iPhone 11 Pro vs 1DXii Locked

Started 3 months ago | Discussions
This thread is locked.
OP Dexter75 Senior Member • Posts: 2,379
Re: iPhone 11 Pro vs 1DXii

stevo23 wrote:

Dexter75 wrote:

I don’t use HDR in my workflow. I get my photos right when I shoot them so I don’t need to spend a bunch of time in post, You may want to lay off the personal attacks, they are against the rules and there is no need for it.

Then why are you gung ho for smartphone HDR?

Because of all the possibilities it opens up and it’s cool to see computational photography getting better every year. Unlike some here, I welcome new tech and advances in photography. I’m not scared of it or threatened by it as a cling to my DSLR and lenses and try to convince myself that there is no way a phone could do anything nearly as good as my $8k “pro” setup.

(unknown member) Forum Member • Posts: 81
Re: Let's be "up with technology."

RUcrAZ wrote:

Kapil Kapre wrote:

Its a bit like complaining dump trucks don't have sun-roofs or in-built seat massagers or rear seat DVD players.

New cars don't have rear seat dvd players. They now have USB connections for smartphones. At least, mine does.

touche !

nevada5
nevada5 Forum Pro • Posts: 14,402
That might be generalizing

New Day Rising wrote:

I will never understand why so many members here - people who supposedly care about photography - get so bent out of shape by the idea that the masses are able to use small, convenient, multi purpose devices to take good photos in most situations. Photos that make them feel happy and satisfied.

I don't understand why so many people here get totally aggrieved that the masses do not pixel peep, do not make giant prints, do not feel any desire to take photos that require 400mm f/2.8 lenses. Therefore the masses don't see the greater merit of those photos that required tens of thousands of dollars worth of gear,and years of experience and hours of post processing. The masses are happy with their own photos and some members hate that happiness.

I don't understand it.

Actually, I do understand it, and find it all a bit pathetic.

I see it differently. Typically there's a post with a cell phone picture and the poster says it's an impressive image and, in any one of various ways, indicates that anyone bothering with using a proper camera should rethink their decision. From there, people will naturally point out why they can't live with the usage and output of a phone's camera. And the arguing ensues.

I have seen several posts where a member shows an image he likes and says he has no need for big prints, for 400mm shots, etc. and he says the phone works very well for his needs. Those posts are invariably met with - "Good for you", "Use what works for you", "Glad you found an easy solution for you." Of course, a dozen posts in and the antagonists change the direction of the thread.  That's another subject.

Nothing new. For years I've watched Nikon users tell Canon owners how stupid they are (switch them around or substitute any brand you like here.) And through those years I've seen as many posts from Nikon owners saying they're glad to hear you're happy with your Canon.

Start a thread with "I like what this does for me. It's not for everyone but I love it" and you'll find lots of agreeable people. Start with "Look at this great image - you're wasting your money if you don't use what I use" and, yeah, you'll ruffle feathers.

-- hide signature --

I'll try to be nicer if you'll try to be smarter.
It's fun being me -- Denny Crane.

 nevada5's gear list:nevada5's gear list
Panasonic LX100 Canon PowerShot S120 Olympus Tough TG-1 iHS Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 +5 more
New Day Rising
New Day Rising Senior Member • Posts: 3,257
Re: iPhone 11 Pro vs 1DXii

Lee Jay wrote:

Dexter75 wrote:

These are really close, even in lower light which is crazy.

No they aren't.

How's that iPhone do in low-light at 400mm-equivalent and a fixed shutter speed of 1/400th to freeze motion?

Answer: The iPhone won't even get a shot, while the SLR and 400/2.8 will get great shots.

I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting that an iPhone  can replace a DSLR and 400 f/2.8 for situations suited to that gear.

Frankly, it strikes me as silly to point out that there are situations in which large, heavy, expensive gear will perform better than a phone. It's a bit like pointing out how your 7Dii and 400 2.8 are absolutely the wrong imaging equipment for undertaking a gastroscopy or colonoscopy (ouch). Or, closer to the point, for taking a wide angled landscape or a portrait in a confined space - things any smartphone camera will do a much better job of.

