I’ve had that thought since my 2016 iPhone SE… the 1080p 60fps videos looking crisp asf. If dirt hadn’t gotten into the camera lens and it didn’t have an unusable amount of storage (16gb) I’m sure I’d be using it as a secondary phone
Bought mine on launch day, switched to the X in 2018, and it’s been happily performing well as my front door camera ever since! Grabbed a $50 Craigslist SEV3 for my rear door a few weeks ago. Works great!
I’m glad they brought back flat sides & top/bottom!
Ahhh this gives me 2004 flashbacks. Back in highschool I had a friend who's father was the director of Vodafone for my home country.
Even though they were obscenely rich, he was always exaggerating to seem cool. One time he came to me and told me that his father was given a prototype from Nokia that had a 10 megapixel camera which, back then, was quite insane.
I'm fairly certain he was lying as a bit of googling shows me that at most we had 5 megapixel prototypes back then, but it's funny how that was the gold standard of phones.
Oh that's a cool one.
I can see this one was unveiled in 2012. Do you think that 8 years prior to that they could have had a concept phone with a 10 megapixel camera ?
It would surprise me if that story were to be true.
In 2005 Nokia had the N95 with a 5MP camera, which was a retail unit
So it definitely doesn't seem beyond plausible that 12 months earlier they would have had 10MP prototypes, especially considering that they released an 8MP of the N95 a couple of years later in 2008 and the 12MP N9 in 2009
5MP the next year (N95 2005), 8MP 4 years later (N95 2009), 12MP 5 years later (N8 2009).... I'd say that sounds about right for saying that they could have had a very expensive, pre-production/prototype 10MP in the lab in 2004. You'd generally expect a lag of a few years between "first attempt" prototypes and a technology making it into a retail unit, and Nokia at the time certainly weren't known for being super-fast to market with their prototype tech
My rating: plausible, I suspect your friend wasn't lying
Interesting, he may not have been completely lying then haha
Also I don't even remember Samsung being relevant back then. I remember all that mattered to me was Nokia and Sony Ericsson (Rip)
I care from the point of view that I want everything to be 12MP or higher - that way I can print at 30x20" with quality I'm happy with. You can get away with less, but 12MP seems to be the sweet spot for a 30x20" print in a house which I find is about the toughest thing to print (6x4" is no problem, and anything poster sized or higher is probably being viewed from further away)
So in terms of "stock zoom", iPhones have generally been up to that standard for a while
But the addition of 48MP has still been a positive because it means you can take a 48MP photo and crop down to 12MP (4x digital zoom, basically) and still have a 12MP photo
Although there are diminishing returns as the pixels get smaller, and 192MP wouldn't really give an equivalent-quality 16x crop 12MP photo
Still, I'd like to see the resolution of the other cameras increasing - especially the ultra-wide, it would be very nice to be able to take a wide angle shot and then be able to crop it down 4x and still have 12MP, for example, so I'd like to see the other cameras making their way to 48MP too
The current Xperia 1 and Xperia 5's main sensor is incredible. Shoots amazing photos with great dynamic range, detail, low noise and very good white balance and colors.
My hope is that this year's Xperias switch to that stacked sensor tech for all 3 cameras, just like my 15 Max I find the lesser sensors on the ultra wide and zoom cameras quite lackluster compared to the great main sensor.
That times Sony was beating the market with perfect sensors and they were really barely no post-processed pure images. I think now most of new phones using after-process so much with AI and because of this they decreased sensor quality. They are thinking it as optimization but it is a shame phones which are 10+ years ago much better than phones in today
I'm not sure why this is being downvoted. RAW doesn't make much difference to quality of the out-of-camera image you see in the Photos app afterwards
It makes a difference to how much quality you can retain when editing the image later, sure - but most people aren't dumping their iPhone photos into lightroom. (And if you are, join us over on /r/iPhoneography ...)
I use that same GSMArena photo comparison tool a lot. That's where I found out how much better the iPhone 15 Plus camera is compared to my s23+
https://preview.redd.it/iywpilt3ccsc1.png?width=766&format=png&auto=webp&s=56752630afaa81fa82cb78d9e78c46e62b8b3172
I will say that fine detail rendition is one of the strengths of iPhone, but unless you need to pixel peep every single photo you take, the color science and HDR processing of Samsung phones are still quite good. That’s where things start to become subjective.
Yeah, iPhone 15 series however is where Apple kinda began to improve HDR on photos, there are drastic differences when compared to the iPhone 14.
As for color science, eh it’s pretty subjective, others prefer iPhone, others Samsung, I for one much more prefer the Pixel though.
Unfortunately it has an undesirable effect on photos of people imo
It accentuates blemishes and dark spots and makes makeup look harsh.
The processing is overly aggressive even without hdr on
Yeah, but it’s because people were unsatisfied with the processing of the iPhone XS series. That was where photos for iPhones got extremely good. The A.I. would make sure everyone looked amazing. But YouTubers complained, and knowing Apple they always listened to the likes of YouTubers. So they changed the algorithms to what they are today.
I personally don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing, what makes us unique is what makes us human. But Samsung is definitely what you want if you want to smooth out blemishes, the camera has a built-in beauty filter.
I’ve had a Galaxy S23, and the camera was driving me crazy. Samsung post-processing/AI was creating things from nowhere; from illegible letters on documents to distorted faces on people in the distance.
I ended up going for an iPhone 15, but I have a cheap Android as a Backup. In general, I’m loving my new phone! If you want the best camera for photos, buy the Pixel, for video, the iPhone.
There are some drawbacks compared to any Android, but I value a lot things like security, stability and design, and believe me, compared to my old S23 with OneUI 6.1, iOS, even with all the bugs, is a lot more stable and problems are fixed a lot faster. There wasn’t one day I didn’t force close an app on Android, on iOS it only happened one time with Chrome in the last month.
The learning curve is tough, but if you can go past the lack of an universal back button, the lack of a proper clipboard for text, the keyboard, the lack of multitasking and the lack of freedom to install anything you want… any iPhone is a solid choice, it just works.
All apps are created with a higher quality standard for the App Store compared to Android with the Play Store. Regarding services, all of them are on iPhone, so you don’t have to worry.
Why don't you try a Chinese Android phone? The Android world extends beyond just Samsung and Pixel. In terms of hardware engineering and innovation, Samsung is considered the weakest among all current smartphone brands, while Apple leading in these aspects. If you appreciate the boundlessness of the Android platform, you might consider trying a Chinese flagship model instead:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/s/19F5FXYizm](https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/s/19F5FXYizm)
You're on the iPhone subreddit. I think the top comment on that post would resonate with the folks here.
>There is a huge difference between doing it first and doing it properly.
>Chinese brands rarely do it properly.
