Previous news story    Next news story

Quick Review: Apple iPhone 5

By dpreview staff on Oct 1, 2012 at 22:00 GMT

Just Posted: A quick review of the iPhone 5's camera. Apple might not have set out to make some of the most popular cameras on the planet with its iPhone range of smartphones, but that's exactly what has happened. The iPhone 5, Apple's latest model brings a larger screen, faster processor and redesigned camera compared to its predecessor. In this 5-page article we take a look at the iPhone 5's performance as a camera, including comparisons with the iPhone 4S and iPhone 4 in a range of different environments, video samples and a full gallery of 'real world' shots.

Comments

Total comments: 218
12
vanessaelizebeth
By vanessaelizebeth (Feb 14, 2013)

The new iPhone will be available in black and white,this has more than 200 new features in ios 6 .

www.mobilephonesreview.in

0 upvotes
henhen
By henhen (Oct 14, 2012)

Its clear that dpreview must have sold its soul to apple. This post and the last 3 articles all are apple advertisements.

tips for taking your iphone into the ocean

travelling with only your iphone

ipad role in photo workflow

0 upvotes
IcyPepsi
By IcyPepsi (Oct 8, 2012)

Just walked into an Apple store. Checked out THE MOST POPULAR CAMERA ON flickr.com (and possibly the world), on iPhone 5. I was shocked to see that there was no way to increase the EV for one composition I was trying. Then I tried spot focusing on a "darker" area in the view, hoping that it will increase the overall EV. It did.. but just a wee bit. Definitely way under +1 EV and no where close to what I was looking for that composition. And I know this was the case with previous iPhone models as well. The EV limit/decision posed by Apple. Really? Is this limit (and many other limits to my taste) what users will have to live with?

But on many Android phone, you easily get upto +/- 2 EV, ISO, WB and even shutter speed (and ofcourse an auto mode). Isn't manual control the amusing part of any camera on a camera review website? Or am I missing something?

0 upvotes
7ape
By 7ape (Oct 8, 2012)

There are apps for that. http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/645-pro/id518235205?mt=8 You can even shoot in RAW :)

0 upvotes
Atomez
By Atomez (Oct 5, 2012)

iPhone 5 purple lens flare against a bright light source. Looks like a reflection on the lens.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccZhIDbBnPk&hd=1

2 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (Oct 4, 2012)

What's wrong with using your smartphone's camera as your primary, and perhaps only, picture taking device? Absolutely nothing! There are a lot of people out there who are being introduced to the joy of photography who may never have been, and it's all because of those cameras built into their phones that we "real photographers" love to bash. Why do you think the market for new and used cameras has been steadily growing these past few years? A lot of those novice picture takers grow up and buy "real cameras" as a direct result of their camera-phone involvement. That makes it a win win for everybody.

3 upvotes
guyfawkes
By guyfawkes (Oct 4, 2012)

Donnie G,

I rather suspect that the majority of smartphone camera users won't progress beyond the phone stage. Already we are seeing sales of compacts falling off dramatically and it is said this is due to the smartphone. IMHO, the image quality of the best smartphones is all they want, not the versatility of a compact that can offer a decent optical zoom and potentially higher quality images. It is the plus factor of the instant upload to sites such as facebook and youtube etc that seems to be the biggest selling point.

If this catchment of users is significant, then it is to be welcomed that at least phone manufacturers are addressing quality issues for them. But the better the quality of a camera phone, the less reason for them to upgrade, surely?

4 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (Oct 4, 2012)

@ guyfawkes,

Sales of low end compacts are falling off and will continue to do so. The camera-phone is replacing the inexpensive point & shoot camera as camera of choice for the casual photographer simply because it doesn't make much sense for them to own 2 devices to do the same job, and they always have their phones with them anyway.

Image quality is something that we grow to recognize as we become more involved with our hobby. How many of us actually were concerned about IQ when we first started taking pictures? I know that I wasn't, and I had formal training. Just like the camera-phone user of today and the disposable camera users of yesterday, all I wanted was to make an image that I could share among family and friends who hopefully would appreciate my effort at art. As my expectations and budget grew, so too did my investment in my hobby/business/and now hobby again. The sales boom is in higher end cameras like ILCs and DSLRs.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 11 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
bostic
By bostic (Oct 4, 2012)

Nothing wrong with it, if you only use it for Flickr.

0 upvotes
T. L. Rutter
By T. L. Rutter (Oct 5, 2012)

you are 100% true! About 7 years ago, I was at the zoo and had my really nice camera and a family next to me had a crappy phone (not even a smartphone back then) and they were taking pictures of their kids and the animals at the zoo and I was thinking of how stupid they were for doing so. After giving it a lot of thought, I came to respect them for doing so and had admiration, no matter how crappy the format.

0 upvotes
kadardr
By kadardr (Oct 4, 2012)

The more we talk about it, the better is for iphone.

Someone should write an essay and analysis on camera-phones in general and iphone photography artisan hype in particular.

All this started with enabling the elevation of monthly fees by boosting mms (and putting camera in the phone).

2 upvotes
PhotoPoet
By PhotoPoet (Oct 3, 2012)

I've been a photographer professionally and now just for enjoyment not for cash. I love my D7000 and all the other cameras I have gone through, Sony Cybershot DSC-F55E, etc.. When I switched from film to digital I became a truly bad photographer, not composing, just shooting. No longer worrying that I only had 11 rolls of film with me that day... I got over that and as we all have (well most of us) and began to understand and love digital. Film still has a time and reason but not for me. Side note: I don't understand why I would want a Micro Four Thirds system. I tried it in store.. I walk around holding the lens.. weird...I love my D7000 and my iPhone5. The iPhone is not a D7000 or even a PowerShotS110. It is a fantastic, always in my pocket, take anywhere camera/photolab. That is a fact. I get wonderful shots, I edit (no fixer smell) post and enjoy the feedback. Get over it. Phone cameras are here to stay... enjoy them. Welcome aboard to all photographers..

7 upvotes
larrytusaz
By larrytusaz (Oct 3, 2012)

Well by all means, you're free to do as you please. I'm equally free to microwave a Hot Pocket and call myself a chef, as full of bologna as that would be.

6 upvotes
theyowlingcat
By theyowlingcat (Oct 3, 2012)

@larrytusaz Why the personal attack on @PhotoPost?

0 upvotes
larrytusaz
By larrytusaz (Oct 3, 2012)

It's not a personal attack. "You're a dummy/idiot" etc, THAT would be a personal attack. I'm just challenging the notion that using an iPhone is "photography." This thread was about dead anyway, and we seemed to have moved on until next time (with me also acknowledging that Dpreview is now doing lens reviews again & that's just great) so maybe for THAT reason I should have left it alone I suppose.