 New Day Rising's gear list:New Day Rising's gear list
Nikon D50 Fujifilm FinePix S1 Pro Fujifilm X-T1 Canon EOS 550D Olympus OM-D E-M10 II +6 more
OP Dexter75 Senior Member • Posts: 2,379
Re: That might be generalizing

nevada5 wrote:

I see it differently. Typically there's a post with a cell phone picture and the poster says it's an impressive image and, in any one of various ways, indicates that anyone bothering with using a proper camera should rethink their decision.

Ive never seen that here, not one time. Can you provide links to posts like that? At the most, Ive seen someone say that THEY may not bother taking THEIR DSLR around all the time because their phone works for THEM in most uses. Ive never once seen anyone here proclaim that everyone should dump their DSLRs or mirrorless cameras for smartphones lol.

sluggy_warrior Senior Member • Posts: 2,088
Re: iPhone 11 Pro vs 1DXii

Dexter75 wrote:

stevo23 wrote:

Dexter75 wrote:

I don’t use HDR in my workflow. I get my photos right when I shoot them so I don’t need to spend a bunch of time in post, You may want to lay off the personal attacks, they are against the rules and there is no need for it.

Then why are you gung ho for smartphone HDR?

Because of all the possibilities it opens up and it’s cool to see computational photography getting better every year. Unlike some here, I welcome new tech and advances in photography. I’m not scared of it or threatened by it as a cling to my DSLR and lenses and try to convince myself that there is no way a phone could do anything nearly as good as my $8k “pro” setup.

I, too, welcome new tech and advancements. But, I do that by compiling darktable with the latest commit directly from github, by learning to shoot 25+ shots and stitch them into little planet in Hugin, by tweaking and modifying the MacroFusion Python script to stack 30+ macro shots, ...

Meanwhile, I rely on my camera to provide me the sharpest and cleanest RAW data that I can feed to those advanced algorithms/tools. Remember, whatever cool tricks an iPhone can do (neural network, stacking, AI, ...), desktop/laptop softwares can do much better (not restricted by power/battery or real-time constraint), with the best data from a sensor that is 10+ times larger and higher DR, from glasses that are way superior than the (scratched) tiny lens on a phone.

Again, the smartphone is smarter than a camera, but that's just trading off the strengths of a camera+software for convenience/mobile. Different use cases/needs for different types of users.

lightmeter
lightmeter Regular Member • Posts: 432
Re: iPhone 11 Pro vs 1DXii

At the  6:30 mark in the video he tells how much the phone costs. $2000 for a phone? That's beyond insane!

-- hide signature --

Bill
lf it's full frame, then l can't afford it.

 lightmeter's gear list:lightmeter's gear list
Nikon D7100 Canon EOS M50 Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +28 more
lightmeter
lightmeter Regular Member • Posts: 432
Re: iPhone 11 Pro vs 1DXii

On the DSLR e used a 16-35 for portraits of people. lf he had a proper portrait lens like an 85mm, the DSLR would have ripped the l phone to shreds.

-- hide signature --

Bill
lf it's full frame, then l can't afford it.

 lightmeter's gear list:lightmeter's gear list
Nikon D7100 Canon EOS M50 Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +28 more
mamallama
mamallama Forum Pro • Posts: 56,719
Re: iPhone 11 Pro vs 1DXii

New Day Rising wrote:

I will never understand why so many members here - people who supposedly care about photography - get so bent out of shape by the idea that the masses are able to use small, convenient, multi purpose devices to take good photos in most situations. Photos that make them feel happy and satisfied.

I don't understand why so many people here get totally aggrieved that the masses do not pixel peep, do not make giant prints, do not feel any desire to take photos that require 400mm f/2.8 lenses. Therefore the masses don't see the greater merit of those photos that required tens of thousands of dollars worth of gear,and years of experience and hours of post processing. The masses are happy with their own photos and some members hate that happiness.

I don't understand it.

It might be envy from those who carry around large cameras and don't really make giants prints or take photos that require 400mm f/2.8 lenses either.

Actually, I do understand it, and find it all a bit pathetic.

 mamallama's gear list:mamallama's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 +1 more
David Tallboys Regular Member • Posts: 335
Re: iPhone 11 Pro vs 1DXii

Time to throw in that DPR favourite Ken Rockwell:

https://www.kenrockwell.com/apple/iphone-11-pro-max.htm

I'm with a £79 Nokia 2.2 and a 2013 Note 3 still. Oh well.

 David Tallboys's gear list:David Tallboys's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Canon PowerShot S120 Canon PowerShot SX280 HS
New Day Rising
New Day Rising Senior Member • Posts: 3,257
Re: iPhone 11 Pro vs 1DXii

mamallama wrote:

New Day Rising wrote:

I will never understand why so many members here - people who supposedly care about photography - get so bent out of shape by the idea that the masses are able to use small, convenient, multi purpose devices to take good photos in most situations. Photos that make them feel happy and satisfied.

I don't understand why so many people here get totally aggrieved that the masses do not pixel peep, do not make giant prints, do not feel any desire to take photos that require 400mm f/2.8 lenses. Therefore the masses don't see the greater merit of those photos that required tens of thousands of dollars worth of gear,and years of experience and hours of post processing. The masses are happy with their own photos and some members hate that happiness.

I don't understand it.

It might be envy from those who carry around large cameras and don't really make giants prints or take photos that require 400mm f/2.8 lenses either.

Yes, envy is definitely part of it

Actually, I do understand it, and find it all a bit pathetic.

 New Day Rising's gear list:New Day Rising's gear list
Nikon D50 Fujifilm FinePix S1 Pro Fujifilm X-T1 Canon EOS 550D Olympus OM-D E-M10 II +6 more
Mika Y.
Mika Y. Senior Member • Posts: 1,270
Re: iPhone 11 Pro vs 1DXii

sluggy_warrior wrote:

Dexter75 wrote:

stevo23 wrote:

Dexter75 wrote:

I don’t use HDR in my workflow. I get my photos right when I shoot them so I don’t need to spend a bunch of time in post, You may want to lay off the personal attacks, they are against the rules and there is no need for it.

Then why are you gung ho for smartphone HDR?

Because of all the possibilities it opens up and it’s cool to see computational photography getting better every year. Unlike some here, I welcome new tech and advances in photography. I’m not scared of it or threatened by it as a cling to my DSLR and lenses and try to convince myself that there is no way a phone could do anything nearly as good as my $8k “pro” setup.

I, too, welcome new tech and advancements. But, I do that by compiling darktable with the latest commit directly from github, by learning to shoot 25+ shots and stitch them into little planet in Hugin, by tweaking and modifying the MacroFusion Python script to stack 30+ macro shots, ...

Meanwhile, I rely on my camera to provide me the sharpest and cleanest RAW data that I can feed to those advanced algorithms/tools. Remember, whatever cool tricks an iPhone can do (neural network, stacking, AI, ...), desktop/laptop softwares can do much better (not restricted by power/battery or real-time constraint), with the best data from a sensor that is 10+ times larger and higher DR, from glasses that are way superior than the (scratched) tiny lens on a phone.

Again, the smartphone is smarter than a camera, but that's just trading off the strengths of a camera+software for convenience/mobile. Different use cases/needs for different types of users.

Yup, as someone who occasionally stacks dozens of individual exposures to improve the signal/noise ratio for deep-sky astrophotography or playing with image synthesis using neural networks at home, I can't see myself being exactly averse for advanced image processing. I just *personally* prefer doing it mostly hands-on, instead of relying on black-box automation.

Obviously it's not just binary "point to something and let the camera always do all the rest" and "point to something, control everything manually, do *everything* starting from demosaicing with code written by you" choice though, even if DPR discussions often get extremely polarized. There's plenty of room for different preferences between those extremes.

 Mika Y.'s gear list:Mika Y.'s gear list
Canon EOS 40D Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS Rebel T4i Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF-S 10-22mm F3.5-4.5 USM +14 more
muljao Regular Member • Posts: 219
Re: iPhone 11 Pro vs 1DXii

Technology is definitely getting better and smart phones cameras are getting better. I've never shot photos with the newer iPhones, they are apparently very good, a thousand times better than any device that size for taking photos a few years ago.

I do admit I'd hate to think that smart phones are as good as my DSLR kit

 muljao's gear list:muljao's gear list
Nikon D610 Nikon D7200 Nikon D5600 Sigma 150-600mm F5-6.3 | C Tamron SP 90mm F2.8 Di VC USD 1:1 Macro (F004) +4 more
Lee Jay Forum Pro • Posts: 55,144
Re: iPhone 11 Pro vs 1DXii

New Day Rising wrote:

Lee Jay wrote:

Dexter75 wrote:

sluggy_warrior wrote:

Dexter75 wrote:

How did the 1DXii do in the video in the shots with a subject in front of a window? Very poorly, it blew everything in the background out while the iPhone nailed it. The 1DX couldn’t even handle the following outdoor shots in the video with the guy under the tree, it blew out the sky while again, the iPhone nailed it. The iPhone has superior IQ to a $5500 full frame camera with a quality $2000 lens which is very impressive. They both have their strengths and weaknesses. With the iPhones Night Mode and an aftermarket lens, I wouldn’t assume the iPhone won’t even get a shot in the scenario you listed above.

What is your definition of IQ?

I hate to repeat myself here, but the only advantage a phone has is convenience. The software is smart enough to make the mediocre image looks decent, but there's nothing it can do that post-processing the RAW can't. A desktop software is much more powerful and have no real-time constraint.

The smartphone makes it easy for its user. The camera leaves the control and creativity to the photographer. If the photographer doesn't know how to shoot and process a backlit scene, s/he probably should just switch to using the smartphone if s/he doesn't want to invest time into learning/mastering her/his tool.

Sorry to everyone else, I'm bored at lunch and feel like feeding the trolls. Expecting FluidKnowledge and Brick Wall to jump in soon

My definition of IQ is reading a scene and delivering a quality photo and thats where the iPhone has the advantage.

That's the definition of good auto-modes, not the definition of good image quality.

Things like Smart HDR, Deep Fusion and Night Mode. We have all sat there with a DSLR or mirrorless fussing with our settings in a heavily backlit scene like the window shots in that video.

No, I just use a little pop of fill-flash.

The iPhone nails it with no fussing, point and shoot, thats superior IQ.

No, that's superior convenience. Maybe you thought IQ stood for something other than image quality?

The shot with the guy in front of the tree came out better on the iPhone too. While the camera is just shooing one image, the iPhone has already taken several images before you have even taken the shot and then takes several more, analyzes and combines them all and gives you the best shot within a second. Thats superior IQ and a camera can not even come close to matching that tech.

One thing I hate about shooting with cell phones is that it's just so darned slow. I can often get several shots at several different focal lengths and framing while the person next to me is unlocking their phone, and that's starting with a camera that's off.

Depending on what I've been doing with the phone previously (ie, what apps have been running) unlocking the phone, opening the camera app and being ready to take a photo takes between 3 and 5 seconds.

I fail to see the problem or how you are taking several photos at different focal lengths in that time (even if you aren't bothering about composition).

From camera off to several shots taken at different focal lengths and framing can be 1-2 seconds. It often takes the person next to me 30 seconds to a minute to get one shot on a cell phone. This can be a problem if they're between me and what I want to shoot and I have to stand there waiting for them to move and especially if there's a line of them all doing the same thing. I've had this happen many times especially at museums.

-- hide signature --

Lee Jay

 Lee Jay's gear list:Lee Jay's gear list
Canon IXUS 310 HS Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon Extender EF 2x III +23 more
Lee Jay Forum Pro • Posts: 55,144
Re: iPhone 11 Pro vs 1DXii

Dexter75 wrote:

Lee Jay wrote:

Dexter75 wrote:

I get my photos right when I shoot them so I don’t need to spend a bunch of time in post,

Not always possible. How, exactly, would you use fill-light on the moon or the sun's corona?

Yes, it’s always possible for me. I don’t shoot the moon. I get paid to shoot fashion and glamour work. I control my own light in the studio and I know what I’m doing when I shoot portraits in natural light.

All that is easy stuff technically. Not all of us stick to easy to shoot subjects in easy or controlled conditions. For me, many of those subjects and conditions are miles beyond those any phone can handle.

I recently did a portrait shoot in natural light using the sun behind the subject as a hair light. This naturally required a ton of fill flash to compensate for the powerful backlight.  I doubt HDR could have managed it. The Pixel 4 samples include a shot like this and it's a train wreck.

-- hide signature --

Lee Jay

 Lee Jay's gear list:Lee Jay's gear list
Canon IXUS 310 HS Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon Extender EF 2x III +23 more
Lee Jay Forum Pro • Posts: 55,144
Re: iPhone 11 Pro vs 1DXii

New Day Rising wrote:

Lee Jay wrote:

Dexter75 wrote:

These are really close, even in lower light which is crazy.

No they aren't.

How's that iPhone do in low-light at 400mm-equivalent and a fixed shutter speed of 1/400th to freeze motion?

Answer: The iPhone won't even get a shot, while the SLR and 400/2.8 will get great shots.

I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting that an iPhone can replace a DSLR and 400 f/2.8 for situations suited to that gear.

Frankly, it strikes me as silly to point out that there are situations in which large, heavy, expensive gear will perform better than a phone. It's a bit like pointing out how your 7Dii and 400 2.8 are absolutely the wrong imaging equipment for undertaking a gastroscopy or colonoscopy (ouch). Or, closer to the point, for taking a wide angled landscape or a portrait in a confined space - things any smartphone camera will do a much better job of.

One of my lenses is the Canon 8-15 zoom fisheye which will crush any smartphone in a confined space.

-- hide signature --

Lee Jay

 Lee Jay's gear list:Lee Jay's gear list
Canon IXUS 310 HS Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon Extender EF 2x III +23 more
New Day Rising
New Day Rising Senior Member • Posts: 3,257
Re: iPhone 11 Pro vs 1DXii

Lee Jay wrote:

New Day Rising wrote:

Lee Jay wrote:

Dexter75 wrote:

sluggy_warrior wrote:

Dexter75 wrote:

How did the 1DXii do in the video in the shots with a subject in front of a window? Very poorly, it blew everything in the background out while the iPhone nailed it. The 1DX couldn’t even handle the following outdoor shots in the video with the guy under the tree, it blew out the sky while again, the iPhone nailed it. The iPhone has superior IQ to a $5500 full frame camera with a quality $2000 lens which is very impressive. They both have their strengths and weaknesses. With the iPhones Night Mode and an aftermarket lens, I wouldn’t assume the iPhone won’t even get a shot in the scenario you listed above.

What is your definition of IQ?

I hate to repeat myself here, but the only advantage a phone has is convenience. The software is smart enough to make the mediocre image looks decent, but there's nothing it can do that post-processing the RAW can't. A desktop software is much more powerful and have no real-time constraint.

The smartphone makes it easy for its user. The camera leaves the control and creativity to the photographer. If the photographer doesn't know how to shoot and process a backlit scene, s/he probably should just switch to using the smartphone if s/he doesn't want to invest time into learning/mastering her/his tool.

Sorry to everyone else, I'm bored at lunch and feel like feeding the trolls. Expecting FluidKnowledge and Brick Wall to jump in soon

My definition of IQ is reading a scene and delivering a quality photo and thats where the iPhone has the advantage.

That's the definition of good auto-modes, not the definition of good image quality.

Things like Smart HDR, Deep Fusion and Night Mode. We have all sat there with a DSLR or mirrorless fussing with our settings in a heavily backlit scene like the window shots in that video.

No, I just use a little pop of fill-flash.

The iPhone nails it with no fussing, point and shoot, thats superior IQ.

No, that's superior convenience. Maybe you thought IQ stood for something other than image quality?

The shot with the guy in front of the tree came out better on the iPhone too. While the camera is just shooing one image, the iPhone has already taken several images before you have even taken the shot and then takes several more, analyzes and combines them all and gives you the best shot within a second. Thats superior IQ and a camera can not even come close to matching that tech.

One thing I hate about shooting with cell phones is that it's just so darned slow. I can often get several shots at several different focal lengths and framing while the person next to me is unlocking their phone, and that's starting with a camera that's off.

Depending on what I've been doing with the phone previously (ie, what apps have been running) unlocking the phone, opening the camera app and being ready to take a photo takes between 3 and 5 seconds.

I fail to see the problem or how you are taking several photos at different focal lengths in that time (even if you aren't bothering about composition).

From camera off to several shots taken at different focal lengths and framing can be 1-2 seconds.

1-2 seconds for several shots at different focal lengths and different framing? I don't believe you.

Even if it is true, that is the very definition of 'snapshots'. Not even any pretence of trying to compose.

It often

"often"? I don't believe you.

takes the person next to me 30 seconds to a minute to get one shot on a cell phone.

There is nothing inherent to modern smartphone camera technology that would require 30 seconds just to turn on the phone, open the camera app and be ready to shoot. Perhaps they are bothering to take time over their composition. Some people do that.

This can be a problem if they're between me and what I want to shoot and I have to stand there waiting for them to move

You have to wait for 30 seconds!!!! That is unthinkable. I am so desperately sorry for you that someone else would use up 30 seconds of your precious time. Don't they realise how much more important your time is than theirs?

and especially if there's a line of them all doing the same thing.

Just be grateful they are not using a 'proper' camera and taking time to set up the shot, compose, make exposure adjustments, check focus. And just imagine if they were setting up an ILC on a tripod!! The horror!!!

I've had this happen many times especially at museums.

Appalling. Imagine people spending 30 seconds at a museum exhibit. I thought all museum exhibits had a strict 10 second viewing time. How else are people supposed to get through an entire museum in less than an hour? It's almost like people are taking time to actually look at the exhibits, appreciate what is being presented there.

I suppose now you're going to tell us something bizarre, like your goal is to get through the museum as quickly as possible, photographing everything in 5 seconds or less so you can look properly at the exhibits in photos when you're back home. I hope not. That would be weird.

 New Day Rising's gear list:New Day Rising's gear list
Nikon D50 Fujifilm FinePix S1 Pro Fujifilm X-T1 Canon EOS 550D Olympus OM-D E-M10 II +6 more
DeathArrow Senior Member • Posts: 2,313
Re: iPhone 11 Pro vs 1DXii

Someone please give those poor guys some iPhones!

 DeathArrow's gear list:DeathArrow's gear list
Nikon D750 Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D Tamron 15-30mm F2.8 Tamron SP 24-70mm F2.8 Di VC USD Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro +3 more
New Day Rising
New Day Rising Senior Member • Posts: 3,257
Re: iPhone 11 Pro vs 1DXii

Lee Jay wrote:

New Day Rising wrote:

Lee Jay wrote:

Dexter75 wrote:

These are really close, even in lower light which is crazy.

No they aren't.

How's that iPhone do in low-light at 400mm-equivalent and a fixed shutter speed of 1/400th to freeze motion?

Answer: The iPhone won't even get a shot, while the SLR and 400/2.8 will get great shots.

I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting that an iPhone can replace a DSLR and 400 f/2.8 for situations suited to that gear.

Frankly, it strikes me as silly to point out that there are situations in which large, heavy, expensive gear will perform better than a phone. It's a bit like pointing out how your 7Dii and 400 2.8 are absolutely the wrong imaging equipment for undertaking a gastroscopy or colonoscopy (ouch). Or, closer to the point, for taking a wide angled landscape or a portrait in a confined space - things any smartphone camera will do a much better job of.

One of my lenses is the Canon 8-15 zoom fisheye which will crush any smartphone in a confined space.

Terrific. So if you happen to have that lens with you, you can swap it for the 400mm and take a shot like that. That's amazing. It's almost like your interchangeable lens camera lets you interchange the lenses.

At the risk of repeating myself (but with a slight modification): I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting that an iPhone can replace a DSLR and 8-15mm fisheye for situations suited to that gear.

If you are prepared to put the money and effort into buying and carrying around a DSLR, 400mm f/2.8 and 8-15 fisheye (and whatever else you have and carry about with you constantly) that gear will given you certain advantages over an iPhone - which will, in its turn, give you certain advantages over all the DSLR gear. That's pretty obvious, isn't it? I mean, why put in the money and effort for no gain? That would be stupid.

So, by pointing out that the expensive, heavy gear will do certain things that the phone can't, you aren't really saying anything at all. Someone might as well ask you how's that DSLR do when you need to make a phone call, send a text message, use navigation, etc. etc? (Answer: Useless. It won't even make the call, send the message, etc. while the phone will make great calls, send great messages, etc.). It's a totally vacuous statement.

 New Day Rising's gear list:New Day Rising's gear list
Nikon D50 Fujifilm FinePix S1 Pro Fujifilm X-T1 Canon EOS 550D Olympus OM-D E-M10 II +6 more
Lee Jay Forum Pro • Posts: 55,144
Re: iPhone 11 Pro vs 1DXii

New Day Rising wrote:

Lee Jay wrote:

New Day Rising wrote:

Lee Jay wrote:

Dexter75 wrote:

sluggy_warrior wrote:

Dexter75 wrote:

How did the 1DXii do in the video in the shots with a subject in front of a window? Very poorly, it blew everything in the background out while the iPhone nailed it. The 1DX couldn’t even handle the following outdoor shots in the video with the guy under the tree, it blew out the sky while again, the iPhone nailed it. The iPhone has superior IQ to a $5500 full frame camera with a quality $2000 lens which is very impressive. They both have their strengths and weaknesses. With the iPhones Night Mode and an aftermarket lens, I wouldn’t assume the iPhone won’t even get a shot in the scenario you listed above.

