Just looked like a smartphone picture with buckets of artificial touch ups to compensate tbh. Looks pretty good considering the size limitations of the phone.
I could tell A was the smartphone because smartphones typically add a tonne of saturation and other post-processing effects to the final image. B looked a lot more raw.
Photo b was my instant guess after i saw the lens flare The thing is that photo b is taken using some kind of filter, can't identify properly but maybe it was polarized filter on the lens
Photo b was also my guess for the professional camera, but not because of the lens flare in photo a. It was that photo a had ridiculously good HDR from intelligently blending multiple exposures, while photo b, taken by the professional camera with all of its "glorious 12-bit RAW", did not. Also, these comments about depth of field are misplaced in this scenario. This is a scene where you would *want* everything to be in focus, so you don't want the foreground to be blurry because of some stupid notion that blur is a "characteristic of professional cameras" - like dude, professional landscape photographers use tilt-shift lenses to let the whole scene be in focus even at a wide aperture.
@@randomoneforstuff3696I understand him saying dof is what makes this but like, if you also want to eliminate lens flare you usually also want to do a higher F number on the lens, which should be perfect for this since as you said, you want everything to be in detail here
I love photography, there’s all these little things that go into these photos, but from the perspective of someone who doesn’t know all this, it doesn’t have the same lasting affect on you unless you truly take time to look at these pictures. Each one tells a story, full of meaning and purpose… it’s utterly fascinating
yes, in certain situations a phone cane look really good (like this, still obvious for photographers but for the general public not so much) but now try taking portraits with blurry backgrounds, sports, something with lots of colors etc. it won't be nearly as close as this. imagine doing a wedding! a few situations would look good, but everything else.... well i hope if u ever work again after that
That is also how our eyes work. When you focus your eyes on something, anything that is closer or farther away from that object will be blurry. You probably never noticed this.
I love the results from my Pixel 7. I even do a majority of Instagram reels with it, not feeling like I'm compromising. It has 10-bit at 4k 30 and you can push the files significantly.
I was able to guess because phone pictures normally are brighter, and light points get more obvious lens flares. In general those are things that make me able to guess pretty well if smth is from a phone or not.
I guess photo b was the cammera because it was a lower camera angle (the cammera was lower to the ground)for those who still dont get it the smartphone is taller than the cammera. Think smarter not harder
In this latest Camera update for the Pixel Phones it actually reduces that Noise from the Flare. If there's one really good point of the Pixel Phones it is that the camera is ever-changing.
Whatever they do, not much can be improved with that terrible Samsung sensor which produces typical overprocessed Samsung-ish ugly images with black outlines at every edges in the picture. I remeber even my cheap Motorola phone with SD 636 having omnivision sensor used to produce far better photos using the Google Camera app compared to my Pixel 6. Pixels used to be good with the Sony sensors. Google needs to ditch all Samsung garbage at earliest from their Pixel lineup to stay in the competition.
The blur has nothing to do with the body of the camera. It's all about the lens and having the proper aperture to get that depth of field. If you're newer to photography and looking to upgrade, always upgrade glass before the camera body.
it's also linked focal length, not just aperture. Higher focal lengths can produce shallower depth of field, while smartphone camera lenses always use very short focal lengths, due to the smaller sensors built into these cameras.
I only saw this short, not the other, but i could instantly tell b was the pro camera due to the angle. As the phone camera is higher up in A, i quickly concluded that A is the phone shot without looking at details
I bet most people wouldn't be able to tell that I don't use a professional camera to take pictures My phone takes pretty good photos and has great camera options, and provides a manual camera option where you can tweak every single thing to get just the shot you want
Unfortunetly phone cameras dont have apature control and struggle with high ISO. They are still more than good enough generally and you always have your phone with you.
I know professional cameras are always going to be the best option but still its fascinating to see a small handheld smartphone closing the gap between cameras
how I could tell is the height of the sun. since it is a phone camera, it's lens will be a bit higher, so the sun will be a bit more higher, whereas in the pro camera, it is smaller in height so the sun would be lowerish
The angle of the horizon was different and I noticed that photo b was taken from lower down, and I reasoned that since phones are taller, it wouldn’t be able to take a photo any lower so the lower of the two photos should be the camera
I guessed it through the difference in HDR . Professional cameras can't be compared to Smartphones in terms of HDR. In Photo A the sun was having a better HDR and processing than Photo B, where the sun was more whitish.
@@SmitePlayz1 In case of balancing skies yeah. Google does it the best but in case of processing especially skin tone, it kinda sucks. Like in the case of Pixel 7 and 7pro if you take the brown skin color or the pale skin, it looks over processed and not at all close to natural. The processing is great unless you give it a complex skin tone to shoot.
I didn't guess because of lens flare or dof, I guessed looking at the subject who was more three dimensional in camera photo. Felt like a real photo while photo A was totally flat.
This reminds me of natural and man made diamonds. Hear me out. Before man made diamonds was created for drilling, and looked crude and yellow. Now, man made diamonds are so well made, they have to put it though a spectrograph and see the differences in frequency from natural diamonds Man made diamonds are more or less the same as natural. Phone cameras are just a couple of generations away from outperforming “Real” camera.
It's physically impossible for smaller sensors and lenses to compete with their larger cousins, you won't ever get around the physics or how Light works. But why we're seeing smartphones catching up is because they are utilizing extreme levels of computational photography ie combining many pictures together, HDR, AI noise reduction and sharpen etc unlike dedicated cameras which are lagging very far behind in the software front. If you know what you are doing though, you can apply even better versions of the computational techniques on pictures taken by your dedicated camera. The only issue is that it's a huge hassle and requires a PC and many separate software suites unlike phones. This will continue to be so until camera manufacturers start putting some effort into their software.
@@jadeidkabir5395 Camera manufactures has already lost the race. Even Sony can’t catch up. Any of the tech top companies can either buy out a say Nikon, or just bundle a large sensor and glass and build a smart phone around it.
The photo A also has traces of HDR processing at the edge of the rim where the sky meets the ground and the shadows are washed-out, so the immediate conclusion follows that we're looking at a typical smartphone pic.
The phone pic doesn't look that bad but a purpose built machine will always beat a multifunctional machine such as a DSLR vs Phone, it's amazing to see how far phone cameras have come in the past decade I've been using them.
The "LoOkS sHaRpEr" only really works on displays and is usually caused by a heavy ugly filter that is supposed to bring out some details after the extreme noise reduction a lot of smartphone cameras have to go through
If one presents unedited photo, one of the clue is to look for contrast. If for some reason photo looks evenly lit across the board, it's from a smartphone.
Phone for norm pictures, yes. But if you zoom the images, the difference is tremnedous. Even my 90D with apsc frame outperform my pixel in every way in photography. Full frame will do even better
If theres something I’ve learned from all of these shorts, reels, tiktoks, etc about “Smartphone V. Camera” (one time i saw one verus a red camera” is that smartphones have more of a bloom effect on light. If a pictures more brighter, chances are its the smartphone. Camera and cinema cameras have more of a toned down look to it.
I think part of that has to do with the super-small lens opening on smartphone cameras. Plus... even the slightest smudge of a fingerprint on your smartphone lens will smear the footage like crazy!
I’ve got a pixel 6a which shouldn’t be as good as the 7, but I’m constantly looking at the photos and wondering how they manage to look as god as they do. Then I pixel peep with my FF camera and it exposes the pixel for what it isn’t. But I’m still amazed at how good the pixel is! Computational photography can impersonate a large sensor rather well. Too bad phones still have awkward manual controls.
The pixel is great, but its manual controls are so terrible lol. There needs to be a full manual mode. When I upgraded from my 5 year old LG V30 to pixel 5, I was shocked at how limited it was with controls
@@JamesXylight Everything in iPhone and Pixel cameras is artificial. There is nothing good about the cameras of these two phones. If you want a phone with really nice cameras, these are the Xperia Pro1, Xiaomi S12Ultra and Huawei P50Pro.
@@JamesXylight What? Those cameras didn't reach the top? Hahahaha do you know what a one inch sensor phone is? These are the phones in the first three places in the top charts🤔🤔🤔🤔
If these photos are straight out of the device without processing, its super easy to say pic A its from a phone.. The dynamic range out of the box its wild and fairly sharp all over.. However, as you said, the cameras with decent lenses will make most of image out of focus but the subject will be focused (depending on the aperture), and even if the image looks a bit trashy or not so complete compared with a phone, with processing, the images of a digital camera will always be way superior to phones
@@gwop827 exactly.. I will use my phone for things that I won't print, or for video because my 750D doesn't have 4K, but even then, 1080p on my camera with a decent lens looks better than the 4K if I'm being honest.. All photography I intend to make prints and memories of, I use my camera because the quality doesn't even compare ☺️ I've got 108mp on my phone but sensor its pretty trash. They all are honestly 😂 and the little lenses phones have can't match a decent camera. At some point, there were a few Nokia phone that could match digital cameras, but then again, they had decent optical zoom and everything. Can't remember the exact model, but it has a massive camera module on the back
I got it right because of how different the atmosphere of the photo b is and on how it's much clearer and blurry it is on the far sight unlike photo A where's it's being covered with such lens flare and the atmosphere adding more little saturation
Forget high end camera lenses. My old Nikon D3500, which is a beginner DSLR is still levels above my Pixel 6 Pro. I know my phone is not a dedicated device but my camera cost me less than a third of my phone.
lidar is apple, others like samsung and google have a better edge detection but the camera still doesnt know which parts of the image for foreground and background, so far it cant match a "real" camera DoF
Just compliment the damn phone, no need to get so defensive like a phone is gonna devalue photography, all iconic photos were taken by old cameras, I can't find any iconic photos by cheaper cameras, but cameras these days are too damn perfect, I start to appreciate imperfections more.
I have to still say that modern phone camerasystems are 100 times better for normal photography than professional ones. My S22 Ultra for example has literally the specs and features of a 4000$ professional camera and it costs just 900$...
That is the most wrong set of statements I have read in my entire life. A high MP count doesn't automatically equate to better quality. The processor in a phone isn't dedicated, which means less processing power goes to the photography of the camera. Not to mention the only way to zoom is with software since the focal length of a phone camera doesn't change.
For vacationing and candid moments phones will do fine. For professional use high end cameras are a must. Just think wedding photographers. You don’t see any taking phone pictures.
Smartphones have nearly nailed the landscape scenery aspect of photography. There is little difference except in lens flares. Smartphones are yet to nail the subject aspect of photography. Hence, smartphone can never replace a good camera for photoshoots and high profile events
Thanks to everyone who guessed and left a comment! :)
ruclips.net/user/shortsGffPHhzhgUs
first is with mobile camera and the second one is with digital camera
Yes
You can also use photoshop to make photo a look more like a professional camera took it
Can we just take a moment to appreciate how amazing the photo taken with a phone really is?
no we can't
welcome to the future. no longer do we have 240p potato cameras on good phones
It's looks good if you're not zooming into the photo.
Just looked like a smartphone picture with buckets of artificial touch ups to compensate tbh. Looks pretty good considering the size limitations of the phone.
Nope, the one from the camera in the hand of a professional can look even more amazing
I got it right! The post processing on the phone was the giveaway for me.
😉
In other words: the better looking photo is taken with the smartphone
@@Zain0_0 in this instance yes
@AnthonyGugliotta You could try it in raw mode, the new S23 has a real good raw camera mode
@@Zain0_0 if you don’t plan on editing it, yes. Second photo is way more editable.
I could tell A was the smartphone because smartphones typically add a tonne of saturation and other post-processing effects to the final image. B looked a lot more raw.
That's also my reason. Forget the lens flare but photo B is definitely more Raw but still has the detail.
As a non-photographer, photo B looks sharper in focus, more rich colors, and phones really struggle with the sun directly at them
Photo b was my instant guess after i saw the lens flare
The thing is that photo b is taken using some kind of filter, can't identify properly but maybe it was polarized filter on the lens
Almost definitely a circular polariser me thinks
Photo b was also my guess for the professional camera, but not because of the lens flare in photo a. It was that photo a had ridiculously good HDR from intelligently blending multiple exposures, while photo b, taken by the professional camera with all of its "glorious 12-bit RAW", did not.
Also, these comments about depth of field are misplaced in this scenario. This is a scene where you would *want* everything to be in focus, so you don't want the foreground to be blurry because of some stupid notion that blur is a "characteristic of professional cameras" - like dude, professional landscape photographers use tilt-shift lenses to let the whole scene be in focus even at a wide aperture.
@@randomoneforstuff3696I understand him saying dof is what makes this but like, if you also want to eliminate lens flare you usually also want to do a higher F number on the lens, which should be perfect for this since as you said, you want everything to be in detail here
I love photography, there’s all these little things that go into these photos, but from the perspective of someone who doesn’t know all this, it doesn’t have the same lasting affect on you unless you truly take time to look at these pictures. Each one tells a story, full of meaning and purpose… it’s utterly fascinating
The story is the best part, and all the little details that are easy to overlook is what makes it so fun!
I got a pixel 7 and absolutely love it, installed grapheneos and love that too. Good phone worth the price.
It’s honestly the best priced flagship out there.
yes, in certain situations a phone cane look really good (like this, still obvious for photographers but for the general public not so much) but now try taking portraits with blurry backgrounds, sports, something with lots of colors etc. it won't be nearly as close as this. imagine doing a wedding! a few situations would look good, but everything else.... well i hope if u ever work again after that
That is also how our eyes work. When you focus your eyes on something, anything that is closer or farther away from that object will be blurry. You probably never noticed this.
I just looked at the sun and since photo A was brighter i guessed it was the phone
You can immediately tell from just the colour and tones that B was the DSLR Camera.
Still 74% is still incredible, four years ago it would’ve been much higher. Plus it looks incredible
Easily differentiated by seeing dynamic range
I love the results from my Pixel 7. I even do a majority of Instagram reels with it, not feeling like I'm compromising. It has 10-bit at 4k 30 and you can push the files significantly.
If I have the time and it's important though, my Sony a7iii never fails to impress me.
I didn't guess, but thanks for teaching me how to tell next time!
Bro your pixel 7 has the same exact case as mine, kinda cool to see
Which one is it?
@yesiamsahil on closer look, I do not think it is the same but it is very similar to my tech21 slim case.
Thanks dude for this lesson
I was able to guess because phone pictures normally are brighter, and light points get more obvious lens flares. In general those are things that make me able to guess pretty well if smth is from a phone or not.
I guess photo b was the cammera because it was a lower camera angle (the cammera was lower to the ground)for those who still dont get it the smartphone is taller than the cammera. Think smarter not harder
No way they thought the dof blur was making the photo less sharp 💀
That’s what I’m saying 😂😂😂
In this latest Camera update for the Pixel Phones it actually reduces that Noise from the Flare. If there's one really good point of the Pixel Phones it is that the camera is ever-changing.
Whatever they do, not much can be improved with that terrible Samsung sensor which produces typical overprocessed Samsung-ish ugly images with black outlines at every edges in the picture. I remeber even my cheap Motorola phone with SD 636 having omnivision sensor used to produce far better photos using the Google Camera app compared to my Pixel 6. Pixels used to be good with the Sony sensors. Google needs to ditch all Samsung garbage at earliest from their Pixel lineup to stay in the competition.
Next time Photoshop the smartphone one, adjust the curve bump up the contrast and fix the glare/ shadow spots and see if people can still get it right
Crazy good photo results
Whoa! These video make my brain expand every day🤯
I have a pixel 7, so I recognized the particular warmth of the pixel's camera
I wouldnt of known which is which
The blur has nothing to do with the body of the camera. It's all about the lens and having the proper aperture to get that depth of field. If you're newer to photography and looking to upgrade, always upgrade glass before the camera body.
it's also linked focal length, not just aperture. Higher focal lengths can produce shallower depth of field, while smartphone camera lenses always use very short focal lengths, due to the smaller sensors built into these cameras.
I only saw this short, not the other, but i could instantly tell b was the pro camera due to the angle. As the phone camera is higher up in A, i quickly concluded that A is the phone shot without looking at details
And i changed my decision two times while he was explaining 😊
I bet most people wouldn't be able to tell that I don't use a professional camera to take pictures
My phone takes pretty good photos and has great camera options, and provides a manual camera option where you can tweak every single thing to get just the shot you want
Unfortunetly phone cameras dont have apature control and struggle with high ISO. They are still more than good enough generally and you always have your phone with you.
The noise would be enough though. Phone shots will either be a bit more noisy, or a bit more soft because of the denoise.
i guessed B was the smartphone because i heard IPHONE and not pixel 7 lol
Oh, i thought the pixel was the professional cam, idk why i guess i liked it more
I know professional cameras are always going to be the best option but still its fascinating to see a small handheld smartphone closing the gap between cameras
Until it time for printing
Got it right on the second you showed the pics
I love how most people purchase a fancy camera then upload to Instagram only were they compressor the image down anyways 🤣
I would rather buy the phone than the camera, cuz it's an all rounder
Can you do one of these with no edits and then walk through how to edit each one(jpeg, raw)? Because yo-yo edits are always amazing!
*Your
Just saw a glance and guessed correctly, it just looks more natural.
I instantly guessed photo B because of how dark it is, cuz usually professional cameras are kinda more darker than phone cameras
I got the same phone case nice choice
how I could tell is the height of the sun. since it is a phone camera, it's lens will be a bit higher, so the sun will be a bit more higher, whereas in the pro camera, it is smaller in height so the sun would be lowerish
The angle of the horizon was different and I noticed that photo b was taken from lower down, and I reasoned that since phones are taller, it wouldn’t be able to take a photo any lower so the lower of the two photos should be the camera
I guessed right, but only because I have a pixel 7 as well and immediately recognised the processing 🤣
I guessed it through the difference in HDR .
Professional cameras can't be compared to Smartphones in terms of HDR. In Photo A the sun was having a better HDR and processing than Photo B, where the sun was more whitish.
same with me, computational photography works very well with small sensors.
What do u expect, Google pixels have the best post-processing out of any phone!
@@SmitePlayz1 In case of balancing skies yeah. Google does it the best but in case of processing especially skin tone, it kinda sucks. Like in the case of Pixel 7 and 7pro if you take the brown skin color or the pale skin, it looks over processed and not at all close to natural. The processing is great unless you give it a complex skin tone to shoot.
I didn't guess because of lens flare or dof, I guessed looking at the subject who was more three dimensional in camera photo. Felt like a real photo while photo A was totally flat.
I guessed it was B and was correct, i knew the blurriness of the ground was just an effect and not an issue of quality of the camera
This reminds me of natural and man made diamonds. Hear me out.
Before man made diamonds was created for drilling, and looked crude and yellow.
Now, man made diamonds are so well made, they have to put it though a spectrograph and see the differences in frequency from natural diamonds
Man made diamonds are more or less the same as natural. Phone cameras are just a couple of generations away from outperforming “Real” camera.
It's physically impossible for smaller sensors and lenses to compete with their larger cousins, you won't ever get around the physics or how Light works. But why we're seeing smartphones catching up is because they are utilizing extreme levels of computational photography ie combining many pictures together, HDR, AI noise reduction and sharpen etc unlike dedicated cameras which are lagging very far behind in the software front. If you know what you are doing though, you can apply even better versions of the computational techniques on pictures taken by your dedicated camera. The only issue is that it's a huge hassle and requires a PC and many separate software suites unlike phones. This will continue to be so until camera manufacturers start putting some effort into their software.
@@jadeidkabir5395 Camera manufactures has already lost the race. Even Sony can’t catch up. Any of the tech top companies can either buy out a say Nikon, or just bundle a large sensor and glass and build a smart phone around it.
How the sun looks is what gave it away for me
The photo A also has traces of HDR processing at the edge of the rim where the sky meets the ground and the shadows are washed-out, so the immediate conclusion follows that we're looking at a typical smartphone pic.
The phone pic doesn't look that bad but a purpose built machine will always beat a multifunctional machine such as a DSLR vs Phone, it's amazing to see how far phone cameras have come in the past decade I've been using them.
I just looked at the light and I could tell
Blow them up to 16x20 prints and then ask.
Smartphone camera is pretty damn good
The "LoOkS sHaRpEr" only really works on displays and is usually caused by a heavy ugly filter that is supposed to bring out some details after the extreme noise reduction a lot of smartphone cameras have to go through
Yea cool, but foto "b" looks better
If one presents unedited photo, one of the clue is to look for contrast. If for some reason photo looks evenly lit across the board, it's from a smartphone.
Phone for norm pictures, yes.
But if you zoom the images, the difference is tremnedous.
Even my 90D with apsc frame outperform my pixel in every way in photography.
Full frame will do even better
Lens flair looks kinda cool tho
If theres something I’ve learned from all of these shorts, reels, tiktoks, etc about “Smartphone V. Camera” (one time i saw one verus a red camera” is that smartphones have more of a bloom effect on light. If a pictures more brighter, chances are its the smartphone. Camera and cinema cameras have more of a toned down look to it.
I think part of that has to do with the super-small lens opening on smartphone cameras. Plus... even the slightest smudge of a fingerprint on your smartphone lens will smear the footage like crazy!
I knew that A was the phone because phones like to have everything in focus, but professional cameras tend to have just the subject in focus
Oh cool I did not see this will you make another one?
I’ve got a pixel 6a which shouldn’t be as good as the 7, but I’m constantly looking at the photos and wondering how they manage to look as god as they do. Then I pixel peep with my FF camera and it exposes the pixel for what it isn’t. But I’m still amazed at how good the pixel is! Computational photography can impersonate a large sensor rather well. Too bad phones still have awkward manual controls.
The pixel is great, but its manual controls are so terrible lol. There needs to be a full manual mode. When I upgraded from my 5 year old LG V30 to pixel 5, I was shocked at how limited it was with controls
Photo a is the phone because the camera on the phone is higher
It's still amazing how good the Pixel 7's camera is.
No, is not.
@@rosen7923 wdym
It literally got 2nd in the blind camera test and the pixel 6a got first
@@JamesXylight Everything in iPhone and Pixel cameras is artificial. There is nothing good about the cameras of these two phones. If you want a phone with really nice cameras, these are the Xperia Pro1, Xiaomi S12Ultra and Huawei P50Pro.
@@rosen7923 bruh lmao none of those even got close to the top
The end result is more important.
@@JamesXylight What? Those cameras didn't reach the top? Hahahaha do you know what a one inch sensor phone is? These are the phones in the first three places in the top charts🤔🤔🤔🤔
If these photos are straight out of the device without processing, its super easy to say pic A its from a phone.. The dynamic range out of the box its wild and fairly sharp all over.. However, as you said, the cameras with decent lenses will make most of image out of focus but the subject will be focused (depending on the aperture), and even if the image looks a bit trashy or not so complete compared with a phone, with processing, the images of a digital camera will always be way superior to phones
Also since they record more data, the xmp files can be adjusted much more than a phone cameras image
@@gwop827 exactly.. I will use my phone for things that I won't print, or for video because my 750D doesn't have 4K, but even then, 1080p on my camera with a decent lens looks better than the 4K if I'm being honest.. All photography I intend to make prints and memories of, I use my camera because the quality doesn't even compare ☺️ I've got 108mp on my phone but sensor its pretty trash. They all are honestly 😂 and the little lenses phones have can't match a decent camera. At some point, there were a few Nokia phone that could match digital cameras, but then again, they had decent optical zoom and everything. Can't remember the exact model, but it has a massive camera module on the back
I looked at the angle and saw the difference in height between the camera and phone
I actually like the photo a and it blows my mind that it's taken from a phone 😮😮
ILY Anthony
For me the brightness of the sun was a giveaway
Yeah, the noisy blacks, depth of field and the colors from a raw photo gave it away
The two things I noticed was the noise on his jacket, and the dof
I got it right because of how different the atmosphere of the photo b is and on how it's much clearer and blurry it is on the far sight unlike photo A where's it's being covered with such lens flare and the atmosphere adding more little saturation
The sun simply gave it away ...
Forget high end camera lenses. My old Nikon D3500, which is a beginner DSLR is still levels above my Pixel 6 Pro. I know my phone is not a dedicated device but my camera cost me less than a third of my phone.
Actually what gave it away was the dynamic range
the depth of field has nothing to do with the price of a camera, it's the focal length and the aperture of the LENS.
Well, As someone who doesn't like computational photography I'd prefer the dlsr look anytime
you can probably get a modern phone to add DoF in post because they have depth-sensors (LiDAR) but I don't know if the camera app does that by default
You usually can with the portrait mode. But’s a digital blur and doesn’t look as good as real shallow depth of field shots (yet)
lidar is apple, others like samsung and google have a better edge detection but the camera still doesnt know which parts of the image for foreground and background, so far it cant match a "real" camera DoF
Just compliment the damn phone, no need to get so defensive like a phone is gonna devalue photography, all iconic photos were taken by old cameras, I can't find any iconic photos by cheaper cameras, but cameras these days are too damn perfect, I start to appreciate imperfections more.
Honestly, I prefer the photo taken by the cell phone because the sun is brighter and gives the piece a little more brightness and a splash of color.
As someone with a Pixel 7 Pro, I recognized that phone instantly
And that is one reason I want a Google pixel 7
Dynamic range was my reasoning. B has way better dynamic range
I have to still say that modern phone camerasystems are 100 times better for normal photography than professional ones. My S22 Ultra for example has literally the specs and features of a 4000$ professional camera and it costs just 900$...
That is the most wrong set of statements I have read in my entire life. A high MP count doesn't automatically equate to better quality. The processor in a phone isn't dedicated, which means less processing power goes to the photography of the camera. Not to mention the only way to zoom is with software since the focal length of a phone camera doesn't change.
That what most reviewer of phonw camera don't get....
Picture is not only sharpness of a definite subject
For vacationing and candid moments phones will do fine. For professional use high end cameras are a must. Just think wedding photographers. You don’t see any taking phone pictures.
When you yourself have a Dslr its easy to notice the small details that a phone doesn't have
Wow so impressive how well the pixel camera does but for me I can tell which is which
I don't understand why I was so tense to find out if I was right....I was right.
I kinda like phone result here 😸
The noise is a dead giveaway.
Google needs to add a professional mode to the camera
I got it
I use cameras everyday like alot of people but i dont post i just practice
I deleted 800 photos from June 15th-25th never first try
Easy to tell because of the lens of the camera, the barrel was wider that's what you get on a camera
Smartphones have nearly nailed the landscape scenery aspect of photography. There is little difference except in lens flares.
Smartphones are yet to nail the subject aspect of photography. Hence, smartphone can never replace a good camera for photoshoots and high profile events
You could tell photo A was a smartphone because of the over sharpening, lack of depth of field, and the over processed HDR.
I honestly like lens flare, it just makes a picture so much look cooler to me
"High end professional lenses" - nifty fifty