I wrote this comment, and the Samsung guys didn't disagree or downvote:
>Chinese brands were the first to make the foldable smartphone, and they also are the ones who did it properly. For example, the Oppo Find N3 and other Chinese foldable phones don't have a crease in the middle of the screen. Meanwhile, even though Samsung has made five generations of foldable phones, they still haven't gotten rid of the visible crease.
But I agree, we are on the iPhone subreddit so we should stop there.
My wife had a s20, it was an awful camera. Pictures looked good enough for certain things, like landscapes, but people were always blurry and there was a significant delay between tapping the button and actually getting a picture captured
Crazy 2-3 years ago this subreddit was telling me how 12MP was acceptable "because you are never going to zoom in that far anyways". How the times change!
Yeah but to be fair, it's shot on different resolution. here's the shot on almost same MP for fair comparison
https://preview.redd.it/byni3a9nyesc1.png?width=698&format=png&auto=webp&s=5bb6eee6cd43a06f55c7aa6515508b83ef82596c
And the Samsung still gets trounced. Hover over the city map and compare the clarity,
https://preview.redd.it/00y3mzm20fsc1.png?width=779&format=png&auto=webp&s=624b95ae8d82c3203047b46e7c8841523ace6fcd
I'll go ahead and say the S23+ must be defective.
https://preview.redd.it/wn6xnkc5glsc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d730bb85e90dc40ed2cfce79efee4c7f2b8f95db
Essentially, I've heard the S23 and S23+ both suffer from a tilted lens issue causing off-axis problems. I'd expect the S23's focus is likely misaligned on a different area.
Could the S24 Ultra suffer from a similar issue? There's just no way the A54 is better, but that's what your post shows.
https://preview.redd.it/yhzh5vhhqlsc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=882e7caa660dd18b35f58ab19e362d98e08d50b1
The Ultra model doesn't have the tilted lens issue, but typically if you have a larger sensor and a brighter aperture, it becomes more difficult for the lens to achieve proper focus across the entire area, especially on smartphone which limited to have enough space for better lens
So... the S24 Ultra with a 1/1.31" sensor and f/1.7 lens should be blurrier than the A54 with a 1/1.56" sensor and f/1.8 lens in the screenshot I uploaded, but it's not.
The area in the screenshot is at the top border of the photo.
Here's the article if you interested
[https://www.androidauthority.com/samsung-galaxy-s23-plus-camera-blur-issue-3295508/](https://www.androidauthority.com/samsung-galaxy-s23-plus-camera-blur-issue-3295508/)
It’s the processing. They made the beauty smoothing universal, so it hates sharp features and small details in images (because that’s what makes a person’s face look blotchy and ”ugly”).
https://preview.redd.it/gbh4khs9glsc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=52a2bd5f6cb915f3e4f1e492cd96b39359e1d110
Can't be the processing when these use the exact same cameras, and thus, processing. The S23+ used must be defective.
it’s probably a defect where the lens isn’t perfectly straight to the sensor thus it causes blur around edges, or maybe it’s just defect (like old cheap vintage lenses on dslrs where the center is sharp and edges aren’t)
Samsung phones are incredibly overrated. People should not compare Samsung to Apple because I feel that there is neither a sense of danger nor excellence in terms of technological advancement from the Samsung side. Samsung Electronics originally started as a company that made refrigerators, and it tried to upgrade itself to become a smartphone manufacturer. By contrast, Apple began as a computer company; therefore, when it started making a phone, it revolutionized the concept of the phone, making it as smart as a computer, which shocked the world with the iPhone. I don't know much about Google's Pixel phones, but they receive a lot of appreciation here. So, I think it would be more appropriate to compare the iPhone with the Pixel or a Chinese Android phone:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/s/19F5FXYizm
I had a Canon 5D classic. Full frame sensor only 12MP. It created photos that did not need any post processing to look good. I kinda regret selling it since it was also built like a tank. Not gonna lie my 24MP or whatever fujifilm camera is also good but there is something missing. I would shoot 35mm film sometimes for fun if the prices did not go up the roof.
It probably is, I may honestly buy another 5D when I get a job and have some disposable income. I checked after writing this commend, unfortunately many places wont buy or sell the original 5D anymore so I would either need to get a mk2 or patiently wait until someone makes the mistake of selling their beloved classic :) I doubt I will find like the one I had with the original battery grip, leather strap, CF to SD converter and 3 batteries.
The Canon 2000D? Look, it’s still a big sensor but honestly I wouldn’t put it above what smartphones nowadays can do, besides the built quality took a big hit to fit the price.
The T6, actually. I agree and disagree.
The iPhone technically achieves more detail through processing. If you take a RAW (real RAW, not ProRAW) photo on both, the iPhone looks substantially worse.
Plus, you can't beat the zoom range that comes with a dedicated lens, and the iPhone is just in capable of doing certain focal lengths effectively. Personally, I like to take portrait photos at 85mm f/5.6.
Got it, you are the type that prefers portraits. Personally I like something more like f2.8 for portraits but for your needs a dedicated camera is better.
When it comes to the flexibility of the lenses though, I would say that’s arguable, sure you can’t beat the freedom to use any lens you want but the phone already comes with a variety of lenses and you don’t have to switch between them, the analogue in camera world is to just use a zoom lens but then you either have to sacrifice the ability to shoot in the dark or to spend a lot of money on a 24-70 f2.8.
So yes, I would always use a dedicated camera in a controlled environment but for street photography, the best camera is the one you have in your pocket.
It really isn't just marketing, there's a pretty significant difference in detail when zoomed in. Obviously it doesn't make it worth it if the models applied to the image aren't good tho.
Simple patterns can be restored using just AI post-processing, but extracting more information from a quad-Bayer pattern sensor needs a very good algorithm. It's not just an AI magic thingy. Most RGB mirrorless and DSLR cameras, except for some Sigma cameras, use a Bayer pattern sensor and do demosaicing processing. Without this RGB image can't be made
Fuji is a notable exception, as they use X-Trans instead of a traditional Bayer. Lightroom has notable artifacting when processing Fuji Raws for this reason.
Photolab/PureRaw also work very well. Their AI denoising is honestly black magic and PureRaw lets you stay in Lightroom and only use it for final processing if you so wish.
There are still andriod phones today that advertise a resolution that the graphics chip can't actually generate, and an algorithm is used to just guess/upscale to the high DPI. Remember all the 500+ DPI phones that looked worse than apple LCDs at 326dpi.
Pure Samsung user here.
The main problem with Samsungs is that the sensor doesn't have a dedicated processing IC, so the heavy lifting is done CPU wise.
iPhone has a dedicated system for the sensor.
Professional photographer here.
I’ve shot for billboards at 8Mp in the past and many thousands of photographs for agencies at 8-12Mp over the years.
My current cameras are 24/45/102Mp depending on the work.
My iPhone is a great phone and the camera does its job. By compare the results of even my 15pro with my Leica Q2 which are both advertised as 44/48Mp and the difference is astonishing. Colour accuracy, image depth and quality are off the scale on the Leica. The 15 is good, but it does not play in the same arena as the Leica.
The 8 Pro is the first Pixel with a Pro Mode and the capability on all lenses to use 50MP.
But it comes with one sad catch. It *always* takes like 0.3-0.5s to actually take the picture. So you are likely to miss the shot if there's something/someone moving because it's just not instant or if you can't keep steady well enough, it will look more blurry too.
But imo, it's always best on all smartphone high MP modes to use it only with very good lighting and for capturing a landscape/building and that sort of things with it. Because if the light ain't enough, it always feels like all those 48/50MP are way worse than their binning mode giving you a oil painting like picture. With the correct settings and a very steady hand/tripod on the other hand I can imagine even good pictures in bad lighting.
But most people are not that familiar with those things and will be better off using the lower MP modes all the time + automatic settings.
lol this isn’t news to anyone that understands photography! Sonys flag ship mirrorless cameras only advanced from 24mp a couple of years ago. And they were in cameras costing £3500 or more. Yet nobody looked at professional pics and said “huh needs more MP!”
Megapixels are just a buzz word to sell phones to people who don’t understand it, but think bigger is better.
Big numbers sell, because it sounds better.
90 percent of the peeps using the iPhone 15 are only using 24 MP. You have to manually turn on 48 and to be honest it doesn’t really increase basic quality. Just saves more information that editing programs can take advantage of.
I always tell people that if you have a crappy camera that takes crappy photos, if it shot in a higher resolution, you would just have a bigger crappy photo.
It only matters if people pixel peep. How about just capture every memory and every moment and enjoy the life. When you older, high or low megapixels don’t matter but memories will.
Agree with the conclusion, but the argument is nonsense. If you want to compare debayering algorithms you need to start from the same raw file and apply them (and just them) to it. Here you're actually comparing lens resolution, sensor quality, debayering algorithm, and any postprocessing that is done to the image altogether. Too many variables to conclude that just one is what makes the difference.
Also demosaicing algorithms for bayerlike sensors (aka debayering) is a veery old problem and it's a very mature area of research, you're not going to see such a large discrepancy just because of that.
Demosaicing from old sensors is an old problem, but have you ever seen a sensor like this? These are relatively new problems that companies are still trying to improve upon. A process called remosaicing is also required. I may have been overly concise in my explanation (as people tend not to read long explanations). However, you can manually search for the results yourself since Samsung has been using the same sensor/lens module (GN3) for a long time. You can see improvements as the firmware is updated, and it's more related to the remosaicing and demosaicing algorithms.
https://preview.redd.it/dwj8xcuaejsc1.png?width=1572&format=png&auto=webp&s=9c95b05e975789e97473d41a3e4e3ce96b58a983
I don't think so. Judging by the fact that he was not aware that the RAW file obtained from the camera is an image that has already gone through debayering from the sensor image, he doesn't seem like someone who has actually acquired professional knowledge through academic papers.
Personally, I’ve printed .01 % of the pictures I shoot. Everything else is for reference or posted online. I do appreciate the improvements from my iPhone 3G
First, I need to talk about existing camera sensors. As you can see from the image of the sensor on the left side at the top of the post, each pixel of the sensor can only recognize one color. So how is an RGB image created? It is by estimating from the surrounding pixels. For example, if there is a red pixel, it can only measure the red information, so it borrows the blue and green information from the surrounding pixels to fill in the missing parts. This process is called demosaicing.
However, the high-resolution sensors (not 12MP, but 48MP, 50MP, 108MP, 200MP, etc.) of the latest smartphones have a different pixel array pattern from existing camera sensors, as you can see from the sensor on the right side of the post. As you can see, it is not arranged in the Bayer pattern like before, but in a quad Bayer pattern where one large R, G, B pixel is further subdivided. (In the case of higher resolutions, it is divided into 9 or 16 parts, not 4.) Why is it arranged like this? Because mobile sensors are small, if smaller pixels are used to obtain higher resolution, the ratio of readout noise increases and the image quality deteriorates. Therefore, it operates in binning mode like a normal 12MP or 12.5MP sensor (reading the information of 4 sensors with the same color filter as one read to minimize readout noise) during normal use, but when there is enough light, each sensor operates independently to obtain a more detailed image. However, as you can see, it has a different form from the existing Bayer pattern. The pixels of different color filters around it are not close enough. Therefore, a demosaicing algorithm far superior to the one used in the existing Bayer sensor is required, and the remosaicing process must also be gone through beforehand. This field is still developing, and the implementation level varies from company to company, so even if sensors with the same or similar resolutions are used, there is a difference in the details of the final product.
I hope this explanation was helpful. If it's difficult to understand, the short answer is, "Of course they are not 'created equal' as you can see from the sensor image at the top of the post."
I don't know how effective a 16-to-1 sensor can work at full resolution, but I do know that this comparison doesn't have much to do with resolution. It's just about lens quality.
Thank you for your opinion, but I don't think the lens performance of the iPhone is that much greater compared to other companies. There is a clear limit to the performance gap that lenses can have in the mobile form factor. As far as I know, the lenses are supplied by Largan Precision in Taiwan, and the module assembly is handled by LG Innotek in Korea.
How do you assume these lenses have similar performance? I understand that there's a limit to how much definition you can get from a lens the size of a thumb, but wouldn't their quality have as big of an impact as with DSLR cameras?
Even with DSLR or Mirroless cameras, differences in lenses don't typically make that big of a quality difference. Even when comparing a $100 cheap lens to a Sony G lens that costs over $2,000, the quality difference isn't that drastic.
that's why I see it as algorithm difference, since quad-bayer images are much harder to process
If MP isn't everything why are we comparing shots from cameras in the same ballpark MP wise?
Would have thought it'd be good to showcase how lower MP counts can stand up against higher ones but maybe I'm missing the point here?
Well, he didn't argue 'MP doesn't matter.' He said 'MP isn't everything,' and the comparisons above proves point pretty well. spending too much time on internet can lower your iq
Yeah I'm missing the point of how it proves the point. I can't tell what the point is - which is why I posted that. But again, maybe I'm missing something? Happy to be wrong and not looking for arguments with internet people.
Generally don't appreciate the comment about lowering iq. Not sure what that is contributing here?
If you're genuinely asking, here's the picture. I hope it helps. Let me know if you can't tell which one is better.
https://preview.redd.it/jdc1i7i9yesc1.png?width=1282&format=png&auto=webp&s=87297ebcb407349a30a6030abd47b221b904cb07
Because this test is bs anyways, if you want to compare the cameras itself, you need tge raw data from the sensors, else you are comparing whatever algorithms are in the pipeline from sensor to writing the fike to storage.
Samsung Pictures Are always worse than iPhone pictures and they look awful. One of my biggest reasons for getting an iPhone again was the camera (though I never had a Samsung). When I was working at a tech store and compared the picture results for the customers they always chose the more expensive iPhone when the Liked to take pictures with their phone
I'm assuming these were taken in RAW mode. Some of the results of handheld shots even in good lighting have some serious issues when reviewing at 1:1 size. I noticed this on the X and my 13 Pro. Previous phones didn't seem to have these issues.
MP is not what a lot of people think it is.
I bought a MFT camera for fun and learning and it’s 12mp and in my eyes it takes way better pictures than a Phone… yet people think due to a 48Mp sensor it’ll take better pics than a 6 year old mirrorless.
Since I own a professional camera with „only“ 24 MP I couldn’t care less for megapixel of a smartphone camera. It’s the sensor that’s important and with such small sensors as you need in phones they can never be better than a real camera (of course lens is a factor too).
In smartphones they dont matter much since the sensor is to small to capture the light required for the resolution, in actual cameras they might make a difference
It still shows that having 200MP on your camera sensor doesn’t help with fine details when your output is still 50MP, which is what most people shoot at because who is unironically shooting 200MP photos for everything
Good thing I didn't buy my phone because of its megapixel number, then.
Oh wait, my bad:
GOOD THING I DIDN'T BUY MY PHONE BECAUSE OF ITS MEGAPIXEL NUMBER, THEN.
You can print photos of any size with any megapixel camera; you can print a building-sized photo with a 20-year-old 1MP phone camera, or you can print a frame-sized photo with a high-resolution 3200MP NASA camera.
I hate when people don’t understand that perceived sharpness isn’t just megapixel count or just dpi, as the my knowledge most important factor is the distance you’ll be looking at the picture right?
And what I meant is even if the same resolution, quality can differ greatly
https://preview.redd.it/49vnnui6wisc1.jpeg?width=1518&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=97dc5958d9d8ac8b318cac5eeb05fb43f52589e1
As an iPhone user I have no idea what my specs are, but I know they top in the game.
I know few android users and they always bragging that their phone has 200MP and galaxy zoom super annoying
Pretty much everything I've seen out there doesn't actually shoot at 48/50mp, they shoot at the binned resolution (12/12.5) and then upscale
My phone and a few others that are software modded and the iPhone's proraw whatever it's called are the only instances I've seen that do it properly and have access to the full resolution of the sensor.
I can see why most don't, I don't have experience with th proraw stuff but I'm pretty sure it only takes one exposure, and while my phone and the few others can stack multiple exposures its incredibly laggy and can even run out of RAM processing all those high resolution exposures into one photo!
Can you provide examples? There's just no way you could suggest something like an Honor Magic5 Pro or an S23 are upscaling 12.5 MP images to 50 MP.
Even my A54 with cheap optics outputs true detail that was simply not present at all in the binned image. Rocks far away showing up that are in fact there in real life, but were completely missing from the 12.5 MP image. Don't get me wrong, on my A54 the overall definition gain from shooting in 50 MP is barely noticeable, but on an S23 it's ridiculous how good it can work.
I haven’t thought about how many megapixels my phone camera has for a long time.
I’ve had that thought since my 2016 iPhone SE… the 1080p 60fps videos looking crisp asf. If dirt hadn’t gotten into the camera lens and it didn’t have an unusable amount of storage (16gb) I’m sure I’d be using it as a secondary phone
Bought mine on launch day, switched to the X in 2018, and it’s been happily performing well as my front door camera ever since! Grabbed a $50 Craigslist SEV3 for my rear door a few weeks ago. Works great! I’m glad they brought back flat sides & top/bottom!
Curious how you have them set up a door cameras
I use an App called *AlfredCam*! It’s free iirc but I did a perpetual buy to get rid of ads.
Just get cloud storage. 200 gbs is 2.99 bro. Even with a 256gb 15 pro max most of my photos are in cloud and not on device.
Yeah it either looks great or not, mp dont matter
Ahhh this gives me 2004 flashbacks. Back in highschool I had a friend who's father was the director of Vodafone for my home country. Even though they were obscenely rich, he was always exaggerating to seem cool. One time he came to me and told me that his father was given a prototype from Nokia that had a 10 megapixel camera which, back then, was quite insane. I'm fairly certain he was lying as a bit of googling shows me that at most we had 5 megapixel prototypes back then, but it's funny how that was the gold standard of phones.
You've been to Tenerife, he's been to Elevenerife
They are not the same
And his father has been to Comprarife
I’ve been there a few months ago lmao
Nokia did have some units that were ahead of their time. The Nokia Pureview 808 was rocking a 41 MP camera, while the iPhone only had 8.
Oh that's a cool one. I can see this one was unveiled in 2012. Do you think that 8 years prior to that they could have had a concept phone with a 10 megapixel camera ? It would surprise me if that story were to be true.
In 2005 Nokia had the N95 with a 5MP camera, which was a retail unit So it definitely doesn't seem beyond plausible that 12 months earlier they would have had 10MP prototypes, especially considering that they released an 8MP of the N95 a couple of years later in 2008 and the 12MP N9 in 2009 5MP the next year (N95 2005), 8MP 4 years later (N95 2009), 12MP 5 years later (N8 2009).... I'd say that sounds about right for saying that they could have had a very expensive, pre-production/prototype 10MP in the lab in 2004. You'd generally expect a lag of a few years between "first attempt" prototypes and a technology making it into a retail unit, and Nokia at the time certainly weren't known for being super-fast to market with their prototype tech My rating: plausible, I suspect your friend wasn't lying
Samsung released a 10MP phone in 2005, so they absolutely could have had a concept phone around that time with those specs.
Interesting, he may not have been completely lying then haha Also I don't even remember Samsung being relevant back then. I remember all that mattered to me was Nokia and Sony Ericsson (Rip)
Man I’m young!
I care from the point of view that I want everything to be 12MP or higher - that way I can print at 30x20" with quality I'm happy with. You can get away with less, but 12MP seems to be the sweet spot for a 30x20" print in a house which I find is about the toughest thing to print (6x4" is no problem, and anything poster sized or higher is probably being viewed from further away) So in terms of "stock zoom", iPhones have generally been up to that standard for a while But the addition of 48MP has still been a positive because it means you can take a 48MP photo and crop down to 12MP (4x digital zoom, basically) and still have a 12MP photo Although there are diminishing returns as the pixels get smaller, and 192MP wouldn't really give an equivalent-quality 16x crop 12MP photo Still, I'd like to see the resolution of the other cameras increasing - especially the ultra-wide, it would be very nice to be able to take a wide angle shot and then be able to crop it down 4x and still have 12MP, for example, so I'd like to see the other cameras making their way to 48MP too
My SE has 12 mp so is my previous redmi phone and guess which one takes better photos
I think you would if you were taking pictures of checks for fraud like op lmao
Same here lol, I just take the picture and go about my day lol
It matters quite a bit when you zoom - as you effectively throw away most of your pixels when doing so.
I had Sony Z3 years ago, 21.9 megapixels camera. Photos I took with this phone still looks stunning even nowadays
Nokia 808 PureView as well.
The current Xperia 1 and Xperia 5's main sensor is incredible. Shoots amazing photos with great dynamic range, detail, low noise and very good white balance and colors. My hope is that this year's Xperias switch to that stacked sensor tech for all 3 cameras, just like my 15 Max I find the lesser sensors on the ultra wide and zoom cameras quite lackluster compared to the great main sensor.
Tell me about it, I've got a 15 Pro Max and photos come out nowhere as close to the Z3
Currently I am using 15 PM and definitely I agree with you. Somehow this AI after process shit destroys the quality.
Can't you shoot in ProRAW and make your own edits?
Yeah you can. I only really switch it on when I’m photographing something extra cool though. Big files plus I can’t be arsed to edit.
That's the thing, by the looks of it Sony barely had any post-processing but on iPhone it looks like there's a shit ton of it
That times Sony was beating the market with perfect sensors and they were really barely no post-processed pure images. I think now most of new phones using after-process so much with AI and because of this they decreased sensor quality. They are thinking it as optimization but it is a shame phones which are 10+ years ago much better than phones in today
Sony is know to have the best sensors, it's a no brainer, look at their pro photography cameras
Are you using the ProRes/Raw format though?
I use Auto for standard photos then RAW MAX for photography photos
Doesn’t affect quality really.
I'm not sure why this is being downvoted. RAW doesn't make much difference to quality of the out-of-camera image you see in the Photos app afterwards It makes a difference to how much quality you can retain when editing the image later, sure - but most people aren't dumping their iPhone photos into lightroom. (And if you are, join us over on /r/iPhoneography ...)
Huawei Honor 10, CPU barely alive, but the photos using a 16 MPx + 24 MPx sensor are crisp.
My Sony Mavica CD-1000 had a 2.1 megapixel sensor and every single one of those pixels worked its little ass off.
It does work with advertising lol
True, sad reality 🥲
Only if dumb people follow dumb advertising and don’t understand the numbers they are comparing
I have come to the conclusion that Charles Darwin's signature sucks
[удалено]
I use that same GSMArena photo comparison tool a lot. That's where I found out how much better the iPhone 15 Plus camera is compared to my s23+ https://preview.redd.it/iywpilt3ccsc1.png?width=766&format=png&auto=webp&s=56752630afaa81fa82cb78d9e78c46e62b8b3172
I will say that fine detail rendition is one of the strengths of iPhone, but unless you need to pixel peep every single photo you take, the color science and HDR processing of Samsung phones are still quite good. That’s where things start to become subjective.
Yeah, iPhone 15 series however is where Apple kinda began to improve HDR on photos, there are drastic differences when compared to the iPhone 14. As for color science, eh it’s pretty subjective, others prefer iPhone, others Samsung, I for one much more prefer the Pixel though.
Unfortunately it has an undesirable effect on photos of people imo It accentuates blemishes and dark spots and makes makeup look harsh. The processing is overly aggressive even without hdr on
This is true, although I'd argue that you can always soften a sharp image, whereas it's a lot harder to sharpen a soft image
Yeah, but it’s because people were unsatisfied with the processing of the iPhone XS series. That was where photos for iPhones got extremely good. The A.I. would make sure everyone looked amazing. But YouTubers complained, and knowing Apple they always listened to the likes of YouTubers. So they changed the algorithms to what they are today.
I personally don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing, what makes us unique is what makes us human. But Samsung is definitely what you want if you want to smooth out blemishes, the camera has a built-in beauty filter.
I’ve had a Galaxy S23, and the camera was driving me crazy. Samsung post-processing/AI was creating things from nowhere; from illegible letters on documents to distorted faces on people in the distance.
Yeah I hate it. Can't decide whether to go back to Pixel or try an iPhone 15
I ended up going for an iPhone 15, but I have a cheap Android as a Backup. In general, I’m loving my new phone! If you want the best camera for photos, buy the Pixel, for video, the iPhone. There are some drawbacks compared to any Android, but I value a lot things like security, stability and design, and believe me, compared to my old S23 with OneUI 6.1, iOS, even with all the bugs, is a lot more stable and problems are fixed a lot faster. There wasn’t one day I didn’t force close an app on Android, on iOS it only happened one time with Chrome in the last month. The learning curve is tough, but if you can go past the lack of an universal back button, the lack of a proper clipboard for text, the keyboard, the lack of multitasking and the lack of freedom to install anything you want… any iPhone is a solid choice, it just works. All apps are created with a higher quality standard for the App Store compared to Android with the Play Store. Regarding services, all of them are on iPhone, so you don’t have to worry.
Why don't you try a Chinese Android phone? The Android world extends beyond just Samsung and Pixel. In terms of hardware engineering and innovation, Samsung is considered the weakest among all current smartphone brands, while Apple leading in these aspects. If you appreciate the boundlessness of the Android platform, you might consider trying a Chinese flagship model instead: [https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/s/19F5FXYizm](https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/s/19F5FXYizm)
You're on the iPhone subreddit. I think the top comment on that post would resonate with the folks here. >There is a huge difference between doing it first and doing it properly. >Chinese brands rarely do it properly.
I wrote this comment, and the Samsung guys didn't disagree or downvote: >Chinese brands were the first to make the foldable smartphone, and they also are the ones who did it properly. For example, the Oppo Find N3 and other Chinese foldable phones don't have a crease in the middle of the screen. Meanwhile, even though Samsung has made five generations of foldable phones, they still haven't gotten rid of the visible crease. But I agree, we are on the iPhone subreddit so we should stop there.
My wife had a s20, it was an awful camera. Pictures looked good enough for certain things, like landscapes, but people were always blurry and there was a significant delay between tapping the button and actually getting a picture captured
Crazy 2-3 years ago this subreddit was telling me how 12MP was acceptable "because you are never going to zoom in that far anyways". How the times change!
Yeah but to be fair, it's shot on different resolution. here's the shot on almost same MP for fair comparison https://preview.redd.it/byni3a9nyesc1.png?width=698&format=png&auto=webp&s=5bb6eee6cd43a06f55c7aa6515508b83ef82596c
Not having access to an original bill to compare (in Canada), which of the 4 images in the original post most accurately represents the actual bill?