3 upvotes
Serenity Now
By Serenity Now (Oct 4, 2012)

How is it NOT photography? It's a camera - you take a picture - it's photography. If you mean it's not photography because it's not a specialised photographic device then it must follow the all those who own said specialised devices must be photographers? And we know that not to be true.

0 upvotes
larrytusaz
By larrytusaz (Oct 4, 2012)

Oh please, if using a phone camera is PHOTOGRAPHY. then Lucy in "Peanuts" really WAS a "psychiatrist."

4 upvotes
Lilianna
By Lilianna (Oct 5, 2012)

The Irony is that critics and painters in the 19th century derided the idea of photography as "art".
Guess Sherlock WAS a real detective then :)

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
vv50
By vv50 (Oct 5, 2012)

larrytroll, if everyone agreed to your definition of photography, there would be no true photographers. http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/no-true-scotsman

1 upvote
JazzMasta
By JazzMasta (Oct 6, 2012)

larrytroll, the most negative person alive.

0 upvotes
larrytusaz
By larrytusaz (Oct 9, 2012)

Nah, I would say the most honest person alive (or just plain honest, not necessarily the most honest alive).

0 upvotes
globethrottle
By globethrottle (Oct 3, 2012)

So, whats the market share better camera phones need to have to get reviewed on this site?

1 upvote
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Oct 3, 2012)

I don't know whether somebody has provided this link yet but I'm too lazy to read the two pages of comments already writen about this "photography future" tool...

So here is the link to the page dealing with the purple iPhone defect: http://gizmodo.com/5947972/apple-acknowledges-iphone-5-camera-problem-says-youre-holding-it-wrong

If that's really what some of us believe is the future of photography - because it's "already as good as a D800", not less ! - well, I enjoin them to buy a new pair of glasses... and a little sense of circumspection. It won't be superfluous !

2 upvotes
guyfawkes
By guyfawkes (Oct 4, 2012)

Hi, WilliamJ.

I checked out the link. Very interesting. Just think: what if a camera produced this (van Gogh?) effect? What about the infamous Fuji orbs? Look at the furore these caused, because it was a camera. Yet this gets by almost unnoticed, because it is an Apple smartphone. Apple can get away with it because they have such a loyal (dumb?) customer base.

1 upvote
tommy leong
By tommy leong (Oct 3, 2012)

"purple flare" problem doesn't exist on android phone.
Therefore, android phone users MUST be competent photographer

LOL

0 upvotes
EvlBert
By EvlBert (Oct 2, 2012)

Thoughts on the "purple flare" problem? I'm thinking lens coating issues.

0 upvotes
Gully Foyle
By Gully Foyle (Oct 2, 2012)

Nah, it's your fault. You're holding it wrong.

3 upvotes
graybalanced
By graybalanced (Oct 2, 2012)

It was covered in the review. They basically said just do what you normally do as a competent photographer, which is, keep bright light sources out of your sensor.

0 upvotes
zigi_S
By zigi_S (Oct 3, 2012)

Imho it's the same problem as ccd sensors had. It's a sensor problem.

2 upvotes
Pavel Sokolov
By Pavel Sokolov (Oct 2, 2012)

This is the fifth iphone 5 topic in news in the past month. I think this is the last one, due to magical number 5.

7 upvotes
ChrisKramer1
By ChrisKramer1 (Oct 2, 2012)

I must say Apple have outdone themselves by getting their smart phone reviewed on a photography website! When can we expect to see the review of the Samsung Galaxy 3, the HTC One or the hundreds of other smart phones out there? After all, DPReview would not want to be seen giving favour to Apple would they?

Incidentally, where is the review of the Pentax K30?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
20 upvotes
Pavel Sokolov
By Pavel Sokolov (Oct 2, 2012)

Apple is very strong in product placement. Try to find the movie where bad guy have an MacBook. Only good guys may have MacBooks.

2 upvotes
Simon Joinson
By Simon Joinson (Oct 2, 2012)

well we already reviewed the Nokia 808, and are working on the Samsung G3 and HTC One. Because no, we wouldn't want to give favor to one manufacturer (we gave up caring how we were 'seen' long ago).

10 upvotes
Pierre-Arnaud Bonraisin
By Pierre-Arnaud Bonraisin (Oct 2, 2012)

@Simon.

Good for you. Don't let Googoloids/Apple bashers bully you, as they usually do along forums.

0 upvotes
IZO100
By IZO100 (Oct 2, 2012)

@Simon
Then why is the first review the iPhone 5 and not the HTC One or the Samsung Galaxy S3 ?

8 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (Oct 2, 2012)

@IZO100: According to your reasoning, the manufacturer whose product gets reviewed first, is being favoured. So if the Samsung got reviewed first, what would be the difference?

0 upvotes
guyfawkes
By guyfawkes (Oct 4, 2012)

@Revenant, but as Jadedgamer said, if it is so relatively easy to do a camera review, why didn't dpreview do a comparison review of the top handful of smartphones? Then no one gets to be #1, except if they come out on top.

0 upvotes
Petrogel
By Petrogel (Oct 2, 2012)

what about comparison iphone vs Nokia 808 pureview, human vanity versus nominal big pixel count ?

2 upvotes
Pavel Sokolov
By Pavel Sokolov (Oct 2, 2012)

video with nokia 920
http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/25/iphone-5-lumia-920-image-stabilization-face-off/

0 upvotes
Petrogel
By Petrogel (Oct 2, 2012)

i don't like cameras attached on-to phones costing more than 200 euros i consider it as a rip off, specially when they deliver image quality like this

0 upvotes
Stevan G
By Stevan G (Oct 5, 2012)

808 vs N8 vs IP5

http://t.co/D9auRIAd

N8 still dominates "reinvented" IP5 camera, nough said

Comment edited 57 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Joes Raw Talk
By Joes Raw Talk (Oct 2, 2012)

DPR is doing what they ought to do to stay up with trends in technology. Fact; many, many people capture images with smartphones/iPhones. I guess I could relate this to the fact that I abhor video being integrated into all my cameras as well as seeing the subject examined far too much for my interest. I have found it is best to ignore what does not interest you and allow others to enjoy even what you do not.

9 upvotes
RAMcG
By RAMcG (Oct 2, 2012)

Wow, strong feelings on both sides. I think people need to lighten up a touch.

One thing that Barney said a few times, early on, was that this review was done in a couple of days, and over a weekend. That suggests to me that he and perhaps others gave up their weekend to do this. Assuming that's the case, thanks for the reivew. It was timely and much appreciated.

The Apple fanboys (and girls) have already snapped up 5 million of these babys. Now, those who are still considering whether to upgrade from a 4s will have additional, objective information. And, assuming the repeated comments that a more in-depth review with other options is coming, shortly those considering a broader range of options will have that type of information.

3 upvotes
guyfawkes
By guyfawkes (Oct 2, 2012)

I don't mind the odd phone review, but has dpreview lost its way? Where are the camera reviews? These seem to be taking second best to gadgets and phones.

16 upvotes
RXVGS
By RXVGS (Oct 2, 2012)

Agreed, it use to be good a few years ago, but has been going downhill since they got taken over by Amazon. Maybe Apple will be the next owner and change the name to 'iPreview' and be full of phone reviews with the odd 'quick camera review' from time to time.

12 upvotes
Ross Murphy
By Ross Murphy (Oct 2, 2012)

the only problem I have seen is people constantly whining about the web site and the cameras, dpreview does a great job with reviewing cameras and the gear and gadgets that go with them

7 upvotes
JadedGamer
By JadedGamer (Oct 3, 2012)

"Proper" camera reviews take longer because there is more to consider - a smartphone camera has fewer bells and whistles.

0 upvotes
jeff_006
By jeff_006 (Oct 2, 2012)

iPhone, the only cameras (and phone) in the world that needs to spend 80 euros to change the battery...What is amazing with Apple is that customers are so happy to pay more and to be stolen !
I definitely don't like Apple despite their nice designs and good products. Apple is just too closed, I don't like their policy of closed system and they see their customers as (happy) milk cows. I will never buy Apple

18 upvotes
wetsleet
By wetsleet (Oct 2, 2012)

well, you pay about £50 for a Nikon battery (D800/D7000 etc). Ok, so then you can change it yourself, but the meoney is still spent.

1 upvote
larrytusaz
By larrytusaz (Oct 2, 2012)

I will agree with (wetsleet) here, although it's somewhat off-topic. How has Nikon managed to "lock-down" the EN-EL14 (D3100-D5100-D3200) and EN-EL15 (D7000, D800, V1, D600) to where you absolutely cannot find a generic equivalent anywhere? Did they get a patent of some sort? The generic companies have managed to overcome just about every other "smart battery" lock-down attempts.

1 upvote
JPMontez
By JPMontez (Oct 2, 2012)

@larrytusaz: Take a look at http://www.amazon.com/Wasabi-Power-Battery-Charger-EN-EL15/dp/B009DJ1THW

1 upvote
Pierre-Arnaud Bonraisin
By Pierre-Arnaud Bonraisin (Oct 2, 2012)

#1 You hate Apple.

#2 You find reasons to justify #1.

#3 You still don't get a life. Back to #1.

3 upvotes
larrytusaz
By larrytusaz (Oct 2, 2012)

(JPMontez) I appreciate link very much. I don't even own any cameras that use that battery--I have the D5100, which uses the EN-14, and I managed to get spares for it pretty cheap.

However, your link is helpful in the event I ever get a D7000 or D600. I don't like this "smart battery" technology, I like to be able to get my own batteries from ANYBODY. Making people buy their batteries from you--well, it sounds like something Apple would do.

1 upvote
Gully Foyle
By Gully Foyle (Oct 2, 2012)

@Pierre-AB
Replace 'hate' with 'love' and repeat.
#1 You love Apple.
#2 You find reasons to justify #1.
#3 You still don't get a life. Back to #1.
Happy now?

1 upvote
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Oct 3, 2012)

#1 I don't hate Apple, still like Jeff, do not like at all their way of doing business.

# 2 Don't need to look for a reason too far as there are plenty at hand to justify #1

# 3 I, for sure, live my life fully as I don't own any "smart"phone.

0 upvotes
VividExposures
By VividExposures (Oct 2, 2012)

http://gizmodo.com/5947972/apple-acknowledges-iphone-5-camera-problem-says-youre-holding-it-wrong

LMAO!

8 upvotes
veato
By veato (Oct 2, 2012)

The iPhone (although a phone) is the most popular camera in the world. That alone would explain why a photography website might want to have a look!

If you disagree, don't read the review. Easy.

6 upvotes
zigi_S
By zigi_S (Oct 2, 2012)

It's a smartphone not a camera. The camera on this .... is an afterthought.

6 upvotes
veato
By veato (Oct 2, 2012)

The quality of the camera on a smartphone is a big draw nowadays for the general public. Apple know this hence why its features appear on detail on the site above the new connector, maps, siri, iOS6, iCloud and a host of other features.

This is certainly not an afterthought.

1 upvote
cordellwillis
By cordellwillis (Oct 2, 2012)

If you don't agree with the disagreements don't read them. Easy too :D

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
zigi_S
By zigi_S (Oct 2, 2012)

Nothing against phone cameras. Something against apple propaganda that is so obvious you have to be blind not to see it. Also, flickr count of pictures taken with the iphone doesn't make it the most popular. It just speaks wolumes about iphone users who are mostly facebook addicts and have to snap every boring moment of their life and publicize their misery to the whole world.

13 upvotes
guyfawkes
By guyfawkes (Oct 2, 2012)

@ veato. Shhh, perhaps Apple would prefer you not to mention the Apple maps! Just because they have a spat with google.

1 upvote
Gully Foyle
By Gully Foyle (Oct 2, 2012)

The most popular camera in the world?
I thought that the biggest cameraphone mfg is Samsung, be it a smartphone or a simple featurephone or whatever. Not to mention that prior to Samsung, Nokia was the #1 phone mfg, camera or not. Where was Apple then, when millions of people the world all over were happily taking photos with their phones? I know people who are plenty happy with their 1.3MP photos because they print pretty well *for their needs*. They also spend a lot of time taking photos because they keep almost every one. They also have no idea of how to create a Facebook account or a flickr or whatever, because they don't care to take part in it. Dismissing these facts is naive at best.
The arguments made by Apple fanboys are always, *always* soooo out of place that there's no wonder why Apple managed to get thus far.

--EDITS
Corrections and typos

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 11 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
veato
By veato (Oct 3, 2012)

""Also, flickr count of pictures taken with the iphone doesn't make it the most popular""

No the fact that the device has sold in its millions probably makes it technically the most popular camera

0 upvotes
theyowlingcat
By theyowlingcat (Oct 3, 2012)

A camera can be a box with a hole in it. People can take bad or good photos with any camera.

