Is the RX100vii Still Relevant with an iPhone 17 Pro?

Dak on cam said:

A minor niggle: most raw file formats are TIFF files.

Click to expand...

Probably a good idea to look into that more before making the statement.

Dak on cam said:

TIFF is a container format, it doesn't prescribe the content. It may be RGB or anything else. Some of the tags (TIFF stands for "tagged image file format") tend to be more widely supported than others. Raw file formats tend to be rather specialized, RGB formats tend to be reasonably supported by image displayers claiming to support "TIFF", support for things like Fax Group 4 is more spotty.

That camera raw files are "TIFF" does not mean anything upfront: Sony SR2 and Nikon NEF raw files (for example) are TIFF:

Click to expand...

Finding 'TIFF' in metadata does not automatically mean the file is TIFF.

Dak on cam said:

_DSC8504.SR2: TIFF image data, little-endian, direntries=19, compression=JPEG (old), description= , manufacturer=SONY, model=DSC-R1, orientation=upper-left, xresolution=288, yresolution=296, resolutionunit=2, datetime=2025:09:10 10:48:12

(ok, here the first TIFF directory entry appears to be the JPEG thumbnail rather than the raw data or EXIF or any of the other blocks)

DSC_7499.NEF: TIFF image data, little-endian, direntries=28, width=160, height=120, bps=350, compression=none, PhotometricInterpretation=RGB, manufacturer=NIKON CORPORATION, model=NIKON D750, orientation=upper-left

So I am not really sure what "TIF" file in the context of phone raw files means. Could be RGB (in which case older image viewers and processors might or might not understand it out of the box) but that is not a given.

Click to expand...

My own Nikon V3 NEFs show two TIFF tags, but they're apparently associated with a tiny thumbnail image that's separate from the full size embedded JPEG ...

TIFF-EP Standard ID : 1.0.0.0
Jpg From Raw : (Binary data 4505122 bytes, use -b option to extract)
Thumbnail TIFF : (Binary data 57816 bytes, use -b option to extract)

I see no mention of TIFF at all in my Sony ARWs.

ishwanu said:

Dak on cam said:

A minor niggle: most raw file formats are TIFF files.

Click to expand...

Probably a good idea to look into that more before making the statement.

Click to expand...

Because?

ishwanu said:

ishwanu said:

TIFF is a container format, it doesn't prescribe the content. It may be RGB or anything else. Some of the tags (TIFF stands for "tagged image file format") tend to be more widely supported than others. Raw file formats tend to be rather specialized, RGB formats tend to be reasonably supported by image displayers claiming to support "TIFF", support for things like Fax Group 4 is more spotty.

That camera raw files are "TIFF" does not mean anything upfront: Sony SR2 and Nikon NEF raw files (for example) are TIFF:

Click to expand...

Finding 'TIFF' in metadata does not automatically mean the file is TIFF.

Click to expand...

Having the right magic number at the start of the file and proper TIFF directories is kind of a giveaway, though.

tiffinfo 207ND750/DSC_7549.NEF |head
TIFFReadDirectory: Warning, Unknown field with tag 36867 (0x9003) encountered.
TIFFReadDirectory: Warning, Unknown field with tag 37398 (0x9216) encountered.
TIFFFetchNormalTag: Warning, ASCII value for tag "Copyright" contains null byte in value; value incorrectly truncated during reading due to implementation limitations.
=== TIFF directory 0 ===
TIFF Directory at offset 0x8 (8)
Subfile Type: reduced-resolution image (1 = 0x1)
Image Width: 160 Image Length: 120
Resolution: 300, 300 pixels/inch
Bits/Sample: 8
Compression Scheme: None
Photometric Interpretation: RGB color
Orientation: row 0 top, col 0 lhs
Samples/Pixel: 3
TIFFFetchNormalTag: Warning, Incorrect count for "MakerNote"; tag ignored.
TIFFReadCustomDirectory: Warning, Wrong data type 3 for "GainControl"; tag ignored.
TIFFReadDirectory: Warning, Unknown field with tag 36867 (0x9003) encountered.
TIFFReadDirectory: Warning, Unknown field with tag 37398 (0x9216) encountered.
TIFFFetchNormalTag: Warning, ASCII value for tag "Copyright" contains null byte in value; value incorrectly truncated during reading due to implementation limitations.
TIFFReadDirectory: Warning, Unknown field with tag 36867 (0x9003) encountered.
TIFFReadDirectory: Warning, Unknown field with tag 37398 (0x9216) encountered.
TIFFFetchNormalTag: Warning, ASCII value for tag "Copyright" contains null byte in value; value incorrectly truncated during reading due to implementation limitations.
MissingRequired: TIFF directory is missing required "ImageLength" field.
TIFFReadDirectory: Warning, Unknown field with tag 37399 (0x9217) encountered.
MissingRequired: TIFF directory is missing required "ImageLength" field.
TIFFReadDirectory: Warning, Unknown field with tag 36867 (0x9003) encountered.
TIFFReadDirectory: Warning, Unknown field with tag 37398 (0x9216) encountered.
TIFFFetchNormalTag: Warning, ASCII value for tag "Copyright" contains null byte in value; value incorrectly truncated during reading due to implementation limitations.

