This is why I love this channel. A comparison without snark and that keeps things in perspective. Most people that take photos with an iPhone are doing so precisely because they don’t won’t to carry around a camera and/or spend the money on a “real” camera.
Snark on this channel is reserved for products and companies the Fro don't like. If the small sensor is on an iPhone he uses, it will be less criticized than if it is on a Micro Four thirds camera.
I’m kind of glad to hear this review. I’ve been shooting on pro cams for years, and frankly I’m kind of worn out from the cumbersome process of lugging a big cam around, dumping huge batches, and forcing myself to go back and edit photos from something where the moment has way passed. I’m kind of generally uninspired. I just recently ordered a 15 pro max upgrading from an XR. I’m kind of excited to see what I can get when the mood strikes me and it’s in my pocket, rather than loading up my gear and trying to “go get something”. I certainly won’t be getting rid of my pro cams, but I’m looking forward to having something pretty capable in my pocket at all times.
120mm (full frame equivalent) is a native focal length of the iPhone, but imagine you need to go a little wider. At 100mm you need to use the 24mm lens and apply a heavy crop. You will only use 5.76% of that already very tiny sensor. That is less than 1/1000 of the sensor size of full frame.
Fundamentally misunderstands the nature of computational processing in order to justify spending 4 figures on a fringe use case lens that will weigh 2-3 pounds. If you regularly need 100mm you already know it and no video is going to convince you one way or the other. Otherwise you're working backwards from your conclusions.
Thanks for a cool video. For me, the most obvious difference between the two images was not in the bokeh rendition. It was the oversharpening in the iPhone pics. Where the bokeh looked good, I looked at the skin tones and the hair, and the iPhone looked a bit more like a plastic model, rather than lifelike.
This was something I was trying to determine. The oversharpening in the iPhone photo made it look like the pants and shirt had a texture on them that could absolutely be there, but evidently wasn't.
I am mostly a portrait photographer with some events here and there, and I am amazed by this! I can clearly tell between camera and iPhone because of the vignetting of the lens (And the Z9 has slightly nicer contrast than the iPhone!) But the fact that it's so close is amazing! I'mma put it like this: The quality is in there, the versatility isn't. So, I could probably take my portraits with an iPhone and no one would notice (I take mostly 50mm - 85mm), but would I take the iPhone to a wedding? Never. It just doesn't have the versatility of having more zoom, using Off-Camera Flash etc. (Of course no one in their right mind would switch their cameras for a phone but it was an example of how close this is :o)
Yeah, or for a couple hundred dollars more you could upgrade to Samsung and get a 10x better phone with a refined 10x optical zoom camera. I understand Apple people inherently are ignorant about all non-Apple technology in the world, but Samsung has been making amazing 10x optical lense/cameras in their phones for nearly half a decade. Samsung patented the whole periscope lens form factor that makes Apple's meager 5x lens even possible.
I got an iPhone 13 Pro 2 years ago think it’s fantastic. I have use cases for the iPhone, use cases for my mirrorless gear, and even use cases for my old Canon PowerShot S110. I think you illustrate that it’s about knowing the basics of photography and being familiar with the gear you have available.
Very good review. I did not focus on the bokeh, more so on the dynamic range and that allowed for me to determine which was the iPhone or Nikon. Needless to say, the iPhone did extremely well.
For phones that capture depth data, usually when people find ways to extract the depth map, it becomes clear that the depth map is extremely low res, often around 0.5 megapixels for a 12 megpaixel image. They then rely on AI edge detection for the subject, but the end result is that the depth of field will look bad unless the background is far from the subject, and even then it will struggle with fine edge details where it is harder for the AI to figure out what is part of the subject and what is part of the background, since the depth map will not have any fine detail thus it cannot rely on depth info to help select the subject.
9:25 I admit, that's an impressive comparison side by side. I did find the camera on the right, but it was only because of the smoother more continuous blurring of the field.. I tried to see in the background differences in blur or bokeh.. but nothing super visible. impressive.
11:33 I was mistaken.. I thought the busier blur in the background was the iphone, but nop. 12:04 I applied my initial assumption and got it right; the blur is much more continuous over the field with the camera.. so also more natural But indeed, minor differences, provided as you say, that you do fill the frame
I'm "old," (retired) and gave away my "good" camera gear to my oldest son who is a serious hobbyist. I now have the iPhone 15 Pro Max and that is now my only camera. I like watching channels like this so I can see all of the great stuff I can do with it. I use the iPhone for more than just its camera, of course, but this is what I'm looking for when I come here.
Thanks so much for posting a great comparison video with the new iPhone 15 Pro Max and a full frame Nikon with equivalent focal length lens setting. I’ve shot sports with a full frame Nikon and a 300 mm Nikon lens and had many great shots but there have been many occasions when I didn’t have all my gear along for the ride. What I did have was my iPhone. It’s nice to at least have something to capture the moment. I’m so glad to see the improvements that Apple has made with their cameras in the Pro Max model. My point here is that the best camera is the one you have with you at the moment. Sometimes, that’s just a lowly cellphone. 🤷🏻♀️ Thanks also for your tips about shooting with the iPhone and gaining access to the portrait features post shooting. I would have always selected RAW. Your channel is great!
