Previous news story    Next news story

iPhone 5 vs. iPhone 4S: Image comparison

By dpreview staff on Sep 12, 2012 at 23:06 GMT

Apple has shared a gallery of images from the new iPhone 5, one of which particularly caught our eye.

Dpreview’s own Scott Everett just recently traveled to Big Sur in California, capturing with his iPhone 4S a nearly identical image of the coastline as that which Apple shared today in the iPhone 5 sample gallery.

We thought we’d post the two side-by-side so that you can compare results from the iPhone 4S with those from the iPhone 5 yourself.

Big Sur on the iPhone 4S, taken by dpreview product manager Scott Everett. Big Sur on the iPhone 5, shared as part of the sample gallery of images from Apple.

Looking at the EXIF data of the images strongly suggests that this is a new sensor, despite the pixel count remaining the same. Close examination shows the iPhone 5 is using a 4.1mm lens to give a 33mm equivalent field of view, rather than the 4S's 4.3mm lens, which gave a 35mm equivalent view. This would suggest the new sensor is a tiny fraction larger though the difference is within the territory of rounding error. The iPhone 5 has also selected ISO 50, 1/3EV below the 4S's minimum sensitivity of ISO 64.

Read more about the iPhone 5’s camera capabilities in the story we posted earlier today.

Comments

Total comments: 93
Sam Kapoor
By Sam Kapoor (Oct 9, 2012)

You’re absolutely right I have same purple haze problem in my Iphone 5 camera. Some people said that it is due to introduction of a sapphire lens in iPhone 5 cameras but apple has refused all these issues and said that it is normal behavior of Iphone 5 camera and the lens has nothing to do with this. So I decided to find the solution on internet and I successfully got solution here http://howmobile.net/apple-iphone/2853-solution-camera-issues-iphone.html. You must see these solutions. After applying these solutions on my Iphone device, my Iphone camera started working quite nicely. Hope it will also help you.
Thanks

0 upvotes
duartix
By duartix (Sep 17, 2012)

Come on dpreview...

How hard is it to get both phones focusing on the same spot?

As if the issue wasn't already ubiquitous with camera reviews and your test pictures, now you're doing the same mistake on phone comparisons???

0 upvotes
SirAntonio
By SirAntonio (Sep 17, 2012)

You should read the text before commenting

1 upvote
duartix
By duartix (Sep 17, 2012)

Ok, thanks for pointing, so not only they are focused on different distances, they've been taken in different occasions, with different lighting, by different people.
All I can see is that their relevance is even smaller, yet they made the news. Also, focusing on infinity and taking more than one shot shouldn't be that difficult. But if they can't even do it properly on a controlled environment (studio) why wouldk I expect it to be better this way?
You are right...

0 upvotes
SirAntonio
By SirAntonio (Sep 18, 2012)

that's fair, I get your point. Though I don't mind this post as the controlled studio environment is not a realistic one, I prefer real life examples to examples from professional lighting. But that's just my opinion, each to their own.

0 upvotes
Jostian
By Jostian (Sep 16, 2012)

No real difference at all but at least its no worse than before as iPhone 4S quality was pretty decent

0 upvotes
yuyucheu
By yuyucheu (Sep 16, 2012)

I can't see match different.

0 upvotes
LaFonte
By LaFonte (Sep 14, 2012)

Wow. it is totally amazing. A digital image! And made with a phone! How they did that?

5 upvotes
Sephirotic
By Sephirotic (Sep 14, 2012)

Apple stated is the same sensor. Same specs. Lower iso is just software/firmware updates.

Especulating things that go against official statements from a mere EXIF sounds very unprofessional inmho. But that is now the basis with all the blind hype surrouding apple. The differences could easily be explained by revised processing software.

If indeed there is a new sensor with the same mpx, it's probably the worst gain in a revised sensor in history.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
photogerald
By photogerald (Sep 17, 2012)

I agree - from what we know right now, the sensor is unchanged. This article is poorly researched and I would've expected better from dpreview. For one, when and where did Apple state that the sensor is "new"? And the use of EXIF info to "confirm" this "fact" is flawed (as I pointed out in my previous comment below). It's a shame that this article got posted as it's already been cited by several other review sites/blogs.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
photogerald
By photogerald (Sep 17, 2012)

The following article states that the camera sensor is unchanged:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/09/12/Apple-iPhone-5-announced

So which is it, depreview?