1 upvote
zigi_S
By zigi_S (Oct 4, 2012)

>No the fact that the device has sold in its millions probably makes it technically the most popular camera.

No it's not. Feature phones still sell in hundreds of millions. While it's really something to acheive the success apple did with it's iphone. It's still nowhere the figures of most sold camera phones. Also. You really pay for the camera that is still just a phone camera that is iw wise in the neighbourhood of a 80€ point&shoot.

Look at the nokia asha series. Certainly not "popular" in the "1st world" but it will be sold easily at numbers of the iphone and over. But will we see a review of it's camera? Not likely. Its a cultural phenomen. The sympton of the Lowest common denominator type of culture. A social status for people without their own opinion and style.

0 upvotes
jjlmoose
By jjlmoose (Oct 2, 2012)

Great Job DPR...

How can anyone argue that this isn't news to the photographic community. I own Nikon FX and DX, Panasonic M4/3, Sony and Canon P&S gear and I'm still interested in the iphone camera as I have it with me all the time. Find another manufacturer that sold 5 million cameras in the first three days of it's release and I'm sure it will be front page news here. It could even be safe to say that the iphone will be, if it isn't already the single most popular camera in the world.

11 upvotes
facedodge
By facedodge (Oct 2, 2012)

Thanks for the review DPreview. You've created something that no one else has done. There will be a million reviews of the iphone as a phone and the D600 as a camera, but this is the only in-depth review of the iphone 5 camera.

4 upvotes
JesperMP
By JesperMP (Oct 2, 2012)

Why cant we load iPhone 5 into the comparison wizard page and do our own conclusions ?
I wanted to compare Nokia 808 with iphone 5, but while I could load the 808, the iphone 5 is not in the list despite that we can see that DPR has used the standard studio scene for the sample images in the quick review.

edit: Please ignore. I see that DPR say that they are working on a more in-depth review.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Oct 4, 2012)

Also a totally new studio scene, which will make these comparisons much, much more meaningful than we could manage with our existing setup. That's in the pipeline (just ironing out the bugs at the moment).

0 upvotes
Laurentiu Todie
By Laurentiu Todie (Oct 2, 2012)

Thank you!
This was useful to me.

2 upvotes
ageha
By ageha (Oct 2, 2012)

I hope DPR reviews even more gadgets in the future!

3 upvotes
raylob
By raylob (Oct 2, 2012)

Only after DPR reviews all the cameras first!

4 upvotes
Sergey Borachev
By Sergey Borachev (Oct 2, 2012)

I don't care how good this iPhone5 or any iPhone is in future. To me, all the proprietary stuff is not attractive and their action against Samsung was the last straw. I will never buy anything Apple unless I have no choice.

I did not read this review or any other such reviews or news. Skip, skip.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
21 upvotes
HDF2
By HDF2 (Oct 2, 2012)

Glad to see your time is so valuable that you wouldn't waste it on reading this review.

But apparently your time is cheap enough that you would waste it (and ours) by commenting on a article you haven't read.

10 upvotes
Wye Photography
By Wye Photography (Oct 2, 2012)

I don't suppose Apple would want Sergey as a customer anyway!

1 upvote
Sergey Borachev
By Sergey Borachev (Oct 3, 2012)

It's not about availability of time or about me as a customer. It is about standardisation, competition, ... like HDMI, USB, SD Card slot, and other open standards ... Android applications, ...and ultimately value and choice to consumers. I believe there are numerous others like me.

2 upvotes
JadedGamer
By JadedGamer (Oct 3, 2012)

USB is not open, it is ruled by the USB Consortium.
HDMI is equally not open. Anyway, Apple have adapters for both.
SD cards are common but under a shed load of patents so not particularly open. Plus many other devices are without a SD card slot as well (Nexus 7, all WP7.x phones, ...)
And when did "Android applications" become a standard?

0 upvotes
Earthlight
By Earthlight (Oct 2, 2012)

Darwin would be pleased to read some of the comments here. People really do descent from apes.

5 upvotes
JohnnyWashngo
By JohnnyWashngo (Oct 2, 2012)

We didn't descend from apes so much as we share a common ancestor.

3 upvotes
raylob
By raylob (Oct 2, 2012)

and we have learned to read and write!

1 upvote
zigi_S
By zigi_S (Oct 2, 2012)

Some still kept their need to hold iph.. i mean stones.

1 upvote
Wye Photography
By Wye Photography (Oct 2, 2012)

...and 'we' have learned to kill millions of our own species and endanger the life of all the rest.

I believe in de-evolution.

1 upvote
Vegasus
By Vegasus (Oct 2, 2012)

Please stop making comment negatively. Lets play some quiz shall we? What is the first manufacture making camera phone? And what year?

3 upvotes
aardvark7
By aardvark7 (Oct 2, 2012)

Looking at the opposing views about whether such reviews are merited, I wonder if DPReview could carry out some research (no idea where to start, sorry!) as to the nature of photography, not from the point of the capture device but with regard to the final display. Also, to take into account the average time of display.

In other words, has photography changed from being prints in frames and magazines etc., to 'Facebook' galleries and has the lifespan of any image gone from decades to mere hours in some cases?

Furthermore, what percentage of pictures ever get seen by anyone other than those few who view it on the LCD screen immediately after being taken?

It might make for an interesting piece...

3 upvotes
larrytusaz
By larrytusaz (Oct 2, 2012)

I actually like that idea. Apart from the phone camera aspect, there is a growing sense I'm detecting that seems to go beyond simply appreciating "live at the scene" photos (which is fine) to actually considering any non-current photo to be yesterday's news. I rather like the idea of photos that still evoke emotion years later, even if they're simply "silly snaps" that could've been taken by my 5 year-old. (Believe it or not I do those.) Things change & photos capture life as it was at the time of capture & locks it in. You can at any time revisit that era by taking a journey via your shots. That's a large part of the beauty of it to me anyway.

1 upvote
Mike Hoban
By Mike Hoban (Oct 2, 2012)

Is Barney Britton a real name or a screen name?, either way, its cool, and would suit me. Maybe with a couple of letter swaps.

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Oct 2, 2012)

Real. We all have our crosses to bear.

1 upvote
Mike Hoban
By Mike Hoban (Oct 2, 2012)

Indeed we do, I use an Iphone 5 now instead of a once very high spec Nikon Coolpix.....let me be damned! :)

0 upvotes
mirabeau
By mirabeau (Oct 2, 2012)

If you want this site tailor made to your own needs then read the previews and reviews that interest you, why get worked up about something you have no interest in????There's plenty more on this site to read about other than iphones etc etc, and I'm sure there will be plenty more to come, now that we are post Photokina.