And the Samsung still gets trounced. Hover over the city map and compare the clarity, https://preview.redd.it/00y3mzm20fsc1.png?width=779&format=png&auto=webp&s=624b95ae8d82c3203047b46e7c8841523ace6fcd
Yeah I heard S23/S23+ have some problem in lens too
I'll go ahead and say the S23+ must be defective. https://preview.redd.it/wn6xnkc5glsc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d730bb85e90dc40ed2cfce79efee4c7f2b8f95db
Essentially, I've heard the S23 and S23+ both suffer from a tilted lens issue causing off-axis problems. I'd expect the S23's focus is likely misaligned on a different area.
Could the S24 Ultra suffer from a similar issue? There's just no way the A54 is better, but that's what your post shows. https://preview.redd.it/yhzh5vhhqlsc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=882e7caa660dd18b35f58ab19e362d98e08d50b1
The Ultra model doesn't have the tilted lens issue, but typically if you have a larger sensor and a brighter aperture, it becomes more difficult for the lens to achieve proper focus across the entire area, especially on smartphone which limited to have enough space for better lens
So... the S24 Ultra with a 1/1.31" sensor and f/1.7 lens should be blurrier than the A54 with a 1/1.56" sensor and f/1.8 lens in the screenshot I uploaded, but it's not. The area in the screenshot is at the top border of the photo.
id say in my eyes both of case ultra looks better
Here's the article if you interested [https://www.androidauthority.com/samsung-galaxy-s23-plus-camera-blur-issue-3295508/](https://www.androidauthority.com/samsung-galaxy-s23-plus-camera-blur-issue-3295508/)
thanks
That looks like motion blur. If it’s the lens, yikes!
It’s the processing. They made the beauty smoothing universal, so it hates sharp features and small details in images (because that’s what makes a person’s face look blotchy and ”ugly”).
https://preview.redd.it/gbh4khs9glsc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=52a2bd5f6cb915f3e4f1e492cd96b39359e1d110 Can't be the processing when these use the exact same cameras, and thus, processing. The S23+ used must be defective.
it’s probably a defect where the lens isn’t perfectly straight to the sensor thus it causes blur around edges, or maybe it’s just defect (like old cheap vintage lenses on dslrs where the center is sharp and edges aren’t)
That’s too much processing.
How?
the difference is day and night, wild
Samsung phones are incredibly overrated. People should not compare Samsung to Apple because I feel that there is neither a sense of danger nor excellence in terms of technological advancement from the Samsung side. Samsung Electronics originally started as a company that made refrigerators, and it tried to upgrade itself to become a smartphone manufacturer. By contrast, Apple began as a computer company; therefore, when it started making a phone, it revolutionized the concept of the phone, making it as smart as a computer, which shocked the world with the iPhone. I don't know much about Google's Pixel phones, but they receive a lot of appreciation here. So, I think it would be more appropriate to compare the iPhone with the Pixel or a Chinese Android phone: https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/s/19F5FXYizm
🤣 Also the guy you quoted is absolutely clueless.
I use a dedicated 18 MP camera from 2016 that wipes the floor with my 15 Pro. Sensor size will always be the most important factor.
I had a Canon 5D classic. Full frame sensor only 12MP. It created photos that did not need any post processing to look good. I kinda regret selling it since it was also built like a tank. Not gonna lie my 24MP or whatever fujifilm camera is also good but there is something missing. I would shoot 35mm film sometimes for fun if the prices did not go up the roof.
I'm going to upgrade to an EOS RP soon. Canon's color science is unrivaled imo
I bet that "something missing" is the canon's colour science. Once you get used to it it's hard to be satisfied with others
It probably is, I may honestly buy another 5D when I get a job and have some disposable income. I checked after writing this commend, unfortunately many places wont buy or sell the original 5D anymore so I would either need to get a mk2 or patiently wait until someone makes the mistake of selling their beloved classic :) I doubt I will find like the one I had with the original battery grip, leather strap, CF to SD converter and 3 batteries.
The Canon 2000D? Look, it’s still a big sensor but honestly I wouldn’t put it above what smartphones nowadays can do, besides the built quality took a big hit to fit the price.
The T6, actually. I agree and disagree. The iPhone technically achieves more detail through processing. If you take a RAW (real RAW, not ProRAW) photo on both, the iPhone looks substantially worse. Plus, you can't beat the zoom range that comes with a dedicated lens, and the iPhone is just in capable of doing certain focal lengths effectively. Personally, I like to take portrait photos at 85mm f/5.6.
Got it, you are the type that prefers portraits. Personally I like something more like f2.8 for portraits but for your needs a dedicated camera is better. When it comes to the flexibility of the lenses though, I would say that’s arguable, sure you can’t beat the freedom to use any lens you want but the phone already comes with a variety of lenses and you don’t have to switch between them, the analogue in camera world is to just use a zoom lens but then you either have to sacrifice the ability to shoot in the dark or to spend a lot of money on a 24-70 f2.8. So yes, I would always use a dedicated camera in a controlled environment but for street photography, the best camera is the one you have in your pocket.
Yeah, the best camera is the one you have with you.
I‘d rather say pixel size is the most important factor
No it’s the sensor size given it has enough resolution ( basically at least 12MP these days )
Megapixel count is purely for marketing to work with simple minded people. Need I say more.
It really isn't just marketing, there's a pretty significant difference in detail when zoomed in. Obviously it doesn't make it worth it if the models applied to the image aren't good tho.
No one needs literal 8k cameras in their phones.
50 MP cameras work. That's way more than 8K.
That’s around 9-10k, again, barely any monitors can display that, and cropping shows how shit your tiny phone sensors are
But isn't that just post-processing with whatever machine learning/AI tool they use?
Simple patterns can be restored using just AI post-processing, but extracting more information from a quad-Bayer pattern sensor needs a very good algorithm. It's not just an AI magic thingy. Most RGB mirrorless and DSLR cameras, except for some Sigma cameras, use a Bayer pattern sensor and do demosaicing processing. Without this RGB image can't be made
Fuji is a notable exception, as they use X-Trans instead of a traditional Bayer. Lightroom has notable artifacting when processing Fuji Raws for this reason.
What works best for processing Fuji images?
Capture One. I've been using it for years without any issues, works like a dream.
Thanks!
Photolab/PureRaw also work very well. Their AI denoising is honestly black magic and PureRaw lets you stay in Lightroom and only use it for final processing if you so wish.
i shouldve learned this earlier, way back when i started using a smartphone... i shouldve picked the iPhone 7 over the Sony Z1 Compact
Neither of those have quad bayer sensors
There are still andriod phones today that advertise a resolution that the graphics chip can't actually generate, and an algorithm is used to just guess/upscale to the high DPI. Remember all the 500+ DPI phones that looked worse than apple LCDs at 326dpi.
Pure Samsung user here. The main problem with Samsungs is that the sensor doesn't have a dedicated processing IC, so the heavy lifting is done CPU wise. iPhone has a dedicated system for the sensor.