1 upvote
glastoria
By glastoria (Sep 23, 2012)

The iPhone 5 has a Sony sensor

http://www.petapixel.com/2012/09/22/iphone-5-and-ios-6-polished-panoramas-pixel-oversampling-and-a-sony-sensor/

0 upvotes
Prestidigitator
By Prestidigitator (Sep 14, 2012)

The camera on this crApple iFruitcake is not worth an article here in DPR. Write an article when the hypePhone finally manages to reach the level of the Nokia N82, Samsung Innov8 or Nokia N8. We can of course forget about it even reaching the level of the mighty Nokia PureView 808 given a decade. Why the iSheep would even line up in front of a store to get this model is really one of the greatest mysteries in the world. Are they too intellectually-challenged to order it online?

5 upvotes
kb2zuz
By kb2zuz (Sep 14, 2012)

A couple counter agruments as to why it's relivant on this website: What is the most popular camera on Flickr? The iPhone 4s. What is the 2nd most popular camera on Flickr? The iPhone 4. Not saying this is why you should buy it, but I'm saying why it's relevant. I agree the PureView 808 is a lot more interesting to a photographer, but DPreview covered that even though few people will buy it compared to the iPhone and they're covering a camera that likely millions of people will buy. Covering both sides gives perspective. DPreview covers a range from consumer to pro and they have a range of viewers, many more are closer to consumers. You don't hear me complaining they haven't reviewed the Hasselblad H4D-200MS.

4 upvotes
Lupti
By Lupti (Sep 14, 2012)

Why should popularity count? Millions of flies eat what? Same thing.
I don´t see that a device being capable of taking pics should have too much room here only because it´s "popular".
I´m solely interested in "standalone" cameras, not smartphones with cameras. If I would, I would go to a dedicated smartphone website, not to DPreview.

Comment edited 32 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Lupti
By Lupti (Sep 14, 2012)

Becaue it´s Apple. Apple is so coooool and trendy, and innovative, so Apple evangelists must buy it, otherwise they aren´t trendy and cool anymore and would possibly be ignored by other Apple evangelists. Oh my.

Let´s wait how long it will take until Dpreview is reviewing tablets capable of taking photographs. Sorry, but it seems to me that they are trying to fill up every day with some new articles, no matter which quality. There is another site(I don´t mention the name here, but it´s only run by one man) which still concentrates on real photography, camera reviews and doing a lot more of them rather than reporting something about smartphones. Like old DPreview did...

2 upvotes
Prestidigitator
By Prestidigitator (Sep 15, 2012)

So Flickr should write an article about it if they want, DPR is not Flickr. Who cares if it's popular there? That's just the typical effect of the Reality Distortion Field marketing claptrap.

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting
1 upvote
ksgant
By ksgant (Sep 15, 2012)

Prestidigitator, you're really cool! Do you have a newsletter or blog we can subscribe to?

I like how you use "iSheep" and "hypePhone"! You're totally original and creative. Seriously, I'd like to see what else you write and you're amazing photos (I mean, I can just tell you're a world class photographer and blogger).

Looking forward to your insightful and compelling views on todays technology. I think you can become the next Ken Rockwell!

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Prestidigitator
By Prestidigitator (Sep 17, 2012)

No, because that would be too mainstream for hipster douchebags like you. You can only read up to 140 characters right? Here, have some more of the crApple-flavored Kool-Aid.

1 upvote
jedics
By jedics (Sep 18, 2012)

I agree completely, how is it a 5 year old Nokia n82 can still take consistently better images that a current $1000 phone? This is not a subjective opinion either, it has a dedicated focusing lamp so gets things in focus more often, a dedicated flash (not LED) that exposes things much better. When it was released I breathed a sigh of relief that finally phones were going to take decent photos in most conditions yet 5 years later the iphone still cant do it at more than double the price?

0 upvotes
ksgant
By ksgant (Sep 18, 2012)

Prestidigitator, your comment couldn't be directed at me, as I'm a great admirer of your writings. You should really think about doing a podcast!

I like the "hypePhoto" and "iSheep" too. LOL, where do you come up with that! That's just genius.

And I agree jedics, those iPhonies cost thousands and thousands of dollars and they're no better than the n82. Like most people, I buy a phone (and also, i wouldn't spend over $200 for one, unlike the "hypePhone" which costs like $10,000 or whatever) for it's camera and its camera only. That's why I haven't bought one of those mobile phones at all because they're cameras aren't good enough yet. I mean, why else would you want a phone except for a camera? I don't get it.

