darwiniandude

Joined on May 23, 2012

Comments

Total: 35, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

dpfan32: The problem with smartphone pics is that they are heavily processed.
They look good on the smartphone's display. But when you apply more effects on apps like Snapseed, noise and artifacts in the sky are appearing immediately. Even when I shoot RAW with my iPhone the sky has plenty of noise when I make sky details visible. As I said, no problem on the iPhone's display but viewd on a desktop PC you can clearly see that the picture is made by an iPhone. It's a matter of what you got used to. Someone who used a large sensor camera will never be fully satisfied by an iPhone camera.

I mean look at this:
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4358/36436796342_4705abe473_o.jpg
needs heavy noise reduction

I take your point, but pushing levels after the fact is going to emphasise issues that may not be obvious before hand. Not everyone edits.

Also, your iPhone 6s used to take that photo is (equivilent) f2.2 with no optical image stabilisation. One year later, the iPhone 7 has optical image stabilisation and is f1.8. That would’ve definitely helped.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 13:08 UTC
In reply to:

jaykumarr: In 2007 - 2011 every photo from Blackberry looked better than every photo from iPhone I owned. From 2011-2017 every photo in Samsung/google phone looks better. And we know Apple failed both in AI & machine learning while google, microsfot did a great job. So this article is plain wrong.

freediverx, I think you missed their sarcasm...

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2017 at 04:08 UTC
In reply to:

Copal Fit: From what I see this article seems correct. Many friends and colleagues use an iphone, and images taken with this phone are relatively speaking better than what I can get from my Android-based Samsung phone camera. This has never been a big issue for me since I only use my cellphone's camera to take a few snapshots. For me a cellphone does simply not replace a good camera (for both digital and film).

freediverx,
“The camera on a Galaxy Note 5 or S8+ delivers noticeably better performance than that of an iPhone 7”...
Really? How do either phone create a depth map and use that to computationally simulate large aperture DOF effects without a second camera with 56mm lens which is how the iPhone does it? Because that’s what this guy was talking about.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2017 at 04:05 UTC
In reply to:

WJMWJM: Odd....show me any iPhone that can take super-wide images right out of the box, like the LG G5 (135 degrees, beating even the largest non-fisheye for DSLR (11-24mm, 126 degrees)
(no, clumsy add-on lenses don't count)
(nor is the G5 a clean rectilinear)
(beats me why no 100% software correction)

Add in-camera panorama and HDR-Art, and indeed there is no DSLR to match anywhere, at least not for instant pix & sharing.
But there is no iPhone of that caliber either.

I’d rather a 56mm second 12MP camera to get closer to a subject, personally. I don’t see the appeal of super wide at all but it depends what you shoot.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2017 at 22:15 UTC
In reply to:

sirhawkeye64: And this is a news-worthy article? I mean, I'm sure somewhere someone working at a Ford dealership drives a Chevy or a Honda.... And I know there has to be some Mac heads working at Microsoft since they develop Office 365 for the Mac.... see where I'm going with this.... So what if the "former" Google worker likes the iPhone?

cosinaphile, look at his posts on Facebook. He’s enthusiastic about everything. I think it’s just how he is.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2017 at 22:05 UTC
In reply to:

darwiniandude: IPhone 7+, no edits, taken about 3PM:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/lwmmzjtr4rp0cm2/Photo%206-5-17%2C%203%2000%2030%20pm.jpg?dl=0
Fuji X-T1, 56mm @ f1.2, taken about 3:45PM. Sun was hiding a bit then though.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5vdd9jdn09p9888/Photo%206-5-17%2C%203%2045%2057%20pm.jpg?dl=0

MyReality, I originally replied to a comment stating iPhone photos are crap. I then posted a comparison of the 56mm (with depth map) in the iPhone to the 56mm f1.2 on my Fuji. Note that the iPhone is f2.8 and a minuscule sensor so this only works well in good light.
Anyway. Not trying to say I don’t need my X-T1 - I do! It takes way better photos on more situations, but even with mirrorless the iPhone is way smaller. I don’t always have the X-T1 with me.

As for the 300mm argument, I get it - but does that mean the Fuji X100 series is rubish because it can’t take a 300mm lens? No. My wife’sCanon 100mm macro is rubbish because it’s not 300mm? No.

But I’d rather have the option of getting optically closer to the subject which is why (for a cameraphone) I love the 7 Plus - it has a 56mm lens. And yet some people here are comparing it to an LG phone that has a super wide angle with a smaller sensor as the second camera? They don’t get it.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2017 at 22:01 UTC
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: This is the Mac vs PC argument again. A PC can consist of trillions of different components, and you can run multiple OS on it. For a mac there are 5 different hardware options available, all made by Apple. And there is one OS (ignoring stuff made by hackers).

Therefor Mac is a more orderly environment. Yes, that is very obvious.

And now this guy (that earlier worked with Android) have detected that. What fantastic news! Or ... rather ... how nice for him. Or ... whatever.

BTW ... if you want a really fast machine with wooping graphics for a reasonable price, it is not a Mac. The same goes for IPhone. Those iPhones are not cheap.