This was a really great comparison/test with impressive results. Besides this specific test case the new iPhone 15 camera(s) seems to suck really bad using heavy cropping to get pictures at the old 'normal' focal lengths.
Nice comparison. I have a Canon R5 with an array of L lenses. That said, my phone is always with me. Apple, Samsung and Pixel are all improving mobile phone photography. I find my big rig full frame often stays home these days. The new phone cameras are simply good enough in many cases.
Thanks for the video! This is a great reminder that phone cameras have evolved a lot but still can't really compete with dedicated photography equipment. In the end, the application/need and expectations (as well as budget) should direct people to one equipment or the other.
I think Budget isn't really relevant because for the price of a 15 pro max you can get an amazing DSLR and lens that will destroy any phone and you still have some money left for a phone
@@lukassinger_photo Let's consider that's correct. How many people would opt to buy the camera instead of the phone? If you do not have capital constraints you can buy both but most people can't and many do not even care about owning a real camera.
@@lukassinger_photo The big difference is that, at least in the US, carriers will essentially finance the purchase of the phone. That makes a huge difference.
You are so professional and unbiased with your reviews unlike others no manes but I think you know who! Most of my photography gears were purchased after your reviews including Canon R6. cheers
I almost got the images wrong, but changed my mind last second, when I looked at the bokeh again. The fake-bokeh from the iphone still looks a lot like gaussian blur, while the Nikon has more err ‘texture’ to.
The batter is standing in one place. No matter how hard he is swinging, this is not action photography. Take it to a soccer field and track a player close enough for the 120. The extra sharpening of the iPhone is one tell. Another is the evenness of the lighting in the background. The 70 to 200 at 2.8 has obvious vignetting. You are also taking a picture without transitional bokeh. The background is far from the batter. Let's see how this looks with a soccer player surrounded by defenders. Personally, I would forget about the fake bokeh and use the natural bokeh of the iPhone telephoto shooting close. I use a Google pixel 6 Pro and the natural bokeh from the telephoto is quite nice. It isn't lost shooting raw. Still a very enjoyable review to watch. Great job!
Fast apertures aren’t just for depth of field..it’s for light gathering too. So it still won’t replace fast lenses but if you’re on a budget and can’t afford more than a slow zoom and shoot during the day you can use that feature absolutely
these were some of the harder photos to tell apart in these kinds of comparisons. to be honest the same thing still rings true, the cutting out of the hair and the ways it computes the out of focus blue. they are way better then they have ever been which is impressive. but its still a pretty big give away. even on one of the shots there was a little fluff on the shirt that caught a little light from the big stadium lighting and it showed up on the real camera but the phone blured it away. again... for a phone this is the best I have seen. for me the buttons and dials and control you get with a real camera will always win out over a phone
I had a teenager looking at some of the images I took with a real camera and they said it looked like I went too far with blurring the background of a portrait making it look fake. When I tried explaining to them that this is not fake, but the results of a shallow depth of field on a wide aperture lens, they had a hard time grasping the idea. At some point more people may prefer fake bokeh to real bokeh.
Iphone, to me, looks like someone did a really decent job with masking and gaussian blur. The bokeh is far too consistent to mimic any real optical fall off. That being said, it looks damn good and at first glance and without any added context, I probably wouldn’t look twice
The real camera and lens have a little vignetting which made it easy to tell once I saw that, but hey it's a dang phone with a tiny sensor, pretty damn good, that being said I I ordered a 15 Pro not max. I prefer the smaller size and price.
These Pro Photographer videos are really important to me. I held off for years with my iPhone 11 & will buy the 15 Pro Max. BUT! Those baseball shots show that the professional photographer CAN get better shots with a pro grade camera. I didn’t even know that capability existed.
Really impressed by the iPhone considering the lack of lighting is pushing the limits of the 5x. I enjoy a bit of street photography but no longer have the time to spend on workflows and tweaking so hoping this is going to work well for me.
As a Pittsburgher, it’s cool to see the photos of the Pirates vs. the Phillies! Not to mention the typical Angel Hernandez debacle!!! Great to see the comparison!
11 месяцев назад
Now you can shoot raw, edit it and then in Lightroom add their new future which blurs the background
Great video Jared, but I hate these comparison videos, maybe it's because I'm scared that phones are this good nowadays, but it's mostly because non-photographers pretend they know the trick of the trade because their phones takes (heavily processed) decent photos. Imho it's a difference between making a photo as a photographer and taking a photo with your phone. I have more of a problem with the people than the tech itself.
@@RichardFraser-y9t true, but holding a phone is not ergonomic. If you want to film for longer or take pictures from high or low angles its really hard. I mean you dont have a tilt screen for holding it near the floor.
Very interesting comparison Fro! I still maintain that no matter how much “technology” Apple or anyone else throws at the phone camera, it will always be inferior to a “real camera” in at least 2 aspects: print size and ergonomics, the former simply because of the sensor size disparity, and the latter due to shape, button/control placement. That said, I agree that most people aren’t as analytical about image quality as you or I are. So, I too, use an iPhone, for things other than serious photography.
I purchased the 15 Pro 128 Gig model. I see the stills / video capability of this camera as complementary to a mirrorless setup. I will say that I am really impressed with the footage that I get when recording 4K 60p log footage to an external SSD over the 10 Gbps USB-C transport with the iPhone 15 Pro - at least with decent lighting.
As someone who sees hundreds and hundreds of iPhone photos from family members who are not photographers, it drives me crazy to see computational bokeh all the time. It can fool you for a second but then when you actually look at the photo, peoples hands and hair and clothes are disappearing into a blur realm at the edges. they think it’s the coolest thing to have blur. Here I spend 8500 on a camera rig and show them my photos and the only difference they see is that the blur is cleaner. Plus I have to do processing to recover highlights and achieve an HDR look that the iPhone does rather nicely. I feel like computational photography is in an awkward phase where it gives consumers an ego-boost and pisses off photographers. It makes my job a bit unpleasant when I show up to a job and start shooting holiday family portraits and people looking over my shoulder at the camera screen start making comments about how their iPhone looks just as good. Of course to me the final result looks a million times better butter them all they see is a $300 bill and photos that look slightly different. Lol
Good perspective, Jared. The biggest advantage of my iPhone 15 Pro Max is that it is always in my pocket. I get so many shots with it that my Sony A1 can't even come close to capturing because the A1 is not with me. Also, I push my iPhone a bit harder and shoot with the 24mm 48MP camera as much as possible. When I use the other lenses, I keep it in RAW and do the second half of the job in LR. Now, with the early release Blur tool in Lightroom, Adobe can create a depth map on the RAW and 48MP RAW. When used within reason, it works well. I am enjoying photography more now than in my 40 previous years of shooting. An iPhone won't do it all, but it can do a lot, just as my A1 with the Sony 600mm F4 is a great bird-in-flight setup. It doesn't do as well with street photography or architecture. I am looking forward to the 16, 17, 18. Computational photography will do to big optics and big sensors what digital did to film. Keep up the good work. Regardless the gear, a great photograph still requires a great photographer.
Honestly, looking at the comparisons at the size of a postage stamp--while I was moving at that!--I was able to tell the difference immediately. Not that the images look bad, because they absolutely don't. Do I think, though, that you could have brought a second hand Rebel T3i with a first generation 70-200mm f/4 lens to the game and blown this out of the water for a fraction of the price of this phone? Yes. Yes, I do.
Terrific comparison, imagine how is going to be in 10 years, mobile technology advance so fast. I still remember when I used for a first time a Sony digital camera in 2001-02, with 3 1/2 inches floppy disks and I realized that it was the future of photography
Wow verry good video, Listen my history, 1 year aga I buy Sony A7 IV and I dont like because to much menu and the POUNDS with different lens (I had 3 lens ouff) when you go hockey game to Big, now I have iphone 15 promax with gimbal (insta 360) and is perfect for me. I understand verry well what you said. Thanks again.
It always comes down to what people want. Most people were happy with a Kodak Brownie or Instamatic, which were Point and Shoot (P&S) film cameras from the 1910s or so through the 1980s. P&S cameras, which IMHO phone cameras are, were and are popular because most people DON'T CARE. They just want to make snapshots. A snapshot is a memory. A photograph is art. In the hands of an artist, a P&S can make art, but most people just want to save memories. And there's nothing wrong with that.
Grass on many photos is not blured the same. Looks like the iphone just blurs it as much as the far away background were in fact it is closer and on Nikon we can still seem some bands etc.
I don’t think a phone will ever replace a camera however Sony is certainly trying… I think for those that don’t want to camera a big camera around with them everywhere having the quality of the iPhone means if you do see one of those moments you can catch it. With how much they continued to improve with the 12MP sensors I’m interested to see how much they’ll continue to improve the quality with the bigger and better sensors. I’ve got some photos I’m super proud of and I’m using an iPhone SE (2nd Gen) I can’t wait till I upgrade to the 18 in a few years to see the quality jump.
at 9:00 I wasn't sure, but my pure guess was right. you could see the vignetting from the actual glass lens, even though I wasn't sure if that was a filter or not. also interesting to see that the glass and full frame sensor did seem to be letting more light in. thanks for the side by side comparison! if I was looking for a new phone and pocket ai computer, that also had a nice camera, i'd be tempted by the iPhone 15 pro max. lots of places and people get jittery these days if you pull out a traditional camera, but they don't blink twice if you pull out a phone with a camera and microphone that are connected via satellite to ai powered cloud servers. people are funny that way
The iPhone did really good here but this is also a clear case for Samsung's 10x optical option. Would've been really good to see that thrown in the mix in this situation. These shots came out really well.
Or just grab an m100 and the EF-M55-200 or EF-S 55-250 for like $600 total and get 320/400 ff equiv in a package you are likely to be let in with. The first comparison took me a while but I got it, the shirt and hair looked over sharpened and raised shadows on the iPhone. The pants color and bokeh was throwing me for a loop , but once I honed in on the shirt it was pretty clear. After that iPhone stuck out like a sore thumb, still pretty good but the knowing what to look for made it easy. Also worth mentioning the iPhone Pro max is $1,600, that's not nothing and the camera is a pretty big selling point..... But.... For the form factor it's great, so YMMV I guess.