And so on. What does it tell us? Use of unknown tags, strings containing NUL bytes and other complications affecting the interpretation of the data. But the structure is there.

ishwanu said:

ishwanu said:

_DSC8504.SR2: TIFF image data, little-endian, direntries=19, compression=JPEG (old), description= , manufacturer=SONY, model=DSC-R1, orientation=upper-left, xresolution=288, yresolution=296, resolutionunit=2, datetime=2025:09:10 10:48:12

(ok, here the first TIFF directory entry appears to be the JPEG thumbnail rather than the raw data or EXIF or any of the other blocks)

DSC_7499.NEF: TIFF image data, little-endian, direntries=28, width=160, height=120, bps=350, compression=none, PhotometricInterpretation=RGB, manufacturer=NIKON CORPORATION, model=NIKON D750, orientation=upper-left

So I am not really sure what "TIF" file in the context of phone raw files means. Could be RGB (in which case older image viewers and processors might or might not understand it out of the box) but that is not a given.

Click to expand...

My own Nikon V3 NEFs show two TIFF tags, but they're apparently associated with a tiny thumbnail image that's separate from the full size embedded JPEG ...

TIFF-EP Standard ID : 1.0.0.0
Jpg From Raw : (Binary data 4505122 bytes, use -b option to extract)
Thumbnail TIFF : (Binary data 57816 bytes, use -b option to extract)

I see no mention of TIFF at all in my Sony ARWs.

Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean by "mention of TIFF". TIFF files are not required to contain literal strings called "TIFF". Please check out https://github.com/lclevy/sony_raw for a description of various Sony raw file formats. Also check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIFF for a description of the TIFF file structure.

Dak on cam said:

ishwanu said:

Dak on cam said:

A minor niggle: most raw file formats are TIFF files.

Click to expand...

Probably a good idea to look into that more before making the statement.

Click to expand...

Because?

Click to expand...

Have you really done such research regarding most RAW files?

Dak on cam said:

Dak on cam said:

Dak on cam said:

TIFF is a container format, it doesn't prescribe the content. It may be RGB or anything else. Some of the tags (TIFF stands for "tagged image file format") tend to be more widely supported than others. Raw file formats tend to be rather specialized, RGB formats tend to be reasonably supported by image displayers claiming to support "TIFF", support for things like Fax Group 4 is more spotty.

That camera raw files are "TIFF" does not mean anything upfront: Sony SR2 and Nikon NEF raw files (for example) are TIFF:

Click to expand...

Finding 'TIFF' in metadata does not automatically mean the file is TIFF.

Click to expand...