3 upvotes
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Oct 2, 2012)

In my perspective, I view the phone as a small sensor compact with a fixed lens, small photosites do not interest me. Yet, I would still read the article though, it's better to know than not at all.

1 upvote
backayonder
By backayonder (Oct 2, 2012)

If I dump my Nokia and move over to Apple will my lenses, flash and filters fit the iPhone5 ?

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
1 upvote
JWest
By JWest (Oct 2, 2012)

I can confidently say that you won't have a compatibility problem with a single one of your Nokia lenses or accessories.

2 upvotes
raylob
By raylob (Oct 2, 2012)

I thought iPhone was a phone rather than a camera?
Ray

5 upvotes
Barry Fitzgerald
By Barry Fitzgerald (Oct 2, 2012)

Lol yes it is. IMO DPR have better things to do than waste time reviewing a phone with a camera.
More and more DPR get distracted when there are lots of "real cameras" to review. Let the phone sites do phone reviews, photo sites do real camera reviews.

8 upvotes
JadedGamer
By JadedGamer (Oct 3, 2012)

Ah, the "DPReview can only do one thing at a time" myth.

The DP stands for "Digital Photography" not "What I The Reader Decide Is A Digital Camera".

0 upvotes
Daniel
By Daniel (Oct 2, 2012)

It seems there are two main ways to elicit a storm of angry responses on dpreview: either by reviewing products from Apple or from Leica. It may be useful to keep in mind that the "dp" in "dpreview" stands for "digital photography". It does not stand for "digital photography using equipment that satisfies my own personal needs", nor does it stand for "digital photography using equipment I can afford". It aims to cover all aspects of digital photography, from simple cameras built into phones to high-end professional equipment.

This site does this exceptionally well and has become THE reference for digital photography equipment on the web. If you dislike a review, move on and read something else. If you feel your needs are not being addressed, politely suggest items for review, but you have no right to make demands or become abusive. You are here because others are putting in a lot of good work that you get to benefit from for free. A little appreciation would not be out of place!

24 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Oct 2, 2012)

"It seems there are two main ways to elicit a storm of angry responses on dpreview: either by reviewing products from Apple or from Leica."

Well, actually, they have been shouted at for publishing Nokia-related news / reviews too...

0 upvotes
Scott Everett
By Scott Everett (Oct 2, 2012)

We are going to continue covering what is happening at the center of photography, regardless of whether a subset of our users doesn't necessarily like it. That doesn't mean we dont care about our users, it just means we are realistic. If we pandered to every single outcropping of product love or hate, we'd probably not cover Canon or Nikon for years at a time, depending on how loudly the masses are yelling.

We strive to provide the most informative and objective information that we can. We have editorial meetings daily to this end. It's hard to get that as a reader coming to the site with understandably strong opinions about a range of topics. But trust that our goals remain unchanged. We are photographers through and through, and so do not feel alone in your disdain of various trends in the world of photography, as many of these same arguments happen with us over lunch, or a beer.

23 upvotes
Scott Everett
By Scott Everett (Oct 2, 2012)

However, journalistically it simply doesn't make sense for us to provide only a single perspective of the technology or culture of photography. We want to provide the whole picture.

So as we expand to cover more and more of these emerging technologies, if you do not care to learn about the performance, innovation, or general state of where the industry is going, we'll understand. Move on to another article or review, if you like. Or move on to another site with different goals. I expect you will not find a single one doing the job we are with the products you actually are loyal to or interested in. You may find a "review" the day after launch, which may consist of a guy just like you spouting off 1000 words about his initial impressions of a product. If that's what you want out of a review, we're probably not the site for you. :)

15 upvotes
Martin Datzinger
By Martin Datzinger (Oct 2, 2012)

That's very sound approach, IMO, bravo! But would you then please cover medium format more as well, please? RAW studio samples, some handling impressions and in your hand shots, just to give people an idea what else there is (the Pentax 645D is barely just scratching the surface of MF IQ, I suppose).

2 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (Oct 2, 2012)

Sign of the times. Roll with it.

Digital photography is probably at the biggest disruptive moment since the Nikon D70 brought dSLRs within reach of consumers, ushering in the "golden age of the dSLR". That era is on its way out.

Video, mirrorless, instagram, iphone. What we shoot, how we shoot, who does the shooting, and what we do with the images - its all in a state of flux.

2 upvotes
Mandeno Moments
By Mandeno Moments (Oct 2, 2012)

My phone has a 2MP camera that's only useful as a visual notebook, and if you reviewed that type of camera phone it would seem pointless. However, I do think it's great that you're open minded enough to cover devices such as the iPhone and Nokia 808 that potentially have value to photographers.

One item of practical value that you could add to this review is the iPhone's unusual program line.

1 upvote
Shamael
By Shamael (Oct 2, 2012)

Scott is right here. It must be articles and tests for all kind of stuff. All of us know that we will not compare an I-Phone to a d800, despite the fact that the 42 mpix Nokia is not so bad compared to it. All of us buy a phone, and since we have a camera included, it is a bargain to see on tests like this one if it is worth to buy that model or not. If we follow that policy the people ask here for, we limit the site to the few FF cameras on the market. One can be against P&S or Phones, if a review is posted, just avoid it, but do not criticize it.

Comment edited 32 seconds after posting
1 upvote
happypoppeye
By happypoppeye (Oct 2, 2012)

It only makes good business sense that dpreview covers what will most likely be the highest selling camera per volume to ever be produced ...and which probably has outsold most other camera's already. To discount it because it is a phone is almost like just ignoring something that is there.

If I owned DPR, this review would be the highest priority. Good work guys.

1 upvote
GoranS
By GoranS (Oct 2, 2012)

I'm long time reader of DPReview and all those outcries of people who think that this site is all about niche high-end photography really saddens me. It never was and it never will be. Scott and rest of the team keep up the good work.

0 upvotes
zigi_S
By zigi_S (Oct 2, 2012)

Then please make reviews of other phones also. There are so many more people with non-apple smartphones out there that use their cameras. Though i'm not that naive not to know to which market you cater too.

2 upvotes
keeponkeepingon
By keeponkeepingon (Oct 2, 2012)

Thanks for the timely quick review!

I would have loved to see a comparison to the Nokia 808.

I'm leaning towards the iPhone5 as I have a ton of iOS apps but it would be nice to know how much IQ I'm giving up by not dumping apple and going with Nokia.