Actually all 3 comparisons I could easily tell which one was the iPhone vs the Nikon, I actually got all 3 right. You could tell by the colors of the image and the texture of the numbers on the jersey, the Nikon you can almost see the threads of the numbers. Plus the whole image looks sharper. And I am a Canon shooter praising Nikon LOL. I am viewing the video on my phones screen, and I could tell them apart. That said if you showed me the photo without the Nikon one beside it I would have thought that it was a camera with a higher ISO setting than needed.
Next to each other, it wasn't terribly difficult to tell the difference, especially when I realized the iphone has an issue with yellow saturation. However, the iphone camera is nucking futs good. I remember when the first iphone came out with it's 2.0MP camera. We've come a VERY long way.
I was 3 for 3 in picking out the iPhone. I agree the iPhone images look pretty good at first glance, but in all cases there are clear artifacts and problems around the edges of the subject which make it pretty obvious - at least to me. I would also say that on that final image although the artifacts weren't at first as obvious to me, there was something about the transition between the in and out of focus area and the overall quality of the out of focus area that looked very artificial. Put differently, I don't agree that the bokeh looks great on that last image: I think it looks artificial.
I think Back and Foreground Blur is going to improve rapidly with all the focus AI Bokeh is getting right now. What stands out in this comparison between phone and FF Sensor is as usual dynamic range and also that really awkward sharpening that apple keeps pushing on its photos.
This might be sports photography, but the sample photos are not much different from portraits. Especially the comparisons between the two cameras. The real comparison would be someone running to a base or trying to catch the ball. Many sports events are indoors in poor lighting but require good AF and ISO performance. That's where many professional cameras might struggle as well. These home base portrait shots I can do easily with my Z50 + Viltrox 85mm for under a 1000€ and that's why the Iphone has no issue either. Granted, in broad daylight the Iphone wouldn't have issues capturing fast sports events either.
Jared! Did you get a photo of the helmet toss???!! Maybe you had too much lens to take it all in? Hopefully you sold it to MLB for a lifetime press pass so they could kill it.
Easiest way to find it which is which is zooming into them. But yes phone camera have come a long way. Sharpness is another thing I've noticed as well.
Nice comparison, it proves that most people would be happy just using the iPhone (not the photographers, which is obvious). What I'd love to see is a comparison of basketball video: iPhone 15 Pro MAX VS Canon R8
Professional photography equipment isn't just about getting great image quality. It's about getting great image quality in any situation.
I know right... consistently great pic in any moment, not only few 'nice' pictures
iPhone can take pictures in almost every possible situation.
@@stevemuzak8526 lol iphone sucks. you'll never know that if you don't get your hands on a real camera.
@@stevemuzak8526any phone can take pictures in any condition but they are taking about good picture quality in any condition 👍
@@stevemuzak8526not really. Wildlife (birds in flight) and macro are just not the same. Low light long exposure. Sunburst shots…etc etc
"If that F doesn't show up..." then you're effed.
This is why I love this channel. A comparison without snark and that keeps things in perspective. Most people that take photos with an iPhone are doing so precisely because they don’t won’t to carry around a camera and/or spend the money on a “real” camera.
Snark on this channel is reserved for products and companies the Fro don't like. If the small sensor is on an iPhone he uses, it will be less criticized than if it is on a Micro Four thirds camera.
@@ElMundoDuro exactly right. I am amazed how forgiving most RUclipsr reviewers seem to be of the iphone's obvoius flaws .
haha yeah i'm a fan of the Fro snark, and i appreciate that he doesn't just have it on all the time
But yet they will buy a new $1300/$1500 phone every few years whereas a camera from 2014 can still do incredibly well.
I’m kind of glad to hear this review. I’ve been shooting on pro cams for years, and frankly I’m kind of worn out from the cumbersome process of lugging a big cam around, dumping huge batches, and forcing myself to go back and edit photos from something where the moment has way passed. I’m kind of generally uninspired. I just recently ordered a 15 pro max upgrading from an XR. I’m kind of excited to see what I can get when the mood strikes me and it’s in my pocket, rather than loading up my gear and trying to “go get something”. I certainly won’t be getting rid of my pro cams, but I’m looking forward to having something pretty capable in my pocket at all times.
120mm (full frame equivalent) is a native focal length of the iPhone, but imagine you need to go a little wider. At 100mm you need to use the 24mm lens and apply a heavy crop. You will only use 5.76% of that already very tiny sensor. That is less than 1/1000 of the sensor size of full frame.
Fundamentally misunderstands the nature of computational processing in order to justify spending 4 figures on a fringe use case lens that will weigh 2-3 pounds. If you regularly need 100mm you already know it and no video is going to convince you one way or the other. Otherwise you're working backwards from your conclusions.
Thanks for a cool video. For me, the most obvious difference between the two images was not in the bokeh rendition. It was the oversharpening in the iPhone pics. Where the bokeh looked good, I looked at the skin tones and the hair, and the iPhone looked a bit more like a plastic model, rather than lifelike.
This was something I was trying to determine. The oversharpening in the iPhone photo made it look like the pants and shirt had a texture on them that could absolutely be there, but evidently wasn't.
And i would like to zoom in to 100 percent hahahaha
Everything looks HDR out of iPhone
I am mostly a portrait photographer with some events here and there, and I am amazed by this!
