Tony, you and I are old enough to remember the days when Apple was synonymous with innovation and quality, under Steve Jobs' leadership. Under Tim Cook, the focus seems to have shifted towards marketing and hype. Despite this, Apple's revenue reached a staggering $96.99 billion last year, proving the effectiveness of their marketing strategies. It’s unlikely that Apple will change its trajectory anytime soon, as long as their products continue to sell. However, there's always a chance that consumers may eventually tire of the marketing and stop supporting them. When that happens, Apple might be forced to pay closer attention to customer feedback, innovation and truly benefits the people who's putting money on their pockets. I find it very intriguing that someone with your background and knowledge continues to fall for Apple's marketing and keeps feeding the machine 🤔
It will always be that way due the phone being limited in space. R&D teams & Marketing working together plays a huge part as well, as consumers with little understanding of sensors (like me) we just give up and believe more is better. I am only upgrading as my phone is now 4 years old. If only apple bought sigma. I believe they had the best sensor design, I think it was called faveon or something. Sd14/sd15. Only 3mp but image quality was amazing! Been away from DSL for sometime now😢
This guy is straight up lying. The iPhone comparison shots with the real camera have been taken in indoor lighting which is not fair, since the iPhone camera is struggling and fighting with the indoor noise compared to the real camera which got a bigger sensor and is therefore not fighting against noise as much as the iPhone does. He should’ve compared them outdoors. Secondly the 5x zoom camera on iPhone 15 pro max is indeed better than the 3x zoom 14 pro max if u zoom out further than 5x. And thirdly the 48mp camera mode on the iPhone is indeed sharper than the 12mp mode, bunch of RUclipsrs have compared and proven that. BTW: why does this guy always rant against Apple? Isn’t Samsung and all the other android manufacturers the ones that created 200mp phone cameras long time ago? 🙄🙄.
@denissssss8579 that's dumb, why should he only compares them outdoor? Does Apple say "our camera is only usable on outdoor"? No. The fact is Apple is taking advantage of the general public who doesn't have photography knowledge and lead them to believe their deceitful marketing terms. Yes the same goes for Samsung and many other brands, but maybe Tony doesn't use them and couldn't judge them fairly?
@@GP996_LB I don't think Apple is trying to replace Sony mirrorless cameras with lenses that cost more than the phone. THey are trying to best the previous iphone. Most epople use these images for social media, small prints, or display on a TV. He should be comparing the new phone cameras to previous phone cameras. That would make more sense.
@@denissssss8579 You haven't watched the video? Did Apple ever marketed 48MP as an outdoor only resolution? Tony points out the huge quality gap between the 1x and 5x magnification, which most people use. After 5x, quality will be higher, but at 3x, or at any popular focal length such 75mm, 85mm or 105, the old 14 Pro takes much better quality photos compared to the new phones. Bunch of youtubers get paid for that. They compare only 12MP and 48MP iPhone photos. They never compare with an actual 12MP or 48MP photo like Tony did here. Advertising 48MP camera but it only has 6MP details. This is fooling customers. He used a tripod setup in this video for taking photos, in that case, Apple does auto night mode processing to improve details, still it came with only 6MP details. If used handheld, it would be even lower.
I've always used the Iphone as you've suggested - as three prime lenses that you never crop. The issue with the Iphone 15 Pro Max / Iphone 16 Pro's is there is too much gap between 1x and 5x. That means lots of zooming with your feet between 1x and 5x. That's fine if you realize the limitations. I agree that the 3x zoom is a more useful focal length. Good video.
yeah did he say in this video that the 3x on the 14 pro is better than the 3x on the 15 pro? of course it is you arent using the 5x lens you are in the in-between whereas the 14 you've moved on to its telephoto lens... pretty dumb chart he showed if im reading it correctly. at 5x the 15 is obviously more mp than the 14.
Funny that most Android manufacturers find out about that issue back then when they r still experimenting with zoom camera. Nowadays most have a 3x zoom and a 5x+ zoom so such issues would be minimise
I actually have a phone like this and use it all the time. I have both a Samsung Note Ultra 20 and Iphone 13Pro. The Samsung has a 5x zoom. It's good at 5x (of course) but struggles otherwise (1x and .5x also work well as it has 3 lenses). Once again, I use them as primes, and the gap between 1x and 5x is too great. I don't use it for photography very much, but really love the pen and use it as my business phone. I use the Iphone most of the time for day to day photography. Note that I am a professional photographer and use Nikon mirrorless for professional work. I also frequently use a Sony ZV-1 for non-client work. It's a nice video camera that takes surprisingly good stills. Because it's so compact, I often have it available when I want a little better quality in low light.
Thank you for this awesome video! But I'm confused. The title refers to iPhone 16, but the video seems to be talking about the iPhone 15. Is the iPhone 16 better than the iPhone 15 examples in this video?
It appears that what Apple have you doing is taking a 12MP image and quadrupling the pixels. Its not pixel shifting the sensor in these situations. You end up with bigger files with seemingly no real gain in image sharpness. I love my iPhone and as a person that has ‘real’ cameras the iPhone for obvious reasons is the camera I use most often. What Apple are doing incentivises me to stay with my iPhone 13 pro as it takes 12MP images and that is what you get. As with any phone stick to the ‘prime’ focal lengths, compose, watch your lighting and you get great results. Let’s not get deceived by megapixel marketing hype, my first DSLR was 6MP and I still consider some of the images I took to be wonderful.
The images are binned from 48MP down to 12MP not the other way around, this video is full of errors. If you Google Quad Bayer sensor you'll get a better explanation of how this works, and what the benefits are. The guy that made this video gives misleading information which is ironic as he accuses Apple of being misleading, but in reality he's just a bit clueless. I'd recommend getting your information from more credible sources than this channel.
This is not true. The 48MP of a quad Bayer sensor are indeed true 48MP. The small lens of the iphone just cant resolve the detail properly. Also, 48MP on such a small sensor results in some artifacts which need to be fixed by computational processing.
@@Skullet true, this whole video made me barf. How can people buy this BS, I am not a subscriber and I know this channel from the times I had a Canon Rebel T1i back in 2010. It was always like this, the information wasn't concise and mostly it was very opinionated. I saw this video because RUclips algorithm told me to and what I thought of this channel still holds true, impressive. I own an iPhone 15 Pro and yes, even when compared to my old T1i, the T1i produces sharper images, but the T1i is not as versatile as the iPhone I agree, but the comparison here was abhorrent, all clout for views and it seems to be working. Deceiving as ever....
it can be beaten by computational photography in some circumstances. Compare the "fake" bokeh an iphone creates using it's computational aperture adjustments and compare results to your kit camera lens. an iphone can't compare to an expensive 1.4 prime, but it can certainly hold its own against a kit lens as long as you're not pixel peeking.
This is Apple's MO across so many areas though. Control and manipulation through technical friction and a web or lies painted into fashion and perception
"Our 8 GB ram is 16 GB ram" Or way back: "You need our PowerPC because it's faster than intel" And then: "You need intel because it's faster than PowerPC"
All cameras, any camera: one of the most important aspects other than the person controlling the camera, is the size of the sensor. Not one single smartphone on the market has the sensor size. Add in items such as the depth of the camera (because optic depth is actually important), and also the size (top to bottom) of the lens. Smartphones are usually limited to screen only presentations. Try to print it, and most images do not print well - especially when people are the main subjects of the photos.
Agree Tony with all your comments. Apple rule and many people never question Apple. No phone will ever match a real camera..Apple will never admit that though.
I once had a similar conversation with a friend and the entire 3x vs 5x lens discussion was stuck at "but 5x zoom is more than 3x zoom." And since then I've got the attitude of if a company can sell the same thing (or, in this case, a worse thing) to consumers over and over again since they don't want to think then who am I to tell them no. There's obviously enough people buying it every year that I end up looking like a crazy person for speaking up against it, it sounds like a psychological experiment to be honest.
I got one for the battery life, better screen and the carrier paying for most of it for signing a new contract for phone service I was going to pay for anyway. The cameras are meh but they’re in your pocket when you’re not carrying something better.
Apple's iPhone camera marketing always is pretty, um, creative. That said, I think I'm going to get one. It's a substantial upgrade from my 11, and there's always my real cameras.
I’m considering a new battery for my 11 instead of getting the 16 pro max I’ve been waiting for and waiting another year. I’m embarrassed to admit I was thinking this rumoured (now reality) ultra wide 48 megapixel meant I might be able to leave my full frame at home when trying to travel light. The second I saw the pixel pitch of the ultra wide compared to the main camera I new that idea went out the window
@@stephennowlan2637 Yeah, I definitely have given keeping my 11, with a new battery (it's gotten pretty weak) some consideration, and I'm still not absolutely certain I'll actually order the 16 Pro Max tomorrow. I'm disappointed by the camera, too, though I still think it would be nice for other reasons. Argh!
@@stephennowlan2637 I used to think my iPhone 11 was a good camera and then I got the iPhone 15 Pro which proved that it is. I love the extra reach of the iPhone 15 pro, but still really impressed with the iPhone 11. I teach photography and print to a wide format printer, so I'm picky,
This guy is straight up lying. The iPhone comparison shots with the real camera have been taken in indoor lighting which is not fair, since the iPhone camera is struggling and fighting with the indoor noise compared to the real camera which got a bigger sensor and is therefore not fighting against noise as much as the iPhone does. He should’ve compared them outdoors. Secondly the 5x zoom camera on iPhone 15 pro max is indeed better than the 3x zoom 14 pro max if u zoom out further than 5x. And thirdly the 48mp camera mode on the iPhone is indeed sharper than the 12mp mode, bunch of RUclipsrs have compared and proofed that. BTW: why does this guy always rant against Apple? Isn’t Samsung and all the other android manufacturers the ones that create 200mp phone cameras? 🙄🙄……
@@denissssss8579 Me too, I love DSLR cameras and I have the IPhone 15 Pro Max. Obviously he will always be slightly biased towards the camera but we need a third party to verify both takes. His take and what Apple say etc. What I will not forgive is Apple using 60hz screen in 2024. Unbelievable. They need to make the base IPhones at least 120hz.
@@denissssss8579no body said Samsung is better he is just calling iphone out. When s25 comes out if they lie they should be called out too. .. not everything is apple vs android
Wait, I’m revisiting this video and I’m confused. The title says the iPhone 16 is the one that is disappointing. But you keep showing photos taken with the 15. Are these issues fixed in the 16? Can you clarify?
So in total which iPhone is best for cinematic video handheld run and gun without gimbal and crispy photos under 5X ? Which phone would be even better than 16 pro for that usecase for travel purpose too? By the way I had 13 before and loved the rendering
let's be honest, i dont think anyone buying the new iphones would want to become professional photographers.. as long as the camera is not blurry and can take pictures and videos to preserve priceless memories, that's enough.. is the hefty price tag justifiable? heck no... but that's the way things work now... even groceries costs more than they once did so what do you expect... bottomline is, if you wanna buy the new phone and have the money for it, then buy it.. if you don't like the phone, then don't... simple as that...
100% agree with you. The primary manufacturer of iPhones is Foxconn in China. Apple in the USA designs the phones and collects the insane profit margins.
kinda depends on what you mean my "manufacturer." Everyone would acknowledge that Ford is an American manufacturer, but they really only have 5 plants in the US. Most of Ford's manufacturing plants are in Mexico, Canada and China. if your definition of "american manufacturer" means that all parts/components were made in the US, designed in the US and assembled in the US, I'd suggest there are no "american manufacturers" at all left.
Basically thriving on Chinese slaves labor (I'm not exaggerating there are videos of Chinese workers fleeing from foxconn climbing over fences to escape). Sure it's a new form of slavery, don't take the word too literally but it's absolutely a form of slavery
@@mattsmith3135 given your logic, Foxconn technically doesn't manufacture anything - they take parts/components that other manufacturers like apple (chips); qualcomm (wireless); screens (samsung) manufacture and assembles them all together like a puzzle in a plant in China.
@@1970rsc I think you make a good, valid point. In the case of Apple, they don't manufacture any of the components themselves nor do they do the assembly, so they are literally manufacturing nothing. They don't own the offshore factories that manufacture those components either (unlike Ford's offshore factories). Screens come from Samsung, CPUs come from TSMC, camera sensors come from Sony, assembly by Foxconn, etc etc.
Honestly Tony is a treasure for technical photography and photography gear community (yes I just invented that). But I am serious, over the years Tony contributed immensely to people at least understanding how photography and photography gear actually work
Respect him for what? During iPhone 16/Plus/Pro/Pro Max Keynote Apple never stated that new iPhone’s camera is somewhat better or comparable to DSLR / MILC.
Tony is just a spurned year on year upgrade dork. He’s upset because his consumerism compels him to purchase despite his gripes, but he is somehow wishing he were getting more. No serious photographer or educated tech enthusiast expects an iPhone to produce an image comparable to a Nikon Z8. The audience for this video is Tony and Tony alone.
@@asyetundetermined the audience for this video is most people who think a phone can provide similar results as a camera. I used to think as such. The more people realize you can't beat physics, it would be better for all. Apple marketing is trickery.
@@asyetundetermined can’t agree more with what you’ve just said. Also as far as I remember Tony already did similar video for previous generation iPhone. And also we all photographers should keep in mind it’s not the camera that gets the shot done (camera is the only technical side) it’s the photographer in the end. Sometimes (or for some - most of the time) camera doesn’t matter so much, unless you’re doing advertising, macro, fashion, landscape or other photography genres where details and sharpness are expected. Sometimes you can do damn good street art on just an iPhone, but ofc big camera can give you some benefits impossible with mobile camera.
I recently completed a short documentary about a historic mining town, starting off with a Panasonic Camcorder and a Canon 7D 35mm camera. Midway through the project, my daughter, who lives in LA, joined me to assist with the filming. She brought along her iPhone 14 Pro Max, which matched mine, and we used them alongside the Canon as backups. One scene took us deep into a mine, about 1000 feet in and just as deep-total darkness except for our headlamps. I was filming with the Canon, while my daughter captured footage on her iPhone, using mine as a backup. After reviewing all the footage, it was clear that the iPhones outperformed the Canon, especially in low-light conditions. Most of the best shots came from the iPhones, while many of the Canon's shots were cut due to poor quality. This experience plus my past history on using iPhones has made me an iPhone believer for a long time. I just ordered the new iPhone 16 Pro Max and couldn’t be more excited. I’ve always trusted Apple for my computers, and now I’m convinced their iPhones are unbeatable for filmmaking too.
A Canon 7D?!? Yeah I'm not surprised an iPhone 14 could beat a 15 year old camera. Lol. The 7D suffered from horribly low detail, rolling shutter and aliasing. Try that same glass you were using on any sensor made in the last 5 years by Sony, Panasonic, Canon, etc and see who wins.
Comparing 48 MP full frame camera to a 48 MP (almost) 1” camera. What are you after?! This video is bogus! I’m stunned that now a phone has the same resolution as an analog fine grain 35 mm film. Where is your comparison of 120 MP mobile camera to Hasselblad X2D?! 😂
@@ericlamont4130 You cannot really mislead anyone with a keen interest in photography with this. All of us know a phone cannot match a professional camera. However, a person with no special interest in photography will get better pictures by shooting on an iPhone than with any kind of "real" camera in full Auto mode, 'cause that's what they're going to use.
@@ericlamont4130 The only truly misleading and dishonest claims made about phone cameras have been from Huawei, twice, using DSLR images to promote their phone cameras. Other than that, it's been usually phone manufacturers sprinkling in fancy words to sell phone to people who are not in the market for a $2000 camera.
All (semi) pro photographers know that iPhones can't beat their pro cameras. I think Tony wants to attract a couple of new subscribers outside the photography world....and that's totally fine :) As a photographer I think it's great that I don't need a seperate "point a shoot camera" when I don't have my gear with me. I think smartphone and their "software cameras" are a very interesting development to watch.
I was being my Canon G7X point and shoot camera at it completely destroys my iPhone and all my friends iPhone in any situation especially at night when there people and a good quality flash is needed. Even in the day a strong fill flash from a Canon G7X does wonders to eliminate shadows from faces even the Canon S95 smaller point and shoot blows away any iPhone camera in quality and night shots.and I will never ever sell those point and shoot cameras it will take apple 20 years to catch up.
Yes. It’s just a typical buzzword / contrarian YT title meant to garner views. Nothing new. Everybody knows, including Tony behind camera, that an iPhone and most smartphones are barely passable as hobby grade.
I think its extremely important. Less than 2 years ago i couldnt have had a single idea of why my iphone images looked bad without just thinking it was a lack of “megapixels”.
Excellent and convincing presentation of the mega misleading 48MP camera results! Such a disappointing marketing trick! Again, I take my hat off for you Tony! Please keep up your very good work! (Btw, am still impressed by your first RUclips videos that I happen to recently re-watch! Excellent facts you generously share with us your many followers! Stay blessed you and your whole family and loved ones! Best regards from Sweden!) 💯👍🙏👌💖
@@axgrf Thank you for stating this. Someone that actually understands the Bayer filter and know that demosaicing process dictates this. Also why is he comparing two different classes of sensors on here. Full-frame, APS-C, micro four-thirds e.t.c will give different crop format for a full frame and the type of Bayer filter array method used matters. This is just so misleading that it even makes legit points he makes irrelevant. People need to understand here that he is making false claims as his basis for his arguments are seriously flawed. If he wanted to compare this to something closer, he can get point and shoot cameras or other mobile phones with similar sensor sizes and start from there. No disclaimer or anything or even stating the obvious difference of sensor size. He makes it seem like he is comparing an equal sensor size in an iPhone (a mobile phone) to an equal sensor size in an SLR with the huge lens he showed in the video. Looking through the comments, only very few caught on his propaganda. This is not to defend iPhone but rather to enlighten people to better understand the other technicalities in photography that affect the outcome of a photograph.
Man, you put into the caption that this is iPhone 16 camera meanwhile it is iPhone 15. You did it for the same reason you criticized Apple, more numbers on your video and they got more sales. You lied more than Apple with theirs marketing
@@dawebslave3571it isn’t. Changeable aperture will mostly degrade the resolution of the tiny lens then adding something. It can help on video to get lower shutter speed when its too much light, but thats it
Uh the point of this video went WELL over your head. Also with camera reviews finally out, it turns out this is still true. Stop defending a multi-trillion dollar tech company please.
I feel like the video disrespects its audience. What photography enthusiast who comes to a channel like this one actually believes all the event hype around smartphones? We can't possibly be that ignorant. Even among the rookies, we all have our own smartphones, with their limited dynamic range and blown-out highlights, as proof that they don't compare to big rigs.
Tony you never mentioned if you switched the iphone camera to true 48mpx mode (proraw max) or were you testing in default 12mpx mode? I have compared my iphone 13 pro max with my friend's 14 pro max in true 48 mpx mode and the difference in res was plainly obvious
@@EmersetFarquharson Bei Kameras, die die hohe Bildqualität über das Zusammensetzen mehrerer Bilder erzielen, ein billiges Einzel-DNG-RAW zu nutzen ist so was von dilettantisch. Es zeigt aber, dass die Nerven bei den Herstellern der Klötzer blank liegen.
This guy is straight up lying. The iPhone comparison shots with the real camera have been taken in indoor lighting which is not fair, since the iPhone camera is struggling and fighting with the indoor noise compared to the real camera which got a bigger sensor and is therefore not fighting against noise as much as the iPhone does. He should’ve compared them outdoors. Secondly the 5x zoom camera on iPhone 15 pro max is indeed better than the 3x zoom 14 pro max if u zoom out further than 5x. And thirdly the 48mp camera mode on the iPhone is indeed sharper than the 12mp mode, bunch of RUclipsrs have compared and proofed that. BTW: why does this guy always rant against Apple? Isn’t Samsung and all the other android manufacturers the ones that create 200mp phone cameras? 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄
@@denissssss8579 you didnt listen to what he said. 48mp would be sharper than 12mp on the same phone. thats not the point. the point is, 48mp iphone is not sharper than 12mp real camera. the 3x is more useful for most scenarios, if you're between 3x - 4.9x the iphone 16 image is horrible. hes comparing both cameras raw files, so its fair. but sure it may perform ok outdoors but still it wouldn't be any better than a real camera.
If Sony/Canon/etc. integrated half of the non-image related features from the iPhone (theft detection/encryption, backup, etc) that Tony mentioned, they would be a huge step ahead of the other companies. The better quality of a big camera just doesn't outweigh the convenience of having those types of features on my phone. Sure a pro would scoff at that idea, but most people aren't pros. Just the other day I was telling the wife NOT to use the zoom on her iPhone, just click 0.5, 1, or 3 and move forwards or backwards until she gets the shots she wants - I got that advice from Tony! I'm happy with my 14 ProMax, except for the lightning connector. That is not worth upgrading over, so for the first time I think I won't upgrade and get a cheaper BYOD phone plan, thank you very much.
iphones are really mini computers these days, so incorporating the features in a phone to a camera would require additional processing power equivalent to a phone. The end result would be that you'd have a camera on the market that costs 2x more than the competition with equivalent results. that might work for products like cell phones where convenience and usability are the primary factor in buying, but I doubt that'll work in cameras, where image quality and price are the primary drivers in consumers.
@@1970rsc They wouldn't replace standard cameras of course, but could use to supplement them. SoC's are common these days, putting some logic into an existing camera body need not be an expensive proposition, it's up to the manufacturer to make that choice. Battery life takes a hit of course, but the type of person who would be attracted to this type of product are used to it. Yes photographers won't get much of a benefit since they don't care about convenience apparently, but the creators who use DSLRs would get a benefit since it would improve their workflow. The market isn't as large I understand, but until then people will just put their phones on a gimbal instead of trying to use DSLRs.
@@matt_kelly I didn't think about content creators as part of the camera market, but what you said about that is true. I don't do videos, but I'd assume the work flow is different since they aren't taking 1000s of pictures, but rather, hours of footage broken down into 2-3 min segments that has to be handled different...like a puzzle that fits together instead of 1000 stand alone images. Sony has that ZV-1 camera that looks like a video first/photo second hybrid. Maybe they'll add more "convenience" features into that camera in the next generation if there's a market for it.
@@1970rsc Yeah content creators are a different market than pro photographers, I think they would be interested in something that has similar (or even less) conveniences of a phone, but with better image quality. The ZV-1 camera is an interesting product for that, and is being marketed as such. As you say, I guess we will have to see what the market is for it.
I'm not a pro photographer. For my wife and I, the better quality of a big camera far, far outweighs theft detection/encryption, backup, etc. Most that can be had in other ways with a big camera if they are important (in our case they are not important).
People watching the videos and top trending photos will be perfectly fine with image quality from iPhone 16. Apple didn't advertise iPhone as a replacement for long-range wild-life photography or for taking picture of words on a paper across the street. lol
Thank you very much for this honest review! I didn't know about the cropping factor of the iPhone 15 Pro Max and both 16 Pro models untill seeing your video, nor did I ever saw anyone else talking about this in other reviews. I am thinking about upgrading to an iPhone 16 Pro from an iPhone 12 mini but your video made me somehow sceptical. Given the facts, would you even say that the iPhone 15 Pro base model camera is superior to that of the 15 Pro Max and both 16 Pro models due to the cropping issue?
“The Moonshot” Introducing iPhone 18 Pro Max | Reach New Heights The revolutionary new feature of the iPhone 18: the 100x zoom with a stunning 96MP camera. This feature allows users to capture ultra-detailed, high-resolution images even from extreme distances, bringing the unreachable within reach. The campaign takes inspiration from the idea of shooting for the moon, both literally and metaphorically, positioning the iPhone 18 as a device that pushes the boundaries of what’s possible in mobile photography.
I don’t think I’ll upgrade to the latest iPhone this year. Previous years I use to upgrade my iPhone because of the camera improvements but this year I got me a full frame camera and I really don’t see a need to upgrade this year.
I got the iPhone 15 Pro, it is pretty good (I got the regular Pro over the Pro Max based on Tony's recommendation last year), and I got it for the Camera and USB-C port. The USB-C port is a big upgrade and has allowed capabilities with other systems that I didn't except (like being able to stream 4K and full surround sound to my AVR). I still have my Sony A7CR
Yeah I agree the iPhone 15 pro was a good upgrade because of the usb c port but this year not so much unless you’re upgrading from an older phone and you don’t have or like to use a real camera. I would say don’t upgrade unless you have to have the latest and greatest tech.
Because that’ll open up the door for competition to post numbers that beat theirs, and if they have to prove their case with data, they’ll expose the methods that prove why they’re so much worse than real cameras - and why some peer phone cameras might be a better choice for some (different balance of lenses, different image processing).
MP is resolution and it is 48MP… higher numbers never made cameras good, which is why iPhones stuck with 12MP for so long when Androids had moved on. Anyone with half a brain should understand phone cameras will never match a real DSLR etc. Even my ancient budget T2i destroys modern phones lol
This guy is straight up lying. The iPhone comparison shots with the real camera have been taken in indoor lighting which is not fair, since the iPhone camera is struggling and fighting with the indoor noise compared to the real camera which got a bigger sensor and is therefore not fighting against noise as much as the iPhone does. He should’ve compared them outdoors. Secondly the 5x zoom camera on iPhone 15 pro max is indeed better than the 3x zoom 14 pro max if u zoom out further than 5x. And thirdly the 48mp camera mode on the iPhone is indeed sharper than the 12mp mode, bunch of RUclipsrs have compared and proofed that. BTW: why does this guy always rant against Apple? Isn’t Samsung and all the other android manufacturers the ones that create 200mp phone cameras? 🙄🙄☹️
thank you for being the first one doing this side by side comparison, teaching people the difference between heavy post processing and actual resolution
Even I can see that soon the iPhone will take a crappy phone pic, but the software will identify and digitally reconstruct(make up) the background and subject in glorious IA beauty. Then megapixels wont matter. If the rest of you can't see this coming, you're blind.
@@forrestunderwood3174 I am sure AI will be used more and more to improve image quality doing things a small sensor can't achieve, but this is impacting realism and photos are already looking less and less natural. the solution to photo's overprocessing problem, is not to process them more. people in the future may like more imperfect and less artificial looking pictures.
@@forrestunderwood3174 I am sure AI will be used more and more to improve image quality, this is impacting already how natural the photo looks. the solution to photos' overprocessing is not more processing. maybe people from the future will start liking straight of camera pictures, with some imperfections and so more character.
I've got a TON of Apple stuff. I'm appalled by Apple's deceptive marketing, but since my iPhone 12 is getting long in the tooth, I'll probably grab a 16 Pro. I generally take my R6 Mk II with me most of the time, but my phone is literally ALWAYS on me. I agree with you Tony, that Apple should really try collaborating with a camera/lens manufacturer(s) to get their sensors and optics improved. Hopefully one day, they will.
I am a photographer and I refuse to switch from an iPhone 11 Pro Max to 16 Because there doesn’t seem to be a lot of changes. And I will say this again. A iPhone camera will NEVER be able to match the level of detail of a big DSLR Camera. Simple
wont compare it with DSLR, but all I want for iPhone is to fix the problem of its lens inner reflection or flare whatever its called. Whenever you point to light source at night or sunset, there are light dots.
@@sunlit777 no bro. Only big sensors, more light, more natural depth of field. Other than that everything is just software which includes that fake portraits video. And only a 3X telephoto lens and an ultra wide with Auto Focus. Which I mean who will use that. 😂 iPhone 11 Pro Max is the one and only best iPhone upgrade since iPhone 6 and after that everything is just minor upgrades. I think you are the one who is brainwashed. 😂
@@HarnaiDigital I have just told you that there was a huge leap in resolution between 13 pro max and 14 pro max. Yours is an old generation I don't even want to remember, I had all iphones since 4s and I've taken thousands of pics with each generation
They say they use more megapixels and bin them down to usable size. But if the sensor is tiny, having double the pixels and binning down is exactly the same as if it had bigger (less) pixels
Yes and no. For the software magic to happen the pixel binning may be useful, as it makes it easier in post to make the image look cleaner (pixel prediction etc). But if you take shots with an app that produces real raw files, the truth is disappointing, or the software magic gets even more magical... I would like to see more of this true megapixel videos with at least Samsung s24u and the pixel 9 pro. Thank you for this one Toni.
It's physics. An area of sensor will be able to receive a certain amount of light. Whether a manufacturer decides to make that area into a 1000000 mp sensor or a 1 mp sensor is up to them. There's always a sweet spot to sensor size vs resolution for any sensor generation and I would think the top 'real' camera manufacturers would've got it spot on. When the full frame cameras with a sensor likely 20-30 times bigger than the ones in the cellphones have 40-50 mp, the cellphone mp count is already likely too high and out of the sweet spot.
Man kann auch ein hoch aufgelöstes 48 Mpx Foto mit einem 12 Mpx mit Hoher Dynamik kombinieren und im Ergebnis ein sehr scharfes 12 Mpx Bild mit hoher Dynamik erzielen. Das geht aber nur mit modernen Kameras.
It's true that there isn't much difference compared to the iPhone 15, but I think it's worth waiting for the iPhone 16 Pro Max and switching. Just for the 4K at 120 frames per second, it's worth it-plus, let's not forget that all of this is in HDR, and the video quality we know from Apple is top-notch. The differences may be minimal, but they're worth it.
I was wondering why my 6 year old Leica D-lux was producing amazingly better photos than my iPhone 15 pro max, but then again I'm not a pro photographer. This video was very enlightening.
I personally like having the iPhone as a compact daily easy to use camera. I don’t expect it to produce professional grade photos and videos. I just want my pictures to look great as opposed to be billboard size fantastic.
Thanks Tony! Revelatory as usual. I've owned all the iPhone Pro Max models from the 11 Pro Max on. Liked the addition to shoot in log, but as you noted some of the other "great new features" weren't that great like "action mode". Undecided about the 16 Pro Max. Thanks again.
More people need to hear this. I only recently switched to iPhone 15 pro max and was very,very disappointing. My sim card only last 3 days in this phone.
In theory, these 48mpx quad-pixel sensors should yield 48mpx of edge resolution (i.e., luminance resolution) but only 12mpx color resolution. The fact that they don't give us 48mpx of edge resolution is probably down to the huge difference in lens quality between the iPhone cameras and the pro camera.
No, as luminance is related to the visible spectrum, you need to demosaic in order to get luminance values. There are no white pixels. And when analog binning isn't enabled, demosaicing works worse due to the different color filter array, this leads to artifacts that reduce the level of detail ( worse luminance values) in comparison with a 48 megapixel Bayer sensor. The color resolution is better than with a 12 megapixel Bayer sensor: As you get a better resolution for red pixels, better resolution for green pixels and a better resolution for blue pixels, demosaicing will lead to more accurate color values. Furthermore, one needs to distinguish when the sensor is used in analog binning mode (then you really only get a 12 megapixel Bayer sensor) or not.
I did a side by side shot in the store with my iPhone 12 Pro (dedicated 2x camera) against a iPhone 15 pro with the (digital crop 2x camera) and found the iPhone 12 beat it every time. The 2x camera is more useful than the 3x and the 3x is more useful than the 5x. So if you want to upgrade to the best iPhone for cameras. Buy the 12 pro. Basically the newer iPhones are not giving better cameras, they are just trying to compete with Samsungs and the likes zoom cameras but rather than adding another lens they sabotage the key cameras that we all use. The phones have got bigger to accommodate extra lenses so we should see a reset next year with a new iPhone with 4 cameras hopefully. It’ll probably a different name to signify the change.
Honestly, when he doesn't zoom in, I can't tell a difference between the real 48mp camera and the iPhone. Everyone markets their products misleadingly.
@tiagomaqz nope but then CRAPPLE Fanboys always lie ....they say they don't need a Samsung exclusive but then love it 10 yrs later when Crapple copies it
always detested the fake marketing of phones. if those tiny sensors were any good, they would put them in a mirrorless camera. in this case there is no substitute for size
Apple showed what the iPhone is capable of, I never heard them said the iPhone is better than professional cameras. If I missed that part, please point out where and when Apple said it.
@@unstanic exactly, never paid for it, APPLE also makes it hard to transfer files to PC or other apps like Flickr. I have to manually click and drag files to folders small batches at a time because my 14 pro max will disconnect.
@@ilovebohol file and music transfer have been a huge pain with iPhones since the beginning. Switched to android recently cause I had enough, but android is not without its problems unfortunately... Pick your poison I guess!
Your comparison is flawed. A traditional 48 MP camera has a much larger sensor, much larger lens and much larger distance between the lens and the sensor compared to that of an iPhone. This means more light enters the larger sensor (therefor more optical info), a better zoom capability due to larger lens, and a much better focal point (hence better zoom clarity) due to the better distance between the lens and the sensor. Also, the way you explained quad-pixel is wrong. There are 48 MP on the sensor, and 4 adjacent pixels are combined (pixel binning) to create a 12 MP image which is effectively brighter and has less noise in it. Not the other way round. If compare a traditional camera with an iPhone, you also need to take into consideration how the camera is bulky, requires different (even more bulky) lenses to function at full capacity, and can only do image/video capture and nothing else. On that note, there are cameras that are very good at image but useless in video and vice-versa, so if you want best of both worlds you have to carry 2 sets of cameras and lenses. On the other hand, an iPhone can do all of it sufficiently well despite it's physical limitations, is portable enough to carry in one's pocket and does stuff beyond just image/video capture. A general tool like a swiss army knife can't compete with a specialized tool in its specialized purpose in the first place, so the comparison is moot. A comparison between 2 phones with the same limitation (like you did with 3x of 14 pro and 5x of 15 pro ) is a much more practical approach of comparison
@@madmikkelsen7008 I never disagreed with his point. I just said the comparison is flawed. A professional should already have enough knowledge about the physics behind the camera to know that the iPhone they buy would never be a replacement for an actual camera, and if they don't, they are on the path to be a professional and learn soon.
I don’t know what these „folks” are but probably most normal people do take that already. But there are always some guys and gals that buy this marketing regardless
I am still using an iPhone 14 Pro Max. Mostly because of your video on the iPhone 15s camera. I have been looking at the iPhone 16 Pro Max. I am concerned about its camera. Is it worth upgrading? I do only use my iPhone for photos and videos with the 1x lens selected. Thank you.
You are not comparing apples to apples, excuse the pun. A Caterpillar D11T (Bulldozer) has similar BHP to an F1 car, both are vehicles but you can’t compare. Is the D11T “fake” because it can’t compete in a race? Also, price! 1/8 the cost of what you are comparing it to. You are spreading misinformation, no one thinks it is a “professional” camera, it’s just a bloody good camera in a very small package like lots of other smart phones.
No! The F1 car is the fake, because it can't push as much soil as the D11. Get your facts straight, mister. Also, how is showing examples misinformation??? I'm sorry you waste money on the newest iPhone every year, but one is born every minute. And, you can find a "professional" camera and lens for much less than a new iPhone.
1) Duh. 2) I’ve compared the 15 camera with my 13 mini camera and there’s a noticeable difference. However, I am a full-time, self-employed portrait photographer and the difference is not pronounced. It’s subtle. Still, it is good enough to keep in my pocket for printing photos of special moments (not pro-level shots)-all without having to carry around a pro camera or a quality point and shoot. 3) Duh x2. It’s marketing to the chumps in a “niche” (i.e., humans who are not vocational photographers) that is the masses. In other words, it’s a very good point and shoot that has made incremental advances over the years (even from the 13 to the 15, as stated above). But…it’s marketing. Watch their 14 release…they lie, stating that the 14 Pro has stuff it’s never had before, when the 13 mini had the same stuff. But it’s also truth; the 14 Pro had never existed up to that point, so it really was the first time it had various features.
Finally you show it 100% right, wake up people. It's like you have worthless speakers and you connect a 10.000$ amplifier to them or the other way round.
Wait, but can you redo the test outside on a sunny day? I'm pretty sure that for a phone size sensor, this environment is a low light one, this test needs to be done in a bright condition
Let’s be real, most phone camera users don’t know anything about lighting and are probably taking pictures in less than ideal lighting environments 80% of the time. And yet Apple’s advertisement makes it sound like anyone can take amazing photos under any condition. Just like he said in the video, it’s the talent, writer, lighting, etc, that made that weekend video look good, not the iPhone. But the advertisement made it sound like it was basically 100% the iPhone; and that “you can film something like this too, just get an iPhone”. It’ll only lead to disappointment when people realize it takes way more effort and knowledge than simply buying a new phone. The point of the video isn’t to say “iPhone cameras are garbage”. The point is that Apple’s advertisements are misleading at best. They’re designed to fool people who know nothing about cameras; which is probably over 90% of their consumers. No photographer will take their advertisement seriously at face value. But what about everyone else? How many people now think that the phone in their pocket is *actually* just as good, or even better than a professional camera? *That* is the issue and point Tony is trying to make. iPhone cameras are great, but not as mind-blowingly amazing as they advertise.
@kevinwang7894 I completely agree with you. But I also think this video is misleading in a way, because in a good light condition that 48mpx raw is actually good, of course not as good as bigger camera but is not this terrible like shown in the video. I just think, as a reviewer, you should show this phone camera in all conditions, and let the viewers see the full picture. I don't know, just my opinion, I would have loved to see in this video also a comparison in a good light.
I'm just an average guy who is looking for a great new phone and I've tried all the latest Samsung Galaxy phones and now I'm moving forward to try an iphone for the first time ever. I'm going to purchase a new iphone 16 pro this week
Tony’s point isn’t to boycott Apple, just don’t expect the marketing BS about it being pro quality to be true. The 16 Pro is probably a great phone, just not a pro camera
I can't confirm that, I've done extensive tests myself and only take photos with the main camera in 48 MP ProRAW, mainly in museums and galleries. Since Apple installed the larger Sony IMX803 in the main camera of the 14 Pro, there is a big difference compared to the previous 12 MP iPhones in terms of resolution and the results even exceed some APS-C cameras (Fuji X-Pro 1, Leica X1, Canon 500/600D with prime lenses) as the iPhone has a relatively fast and sharp lens, good image stabilization and noise reduction indoors. It is impressive what Sony achieved 2 years ago. Unfortunately, many users do not use their iPhone's camera to its full potential and shoot in 12 MP pixel binning modes or use the wrong lens.
You're comparing iphone 48mp to iphone 12mp, between these there's a difference but it doesn't mean the iphone 48mp meets the standard, that's what Tony demonstrated. What's the point of stretching a 6-12mp image to 48mp with no detail benefit? To sell you more storage both cloud and physical And even the DSLR raw could be 2 times more detailed in the same 43mp resolution. So it also doesn't meet the standards but at least it's much closer than the iphone, DSLR raw file size is easier to justify.
@@ИванИванов-я9ы8н With the 13 Pro and its 12MP, I can't achieve the same resolution as with a 48 MP quad-bayer sensor. With my DSLR and Mirorless full-frame cameras, I don't save the RAW files in the camera or permanently on the SD card. RAW files are saved and archived twice on hard disks. Anyone who buys a larger iPhone memory or iCloud for this reason takes very few photos. I also don't carry all my film negatives around with me in my camera bag. 48MP quad-bayer gives a bit more resolution in sufficient light than a 12MP smartphone sensor. And with simpler APS-C cameras, you often have neither effective image stabilization nor equivalent noise reduction for freehand indoor shots.
Tony I’m about to upgrade my iPhone, based on this video, I’m not sure whether I should just upgrade to the iPhone 14 promax or the 16 promax… mostly I’m looking for the sharpest resolution. now that you have the 16 promax, what are your thoughts? Thank you., td
Apple brings out a couple new colors and thinks that is a big deal. Then NOBODY notices a 20 percent increase in CPU power. To be noticeable to the average user the increase needs to be a least 50 percent. And then... A BUTTON as a great innovation? I am an iPhone 15 pro max user but the silly Apple hype is bugging me. Oh yes, SIRI still sucks big time and no improvement yet.
What's so bad about minor improvements every year for a product that's already pretty damn good? I mean you don't need 200 megapixels like most of the android phones have and yet they make mediocre photos compare to iPhone's 48 megapixels (and some even lose to previous 12 megapixel iPhones). The phones have gotten so much better at this point that there's not that much that you can improve. Nobody wants a damn under screen camera, I don't mind that pill shaped cutout. I don't understand what else people need from a phone. It calls, it makes GREAT photos, it has a pretty decent battery life even compare to android's with 5000 mah batteries, it has its own unique design that doesn't resemble any android phone, it's got a great powerful chip that outperforms Snapdragon most of the time (at least in benchmarks).
Agree. The iPhone is always beautiful and sleek and Apple’s ecosystem is the best! People Expect every year to have big changes. That would not be good actually bc your current phone would be so outdated. If you have a phone that is 3-4 years old, the 16 would be a good upgrade. If you have a 14 or 15, you can wait 1-2 years if you are not impressed with the 16.
I’ve been waiting to upgrade my iPhone 12 Pro Max with a broken lens for the 16… should I just get the 15? Or 14? Your video alluded to the 14 being better images? I tried taking my Sony DsLR with me when mountain biking… but it was too heavy and I walked a lot worried I’d crash & break it. But mountain biking is when I get really good photos for my work. So I was hoping 16 camera would be great. Darn! 😔 I appreciate all of your reviews!! 👍
You can take a great photo with any shit camera. Better cameras just increase your advantages and options, not everybody can instamagically benefit from those advantages. You use what works for you. If iphone works for your usage, thats gold. If your workflow is hurt by the quality difference, you start carrying around 4kg of electronics and lenses and an extra bag.
If I understood correctly, camera is delivering 100% of possible quality if you use nominal focal length of given lens. And there are 3 lenses, not more. So, if you use wide, then you get 100% quality, but between wide and 1x, you'll get crop (decreased quality). Then again 1x is fine, it's the standard lens, and then you have 5x lens. So more you zoom closer to 5x, the lower quality you get (when you reach 5x, you're switching from standard lens to tele lens and quality should be best possible for given lens). It's like this with every camera, the bad thing is that on camera app you see 2x zoom, so you're eager to use it if framing is right... but, you get decreased quality. Best is to stick to nominal focal length of given lens. Did I get it all right? Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
@@jmydythat is basically correct, there is a decent chance the lighting and focus will be better if you are cropping in on something it doesn’t recognise that it should be focused on (like taking a photo of a building rather than a face) but other than that the results will be about as good if you crop in post.
Tony, I have a special respect for you, because back in 2015, I watched your videos and learnt photography. You're an excellent teacher and a legend., ❤
Same misleading marketing applies to all of them right now. I think maybe the Sony Xperia is the only one with a 1" sensor? correct me if I'm wrong. On the go social media content and what have ya, the video capabilities on these phones very good, and I use it along side the r5+85mm. Best of both worlds.
Oh I'm quite sure they all mislead but curiosity in seeing the comparison directly would be nice from a great camera reviewer. Typical tech reviewers ways of measuring camera performance is just bleh for anyone really looking for details.
Greeeeeat video! You're the one to stand still, when all the other are on bended knees. Great job... I'm curious to know if this problem is just related to iphones, or otherwise to all smartphone photography (as I guess). You could record this video with other top-notch camera smartphone, to say: vivo x100 pro, huawei P70, oppo find x7 pro, honor magic 6 pro...
Hi nice review but I’ve some questions. At a moment you did a review of the Google pixel 7 against the iPhone 14. There the advantage of the main camera at 48mp was obvious against the Google 12mp image. Looking at this review you showed the taken image at 400% (4:30) and it seemed very good to me, was sharp. So did the 48mp IQ drop since the iPhone 14 ? Did some image tests myself and although the IQ of my iPhone 15pro couldn’t compete against my A7r5 (luckily) the resolution of the iPhone 15pro main camera was not far behind…showing more detail than my images with the A9 (24mp) or RX100m5 (20mp). Used the Sony 24mmf1.4 at f5.6 in sunny conditions. Why I did these tests, is because I’m seriously thinking for buying a Google pixel pro 8 (not the new one). And for keeping this as “an always with me alternative” when I’m in a situation that I can’t take my gear with me (even not my RX100).
Regarding camera performance, you should compare iPhone with other brands of mobile phones, not with a professional SLR camera. What if all other mobile phones are "disappointing and misleading" as well?
iPhones get slaughtered by chinese cameraphones like the Xiaomi 13 or 14 Ultra, vivo X100 Pro or X100 Ultra, Huawei Pura 70 Ultra, and an Oppo I think also got a 1" type sensor
@@mikethespike056 Nah, check DXO Mark tests. Chinese cameras are far behind, also they use all the same Sony IMX sensors, maybe beside Oppo who made 1" (still sucks donkey dong). Real race is in the software and Apple wins.
