New iPhone 7 Ads Showcase Waterproofing and Low-Light Camera Features

[AndyDiamond]

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).

Fair comment as I'm only looking at samples I've seen - I have not shot with an iPhone 7 yet.
However, what I have seen, just casually, doesn't seem to indicate the camera is substantially better than the previous ones.

I understand that megapixels are not the whole deal, but megapixels have been going up as the phones get slimmer, or in the the case of the 6 form-factor maintaining the same thickness while increasing the MP count, albeit only 4MP which is not a dramatic increase.

I revisited Austin Mann's video for the iPhone 6 and in some ways it may has well serve as an example of the iPhone 7 in terms of what it actually shows http://austinmann.com/trek/iphone-6-plus-camera-review-iceland

He has also just done a video on the iPhone 7 and did one on the 6S last year.
The 4K and 12MP camera on the 6S was an 'improvement' over the 6 but put all three cameras from the 6, 6S and 7 in a head-to-head photo shoot-out and I would say you'd get a reasonably negligible difference in terms of parting with your money to upgrade.

Just a personal opinion on what I've seen - I'd like to be wrong when it comes to the 7

 

[Keirasplace]

Anyone else think the 6s camera was more crisp with focus and speed? I'm finding it hard to get a good shot of my daughter, granted she is moving constantly, but that hasn't changed in the last 2 days...

Unless you compare it side by side, it is probably just impression.
If you use the zoom (not shooting wide), you'll get less light, less depth of field, which makes shooting something moving fast in front of you harder, especially inside (zone of focus shallower with less light). Verify you're not zoomed.
[doublepost=1474230633][/doublepost]

Fair comment as I'm only looking at samples I've seen - I have not shot with an iPhone 7 yet.
However, what I have seen, just casually, doesn't seem to indicate the camera is substantially better than the previous ones.

I understand that megapixels are not the whole deal, but megapixels have been going up as the phones get slimmer, or in the the case of the 6 form-factor maintaining the same thickness while increasing the MP count, albeit only 4MP which is not a dramatic increase.

Increasing MP count without increasing sensor sizes requires gymnastic in lenses, sensor geometry, being able to isolate noise in sensor and computational photography, etc
This has been improving and that's why the MP count has gone higher a bit.
But, you can't invent light that's not there; you're still getting less light.

BTW, my Canon G16 camera has a 12MP sensor (its a compact DSLR, I also own a Canon G5X) and it kills any cell phone with a 20MP sensor. Only time were a 20MP sensor makes sensor makes sense in a cell phone is in broad daylight with a bright wide lens (that's the kind of tests Samsung still wins with the S7).

Shooting video in bad light with a smart phone is pretty horrible in general cause contrary to photography, you can't vary exposure. So, they're pretty much various shades of terrible in my opinion. Focusing (and keeping focus) on something close that moves in frame will in particular be terrible; forget about doing it with the zoom. Most time, you'd want to lock the focus and keep the action in a plane (and have your actors move in that plane).

Its only in transitional light between good and bad light that you'd be able to see a major improvement. You'd be able to shoot in conditions you could not earlier.

 

[AndyDiamond]

Unless you compare it side by side, it is probably just impression.
If you use the zoom (not shooting wide), you'll get less light, less depth of field, which makes shooting something moving fast in front of you harder, especially inside (zone of focus shallower with less light). Verify you're not zoomed.
[doublepost=1474230633][/doublepost]

Increasing MP count without increasing sensor sizes requires gymnastic in lenses, sensor geometry, being able to isolate noise in sensor and computational photography, etc
This has been improving and that's why the MP count has gone higher a bit.
But, you can't invent light that's not there; you're still getting less light.

BTW, my Canon G16 camera has a 12MP sensor (its a compact DSLR, I also own a Canon G5X) and it kills any cell phone with a 20MP sensor. Only time were a 20MP sensor makes sensor makes sense in a cell phone is in broad daylight with a bright wide lens (that's the kind of tests Samsung still wins with the S7).

Good info there - thanks.
I added some other comments to my reply to you previously

 

[Unami]

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.

not sure how the dual camera in the iphone 7 functions, but usually that's not how it works. a crop is not the same as a different focal length.

 

[pat500000]

The first ad was very dark....wtf? No..it's not just because it's at night.

 

[AndyDiamond]

not sure how the dual camera in the iphone 7 functions, but usually that's not how it works. a crop is not the same as a different focal length.

Fair call.
The second camera seems to shoot 'closer' (2x) optically, without any digital zooming. Not a 'zoom' lens as such that you might find on a conventional camera, but more of a 'mode' (a lens switch if you like).
The samples I have seen, where people show the 1x camera and then a 2x version of the same shot do look good (it's nice to be able to get closer on an iPhone optically, especially for street photography) but to me look a bit like an image from my iPhone 6 Plus in terms of 'quality'.
Again, I'm only looking at what I've seen - I haven't shot with the 7 yet.

 

[nameischarles]

I would love to Apple but unfortunately my carrier said it won't be till November I'll get my jet black.

 

[Keirasplace]

Fair call.
The second camera seems to shoot 'closer' (2x) optically, without any digital zooming. Not a 'zoom' lens as such that you might find on a conventional camera, but more of a 'mode' (a lens switch if you like).
The samples I have seen, where people show the 1x camera and then a 2x version of the same shot do look good (it's nice to be able to get closer on an iPhone optically, especially for street photography) but to me look a bit like an image from my iPhone 6 Plus in terms of 'quality'.
Again, I'm only looking at what I've seen - I haven't shot with the 7 yet.

Most shots people take are not edge cases that need a DSLR or even a low light shooter.
The fact, that most of our shots are not edge cases is the reason people don't buy cameras anymore.

