MY main squeeze is now my cell phone. iPhone 14 pro

[Ysarex]

These days, my main concern is whether the image communicates, regardless of how it's made. Old news: smartphones killed a flagging BestBuy-grade compact segment once smartphones became the EDC for the masses who never used any sort of camera much. Seems borderline absurd to argue otherwise. What the OP misses is the ability of smartphones to share images and video easily and instantly. Given our "attention economy" tell me that's not a game changer...

I don't disagree with any of that. I just want to be able to make the image to my IQ standards level.

 

[cgw]

I don't disagree with any of that. I just want to be able to make the image to my IQ standards level.

Amen...

 

[21limited]

Here's usable DR for an iPhone 14 from a good source: Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting.
"For more cameras (derived from DxOMark data) see DxOMark Photographic Dynamic Range Chart. However, data on this chart, when available, is considered to be more accurate.”
Considered by who? Defintiely not DxO.
What exactly is the problem with DxO testing? If they apply the same standards to all cameras then, their results should bre good for comparing cameras. I actually know of Canon shooters who were demanding enought to switch to Nikon, back in the day, although Canon seems to have produced sensors capable of more DR, in the mirroless offerings. It’s just so odd to see the Canon cameras in a discussion about dynamic range, when everyone I know concerned about dynmaic range , left Canon years ago. The world is full on conundrums.… I know people who work professionally with Pentax 645z as landscape photogrpahers, with amazing dynamic range. I guess being as demanding as you are, that’s what you shoot? Or ae you someone who buys a camera, then tries to justify your choice?

I suspect that you just took what you believe and then found the site that promoted your own beliefs. In ny case, I can’t beleive any site would calim to know anything, if it producesd afwew modules and then used someone else’s research where they dudn’t have it on their own.

Believe what you want, I don’t care but Im not buying it. I don’t look at number then decide I like the iamge. I look at the image, and try and find out why it is what in this. In this cae, the image posted is crap. As tested on many sites, most film never had a DR more than 7. S, maybe you’re right and Apple isn’t much better than film.

Even with Imatest, different testing protocols done by different people can produce very different results. I look at the images and decide. And my Pentax gear has as much or more DR than anything you’re shooting unless you shoot Nikon, where Pentax always seem to be able to squeezae a tiny bit more DR out of the same sensor. You shoot something inferior for DR and complain about Apple. You can’t make this stuff up. Get back to me, when your boys have tested all the cameras they post DR charts for. No legitimate lab would compare their results to someone else’s on a comparison. That’s just junk science.

Looking at that image, it has serious issues. Show me your camera's chart for the same exposure. Wait, these fools used natural light. Uncontrollable and unrepeatable. How convenient, you can’t check thier work because you're never have the same light and the same setting. You do understand the value of repeatability in science don’t you? Pure Mickry Mouse, despite your attempt to paint DxO as the unreliable party.

If you judge photos by test chart number, you’re neither an artist or photographer. You're a technologist. I work backwards from you, if I like the images, I try and figure out why. Problem for guys like you being, because I decided I like the images first, regardless of any technical gobbledygook, I still like the images, even if you’re right, and Apple DR is terrilbe, I still like the image I take with it. Techincal specs don’t change that.

The advantage to testing in albm is you can test full range of colour, on a stessed iamges like that one, you have no idea what a perfect curve would look like.

I rest my case, have at her.

 

[Ysarex]

Here's usable DR for an iPhone 14 from a good source: Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting.
"For more cameras (derived from DxOMark data) see DxOMark Photographic Dynamic Range Chart. However, data on this chart, when available, is considered to be more accurate.”
Considered by who? Defintiely not DxO.
What exactly is the problem with DxO testing?

It's not usable DR it's machine readable DR. Usable DR is practical, machine readable DR is impractical.

If they apply the same standards to all cameras then, their results should bre good for comparing cameras. I actually know of Canon shooters who were demanding enought to switch to Nikon, back in the day, although Canon seems to have produced sensors capable of more DR, in the mirroless offerings. It’s just so odd to see the Canon cameras in a discussion about dynamic range, when everyone I know concerned about dynmaic range , left Canon years ago. The world is full on conundrums.… I know people who work professionally with Pentax 645z as landscape photogrpahers, with amazing dynamic range. I guess being as demanding as you are, that’s what you shoot? Or ae you someone who buys a camera, then tries to justify your choice?

I'm not that demanding I just want good lenses, a raw file and the ability to capture 10 stops of DR. And I'm confident that an iPhone can't do that.