The problem is, other brands never advertise their cameras to be as good as a "pro" camera, they don't lie too often. Meanwhile Apple is just doing Apple's thing, they will tell you that their phone is god sent meanwhile it is made in China
Samsung's turn to be bashed will come around, but it's Apples turn now with the IPhone 16 series on release. Don't cry about it, just accept this as a fact.
@@neilmcguinness4422Samsung's turn will never come because this guy only understands smartphones through Apple events; once be fixes that issue he might start making actually informative videos.
While the education here is great, who in their right mind thinks a phone can replace a professional grade camera? Yes there are the masses who could care less, but the ones that do, we all know a phone can never compare. Regardless on what you think, having a phone with some quality is great for those moments you’re not carrying your professional camera.
The sad story in all this is that innovation in mobile phone technology is focused on the camera, not the phone. I don't buy a new smartphone because it has a better camera. I buy it as a communication device and if I can receive and send data reliably even in remote areas, that's what I want. Smartphones with cameras are mainstream. They have already affected camera sales downward and will unfortunately continue to do so.
they focus on camera because of social life being very big part of human beings. and phone maker cant improve your ability to call without connection in "remote areas" because they just use mobile operator towers to send data, which means no towers - no data. phone makers cant do much here.
@@ugolovniyrozysk Not so. Elon Musk has revolutionized internet access where you can get connected virtually anywhere globally because of the hundreds of low earth orbit satellites his company has positioned. Cell towers are or soon to be obsolete technology. Voice over internet is possible. I have it in my house. At the very least improve reception in the phone to provide more access.
I come to you for it all, Tony. This is the second time I’ve upgraded and found the camera performing horribly. I returned the 15 pro and I think I’ll be returning the 16 pro as well, only this time I’ll follow through on the attorney general claim I said I’d file the last time they sold consumers a less than inferior device.
I can't believe that nobody mentions this: The objects in the Sony "24mm" image are roughly 30% larger than in the iPhone image, they use an approximately 30% larger percentage of the frame. This makes the resolution of the Sony sensor appear roughly 30% better than it actually is. So, 43.4 megapixel (not sure which Sony camera this is) appears like approximately 56 megapixel here regarding the level of detail of the objects! This also increased the amount of light by approximately 30%. And afterwards, iPhone photos were compared by downsampling the approximately 56 megapixel equivalent photos, which again made the resolution of the iPhone look worse than it is because downsampling leads to sharper results at pixel level.
I have the 11 Pro and I always use the fixed lenses and never in between as I know that in between means it’s a crop. Is the 16 Pro functioning the same way or is there a genuine digital zoom in there ?
I am an old-school photographer. Taught Photography in the 70's and 80's. Bought my 35mm Camera in 1964 at Hobby Lobby, I had 50mm, 85mm,135mm, and 200mm lenses on my Kodak Retina Reflex III, Then going to Nam in the late sixties, I bought a Minolta SRT 101 SLR with the same lenses and a 28mm Lens. Lost all the cameras in the Riots in Detroit in 1970. Took lots of pictures during the war there. Started over in 1983, Bought a new Nikon F3 with the 50mm and 85mto 135m and 135. Again boutht the same lenses and Now Zoom Lenseslater bought a Nikon F3 and Sony cameras. The Lenses cost big bucks along with the f/ stop. I agree, my still photos from my cameras far exceed all, not only iPhone cameras.
I really appreciate your work pushing back on fake marketing claims. It's really hard for my to understand why there haven't been lawsuits about this since it's an industry wide practice of bullshitting these megapixels.
Any real photographer already knows that no camera phone could ever compare to a real camera. It’s like shooting film then using a low quality scanner to digitize them. It’s just crap.
Das kommt drauf an. Wer Kutschen herstellt, weiß natürlich, dass Motoren nie mit Pferden mithalten können werden. Genau dieselbe Physik verkaufen uns die Marketing-Abteilungen der Klotzkamera-Anbieter.
I love your videos. But here are two things that make me uncomfortable about this one: 1) Like you mentioned very briefly, the lens quality and sensor size do impact resolution. Couldn't this be the reason for not being able to compare favorable with a FF camera? 2) Don't all smartphone cameras have the same problems?
This is incredibly helpful to have broken down. Unfortunately I think Apple is confusing "professional" with "professionally used" as iPhone cameras can be used for and sometimes is used for professional work. But the use cases are more restrictive. People using them as B cameras and vlogging for instance. Two things I'd be really interested in: There are external lenses for iPhone that can create new native focal lengths out of the other cameras. Do those help bridge the gap? Another question is how does the iPhone stack up to budget and compact cameras? Similarly, do external lenses make the iPhone better than pocket cameras? After using a Sony A7Siii for some professional use I can't imagine traveling with something that massive, so if an iPhone is the best pocket camera I can get then I can save money.
Mate, if you want it to be as good as a professional camera, you should attach a phone to a professional camera, not attaching an average camera to a phone. It's as simple as that. I'm still baffled that some people can actually still fall for this. Yes, there are movies shot on an iPhone, but it's done for artistic purposes. You can't compare it to an ARRI, RED or a Panavision.
Well you can’t deny that the iPhone Pro models have incredible cameras, also I prefer way more to have a good camera on a phone and can do all of things with that phone plus shoot photos/videos rather than taking 100 different lenses tetraprisms garbage trash in bags full heavy equipments trash
@@jasfx7241 I very much doubt that you're a pro. It all depends on the look you are looking for. Yes, you can make pictures with a "point and shoot" camera, you can certainly use the camera of your phone daily to capture memories, nothing wrong with that, but don't fool yourself that it can bring the quality of a $13 000 camera made for shooting real production movies. It just can not. You can make all clever AI tricks that emulate the effects of having real lenses, but guess what - it will never be real. To get the REAL look, you REALLY need all that "garbage". You can't have your cake and eat it too. There's no free lunch. I'm not saying that your family pictures should look like a Hollywood production, I'm just saying that what they claim isn't real.
I do not know what you did in your tests but if I compare the 12mp iphone 15 pro max 24mm image with an A7S III 12 mpx image with a 24mm lense it has exactly the same amount of detail. iPhone looks even a bit more detailed cause of the contrast tricks they use in the processing pipeline but overall it is the same amount of detail. How you come up with 6mp of detail in the 48 mp or regular 12 mp. I do not understand. What did you do there… It also seems unlogical that the 12 mp sensor (even if much smaller) has less detail with proper lighting… (that 48 is less detailed is of course feasible).
There are many factors in image sharpness. The a7S III is an incredibly unsharp camera because it's video focused and has a heavy AA-filter to reduce moire. Of course, your lens can reduce sharpness, too, depending on which lens you're using.
A fantastic review & one that should make you aware that a phone camera will never replace a real camera! Totally agree with Tony’s comments regarding Apple to work with the camera manufacturers rather than against them!👍🏼🙏
Go to squarespace.com/Tony & save 10% off your first website or domain with code “Tony"
The best part of Apple died with Steve jobs....so did the innovation.
Tony, you and I are old enough to remember the days when Apple was synonymous with innovation and quality, under Steve Jobs' leadership. Under Tim Cook, the focus seems to have shifted towards marketing and hype. Despite this, Apple's revenue reached a staggering $96.99 billion last year, proving the effectiveness of their marketing strategies.
It’s unlikely that Apple will change its trajectory anytime soon, as long as their products continue to sell. However, there's always a chance that consumers may eventually tire of the marketing and stop supporting them. When that happens, Apple might be forced to pay closer attention to customer feedback, innovation and truly benefits the people who's putting money on their pockets.
I find it very intriguing that someone with your background and knowledge continues to fall for Apple's marketing and keeps feeding the machine 🤔
It will always be that way due the phone being limited in space. R&D teams & Marketing working together plays a huge part as well, as consumers with little understanding of sensors (like me) we just give up and believe more is better. I am only upgrading as my phone is now 4 years old. If only apple bought sigma. I believe they had the best sensor design, I think it was called faveon or something. Sd14/sd15. Only 3mp but image quality was amazing! Been away from DSL for sometime now😢
It’s HEIC not HACK 🤦🤦🤦🤦
Compare it with the Samsung Galaxy s24 ultra
Tony can tell it like it is because he isn't a phone reviewer, isn't invited to Apple events and doesn't get free phones, so he's got nothing to lose
This guy is straight up lying. The iPhone comparison shots with the real camera have been taken in indoor lighting which is not fair, since the iPhone camera is struggling and fighting with the indoor noise compared to the real camera which got a bigger sensor and is therefore not fighting against noise as much as the iPhone does. He should’ve compared them outdoors.
Secondly the 5x zoom camera on iPhone 15 pro max is indeed better than the 3x zoom 14 pro max if u zoom out further than 5x.
And thirdly the 48mp camera mode on the iPhone is indeed sharper than the 12mp mode, bunch of RUclipsrs have compared and proven that.
BTW: why does this guy always rant against Apple? Isn’t Samsung and all the other android manufacturers the ones that created 200mp phone cameras long time ago? 🙄🙄.
@denissssss8579 that's dumb, why should he only compares them outdoor? Does Apple say "our camera is only usable on outdoor"? No.
The fact is Apple is taking advantage of the general public who doesn't have photography knowledge and lead them to believe their deceitful marketing terms.
Yes the same goes for Samsung and many other brands, but maybe Tony doesn't use them and couldn't judge them fairly?
@@GP996_LB I don't think Apple is trying to replace Sony mirrorless cameras with lenses that cost more than the phone. THey are trying to best the previous iphone. Most epople use these images for social media, small prints, or display on a TV. He should be comparing the new phone cameras to previous phone cameras. That would make more sense.
@@denissssss8579 You haven't watched the video? Did Apple ever marketed 48MP as an outdoor only resolution? Tony points out the huge quality gap between the 1x and 5x magnification, which most people use. After 5x, quality will be higher, but at 3x, or at any popular focal length such 75mm, 85mm or 105, the old 14 Pro takes much better quality photos compared to the new phones. Bunch of youtubers get paid for that. They compare only 12MP and 48MP iPhone photos. They never compare with an actual 12MP or 48MP photo like Tony did here. Advertising 48MP camera but it only has 6MP details. This is fooling customers. He used a tripod setup in this video for taking photos, in that case, Apple does auto night mode processing to improve details, still it came with only 6MP details. If used handheld, it would be even lower.
@@Category5You’re missing the point…
I've always used the Iphone as you've suggested - as three prime lenses that you never crop. The issue with the Iphone 15 Pro Max / Iphone 16 Pro's is there is too much gap between 1x and 5x. That means lots of zooming with your feet between 1x and 5x. That's fine if you realize the limitations. I agree that the 3x zoom is a more useful focal length. Good video.
Interested! Never looked at it like that
yeah did he say in this video that the 3x on the 14 pro is better than the 3x on the 15 pro? of course it is you arent using the 5x lens you are in the in-between whereas the 14 you've moved on to its telephoto lens... pretty dumb chart he showed if im reading it correctly. at 5x the 15 is obviously more mp than the 14.
Funny that most Android manufacturers find out about that issue back then when they r still experimenting with zoom camera. Nowadays most have a 3x zoom and a 5x+ zoom so such issues would be minimise
I actually have a phone like this and use it all the time. I have both a Samsung Note Ultra 20 and Iphone 13Pro. The Samsung has a 5x zoom. It's good at 5x (of course) but struggles otherwise (1x and .5x also work well as it has 3 lenses). Once again, I use them as primes, and the gap between 1x and 5x is too great. I don't use it for photography very much, but really love the pen and use it as my business phone. I use the Iphone most of the time for day to day photography.
Note that I am a professional photographer and use Nikon mirrorless for professional work. I also frequently use a Sony ZV-1 for non-client work. It's a nice video camera that takes surprisingly good stills. Because it's so compact, I often have it available when I want a little better quality in low light.
@@789knowno they dont. I've had a number of phones this year and only the Samsungs had a 3x alongside a tele
More megapixels means Apple can sell you more iCloud storage 😂
Annd a price increase effective Oct 5 smh
Use Google photos! Far better search tools and cross platform.
A compressed HEIC 24MP photo is literally the same size as it’s always been.
exactly. well said
Or you could just not buy an iPhone.
Thank you for this awesome video! But I'm confused. The title refers to iPhone 16, but the video seems to be talking about the iPhone 15. Is the iPhone 16 better than the iPhone 15 examples in this video?
It appears that what Apple have you doing is taking a 12MP image and quadrupling the pixels. Its not pixel shifting the sensor in these situations. You end up with bigger files with seemingly no real gain in image sharpness. I love my iPhone and as a person that has ‘real’ cameras the iPhone for obvious reasons is the camera I use most often. What Apple are doing incentivises me to stay with my iPhone 13 pro as it takes 12MP images and that is what you get. As with any phone stick to the ‘prime’ focal lengths, compose, watch your lighting and you get great results. Let’s not get deceived by megapixel marketing hype, my first DSLR was 6MP and I still consider some of the images I took to be wonderful.
The images are binned from 48MP down to 12MP not the other way around, this video is full of errors. If you Google Quad Bayer sensor you'll get a better explanation of how this works, and what the benefits are.
The guy that made this video gives misleading information which is ironic as he accuses Apple of being misleading, but in reality he's just a bit clueless. I'd recommend getting your information from more credible sources than this channel.
This is not true. The 48MP of a quad Bayer sensor are indeed true 48MP. The small lens of the iphone just cant resolve the detail properly. Also, 48MP on such a small sensor results in some artifacts which need to be fixed by computational processing.
@@Skullet true, this whole video made me barf. How can people buy this BS, I am not a subscriber and I know this channel from the times I had a Canon Rebel T1i back in 2010. It was always like this, the information wasn't concise and mostly it was very opinionated. I saw this video because RUclips algorithm told me to and what I thought of this channel still holds true, impressive.
I own an iPhone 15 Pro and yes, even when compared to my old T1i, the T1i produces sharper images, but the T1i is not as versatile as the iPhone I agree, but the comparison here was abhorrent, all clout for views and it seems to be working.
Deceiving as ever....
Physics can't be beat
It can be beaten by magic.
Magic is fake 😅
it can be beaten by computational photography in some circumstances. Compare the "fake" bokeh an iphone creates using it's computational aperture adjustments and compare results to your kit camera lens. an iphone can't compare to an expensive 1.4 prime, but it can certainly hold its own against a kit lens as long as you're not pixel peeking.
@@محمدالعربي-ن9ل1نMagic is science we don’t understand 😅
egg-zactly. 🙄
This line got me. "They're not your enemies,work with them to produce better images" at 14:28
This is Apple's MO across so many areas though. Control and manipulation through technical friction and a web or lies painted into fashion and perception
"Our 8 GB ram is 16 GB ram"
Or way back:
"You need our PowerPC because it's faster than intel"
And then:
"You need intel because it's faster than PowerPC"
@@mipmipmipmipmip-v5x "4.5 inch is the perfect screen size and we won't go bigger "
🤣
This is awesome. Makes my old dslr feel a bit more relevant 😂
6D will never die!
Hahaha my teenage daughter is amazed that my Nikkon D40 6MP dslr that I bought when she was 2yrs old produce better pictures than her iPhone 15😅
A 15 yo dSLR will always be better than the latest iPhone.
All cameras, any camera: one of the most important aspects other than the person controlling the camera, is the size of the sensor.
Not one single smartphone on the market has the sensor size. Add in items such as the depth of the camera (because optic depth is actually important), and also the size (top to bottom) of the lens. Smartphones are usually limited to screen only presentations. Try to print it, and most images do not print well - especially when people are the main subjects of the photos.
Nothing can beat real glass.
Agree Tony with all your comments. Apple rule and many people never question Apple. No phone will ever match a real camera..Apple will never admit that though.
I love the honest and thorough review. I upgraded from 13 Pro to 16 Pro and was very disappointed with the quality of the photos, so I returned it.
I once had a similar conversation with a friend and the entire 3x vs 5x lens discussion was stuck at "but 5x zoom is more than 3x zoom." And since then I've got the attitude of if a company can sell the same thing (or, in this case, a worse thing) to consumers over and over again since they don't want to think then who am I to tell them no. There's obviously enough people buying it every year that I end up looking like a crazy person for speaking up against it, it sounds like a psychological experiment to be honest.
I got one for the battery life, better screen and the carrier paying for most of it for signing a new contract for phone service I was going to pay for anyway. The cameras are meh but they’re in your pocket when you’re not carrying something better.
Apple's iPhone camera marketing always is pretty, um, creative. That said, I think I'm going to get one. It's a substantial upgrade from my 11, and there's always my real cameras.
I’m considering a new battery for my 11 instead of getting the 16 pro max I’ve been waiting for and waiting another year. I’m embarrassed to admit I was thinking this rumoured (now reality) ultra wide 48 megapixel meant I might be able to leave my full frame at home when trying to travel light. The second I saw the pixel pitch of the ultra wide compared to the main camera I new that idea went out the window
@@stephennowlan2637 Yeah, I definitely have given keeping my 11, with a new battery (it's gotten pretty weak) some consideration, and I'm still not absolutely certain I'll actually order the 16 Pro Max tomorrow. I'm disappointed by the camera, too, though I still think it would be nice for other reasons. Argh!
@@stephennowlan2637 I used to think my iPhone 11 was a good camera and then I got the iPhone 15 Pro which proved that it is. I love the extra reach of the iPhone 15 pro, but still really impressed with the iPhone 11. I teach photography and print to a wide format printer, so I'm picky,
Thanks for calling them out Tony 😮
This guy is straight up lying. The iPhone comparison shots with the real camera have been taken in indoor lighting which is not fair, since the iPhone camera is struggling and fighting with the indoor noise compared to the real camera which got a bigger sensor and is therefore not fighting against noise as much as the iPhone does. He should’ve compared them outdoors. Secondly the 5x zoom camera on iPhone 15 pro max is indeed better than the 3x zoom 14 pro max if u zoom out further than 5x. And thirdly the 48mp camera mode on the iPhone is indeed sharper than the 12mp mode, bunch of RUclipsrs have compared and proofed that.
