Check out what pro photographers accomplish with iPhone 15 Pro Max

AppleInsider

Professional photographers Stephen Wilkes and Reuben Wu share their experience shooting images with iPhone 15 Pro Max, praising the upgrades.

iPhone 15 Pro

The camera system is one of the most important updates in Apple's iPhone each year. For 2023, the iPhone 15 Pro Max received an upgraded telephoto lens capable of 5x zoom.

An exclusive report from People showcases work shot on iPhone 15 Pro Max from Stephen Wilkes and Reuben Wu. The images showcase the strengths of Apple's latest camera systems.

"I think it's a really great upgrade in terms of the image quality," Stephen Wilkes said. "To be able to have prints that look the way these do at that scale [and] captured from a phone is an amazing thing."

Wilkes created a photo series called The Endless Summer shot on Block Island in Rhode Island. Reuben Wu shot a series called The Inner Landscape in the deserts of southern Utah.

Apple CEO Tim Cook visited an exhibit showing off the images, praising the work in an X post.

World-renowned photographers Stephen Wilkes and Reuben Wu show us creativity is limitless with iPhone 15 Pro Max. Their vivid photos display breathtaking views from the beauty of summer in Rhode Island to the other-worldly deserts of Utah. Thank you for showing me your work. pic.twitter.com/6kYnln7HYF

-- Tim Cook (@tim_cook)

September 22, 2023

Apple says the iPhone 15 Pro Max has seven individual camera systems in one device. This is possible because the Main Camera offers 24 mm, 28 mm, and 35 mm focal lengths thanks to the 48MP sensor.

The other cameras include a macro mode, Ultra Wide camera, 2x zoom using the Main Camera, and a 120 mm (5x zoom) telephoto camera.

"I loved the 120 mm lens because I found that it was its own individual lens," Wilkes adds. "I could see the brightness of it. I could see the clarity of it very quickly when you see the image come on the screen."

Images shot by Reuben Wu on iPhone 15 Pro Max. Source: People/Apple

Pro camera system upgrades in the iPhone 15 Pro and iPhone 15 Pro Max focused on user control and image quality. There are more options in the Camera app than ever, plus a new 24MP HEIF default.

The 24MP HEIF is a new approach across the entire iPhone 15 lineup. It provides a higher-resolution image than the previous 12MP default but has more contrast than a 48MP.

Image shot by Stephen Wilkes on iPhone 15 Pro Max. Source: People/Apple

"I think it gives people an opportunity to create very scalable art in a very beautiful way so you're never at a deficit," Wilkes concludes. "If you have your phone with you, you can make a picture and have a photograph that actually is something that you could hang on your wall. As a photographer and an artist, it's a great thing to be able to have a tool that's always with you like that."

iPhone 15 Pro and iPhone 15 Pro Max have begun shipping to customers worldwide. In-store availability begins on September 22.

Read on AppleInsider

charlesn

Does anyone else find it odd that very little is being said (in fact, nothing that I've been able to find) about image quality when using the new 120mm lens? In fact, the only remark I've seen anywhere is from the tech reviewer for the Wall St Journal who wrote that photos taken with the lens were "not as crisp" as she had hoped. Hmmm. I expected that Apple would assign pro photographers and encourage pro photography sites to really put the new lens through its paces. After all, it's THE marquee (and only) feature that distinguishes the Pro Max camera system from the Pro. Suspiciously, Stephen Wilkes comments above about the lens seem to intentionally duck any specifics. "I love the 120mm lens because I found it is its own individual lens." Ummmm... And this was a surprise to you? The fact that an individual lens by design turned out to be an individual lens is the reason you love it? Huh? And then he continues: "I could see the brightness of it. I could see the clarity of it very quickly when you see the image come on the screen." Well, call me crazy, but I don't think that how a lens images on your phone's screen counts as a rigorous test or testament to its image quality. 

If anyone comes across a more serious test of this lens, please post and link to it!

byronl

charlesn said:

Does anyone else find it odd that very little is being said (in fact, nothing that I've been able to find) about image quality when using the new 120mm lens? In fact, the only remark I've seen anywhere is from the tech reviewer for the Wall St Journal who wrote that photos taken with the lens were "not as crisp" as she had hoped. Hmmm. I expected that Apple would assign pro photographers and encourage pro photography sites to really put the new lens through its paces. After all, it's THE marquee (and only) feature that distinguishes the Pro Max camera system from the Pro. Suspiciously, Stephen Wilkes comments above about the lens seem to intentionally duck any specifics. "I love the 120mm lens because I found it is its own individual lens." Ummmm... And this was a surprise to you? The fact that an individual lens by design turned out to be an individual lens is the reason you love it? Huh? And then he continues: "I could see the brightness of it. I could see the clarity of it very quickly when you see the image come on the screen." Well, call me crazy, but I don't think that how a lens images on your phone's screen counts as a rigorous test or testament to its image quality. 