What is your definition of IQ?

I hate to repeat myself here, but the only advantage a phone has is convenience. The software is smart enough to make the mediocre image looks decent, but there's nothing it can do that post-processing the RAW can't. A desktop software is much more powerful and have no real-time constraint.

The smartphone makes it easy for its user. The camera leaves the control and creativity to the photographer. If the photographer doesn't know how to shoot and process a backlit scene, s/he probably should just switch to using the smartphone if s/he doesn't want to invest time into learning/mastering her/his tool.

Sorry to everyone else, I'm bored at lunch and feel like feeding the trolls. Expecting FluidKnowledge and Brick Wall to jump in soon

My definition of IQ is reading a scene and delivering a quality photo and thats where the iPhone has the advantage.

That's the definition of good auto-modes, not the definition of good image quality.

Things like Smart HDR, Deep Fusion and Night Mode. We have all sat there with a DSLR or mirrorless fussing with our settings in a heavily backlit scene like the window shots in that video.

No, I just use a little pop of fill-flash.

The iPhone nails it with no fussing, point and shoot, thats superior IQ.

No, that's superior convenience. Maybe you thought IQ stood for something other than image quality?

The shot with the guy in front of the tree came out better on the iPhone too. While the camera is just shooing one image, the iPhone has already taken several images before you have even taken the shot and then takes several more, analyzes and combines them all and gives you the best shot within a second. Thats superior IQ and a camera can not even come close to matching that tech.

One thing I hate about shooting with cell phones is that it's just so darned slow. I can often get several shots at several different focal lengths and framing while the person next to me is unlocking their phone, and that's starting with a camera that's off.

Depending on what I've been doing with the phone previously (ie, what apps have been running) unlocking the phone, opening the camera app and being ready to take a photo takes between 3 and 5 seconds.

I fail to see the problem or how you are taking several photos at different focal lengths in that time (even if you aren't bothering about composition).

From camera off to several shots taken at different focal lengths and framing can be 1-2 seconds.

1-2 seconds for several shots at different focal lengths and different framing? I don't believe you.

It's still true.

Even if it is true, that is the very definition of 'snapshots'. Not even any pretence of trying to compose.

False.

It often

"often"? I don't believe you.

Hundreds of times a year.

takes the person next to me 30 seconds to a minute to get one shot on a cell phone.

There is nothing inherent to modern smartphone camera technology that would require 30 seconds just to turn on the phone, open the camera app and be ready to shoot. Perhaps they are bothering to take time over their composition. Some people do that.

No, they are fiddling with the phone trying to get it to work. Bad ergonomics, pinch zoom and touch screens are slow.

This can be a problem if they're between me and what I want to shoot and I have to stand there waiting for them to move

You have to wait for 30 seconds!!!!

For each person in front of me at each display in each museum.

and especially if there's a line of them all doing the same thing.

Just be grateful they are not using a 'proper' camera and taking time to set up the shot, compose, make exposure adjustments, check focus. And just imagine if they were setting up an ILC on a tripod!! The horror!!!

And yet, I can do all that in a second or two, excluding the tripod.

I've had this happen many times especially at museums.

Appalling. Imagine people spending 30 seconds at a museum exhibit.

I once went to 11 museums on one trip. One of them was housed in four enormous hangers.

I thought all museum exhibits had a strict 10 second viewing time. How else are people supposed to get through an entire museum in less than an hour? It's almost like people are taking time to actually look at the exhibits, appreciate what is being presented there.

I suppose now you're going to tell us something bizarre, like your goal is to get through the museum as quickly as possible, photographing everything in 5 seconds or less so you can look properly at the exhibits in photos when you're back home. I hope not. That would be weird.

Well, if you have 5 hours to spend at a museum that has four huge buildings and thousands of individual exhibits, that approach is practical.

-- hide signature --

Lee Jay

 Lee Jay's gear list:Lee Jay's gear list
Canon IXUS 310 HS Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon Extender EF 2x III +23 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads