Why would the reflected image in his sunglasses be blurred? With the depth of field even with a higher-end camera with his nose as focal point would still have his sunglass image reflection sharp as well.
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.
Photographer Austin Mann Shares First Photos Captured With iPhone XS
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why would the reflected image in his sunglasses be blurred? With the depth of field even with a higher-end camera with his nose as focal point would still have his sunglass image reflection sharp as well.
It is funny because for the life of me, I am horrible at taking decent photos with my iPhone, but am "ok" with my camera. I am impressed with people's ability to get these types of photos out of a phone's camera, no doubt. I bet pulling the shadows on the last image posted in the OP would not be pretty, where as in my A7R2 the camera is pretty much ISOless when exposed for highlights
I mean, obviously we have very different expectations, but this is the best camera on a smartphone, I’d imagine once reviews are out.
Yes, likely this is the best smartphone camera, but you could buy a $500 phone and a $500 camera and get better results every time for the same money. Just depends on your expectations and what you want to get out of your photographs.
Mmmm turtles ... turtle soup!
Of course today eating sea turtles, even in the Caribbean is no longer allowed/ilegal.
Of course today eating sea turtles, even in the Caribbean is no longer allowed/ilegal.
I have some iPhone 6 video of my daughter at a dance. The last thing I notice is the quality. Watching her I’m happy I had a camera to capture that moment. Love watching that video.
I see all these criticisms and I'm just happy that I think iPhone cameras have gotten good enough for me that I don't have to worry about that check box on my upgrades going forward because they've already met all my expectations lol.
My only sore spot is still low light.
My only sore spot is still low light.
No it wouldn’t. If I focus on an object positioned beside a mirror, a few metres away from me, with a narrow focal point, my reflection in the mirror is not also in focus. The same applies to a photo of someone’s sunglasses, reflections of objects several metres away should not be in focus.
If you have a DSLR, test it for yourself. Stand in front of your mirror, and focus your camera on a smudge on the mirror. You will see that your reflection will be out of focus.
But we aren't talking about a mirror. We are talking about a super small area of focus on someone's face.
Same concept, in this case the eyeglass lens is acting as a mirror.
Incorrect! I just had turtle steak in Grand Cayman. Not particularly full of taste but perfectly legal.
Let’s just agree to disagree, maybe you’re right, maybe I’m right. In my opinion it was quite jarring seeing the sharp reflection in his sunglasses with such a blurred background in a photo that is intended to mimic a narrow focal point. From my experience taking photos with a narrow focal point, you would not get these sharp reflections of objects. Of course for some people the result may not be so jarring, for me it was.
I may have missed it but I didn’t see his opinion of the quality of the phone itself. I saw his comment about the quality of many people using phone cameras but not the Xs camera itself.
Of course it will, it's a single function (or dual function if you do video) device. The iPhone is a multi-function device, so it's going to have to compromise.
Also, what kind of DSLR are you getting for less than $1000 with a lens? My dad just dropped around $1300 on an 80D with a lens.
Hmm... I think it’s a very slippery slope once all these ‘creative’ features start becoming part of the regular camera app.
Providing optical zoom with a separate lens and sensor is a good example of bringing the quality of a larger lensed camera to a smartphone.
HDR is also a good example of intelligently improving the image end-result without adding new information to the picture that wasnt already supplied as light information through the lens, albeit over several exposures.
Even the more extreme filters in the camera app are using established standard light/colour parameters to adjust the original image and achieve the filter result and these parameters are exposed to the user and applied consistently across the image.
Now what we have is the smartphone image processor being set loose with something akin to photoshop’s magic wand and blur tools, adding new image information to the photo inconsistently with lots of artefacts and it’s increasingly clear that adjustments are not based on an accurate depth map, especially if the single lens xr has the feature.
There’s nothing wrong with having creative photo filters and image processors on an iPhone but to make it part of the normal camera app seems like a bad decision. Leave this sort of thing to third party apps.
The last DLSR I bought was a Canon 30D and I paid around $1500.00 for it and a lens 8 years ago. I know you can get a Sony or the prosumer Nikon or Canon for less than $1000 but I don’t think it’s a lot less. And you won’t be browsing the Internet or calling someone with them.
Sweet. It’s been 2 decades and thought and was told not legal. Very happy. Especially when you catch it fresh. I’m a picky eater so seasoning is very key.[to any dish of course]
I disagree. These are not that good. Way too much noise reductions. Just like with the X the photos look too much like water paintings. Absolutely no details. So disappointed.
[doublepost=1537234014][/doublepost]
The new Canons SL2 is under $1000 and is quite nice.
Agree they are really good. What I mean is What's better about them that couldn't be done on the X? I'm sure there's something there but I don't know what it is. Not saying it as a negative. Genuinely interested in the detailed photography aspects.
At this stage, all digital cameras (DSLR, mirrorless, smartphone) are, in terms of technical image quality, more than sufficient for the average person; especially those who basically take snapshots. If your iPhone from four years back took great photos then, it still takes great phots now.
And really, if you need to do a side-by-side comparison to reveal slight differences in technical quality, then does it really matter? Actually, how much does technical perfection matter in the overall photographic canon? Not as much as lots of folks are lead to believe.
I’m not dropping the relevance of image quality from 100 to 0, but there are a number of points in-between that different people will find aesthetically acceptable, particularly when more important matters are considered, such as lighting, composition, geometry, tonality, contrast, movement, or subject matter.
Robert Frank’s “The Americans” is technically messy, but I’ve never encountered a greater photographic essay (maybe there's one that I just haven't seen yet, but until then...).
But yeah, I get it; some folks, particularly those whose livelihood depends on photography, need the latest and most advanced to not just best facilitate their style but to also do so in the most efficient and reliable manner.
Then again, I also know that I’ve seen some recent pinhole photographs that are as visually engaging as any other shots that have crossed my eyeballs. Sure, it’s all a bit subjective, but that’s OK…it’s why choice remains important. Use what you want, use what you need.
Finally, irrespective of what camera you are using, don’t underestimate the value of post processing; it’s been an essential element of photography since the medium’s inception.
And really, if you need to do a side-by-side comparison to reveal slight differences in technical quality, then does it really matter? Actually, how much does technical perfection matter in the overall photographic canon? Not as much as lots of folks are lead to believe.
I’m not dropping the relevance of image quality from 100 to 0, but there are a number of points in-between that different people will find aesthetically acceptable, particularly when more important matters are considered, such as lighting, composition, geometry, tonality, contrast, movement, or subject matter.
Robert Frank’s “The Americans” is technically messy, but I’ve never encountered a greater photographic essay (maybe there's one that I just haven't seen yet, but until then...).
But yeah, I get it; some folks, particularly those whose livelihood depends on photography, need the latest and most advanced to not just best facilitate their style but to also do so in the most efficient and reliable manner.
Then again, I also know that I’ve seen some recent pinhole photographs that are as visually engaging as any other shots that have crossed my eyeballs. Sure, it’s all a bit subjective, but that’s OK…it’s why choice remains important. Use what you want, use what you need.
Finally, irrespective of what camera you are using, don’t underestimate the value of post processing; it’s been an essential element of photography since the medium’s inception.