If anyone comes across a more serious test of this lens, please post and link to it!

iPhone 15 Pro Max vs Samsung S23 Ultra Camera Battle!YouTubehttps://www.youtube.com › watch

Maybe this?

harperium

With every new iPhone come the articles: "You don't need a real camera, the iPhone is incredible!" Sadly people don't realize what they're missing. People's photo libraries are flooded with poor quality, wide-angle, zero-subject-isolation snapshots.

FYI You could take images from any camera from the 1950s on, shrink them down to a small size, apply the same noise reduction and image enhancement, and they'd look "good" too.

melgross

charlesn said:

Does anyone else find it odd that very little is being said (in fact, nothing that I've been able to find) about image quality when using the new 120mm lens? In fact, the only remark I've seen anywhere is from the tech reviewer for the Wall St Journal who wrote that photos taken with the lens were "not as crisp" as she had hoped. Hmmm. I expected that Apple would assign pro photographers and encourage pro photography sites to really put the new lens through its paces. After all, it's THE marquee (and only) feature that distinguishes the Pro Max camera system from the Pro. Suspiciously, Stephen Wilkes comments above about the lens seem to intentionally duck any specifics. "I love the 120mm lens because I found it is its own individual lens." Ummmm... And this was a surprise to you? The fact that an individual lens by design turned out to be an individual lens is the reason you love it? Huh? And then he continues: "I could see the brightness of it. I could see the clarity of it very quickly when you see the image come on the screen." Well, call me crazy, but I don't think that how a lens images on your phone's screen counts as a rigorous test or testament to its image quality. 

If anyone comes across a more serious test of this lens, please post and link to it!

There are a number of YouTube channels with pro photographers who have written reviews already. One of the talking points is that lens. I’m sure you can find plenty just by inputting iPhone 15 Pro Max review into YouTube.

melgross

harperium said:

With every new iPhone come the articles: "You don't need a real camera, the iPhone is incredible!" Sadly people don't realize what they're missing. People's photo libraries are flooded with poor quality, wide-angle, zero-subject-isolation snapshots.

FYI You could take images from any camera from the 1950s on, shrink them down to a small size, apply the same noise reduction and image enhancement, and they'd look "good" too.

Unfortunately,  ost photos from full frame mirrorless cameras are of poor quality as well. My 14 Pro Max does take excellent pictures. But then, my field have been commercial photography since 1969, so I should know how to take a photo. I can’t wait to get the 15 Pro Max shortly. The photos I’ve seen taken with if from pros who have been reviewing the phone have looked really good. But you have to shoot ProRaw for the best results just as on any other digital camera, and you have to know how to post process the images properly. Nothing new there.

video on the iPhone has always been pretty goo. But it’s gotten better over time.

charlesn

harperium said:

With every new iPhone come the articles: "You don't need a real camera, the iPhone is incredible!" Sadly people don't realize what they're missing. People's photo libraries are flooded with poor quality, wide-angle, zero-subject-isolation snapshots.

FYI You could take images from any camera from the 1950s on, shrink them down to a small size, apply the same noise reduction and image enhancement, and they'd look "good" too.

"A real camera" isn't going to solve "poor quality, wide-angle, zero-subject isolation" snapshots. That's a user problem, not a camera problem. In the hands of a competent photographer, the iPhone Pro IS an incredible, real camera. And you're hearing that from someone who sold off his Nikon D3s and bagful of Nikon's top pro lenses years ago to switch to iPhone photography exclusively. Is the iPhone the equal of my prior equipment? Of course not. But the more I used my iPhone, the less I used my pro equipment, until I could no longer justify keeping it. Plus, as the saying goes, the best camera is the one you have with you, and the iPhone is with me always.

People mostly have no idea how good a printed, well-shot iPhone photograph can be. I spent an afternoon one day shooting orchids with my 13 Pro at NY Botanical Gardens. I printed a half-dozen or so of them on Canon's 13x19 Photo Glossy II paper. Straight from the camera jpgs, full frame, no post-processing at all. I brought them to work, hung them in my office and the first question from everyone was, "What kind of camera did you use to shoot THESE?" Everyone assumed these images required expensive pro equipment. They were stunned to hear it was an iPhone. And that's not even the limit of how large you can print. I have a 24 x 30 photograph hanging in my living room, different subject matter, but equally stunning. I did send that out to printed since it exceeded the size limits of my printer, but it was the same deal as the flowers--straight from the iPhone jpg, full-frame and no post-processing. 

Look: there are many reasons someone might want a larger format camera anyway, and I get that. But anyone who thinks the iPhone camera is the reason they're not getting great pictures really needs to take a good long look in the mirror. 

king editor the grate

harperium said:

FYI You could take images from any camera from the 1950s on, shrink them down to a small size, apply the same noise reduction and image enhancement, and they'd look "good" too.

