Not excited about the iPhone 13 DPR Gallery?

[mga010]

Who else does not find results in the iPhone 13 gallery at this site overwhelming? I see a lot of flaring, washed out colors, artificial looking images. What do you see?

 

[Howard V]

Who else does not find results in the iPhone 13 gallery at this site overwhelming? I see a lot of flaring, washed out colors, artificial looking images. What do you see?

I see little need to trade in my iPhone 8 Plus.

 

[iljitsch]

Yes, flaring, some pretty bad blown out highlights and the backlit shots tend to look unnatural, such as with the first one with the little girl being very nicely exposed with the sun coming in just over her head. That's just strange.

But to me the colors look mostly natural, and if anything, a bit too strong here and there. Were the skies really that blue? But the most notable example is the shot with the pumpkins and the red chair. That chair just looks too red.

Note that iPhones shoot with a custom color profile that allows for more intense colors on displays that support that. I looked at these photos on an older MacBook Pro, which can't display those colors, but will interpret the color profiles correctly. Flat colors could be the result of viewing the photos on something that doesn't apply the color profile in the photos correctly.

Contrast seems to be fairly low.

Still, most of the photos looked nice and natural to me.

 

[Klaus dk]

I think meh. I'm a studio portrait shooter first and foremost, and I use a Sony RX100m2 for travel and leisure photography, so I have no interest in smartphone photography - yet

 

[richj20]

I've not been impressed with iPhone images other than viewing at small size.

Recently, these examples of other phones look impressive:

Huawei P40 Pro ELS-NX9
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65518289

Vivo z1 Pro.

Vivo

 

[Bob A L]

I did not get excited by the photos, but didn't look at them from that angle. I did not necessarily agree with the processing exhibited, but that's personal preference, but did see some very nice photos that show that the cameras have potential to produce very usable photos from a device that I can carry with me all the time without even being conscious that I am carrying it. I have gotten so many photos since getting a fairly capable phone camera that I would have never had if I did not have my smartphone that make it valuable to me as a tool in my image maker toolbox. I went to the 13 pro not because of its possible increase in photo quality, but to allow me to have some resemblance of telephoto capabilities in a pocketable device. The only dedicated camera I have owned that even came close to being something I could carry in my pocket without knowing it was there was a kodak 110 instamatic - did you ever see photos out of one of those things? The photo quality from the iphone 13 pro exceeds that of the 110 instamatic by huge leaps and bounds. I do not expect my photos from my phone to look great if viewed at 100%, but if they look pretty good at fullscreen on my computer, I'll take that. And the photos that I have only because of having a phone in my pocket are 100% better than the photos I don't have because I didn't have my dslr or other dedicated camera when I went to town for groceries. I'll take a slightly blurry picture of a huge deer over no photo of a huge deer that stepped out of the woods down the road when I went to the store. Or even the great sunset or rainbow that popped up out of nowhere when I left the house with no intention of taking a photo.

 

[tbcass]

Who else does not find results in the iPhone 13 gallery at this site overwhelming? I see a lot of flaring, washed out colors, artificial looking images. What do you see?

I see smearing from noise reduction but overall they are usable. That said they don't look much better than my iPhone 11, certainly not enough for an upgrade if better IQ is the goal.

 

[Bob A L]

I did upgrade from an iphone 11, but image quality increase was not the driving force. My photography interests leads me to use of longer focal lengths more often than not and that was my reason for the move. I realize that tomorrow there will be something better out there and maybe even today, but not necessarily easily obtainable in the US. Thus far I am satisfied with what I got. I find myself using the 77mm equivalent lens more often than not and am not afraid to digitally zoom it out to around 250mm equivalent and be satisfied which is much more satisfactory than the 135mm digitally produced focal length from my 11. And if the need is there, can reach out to 405mm equivalent with less than stellar results, but better than nothing. As noted, I'm fairly happy now, but gonna hate it when the next new telephoto capable phone shows up. Unfortunately for us poor folk the way we end up with whatever phone camera we have is through some promotions with our cell carrier along with some form of time commitment.

