that's where I turn it on, but, it defaults back to not being used every time the app starts ... there's an icon in the viewfinder where ProRaw is crossed out, it's a toggle to turn on/off
Under camera settings, preserve settings, turn on for raw, ProRes or anything else
I would say this is not a macro shot. It’s just a normal 13mm wide shot.
It sounds more like all smartphone user are stupid and they make just photos from their lunch for Facebook.Well said!
I plan on waiting on reviewers to do just that. And maybe in a week or so this site will post an article comparing different camera configurations.
Im sure the super expert pro reviewer will bring out some magic news regarding that... they will proof that the technical data everyone can read on apples page is wrong.... the 120mm prime lens like described on the technical data page of the official apple page is in truth the optical magic zoom lens (apple don't write that just to surprise the reviewer later).
there is an estimated 6+ Billion smartphones out there, I said 99%, so that leaves 60 Million who care about photography terms, maybe it is 98%, maybe 97% ... it is the VAST majority of smartphone users for sure.
Right exactly, this is all more than a little pedantic. From the perspective of casual photographers and end users, the phone has a “make far away stuff bigger without distortions” feature. And the sorts of people who actually care about the distinction probably already have a camera with optical zoom (and probably greater than 5x, I’d reckon).And, right there, you’ve lost most people as they turn away, snap a picture using the 5x button and walk away happy having captured a picture they consider as “zoom” with a camera someone just told them doesn’t have zoom!
A lot of photographers will tell you the only ‘true real’ lenses are prime lenses. Zoom lenses are a solution to a problem, and are in no way better than a prime equivalent. Even the very good ones (I have a rather excellent 70-200, but it’s not a patch on my 135, 100 macro, my 85 or my 50). On a smartphone I’d would wager that’s a thousand fold.
Wouldn’t be the first time people have misread misinterpreted or miswrote technical information. I understand you want people to get out pitchforks and stuff. If you’re correct then I’m sure some site will cover how a billion dollar company managed to blow it or maybe nobody would care because it still looks like the overall picture quality improved. Technical data doesn’t always show the full picture 😉 especially when it’s provided by Apple.
I see what you're saying. They're reporting "26mm" by cropping it at 50% and then digitally zooming 200% to make the 6MP image look like a 12MP one.
The moment I saw someone with iPhone 12 Pro Max taking a photo of a light fitting under mid-low light condition, I knew iPhone camera Apple shown in advertisement were 100% scam and no truth. From that point on, I completely lost faith on smartphone camera because they cannot and will never be able to compete dedicated DSLR In terms of versatility and quality on photos.
To me photo itself doesn’t strike too much of visual differences. But Im not a photographer and I have terrible eyes so who knows. What I am afraid of is Apple will hide detail information of photos taken by iPhone in later version of macOS and iOS just like they take away battery remaining hours info from system tray.
Camera itself is not, but camera marketing done by Apple is 100% scam and no truth.
No, there’s a LOT of them that know better, but they know better because they DESIRED to know better and educated themselves. Those that don’t know, don’t want to know, because maybe they get lots of compliments on their pictures from friends and family, but wouldn’t be able to tell anyone what an fstop was even with cash on the line.
Most importantly, as Apple will likely sell over 200 million phones and even if only 25% are iPhone 15 Pro Max’s, that’s 50 million devices that have to have parts delivered and assembled and work with a high rate of success (because of the number that have to be produced and ready to be packaged per day). From the information I just checked, Sony haven’t sold over 10 million since 2017. I would imagine that there’s far more technology suppliers that can reliably ship 3 million parts than 50 million parts.
No there’s lots of actual real differences there. Whether it’s a cheap, expensive, or smartphone camera, they’re all dealing with the same light in different ways. The analogy would be more like Apple selling Jimmy Dean while someone is trying to explain how it’s “not real sausage” and that local organic is would be SO much better to someone that regularly consumes and enjoys Great Value sausages.
Just prerelease babbling. Stop meaninglessly nit-picking specs and test real iPhone camera systems in a week. What matters is, can we improve our image captures using the new camera systems?
That is just flat wrong. The published specs do not describe the quality of the optics, the interaction of the computing, the UI, etc.: how well it all works in real world usage capturing images. And real world usage capturing images is really all that matters.
