Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New iPhone 7 Ads Showcase Waterproofing and Low-Light Camera Features
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's apparent that the new iPhone exceeds IP 7, but Apple likely didn't seek certification of IP 8 because to go beyond IP 7, (30 minutes immersed at up to 1 meter) requires the manufacturer to state the depth beyond 1 meter the device can withstand up to 30 minutes, e.g., Samsung says it the S7 is good up to 1.5 meters, an inconsequential difference with the IP 7 standard, minimally rated 1 meter, but for marketing purposes it allows them to make the claim of the higher standard. Indeed, theoretically, if you were certified at a millimeter over 1 meter, a manufacturer can make the claim of meeting the higher standard.
Unlike Samsung, which is in the position of chasing Apple and feels pressured to make claims they can't always live up to, e.g., Consumer Reports testing, Apple has the luxury to "under promise and over deliver" and let the bloggers, test sites, etc., exclaim how the waterproofing is great and better even than Apple is touting. Voila!
Last edited:
This is fun.
However, the iPhone 7 has got a specific waterproofing rating not to be exceeded. Deep sea photography is not covered, of course, and people has to be aware of this somehow, even if the disclaimer looks ridicolous displayed on an epic ad.
Not my quote Inigo.All iOS devices have capacitive screens.
Sadly, Galaxy S7 is no match for iphone 7 during low light conditions.
In what sense does Samsung chase Apple? They already sell twice as many smart phones as Apple.
Wow!
Those two iPhone ads are awesome.
There's something very compelling about this dark, emotional, but also inspiring vibe they're doing. It connects to a deeper place than other brands that are a afraid to do anything but smiling, dancing, perfect-looking young people on a rooftop.
Those two iPhone ads are awesome.
There's something very compelling about this dark, emotional, but also inspiring vibe they're doing. It connects to a deeper place than other brands that are a afraid to do anything but smiling, dancing, perfect-looking young people on a rooftop.
I've been scanning Flickr and the web for iPhone 7 sample shots - you know, the 'real world' shots that people take, not the images of people taking photos in ads that you don't actually see the pics of....
From what I can see so far, the images do look 'sharper' with a wider color gamut.
However when you start to get in close the images suffer from that same awful 'smearing'.
It's really horrible.
No, you aren't going to see that on a tiny Instagram post but it sucks for those who want to enlarge and/or print big versions of their photos.
If you look at an image from a dedicated camera (I compared stills from a 24.2MP Sony a6300, an iPhone 6 Plus and an iPhone 7 Plus) the 'noise' when zoomed in close from the 24.2MP image is totally acceptable - it's more akin to film grain.
On the iPhone though it just looks like mush!
My iPhone 6 Plus' low-light photos have been OK in some cases but they all suffer from this 'pixel smearing' when you get in close or want to enlarge.
I suspect its the jpeg compression contributing to this so maybe the problem will be solved with RAW capture, not just on the iPhone 7 - any iPhone that has a 12MP camera can shoot in RAW mode. Several third party camera apps now support RAW capture including Pro Camera.
If in fact the RAW capture does eliminate this awful smearing then the iPhone 7 looks like a good shooter.
If not, then we are talking about a fairly unsubstantial camera upgrade.
Personally I would have preferred Apple to have concentrated on developing one camera that could shoot say 18MP in fine detail with no image artifacts than going down this dual camera route.
The ability to 'zoom' is cool but if you are shooting at a higher res you can crop in close without losing quality.
Cropping an 18MP still in 2x from a better camera would suffice over capturing it at 12MP on an average one.
Anyway - we need to see more actual full-res images from the iPhone 7, preferably in RAW format so we can judge - not just 'assume' from watching a TV ad.
From what I can see so far, the images do look 'sharper' with a wider color gamut.
However when you start to get in close the images suffer from that same awful 'smearing'.
It's really horrible.
No, you aren't going to see that on a tiny Instagram post but it sucks for those who want to enlarge and/or print big versions of their photos.
If you look at an image from a dedicated camera (I compared stills from a 24.2MP Sony a6300, an iPhone 6 Plus and an iPhone 7 Plus) the 'noise' when zoomed in close from the 24.2MP image is totally acceptable - it's more akin to film grain.
On the iPhone though it just looks like mush!
My iPhone 6 Plus' low-light photos have been OK in some cases but they all suffer from this 'pixel smearing' when you get in close or want to enlarge.
I suspect its the jpeg compression contributing to this so maybe the problem will be solved with RAW capture, not just on the iPhone 7 - any iPhone that has a 12MP camera can shoot in RAW mode. Several third party camera apps now support RAW capture including Pro Camera.
If in fact the RAW capture does eliminate this awful smearing then the iPhone 7 looks like a good shooter.
If not, then we are talking about a fairly unsubstantial camera upgrade.
Personally I would have preferred Apple to have concentrated on developing one camera that could shoot say 18MP in fine detail with no image artifacts than going down this dual camera route.
The ability to 'zoom' is cool but if you are shooting at a higher res you can crop in close without losing quality.
Cropping an 18MP still in 2x from a better camera would suffice over capturing it at 12MP on an average one.
Anyway - we need to see more actual full-res images from the iPhone 7, preferably in RAW format so we can judge - not just 'assume' from watching a TV ad.
Ask Samsung who has been chasing Apple since the iPhone first came out. They were shameless in copying it almost exactly, even knowing they would later have to pay hundreds of millions in penalties for doing so.
No serious person would compare Samsung's volume of low end cheap cell phones to the iPhone. Apple and Samsung don't compete in that arena because that's not Apple is in business and Apple has no interest in making a cheap phone. They compete in the top end of smart phones. Samsung knows it and all the other manufacturers of cheap cell phones are in a race to the bottom where they all lose.
So that's why Samsung is logically and desperately chasing Apple because Apple is # 1 in that market and in the most recent year earned 92% of the profits of the entire industry, cheap phones included!. Let that sink in. Samsung's executives think about it every day, and on their way to work and home, and it's good for consumers.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/apples-share-of-smartphone-industrys-profits-soars-to-92-1436727458
Last edited:
I don't mean to be mean, but why do some people here care more about professionally made ads than about real life usage?
"
You must not use the great "Hey Siri" capabilities of your iPhone, and they have gotten even better with iOS 10. Try it, then you'll know a different fact.
[/QUOTE]Hey Siri, take photo?
Pretty much the only thing I use my phone for on a ride.
The comparison was not fair! Note 7 is the newer model. yes both Note 7 and S7 have the same certification, but that doesn't make them equal! Gear S3 is certified as IP68 also, but will definitely survive more underwater than the S7
Higher than IP68 it's IP69X (the highest water resistance certification)
"
You must not use the great "Hey Siri" capabilities of your iPhone, and they have gotten even better with iOS 10. Try it, then you'll know a different fact.
Hey Siri, take photo?
Pretty much the only thing I use my phone for on a ride.[/QUOTE]
I thought you were concerned about how you couldn't use the screen when it was wet???? Well, at least now you can see that your worry about a wet screen is easily solved. Also, TJ, you are going to be excited as you learn how much you have been missing out on, and how much more powerful Siri is.
Last edited:
All you have to do is go watch one of the countless number of iPhone water-resistant videos on YouTube to get your answer. Lol
Can I ask, how do you search for photos on Flickr taken on just the iPhone 7 or 7 plus?
Exactly what I was thinking after my experience of my carbon fibre stem shattering mid ride and watching my iPhone (in a case thankfully) get launched off the mount when I hit the ground.
I cringed at the beginning of the video and said not again. But I'm thinking more when he start taking photo in portrait mode. It reminds of their previous ad that was christmas I think. Where the kid took video on portrait mode but the finish product was landscape.
Surely, you're smarter than you made yourself look. Samsung makes DOZENS of phones per year. They sell flip phones still and phones up to nearly $1,000 in its highest configuration. Apple made 3 phones this year. Obviously, it doesn't take a mathematician to know Samsung's combined numbers will be higher. But take any one Samsung phone and put up its sales against the flagship iPhone of that year, and realize why you're literally being laughed at. At least act like you have the intellectual capacity to think critically.
Yes just search for iPhone 7, iPhone 7 Plus - it isn't always easy but you'll find them - also if the EXIF data is present it will show you the device the photos are from.
many time you'll just get promo images of the actual phone lol but keep searching!
Also in Flickr, under the 'Explore' tab, you can go to the 'Camera Finder' to search for photos shot by a certain camera although the iPhone 7 is not showing up in there yet.
"Beats" mean nothing, and Youtube clips mean even less. I'm waiting for an actual at least quasi scientific test, including some NOT on god damn tripods (like ones that actually simulate real life).
[doublepost=1474229621][/doublepost]
As long as it covers what is shown on screen, I'd say no.
[doublepost=1474229900][/doublepost]
From what I seen of RAW, it does remove the softness.
But, calling this unsubstantial is nonsense.
What your asking requires a bigger sensor (thus thicker phone to fit optics) or you won't really get a more detailed picture, just one with more megapixels).