I can clearly tell between camera and iPhone because of the vignetting of the lens (And the Z9 has slightly nicer contrast than the iPhone!) But the fact that it's so close is amazing!
I'mma put it like this: The quality is in there, the versatility isn't. So, I could probably take my portraits with an iPhone and no one would notice (I take mostly 50mm - 85mm), but would I take the iPhone to a wedding? Never. It just doesn't have the versatility of having more zoom, using Off-Camera Flash etc.
(Of course no one in their right mind would switch their cameras for a phone but it was an example of how close this is :o)
Yeah, or for a couple hundred dollars more you could upgrade to Samsung and get a 10x better phone with a refined 10x optical zoom camera. I understand Apple people inherently are ignorant about all non-Apple technology in the world, but Samsung has been making amazing 10x optical lense/cameras in their phones for nearly half a decade. Samsung patented the whole periscope lens form factor that makes Apple's meager 5x lens even possible.
I just got anxiety at the very thought of taking an iPhone to shoot a wedding!! Lol and I almost never get anxiety.
I think the statement "it wouldn't be my first choice" is key. It's nice to have, especially in cases where you might not have your camera.
I got an iPhone 13 Pro 2 years ago think it’s fantastic. I have use cases for the iPhone, use cases for my mirrorless gear, and even use cases for my old Canon PowerShot S110. I think you illustrate that it’s about knowing the basics of photography and being familiar with the gear you have available.
Very good review. I did not focus on the bokeh, more so on the dynamic range and that allowed for me to determine which was the iPhone or Nikon. Needless to say, the iPhone did extremely well.
It’s insanely good, I hear you can actually make phone calls on it as well?? 😂👌🏻👍🏻
For phones that capture depth data, usually when people find ways to extract the depth map, it becomes clear that the depth map is extremely low res, often around 0.5 megapixels for a 12 megpaixel image. They then rely on AI edge detection for the subject, but the end result is that the depth of field will look bad unless the background is far from the subject, and even then it will struggle with fine edge details where it is harder for the AI to figure out what is part of the subject and what is part of the background, since the depth map will not have any fine detail thus it cannot rely on depth info to help select the subject.
9:25 I admit, that's an impressive comparison side by side. I did find the camera on the right, but it was only because of the smoother more continuous blurring of the field.. I tried to see in the background differences in blur or bokeh.. but nothing super visible. impressive.
11:33 I was mistaken.. I thought the busier blur in the background was the iphone, but nop.
12:04 I applied my initial assumption and got it right; the blur is much more continuous over the field with the camera.. so also more natural
But indeed, minor differences, provided as you say, that you do fill the frame
I'm "old," (retired) and gave away my "good" camera gear to my oldest son who is a serious hobbyist. I now have the iPhone 15 Pro Max and that is now my only camera. I like watching channels like this so I can see all of the great stuff I can do with it. I use the iPhone for more than just its camera, of course, but this is what I'm looking for when I come here.
Thanks so much for posting a great comparison video with the new iPhone 15 Pro Max and a full frame Nikon with equivalent focal length lens setting. I’ve shot sports with a full frame Nikon and a 300 mm Nikon lens and had many great shots but there have been many occasions when I didn’t have all my gear along for the ride. What I did have was my iPhone. It’s nice to at least have something to capture the moment. I’m so glad to see the improvements that Apple has made with their cameras in the Pro Max model. My point here is that the best camera is the one you have with you at the moment. Sometimes, that’s just a lowly cellphone. 🤷🏻♀️
Thanks also for your tips about shooting with the iPhone and gaining access to the portrait features post shooting. I would have always selected RAW. Your channel is great!
For me there was a clear difference and it was in the colour rendition. The iPhone looked very muddy and the Nikon was very crisp and vibrant.
This was a really great comparison/test with impressive results.
Besides this specific test case the new iPhone 15 camera(s) seems to suck really bad using heavy cropping to get pictures at the old 'normal' focal lengths.
Nice comparison. I have a Canon R5 with an array of L lenses. That said, my phone is always with me. Apple, Samsung and Pixel are all improving mobile phone photography. I find my big rig full frame often stays home these days. The new phone cameras are simply good enough in many cases.
Same boat as me.
For trips and everyday my Z Fold 4 is more than enough.
My A7 III is now 95% of the time used only for construction inspection now.
Great comparison video. The heavy vignetting on the ‘real’ camera was the biggest difference lol!
Thanks for the video! This is a great reminder that phone cameras have evolved a lot but still can't really compete with dedicated photography equipment. In the end, the application/need and expectations (as well as budget) should direct people to one equipment or the other.
I think Budget isn't really relevant because for the price of a 15 pro max you can get an amazing DSLR and lens that will destroy any phone and you still have some money left for a phone
@@lukassinger_photo Let's consider that's correct. How many people would opt to buy the camera instead of the phone? If you do not have capital constraints you can buy both but most people can't and many do not even care about owning a real camera.
@@lukassinger_photo The big difference is that, at least in the US, carriers will essentially finance the purchase of the phone. That makes a huge difference.