Also, at leat part of the iphone 5 marketing has been directed at how fast it is. I would love to have some impressions on the speed of the 5 for both taking and processing photos versus the older iphones (I'm still using a 3gs).

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Scott Everett
By Scott Everett (Oct 2, 2012)

We're working on some comparisons, coming soon.

1 upvote
globethrottle
By globethrottle (Oct 3, 2012)

" it would be nice to know how much IQ I'm giving up by not dumping apple and going with Nokia."

I guess you meant how much your gaining by dumping apple?

1 upvote
7ape
By 7ape (Oct 2, 2012)

I think it's perfectly reasonable to review and feature a camera review of the most popular camera on the planet, mobile phone cameras have come along leaps and bounds and are providing a great many people with pleasure and excitement at discovering the world of photography.

I have a Panasonic GF1 and an olympus e420 ( not the greatest or newest cameras I'm aware) but I find most of the time I'm using my iphone 4s. It's always in my pocket and generally takes the picture I'd like it to. Of course it's not going to take an amazing concert shot or sports picture, but if something catches my eye I really enjoy being able to take a picture of it, edit it and even share it directly from my phone. It's like a sketchpad for photographs.

I'd like to show you a gallery of pictures that I have mainly taken with the iphone. The excessive processing and filters are down to my personal taste and also done in the spirit of play.

http://sevenape.tumblr.com/

3 upvotes
JWest
By JWest (Oct 2, 2012)

Some wonderful photos there, thank you!

0 upvotes
7ape
By 7ape (Oct 2, 2012)

thank you!!

0 upvotes
vlad0
By vlad0 (Oct 2, 2012)

I made a quick test in low light against the 808.. no contest:

https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=424646B5863880EB!2389

and here a video compareing the two internet browsers:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kR7CSAIHtw

overall, if you like photography, and you want a smartphone.. 808 is the way to go.

4 upvotes
JadedGamer
By JadedGamer (Oct 3, 2012)

Only if you also are satisfied with a brick running a near-abandoned OS in your pocket. Reasonable people await the Lumia 920 instead, which will have a smaller sensor but the same quality image processing.

1 upvote
Stevan G
By Stevan G (Oct 5, 2012)

it will not be the same, not even close...except in very rare situations when you picture static objects at night.

808 has 2.5 times bigger sensor than poor lumia, nough said.

0 upvotes
Eleson
By Eleson (Oct 2, 2012)

If you want to enlighten the audience on these devices, then please do a test on 5-10 of these and educate us in which phone the photo interested should buy. And chip in a 'real' camera as a reference.

4 upvotes
Scott Everett
By Scott Everett (Oct 2, 2012)

Working on it, real soon. :)

2 upvotes
jambalawa
By jambalawa (Oct 2, 2012)

I can't believe some of the comments here.

Its a fact that an iphone will be used by millions of people to create digital photographs with. I for one am not that interested in using one for the majority of my own needs. But I am interested in how they stack up against things like tradition cameras etc.

Thanks for the review - its of interest to many photographers.

11 upvotes
larrytusaz
By larrytusaz (Oct 2, 2012)

I'm encouraged by the negative comments myself. It shows that people care passionately about this fine craft & don't want to see it dumbed down to being defined as soccer moms snapshooting their rug rats at Chucky Cheese. I can microwave Hot Pockets® but I don't run around calling myself a "chef" & disrespecting REAL ones by calling them "elitists" & "snobs."

2 upvotes
Daniel
By Daniel (Oct 2, 2012)

@ larrytusaz: This site is not about "fine craft"; it is about digital photography equipment. It doesn't cater to chefs, it caters to everyone who cooks. Above all, it doesn't take a condescending attitude towards those whose needs are satisfied with simple equipment. It's OK if you think differently, but there's no reason to be obnoxious about it and talk down to people. Also, you're mixing up the tools and the result achieved with them. A great photographer will turn out better pictures with a simple camera than an amateur with a high-end one, and using expensive pots will not make you a better cook than if you used cheap pans.

Comment edited 60 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
larrytusaz
By larrytusaz (Oct 2, 2012)

(Daniel) I respectfully stand by what I said. I think the negative comments alluded to clearly illustrate that many of us have been coming here for years specifically because this was, to us, a place for hobbyists & enthusiasts of photography, vs "snapshooting," to discuss techniques and, yes, gear that's commensurate to such aspirations. It doesn't have to be top-end gear, a Nikon D3200 etc is more than enough, & yes Dpreview used to cover Coolpixes, but by & large they were about the enthusiast. We just wish for them to retain that priority. It doesn't have to mean being unimaginative or stale, I don't think any of us want that.

3 upvotes
photo_rb
By photo_rb (Oct 2, 2012)

Back in the film days, I had a pocketable "Rollei 35" with a fixed lens and I took it everywhere when the SLR was too bulky. I'm guessing the cameras on these phones will give similar quality so what's the difference?

1 upvote
zigi_S
By zigi_S (Oct 2, 2012)

Way more people use their feature phones to take photos. I haven't seen any article about them. Even when the quality of those phones seems comparable to the iphone.

1 upvote
kadardr
By kadardr (Oct 2, 2012)

To pay attention to a phone (even iPhone) as a camera is pure phone marketing.
I want to see a survey on the weight of camera capabilities in the buying decision of a phone buyer (iPhone buyer).

This article is just another brick in the great wall of Apple.

8 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Oct 2, 2012)

What on earth....? 'Pure marketing'? Are you serious? I don't think Apple needs our help selling stuff. I wish they did, I'd be negotiating for commission...

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
11 upvotes
zigi_S
By zigi_S (Oct 2, 2012)

You just jumped on the hype bandwagon. I suposse anything to apple related is just to click-lucrative to pass by.

2 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Oct 2, 2012)

This is a review of a camera. We're not going to start reviewing Apple laptops...

2 upvotes
carsten böttcher
By carsten böttcher (Oct 2, 2012)

"Agfa" in the "Cameras"-List, Nokia and iPhone Reviews. Hmm... a Hasselblad H or Leica S seem to be too lousy to be reviewed or at least minded in the "Latest announcements" list. Can't wait to see Barbie-, Ken- and Lego-Camera on these sites.

12 upvotes
Bruce Dunkle
By Bruce Dunkle (Oct 2, 2012)

I think the idea of reviewing digital pnone cameras is a good one. Let's
remember that this is a digital photography site. Phone cameras are
digital cameras, and we're going to see continuing advances from many
manufacturers. I don't own a digital phone, but am considering buying
one, and I'd likt to see lots more reviews like this one to help me in
making an intelligent buying decision. So keep 'em coming, DPR, and
I'll read them all.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Oct 2, 2012)

@ carsten - you missed the interview I posted recently from Photokina, then? The one with the product manager of the S System?

Those cameras are amazing - truly great products, but we've never committed to reviewing that kind of equipment, it's not our core market. We're writing for enthusiast photographers, and like it or not, devices like the iPhone are part of that environment now.

3 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (Oct 2, 2012)

I do not think that reviewing medium format is useful anyway. Those who have the few cents left to buy that stuff, know what's about. Despite that, Barney, a shot or another made with some of those with an article announcing them would be a bargain, just for most of us to down and compare how much better it is. I remember the Mamyia ZD, it made excellent pictures, a pity this system was not followed. It was the only competitor for the S system, and it was a full medium format, not a half sized chip like the S from Leica.

0 upvotes
carsten böttcher
By carsten böttcher (Oct 2, 2012)

@barney - It's OK to see a review of an iPhone and yes I've read the interviews and all the other press announcements of medium format, thank you for that. But in times where a used Hasselblad H3D body is cheaper than a new Nikon D4 and used Hassy lenses costs the same but are much better than new Nikons my interest moved to medium format (and not to iPhone).

0 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Oct 2, 2012)

To all the negative comments. This site reviews digital cameras. Some are DSLR some are fixed lens and now we have system cameras. DPreview used to review compact cameras but guess what....they just don't sell well anymore and manufactures are trimming product lines. There is still a need for compact cameras and guess what? They happen to also be phones! Should DPreview continue to review portable cameras? Why not? Most of us got started with them and what photographer does not get asked for a recommendation.
Compact cameras will be gone in 2-3 years and camera phones are here for stay. One last thing, I checked the profile/website of most of the negative posters. One thing in common is that most of them need to worry less about what DPreview does and more about photography 101.

11 upvotes
Natalia*W
By Natalia*W (Oct 2, 2012)

Thanks, DPReview Team for the review. Times they are changin' .... lots of times the only camera we have on us is our phone's camera. The one you have on you is the best one, right? :)

4 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Oct 2, 2012)

Thanks, we appreciate the kind words.

1 upvote
photosen
By photosen (Oct 2, 2012)

I appreciate Dpreview's content but the iPhone? Zzzzzz. What's next, the wonders of photography with webcams, security cameras and the like?

I'd rather read about the Pentax K30 (and I don't even shoot Pentax), the Samyang tilt shift lens...

13 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Oct 2, 2012)

Jeez, pal, did you just crawl out from under a rock or something? There's a LOT of photography being done these days with iPhones. Heck, they even call it "iPhoneography":

http://www.flickr.com/groups/iphoneography/

I don't see people doing photography with webcams or security cams.

Comment edited 15 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
shahid11235
By shahid11235 (Oct 2, 2012)

No offense, but it seems to me that DPreview has got severely obsessed with iPhone.

18 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Oct 2, 2012)

It's a huge product for a lot of photographers. Sorry, but that's a fact.

Comment edited 8 seconds after posting
12 upvotes
pumeco
By pumeco (Oct 2, 2012)

And since when has it been wise to review products based on popularity?

I assume the Pentax Q was not very popular then, because while you have time to mess around with phones (four times), you never found the time to review an actual camera that had a totally now mount, I mean what's that all about?

How can a major camera review site justify not reviewing a camera that has a whole new mount, I mean seriously, do you realise how ridiculous that sounds?

No review for the Pentax Q is beyond belief, and I tell you what, I think you're literally digging your own grave by plugging these Apple devices - wait and see.

11 upvotes
Caleido
By Caleido (Oct 2, 2012)

@Barney

Than why not include a range of direct competitors to the iPhone if you want to inform about the IQ? The S3? Nokia Pureview? Sony Xperia S? Amongst others.

12 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Oct 2, 2012)

Apple sold 5 million iPhones in their first weekend. That basically means 5 million iPhone *cameras* sold in the first weekend. You simply can't ignore *that many* cameras falling until people's hands without putting it through some tests. Does any other camera sell that many units in its first weekend of availability?

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Scott Everett
By Scott Everett (Oct 2, 2012)

We have more reviews coming, soon...

1 upvote
pumeco
By pumeco (Oct 2, 2012)

I'm starting to wonder if you guys are on some sort of commission (and I'm not the only one). You've given this "product" no less than four news plugs in less than a month - the same product.

Meanwhile, despite another member pointing out to DPreview that there is no mention of the new CASIO models on the news page, it still hasn't been put there.

I wonder how many people are aware that these Apple devices you keep plugging, are already causing manufacturers to pull their products? How many people know what is happening with CASIO?

Do you even remember who brought the first consumer digital camera to market?

I'll give you a clue, it wasn't CRAPPLE, it was CASIO, so you need to show some respect and stop leaving them out cold in the "plugs" department while you repeatedly plug a damn phone.

The world needs CRAPPLE like a jockey needs piles. So again, the CASIO releases need plugging an the front page seeing as they're actual cameras and that's what we're here to read about.

18 upvotes
blairquax
By blairquax (Oct 2, 2012)

casio casio... yawn - Kodak made the first digital camera. BTW putting CR in front of Apple doesn't make your point any stronger - just makes you look stupid.

3 upvotes
Tee1up
By Tee1up (Oct 2, 2012)

Well, it is a camera. More people own this camera than any other on the planet. A lot of people are wanting to know if this is the one that will replace their point and shoot. It deserves some attention.

12 upvotes
pumeco
By pumeco (Oct 2, 2012)

@blairquax
Typical Apple-user mentality.

But anyway, CASIO brought the first digital camera to market, so I'm guessing you being wrong makes you look even more stupid then!

I could go into the mechanics of why these devices are already effecting the camera industry for the worse, but explaining such things to an Apple user would be no easy task.

I'll spell it out for you as simple as is humanly possible:

We used to have high-street music dealers that sold music and provided jobs for people throughout the world. Not many left now. Carry on with this crap and it won't be long before there are less and less manufacturers to choose from for our cameras, either.

CASIO is just the start, it's a warning, stupid, so either wake-up, or for crying out loud, please do shut-up until you're capable of reading the economy.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
Camediadude
By Camediadude (Oct 2, 2012)

Pumeco, I share similar feelings. There are other photography sites (that are actually purists, at that) out there that I am enjoying exploring. This site here is not what it used to be, sadly.

9 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Oct 2, 2012)

So we should cover Casio in preference to Apple? Because.... Casio has a longer history of making digital cameras? The iPhone's most recent iterations are some of the most popular cameras ON EARTH.

We're covering the iPhone because it's a popular, relevant product. But it's not like we're covering it at the expense of anything else.

9 upvotes
Mattwd
By Mattwd (Oct 2, 2012)

@pumeco
Dismissing someone's criticism as "typical Apple-user mentality" makes you look even stupider than putting "cr" in front of Apple already made you look. Blairquax's comment was considerably less predictable than your retort to him.

Also, you sound like a broken record. And a hypocrite. You accuse DPR of being on the take from Apple, yet you yammer on for 10 paragraphs about Casio?

2 upvotes
pumeco
By pumeco (Oct 2, 2012)

See what I mean?

Barney, you just totally ignored the reason for the post, the CASIO news article is not on the front page and never has been, even selecting CASIO by tag doesn't bring it up.

Mattwd, the fact that the situation being brought up was avoided, is another example of why it was here. It's a bloody camera review site yet CASIO's new models have got no mention on the front page, yet a damn phone gets four plugs!

Why is it so hard to grasp?
How hard can it be to put it where all the other news is?

5 upvotes
pumeco
By pumeco (Oct 2, 2012)

PS:

Yes, I absolutely think you should cover CASIO in preference to Apple, because unlike Apple they actually make dedicated cameras, and that is what this site is supposed to be about, isn't it?

The way you talk it's as if CASIO aren't worth writing about, I mean did they p*ss you off at a show or something?

What did they ever do to you other than bring you the words first digital camera? - Just curious because you still haven't put the news up on the front page about their new models.

I know what they are, but the point is, others won't unless you tell them - that being my issue here.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
5 upvotes
Mattwd
By Mattwd (Oct 2, 2012)

Pumeco, I understand where you're coming from, actually. Paying too much attention to any one product is a slippery slope for a website like this one. I don't agree that they're doing that yet, but it's good we can call them on it if they do.

However, and I hate to break it to you, but Casio just barely matters to the majority of this site's readers. We've all heard the forewarnings of the diminishing necessity of point-and-shoot cameras, and a company that makes nothing BUT compacts is sort of riding on the edge of a razor.

"Serious" photographers are far more likely to split their photography between a DSLR/ILC and a phone. With that in mind, the editors have seen fit to cater to those ends of the spectrum. There are thousands of products in the world of photography and a limited-staff website can only pay close attention to so many of them.

I think a more reasonable request would be for the editors to post head-to-head phone reviews, and something tells me they're working on it.

2 upvotes
pumeco
By pumeco (Oct 2, 2012)

Thanks Mattwd, and likewise, I see where you're coming from and even where DPReview is coming from, but that has no bearing on what they're doing.

You saw Barney's response which proves he hasn't understood the problem that is being discussed. Barney speaks as if I were asking him to prioritise CASIO over Apple, well I wasn't, I was simply asking him to put the CASIO news on the same page as the others instead of hiding it.

No brand should be prioritised, not through popularity or indeed any other reason. Such a policy goes against what people come to a review site for, and that is to compare an unbiased review of the various options out there.

We cannot do that if DPReview have a policy of news and/or review articles based on popularity.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
photo_rb
By photo_rb (Oct 2, 2012)

Did Casio really bring the first digital camera to market? Is it possible that Apple had a digital camera on the market before Casio?

0 upvotes
zigi_S
By zigi_S (Oct 2, 2012)

>Well, it is a camera. More people own this camera than any other on the planet.

Since when does the number of pictures on flickr define the most popular camera in the world? I'm pretty sure there are way more popular camera feature phones alone on the subcontinent than all iphones sold combined. But no one cares about those. They don't access the internet and click on ads on sites for overpriced crap from china like people who stand in line for days just to spend a lot of money on a subpar product. Have your way but please stop with the stupidity you are so proud to sprout around.

1 upvote
JadedGamer
By JadedGamer (Oct 3, 2012)

I thought the first commercially available digital camera was Apple's QuickTake from 1994 - 1997 (Built by Kodak then Fuji)? The Casio QV-10 in 1995 was the first with a TFT LCD screen though.

0 upvotes
Serenity Now
By Serenity Now (Oct 4, 2012)

Your comments [pumeco] are as pathetic and dull as they are ignorant. "Actual cameras"?! Good grief - grow up!!!

Why is it when you imbeciles don't get what you want you start screaming conspiracy? "(and I'm not the only one)" Really? Hmmm...well then that IS a concern because if it was just you we'd stay on the floor laughing.

Smartphones have "actual" cameras in them. THAT is the point. The assertion that because it's in a phone it can't be a camera is laughable and plainly false.

This review is about a camera in a particular phone - just as DP review looked at the camera in the new Nokia. No one cares what phone you prefer. NO ONE!! This is a welcome review on the merits of a widely used camera. Thank you DPReview.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
pumeco
By pumeco (Oct 4, 2012)

Sorry, but crawling to DPReview with a "thank you" does not get you off name calling.

First off, you're in no position to call me an "Imbecile". The word "Imbecile" would be better used to describe one who still hasn't grasped what my issue was and the reason for my posts.

I couldn't give a crap about iPhones because I refuse to buy a product from a company with policies and business ethics such as Apple has. I do not like them, and will never buy one of their products.

The products themselves are fine, I'm well aware of that, I appreciate quality hardware as much as anyone else. However, I will not buy one for the reasons pointed out.

My issue was that a phone gets four plugs while a range of cameras made by a long-time camera manufacturer got none.

Is that clear enough for you this time, imbecile?
"Think" before you rant and call me names.

1 upvote
pumeco
By pumeco (Oct 4, 2012)

PS:

@JadedGamer
The first consumer digital camera was produced by one of CASIO's teams but it flopped. Later, CASIO brought the first digital camera with a screen to the market, it was a success, and was the blueprint for every compact you use to this very day (you could even twist it).

Quote from the Wiki:

"The first consumer camera with a liquid crystal display on the back was the Casio QV-10 developed by a team lead by Hiroyuki Suetaka in 1995 after the first digital camera released on the consumer market by his team 8 years earlier had flopped."

1 upvote
Blimpy
By Blimpy (Oct 2, 2012)

Thanks for taking the time to review and compare iphone4, 4s, 5. Appreciate the effort.

I care how my mobile phone takes pictures because sometimes it's all I have with me. Based on the comparison, looks like I will keep my 4s since (to me) there isn't a substantial improvement in IQ.

3 upvotes
Total comments: 218
12