Roland, Apple makes and ships bootcamp driver pack for Windows. And every new Mac ships once these drivers are ready for people to install Windows. But really the whole discussion is irrelevant, we’re talking smartphones here. And I fail to see how it’s relevant that you can install multiple OSes on a computer. I can’t buy a Google Pixel and download and install Tizen onto it. Google isn’t providing drivers and support for installing Windows Phone on there either.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2017 at 21:54 UTC
In reply to:

evilmagicnut: He spends great length describing the conditions that should make Apple the better platform, then fails to identify those distinguishing features (other than Apple portrait mode) that have arisen from that. If anything, he defeats his own argument by failing to list more than one distinguishing feature of the IPhone that matters for photography.

My experience: both Android and IPhone have fantastic imaging capabilities. I've shot both the Samsung S7 and IPhone 7 and I chose the former.

The S8+ is six months newer, doesn’t have two cameras (I’d expect the 56mm tele to be more of a depth constraint than the 28mm) and is also 1.0mm thicker. The same thickness as the iPhone 7 where the camera is.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2017 at 09:29 UTC
In reply to:

Peter Gordon 01701: No wonder the guy was fired by Google. He has been overcome by the apple reality distortion field. The fact is Samsung's cameras are better. My note 4 had a better camera than my friends Iphone 6S. I now have a Galaxy S8+ which has an unbelievable camera but I still us my Nikon D750 as well.

>@freediverx i was replying to the user who stated that the Note4 took better photos than the 6s. From those pics, I think the previous generation iPhone took better shots than the Note 4.
Anyway, they all have their pros and cons. I can take pics to make my X-T1 look better than my wife’s EOS, or vice versa.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2017 at 09:23 UTC
In reply to:

farhadvm: nice Ad, iphone photos are crap

Nice and balanced comment there.
Have a look at my two linked photos below comparing a 7+ portrait mode photo with my X-T1 56mm @f1.2.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2017 at 09:21 UTC

IPhone 7+, no edits, taken about 3PM:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/lwmmzjtr4rp0cm2/Photo%206-5-17%2C%203%2000%2030%20pm.jpg?dl=0
Fuji X-T1, 56mm @ f1.2, taken about 3:45PM. Sun was hiding a bit then though.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5vdd9jdn09p9888/Photo%206-5-17%2C%203%2045%2057%20pm.jpg?dl=0

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2017 at 04:02 UTC as 12th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

sirhawkeye64: And this is a news-worthy article? I mean, I'm sure somewhere someone working at a Ford dealership drives a Chevy or a Honda.... And I know there has to be some Mac heads working at Microsoft since they develop Office 365 for the Mac.... see where I'm going with this.... So what if the "former" Google worker likes the iPhone?

Why does it seem solicited? Is there an Android phone on the market at the moment with dual 12MP (or more) cameras where one is 28mm f1.8 and the other is 56mm (unfortunately only f2.8) with Apple’s dedication to camera software trickery?
The old iPhone 5s could take 8MP shots at 10 frames per second for a burst of 999 shots. It takes several shots and combines the best from each in low light with a single shutter push, to minimise subject blur. It fires a test ‘red eye’ flash briefly, takes a photo, does white balance analysis on it, and then fires the real flash combining a white and a yellow LED to recreate the colour temperature of the lighting already in the room, so the light colour matches and you don’t get ‘that camera phone flash’ look. It’s an autogelling flash, basically, in the iPhone 5s, back in 2012. Apple has done lots of great things to advance smartphone cameras.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2017 at 03:51 UTC
In reply to:

ERKM: Used iPhone since 2010. Now I have an LG V20 because of the dual lens. One lens is WIDEANGLE.
Awesome.
Bokeh control? I do it with software, then I have full control.

And now the more I use Android the more I like it. No longer use the iPad Mini, now I have an LG V496 Tablet. Bought for $77.

Honestly, i’d rather have an extra lens be Tele than Wide. 56mm on the iPhone is also a more flattering perspective than normal or wide lenses for portraits.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2017 at 03:46 UTC
In reply to:

srados: My 4 year old Note4 can choose focus and blur the BG...I still do not get Apple crowd?

Obviously, any phone can close focus and blur the background. This is a bit different from having a 28mm f1.8 and a 56mm f2.8 taking the same shot, generating a depth map, and software trickery simulating the behaviour of a large ape rapture portrait lens. The field of view is also 56mm in this mode, as it’s using the 56mm lens. (All above figures obviously 35mm equivlient, I’m not an idiot) Does this match what I can get from my 56mm f1.2 on my real camera? No. But in good lighting with a still subject, it can be scarily good though.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2017 at 03:44 UTC
In reply to:

NJOceanView: I love the Apple interface and love my 7 Plus Portrait Mode, but I think some Samsung cameras have better OOC shots (a bit more punch and color without going overboard) and the Google Pixel looks superior to all of them while peeping. So it's hard for me to take sides at this. I've seen stunning smart phone photos on all platforms and devices and am happy so many people are getting so good at shooting.