That's why improvement in smart phone photography is about to become a non sequitur for most people.
The phones are good enough for 99% of their needs.

If the shot could not be taken with your 6s (subject too far and you don't want to get in his face); which in street photography I would say constitute many of my shots, then you're not really comparing the same thing really.

Moving to get the best shot is the best option, if you can; but many times you cannot (say you'd need to stand in the middle of the Place the L'Etoile (Around the Arc the Triomphe) to take the shot (not recommended)), then you need a Zoom. A Normal wide shot of this only shows you concrete and a sea cars with the monument in the background (this view has its own interest in how chaotic it is).

The optical zoom allows you to get shots you couldn't otherwise.

 

[Mansu944]

Water damage not covered by warranty? WTF

 

[macduke]

"Morning Ride" is one of the best Apple commercials I've ever seen. Great work guys!

 

[Glideslope]

The first ad is perfect IMO. It really draws you in quickly, relays the message, and keeps you lock on.

The second is over the top for me. What dumb ass is going to ride their bike in a Thunderstorm of that magnitude. Just plain unnecessary.
[doublepost=1474233491][/doublepost]

The second advert is better.

Vastly so.

 

[Kabeyun]

Cookie Monster shakes head.

Ok, good point. Nice exception.

 

[AndyDiamond]

Most shots people take are not edge cases that need a DSLR or even a low light shooter.
The fact, that most of our shots are not edge cases is the reason people don't buy cameras anymore.

That's why improvement in smart phone photography is about to become a non sequitur for most people.
The phones are good enough for 99% of their needs.

If the shot could not be taken with your 6s (subject too far and you don't want to get in his face); which in street photography I would say constitute many of my shots, then you're not really comparing the same thing really.

Moving to get the best shot is the best option, if you can; but many times you cannot (say you'd need to stand in the middle of the Place the L'Etoile (Around the Arc the Triomphe) to take the shot (not recommended)), then you need a Zoom. A Normal wide shot of this only shows you concrete and a sea cars with the monument in the background (this view has its own interest in how chaotic it is).

The optical zoom allows you to get shots you couldn't otherwise.

Yes for that reason alone the 'zoom' is very worthwhile if all you shoot with is a phone.
There are many photographers who only use iPhone - I'm not going to get caught up in the "why not buy a real camera" argument here lol.
It's just a fact.
In that case these photographers really do want the best possible camera (from a phone).
It isn't about fact that they should get a 'real camera', it's more that they prefer the iPhone workflow - shoot/edit/share etc on the one device.
Until the technology catches up with dedicated cameras (and no doubt it will to a point) iPhone shooters are stuck with the compromise of lower resolution. As you say, that is actually OK for many people but I guess iPhone photographers are looking for more. Currently it's a bit of a snail's pace.

 

[truthertech]

Water damage not covered by warranty? WTF

This has already been addressed many times. You can't say you'll cover water damage because Apple has no way of knowing if you used it beyond its rated IP7 certification, e.g., you submerged it below 1 meter or longer than 30 minutes , or went diving, etc. Under your logic Apple would have to give them a new phone, which we all end up paying for in higher costs.

 

[Zirel]

Apple Store: "Sir? Your iPhone is damaged by water. It's $349 plus tax to replace the phone."

Except the iPhone is more than waterproof enough to survive any downpour.

Keep trying, haters.

 

[leroypants]

Did I miss the part where they actually showed the photos taken at night time?

 

[truthertech]

The first ad is perfect IMO. It really draws you in quickly, relays the message, and keeps you lock on.

The second is over the top for me. What dumb ass is going to ride their bike in a Thunderstorm of that magnitude. Just plain unnecessary.
[doublepost=1474233491][/doublepost]

Vastly so.

You must not be a hard core rider or you live where it doesn't rain and storm often. The suit he put on is likely foreign to you. Many of us ride where we know it is likely that at some point on the ride we will be in a downpour. from a storm. Not everyone is a weekend warrior, but even if they are, this great ad makes the point in a compelling way that they won't have to worry.

 

[RagingBrosGaming]

Here is the best low light iPhone 7 Plus test out there!!

 

[TallManNY]

Interesting shift in focus. Those adds seem to be targeted toward young men and an active lifestyle. Perhaps Apple feels like they've already captured as much of the married with children crowd in the US as they are going to get. And Apple wants to get the younger crowd who might find Android's complexity more appealing or at least less intimidating.

 

[dimabear]

As a roadbiker, I would NOT recommend riding a bike in the rain. Even if it recently rained, I'm hesitant to ride. Those lane markers, once wet, are like ice.

 

[now i see it]

The low light ad looks really great.... but it sure as heck wasn't shot on an iPhone 7. An advertisement.

 

[Cycling Asia]

edit: ps. putting a lot of trust in that bike mount. that dude is NUTS for not having a case on that thing.

I have my 6+ mounted on my road bike using a topeak case and mount. It has survived a stack at 40km/h and didn't even come off the mount. I trust it more than having the phone in my back pocket.

WRT the ads, how come there wasn't any reference to the inferior water resistance of the android devices? I thought that is how phone advertising worked - you just bash the competitor. Advertising based purely of the merits of the phone you're selling is a strange concept today... (PS, that last bit was a joke - in case anyone missed the humour)

 

[Flow39]

Morning Ride is my favorite Apple ad in a long time. Throwing some AC/DC in there was just the cherry on top. Amazing job on the commercial!

 

[Tech198]

if the music alone then ya. it's my favorite too..

I always though the ad's were supposed to be showing of camera in low light... It's kinda tough to know how those photos taken actually turn out since we never see them..


umm.. maybe we can all just imagine... taking those photos specifically mean nothing unless u see what they turn out like on iPhone 7

 

[davester]

Would you really go out when there's lightning?

Seconds after fade out, he puts the garage door back down