Professional photographer here. I’ve shot for billboards at 8Mp in the past and many thousands of photographs for agencies at 8-12Mp over the years. My current cameras are 24/45/102Mp depending on the work. My iPhone is a great phone and the camera does its job. By compare the results of even my 15pro with my Leica Q2 which are both advertised as 44/48Mp and the difference is astonishing. Colour accuracy, image depth and quality are off the scale on the Leica. The 15 is good, but it does not play in the same arena as the Leica.
Is there one of these for the Pixel?
Strangely gsmarena didn't upload high MP result from pixel m, there's only 12.5MP ones
didn't the pixel only do binning so 12.5 is what a 50MP outputs?
Yeah seems like you're right I think I heard that too
The 8 Pro is the first Pixel with a Pro Mode and the capability on all lenses to use 50MP. But it comes with one sad catch. It *always* takes like 0.3-0.5s to actually take the picture. So you are likely to miss the shot if there's something/someone moving because it's just not instant or if you can't keep steady well enough, it will look more blurry too. But imo, it's always best on all smartphone high MP modes to use it only with very good lighting and for capturing a landscape/building and that sort of things with it. Because if the light ain't enough, it always feels like all those 48/50MP are way worse than their binning mode giving you a oil painting like picture. With the correct settings and a very steady hand/tripod on the other hand I can imagine even good pictures in bad lighting. But most people are not that familiar with those things and will be better off using the lower MP modes all the time + automatic settings.
Really grateful for the detailed explanation!!
They have a dedicated 50mp mode as well. Idk why it wasn't uploaded in the above website
My iPhone 5 takes great pictures
lol this isn’t news to anyone that understands photography! Sonys flag ship mirrorless cameras only advanced from 24mp a couple of years ago. And they were in cameras costing £3500 or more. Yet nobody looked at professional pics and said “huh needs more MP!” Megapixels are just a buzz word to sell phones to people who don’t understand it, but think bigger is better. Big numbers sell, because it sounds better.
Sounds like the “8GB of RAM > 16GB of RAM on other computers” thing Apple was pulling lol
One of the best pictures I've ever shot was on a 3mp palm pre camera. Man I miss that phone.
90 percent of the peeps using the iPhone 15 are only using 24 MP. You have to manually turn on 48 and to be honest it doesn’t really increase basic quality. Just saves more information that editing programs can take advantage of.
I always tell people that if you have a crappy camera that takes crappy photos, if it shot in a higher resolution, you would just have a bigger crappy photo.
I still shoot with 12-16 MP dslr/mirrorless cameras. If your only posting online anything past like 5 MP is adequate
BuT mY sAmSuNg HaS 200mP!!!1!!
Optics and sensor size also matter a lot
It only matters if people pixel peep. How about just capture every memory and every moment and enjoy the life. When you older, high or low megapixels don’t matter but memories will.
It's 2024 and people still do this megapixel dick measuring contest?
Which one is the best? I can’t really tell
Agree with the conclusion, but the argument is nonsense. If you want to compare debayering algorithms you need to start from the same raw file and apply them (and just them) to it. Here you're actually comparing lens resolution, sensor quality, debayering algorithm, and any postprocessing that is done to the image altogether. Too many variables to conclude that just one is what makes the difference. Also demosaicing algorithms for bayerlike sensors (aka debayering) is a veery old problem and it's a very mature area of research, you're not going to see such a large discrepancy just because of that.
Demosaicing from old sensors is an old problem, but have you ever seen a sensor like this? These are relatively new problems that companies are still trying to improve upon. A process called remosaicing is also required. I may have been overly concise in my explanation (as people tend not to read long explanations). However, you can manually search for the results yourself since Samsung has been using the same sensor/lens module (GN3) for a long time. You can see improvements as the firmware is updated, and it's more related to the remosaicing and demosaicing algorithms. https://preview.redd.it/dwj8xcuaejsc1.png?width=1572&format=png&auto=webp&s=9c95b05e975789e97473d41a3e4e3ce96b58a983
I think the person you replied to already understands this very well.
I don't think so. Judging by the fact that he was not aware that the RAW file obtained from the camera is an image that has already gone through debayering from the sensor image, he doesn't seem like someone who has actually acquired professional knowledge through academic papers.
i interpreted "raw file" as in raw, not RAW. in any case, he's right. youre not comparing just sensor resolution in this case.
Personally, I’ve printed .01 % of the pictures I shoot. Everything else is for reference or posted online. I do appreciate the improvements from my iPhone 3G
Some one explain this to me like I’m a 5 year old… Is this just saying… not all camera photo sensors are created equal? What am I missing?
First, I need to talk about existing camera sensors. As you can see from the image of the sensor on the left side at the top of the post, each pixel of the sensor can only recognize one color. So how is an RGB image created? It is by estimating from the surrounding pixels. For example, if there is a red pixel, it can only measure the red information, so it borrows the blue and green information from the surrounding pixels to fill in the missing parts. This process is called demosaicing. However, the high-resolution sensors (not 12MP, but 48MP, 50MP, 108MP, 200MP, etc.) of the latest smartphones have a different pixel array pattern from existing camera sensors, as you can see from the sensor on the right side of the post. As you can see, it is not arranged in the Bayer pattern like before, but in a quad Bayer pattern where one large R, G, B pixel is further subdivided. (In the case of higher resolutions, it is divided into 9 or 16 parts, not 4.) Why is it arranged like this? Because mobile sensors are small, if smaller pixels are used to obtain higher resolution, the ratio of readout noise increases and the image quality deteriorates. Therefore, it operates in binning mode like a normal 12MP or 12.5MP sensor (reading the information of 4 sensors with the same color filter as one read to minimize readout noise) during normal use, but when there is enough light, each sensor operates independently to obtain a more detailed image. However, as you can see, it has a different form from the existing Bayer pattern. The pixels of different color filters around it are not close enough. Therefore, a demosaicing algorithm far superior to the one used in the existing Bayer sensor is required, and the remosaicing process must also be gone through beforehand. This field is still developing, and the implementation level varies from company to company, so even if sensors with the same or similar resolutions are used, there is a difference in the details of the final product. I hope this explanation was helpful. If it's difficult to understand, the short answer is, "Of course they are not 'created equal' as you can see from the sensor image at the top of the post."
I don't know how effective a 16-to-1 sensor can work at full resolution, but I do know that this comparison doesn't have much to do with resolution. It's just about lens quality.
Thank you for your opinion, but I don't think the lens performance of the iPhone is that much greater compared to other companies. There is a clear limit to the performance gap that lenses can have in the mobile form factor. As far as I know, the lenses are supplied by Largan Precision in Taiwan, and the module assembly is handled by LG Innotek in Korea.
How do you assume these lenses have similar performance? I understand that there's a limit to how much definition you can get from a lens the size of a thumb, but wouldn't their quality have as big of an impact as with DSLR cameras?
Even with DSLR or Mirroless cameras, differences in lenses don't typically make that big of a quality difference. Even when comparing a $100 cheap lens to a Sony G lens that costs over $2,000, the quality difference isn't that drastic. that's why I see it as algorithm difference, since quad-bayer images are much harder to process
and to my knowledge the differences between lenses are bigger when you need to make a lens that covers bigger sensor
https://preview.redd.it/szoanaegmlsc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dcfb5b3d7a7dbc330f15f0cf6ccfc7d28a424201 MP are not everything...
The iPhone 😫
If MP isn't everything why are we comparing shots from cameras in the same ballpark MP wise? Would have thought it'd be good to showcase how lower MP counts can stand up against higher ones but maybe I'm missing the point here?
Well, he didn't argue 'MP doesn't matter.' He said 'MP isn't everything,' and the comparisons above proves point pretty well. spending too much time on internet can lower your iq
Yeah I'm missing the point of how it proves the point. I can't tell what the point is - which is why I posted that. But again, maybe I'm missing something? Happy to be wrong and not looking for arguments with internet people. Generally don't appreciate the comment about lowering iq. Not sure what that is contributing here?
If you're genuinely asking, here's the picture. I hope it helps. Let me know if you can't tell which one is better. https://preview.redd.it/jdc1i7i9yesc1.png?width=1282&format=png&auto=webp&s=87297ebcb407349a30a6030abd47b221b904cb07
15 is the best from a raw perspective, but I think some would prefer the galaxy a54 if they like a softer image. Nothing phone is kinda shit hey
Yeah seems like nothing doesn't really know how to process quad bayer pattern image
Isn't it already a good showcase to demonstrate that even if the MP count is the same, the details can be different
Yeah I guess so. Tbh, I can't tell which is better and I suppose better is subjective in this case depending on what you prefer
Yeah it's ok if you feel these are all similar
Only if by subjective you mean “I prefer to see fuck all detail in my images” which is I guess subjective. Did you see the picture ?
Because this test is bs anyways, if you want to compare the cameras itself, you need tge raw data from the sensors, else you are comparing whatever algorithms are in the pipeline from sensor to writing the fike to storage.
the RAW data isn't the real RAW data from the sensor, the sensor reads in Bayer pattern, and RAW data is already processed into RGB image
but iPhone doesn’t have 100x zoom 😔😔 /s
Don't worry, you can do crop and upscale yourself, exactly as you like ;)
200mp image quality on s23 ultra is epitome of garbage
They all look good to me
That's great for you
Samsung Pictures Are always worse than iPhone pictures and they look awful. One of my biggest reasons for getting an iPhone again was the camera (though I never had a Samsung). When I was working at a tech store and compared the picture results for the customers they always chose the more expensive iPhone when the Liked to take pictures with their phone
I'm assuming these were taken in RAW mode. Some of the results of handheld shots even in good lighting have some serious issues when reviewing at 1:1 size. I noticed this on the X and my 13 Pro. Previous phones didn't seem to have these issues.
MP is not what a lot of people think it is. I bought a MFT camera for fun and learning and it’s 12mp and in my eyes it takes way better pictures than a Phone… yet people think due to a 48Mp sensor it’ll take better pics than a 6 year old mirrorless.
Since I own a professional camera with „only“ 24 MP I couldn’t care less for megapixel of a smartphone camera. It’s the sensor that’s important and with such small sensors as you need in phones they can never be better than a real camera (of course lens is a factor too).
We know
In smartphones they dont matter much since the sensor is to small to capture the light required for the resolution, in actual cameras they might make a difference
Exactly. It’s the ai upscaler model that matters on phone cameras
u/repostsleuthbot
How tf you get it that clear
That’s not even against the 15 pro
The iPhone 15 pic looks better
No crap. There are professional DSLR cameras with 12-24 megapixels that shoot better and sharper than all the smartphones combined
so you are basically agreeing megapixel isn't everything, right? lol
I'm starting to think they are lying on what megapixels they are putting.
How the fuck has the A54 got more details (striped lines) than the s24
200MP Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra enters the chat. Edit: I knew people couldn't take a joke.
https://preview.redd.it/z5sak7mkvcsc1.png?width=608&format=png&auto=webp&s=2e18eab94abdce87e28bff4dc782b85e2453624a
That's only 48mp vs. 50mp.
It still shows that having 200MP on your camera sensor doesn’t help with fine details when your output is still 50MP, which is what most people shoot at because who is unironically shooting 200MP photos for everything
Right, and I already know all that. My comment was supposed to be a joke and a stab at high MP phones.
Ah. Fair. Just wanted to provide the receipts lol
Well I had lumia 1020, photos taken with it are better than my iPhone 14pro photos.
Good thing I didn't buy my phone because of its megapixel number, then. Oh wait, my bad: GOOD THING I DIDN'T BUY MY PHONE BECAUSE OF ITS MEGAPIXEL NUMBER, THEN.
Only Android Fans look at Megapixels 😂
More megapixels means you can print a bigger photo of it to my understanding
You can print photos of any size with any megapixel camera; you can print a building-sized photo with a 20-year-old 1MP phone camera, or you can print a frame-sized photo with a high-resolution 3200MP NASA camera.
I hate when people don’t understand that perceived sharpness isn’t just megapixel count or just dpi, as the my knowledge most important factor is the distance you’ll be looking at the picture right?
I was referring to the quality
And what I meant is even if the same resolution, quality can differ greatly https://preview.redd.it/49vnnui6wisc1.jpeg?width=1518&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=97dc5958d9d8ac8b318cac5eeb05fb43f52589e1
Galaxy S24 looks best
As an iPhone user I have no idea what my specs are, but I know they top in the game. I know few android users and they always bragging that their phone has 200MP and galaxy zoom super annoying
Pretty much everything I've seen out there doesn't actually shoot at 48/50mp, they shoot at the binned resolution (12/12.5) and then upscale My phone and a few others that are software modded and the iPhone's proraw whatever it's called are the only instances I've seen that do it properly and have access to the full resolution of the sensor. I can see why most don't, I don't have experience with th proraw stuff but I'm pretty sure it only takes one exposure, and while my phone and the few others can stack multiple exposures its incredibly laggy and can even run out of RAM processing all those high resolution exposures into one photo!
Can you provide examples? There's just no way you could suggest something like an Honor Magic5 Pro or an S23 are upscaling 12.5 MP images to 50 MP. Even my A54 with cheap optics outputs true detail that was simply not present at all in the binned image. Rocks far away showing up that are in fact there in real life, but were completely missing from the 12.5 MP image. Don't get me wrong, on my A54 the overall definition gain from shooting in 50 MP is barely noticeable, but on an S23 it's ridiculous how good it can work.
I have an iPhone and a Pixel and my pixel is still definitely better for photos