You guys are the best! Thanks for brightening my day.

1 upvote
wetsleet
By wetsleet (Sep 14, 2012)

get your lawyers on the case pronto - looks like a copyright infringement to me, maybe you can even claim a patent for the "scheme of pressing a button with the device held at that angle at that geographic location" - at least viewed through the alice-in-wonderland world of apple legal manoeuvres.

6 upvotes
Nei1
By Nei1 (Sep 14, 2012)

Looks more like a 35mm compared to a 24mm lens.

0 upvotes
RoelHendrickx
By RoelHendrickx (Sep 16, 2012)

Probably from another vantage point?

0 upvotes
chillgreg
By chillgreg (Sep 14, 2012)

But what does Ken Rockwell think?

1 upvote
SnowHawkMike
By SnowHawkMike (Sep 14, 2012)

What would Ken Rockwell do?
If he was here right now,
He'd make a plan
And he'd follow through,
That's what Ken Rockwell'd do.

5 upvotes
peterwr
By peterwr (Sep 16, 2012)

I bet he'd kick an *rse or two
That's what Ken Rockwell would do.

OK movie, that. :-)

1 upvote
peterwr
By peterwr (Sep 16, 2012)

...still an iPhone, though, with all the walled-garden cruft that goes along with that. I've really gone off Apple lately. Their plans for a closer tie-in with the privacy-invading Facebook clinched it for me - I'm going for a Galaxy S3

1 upvote
SimenO1
By SimenO1 (Sep 14, 2012)

New crap looks better then old crap.

2 upvotes
photogerald
By photogerald (Sep 14, 2012)

I don't think we can conclude that the sensor is larger based on the info in the EXIF. In fact, I believe the difference could be due to rounding errors.

Firstly, from the EXIF the actual focal length of the lens is 4.28mm for the 4S and 4.13mm for the 5.

Secondly, the 35mm equivalent focal length field in the EXIF is an integer (short) value. That means it will not include any decimal places and is most rounded unless the value is an exact integer.

So given the above, if hypothetically speaking the 35mm equivalent was actually 34.6mm (rounds to 35mm) for the 4S and 33.4mm (rounds to 33mm) for the 5, this would give the same multiplication factor and therefore the same sensor size.

As for the ISO difference, there are many examples of cameras using the same sensor but having a different minimum ISO.

2 upvotes
Bo Lorentzen
By Bo Lorentzen (Sep 14, 2012)

Beautiful shots, though about 50 yards apart in position. while not much, that is probably too much to actually compare the lenses FOV.

Place is julia pfeiffer burns state park. Absolutely spectacular at sunset.

0 upvotes
skanter
By skanter (Sep 14, 2012)

I use the iPhone 4S for about 50% of my photography. It's fine for snapshots, and it always in my pocket. Sure, it doesn't compare to my 60D and array of lenses, but (read previous sentence).

Also, although I'm not a big FB fan, it's really great to be able to send a photo to someone immediately in a text or email.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Sep 13, 2012)

Yawn.... If I really want to take pictures with a cell phone, I'll just buy a Nokia or Samsung camera phone, thank you very much. Those are so much better overall, it's not even funny.

5 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Sep 15, 2012)

Which Samsung is not a plastic crap they drop supporting after at best one release delayed for a half a year or more?
BtW, I am a Samsuck phone owner. Damn contracts.

1 upvote
Amin Sabet
By Amin Sabet (Sep 13, 2012)

Apple already stated - same lens, same sensor. Seems like there is a mistake in the EXIF.

0 upvotes
CAcreeks
By CAcreeks (Sep 14, 2012)

Seems like there is a mistake in the photo, too. The 5 looks wider angle, but I trust Apple press releases a lot more than my own eyes.

0 upvotes
remylebeau
By remylebeau (Sep 13, 2012)

Seems to be more DR with the iPhone 5. In any case it's not a step down and I was impressed with the 4's camera before especially with HDR.

0 upvotes
Graystar
By Graystar (Sep 13, 2012)

They both look like crap. I don't understand...why even bother with these?? No lens reviews but you're comparing lousy camera phones. Just doesn't make sense.

9 upvotes
Just a Photographer
By Just a Photographer (Sep 13, 2012)

98% of all these images end up on Facebook.
That does not only go up for pictures taken by mobile phones, but also by many pictures taken with DSLR's as well.

Scaled down to any reasonable size they are not that bad at all. Face it or stick you head into the sand - Times are changing.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 60 seconds after posting
14 upvotes
KevinFultonPhotography
By KevinFultonPhotography (Sep 13, 2012)

The fact of the matter is that most people (myself included) are not hauling around their DSLR, or even point and shoot, everywhere they go. I'd rather get the shot with slightly lower quality then a point and shoot then have no shot at all! Remember that this site is for EVERY PHOTOGRAPHER and not just the gear snobs. It's a tough job so I'd give these guys a bit more respect.

6 upvotes
larrytusaz
By larrytusaz (Sep 13, 2012)

I agree with (Graystar). What the freak is all of this? Do websites about fine cuisine cooking cover the latest Chef-Boyardee recipe based on its popularity with working parents who don't have the inclination to cook fine foods? And I'm just a hobbyist, but I would never insult this wonderful craft by using one of these things when we have m4/3rds and models like the Sony RX100 available--gee whiz, how small do you need? I don't care what the snap-shooting Kodak Brownie crowd is doing, I don't have any dislike for them but they're not photographers anymore than I'm a pro NBA player just because I can fire a shot from my backyard--and aspiring to use a REAL camera makes me no more of a "gear snob" than wanting to cook quality foods makes you a stove snob.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
DjBpic
By DjBpic (Sep 13, 2012)

I'd say the 5 is much more detailed. The rocks on the cliff in the distance and shadows are better.

0 upvotes
JordanAT
By JordanAT (Sep 14, 2012)

Perhaps. I find the 5 image to be more immersive, with a warmth and sense of depth that is lacking in the 4s version. Nonetheless, both sensor/lens/processing combinations lend a sense of realism to the images which give you the "you were there" feeling without the cold, detached, and somewhat empty spatial quantization you experience from most camera phones and many lower end digital point and shoots. Overall, I'd rate A++++, would definitely do business with again. Oh, wait, scratch that last line, I got carried away for a minute.

0 upvotes
Qeqq
By Qeqq (Sep 14, 2012)

Of course....

http://theultralinx.com/2012/09/iphone-5-dumb-people.html

1 upvote
Carl Sanders
By Carl Sanders (Sep 13, 2012)

They both look impressive, would be great to shoot with these for a commercial in a studio set up.

2 upvotes
q8marronglace
By q8marronglace (Sep 13, 2012)

Corrected 4s photo NOT upside down :

http://img641.imageshack.us/img641/6016/75950542.jpg

Side by Side :

http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/9139/compareq.jpg

I guess we can't really judge now, Bothe pictures taken from different spot/angle - timing and lighting!

Both are just great considering from a phone not a pro cam , However
the images you're seeing are in jpeg and jpg format which reduce the
original image quality which is in PNG format "portable network graphics"

Read more about image file format :
http://www.ehow.com/list_7366721_iphone-image-types.html

Hope this info would be helpful ...

5 upvotes
thewhitehawk
By thewhitehawk (Sep 13, 2012)

Regardless of which camera or lens you feel is better in this case, can we set aside that difference for a moment and agree that *this* is a much more proper way to showcase how the cameras performance than the way some other companies do it?

2 upvotes
John down under
By John down under (Sep 14, 2012)

Mate, probably not. Different spots, very different times, which most likely ensures apples vs oranges. I don't know why DPR suggests otherwise.

0 upvotes
PhotoPoet
By PhotoPoet (Sep 13, 2012)

I could be wrong but one photo is upsidedown

0 upvotes
zigi_S
By zigi_S (Sep 13, 2012)

So dpreview couldn't resist and jumped on the fruit wagon.

And don't come with the new sensor BS. You never reported for a new sensor in other phones except nokia 41mp which realy was worth reporting.

1 upvote
Joseph M Croasdaile
By Joseph M Croasdaile (Sep 13, 2012)

Considering that the iPhone is one of the most used cameras out there it is news... regardless if it is just a camera on a phone

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Sasparilla
By Sasparilla (Sep 13, 2012)

This is a small spot of where the world has changed over the last couple of years, where phones have basically taken over a huge chunk of the low end P&S market and DPReview should report on them. Its not jumping on a fruit wagon at all.

If you don't like it, just ignore the articles and spend your time on something you enjoy.