Having the right magic number at the start of the file and proper TIFF directories is kind of a giveaway, though.

tiffinfo 207ND750/DSC_7549.NEF |head
TIFFReadDirectory: Warning, Unknown field with tag 36867 (0x9003) encountered.
TIFFReadDirectory: Warning, Unknown field with tag 37398 (0x9216) encountered.
TIFFFetchNormalTag: Warning, ASCII value for tag "Copyright" contains null byte in value; value incorrectly truncated during reading due to implementation limitations.
=== TIFF directory 0 ===
TIFF Directory at offset 0x8 (8)
Subfile Type: reduced-resolution image (1 = 0x1)
Image Width: 160 Image Length: 120
Resolution: 300, 300 pixels/inch
Bits/Sample: 8
Compression Scheme: None
Photometric Interpretation: RGB color
Orientation: row 0 top, col 0 lhs
Samples/Pixel: 3
TIFFFetchNormalTag: Warning, Incorrect count for "MakerNote"; tag ignored.
TIFFReadCustomDirectory: Warning, Wrong data type 3 for "GainControl"; tag ignored.
TIFFReadDirectory: Warning, Unknown field with tag 36867 (0x9003) encountered.
TIFFReadDirectory: Warning, Unknown field with tag 37398 (0x9216) encountered.
TIFFFetchNormalTag: Warning, ASCII value for tag "Copyright" contains null byte in value; value incorrectly truncated during reading due to implementation limitations.
TIFFReadDirectory: Warning, Unknown field with tag 36867 (0x9003) encountered.
TIFFReadDirectory: Warning, Unknown field with tag 37398 (0x9216) encountered.
TIFFFetchNormalTag: Warning, ASCII value for tag "Copyright" contains null byte in value; value incorrectly truncated during reading due to implementation limitations.
MissingRequired: TIFF directory is missing required "ImageLength" field.
TIFFReadDirectory: Warning, Unknown field with tag 37399 (0x9217) encountered.
MissingRequired: TIFF directory is missing required "ImageLength" field.
TIFFReadDirectory: Warning, Unknown field with tag 36867 (0x9003) encountered.
TIFFReadDirectory: Warning, Unknown field with tag 37398 (0x9216) encountered.
TIFFFetchNormalTag: Warning, ASCII value for tag "Copyright" contains null byte in value; value incorrectly truncated during reading due to implementation limitations.

And so on. What does it tell us? Use of unknown tags, strings containing NUL bytes and other complications affecting the interpretation of the data. But the structure is there.

Dak on cam said:

Dak on cam said:

_DSC8504.SR2: TIFF image data, little-endian, direntries=19, compression=JPEG (old), description= , manufacturer=SONY, model=DSC-R1, orientation=upper-left, xresolution=288, yresolution=296, resolutionunit=2, datetime=2025:09:10 10:48:12

(ok, here the first TIFF directory entry appears to be the JPEG thumbnail rather than the raw data or EXIF or any of the other blocks)

DSC_7499.NEF: TIFF image data, little-endian, direntries=28, width=160, height=120, bps=350, compression=none, PhotometricInterpretation=RGB, manufacturer=NIKON CORPORATION, model=NIKON D750, orientation=upper-left

So I am not really sure what "TIF" file in the context of phone raw files means. Could be RGB (in which case older image viewers and processors might or might not understand it out of the box) but that is not a given.

Click to expand...

My own Nikon V3 NEFs show two TIFF tags, but they're apparently associated with a tiny thumbnail image that's separate from the full size embedded JPEG ...

TIFF-EP Standard ID : 1.0.0.0
Jpg From Raw : (Binary data 4505122 bytes, use -b option to extract)
Thumbnail TIFF : (Binary data 57816 bytes, use -b option to extract)

I see no mention of TIFF at all in my Sony ARWs.

Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean by "mention of TIFF". TIFF files are not required to contain literal strings called "TIFF".

Click to expand...

I didn't say they are ... but in the examples offered in your first post, it looked as though you referenced some metadata to support the statement, so I referenced some metadata.

Dak on cam said:

Please check out https://github.com/lclevy/sony_raw for a description of various Sony raw file formats. Also check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIFF for a description of the TIFF file structure.

Click to expand...

I checked, but I didn't see confirmation that most RAW file formats are TIFF files.

However ... for fun, i asked three AIs the question: Are most raw camera files based on tiff format? Two said yes and only one said no, so that's something.

But if I instead ask Are most raw file formats tiff files? (that was your original statement), they all say no.

ishwanu said:

I didn't say they are ... but in the examples offered in your first post, it looked as though you referenced some metadata to support the statement, so I referenced some metadata.