I suspect that you just took what you believe and then found the site that promoted your own beliefs.

I've been familiar with Bill Claff's work for many years, I and lots of other people find it reliable. And in the case of the iPhone I've confirmed it -- I showed you that.

In ny case, I can’t beleive any site would calim to know anything, if it producesd afwew modules and then used someone else’s research where they dudn’t have it on their own.

Believe what you want, I don’t care but Im not buying it. I don’t look at number then decide I like the iamge. I look at the image, and try and find out why it is what in this. In this cae, the image posted is crap. As tested on many sites, most film never had a DR more than 7. S, maybe you’re right and Apple isn’t much better than film.

Even with Imatest, different testing protocols done by different people can produce very different results. I look at the images and decide. And my Pentax gear has as much or more DR than anything you’re shooting unless you shoot Nikon,

I do. And Canon and Fuji and Leica and Olympus.

where Pentax always seem to be able to squeezae a tiny bit more DR out of the same sensor. You shoot something inferior for DR and complain about Apple. You can’t make this stuff up. Get back to me, when your boys have tested all the cameras they post DR charts for. No legitimate lab would compare their results to someone else’s on a comparison. That’s just junk science.

Looking at that image, it has serious issues.

The raw file from the iPhone 16Pro -- no it doesn't have serious issues. It's an excellent exposure that makes full use of the sensor. The scene foreground is in open shade in front of a clear bright sky which is high contrast back light, and the RawDigger histogram shows you the data recorded. There are EV markings on the graph and you can count the stops.

Show me your camera's chart for the same exposure. Wait, these fools used natural light. Uncontrollable and unrepeatable. How convenient, you can’t check thier work because you're never have the same light and the same setting. You do understand the value of repeatability in science don’t you? Pure Mickry Mouse, despite your attempt to paint DxO as the unreliable party.

If you judge photos by test chart number, you’re neither an artist or photographer. You're a technologist. I work backwards from you,

You don't know anything about me -- you're making assumptions that will make you out a fool.

if I like the images, I try and figure out why. Problem for guys like you being, because I decided I like the images first, regardless of any technical gobbledygook, I still like the images, even if you’re right, and Apple DR is terrilbe, I still like the image I take with it. Techincal specs don’t change that.

The advantage to testing in albm is you can test full range of colour, on a stessed iamges like that one, you have no idea what a perfect curve would look like.

I rest my case, have at her.

So you missed one of the biggest points here. In clueless Gerald's video he shows that imatest chart but never says what the data was charting. The chart isn't clear but there's a hint. If it was charting raw data (iPhones use a Bayer array) then data for RGBG2 should be displayed but instead it displays RGBY suggesting it's not charting raw data. An Apple ProRAW file can capture 12 stops of DR and I suspect that's what was charted.
I'm talking about raw files. I said from the start I require a raw file. In that RawDigger histogram I displayed that's a raw file, 8 stops of DR, and Bill Claff's data is for raw files, 8 stops of DR. Does that not explain the discrepancy?

 

[21limited]

OK, then, I can see we aren’t going aywhere. By the way, I’m familiar with Bill Claff, but just another guy with a different way of testing.

You don't know anything about me -- you're making assumptions that will make you out a fool.

Educated guesses based on the behaviour observed can be wrong. Surprise me.

An Apple ProRAW file can capture 12 stops of DR and I suspect that's what was charted.

No one knows exactly what apple Raw is, but, I believe it’s 10 bit, so better than jpg.
So sad you didn’t watch the video.

What I said is, that unless you know what the ratings for any camera you use it’s is worhtless. 1 person’s 8 DR ,might be somoene else 10. I’ve seen it before with two different people using Imatest.

An Apple ProRAW file can capture 12 stops of DR and I suspect that's what was charted.

Ya, that’s what I said.
You seem to be saying you want an image with no engineering applied in e output. It’s been a very long time since anyone did that.

Personally I alwys shoot raw….

I'm talking about raw files. I said from the start I require a raw file.

Why.
Unless you’re in some kind of technical discipline?
I always shoot raw myself, but I often wonder about other people for whom it’s rule, not a suggestion.
If Apple gets 12 stops out of ProRaw, what’s the issue? They are probably just doing some PP for you, stretching out the 1s and 0s to fill the DR space of the processing pipeline. That would make many images better and also require less post processing. For a camera, that’s a fair approach.Whatever you need that needs full control of raw, most people just want ain image that is in some way pleasing. You make it sound like you can’t decide if you like an image without seeing it post some technical tests first. After all back in the day whe Canon DR sucked, onre of my photogtpraers buddies just leaned on the higer contrast. But sooner or later it wore him out. You never want to get stuck in one style forever.

IN any case I’ll be very interested to know what kind of DR, an Apple phone cant handle that you need. I tend to shoot raw, because you never know when you might want to go back and make some changes. But most people don’t even consider that option. They want to send the photo from the restaurant. and possibly never want to see it again.

 

[Ysarex]

OK, then, I can see we aren’t going aywhere. By the way, I’m familiar with Bill Claff, but just another guy with a different way of testing.

Educated guesses based on the behaviour observed can be wrong. Surprise me.



No one knows exactly what apple Raw is, but, I believe it’s 10 bit, so better than jpg.

Of course we know what it is. Look at that RawDigger histogram -- it's right there in the graph. The iPhone 16Pro has a 12 bit ADC.

So sad you didn’t watch the video.

I didn't say I didn't watch it, there you go assuming again, but I am previously familiar with clueless Gerald.

What I said is, that unless you know what the ratings for any camera you use it’s is worhtless. 1 person’s 8 DR ,might be somoene else 10. I’ve seen it before with two different people using Imatest.



Ya, that’s what I said.
You seem to be saying you want an image with no engineering applied in e output.

I'm saying I want a raw file.

It’s been a very long time since anyone did that.

Personally I alwys shoot raw….

Raw or ProRAW? One is raw the other is not.

Why.
Unless you’re in some kind of technical discipline?
I always shoot raw myself,

Raw or ProRAW? One is raw the other is not.

but I often wonder about other people for whom it’s rule, not a suggestion.

I can answer that but's it's another topic and we should get this one cleared up first.

If Apple gets 12 stops out of ProRaw, what’s the issue?

It's not raw.

They are probably just doing some PP for you,

Indeed they are, you don't know? It's starting to look like I know more about your phone camera than you do and I don't own one.

stretching out the 1s and 0s to fill the DR space of the processing pipeline. That would make many images better and also require less post processing. For a camera, that’s a fair approach.Whatever you need that needs full control of raw, most people just want ain image that is in some way pleasing.

Are you also assuming I'm like most people?

You make it sound like you can’t decide if you like an image without seeing it post some technical tests first. After all back in the day whe Canon DR sucked, onre of my photogtpraers buddies just leaned on the higer contrast. But sooner or later it wore him out. You never want to get stuck in one style forever.

IN any case I’ll be very interested to know what kind of DR, an Apple phone cant handle that you need.

I've already shown you that, but if you want to see another example here. That's 11+ stops of DR.

I tend to shoot raw,

Raw or ProRAW? One is raw the other is not.

because you never know when you might want to go back and make some changes. But most people don’t even consider that option.

Most people again... Is there a facepalm emoji here?

They want to send the photo from the restaurant. and possibly never want to see it again.

 

[greybeard]

They keep getting better and better with each generation. They have already taken over the point and shoot market. And are making inroads into APS-C market as well.

 

[DanOstergren]

I'm happy for you that you have a camera you enjoy using. Excellent work btw.

 

[21limited]

I guess you

Of course we know what it is. Look at that RawDigger histogram -- it's right there in the graph. The iPhone 16Pro has a 12 bit ADC.

I didn't say I didn't watch it, there you go assuming again, but I am previously familiar with clueless Gerald.

I'm saying I want a raw file.


Raw or ProRAW? One is raw the other is not.

Raw or ProRAW? One is raw the other is not.

I can answer that but's it's another topic and we should get this one cleared up first.

It's not raw.

Indeed they are, you don't know? It's starting to look like I know more about your phone camera than you do and I don't own one.

Are you also assuming I'm like most people?

I've already shown you that, but if you want to see another example here. That's 11+ stops of DR.

View attachment 284601

Raw or ProRAW? One is raw the other is not.

Most people again... Is there a facepalm emoji here?

Just anothher one of “those people ”who don’t realize, you have to show two images to do a comparison. I’ll beleive you can’t take that image with an Apple iPhone, when I see the “really bad” iPhone image. I have taken images with a 14 EV camera and a 12 EV camera,ad people couldn’t tell the differemce. That would be becasue before I run my mouth off I take the iamges to prove my point. But, thanks for your contribution. I always love the reactions of people like you, when I prove thay haven’t clue what they’re talking about. Be grateful I’m not up to it.