4 upvotes
Prestidigitator
By Prestidigitator (Sep 14, 2012)

No, zigi_S's point is if DPR starts reporting on one camphone, then fairness dictates that it also reports on the new releases from other brands, not just the tech-ignorant mainstream media's fave brand. As a reasonable compromise, DPR should report on camphones that bring real innovation, like the N82, Innov8, N8, and PureView 808. This iFruitcake most certainly is a mere pedestrian offering and should just be left to gadget-collector sites.

Comment edited 40 seconds after posting
1 upvote
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (Sep 13, 2012)

Both images are really good considering they came from a phone.

3 upvotes
DuncanDovovan
By DuncanDovovan (Sep 13, 2012)

It's likely the same sensor, but the chip has been placed nearer to the lens.

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Sep 13, 2012)

why is one upside down. Makes it hard to do a side by side.

2 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (Sep 13, 2012)

You haven't viewed too many samples from reviews on this site, have you? I ask because most sample pictures that are taken in portrait view are never rotated to their proper orientation. It's a very irritating thing this site does and that they have been doing for years. It's unbelievably lazy and inconsiderate to the readers of this site.

2 upvotes
DannyDD
By DannyDD (Sep 13, 2012)

They look fine to me?

0 upvotes
rikkus
By rikkus (Sep 13, 2012)

That's part of the comparison. One phone takes upside down pictures. Buy if if that's what you want.

5 upvotes
TitusXIII
By TitusXIII (Sep 13, 2012)

I just did a test shot with my 4s:
You could turn the phone upside-down (lens on the bottom) but the software compensates and auto-rotates the image and saves it upside-up.
Funny!

1 upvote
itsastickup
By itsastickup (Sep 13, 2012)

"I ask because most sample pictures that are taken in portrait view are never rotated to their proper orientation"

The image would not then be original but processed and, further, suffer a loss of jpeg quality. There is no way they will ever change this policy.

1 upvote
abrunete
By abrunete (Sep 13, 2012)

luckily, the jpeg format includes a tag for the orientation, you can turn it around without altering the image quality...

0 upvotes
micksh6
By micksh6 (Sep 13, 2012)

Funny, this iPhone 5 photo
http://images.apple.com/v/iphone/gallery/a/images/photo_5.jpg
reminded me my own photo when I was in Santa Cruz few month ago
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/8937956918/photos/2209450/p4224104_5_3_6-hdr-efex
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/8937956918/photos/2209452/p4224105-graduated-filter-color-efex-3

Except that there was dull sad overcast when I was shooting this. I had to do HDR and post-processing, otherwise there was nothing to look at.
And Apple chose great weather and nice light, photo is good as is.
Otherwise composition is almost the same, only iPhone lens is a bit wider.

Natural Bridges State Beach, California.

0 upvotes
kewlguy
By kewlguy (Sep 13, 2012)

why is the 4s sharper?

0 upvotes
Solar Eagle
By Solar Eagle (Sep 13, 2012)

Try looking at the waterfall...

0 upvotes
lost_in_utah
By lost_in_utah (Sep 13, 2012)

I can't. It's upside down. My head hurts.

7 upvotes
AleqCZ
By AleqCZ (Sep 13, 2012)

Look at the focusing. 4S is focused to the front (grounds close to the photographer and perhaps rocks in the water on the right) while 5 is focused on the beach.

Don't judge based on these two pictures.

4 upvotes
Sasparilla
By Sasparilla (Sep 13, 2012)

The rock in the water looks much better on the 4S and the water fall is in shadow in the 4S....for phones they are obviously good cameras, but I don't see the 5's camera being significantly better - course we'd need photo's at the same lighting and focus points for that, just have to wait for DPReview to get one in hand for that.

0 upvotes
Simon97
By Simon97 (Sep 13, 2012)

The 5 image looks like a water color in the details. Obvious heavy NR. The 4s is nothing great either.

1 upvote
tompabes2
By tompabes2 (Sep 13, 2012)

I think they just look awesome when you consider that they have been taken with a mobile phone... they are even better (have less NR) than many entry level compact cameras. And no, I'm not an apple fanboy (I prefer Android).

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Joseph M Croasdaile
By Joseph M Croasdaile (Sep 13, 2012)

So you have another phone that takes better photos? By all means I would love to see another... outside of the Nokia Lumia 920, but I still doubt that as they had to lie and I would like to know how they are getting their low light results.

