If you're looking for that kind of an effect, get out the DSLR and the appropriate lens. For clear snapshots to upload to Facebook, the iPhone is sufficient.

I agree and would. Although as you can see, even a solid quality P&S with a well designed lens can really isolate the subject. Easier to tote around too.

Here's a shot of a Pink Flowering Dogwood I planted last fall and am very happy made it through the winter (ours was almost nonexistent though)

Just to close it out for me here, I agree with the Facebook comment but will also give the iPhone credit where credit is due. It's no DSLR nor meant to be nor is it fully up to snuff to many of even yesterday's P&S cameras but it is with me more than most any other camera.

 

[nburwell]

You lost me completely in your subject title.

My Canon DSLR and iPhone serve two completely different purposes. Yes, my iPhone is nice for when I don't have my DSLR on me, and I want to take stupid pictures to share on FB or Twitter. However, 9 times out of 10, I'd rather have my 5DmkII on me if I want quality images that I intend on printing out.

 

[BiggAW]

I agree and would. Although as you can see, even a solid quality P&S with a well designed lens can really isolate the subject. Easier to tote around too.

But you get into a lack of even basic controls like any sort of manual focus that's remotely possible to use.

 

[DodgeV83]

Not a truly scientific test but I was wrapping up the day and had my phone in my pocket and a freshly charged 11yr old 5mp P&S in my hand.

They don't need to be perfectly lined up to see the drawbacks to the iPhone.

• What jumps out first to me is the lack of DOF. No surprise.
• Poor bokeh; nothing new here but man is it bad.
• Highlights clipped. Again, I've said it all along. No surprise.
• Noise and artifacts. What I'd expect from such a small sensor and knowing the processing of the images. However, an 11yr old camera beats it at a 2/3 stops higher.
• Lack of dynamic range. Dark areas are much darker. Again, no surprise.

100% Crops

Overall, I agree with your assessment. However if you use the right apps, the dynamic range isn't so bad. I tried to find some shots of mine which were directly into the sun, but still showed light in the foreground.

These show some DOF and dynamic range

and this last one shows how you can put the shutter speed low to expose the background, while using the flash to expose the foreground.

Pdqgp, I believe this is how audiophiles felt when MP3 players first became popular. While quality goes down when compared to what we used before, the convenience factor skyrockets to the point where the new technology starts to take over as most people's primary device.

Everyday I open my instragram feed, or check iPhoneography.com, I see some of the most creative photos I've ever seen (I follow the right people), all from people who likely wouldn't be into photography at all were it not for their iPhones.

It's not the best quality in the traditional sense, but it allows for a level of creativity not before possible without lugging out a PC with Photoshop and spending hours editing (assuming you both own Photoshop and have the skills to edit).

 

[pdqgp]

Overall, I agree with your assessment. However if you use the right apps, the dynamic range isn't so bad. I tried to find some shots of mine which were directly into the sun, but still showed light in the foreground.

I agree and noted in my post that the iPhone and other HDR apps are there to help. IMO they are fine for what they are, but they do serve as a crutch. The downside and seen in several of your images, is the slow shutter speed which results in motion blur. All apple has to do is tweak the image processing and hopefully they can eliminate blown highlights and the need to use HDR apps that in some cases work fine but in others don't.

and this last one shows how you can put the shutter speed low to expose the background, while using the flash to expose the foreground.

works fine and demonstrates flash use. my example was showing fill flash.

Pdqgp, I believe this is how audiophiles felt when MP3 players first became popular. While quality goes down when compared to what we used before, the convenience factor skyrockets to the point where the new technology starts to take over as most people's primary device.

Again, I agree. The convenince > quality and that's what is leading to its popularity over a camera only device that still yield way better images and functions.

Everyday I open my instragram feed, or check iPhoneography.com, I see some of the most creative photos I've ever seen (I follow the right people), all from people who likely wouldn't be into photography at all were it not for their iPhones.

It's not the best quality in the traditional sense, but it allows for a level of creativity not before possible without lugging out a PC with Photoshop and spending hours editing (assuming you both own Photoshop and have the skills to edit).

Agree one more time and love the fact that digital photos have gone the way of text messaging and that everyone is now shooting and sharing. That's a great thing.

 

[ixodes]

iPhone > Nikon

iPhone camera, used in the same sentence with the much vaunted Nikon name is completely inappropriate.

 

[SurferMan]

Opinions vary but facts still remain.

Here are a couple from a circa 2001 Sony Camera.

You won't get this kind of bokeh from a 4s

Nor the dynamic range. Again, 5mp 11 yr old technology.

Macro Mode DOF from a 7mp $89 P&S Panny from 2007

Good luck getting anywhere near the same DOF from the 4s, let alone metering accuracy in snow, not to mention the usability in freezing temps. The glare from the iPhone screen and lack of brightness make it difficult even during average days let alone bright days. The controls also don't lend themselves to the best handling devices for photography.

Again, Sony P&S from 2001

Let's not even begin to discuss the 4s's LED Flash. It most certainly doesn't have the fill flash capabilities of even a $100 P&S Fuji from 2006.

And while the 4s does do decent up to ISO 800, you won't get nearly the ISO and associated dynamic range of today's P&S cameras. Here's an ISO 1600 from the same 2006 Fuji F20.

Keep in mind, none of the above are even remotely current cameras either. Putting it's IQ and capabilities up against even a cheap P&S from 2011 or 2012 would be unfair.

ISO 3200 via 2010 P&S Panny Notice the detail and dynamic range and colors. The 4s struggles on this at ISO 800.

All this said, I do enjoy mine but am just pretty firm on outside convenience, it's not necessarily a great replacement for a P&S camera. It works when carry a P&S would be a PIA. However if it's even remotely an option, if the event is something more than just every day life, I'd still suggest carrying your favorite brand P&S Camera in your pocket.

Fully agree, I like my GSII and 4S cam's, their excellent ---> for a "phone". But still not a replacement for even cheaper digi cams, don't get me wrong they take excellent pics for a phone but once lighting starts to change or zooming in especially night and day difference vs a digi cam. I love all the custom adjustments that you can do with ISO etc on the GSII cam though, lot's of settings to play with.

Until they come up with better lens/sensor/optics technology for phones, sticking and bragging about the "MP" it has is useless.

But for the avg person out and about, their way more then sufficient for snapping pics here and there as I don't know anybody that randomly carries a camera with them at all times.