Pro photographer Jason Bradley wrote an article "At play with iPhone XS Max" in Outdoor Photographer magazine (December 2018). He did an extensive testing of camera and prints. He printed images with a size over 36x42 inches and was shocked by quality. His conclusion is that "the iPhone can be used as a fine-art tool for masses".
Here are several points from this article.
- XS takes much better images than X.
- iPhone XS sensor is 30% larger than X (while megapixels of the sensor are a same).
- XS is capable of shooting a full second exposure without tripod.
- New Smart HDR feature in XS dramatically broaden a dynamic range of images.
- You could use RAW (if you download Lightroom app).
- The major improvements came from a new A12 Bionic chip (which manages both CPU and GPU). A12 chip increased an overall phone performance by 50%. New computational capabilities are highly used for the camera in XS. Per Phil Schiller, the vice-president of worldwide marketing for Apple: "a trillion operations performed for every photo taken" (!!).
Do you have an experience with this iPhone? Any plans to use it?
https://www.apple.com/iphone-xs/cameras/ the pictures are nice, but its 12mp. it says dual, but i don't know what that means. and without seeing the 100% view of it, i can't judge anything. but if it improves pocket cameras then fine, but no on that one.
No, I have an iPhone 7 which is capable of taking RAW photos also, no app required for that. The problems with cell phones is that you cannot control the aperture setting because they don't have the same type of aperture as a camera.
I recently purchased an app for $5.99 which significantly improves the camera of my iPhone.
if i needed a phone i'd still look at another brand. because this is a very expensive phone, its high only because its apple and they over charge. a lot of other phones use that dual design, still not sure what the benefits are for. but i'd be buying it because of what other things the phone can do. if i were getting a camera, i'd get a camera, something dedicated always works better. but when i do shop for a phone, a good camera is one of those things i look for. taking pictures on the sly, the phone is best for that.
I'm thinking about upgrading from my old iPhone 5s - but not to the newest iPhone. I'm thinking an 8 - for the upgraded camera - and "really" to get a new battery.
On the other hand, I may try ordering a replacement battery from Amazon (with tools) for $20 and give that a try. If it works on mine then I'll try in on my wife's phone. If I break my phone - then I'll just need the upgrade sooner. LOL
BTW, I certainly agree with Edward's comment: "Fine Art" and "The Masses" shall never go together.
I believe the cellphone camera has indirectly saved the pro photographer but the iPhone (nor any current cellphone) can't be used for what I need a camera to do. I am curious how much he got paid for writing that piece.
I've shot a lot of good images, including some that have sold here, with an iPhone, as long as I don't try to push the capability of the thing too far. It's always in my pocket, ready whenever I am. I have two apps, Pro HDR X and Camera+, which shoot HDR brackets and RAW respectively. As long as you don't do more than one editing cycle with an image (decompress - edit - recompress and save again), the results are surprisingly good sometimes. That said, I'd always rather have my Nikon with more pixels, multiple lenses, many shooting modes and optical zoom.
I don't plan on buying a new phone any time all that soon. A while back when Apple had that battery debacle on 6S phones, I got a new battery for $29. The guy in the Apple store broke my phone whilst replacing the battery, so they gave me a new one for the $29. Aside from newness, I don't want a bigger one that doesn't fit my pants pocket.
If so, I think it is safe to say that the guy has some amount of background and reticence before he would opine thusly.
So the comments that are dismissive of the opinion are misguided, from my point of view.
Of course there is still the concept that "Cameras don't shoot pictures, people shoot pictures." But cell phone cameras are spectacularly better than dslrs of a decade ago (ones that a decade ago would have been astounding to fine art photogs.)
Would I like glass for my phone? Yes.
Would I like it if my cell phone could do what my 360 camera can do? Yes.
Will professionals "whip out" a smaller unit? Don't they now? Who is walking around with a Hasselblad? Who is shooting in 3X4 (?) Who is using a powder flash? The history of photography has consistently been towards miniaturization, less intrusive, more mobile equipment. That will not stop. Pretending that it will is just whistling in the dark.
Tomorrow is coming. Pretending that yesterday is the pinnacle is believing in something that has been disproved each and every day since day ONE.
P.S. His conclusion is that "the iPhone can be used as a fine-art tool for masses". =/= "The masses"
Seems like a small point, but it is half of one six dozen of the other.
I dont do microwave radiation (cell technology), it's bad for your brain. Anything can be used to make art. I went to a photography show at Museum of Modern Art SF and there was an "artist" that only used the cheapest plastic lens camera she could find and make mural sized prints at 20dpi... looked fine from a distance.
no one is rejecting tomorrow. there is no way i would shell out a $1000 for a 12mp camera that cant even zoom. i can't be wowed by professionally lit model like they show on that website of theirs (apple). there is better tech, and its dedicated tech. like that camera can't compare to an slr. it just won't. the phone tech does trickle down to the better cameras.
i'm not sure why you posted that guys link, he doesn't shoot with a phone.
I have the iPhone Xs Max. Good phone/handheld computer. As a camera, it will never satisfy my needs. Not high enough resolution. Not enough dynamic range natively. Not enough control over depth of field or shutter speed (don't get me started with "portrait mode"). And as Mike has said, the lens doesn't have the range I want. I'm all for a few good primes, but I want to be able to change as needed. Can't do that on my phone.
I posted it, Mike, to show that the guy is not me.
I have only my experience to judge the value of my cameras.
Jason Bradley is someone who knows his way around an f-stop. Dismissing his opinion out of hand (when you don't know what a dual whatever it is, is) is misguided.
He knows what an image is supposed to look like at 36X42. And he is impressed with what it looks like. Me? I like distortion.
I will also tell you that I get 25+mb images on my Galaxy s8+. It is a matter of using the technology to your advantage. I am able to take pictures that are outside the capabilities of ordinary cameras. But that's me. I know next to nothing. But Jason Bradley knows what he's talking about.
Wow, Frank, some of the images in your group are stunning! The BEST camera is always the one you have with you. The most expensive professional camera won't do you any good, if you leave it at home. While I definitely prefer a professional camera, in a pinch a cell phone camera is better than nothing!
I use my iphone occasionally for work, for stock and fine art. It is more than just a camera you have with you. I have point and shoots for that. It has capabilities that other cameras don't have. In many situations it is, in fact, the best equipment for the job, and even more so with improvements. I will be looking at replacing my 6+ sometime and will likely own one of these.
if i'm watching a tornado, see something interesting to shoot, that phone in my pocket is a real saver. but as a choice for vacation, its never going to be the phone. it also create weirdly long pictures.
" but for more specialized types of shots it's going to be pretty limited"
So are most lenses. Can you fit a dslr in a guitar body? Can the lenses fit in a hole in a fence? There are millions of uses both general and specialized. And no one said it should replace your other cameras. But for some people, it could be fine as their only camera. .
uther its a real question. the cell phone won't ever replace a real camera period. i would not spend thousands on some guy with a phone. i don't care how clear the images are. there is more than just clarity. lens choice, how well it focuses and handles low light, iso noise, how well it focuses over all, predictive focus, and so on. the phone just can't beat a real camera.
your saying that some how the phone cam is the current tech and its replacing the other things. or that the current is better than the old... and of course it is, not sure i see the point. there are still many things the phone cam will never be able to do..... i do know they are working on a zoom that is flat, using i think oil and electricity, they were able to bend the lens with it. but its still limited.
can you do a race with your street car? sure. will you win? no. you need a specialized car. is the car you have now better than what was out there 10 years ago, sure?
He is a pro. He is also running print services - http://bradleyphotographic. (FINE-ART HAHNENMUHLE PAPERS • CANVAS WRAPS • METAL PRINTS • WOOD MOUNTS • RAW FILE DEVELOPING • PORTFOLIO CURATION • RETOUCHING • CONSULTING).
And he is also doing photo workshops.
As for the article - He proposed to Outdoor Photographer to write the article after he was impressed with XS prints he was asked to print by customers with XS.
Bradford I'm thinking more along the lines of things like astrophotography/star trails, smoothing water with ND filters, even just compressing a scene down with a zoom lens or pushing a scene out with an ultrawide lens, that kind of thing.
I acknowledge that phone cameras can be very useful (squeezing into tight spots as you mentioned is a good example), my only point is that I'd never replace my whole setup with one.
Check out this image, I think this will answer your question.
If you are planning to do this, you may want to look into buying attachment lenses for your iPhone. I have never tried them, but supposedly they will enable you to do macro photography and wide angle photography.
* Disclaimer: I still think professional cameras are better.
