Apple pictures the future with new cameras in the iPhone 6s, 6s Plus

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 70
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by melgross View Post





    Even four thirds is up to 20MP these day. That's just the trend. The problem with DSLRs is that it's almost impossible to focus manually. No focus help in the screen at all. No microprism, no rangefinder in the middle of it. No nothing. Nada! The little dot that tells us when we're in focus isn't much help either, because it's still difficult to quickly tell where the focus is with all of the focus spots cameras offer across the field. Even when these do light up, it's a pain. And it's complex to set that all up for most people.



    But mirror less can give us ELVs, which for those who don't know, means "electronic viewfinders". The old ones really sucked, but the new ones are high Rez, and work pretty well, and they give us view and focus right off the sensor. At some point, when Canikon decide to do this, the DSLR, with optical viewing, will disappear.

     

    My Olympus has a neat trick.  You can set it so when you engage the manual focus ring on the lens and start to rotate it, the image in the viewfinder or on the screen will jump to a magnified view and pop back to the normal view the instant you stop focusing.  It allows for exceptionally accurate focusing as the magnification can be up to 10 times.  You have to manually engage and release the magnified view via a function button press if using an old manual SLR lens but it also has focus peaking which is an effective focus aid also and can be left on.

  • Reply 42 of 70
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    cnocbui wrote: »
    My Olympus has a neat trick.  You can set it so when you engage the manual focus ring on the lens and start to rotate it, the image in the viewfinder or on the screen will jump to a magnified view and pop back to the normal view the instant you stop focusing.  It allows for exceptionally accurate focusing as the magnification can be up to 10 times.  You have to manually engage and release the magnified view via a function button press if using an old manual SLR lens but it also has focus peaking which is an effective focus aid also and can be left on.

    Definately, all of this helps. But I think that most people will agree that with small, and light cameras, such as the iPhone, holding it at a distance isn't too bad. But when a DSLR body reaches two pounds, and lenses are a pound or two over that, with the heavy part of the lens at the far end, that's not a good option.

    I really can't see myself holding my camera with the 70-200 f2.8 L IS zoom away from my body.
  • Reply 43 of 70
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by melgross View Post





    Full frame sensors are approx 24x36mm. That's the same as full frame 35mm film. Medium format sensors are from about 36mm x48mm for the Leica S series, and new model, to much larger, up to about 48mm x56mm.

     

    Yes.  The irony is that some of the DSLR bodies that carry a sensor equivalent in size to 35mm film have bloated to having the bulk of some medium format film cameras.

     

  • Reply 44 of 70
    muppetrymuppetry Posts: 3,331member
    melgross wrote: »
    muppetry wrote: »
    I don't think I understand your comment. Deep trench isolation is designed to prevent electron diffusion, not photon diffusion. It's not a method to reduce optical crosstalk. What am I missing?

    The deep trench is there to isolate each optical column. Whether photons or electrons, they diffuse through the silicon. Isolating these columns minimizes this.

    Ah - so you are saying that DTI can also improve optical isolation if done with materials of suitable refractive index. That's elegant if it works. From the wording I still don't think the author of the article understood the distinction though - it's not diffusion in the case of photons.
  • Reply 45 of 70
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    cnocbui wrote: »
    Yes.  The irony is that some of the DSLR bodies that carry a sensor equivalent in size to 35mm film have bloated to having the bulk of some medium format film cameras.

    <img alt="" class="lightbox-enabled" data-id="62795" data-type="61" src="http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/62795/width/500/height/1000/flags/LL" style="; width: 500px; height: 473px">

    Yeah. These big pro bodies from Canikon are really big, and heavy. They are also very water resistant and dirt resistant, and very sturdy. You can hammer a light nail with these things!
  • Reply 46 of 70
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by melgross View Post





    Definately, all of this helps. But I think that most people will agree that with small, and light cameras, such as the iPhone, holding it at a distance isn't too bad. But when a DSLR body reaches two pounds, and lenses are a pound or two over that, with the heavy part of the lens at the far end, that's not a good option.



    I really can't see myself holding my camera with the 70-200 f2.8 L IS zoom away from my body.



    Agreed, but I find I can't use a screen in high ambient light conditions and I tend to always use the viewfinder.  Often with my phone I just hope I am getting the composition right and have the focus box on my intended target.

  • Reply 47 of 70
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    muppetry wrote: »
    Ah - so you are saying that DTI can also improve optical isolation if done with materials of suitable refractive index. That's elegant if it works. From the wording I still don't think the author of the article understood the distinction though - it's not diffusion in the case of photons.

    That's exactly it. It can be hard for some authors to word these things correctly. That's why it's great when those few authors who do it reply to posts. I don't know the rules here about that.
  • Reply 48 of 70
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by melgross View Post





    Yeah. These big pro bodies from Canikon are really big, and heavy. They are also very water resistant and dirt resistant, and very sturdy. You can hammer a light nail with these things!



    That E-M5 II is also weather and dust proof, as is my E-M1.  5:11 onwards

     

    image

     

    I have had mine out on a tripod doing a time lapse with rain giving it a drenching.

  • Reply 49 of 70
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    cnocbui wrote: »

    Agreed, but I find I can't use a screen in high ambient light conditions and I tend to always use the viewfinder.  Often with my phone I just hope I am getting the composition right and have the focus box on my intended target.

    Exactly, and that why an ELV will be great. You put your eye to the camera, just as we do now, but the viewfinder will be electronic instead of optical. Focusing will be great, because everything will be right there. In dim light, we'll even be able to see what we're taking photos at. It bugs me that my camera can properly expose a scene I can't see.
  • Reply 50 of 70
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    cnocbui wrote: »

    That E-M5 II is also weather and dust proof, as is my E-M1.  5:11 onwards

    <iframe width="640" height="385" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/N9Omqui0SoI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>


    I have had mine out on a tripod doing a time lapse with rain giving it a drenching.

    They make pretty good stuff. I've never been into their bodies myself though. I'm pretty much locked into Canon. But I'm not sure how much longer Olympus will be around. Like Pentax, which is having major problems, even though they're just s division, these days, they can't seem to get serious sales.
  • Reply 51 of 70
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    timt999 wrote: »
    Yep. The core of the camera phone vs. straight camera debate is that they do different things.

    The iPhone is with you at all times -- and it's quality can match the low end P&S cameras. Pros can do great work with an iPhone level camera -- or anyone who has an eye for good composition. And it is the camera you have.

    And that in-my-pocket value means this tool is made to capture the momentary dramas that play around us. Give the phone camera to a kid, and you'll see exactly how they view the world. Give one to Avadon and you'll get his genius at 12 mp a shot (at least now).

    But the high end of the camera market has seen more than its share of technological breakthroughs. Canon's new full frame DSLR hits 50 MP. The 4/3 format cameras are moving into a quality level that used to be reserved for DSLR. And all these high end camera makers, whether 4/3 or DSLR, have a range of precision lenses.

    Plus the high end cameras have sensors 10x the size of a phone camera's.That means 10 x the data throughput into the Raw file. That means way less noise -- even at high ISO. The high end cameras can deliver nuanced shots even by candle-light. And let's not even mention the edge that DSLRs have when it comes to sports photography.

    So yes, the iPhone is my phone when I'm walking through life and recording scenes from life. To ensure you can capture the moment with the most technical polish, you need to go with a dedicated tool.

    They're different.

    It's the same thing as what Jobs said about tablets vs desktops. The iPhone is a sports car, and big cameras are trucks. Both have their place.
  • Reply 52 of 70
    sennensennen Posts: 1,472member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by melgross View Post





    It is strange, particularly considering that one of their partners, Netflix, streams 4K, though with high compression.



    MYbe they will update it later on through software, as the A8, as far as I know, CAN play 4K.



    But, then again, I was surprised that neither the phones, or the ATv has h.265 compression. Being that Apple was one of those that pushed h.265 adoption, it's especially odd it's missing.



    I think this is why:

     

    http://www.cnet.com/news/new-fees-cast-shadow-on-next-gen-high-quality-streaming-video/

  • Reply 53 of 70
    sennensennen Posts: 1,472member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post



    It would be great if we could have a small lens bayonet on, have Apple's lens go to infinity focus, and have focus and aperture controlled by the camera on auto, or even manual. If Apple could do that, and I see no reason why they couldn't, a standard for iPhones would go a long way to making the camera a more serious instrument. Even now, it's used with big mounts for pro video and photography. But I certainly would buy a Zeiss Otus lens series for this, as they would only need to cost between $250 to $400 per lens, for high pro quality. That's because of the small sensor size, and the resultant small lens size.



    Edit:



    I just thought of an addendum. What if Apple made a slightly higher end model called the Photo iPhone, say. That could have the lens mount I suggest, but would allow for the removal of Apple's lens when putting another lens on. This would eliminate all of the problems of trying to make a really good, fast lens, such as a 1.4 aperture version, or a proper wide angle, or high quality zoom.



    I wouldn't mind being able to use my Sigma 35A with the 6S, for example, although I'd rather a case/housing that an iPhone could slip/lock into, connected via the lightning port. If going the minimal route, it would have simply a lens mount on the exterior and the phone would be the guts of the 'camera'. Alternatively, the case/mounting could have more manual controls on it for the more 'traditional' photography experience.

  • Reply 54 of 70
    muppetrymuppetry Posts: 3,331member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by muppetry View Post



    Ah - so you are saying that DTI can also improve optical isolation if done with materials of suitable refractive index. That's elegant if it works. From the wording I still don't think the author of the article understood the distinction though - it's not diffusion in the case of photons.




    That's exactly it. It can be hard for some authors to word these things correctly. That's why it's great when those few authors who do it reply to posts. I don't know the rules here about that.

     

    DED seems to be the only one to engage regularly, but I seem to recall at least one other author replying as an administrator. @nhughes, perhaps?