You are so professional and unbiased with your reviews unlike others no manes but I think you know who! Most of my photography gears were purchased after your reviews including Canon R6.
cheers
I almost got the images wrong, but changed my mind last second, when I looked at the bokeh again. The fake-bokeh from the iphone still looks a lot like gaussian blur, while the Nikon has more err ‘texture’ to.
The batter is standing in one place. No matter how hard he is swinging, this is not action photography. Take it to a soccer field and track a player close enough for the 120. The extra sharpening of the iPhone is one tell. Another is the evenness of the lighting in the background. The 70 to 200 at 2.8 has obvious vignetting. You are also taking a picture without transitional bokeh. The background is far from the batter. Let's see how this looks with a soccer player surrounded by defenders. Personally, I would forget about the fake bokeh and use the natural bokeh of the iPhone telephoto shooting close. I use a Google pixel 6 Pro and the natural bokeh from the telephoto is quite nice. It isn't lost shooting raw. Still a very enjoyable review to watch. Great job!
Regarding loss of data and depth of field adjustment, one could still accomplish the same thing with Lightroom's new lens blur.
This is the game I was at when I saw Jared on the field!!
Well, Lightroom offers lens blur now that can automatically detect depth info and you can choose what to focus like subject or point it out anywhere.
Fast apertures aren’t just for depth of field..it’s for light gathering too. So it still won’t replace fast lenses but if you’re on a budget and can’t afford more than a slow zoom and shoot during the day you can use that feature absolutely
Nailed #2 as well! Yoi spilled the beans on #3 too quickly lol didn't have time to examine
these were some of the harder photos to tell apart in these kinds of comparisons. to be honest the same thing still rings true, the cutting out of the hair and the ways it computes the out of focus blue. they are way better then they have ever been which is impressive. but its still a pretty big give away.
even on one of the shots there was a little fluff on the shirt that caught a little light from the big stadium lighting and it showed up on the real camera but the phone blured it away.
again... for a phone this is the best I have seen.
for me the buttons and dials and control you get with a real camera will always win out over a phone
I had a teenager looking at some of the images I took with a real camera and they said it looked like I went too far with blurring the background of a portrait making it look fake. When I tried explaining to them that this is not fake, but the results of a shallow depth of field on a wide aperture lens, they had a hard time grasping the idea. At some point more people may prefer fake bokeh to real bokeh.
Iphone, to me, looks like someone did a really decent job with masking and gaussian blur. The bokeh is far too consistent to mimic any real optical fall off. That being said, it looks damn good and at first glance and without any added context, I probably wouldn’t look twice
The real camera and lens have a little vignetting which made it easy to tell once I saw that, but hey it's a dang phone with a tiny sensor, pretty damn good, that being said I I ordered a 15 Pro not max. I prefer the smaller size and price.
These Pro Photographer videos are really important to me. I held off for years with my iPhone 11 & will buy the 15 Pro Max. BUT! Those baseball shots show that the professional photographer CAN get better shots with a pro grade camera. I didn’t even know that capability existed.
Really impressed by the iPhone considering the lack of lighting is pushing the limits of the 5x. I enjoy a bit of street photography but no longer have the time to spend on workflows and tweaking so hoping this is going to work well for me.
what a good comparision video, well explained, tks mate, great content!
As a Pittsburgher, it’s cool to see the photos of the Pirates vs. the Phillies! Not to mention the typical Angel Hernandez debacle!!!
Great to see the comparison!
Now you can shoot raw, edit it and then in Lightroom add their new future which blurs the background
Hey. I upgraded to the IPhone 15 pro and love it. I am taking more photos using my phone. I enjoyed the video. Thanks for the content and hard work.
Great video Jared, but I hate these comparison videos, maybe it's because I'm scared that phones are this good nowadays, but it's mostly because non-photographers pretend they know the trick of the trade because their phones takes (heavily processed) decent photos. Imho it's a difference between making a photo as a photographer and taking a photo with your phone. I have more of a problem with the people than the tech itself.
Would love to see your review like this on the sony Xperia 1 mkv as that has controls close to their mirrorless cameras,
The “real” cameras vignette is much more noticeable. Looks like iPhones camera adds a lens correction from the get-go.
Due to sharpening it's recognizable which one is which.
Light room has a new portrait mode style blur feature that's pretty decent so I would just shoot the phone in raw and use light rooms blur
I'd love to see someone try to shoot Birds-in-Flight at 1/100 on the iPhone lol
Yea. That will not be good
its the dynamic range that does it for me...
The main issue with using the phone, for me, is the form factor.
A lot of people have the same issues, for them a back pack full of camera and lens Vs a phone makes the phone the obvious choice.
@@RichardFraser-y9t true, but holding a phone is not ergonomic. If you want to film for longer or take pictures from high or low angles its really hard. I mean you dont have a tilt screen for holding it near the floor.
Very interesting comparison Fro! I still maintain that no matter how much “technology” Apple or anyone else throws at the phone camera, it will always be inferior to a “real camera” in at least 2 aspects: print size and ergonomics, the former simply because of the sensor size disparity, and the latter due to shape, button/control placement. That said, I agree that most people aren’t as analytical about image quality as you or I are. So, I too, use an iPhone, for things other than serious photography.
I’m honestly super impressed with this.