Of course in many cases "professional cameras are better" despite higher weight and price.
The point is the intrusion of high quality images (done by mass-produced, pocket-size cell-phones) into fine art marketplace is getting bigger and bigger. And that intrusion is accelerating too. Many of such images are on par with images done with pro cameras.
We could not ignore it any longer. We could not restrict it too. The only thing we could do ... is to be aware, to look it up ... and to use it by ourselves, when appropriate.
I just placed an order for the IPhone XS Max. The version I ordered was $1,249.00. This will just be my regular phone with a decent camera.
This model does have a two separate lenses- a telephoto and wide angle.
Here are the specs:
Dual 12MP wide-angle and telephoto cameras
Wide-angle: ƒ/1.8 aperture
Telephoto: ƒ/2.4 aperture
2x optical zoom; digital zoom up to 10x
Portrait mode with advanced bokeh and Depth Control
Portrait Lighting with five effects (Natural, Studio, Contour, Stage, Stage Mono)
Dual optical image stabilization
Quad-LED True Tone flash with Slow Sync
Panorama (up to 63MP)
Sapphire crystal lens cover
Backside illumination sensor
Hybrid IR filter
Autofocus with Focus Pixels
Tap to focus with Focus Pixels
Smart HDR for photos
Wide color capture for photos and Live Photos
Local tone mapping
Advanced red-eye correction
Auto image stabilization
Image formats captured: HEIF and JPEG
"If a professional photographer shows up with equipment that he needs to create the images he needs to create, that's that." I disagree. Its a common discussion I have in my small circle of friends. Someone is paying you lets say $2000 to shoot their wedding, don't show up with a $500 camera with a kit lens - or, a cell phone.
But that's also theatrics and flourish and being a part of the show.
The false choice was given. There's no real sense to defend or deflate it.
I'm not saying that it would happen. And we all know that the true skill of photography is the "Photo" part, not the "Graphy" It could be the clearest, cleanest best framed shot in the history of the world, but if the light is wrong, she's going to look like the wedding bell rang, "dung."
Am I wrong?
I will admit that the first few times I read it, I read "Is Iphone Xs Max A Camera Killer?" and/or "Is Iphone Xs Max A Killer of the Camera?"
photography is part person, part camera. the things a better camera can do, can make you a better photographer. and while i can get the right light, and mood etc. there are huge limitations when it comes to phones. the timing of when to push the button, the focus, the depth of focus, the long width they have... all of that makes a difference. and even if your a pro at it, there is only a limit of what a pro can do with a phone.
camera phones have advanced a lot, but you won't get that once in a lifetime shot with it. the timing would be very hard to do with a phone. the the bride and groom kiss and there is a moment and you lost it because you poked the wrong thing at the wrong time. if i went to a photographer to shoot something like that. and he whips out a phone. i would just laugh in his face and walk out of the door.
A lot of this depends on how much processing is done. I know a person who makes a living (about $450 per pop) with iPhone pix. It involves shooting rural scenes at a distance, murky layers, grungy, brownish colors, murky skies and expensive smallish prints with nice frames. By the time the picture is "finished" the camera is nearly irrelevant as long is the image was basically competent at the starting point. I can't say that it's a style that I like, but it's worth a living to this photog.
Expensive cameras seem to be up against a wall. I know that photo equipment fans and fans of pristine, carefully composed pictures will continue to benefit from an expensive camera, but each day the phone cameras nibble away at a little more of the photo world. It's like termites...they only take little bites, but they keep biting. 10 years ago, camera phones couldn't do much, but today we are having this discussion, revealing that some of us have posted and sold phone pictures. 10 years before that digital cameras were not so good, but now they're great.
Granted that the latest iPhone is darn expensive, but my cheap 6S is still working quite well and has shot recent sales and each day the technology of an expensive phone creeps down the price ladder. With better in-phone software that anticipates a lot of difficult lighting, better editing on our computers, better reproduction, I have to admit that I see a shrinking need for a heavy bag full of cameras and lenses. It's sad because I like those gadgets, but it reminds me of the transition from limited, toxic creation of daguerreotypes to glass plate negatives, from glass plates to film, from film to digital and now from big digital cameras to small ones.
In the case of the wedding photog, that and formal portraits might be the last hold-out for big cameras.
Please login before posting a reply to this message. If you do not have an account on Fine Art America, click here to create one!