My first camera in mid-'80s was a 110. The negatives were so small there wasn't much noise to reduce or image to enhance. I suspect my newly arrived Pro Maxxx will be a savory upgrade from my 13 Pro (and old 110).

danox

byronl said:

charlesn said:

Does anyone else find it odd that very little is being said (in fact, nothing that I've been able to find) about image quality when using the new 120mm lens? In fact, the only remark I've seen anywhere is from the tech reviewer for the Wall St Journal who wrote that photos taken with the lens were "not as crisp" as she had hoped. Hmmm. I expected that Apple would assign pro photographers and encourage pro photography sites to really put the new lens through its paces. After all, it's THE marquee (and only) feature that distinguishes the Pro Max camera system from the Pro. Suspiciously, Stephen Wilkes comments above about the lens seem to intentionally duck any specifics. "I love the 120mm lens because I found it is its own individual lens." Ummmm... And this was a surprise to you? The fact that an individual lens by design turned out to be an individual lens is the reason you love it? Huh? And then he continues: "I could see the brightness of it. I could see the clarity of it very quickly when you see the image come on the screen." Well, call me crazy, but I don't think that how a lens images on your phone's screen counts as a rigorous test or testament to its image quality. 

If anyone comes across a more serious test of this lens, please post and link to it!

iPhone 15 Pro Max vs Samsung S23 Ultra Camera Battle!YouTubehttps://www.youtube.com › watch

Maybe this?

That was a very thorough review, the 15 Pro basically walks over the Samsung S23, when it comes to the combination of hardware and software and that’s not even including all the third-party, software and hardware (which wasn’t touched on) that is designed to work with Apples smartphones, and there’s not really much to say, in the video department basically the 15 Pro iPhone is peerless when it comes to the video side and when you add in all of the third-party software that supports video on the iOS platform, Samsung can’t come close, the camera section is the only card Samsung and Google have to play.

The Lidar that’s included on the 15 Pro which is used portrait in mode for measuring distance. What will Lidar and spatial video recording mean when the Apple Vision Pro comes out next year? I think once people see it in action, I think there will be more demand for both devices.

tmay

charlesn said:

harperium said:

With every new iPhone come the articles: "You don't need a real camera, the iPhone is incredible!" Sadly people don't realize what they're missing. People's photo libraries are flooded with poor quality, wide-angle, zero-subject-isolation snapshots.

FYI You could take images from any camera from the 1950s on, shrink them down to a small size, apply the same noise reduction and image enhancement, and they'd look "good" too.

"A real camera" isn't going to solve "poor quality, wide-angle, zero-subject isolation" snapshots. That's a user problem, not a camera problem. In the hands of a competent photographer, the iPhone Pro IS an incredible, real camera. And you're hearing that from someone who sold off his Nikon D3s and bagful of Nikon's top pro lenses years ago to switch to iPhone photography exclusively. Is the iPhone the equal of my prior equipment? Of course not. But the more I used my iPhone, the less I used my pro equipment, until I could no longer justify keeping it. Plus, as the saying goes, the best camera is the one you have with you, and the iPhone is with me always.

People mostly have no idea how good a printed, well-shot iPhone photograph can be. I spent an afternoon one day shooting orchids with my 13 Pro at NY Botanical Gardens. I printed a half-dozen or so of them on Canon's 13x19 Photo Glossy II paper. Straight from the camera jpgs, full frame, no post-processing at all. I brought them to work, hung them in my office and the first question from everyone was, "What kind of camera did you use to shoot THESE?" Everyone assumed these images required expensive pro equipment. They were stunned to hear it was an iPhone. And that's not even the limit of how large you can print. I have a 24 x 30 photograph hanging in my living room, different subject matter, but equally stunning. I did send that out to printed since it exceeded the size limits of my printer, but it was the same deal as the flowers--straight from the iPhone jpg, full-frame and no post-processing. 

Look: there are many reasons someone might want a larger format camera anyway, and I get that. But anyone who thinks the iPhone camera is the reason they're not getting great pictures really needs to take a good long look in the mirror. 

I applaud your interest in printing, and agree that most people would be astounded at how great iPhone images are.

I have a friend that is very much into photography, currently shooting a Sony A7II, and I enjoy seeing his work displayed on his iPhone, though I'm surprised how little interest he has in printing for any kind of display. He does get some prints from a local photography retailer now and then.

Then I recall my own navigation in printing starting with an Epson 3000, and a few others after that, ultimately ending, temporarily at least, after my epson 7900 had some permanent clogging in the Orange and Green channels (I live in the high desert and low humidity requires that I print frequently, something that didn't happen).

Printing can be frustrating and expensive, and as good results can be had with CMYK printers, and more modern print head technology, I'll probably wait a few years to dive back in with the 10/12 inkset printers.