Not all that impressed with portrait mode...

thomamon

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Nov 24, 2008
1,133
126
Flemington, NJ
So first off let me start by saying I am not all that impressed with Portrait Mode. Now before you start criticizing me let me explain my thoughts as to what makes me feel this way.

You are automatically shooting in the 56mm mode. Which camera is it using to focus on the subject and which is it using to blur the background? If it is using the 28mm camera to focus on the subject, then its digital zooming which explains the noise/loss of quality. I do not like that at all if this is a case.

If its using the 56mm on the subject, then what a terrible waste of a great aperture the 28mm lens has to offer. Part of what makes the camera amazing, is the 1.8 aperture and how well it captures darker objects. quite honestly, a 28mm, with a 1.8 aperture is going to give you a much better depth of field anyway.

Hoping they find a way to help fix this feature in the future. Perhaps, even if its adding the 1.8 aperture to the 56mm lens in the next iPhone.

Opinions?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ABC5S

UltraNEO*

macrumors 601
Jun 16, 2007
4,057
12
近畿日本
Wish they have dual facetime cameras instead. I do believe the vast majority of 'portraits' people will take will come in the form of selfies. This 'portrait mode' is more about shooting other people. Am I right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: anonymous guy

I7guy

macrumors Core
Nov 30, 2013
22,946
11,065
Gotta be in it to win it
So first off let me start by saying I am not all that impressed with Portrait Mode. Now before you start criticizing me let me explain my thoughts as to what makes me feel this way.

You are automatically shooting in the 56mm mode. Which camera is it using to focus on the subject and which is it using to blur the background? If it is using the 28mm camera to focus on the subject, then its digital zooming which explains the noise/loss of quality. I do not like that at all if this is a case.

If its using the 56mm on the subject, then what a terrible waste of a great aperture the 28mm lens has to offer. Part of what makes the camera amazing, is the 1.8 aperture and how well it captures darker objects. quite honestly, a 28mm, with a 1.8 aperture is going to give you a much better depth of field anyway.

Hoping they find a way to help fix this feature in the future. Perhaps, even if its adding the 1.8 aperture to the 56mm lens in the next iPhone.

Opinions?
I don't have a 7+ yet, but you are getting virtually no depth of field on a camera phone, even though the aperture is 1.8. This is a way to enhance the image and provide some optical zoom without getting a big old DSLR with red ring lenses.
 

thomamon

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Nov 24, 2008
1,133
126
Flemington, NJ
I don't have a 7+ yet, but you are getting virtually no depth of field on a camera phone, even though the aperture is 1.8. This is a way to enhance the image and provide some optical zoom without getting a big old DSLR with red ring lenses.
I would not say virtually none, depending on where subject is and background if you know what you are doing.
 

cwosigns

macrumors 68000
Jul 8, 2008
1,837
1,484
Columbus,OH
I think you're missing the point of it. The pictures we take on our phones are visual representations of memories. When I look at someone or something that I connect with, that becomes my primary focus. Everything else fades into the background.

Portrait mode captures this. The subject pops off of the screen, and the blurred background gives context without distracting you.

I love it. I've been using it since beta 1.
 

I7guy

macrumors Core
Nov 30, 2013
22,946
11,065
Gotta be in it to win it
I would not say virtually none, depending on where subject is and background if you know what you are doing.
This dual lens setup takes a lot of the "if you know what you are doing" and can enhance the bokeh in the background much more so than with a single lens. I get it you are not impressed with it, but that doesn't mean it's a good feature to have for those who like it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bchreng

GrumpyMom

macrumors G3
Sep 11, 2014
8,749
12,468
But doesn't the 56mm lens give a truer representation of the proportions of the subject's face while the 28 mm impose a degree of barrel distortion? I always thought that's why photographers tend to avoid wide angle lenses for taking portraits but go with 50 mm for them instead.
 
  • Like
Reactions: M. Gustave

Chumlee_

macrumors newbie
Sep 13, 2016
19
8
Santa Barbara, CA
Pretty sure you can still use the portraits mode to take selfie and blur out the background any one remember those days when we use to take selfie from the rear camera
 

Macshroomer

macrumors 65816
Dec 6, 2009
1,205
611
I don't have a 7+ yet, but you are getting virtually no depth of field on a camera phone, even though the aperture is 1.8. This is a way to enhance the image and provide some optical zoom without getting a big old DSLR with red ring lenses.
This is incorrect, it is actually the opposite, smart phone cameras have a LOT of inherent depth of field.

Increased depth of field is more in focus around the plane of focus / focus point. What you are referring to is shallow depth of field which is more notable with lenses with faster / larger apertures. Other contributors to shallow depth of field are closer focus distances and larger formats. My 90mm F8 SW Nikkor 4x5 lens has a lot less depth of field than the 28mm 1.8 lens on the iPhone 7, and they provide the same apparent field of view in terms of what appears in the photo.

I'm not aiming this at you per se but lot of folks read the internet, buy "red ringed lenses" and think that they know about photography. As a very successful full time pro for nearly 30 years and a part time educator at a prestigious photo program...I am surprised at how little people really do know about actual photography.

