National Geographic Photographer Praises iPhone 5s Camera

[matrix07]

Getting press as a photographer has 99% to do with things other than the quality of one's photographs.

Instead of blabbering about, would you just show us your portfolio? We want to be impressed.

 

[cupcakes2000]

Sure he might know what it looked like - that doesn't mean he knows how - or cares - to make the photo match reality. I shoot real estate photography with a much better camera than the iPhone, so I've taken more than my fair share of outdoor landscapes, and I know what correct exposure and white balance looks like. This image has zero highlights and there are some areas in excessive shadow. It's just flat out underexposed. And I know what color skies, trees, mountains, and water look like in real life. Here is s rough estimate of what the white balance should have been (bear in mind I'm going off of an image heavily downsized to web resolution so I don't have nearly the editing flexibility as he had).

Image

Compare that to the original images;
Image

If you tell me the second one is more believable, either your lying or your monitor is badly miscalibrated.

My monitors are perfectly calibrated.

His version has substantially more depth and contrast than yours.

He was obviously shooting in the evening, where things are a little more 'golden' (hence the name... look it up.)

He shoots artistically I suspect utilising his spot meter to capture scenes as they look. (Granted.. not this one with an iphone, but it means he looks at light in a different way..)

You however have used your histogram to create what your computer says is a technically perfect photo. The two are in no way linked.

It's fine.. you shoot real estate. But I doubt that allows for much artistic interpretation. I'm not belittling you, it's just a completely different field.

Whether you would enjoy my work or not, go look. It would freak you right out if you think only a balanced and evenly lit photo is a good one.


Things aren't always in black and white. by joejukes, on Flickr

 

[matrix07]

The issue is that it is not actually a real square format sensor. It is just cropping = wasting a lot of pixels, and it can be done is post processign very easily, allowing for some reframing. Maybe Apple could use a multi format approach.

From Dpreview.com:
"Nokia is the only phone maker we know of that uses multi-aspect ratio sensors: everyone else simply crops a native 4:3 sensor to get “wider” formats that aren’t really wider, just shorter."

Or crop 16:9 sensors to make 4:3 or 1:1, I would add.
I am not sure if Apple uses a 16:9 or 4:3 sensor i the 5s. In the 4s and 5 it was the same Sony sensor, the IMX145. If I am not mistaken it has a native 4:3 ratio.

How does it matter when the purpose is only for Instagram?

----------

Lol a "professional" who shoots for posting instagram. Right. Thats not even close to a pro.

So NG didn't pay him?

----------

Sure he might know what it looked like - that doesn't mean he knows how - or cares - to make the photo match reality. I shoot real estate photography with a much better camera than the iPhone, so I've taken more than my fair share of outdoor landscapes, and I know what correct exposure and white balance looks like. This image has zero highlights and there are some areas in excessive shadow. It's just flat out underexposed. And I know what color skies, trees, mountains, and water look like in real life. Here is s rough estimate of what the white balance should have been (bear in mind I'm going off of an image heavily downsized to web resolution so I don't have nearly the editing flexibility as he had).

Image

Compare that to the original images;
Image

If you tell me the second one is more believable, either your lying or your monitor is badly miscalibrated.

So you think the casting day should look like sunny day? Stupid!
Please, if you think you're so great. Share with us. Don't adjust other people images. I bet I can adjust your picture much better than you.

----------

[/COLOR]

If you use Instagram, you're someone who shoots for fun, not professionally.

This is by no means a pro reviewer.

Again, NG didn't pay him?

 

[matrix07]

I know a thing or two about composition, and there is nothing in the photos posted in the NG article that wows me.

Oh, another genius. Show us your work, will ya?

 

[marcelvelky]

My father is a pro photog as well, and had a similiar experience with the 5s. Its handiness combined with its quality is striking.

He uses it for location scouting and whatnot, then returns with his gear and shoots with the big beast.

heh, i do the same.. with my iP5 and Nikon..

 

[matrix07]

Haha, so obviously paid by Apple.

Read post 108 here before your narrow-mindedness takes control of your life. You seem to lose a little bit of perspective.

----------

Actually I think NG would ask you what photo you took your photograph portfolio that you showed them in the job interview. And they'd probo want you to use the same camera.

One think i have learnt. A photo is only 50% about the camera. The other 50% is the person taking the photo. Learning to take a better pic and getting better subject material can improve your shots more than any camera can. (Not saying that high end hardware is useless though, it's still good too).

That's true. But if you're shooting professionally and all you have is 70D then you should make sure your photos are all damn good, which I doubt (from what the original poster posted).

 

[bigjobby]

I thought this was great until I read the guys description of the camera. Sounds like it's straight out of a commercial. I mean come on, "intoxicating" "stunningly" "amazingly" - those all sound like they were picked out of the samsung booklet.

Probably all unapologetically mentioned.

