See the review. Especially the low light photo, everything appears red
http://it.sohu.com/20160916/n468539203.shtml
http://it.sohu.com/20160916/n468539203.shtml
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.
The iPhone 7 camera sucks at white balance
- Thread starter blackoutz
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't know it's all Chinese (simplified) to me... Honestly I'd like to see a camera that isn't grainy doing a digital zoom while using a high ISO (for the keyboard picture). Seems as though it was purposely used in bad situations. The building windows looked fine to me (or as what would be expected from a digital zoom).
I took a look at an iPhone 7 plus today and took some pictures...The white balance was FINE...I'm a photographer and I know what BAD white balance is...this phone is like most other previous models of the iPhone...its constantly getting better and this one is looking to be a great phone. Yes, next years phone will be better and the camera will improve again. This iPhone is FINE (so far).
Translation here
https://translate.google.com/transl.../20160916/n468539203.shtml&edit-text=&act=url
[doublepost=1474051926][/doublepost]
https://translate.google.com/transl.../20160916/n468539203.shtml&edit-text=&act=url
[doublepost=1474051926][/doublepost]
Have you tried low light? It's the only situation where I am not satisfied with the 6 Plus.
Are we seriously discussing white balance in low light on a PHONE? C'mon folks, it isn't like this thing is supposed to be magic. It is a phone....
Apple made a big fuss about the new camera especially in low light. For the money I am paying, it better beats competition.
Last edited:
Low light is difficult on any device with a standard lens, I would take what you can get in low light with pure bliss, it's way better than it used to be.
The problem is every one expects low light photos to be of the same quality as the images of the aurora borealis, when in fact you are taking good pictures if less than 25% of the picture isn't artifacts. The big thing about low light photography is about being able to control the aperture and shutterspeeds, since the iPhone (or any camera phone) is limited in aperture, this is going to be extremely difficult without 3rd party hardware.
Just be happy you can take better night photos than on the previous models.
Looks like the six-month old S7 still beats it...
http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-iphone-7-plus-galaxy-s7-camera-comparison-2016-9
http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-iphone-7-plus-galaxy-s7-camera-comparison-2016-9
I have seen you coin the highlighted phrase a few time in the past week, had a hunch and decided to check on it and found this little diddy with the following quote:
"I dabble in a little photography"
In 2016...with everyone carrying a camera in their phone, the definition of a "Photographer" is one who makes a living off of it. Everyone else is a photo enthusiast.
Me, it's been my only career for the past 30 years...
it most likely will not, but it will be better than your last iphone. Still, it is a phone and will never be a DSLR replacement.
Personally the Note 7 is almost perfect to me. What matters to me is screen, camera, phone design and then internal components in that order... I really don't care much about the A10 as A8 is fast enough for me.... Too bad Note 7 explodes.
That is currently being addressed and could easily happen to apple or any other vendor. If you like the Note, then wait and get one.
Photographer is assumed someone who makes a living off of it, but that's why Professional is placed in front of the word.
Lets break these down:
profess - belief in something /claim allegiance to
ion - makes this profession: something that is done for a living
al - someone who
Photo - light
Graph - image
er - someone who
So a professional is something who does something for a living, or is just really good at it because they like taking photos and do it a lot
a photographer is someone who takes images based on light (photographs)
all be darn, a photographer does not have to take photos for a living
A professional photographer does take photos for a living.
Etymology ftw
</grammar Nazism>
Also my dad is a photographer, he made a living off of it for 13 years as a professional photographer, just because it's no longer his source of income means he's not a (professional) photographer.
But...but, Tim and Eddie said it was the best camera they've made and it's magical...
[doublepost=1474055116][/doublepost]
If I had a dime every time someone claimed to be a photographer on MRs, I'd be a rich man.
That site did a horrible job
Of comparing the cameras. Half the comparison shots have completely different lighting sources or objects in focus.
Well, I am not a "professional" as I rarely make money on my photography. But I have been taking photos for well over 40 years - so I do consider myself a "photographer". Picked up the iPhone 7 this afternoon and while I have only taken a few pictures so far (still trying to get used to the new home "button"), I just took two in the room in my house that I am sitting in. And the white balance in both seem fine - even when I took the dark end of the bedroom. Certainly not what I could call "sucks" by any stretch of the imagination IMHO.