Oh, and this cute little new "Portrait" thingy, man is it hokey looking, very uneven distribution of focus fall off, things haphazardly disappearing, really not that good when it comes down to the brass tacks.

Just goes to prove that you can't "Photoshop" everything, you need the real deal folks.
 
Last edited:

UltraNEO*

macrumors 601
Jun 16, 2007
4,057
12
近畿日本
Try not to take this wrong but lot of folks read the internet, buy "red ringed lenses" and think that they know about photography. As a very successful full time pro for nearly 30 years and a part time educator at a prestigious photo program...I am surprised at how little people really do know about actual photography.
That is soo true! Ever since digital photography has gone mainstream absolutely everyone thinks they are a 'competent photographer', till you ask them to use multiple strobes and gels to create effects. Most people mess up here. Hence "GWC" lol
 

I7guy

macrumors Core
Nov 30, 2013
22,946
11,065
Gotta be in it to win it
This is incorrect, it is actually the opposite, smart phone cameras have a LOT of inherent depth of field.

Increased depth of field is more in focus around the plane of focus / focus point. What you are referring to is shallow depth of field which is more notable with lenses with faster / larger apertures. Other contributors to shallow depth of field are closer focus distances and larger formats. My 90mm F8 SW Nikkor 4x5 lens has a lot less depth of field than the 28mm 1.8 lens on the iPhone 7, and they provide the same apparent field of view in terms of what appears in the photo.

I'm not aiming this at you per se but lot of folks read the internet, buy "red ringed lenses" and think that they know about photography. As a very successful full time pro for nearly 30 years and a part time educator at a prestigious photo program...I am surprised at how little people really do know about actual photography.

Oh, and this cute little new "Portrait" thingy, man is it hokey looking, very uneven distribution of focus fall off, things haphazardly disappearing, really not that good when it comes down to the brass tacks.

Just goes to prove that you can't "Photoshop" everything, you need the real deal folks.
I'm a part time amateur for a lot more years than you were a pro, and it's late for me and I said it wrong. :) I think the reason you are not impressed is because your expectations are ratcheted way up than what is really derivable on a cell phone camera in terms of big bodies, large lenses and large sensors. I'm not singling you out as you aren't singling me out, but it seems to me people who say they have a deep photographic knowledge, seem to place some of these cell phone cameras in the kiddie car arena.

Everything else aside, most shots with my iphone are in focus from 0 to infinity. It's tough to get any bokeh in these shots, which is what the second lens aims to do and is seems to do it very well. And maybe the software has to come up to snuff on this, with all of the different variations in scenes I think it's going to take apple a while to tweak the software.

And yes, I know to use my equipment and do take a good shot (by my family that is)
 

Relentless Power

macrumors Nehalem
Jul 12, 2016
33,450
34,528
I'll let you know my opinion as soon as they add another camera to the iPhone 7..
And Apple will never do that. Although it's
Clear your being facetious. Apple has and is promoting the Plus variant for obvious reasons. The Plus offers more and yes, costs more. If your disgruntled about your purchase or it's current capabilities, then it's from your own doing.
 

rainafterthesun

macrumors 6502
Jun 23, 2010
412
369
Saw the download for this and was excited to try it out...

not impressed with it initially, maybe over time it'll improve.

I can manipulate that effect with just the stock camera on my iphone depending on the lighting so...
 
  • Like
Reactions: CaptMarvel

bchreng

macrumors 65816
Jul 26, 2005
1,051
345
And Apple will never do that. Although it's
Clear your being facetious. Apple has and is promoting the Plus variant for obvious reasons. The Plus offers more and yes, costs more. If your disgruntled about your purchase or it's current capabilities, then it's from your own doing.
It's a shame that Apple doesn't offer it on the 7 for those who prefer smaller phones though.
 

Hansana

macrumors regular
Jul 2, 2014
107
103
So first off let me start by saying I am not all that impressed with Portrait Mode. Now before you start criticizing me let me explain my thoughts as to what makes me feel this way.

You are automatically shooting in the 56mm mode. Which camera is it using to focus on the subject and which is it using to blur the background? If it is using the 28mm camera to focus on the subject, then its digital zooming which explains the noise/loss of quality. I do not like that at all if this is a case.

If its using the 56mm on the subject, then what a terrible waste of a great aperture the 28mm lens has to offer. Part of what makes the camera amazing, is the 1.8 aperture and how well it captures darker objects. quite honestly, a 28mm, with a 1.8 aperture is going to give you a much better depth of field anyway.

Hoping they find a way to help fix this feature in the future. Perhaps, even if its adding the 1.8 aperture to the 56mm lens in the next iPhone.

Opinions?
Wow you must be really bad at taking photos. Portrait mode has worked amazingly to me and so many others.
 

anonymous guy

macrumors 6502a
Mar 18, 2010
505
126
Yeah, because how I take the photo really controls the noise/pixelation I am seeing. And I am so bad at it, its amazing thats how I've made my living for the better part of the last 14 years... :rolleyes:
I love the blind support this feature has been receiving from "casual" cellphone photogs.

The depth of focus feature looks pretty at a glance, but there are glaring effects within the pictures that reveal the obvious artificial look. The harsh transition from in-focus to the background reminds me of filter apps you can find in the AppStore.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.