I work at Apple, I had the 14 pro max and I returned it. Most of my pictures are taken by the telephoto lens, and that is not improved upon last gen. More so, the normal lens focus slower in photo mode and noticeably slower in video.
I hope the 15 pro max will be better.
Interesting. I played around a tiny bit with it and with the main lens didn’t really noticed much of a difference…but I didn’t really task it hard at all.
For me, good enough that I no longer feel the need to carry a compact as an opportunity camera, but they still fall a long way short of replacing my dedicated camera even at the "modest wide angle" that the main camera covers. If anything I prefer the results from my old Pixel 2 to my current Galaxy s21: even though Samsung's hardware is better their processing is harsher.
@OP
I look at it like this:
When I see professional photographers regularly turning up to weddings and the like with just their mobile phone cameras in their hands then I would think phone cameras might be good enough and I might then consider ditching my 'real camera'.
They've gotten good enough to earn a place in my photographic toolkit. I'll still use a dedicated ILC for professional work and high end personal work as it offers more creative choices and better image quality. However, for more casual usage or when pixel-level quality isn't important, I'll happily use a smartphone camera.
I doubt smartphones will completely replace dedicated cameras at the professional level in my lifetime, but predicting the future is fraught with risk.
It’s not just weddings, IMO. To me it’s really most any shoot that you are getting paid for as a photographer. But my rational might be different than yours.
In my personal opinion, the vast majority of clients (consumers…. Not necessarily persnickety, professional “art directors”) would be totally happy with images from a current generation smartphone —- IF they DIDN’T know it came from a phone….
Perception of value is key: “What a minute. I’m paying you $x to shoot my engagement photos in this park and you show up with some reflectors, lights, and an ……. iPhone? WTF?.”
If the typical client could be blindfolded (which is not possible or the images would look more like BDSM rather than an engagement shoot… hmmm… maybe a niche there?), I think that they would LOVE the images that come out of the smartphone (raw, processed, and delivered to the client). Why do I say that?
For some types of work (good light, outdoors, hang a scrim to diffuse if needed, use a profoto B10 as needed, etc) I honestly think that clients would think the resulting smartphone Images would be “awesome”. But, when they aren’t blindfolded, I’m thinking that they would equate “smartphones to my 17-year old cousin Jeff” and be quite unhappy with the “value proposition”. …… “Jeff would have shot it for free”……
A client showed up at my studio years ago and I was planning to shoot with my Leica M9. The 25 to 30-year old client was unhappy with my “old, toy camera”. I had to assure her all would be fine and promised a refund if they weren’t “great” images. In the end, client was totally thrilled and I got paid. Perception matters sometimes more than anything else.
At one time, 35mm cameras were thought of as toys. Clients wanted to hire pros with “real cameras” (I.e. MF) because, after all, “my uncle Warren has one of those ‘new cameras’.” Perceptions changed over time. They may or may not with smartphones too (which is, I think, what your post implies).
Hi,
The only phone camera that interested me was an Android (don't recall the make or model) which had a snap on camera unit from Hasselblad which went onto the rear of the phone. There was also a snap on projector so you could show your vacation photos like we once did slides. Ha!
The phone itself wasn't anything special and seemed to have more than it's fair share of issues. So I stuck with a BlackBerry Z10 which had the distinction of my having been on the R+D team. So I knew exactly what was good and bad and could do something about it. Plus, the ability to service and repair it myself.
These days I'm using a freebie from AT&T which hasn't nearly as good a camera as I stuck in the Z10. But then I always have used a phone cam like an old Polaroid. Mostly to shoot instrument screens with like I did back in 1980.
This being a shot of such a screen on an instrument not connected to a computer to capture it.
Stan
Amateur Photographer
Professional Electronics Development Engineer
While I can’t speak to the veracity of this survey, the results (from 2021) are interesting:
“36% of Pro Photographers Shoot Some Work on Smartphones”
petapixel.com/2021/08/19/36-of-pro-photographers-shoot-some-work-on-smartphones/
When I still did weddings and events, I used the phone for some quick shots. Clients don’t care as long as the photo is good.
For most cases it is enough. It is only my artistic tooth and GAS that strives for more. I was thinking about only having a phone camera few times. I think Oppo Find X6 pro has that potential, but there are some signs that the potential is hindered. I would like to find out.
I would be happy if they re-thought their lens choices though. Ultrawide should be around 16mm, wide should be 28mm, tele should be 75-80mm. All that's needed. At this point it still looks to me that NOONE takes the phone cameras seriously.
I think they are good enough for some things, but have definite shortcomings in some areas. See my reply to the other similar thread...
Here are a couple of photos that I think would have been extremely challenging to get with a phone camera...
agreed. It really is now, IMO, “horses for courses”. There are a significant number of situations where a smartphone camera just isn’t gonna work well (or at all) for what you are trying to achieve. Your two examples are spot on.
But there are many other situations where the phone is totally suitable. If the survey that I linked to above has any veracity to it, 36% of pros are already using a smartphone camera in some part of their professional business.
All digital cameras - regardless of form factor - will evolve and improve over the coming decades. What strikes me is that many of the same folks who were suggesting, 25-years ago, that Digital would “never” replace film for “serious” work seem to be the same folks who suggest that smartphone cameras “will never…….”…….
For the vast majority of the work that I do now, a smartphone works fine. For birding needing long glass? Not a chance. And that’s why I continue to own an X-T4 and some long glass.
The camera in my iPhone SE is better than the camera in my previous iPhone 6. The camera in newer iPhone models is better than the one in my SE.
If my phone is all I have and I see an interesting subject I will certainly use my phone and share the subsequent shot on FB.
I will also routinely use my phone to take quick-and-dirty shots of various things around the house that I want to use to illustrate a point.
Given my investment in "real" photography over the past 50 years, I don't see any future generation of phone replacing what I current am using to shoot birds.
I am like you - older and never was a "pixel peeper" (still remember Kodak Tri-X and its noise). We just got back from 20 days between Israel and Jordan and only had my iPhone 14, my wife's iPhone 13 and my Sony RX100mk5 and currently going through the approximately 1450 images. And while the images from the RX100 hold up better if I need to do more processing than the iPhone images do, I am very happy with all the various results. Didn't regret not taking my Olympus EM5mk3 at all.
I’m finding the same. I’m questioning the need to bring a dedicated camera to Germany this summer
I don't care how good a picture a phone can take. It can take a better picture than my camera for all I care, I still wouldn't use it, because I take photographs for enjoyment. And phones are the least enjoyable way to take photographs that I can imagine. Ergonomics for a start. Slippery little b@$t@(ds with no grip, no EVF, and virtually zero manual controls. Trying to not include your fingertips in the shot is an exercise in frustration, and the shutter button seems specifically designed to introduce camera shake. Horrible things. I use my phone camera as an absolute last resort, mainly for work purposes, and derive absolutely zero enjoyment from the process.
Give me my little G100 m4/3 body with a tiny little fastish prime any day of the week. No comparison.
Phone vs camera lol
The answer depends on the intended usage. I use my iPhone for a lot of things, but I have never offered an iPhone photograph for sale, or even taken an iPhone shot with serious artistic intent. However, I admire the work of Dan Burkholder.
And here's a hummingbird I took with my Sony Xperia.