 

[Redhenry]

I did not get excited by the photos, but didn't look at them from that angle. I did not necessarily agree with the processing exhibited, but that's personal preference, but did see some very nice photos that show that the cameras have potential to produce very usable photos from a device that I can carry with me all the time without even being conscious that I am carrying it. I have gotten so many photos since getting a fairly capable phone camera that I would have never had if I did not have my smartphone that make it valuable to me as a tool in my image maker toolbox. I went to the 13 pro not because of its possible increase in photo quality, but to allow me to have some resemblance of telephoto capabilities in a pocketable device. The only dedicated camera I have owned that even came close to being something I could carry in my pocket without knowing it was there was a kodak 110 instamatic - did you ever see photos out of one of those things? The photo quality from the iphone 13 pro exceeds that of the 110 instamatic by huge leaps and bounds. I do not expect my photos from my phone to look great if viewed at 100%, but if they look pretty good at fullscreen on my computer, I'll take that. And the photos that I have only because of having a phone in my pocket are 100% better than the photos I don't have because I didn't have my dslr or other dedicated camera when I went to town for groceries. I'll take a slightly blurry picture of a huge deer over no photo of a huge deer that stepped out of the woods down the road when I went to the store. Or even the great sunset or rainbow that popped up out of nowhere when I left the house with no intention of taking a photo.

I agree absolutely, Bob. I finally had the chance to play with a 13 Pro last weekend although it will still be a couple of weeks before mine arrives. Yes, it has to do a few tricks to achieve decent image quality but it will get me the pictures I want and without a lot of fuss. I love the processing controls! I also think it's worth bearing in mind that iPhone pictures are optimised for viewing on Apple devices. Yes, this topic has been rather over-exposed but mainly because you can't mention phone cameras without somebody telling you that they are all terrible! I did like the DPR 13 Pro gallery, thank you.

PS someone will tell me that their compact camera takes better pictures than an iPhone. My RX100 will, too, but that's ALL it'll do!

 

[Travis Nicky Bombastus]

The last time an iPhone gallery excited me was...never.

iPhones keep getting bigger, heavier, and uglier with each passing generation. What started as a flush rear camera became a small hump. Now, it's an obscenely protuberant mound.

The iPhone 5 had the best design.

 

[tbcass]

I did upgrade from an iphone 11, but image quality increase was not the driving force. My photography interests leads me to use of longer focal lengths more often than not and that was my reason for the move. I realize that tomorrow there will be something better out there and maybe even today, but not necessarily easily obtainable in the US. Thus far I am satisfied with what I got. I find myself using the 77mm equivalent lens more often than not and am not afraid to digitally zoom it out to around 250mm equivalent and be satisfied which is much more satisfactory than the 135mm digitally produced focal length from my 11. And if the need is there, can reach out to 405mm equivalent with less than stellar results, but better than nothing. As noted, I'm fairly happy now, but gonna hate it when the next new telephoto capable phone shows up. Unfortunately for us poor folk the way we end up with whatever phone camera we have is through some promotions with our cell carrier along with some form of time commitment.

77mm is not close to enough zoom for me and I find digital zoom abhorrent so I never use it on my phone or any of my cameras. I'll stick with my RX100vii/iPhone 11 combo for portable use. (I carry both with me). My phone is useful for the ultra wide angle the RX100vii doesn't give me.

--
Tom

 

[tkbslc]

I think meh. I'm a studio portrait shooter first and foremost, and I use a Sony RX100m2 for travel and leisure photography, so I have no interest in smartphone photography - yet

meh is how I felt when I looked at the shots from my RX100m3.

 

[tbcass]

I think meh. I'm a studio portrait shooter first and foremost, and I use a Sony RX100m2 for travel and leisure photography, so I have no interest in smartphone photography - yet

meh is how I felt when I looked at the shots from my RX100m3.

Then you must really hate the results from an iPhone.

 

[tkbslc]

The last time an iPhone gallery excited me was...never.

iPhones keep getting bigger, heavier, and uglier with each passing generation. What started as a flush rear camera became a small hump. Now, it's an obscenely protuberant mound.

The iPhone 5 had the best design.

 

[tkbslc]

I think meh. I'm a studio portrait shooter first and foremost, and I use a Sony RX100m2 for travel and leisure photography, so I have no interest in smartphone photography - yet

meh is how I felt when I looked at the shots from my RX100m3.

Then you must really hate the results from an iPhone.

On the contrary, I sold it because it wasn’t consistently beating the shots from our phones. And that was 2-3 years ago. If anything is overhyped it’s those 1” compacts. (Bought and Sold g7x mk2 as well)

 

[tbcass]

I think meh. I'm a studio portrait shooter first and foremost, and I use a Sony RX100m2 for travel and leisure photography, so I have no interest in smartphone photography - yet

meh is how I felt when I looked at the shots from my RX100m3.

Then you must really hate the results from an iPhone.

On the contrary, I sold it because it wasn’t consistently beating the shots from our phones. If anything is overhyped it’s those 1” compacts. (Bought and Sold g7x mk2 as well)

I got fantastic results from my RX100m1 and now my RX100VII, much better than my iPhone 11. If you weren't getting good photos from the RX100m3 then it was due to your incompetence because admittedly it takes more technical knowledge to use an RX100 than a smartphone. It's a poor photographer who blames the camera for bad results.

If you don't like what I'm saying well too bad because the truth hurts.

--
Tom

 

[Phil A Martin]

I think meh. I'm a studio portrait shooter first and foremost, and I use a Sony RX100m2 for travel and leisure photography, so I have no interest in smartphone photography - yet

meh is how I felt when I looked at the shots from my RX100m3.

Then you must really hate the results from an iPhone.

On the contrary, I sold it because it wasn’t consistently beating the shots from our phones. And that was 2-3 years ago. If anything is overhyped it’s those 1” compacts. (Bought and Sold g7x mk2 as well)

Are the photographs in your gallery taken on a smartphone?

 

[tkbslc]

I think meh. I'm a studio portrait shooter first and foremost, and I use a Sony RX100m2 for travel and leisure photography, so I have no interest in smartphone photography - yet

meh is how I felt when I looked at the shots from my RX100m3.

Then you must really hate the results from an iPhone.

On the contrary, I sold it because it wasn’t consistently beating the shots from our phones. If anything is overhyped it’s those 1” compacts. (Bought and Sold g7x mk2 as well)

I got fantastic results from my RX100m1 and now my RX100VII, much better than my iPhone 11. If you weren't getting good photos from the RX100m3 then it was due to your incompetence because admittedly it takes more technical knowledge to use an RX100 than a smartphone. It's a poor photographer who blames the camera for bad results.

and yet here everyone is poo-pooing the iPhone results

If you don't like what I'm saying well too bad because the truth hurts.

I guess I could say the same to you. A lot of people don’t like hearing that their expensive compact is not really necessary anymore and will only beat the phone in a narrow range of conditions. At least the new rx100 models finally have a longer zoom that a phone can’t Compete with.

 

[tbcass]

I got fantastic results from my RX100m1 and now my RX100VII, much better than my iPhone 11. If you weren't getting good photos from the RX100m3 then it was due to your incompetence because admittedly it takes more technical knowledge to use an RX100 than a smartphone. It's a poor photographer who blames the camera for bad results.

and yet here everyone is poo-pooing the iPhone results

That's because people on this forum are extremely picky about IQ. This thread is based on the DPR samples.

If you don't like what I'm saying well too bad because the truth hurts.

I guess I could say the same to you. A lot of people don’t like hearing that their expensive compact is not really necessary anymore and will only beat the phone in a narrow range of conditions.

In your opinion. Why do you own a Canon RP? My expensive cameras are necessary for my satisfaction even if not for you. Even at base ISO, I like my 2 RX100 cameras IQ better but for some purposes, my phone is good enough. One thing I do not like about my iPhone is the ergonomics.

--
Tom

 

[tkbslc]

I got fantastic results from my RX100m1 and now my RX100VII, much better than my iPhone 11. If you weren't getting good photos from the RX100m3 then it was due to your incompetence because admittedly it takes more technical knowledge to use an RX100 than a smartphone. It's a poor photographer who blames the camera for bad results.

and yet here everyone is poo-pooing the iPhone results

That's because people on this forum are extremely picky about IQ. This thread is based on the DPR samples.

And in my opinion if you are picky, you won't like 1" either.

If you don't like what I'm saying well too bad because the truth hurts.

I guess I could say the same to you. A lot of people don’t like hearing that their expensive compact is not really necessary anymore and will only beat the phone in a narrow range of conditions.

In your opinion. Why do you own a Canon RP?

Big difference between FF and my phone or 1".

Not so big difference between 1" and my phone.

My expensive cameras are necessary for my satisfaction even if not for you. Even at base ISO, I like my 2 RX100 cameras IQ better but for some purposes, my phone is good enough. One thing I do not like about my iPhone is the ergonomics.

That is one thing the RX100 completely falls apart on. Worst "high end" camera I have ever used in terms of manual controls. The Canon G7X II had great controls, yes.