1. Another beautiful breakdown with great examples and personality.
2. Angel Hernandez is a joke of an umpire.
Great job
I really think it will replace high end point and shoot cameras like the rx100, g7x and zv1 type cameras
My only critique is your referring to the "catcher" as the "umpire"... 😶🙄😂
It's amazing
I love both a phone camera and a real camera
Depends on the need for shooting
I purchased the 15 Pro 128 Gig model. I see the stills / video capability of this camera as complementary to a mirrorless setup. I will say that I am really impressed with the footage that I get when recording 4K 60p log footage to an external SSD over the 10 Gbps USB-C transport with the iPhone 15 Pro - at least with decent lighting.
9:00 I got it right!🔥
I could tell by looking at the path next to the batter.
Great video...and cool that you caught this moment. How Angel Hernandez is still employed is miraculous 😂
As someone who sees hundreds and hundreds of iPhone photos from family members who are not photographers, it drives me crazy to see computational bokeh all the time. It can fool you for a second but then when you actually look at the photo, peoples hands and hair and clothes are disappearing into a blur realm at the edges. they think it’s the coolest thing to have blur. Here I spend 8500 on a camera rig and show them my photos and the only difference they see is that the blur is cleaner. Plus I have to do processing to recover highlights and achieve an HDR look that the iPhone does rather nicely. I feel like computational photography is in an awkward phase where it gives consumers an ego-boost and pisses off photographers. It makes my job a bit unpleasant when I show up to a job and start shooting holiday family portraits and people looking over my shoulder at the camera screen start making comments about how their iPhone looks just as good. Of course to me the final result looks a million times better butter them all they see is a $300 bill and photos that look slightly different. Lol
Good perspective, Jared. The biggest advantage of my iPhone 15 Pro Max is that it is always in my pocket. I get so many shots with it that my Sony A1 can't even come close to capturing because the A1 is not with me. Also, I push my iPhone a bit harder and shoot with the 24mm 48MP camera as much as possible. When I use the other lenses, I keep it in RAW and do the second half of the job in LR. Now, with the early release Blur tool in Lightroom, Adobe can create a depth map on the RAW and 48MP RAW. When used within reason, it works well. I am enjoying photography more now than in my 40 previous years of shooting. An iPhone won't do it all, but it can do a lot, just as my A1 with the Sony 600mm F4 is a great bird-in-flight setup. It doesn't do as well with street photography or architecture. I am looking forward to the 16, 17, 18. Computational photography will do to big optics and big sensors what digital did to film. Keep up the good work. Regardless the gear, a great photograph still requires a great photographer.
Anyone else catch that difference in image noise around the 8min mark? When Jared is talking about ISO etc…
Simulating what he’s talking about
Honestly, looking at the comparisons at the size of a postage stamp--while I was moving at that!--I was able to tell the difference immediately. Not that the images look bad, because they absolutely don't. Do I think, though, that you could have brought a second hand Rebel T3i with a first generation 70-200mm f/4 lens to the game and blown this out of the water for a fraction of the price of this phone? Yes. Yes, I do.
Terrific comparison, imagine how is going to be in 10 years, mobile technology advance so fast. I still remember when I used for a first time a Sony digital camera in 2001-02, with 3 1/2 inches floppy disks and I realized that it was the future of photography
Wow verry good video, Listen my history, 1 year aga I buy Sony A7 IV and I dont like because to much menu and the POUNDS with different lens (I had 3 lens ouff) when you go hockey game to Big, now I have iphone 15 promax with gimbal (insta 360) and is perfect for me. I understand verry well what you said. Thanks again.
I liked the blurred bat and ball - Ai knew best 😂❤
Vigneting is present in the regular lens vs the iPhone.
It always comes down to what people want. Most people were happy with a Kodak Brownie or Instamatic, which were Point and Shoot (P&S) film cameras from the 1910s or so through the 1980s. P&S cameras, which IMHO phone cameras are, were and are popular because most people DON'T CARE. They just want to make snapshots.
A snapshot is a memory. A photograph is art. In the hands of an artist, a P&S can make art, but most people just want to save memories. And there's nothing wrong with that.
Grass on many photos is not blured the same. Looks like the iphone just blurs it as much as the far away background were in fact it is closer and on Nikon we can still seem some bands etc.
It's awesome how far computational photography has evolved. This will improve "real" cameras.
that’s really good. But you only compared the 12 mpx sensor, now I wonder what the 48 mpx sensor does?
I think the blur is what gave it away for me but damn close
I don’t think a phone will ever replace a camera however Sony is certainly trying… I think for those that don’t want to camera a big camera around with them everywhere having the quality of the iPhone means if you do see one of those moments you can catch it.
With how much they continued to improve with the 12MP sensors I’m interested to see how much they’ll continue to improve the quality with the bigger and better sensors.
I’ve got some photos I’m super proud of and I’m using an iPhone SE (2nd Gen) I can’t wait till I upgrade to the 18 in a few years to see the quality jump.
at 9:00 I wasn't sure, but my pure guess was right. you could see the vignetting from the actual glass lens, even though I wasn't sure if that was a filter or not. also interesting to see that the glass and full frame sensor did seem to be letting more light in. thanks for the side by side comparison! if I was looking for a new phone and pocket ai computer, that also had a nice camera, i'd be tempted by the iPhone 15 pro max. lots of places and people get jittery these days if you pull out a traditional camera, but they don't blink twice if you pull out a phone with a camera and microphone that are connected via satellite to ai powered cloud servers. people are funny that way
Side by side reveals the Nikon has some vignette that the iPhone doesn’t have - which I like
The iPhone did really good here but this is also a clear case for Samsung's 10x optical option. Would've been really good to see that thrown in the mix in this situation. These shots came out really well.
U should compare with APS C camera which is below $1000
you shouldve used the pro cam app to control the shutter speed
I keep trying to spot you during Phillies playoffs. Thank you for all your hard work.
please make a comparison video between Sony Xperia 1v vs professional camera Gear like this. and you should make it though.
I was able to tell every pic...immediately its the colors but also the iphone had this texture sharpness that the camera pics didnt have
Or just grab an m100 and the EF-M55-200 or EF-S 55-250 for like $600 total and get 320/400 ff equiv in a package you are likely to be let in with.
The first comparison took me a while but I got it, the shirt and hair looked over sharpened and raised shadows on the iPhone. The pants color and bokeh was throwing me for a loop , but once I honed in on the shirt it was pretty clear. After that iPhone stuck out like a sore thumb, still pretty good but the knowing what to look for made it easy.
Also worth mentioning the iPhone Pro max is $1,600, that's not nothing and the camera is a pretty big selling point..... But.... For the form factor it's great, so YMMV I guess.
Actually all 3 comparisons I could easily tell which one was the iPhone vs the Nikon, I actually got all 3 right. You could tell by the colors of the image and the texture of the numbers on the jersey, the Nikon you can almost see the threads of the numbers. Plus the whole image looks sharper. And I am a Canon shooter praising Nikon LOL. I am viewing the video on my phones screen, and I could tell them apart. That said if you showed me the photo without the Nikon one beside it I would have thought that it was a camera with a higher ISO setting than needed.
Next to each other, it wasn't terribly difficult to tell the difference, especially when I realized the iphone has an issue with yellow saturation. However, the iphone camera is nucking futs good. I remember when the first iphone came out with it's 2.0MP camera. We've come a VERY long way.
Great take on this Jared. Love, and agree with your comments regarding this.
Main camera vs fullframe 24mm would be even harder to tell apart.
I was 3 for 3 in picking out the iPhone. I agree the iPhone images look pretty good at first glance, but in all cases there are clear artifacts and problems around the edges of the subject which make it pretty obvious - at least to me. I would also say that on that final image although the artifacts weren't at first as obvious to me, there was something about the transition between the in and out of focus area and the overall quality of the out of focus area that looked very artificial. Put differently, I don't agree that the bokeh looks great on that last image: I think it looks artificial.
I think Back and Foreground Blur is going to improve rapidly with all the focus AI Bokeh is getting right now.
What stands out in this comparison between phone and FF Sensor is as usual dynamic range and also that really awkward sharpening that apple keeps pushing on its photos.
I saw you on TV when you ran on the field! Its awsome where photography has taken you.
Thank you
9:26 not really. The grass is what gave it away for me. But I must admit nothing else looked "off"
Finally, I’ve been waiting for this. Thanks.
never had a hard time telling them iphone and any small sensor is always gonna have that over sharpend look even if the fake bokeh cutout is perfect
Thank you for this Jared. I have more confidence in iPhone 15 Pro Max now as a camera.
Thank you. I am thinking about getting the 15pro plus and your reasons for doing so mirrored my own thoughts. Very helpful!
This might be sports photography, but the sample photos are not much different from portraits. Especially the comparisons between the two cameras. The real comparison would be someone running to a base or trying to catch the ball. Many sports events are indoors in poor lighting but require good AF and ISO performance. That's where many professional cameras might struggle as well.
These home base portrait shots I can do easily with my Z50 + Viltrox 85mm for under a 1000€ and that's why the Iphone has no issue either.
Granted, in broad daylight the Iphone wouldn't have issues capturing fast sports events either.
As a full time camera operator for a network I have started using the iPhone for a few shots for Olay/ b roll
No one knows the wiser
Please make another one by s24 Ultra
Jared! Did you get a photo of the helmet toss???!! Maybe you had too much lens to take it all in? Hopefully you sold it to MLB for a lifetime press pass so they could kill it.
Where’s the “zoom in” photo comparison? Or, quality from printing a poster size image?
It took awhile but i got it right with the picture on the right being the camera.
Great job, I have been waiting for this video. I think you hit the nail on the head with the iPhone. Great job to you and Steven.
Great video, it helps me to see the performance of the new iPhone Pro 15. Thanks!
You cant beat the power of Nine Blades in a image. They look ok from the cellphone but that was the easy give away from each photo for me.
Easiest way to find it which is which is zooming into them. But yes phone camera have come a long way. Sharpness is another thing I've noticed as well.
Nice comparison, it proves that most people would be happy just using the iPhone (not the photographers, which is obvious).
What I'd love to see is a comparison of basketball video: iPhone 15 Pro MAX VS Canon R8
What about Calls? Does the Canon have a Speaker for hands free?