Click to expand...

I have no idea what makes you think that. I asked the 'file' utility to identify the file type of different raw files. That has nothing to do whatsoever with metadata.

ishwanu said:

ishwanu said:

Please check out https://github.com/lclevy/sony_raw for a description of various Sony raw file formats. Also check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIFF for a description of the TIFF file structure.

Click to expand...

I checked, but I didn't see confirmation that most RAW file formats are TIFF files.

Click to expand...

It describes the structure of the given Sony files as TIFF files including the used TIFF tags.

ishwanu said:

However ... for fun, i asked three AIs the question: Are most raw camera files based on tiff format? Two said yes and only one said no, so that's something.

But if I instead ask Are most raw file formats tiff files? (that was your original statement), they all say no.

Click to expand...

AIs produce unvalidated and unqualified hearsay with confidence. That's what they are designed to do. They don't name their (distributed) sources and may even invent references.

Dak on cam said:

ishwanu said:

Dak on cam said:

A minor niggle: most raw file formats are TIFF files.

Click to expand...

... but in the examples offered in your first post, it looked as though you referenced some metadata to support the statement, so I referenced some metadata.

Click to expand...

I have no idea what makes you think that. I asked the 'file' utility to identify the file type of different raw files. That has nothing to do whatsoever with metadata.

Click to expand...

Alrighty then. Forget the metadata part. That's simply the way it appeared to me.

Dak on cam said:

Dak on cam said:

Dak on cam said:

Please check out https://github.com/lclevy/sony_raw for a description of various Sony raw file formats. Also check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIFF for a description of the TIFF file structure.

Click to expand...

I checked, but I didn't see confirmation that most RAW file formats are TIFF files.

Click to expand...

It describes the structure of the given Sony files as TIFF files including the used TIFF tags.

Click to expand...

Again, Sony files are not most RAW files.

Dak on cam said:

Dak on cam said:

However ... for fun, i asked three AIs the question: Are most raw camera files based on tiff format? Two said yes and only one said no, so that's something.

But if I instead ask Are most raw file formats tiff files? (that was your original statement), they all say no.

Click to expand...

AIs produce unvalidated and unqualified hearsay with confidence. That's what they are designed to do. They don't name their (distributed) sources and may even invent references.

Click to expand...

I know about the present limitations of AI, so I didn't say the answers are reliable. I said for fun. But it might interest you that the AIs mentioned that many files from Sony, Canon, Nikon, and Olympus are based on TIFF format. I'll bet you like that answer.

But at this point, let's just acknowledge that your original statement that most raw file formats are TIFF files was not well worded compared to an alternative statement like most raw camera files are based on TIFF format. The two are not directly interchangeable.

ishwanu said:

Dak on cam said:

ishwanu said:

Dak on cam said:

A minor niggle: most raw file formats are TIFF files.

Click to expand...

... but in the examples offered in your first post, it looked as though you referenced some metadata to support the statement, so I referenced some metadata.

Click to expand...

I have no idea what makes you think that. I asked the 'file' utility to identify the file type of different raw files. That has nothing to do whatsoever with metadata.

Click to expand...

Alrighty then. Forget the metadata part. That's simply the way it appeared to me.

ishwanu said:

ishwanu said:

ishwanu said:

Please check out https://github.com/lclevy/sony_raw for a description of various Sony raw file formats. Also check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIFF for a description of the TIFF file structure.

Click to expand...

I checked, but I didn't see confirmation that most RAW file formats are TIFF files.

Click to expand...

It describes the structure of the given Sony files as TIFF files including the used TIFF tags.

Click to expand...

Again, Sony files are not most RAW files.

Click to expand...

As I wrote, NEF files are also using the TIFF structure. And raw files tend to contain EXIF in a manner that can be accessed by utilities such as exiftool, and EXIF data embeddings for images are defined for JPEG and TIFF containers, cf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exif#Technical .

Do you have a single example for a raw file format that isn't structured as a TIFF file?