I’d rather a more natural default, as it’s simple to tape edit, tap colour, and drag the slider a bit, or tap edit, light, contrast, and make it a bit punchier if/when needed.
I have a strong dislike for some Samsung phones shipping with ‘beautify’ mode enabled at maximum on the front camera. Everyone looks like terrible wax figures.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2017 at 03:40 UTC
In reply to:

Peter Gordon 01701: No wonder the guy was fired by Google. He has been overcome by the apple reality distortion field. The fact is Samsung's cameras are better. My note 4 had a better camera than my friends Iphone 6S. I now have a Galaxy S8+ which has an unbelievable camera but I still us my Nikon D750 as well.

Well looking at these shots, ignoring the article’s author at times, I’d say the older iPhone 6 Plus takes better pics than the Note4. https://www.cnet.com/au/news/samsung-galaxy-note-4-camera-shootout-versus-iphone-6-plus-lg-g3/
Look at the HDR shot which they show where the iPhone is darker. Look at the detail in the glass roof. The exposure chosen and the HDR has pulled back the highlights so you can see metal detail on the roof outside the glass. That area is a mess on the other cameras.
Anyway, each to their own. Thank goodness there isn’t only one camera or smartphone brand :)

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2017 at 03:38 UTC
On article Gear of the Year: Richard's choice - Fujifilm X-T2 (172 comments in total)
In reply to:

Carl Mucks: Fujifilm X-T2 -- Gear of the Year? It's like an April fools' day in the middle of the winter.
No, really, if I didn't use any of Fuji cameras I would have believed this hilarious review. But I did use almost every Fuji, and they all fall short in image quality department. If you want the best Fuji files, buy their Bayer CFA models (X-A1/2/3). The x-trans have serious problems with colors. The OOC jpegs are pretty poor, but that's a small problem. Jpegs from all cameras are relatively poor, so if you value your pictures you would use raw anyway. And that's the biggest Fuji problem. The popular RAW converters (Adobe, Iridient, C1) produce awful colors, very bad color separation, and no micro-contrast to talk about. When you compare it to Canon/Sony (my favorite cameras) then you immediately notice how dull Fuji images are. And don't forget the worms in the landscapes, and plastic looking skin -- yikes! The PhotoNinja and RawTherapee do a better demosaicing job, but fail in other respects

Disagree. I dislike the Canon look now. Which is a pity because I love the 100mm 2.8 IS we have. Besides, Gear of the year for Richard was what he had the most fun with. Having transitioned to Fuji from Canon over the last few years I personally agree, at least for me.
If gear of the year was purely Max IQ — which it isn't — we'd have a medium format winner with slow burst rates, limited lens selection, handling penalties and other compromises.
I've taken some awesome portrait shots from my 56mm 1.2 on the X-T1. Beautiful skin tones.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2017 at 04:54 UTC
On article Gear of the Year: Richard's choice - Fujifilm X-T2 (172 comments in total)
In reply to:

Miki Nemeth: I thought that RB cannot live without a touch-screen. The X-T2 is cool, but its video AF hunts like crazy. No GPS, Fujifilm WiFi is a joke. Cannot even come close to M5 or A6500 for video C-AF. The missing touch screen was really a deal breaker to me. I still keeping my X-A1 and not upgrading, though. In camera film simulation is pretty cool for JPG shooters, sure; but I prefer my film cameras for film simulation. I have a Df, too, and I'd prefer the Df for retro-digital since it is full frame and much better to give back the old style shooting experience. On the other hand, I completely understand RB, you could fell in love with a camera like this without any meaningful reasons, very true, it's so cool.

I find the Fuji Wi-Fi faultless on both iPhone 7 Plus and 12" iPad Pro. If I need to transfer many large movies though I pull out the lightning USB 3 SDcard reader and zap them in quickly.
Greatly superior to Wifey's Canon Wi-Fi and our Eye-Fi cards. Sure, it could be better...
App also sends GPS local to the camera. I'd rather do that every so often than running the camera flat trying to get a GPS lock without SIM card cell tower triangulation.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2017 at 04:48 UTC
On article Gear of the Year: Richard's choice - Fujifilm X-T2 (172 comments in total)
In reply to:

kobakokh: "The X-T2 is not cheap, by any means"... Its expensive then many full frame camera, including the Nikon D750... Very funny story...

Well worth the extra $100 in my opinion.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2017 at 04:27 UTC
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2215 comments in total)
In reply to:

Raja Moha: Hi Richard,

Just curious to know whether did you test the X-T2's ISO accuracy where as the X-T1 review in 2014 stated that the ISO accuracy of the X-T1 "...the X-T1's measured sensitivities are around 1/2 - 2/3EV lower than marked" and "...that is abit unusual for a modern camera". Doesn't stop me from getting the X-T1 though.

Link below:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-t1/16

boni, the X100 doesn't even really do ISO 6400. 1600 or so is the limit of that sensor, the rest is in gain. The X100 is also 5-6 years old, and Bayer sensor not X-Trans.
dxomark refuses to test any recent Fuji cameras because with X-Trans they are not directly comparable.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2016 at 18:29 UTC
Total: 35, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »