Why does the 8-year-old iPhone 7 Plus have such good dynamic range in RAW?

[Cam0A2b0e2]

These two photos were taken with my very old iPhone. Both photos were shot in RAW mode with a 3rd party app called Pro Camera by Moment.

The top photo shows relatively low noise in the shadows, and only a small part of the roof of the building is clipping white. The iPhone 7 Plus main lens has a 1/3" sensor and shoots 12 MP. Why is the sky not clipping? Is this good dynamic range?

iPhone 7 Plus, main lens at f1.8, shutter speed 1/48, ISO 20. No noise reduction applied.

iPhone 7 Plus, main lens at F1.8, shutter speed 1/447, ISO 20. No noise reduction applied.

 

[Edgar_in_Indy]

Why does the exposure look the same when both photos are shot at f/1.8 and ISO 20, but one is shot at 1/50 sec and the other at 1/500 sec??

 

[Cam0A2b0e2]

Why does the exposure look the same when both photos are shot at f/1.8 and ISO 20, but one is shot at 1/50 sec and the other at 1/500 sec??

They were processed to look the same. But the second photo with the 1/447 shutter speed has a ton of shadow noise, so it does look different.

 

[Mark Sloe]

Aren't the raw files still stacked exposures?

 

[Cam0A2b0e2]

Aren't the raw files still stacked exposures?

The iPhone 7 doesn’t seem to do stacked exposures at all, even with Jpegs.

These files are definitely real RAW files, as in them there are no signs of noise reduction smearing, sharpening, or stacked exposures as there is with Apple’s latest RAW format “ProRAW.”

 

[Edgar_in_Indy]

Why does the exposure look the same when both photos are shot at f/1.8 and ISO 20, but one is shot at 1/50 sec and the other at 1/500 sec??

They were processed to look the same. But the second photo with the 1/447 shutter speed has a ton of shadow noise, so it does look different.

So the second one was shot underexposed, and then lifted in post?

 

[Cam0A2b0e2]

Why does the exposure look the same when both photos are shot at f/1.8 and ISO 20, but one is shot at 1/50 sec and the other at 1/500 sec??

They were processed to look the same. But the second photo with the 1/447 shutter speed has a ton of shadow noise, so it does look different.

So the second one was shot underexposed, and then lifted in post?

Correct.

 

[Dick Dastardly]

They made some really good phone camera sensors. Iphones took decent images starting with the 6, also check out Motorola phones from back then, they shot equally good images at around 20 megapixels and the IQ was based mostly on hardware rather than software, so the resulting images looked good and similar with what a standalone camera produced.

Then the "computational" frenzy started and nobody paid any attention to the hardware side of things, progress slowed.

As always, just because a product is new doesn't automatically mean it's better overall than something made 10 years ago.

Realistically speaking camera phones always needed better hardware, better sensors and optics, not software gimmicks.

There might be a new batch of quality cameraphones released in the next few years, 2017-2021 was a dead period for me, very few models with quality cameras released in that time frame.

 

[Cam0A2b0e2]

Why does the exposure look the same when both photos are shot at f/1.8 and ISO 20, but one is shot at 1/50 sec and the other at 1/500 sec??

They were processed to look the same. But the second photo with the 1/447 shutter speed has a ton of shadow noise, so it does look different.

So the second one was shot underexposed, and then lifted in post?

It is possible that the sky and shadows are nicely exposed because when the pictures were taken, it was a cloudy way, which causes there to be less contrast in the scene. Still, it is strange that the first photo had very little shadow noise.

 

[ZorSy]

They made some really good phone camera sensors. Iphones took decent images starting with the 6, also check out Motorola phones from back then, they shot equally good images at around 20 megapixels and the IQ was based mostly on hardware rather than software, so the resulting images looked good and similar with what a standalone camera produced.

Then the "computational" frenzy started and nobody paid any attention to the hardware side of things, progress slowed.

As always, just because a product is new doesn't automatically mean it's better overall than something made 10 years ago.

Realistically speaking camera phones always needed better hardware, better sensors and optics, not software gimmicks.

There might be a new batch of quality cameraphones released in the next few years, 2017-2021 was a dead period for me, very few models with quality cameras released in that time frame.

Xiaomi had IMO the best time between 2019-2021, starting with 9Pro, CC9/Note10, followed by 10 Ultra and then 11Pro/Ultra. They were not known back then but some of us, early adopters chasing the best in phone photography, knew it...

 

[Dick Dastardly]

They made some really good phone camera sensors. Iphones took decent images starting with the 6, also check out Motorola phones from back then, they shot equally good images at around 20 megapixels and the IQ was based mostly on hardware rather than software, so the resulting images looked good and similar with what a standalone camera produced.

Then the "computational" frenzy started and nobody paid any attention to the hardware side of things, progress slowed.

As always, just because a product is new doesn't automatically mean it's better overall than something made 10 years ago.

Realistically speaking camera phones always needed better hardware, better sensors and optics, not software gimmicks.

There might be a new batch of quality cameraphones released in the next few years, 2017-2021 was a dead period for me, very few models with quality cameras released in that time frame.

Xiaomi had IMO the best time between 2019-2021, starting with 9Pro, CC9/Note10, followed by 10 Ultra and then 11Pro/Ultra. They were not known back then but some of us, early adopters chasing the best in phone photography, knew it...

2019 was 6 years ago, cameraphones are around since 1999, plenty of really nice models and early adopters in the 26 year time frame.

I did not have the 11 pro, but i have used a couple of the 10 series models and they are built well but the cameras are just ordinary.

Heard about the 11 ultra and wanted one, but everyone is complaining about the battery so i skipped over that model.

FYI, when a phone costs $1500 pretty much everything would have to be perfect on it, and Xiaomi phones are not perfect. For that amount of money i can buy a great cameraphone AND a dedicated camera.

Last but not least, they should come with an option from Xiaomi themselves for an extra external battery pack/case, because lots of people including me would rather have a thicker phone body with a decent battery life than a thin slippery phone with poor battery life.

Can't take pictures when the sealed in-battery of a $1500 phone is empty, that's just absurd.

 

[ZorSy]

FYI, when a phone costs $1500 pretty much everything would have to be perfect on it, and Xiaomi phones are not perfect. For that amount of money i can buy a great cameraphone AND a dedicated camera.

Nothing is perfect, even things costing xxxxx $$$$. You were not around here in 2019 while many of us were. And $1500 will not buy you a great cameraphone and good dedicated camera. But then, you also claimed to had bought Vivo X80 pro for $200 (in Austria, which is hard to believe to be true)...

 

[Panino Manino]

They made some really good phone camera sensors. Iphones took decent images starting with the 6, also check out Motorola phones from back then, they shot equally good images at around 20 megapixels and the IQ was based mostly on hardware rather than software, so the resulting images looked good and similar with what a standalone camera produced.

Then the "computational" frenzy started and nobody paid any attention to the hardware side of things, progress slowed.

As always, just because a product is new doesn't automatically mean it's better overall than something made 10 years ago.

Realistically speaking camera phones always needed better hardware, better sensors and optics, not software gimmicks.

There might be a new batch of quality cameraphones released in the next few years, 2017-2021 was a dead period for me, very few models with quality cameras released in that time frame.

But sensors ARE improving.

Sometimes you have some questionable sensors, mostly from Samsung, but Sony keeps improving even allowing better smaller sensors. Omnivision is also back in the game offering sensors just as good as the ones made by Sony.

You're just bothered by the current trend of processing that reached even the RAWs but I believe there are ways to evade some of this intrusive processing.