Dak on cam said:

ishwanu said:

But at this point, let's just acknowledge that your original statement that most raw file formats are TIFF files was not well worded compared to an alternative statement like most raw camera files are based on TIFF format. The two are not directly interchangeable.

Click to expand...

Do you have a single example for a raw file format that isn't structured as a TIFF file?

Click to expand...

I don't have examples and have not made any claims of my own about how RAW files are structured. I commented about that original wording. It is not what you ended up saying, despite any attempts to make it seem so. Perhaps you noticed that Digital Nigel took similar exception to it as well.

ishwanu said:

Dak on cam said:

ishwanu said:

But at this point, let's just acknowledge that your original statement that most raw file formats are TIFF files was not well worded compared to an alternative statement like most raw camera files are based on TIFF format. The two are not directly interchangeable.

Click to expand...

Do you have a single example for a raw file format that isn't structured as a TIFF file?

Click to expand...

I don't have examples and have not made any claims of my own about how RAW files are structured. I commented about that original wording. It is not what you ended up saying, despite any attempts to make it seem so. Perhaps you noticed that Digital Nigel took similar exception to it as well.

Click to expand...

Not really: his response did not contain any reference or factual statement or authority. He just stated his personal belief that TIFF files are exclusively RGB files, easily disproven by looking up any actual reference about TIFF files.

Any way, here is Wikipedia's take on it:

"Many raw file formats, including IIQ (Phase One), 3FR (Hasselblad), DCR, K25, KDC (Kodak), CRW, CR2 (Canon), ERF (Epson), MEF (Mamiya), MOS (Leaf), NEF NRW (Nikon), ORF (Olympus), PEF (Pentax), RW2 (Panasonic) and ARW, SRF, SR2 (Sony), are based on TIFF, the Tag Image File Format.[4] These files may deviate from the TIFF standard in a number of ways, including the use of a non-standard file header, the inclusion of additional image tags and the encryption of some of the tag data.

DNG, the Adobe digital negative format, is an extension of the TIFF 6.0 format ..."

One advantage, as I wrote before, is that it is straightforward to use Exiftool on most of those file formats, for examining EXIF data but also for adding geotagging to the raw files. That is because while there are non-standard tags and directory entries, the TIFF file structure is maintained to a degree where accessing and manipulating the EXIF data (including changing its content, modifying or stripping previews) is possible without corrupting the raw file structure.

Digital Nigel said:

To correct one thing: modern iPhones do not save raw images. All their images are heavily processed. That’s good for casual shooters, but less so for photographers.

Click to expand...

With a 3rd-party camera app - the magnificent HALIDE - there is an option to shoot RAW with absolutely no Apple processing. They call it "Process Zero".

It's pretty fun to see just how much noise there is in higher ISO shooting conditions without any of the computational fiddling being applied.

I don't normally get involved in discussions of/arguments about equipment minutia, nor do I have an iPhone 17 Pro. However, I find this interesting because, for me anyway, the RX100 VII is literally a unique and (so far) irreplaceable photographic tool. If it can be replaced by something I will aways have with me anyway, that would be a very good thing.

I have an iPhone 16 Pro; and (apparently like many here), the phone is always with me, along with my wallet, watch and knife.



When I first upgraded from an ancient iPhone to the 16 Pro, the then new 16 Pro was being touted as a substitute for the RX100 VII. So, I did a series of experiments by using the iPhone for my usual field/action/landscape photography and then trying to shoot more or less the same things with the RX100 VII. At the time, I posted a whole series of comparison photographs on our Show, Tell and Critique thread here (maybe Dak remembers). I've since deleted them, so I can't show them here, but I can describe the results of the experiment.

For snapshot-type pics, the phone was just fine. So I'd give it a 100% rating for that use.

For documentary-type pics, the IPhone is actually better and much easier to use than the Sony. For example, pics of my flintlock gun making projects:













I would give the iPhone a 100% rating for that use, as well.

To my mind, an RX100 VII is not the ideal camera for landscape-type pics, but rather one that gets pressed into that use because it's what I have at the time. Ignoring that issue, the phone often (but not always) processed landscape scenes in ways I didn't like, as compared to what I could do by post-processing in Photoshop myself (something I greatly enjoy) a 5-shot HDR series from the RXD100 VII. Also, IQ was much better with the little Sony. I'd give the iPhone a 33% rating for that use.

For field action shots (to me by far the most important aspect of photography), the 16 Pro was hopeless - it didn't have the optical reach; it didn't have the handy, fast burst rate. By way of just example this is the kind of field action shots I am talking about:

Bliss pointing a wild rooster pheasant for my wife late in the day, as she walks in on the point to flush the bird:



The flush!! (No birds were harmed in the making of these pics, BTW - she missed :-( )







There is simply no way an iPhone 16 Pro could have captured that series. So, the RX100 VII soldiers on for me.

Is the new 17 Pro so much better than the 16 that it could be a substitute?

Greg

--
Check out my photos at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/137747053@N07/

ishwanu said:

Phone 'RAW' files are not the same as dedicated camera RAW files.

Click to expand...

True.

Apple ProRAW is a 12-bit DNG (Digital Negative) that blends multi-frame computational processing (Smart HDR/Deep Fusion) with RAW latitude. It’s still a RAW-workflow file, but it’s not the same single-frame, minimally processed RAW most cameras output.

Apple says "You can open a ProRAW photo in an photo editors that doesn’t support ProRAW, but it might look different than expected when opened. If the ProRAW photo doesn't look as expected, try using the app's feature for automatically enhancing the photo."

SOURCE: Apple Support

When you capture an image in Apple ProRAW, the iPhone performs multiple processing steps to optimize detail, texture, and noise reduction, while still retaining the uncompressed, unprocessed data. In practice it means you can adjust parameters like white balance and exposure without losing the enhancements provided by Deep Fusion and Smart HDR.

Dedicated camera RAW files a basically the data off the sensor. But some features do affect the RAW output beyond that:

Many ILCs do a dark-frame subtraction that modifies the RAW for long shutters. Nikon and Canon document that LENR processes images of ≥1 s and doubles processing time because the camera is building the corrected file (i.e., affecting NEF/CR3, not just JPEG). So RAW but modified.

Digital Nigel said:

Sony’s new Bionz XR chip set would be too power-hungry for the tiny current RX100 battery, thus requiring a larger battery and new, larger form factor. The price point would also be higher.

Click to expand...

Just wondering about the chip: wouldn't the relatively low pixel count reduce the power consumption compared to other models?

Also, manufacturing processes still make significant improvements almost yearly. Producing the chip with a newer process would, by itself, cut its power consumption. I am naively assuming that the cost would be similar to the first run for "second best" tech but not for the cutting edge.

And Sony may still have a huge pile of chips in stock that they are definitely not throwing away.

Camrarat said:

Seems like the new iphones have the same reach, are capable of RAW shooting, and even shoot wide with fast aperture as well.

what advantage besides continuous zoom (and niceties like EVF, buttons etc) do you get from a pricey sony point and shoot today compared to the best iphone?

Click to expand...

In the last 8 years, I've owned two phones.

Some mid range Honor, and a 2020 One Plus Nord (both to this day still work great, my gf is using my Honor phone right now).

With the money I've saved on phone upgrades, I've bought and sold many cameras over the years, that will still work if I should change my phone for an even cheaper 200€ one.

You ask what's a possible advantage... not being a slave to phone companies immediately comes to my mind.

Bender79ita said:

Camrarat said:

Seems like the new iphones have the same reach, are capable of RAW shooting, and even shoot wide with fast aperture as well.

what advantage besides continuous zoom (and niceties like EVF, buttons etc) do you get from a pricey sony point and shoot today compared to the best iphone?

Click to expand...

In the last 8 years, I've owned two phones.

Some mid range Honor, and a 2020 One Plus Nord (both to this day still work great, my gf is using my Honor phone right now).

With the money I've saved on phone upgrades, I've bought and sold many cameras over the years, that will still work if I should change my phone for an even cheaper 200€ one.

You ask what's a possible advantage... not being a slave to phone companies immediately comes to my mind.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I bought a $650 open box RX100VI 5 years ago and don't have to sweat the camera upsell on phones.