0 upvotes
Prestidigitator
By Prestidigitator (Sep 14, 2012)

Yes, Joseph, and it has existed for many years. Try getting a Nokia N82, Samsung Innov8, Nokia N8 or PureView 808. The Nokia Lumia 920 also has PureView tech, an optical image stabilizer and physically larger sensor than this overhyped crApple iFruitcake.

2 upvotes
Thomas
By Thomas (Sep 16, 2012)

Thing is, Nokia is almost bancrupt, so there is not much to report about...who will buy a Nokia now? It's like buying a second hand Saab now LOL...
And can you maybe change your synonyms once a while...I've seen more creative haters...

Comment edited 26 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
jcmarfilph
By jcmarfilph (Sep 13, 2012)

Looks good on 3 inch display. =D

6 upvotes
RussellInCincinnati
By RussellInCincinnati (Sep 13, 2012)

Pretty nice images for a phone. Should get out an old Minolta Dimage 7i and see if that bridge camera can match 'em.

Yes the 4S image on the left is sharper, surely due to less camera movement. Heck the news blurb said the newer camera runs at lower ISO maybe. We haven't the slightest idea what post-processing was or should have been done to either image, if any.

Interesting thing is that the presence of the iPhone 5 actually made the sea level rise.

0 upvotes
LeonTheremin
By LeonTheremin (Sep 13, 2012)

Why the Minolta Dimage 7i? Is there something unique about that camera?

0 upvotes
RussellInCincinnati
By RussellInCincinnati (Sep 13, 2012)

Did not make it clear that was merely casting around for an illustrative example. The Minolta camera is an example camera that (a) have personal access to (b) was considered decent in its day and (c) as a sign of changing times, may indeed have been surpassed in image quality by a mere cellphone. All of which constitutes a mildly interesting marker, of the advance of photo technology and computational photography.

0 upvotes
Doug Pardee
By Doug Pardee (Sep 13, 2012)

Both photos have their EXIF intact.

4S: 1/1381 f/2.4 ISO 64 f=4.3mm (35mm equiv)
5: 1/1642 f/2.4 ISO 50 f=4.1mm (33mm equiv)

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 33 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
John McCormack
By John McCormack (Sep 13, 2012)

Both look fine to me. Apple says the 4s and 5 cameras are identical. I'd rather have the iPod Touch with the 5MP camera. Better for hiking, biking, running and travel photos. No stupid phone to answer.

2 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Sep 13, 2012)

The EXIF suggests the cameras are not the same.

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
JadedGamer
By JadedGamer (Sep 13, 2012)

Same sensor but different lens...

0 upvotes
ryansholl
By ryansholl (Sep 13, 2012)

Airplane mode, John. Airplane mode.

0 upvotes
tommy leong
By tommy leong (Sep 13, 2012)

i recognise that image
its from 3GS phone !!

0 upvotes
DStudio
By DStudio (Sep 13, 2012)

What we know is that the 4S had the better photographer! Really, that may be it - The 4S has pretty good sharpness in the foreground to the middle of the frame. The 5 seems slightly blurry throughout - i.e. camera shake, or loss of detail due to the VR mechanism. It's probably because Scott took the shot standing on his head in a tripod position.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
B1ackhat
By B1ackhat (Sep 13, 2012)

The $S pic *is* sharper, but it's not a direct comparison so we are really none the wiser at this point.

0 upvotes
Elinas
By Elinas (Sep 12, 2012)

In this comparison, image from 4S is better than the one from 5... Even if it is up-side-down.

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Camediadude
By Camediadude (Sep 13, 2012)

I'm dizzy now from standing on my head ... big sur is purty though, even upside down :P

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
makofoto
By makofoto (Sep 12, 2012)

Like that the new one is wider

0 upvotes
Jan_Shim
By Jan_Shim (Sep 12, 2012)

What modern day phone with a decent camera isn't capable of taking good day light pictures? Photographers know it's low light capability / performance that gets the vote!

5 upvotes
jimr
By jimr (Sep 12, 2012)

Good job Apple.
The iPhone 5's IQ is clearly better.

0 upvotes
Elaka Farmor
By Elaka Farmor (Sep 12, 2012)

sure........

5 upvotes
AleqCZ
By AleqCZ (Sep 13, 2012)

Sorry, but where exactly? :) Notice the difference in focus. Don't judge based on a level of beach detail

3 upvotes
Elaka Farmor
By Elaka Farmor (Sep 12, 2012)

4s sharper and up-side-down :-)

3 upvotes
Total comments: 93