 

[Ysarex]

I guess you

Just anothher one of “those people ”who don’t realize, you have to show two images to do a comparison. I’ll beleive you can’t take that image with an Apple iPhone, when I see the “really bad” iPhone image. I have taken images with a 14 EV camera and a 12 EV camera,ad people couldn’t tell the differemce. That would be becasue before I run my mouth off I take the iamges to prove my point. But, thanks for your contribution. I always love the reactions of people like you, when I prove thay haven’t clue what they’re talking about. Be grateful I’m not up to it.

Clearly you're not up to it. You didn't know ProRAW files aren't raw. You thought you were saving raw files. You don't know exactly what kind of PP is applied to ProRAW files? They're noise filtered which is why, for me, they're not acceptable. You thought iPhone raw files might be 10 bit. Yep, you're not up to it.

 

[21limited]

I was kind of hoping to hear from people more capble of making good use of thier phones than you. Could you perhaps stop posting in this thread? There are many people now, who make very good use of their phones. There are some who look at the disadvantges of phones, and can make lemonade out of lemons. This thread is for them. Thanks in advance. I’m not interested in the places where they don’t work, I’m interested in where they do, same as every camera I own. Some people just get a camera and figure it out. WIth it’s size and phtograpahic quality it’s advantages are obvious. And many have figured out how to take advantage. Why those who have figured out what place phones have in their photographic arsenal, would want to listen to people crippled by their own biases is beyond me.

 

[Ysarex]

Why those who have figured out what place phones have in their photographic arsenal, would want to listen to people crippled by their own biases is beyond me.

You really need to do less judging and drawing assumptions about people you know nothing about, now I'm crippled by bias. In my first post in this thread I said this about phone cameras. "I'm very glad they're so ubiquitous and have gotten quite good. Lots of folks get great value from them." That was my bias on display right.

Your information was faulty and when I corrected you you got all huffy and belligerent -- you said I couldn't be an artist or photographer, I'm a technologist. Next I'm one of "those people." I'll be happy to leave you alone -- don't respond back and I will.

 

[21limited]

Good ridance…. don’t forget to close the door on the way out. Sorry folks, this is so messed up, I’ll most likey just abandon the thread, I’m so disappointed in the way this turned out. OH well, live and learn. Is there way to keep this guy out of future threads? What a disaster.

 

[Steve Anchell]

Even though I shoot thousands of photo’s every year usually throwing away at east 5 for everyone I keep, last year 2024… I kept over 1000 cell phone photos and over 600 DSLR photos. Given that iPhones are the most commonly used cameras on flickr, with Canon in second, I can see this cutting into camera sales even more as they get better. The low light capacity of these phone sis very good, probably due to some in camera stacking, it shoots raw, and at 24mm equivalent it shoots 48 MP and the images hold up compared with my 36 MP FF.

Some examples….
2024-10-21-AP-Opeongo-Access by Norm Head, on Flickr

2024-10-08-AP-Starling-Lk_lookout by Norm Head, on Flickr

2024-10-07-Lk-St-Peter-PP-12 by Norm Head, on Flickr

2024-08-22-AP-Opeongo-Annie's-Bay-fishing-1 by Norm Head, on Flickr

2024-07-21-AP-Penn-to-Rock-access-9 by Norm Head, on Flickr

2024-07-19-Penn-Lake_sunset by Norm Head, on Flickr

My wildlife images still require a DSLR,.
2025-02-26-Feeder-Creatures_RB-nuthatch by Norm Head, on Flickr

But for less than 100 mm, the iPhone has pretty much taken over. MY wife is having a similar time with her Google Pixel 7.

Your collection includes some nice images. What many people are slow to realize is that iPhones 14 and higher and top-end Androids are high-quality small-format cameras that cost around $1000. As a bonus, they come bundled with a phone and creative Apps. Keep at it and push the boundaries.

 

[21limited]

Your collection includes some nice images. What many people are slow to realize is that iPhones 14 and higher and top-end Androids are high-quality small-format cameras that cost around $1000. As a bonus, they come bundled with a phone and creative Apps. Keep at it and push the boundaries.

I’m fiding a lot of people are so slow to see what’s in front of them based on old prejudices. I shoot enough wildlife and birds I’ll never be able to ditch my DSLRs, but the phone has largely replaced my snapshot and a lot of my landscape use. Back in the day, small format meant poor images quality even at 4x6 sometimes. My main camera iPhone images, are good enough to print quite large. My oft repeated line is, your printer doens’t care if the pixel was recorded large format or small format. To it, a pixel is a pixel, they are just numerical values, and as long as you can print at 100 dpi or better, you’re good to go, at least on canvas, maybe a bit higher glossy.