 

[macchiato2009]

i don't seriously find this picture amazing... especially considering the resolution and format

i'm pretty sure that if you look at a 100% crop, the result is quite average

instagram format, there is nothing to brag about

 

[Khedron]

Not commenting on the Instagram portion of that quote, but Hasselblad, the respected Swedish maker of medium format professional camera equipment, was always a great proponent of the square format; they in fact published some booklets in the seventies and eighties extolling the virtues of the square format.

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_kw=Hasselblad+Square+Composition It's quite compelling in it's arguments.

Some more articles on that subject:

http://digital-photography-school.com/6-lessons-the-square-format-can-teach-you-about-composition
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9462076757/square-format-not-so-weird
http://photo.tutsplus.com/articles/theory/a-guide-to-producing-beautiful-square-format-images/

Interestingly, their new (digital) backs have all reverted to the rectangular format.

Thanks for the links

 

[verpeiler]

It would be really interesting to see where mobile phone photography, and photography in general will be in a decades time. God bless technology!

I'm curious about that too. But technology has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with some god ;-)

 

[Vegasman]

I see ppl here excited about 41 MP camera.

I'm sorry to say but I would never buy that on a phone, due to the small sensor size which would produce bad photos in low light.

If you would check the 41 MP photos at full size, you will hate the looks because the pixels look like **** due to small sensor size.

So what do you do? You resize the photo, you make it 3-4 time smaller, then it starts to look OK.

But in the resizing process, the color information is combined, the pixel accuracy is lost, and basically you're back to a 10 MP camera, with bad color accuracy.

8-10 MP is enough, what you want is a BIG SENSOR (which translates into an increased sensor pixel size) in order to have improved color accuracy. And for a 41MP crammed into a phone, that's just not possible. Your sensor pixels will be too small.

Beware the marketing!

I am sorry to say... http://connect.dpreview.com/post/75...urce=news-list&utm_medium=text&ref=title_0_17

 

[NoNothing]

The white balance of that photo is horrible. It is way too cool and there is too much magenta as well. It also looks about a stop underexposed - where are the highlights?

I could not disagree with your assessment more. The spacial composition, foreground and dynamism in the lighting is spot on. The WB is a perfect cool to offset the warm turning of the autumn colors providing exceptional conflict between cold and warm. The exposure projects a darkness of colder days coming.

 

[aismaiil]

4,000 photos? Did Apple give him a special edition 128 GB model???

I guess you fail at simple math. If each picture is about 8mb x 4000 = 32000 or 32 gigs. 64 gig iPhone can easily handle...

Plus he said over 4 days, which means he had plenty of time to extract the pics unto his laptop and clear out space for more pictures!

 

[chaosconan]

Incorrect. No matter how many photo your device uploads to iCloud Photo Stream, only the most recent 1,000 are kept there.

True, but you can create multiple streams and each stream can have max of 1000. So, if you create 4 streams you can have 4000 photos

 

[NoNothing]

Sure he might know what it looked like - that doesn't mean he knows how - or cares - to make the photo match reality. I shoot real estate photography with a much better camera than the iPhone, so I've taken more than my fair share of outdoor landscapes, and I know what correct exposure and white balance looks like. This image has zero highlights and there are some areas in excessive shadow. It's just flat out underexposed. And I know what color skies, trees, mountains, and water look like in real life. Here is s rough estimate of what the white balance should have been (bear in mind I'm going off of an image heavily downsized to web resolution so I don't have nearly the editing flexibility as he had).

Image

Compare that to the original images;
Image

If you tell me the second one is more believable, either your lying or your monitor is badly miscalibrated.

You have way too much cyan in your shot and the sky looks flat and boring. You brightened the image loosing some of the conflict the original had. Looks like you did histogram 101. You made a brighter more typical interpretation but it lacks the emotion of the original.

 

[Viking2]

Tiresome

I agree with many in this format that it is both tiresome and annoying to read post from 99% besserwissers like "Pyrrhic Victory" and other whiners.

Please pixel peepers, this is not a article about that the iPhone 5s is better then a DSLR. I have a Canon 7D and 5 lenses, some really good lenses - it is no doubt that my Canon takes better pictures. I have a Sony RX100 and it is no doubt it takes better pictures (most of the times) then an iPhone 5s/Samsung S4 etc.

That is not the point.
The point is that I always carry my phone with me.

So I take the most pictures with my camera phone, then comes my RX100 and last comes my Canon 7d.

I am amazed how well pictures the iPhone 5s takes for being a phone. It takes way better pictures then my first digital DSLR the Canon 10D and perhaps better then my second DSLR Canon 20D.

It is tiresome to read how tacky the NG photographer is to use Instagram - how much he has been paid by Apple to sink so love that he agrees to use an iPhone - how he has succeeded in life by making this article just to be published in Mac rumors.

He is just showing us the possibilities with the iPhone5S - how good pictures you can take. Most people who use photos do post processing so the white balance and such can come later. That could be another interesting article how he works with photoshop with iPhone pictures and so on.

Stefan

Ps.
I have to admit I been using a Samsung S4 since it was released. Just to test how it is. It also takes decent pictures. Gave away my iPhone 5. And even if I like most of the Samsung S4 hardware better (bigger screen, microSd card, replaceable battery, 4G working in Sweden etc) I will go back to iPhone 5S when it is released in Sweden. I miss the iPhone experience. I also prefer the iPhone camera experience over the Samsung. If I wanted a Camera in the first place, with the possibility to make, calls, surf the web etc I would for sure buy the Nokia Lumia 1020.

 

[ScholarsInk]

Would like to see a no bias, factual comparison with the Nokia/Windows, Samsung and 41MP images from normal light to dark settings.

There you go.

 

[charlesdayton]

Originally Posted by chumawumba
Im not surprised you said that, considering your username is applefan

You know, you are on a site dedicated to apple fans. Most of us visit this site because we like Apple products.

 

[scott911]

"it utilizes a sensor that has a 15 percent larger surface area, which means it will produce higher quality photos"

thanks you, author for being one of the few that realize that pixel count is not what it's all about. And in fact - packing more pixels in can often reduce a camera's overall quality.

 

[Ciclismo]

Would like to see a no bias, factual comparison with the Nokia/Windows, Samsung and 41MP images from normal light to dark settings.

Although they're far from perfect, DXOMark is a good place to look until someone like DigitalRev or DPReview do this http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Mobiles

 

[croooow]

So why is a professional Nat Geo photographer using Instagram?

Because not all people work 24/7. A photographer can post on Instagram with a camera phone for fun when he/she is not taking real photos with a DSLR.

----------

...And I know what color skies, trees, mountains, and water look like in real life...

Do you know what every view of all skies, trees, mountains and water look like at every moment in time?

Do you know what this view looked like at the moment that photo was taken? This was a photo posted to Instagram, so was it meant to look realistic or did he have a filter on? Why are you obsessed with this guy's one photo?

 

[gnasher729]

"it utilizes a sensor that has a 15 percent larger surface area, which means it will produce higher quality photos"

thanks you, author for being one of the few that realize that pixel count is not what it's all about. And in fact - packing more pixels in can often reduce a camera's overall quality.

I think there are quite a few people who realise that.

As usual, when Apple said "we didn't add pixels, but we made them 15% bigger" all those who understand the subject kept quiet because there was really nothing to add - Apple said it all. Those who don't understand were of course screaming "but Samsung has so many megapixels".

Plus one poster who actually said that _he_ knows that what Apple does is better for the user, but Apple _should_ use a camera that has more megapixels and therefore less quality, because a big megapixel number is what keeps users happy. Which is probably something that was discussed and rejected at Apple.

 

[croooow]

I'll take my DSLR (Canon 70D) over the iPhone (or any other phone/P&S, FTM) any day. You'd have to be insane to bring a phone as your only camera on a "once in a lifetime" trip! This story is bogus. NG would not pay his expenses if all he had with him was a phone camera.

It is not a "once in a lifetime" trip

Jim Richardson returns to a favorite spot to photograph, the Scottish Highlands, with a brave new tool—the iPhone 5S.

I missed the part of the article about his expense report. It does say "Leaving his trusty Nikon behind" but that does not mean he did not have it on the trip (just that he left if behind while he returned to the Highlands to use the iPhone 5s. He could have just gone back to his hotel and gotten his Nikon for other work)

 

[JHankwitz]

It's taking way too long for my 4S to get here. Speaking as a professional photographer, this camera has to be one of the greatest innovations of all time. Many of its features surpass all of my professional equipment.

 

[zhenya]

Sure he might know what it looked like - that doesn't mean he knows how - or cares - to make the photo match reality. I shoot real estate photography with a much better camera than the iPhone, so I've taken more than my fair share of outdoor landscapes, and I know what correct exposure and white balance looks like. This image has zero highlights and there are some areas in excessive shadow. It's just flat out underexposed. And I know what color skies, trees, mountains, and water look like in real life. Here is s rough estimate of what the white balance should have been (bear in mind I'm going off of an image heavily downsized to web resolution so I don't have nearly the editing flexibility as he had).

Image

Compare that to the original images;
Image

If you tell me the second one is more believable, either your lying or your monitor is badly miscalibrated.

And in contrast, yours looks way overexposed and artificial, with colors and contrast that probably wasn't actually there. Your looks like I'm looking through a filter, not how the world typically looks naturally. Furthermore, were the dark clouds coming in, lending an ominous feeling to the atmosphere, or were they breaking and the sun peaking through for the first time?

That's the thing - you weren't there so you don't know what the scene looked like OR if he was actually trying to capture the scene exactly as pictured. This is exactly the point I made in the first post that you can be technically proficient but still not have a great eye. You've illustrated my point perfectly.