  • Reply 55 of 70
    Can someone tell me why they didn't change their aspect ratio for their photos? When we snap photos we get this lousy half a screen photo so they give us more pixels and a better front facing camera but keep the same aspect ratio so when we take beautiful pictures they only fill up 3/4 of our screens. Great job Apple!
  • Reply 56 of 70

    Uh oh. Millimeters again. :rolleyes: 

  • Reply 57 of 70
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by staticx57 View Post

     

    I am not sure I am underestimating where this is going. DSLR and MILC are already fairly niche compared to the point and shoot market. The point and shoot market is the market most suffering the iPhone.

    Which is what I attempted to convey in my original post. I am not sure he needs the versatility of a DSLR if his needs are satisfied with an iPhone.




    Why do people always use present tense when I am talking about the future! My needs are NOT satisfied right now, they WILL not be satisfied in this iteration, the NEXT iteration 'potentially', FUTURE iterations absolutely guaranteed :) I travel the world loads, so yes I want high quality images ( in-fact funnily enough I was floating down the Lijang river in china not that long ago where the picture of the cormorants was taken in the keynote).

    As you say, it is fairly niche already, the iPhone will kill off the pro-sumer market, and along with it a lot of the financing to push technology at the speeds they once did. Meanwhile, Apple is cramming more and more technology into a small space, and what can't be achieved by optics alone will be simulated digitally with satisfactory results.

  • Reply 58 of 70
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by melgross View Post





    Exactly, and that why an ELV will be great. You put your eye to the camera, just as we do now, but the viewfinder will be electronic instead of optical. Focusing will be great, because everything will be right there. In dim light, we'll even be able to see what we're taking photos at. It bugs me that my camera can properly expose a scene I can't see.

     

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by melgross View Post





    I got rid of my Leicas in 1985. Rangefinders were simply obsolete by then. I only bought the M5 and the three lenses to shoot specific things where noise was very important, and I couldn't use flash.



    But I've got a large range of "L" lenses for my various Canon 5D models, and I used to use them a lot. I'm even considering the new 5Dr s.



    But, I use my iPhone for almost 90% of the time I shoot these days, and rarely take my DSLR around. I'm not going to upgrade my 6+ this year, but I'm looking forwards to next year. I've bought several lens systems for my iPhones, but have been disappointed in several ways. Sometimes, the lens quality delivers a pretty good picture, but is clumsy to use, with the case, and all. But what bothers me as that new phones require new lenses and cases, or attachments.



    What I would absolutely love for Apple to do, which would absolutely kill the entire compact camera industry, which is already sliding very badly, is if they made a small bayonet around the lens on the phone. It could even have some electrical connections for focus, aperture, etc. This could be pretty small, and Apple could have standards as to what could attach, and how they would work, just as the major camera manufacturers do now.



    It would be great if we could have a small lens bayonet on, have Apple's lens go to infinity focus, and have focus and aperture controlled by the camera on auto, or even manual. If Apple could do that, and I see no reason why they couldn't, a standard for iPhones would go a long way to making the camera a more serious instrument. Even now, it's used with big mounts for pro video and photography. But I certainly would buy a Zeiss Otus lens series for this, as they would only need to cost between $250 to $400 per lens, for high pro quality. That's because of the small sensor size, and the resultant small lens size.



    Edit:



    I just thought of an addendum. What if Apple made a slightly higher end model called the Photo iPhone, say. That could have the lens mount I suggest, but would allow for the removal of Apple's lens when putting another lens on. This would eliminate all of the problems of trying to make a really good, fast lens, such as a 1.4 aperture version, or a proper wide angle, or high quality zoom.



    Olympus have sort of made a move in the direction you suggest, though it hasen't turned out quite as small as you had hoped. ;)

     

  • Reply 59 of 70
    19831983 Posts: 1,225member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by foggyhill View Post

     

     

    I've got a lowly G16, a mid range Canon camera and the Iphone 6, G6 are not even close, let alone close to a top end DSLR. The difference is taggering in my eye. Low light shots in particular are ridiculously bad on all smart phone cameras. But, I guess people have gotten used to them.

     

    I can shoot in total darkness with just a bit light on buildings on a remote and get a very good shot on a the G16 (not a top end camera), while it would be total crap (if it could even focus) on the Iphone.




    Yes I totally agree, low-light performance on even the latest iPhones and all other smartphones for that matter is atrocious! The amount of noise and grain visible makes an 8MP shot more reminiscent of 3MP one! I used my Fujifilm X-E2 (which uses a 16MP APS-C sensor) for direct comparison. But even if I didn't its just so obvious to the visible eye anyway! As you said, people have gotten used to lower quality. Either because they don't know any better or just don't care.

  • Reply 60 of 70
    19831983 Posts: 1,225member

    "Broadly, deep trench isolation refers to a process by which tiny voids are created between pixels during sensor fabrication. Those voids are then filled with insulating material, preventing photons from moving between pixels after passing through the photoreceptors — and making for crisper shots at higher resolutions"

     

    From what I understand when the photons hit the photoreceptors they are converted to electrons, the deep trench isolation is then designed to reduce the electrical crosstalk between those photoreceptors/pixels, which can cause increased image noise and other artefacts, not the photons.

Sign In or Register to comment.