BTW: why does this guy always rant against Apple? Isn’t Samsung and all the other android manufacturers the ones that create 200mp phone cameras? 🙄🙄……
@@denissssss8579why do you care, let him rant
@@sephiroth4543 because i as an Apple enthusiast feel insulted.
@@denissssss8579 Me too, I love DSLR cameras and I have the IPhone 15 Pro Max. Obviously he will always be slightly biased towards the camera but we need a third party to verify both takes. His take and what Apple say etc.
What I will not forgive is Apple using 60hz screen in 2024. Unbelievable. They need to make the base IPhones at least 120hz.
@@denissssss8579no body said Samsung is better he is just calling iphone out. When s25 comes out if they lie they should be called out too. .. not everything is apple vs android
Wait, I’m revisiting this video and I’m confused. The title says the iPhone 16 is the one that is disappointing. But you keep showing photos taken with the 15. Are these issues fixed in the 16? Can you clarify?
So in total which iPhone is best for cinematic video handheld run and gun without gimbal and crispy photos under 5X ?
Which phone would be even better than 16 pro for that usecase for travel purpose too? By the way I had 13 before and loved the rendering
let's be honest, i dont think anyone buying the new iphones would want to become professional photographers.. as long as the camera is not blurry and can take pictures and videos to preserve priceless memories, that's enough.. is the hefty price tag justifiable? heck no... but that's the way things work now... even groceries costs more than they once did so what do you expect... bottomline is, if you wanna buy the new phone and have the money for it, then buy it.. if you don't like the phone, then don't... simple as that...
I don't know that i'd call Apple an "American manufacturer." An American company, but all manufacturing happens overseas.
100% agree with you. The primary manufacturer of iPhones is Foxconn in China. Apple in the USA designs the phones and collects the insane profit margins.
kinda depends on what you mean my "manufacturer." Everyone would acknowledge that Ford is an American manufacturer, but they really only have 5 plants in the US. Most of Ford's manufacturing plants are in Mexico, Canada and China. if your definition of "american manufacturer" means that all parts/components were made in the US, designed in the US and assembled in the US, I'd suggest there are no "american manufacturers" at all left.
Basically thriving on Chinese slaves labor (I'm not exaggerating there are videos of Chinese workers fleeing from foxconn climbing over fences to escape). Sure it's a new form of slavery, don't take the word too literally but it's absolutely a form of slavery
@@mattsmith3135 given your logic, Foxconn technically doesn't manufacture anything - they take parts/components that other manufacturers like apple (chips); qualcomm (wireless); screens (samsung) manufacture and assembles them all together like a puzzle in a plant in China.
@@1970rsc I think you make a good, valid point. In the case of Apple, they don't manufacture any of the components themselves nor do they do the assembly, so they are literally manufacturing nothing. They don't own the offshore factories that manufacture those components either (unlike Ford's offshore factories). Screens come from Samsung, CPUs come from TSMC, camera sensors come from Sony, assembly by Foxconn, etc etc.
i respect Tony for this. hes the only one who looks past the fancy camera button and showcases all the lies in the marketing.
Honestly Tony is a treasure for technical photography and photography gear community (yes I just invented that). But I am serious, over the years Tony contributed immensely to people at least understanding how photography and photography gear actually work
Respect him for what? During iPhone 16/Plus/Pro/Pro Max Keynote Apple never stated that new iPhone’s camera is somewhat better or comparable to DSLR / MILC.
Tony is just a spurned year on year upgrade dork. He’s upset because his consumerism compels him to purchase despite his gripes, but he is somehow wishing he were getting more.
No serious photographer or educated tech enthusiast expects an iPhone to produce an image comparable to a Nikon Z8.
The audience for this video is Tony and Tony alone.
@@asyetundetermined the audience for this video is most people who think a phone can provide similar results as a camera. I used to think as such. The more people realize you can't beat physics, it would be better for all. Apple marketing is trickery.
@@asyetundetermined can’t agree more with what you’ve just said. Also as far as I remember Tony already did similar video for previous generation iPhone.
And also we all photographers should keep in mind it’s not the camera that gets the shot done (camera is the only technical side) it’s the photographer in the end. Sometimes (or for some - most of the time) camera doesn’t matter so much, unless you’re doing advertising, macro, fashion, landscape or other photography genres where details and sharpness are expected. Sometimes you can do damn good street art on just an iPhone, but ofc big camera can give you some benefits impossible with mobile camera.
I recently completed a short documentary about a historic mining town, starting off with a Panasonic Camcorder and a Canon 7D 35mm camera. Midway through the project, my daughter, who lives in LA, joined me to assist with the filming. She brought along her iPhone 14 Pro Max, which matched mine, and we used them alongside the Canon as backups.
One scene took us deep into a mine, about 1000 feet in and just as deep-total darkness except for our headlamps. I was filming with the Canon, while my daughter captured footage on her iPhone, using mine as a backup. After reviewing all the footage, it was clear that the iPhones outperformed the Canon, especially in low-light conditions. Most of the best shots came from the iPhones, while many of the Canon's shots were cut due to poor quality.
This experience plus my past history on using iPhones has made me an iPhone believer for a long time. I just ordered the new iPhone 16 Pro Max and couldn’t be more excited. I’ve always trusted Apple for my computers, and now I’m convinced their iPhones are unbeatable for filmmaking too.
A Canon 7D?!? Yeah I'm not surprised an iPhone 14 could beat a 15 year old camera. Lol. The 7D suffered from horribly low detail, rolling shutter and aliasing. Try that same glass you were using on any sensor made in the last 5 years by Sony, Panasonic, Canon, etc and see who wins.
Comparing 48 MP full frame camera to a 48 MP (almost) 1” camera.
What are you after?! This video is bogus!
I’m stunned that now a phone has the same resolution as an analog fine grain 35 mm film.
Where is your comparison of 120 MP mobile camera to Hasselblad X2D?! 😂
Yes... is like you compare a Truck with a Bicycle and both have same horse power.
You would be stunned how much detail 35mm film can have when using a sharp lens. Especially at lower ISO, 35mm is very very detailed.
Have you seen whole video? Tony is just calling marketing BS by comparing images. Great video.
Its all about the marketing that a phone can replace a professional camera. And we all know its a lie, but they keep pushing it.
@@sensoraway But, but, but, my pics get likes on social media when my friends see them on their tiny little phone screens...
All phone cameras are like this. Physics. It's all computational imaging.
The problem is the marketing, making misleading and downright dishonest claims.
Wouldn't Topaz Gigapixel AI do a better job of up-resing images.
@@ericlamont4130 You cannot really mislead anyone with a keen interest in photography with this. All of us know a phone cannot match a professional camera. However, a person with no special interest in photography will get better pictures by shooting on an iPhone than with any kind of "real" camera in full Auto mode, 'cause that's what they're going to use.
@@ericlamont4130well, not only it works 95% of public absolutely buy it
It is what it is
@@ericlamont4130 The only truly misleading and dishonest claims made about phone cameras have been from Huawei, twice, using DSLR images to promote their phone cameras.
Other than that, it's been usually phone manufacturers sprinkling in fancy words to sell phone to people who are not in the market for a $2000 camera.
All (semi) pro photographers know that iPhones can't beat their pro cameras. I think Tony wants to attract a couple of new subscribers outside the photography world....and that's totally fine :) As a photographer I think it's great that I don't need a seperate "point a shoot camera" when I don't have my gear with me. I think smartphone and their "software cameras" are a very interesting development to watch.
I was being my Canon G7X point and shoot camera at it completely destroys my iPhone and all my friends iPhone in any situation especially at night when there people and a good quality flash is needed. Even in the day a strong fill flash from a Canon G7X does wonders to eliminate shadows from faces even the Canon S95 smaller point and shoot blows away any iPhone camera in quality and night shots.and I will never ever sell those point and shoot cameras it will take apple 20 years to catch up.
Yes. It’s just a typical buzzword / contrarian YT title meant to garner views. Nothing new. Everybody knows, including Tony behind camera, that an iPhone and most smartphones are barely passable as hobby grade.
I think its extremely important. Less than 2 years ago i couldnt have had a single idea of why my iphone images looked bad without just thinking it was a lack of “megapixels”.
Excellent and convincing presentation of the mega misleading 48MP camera results! Such a disappointing marketing trick! Again, I take my hat off for you Tony! Please keep up your very good work! (Btw, am still impressed by your first RUclips videos that I happen to recently re-watch! Excellent facts you generously share with us your many followers! Stay blessed you and your whole family and loved ones! Best regards from Sweden!) 💯👍🙏👌💖
He clearly has no idea what he’s talking about when it comes to sensor tech. A quad Bayer sensor is not “marketing”. It does indeed have 48MP.
@@axgrf Thank you for stating this. Someone that actually understands the Bayer filter and know that demosaicing process dictates this. Also why is he comparing two different classes of sensors on here. Full-frame, APS-C, micro four-thirds e.t.c will give different crop format for a full frame and the type of Bayer filter array method used matters. This is just so misleading that it even makes legit points he makes irrelevant. People need to understand here that he is making false claims as his basis for his arguments are seriously flawed. If he wanted to compare this to something closer, he can get point and shoot cameras or other mobile phones with similar sensor sizes and start from there. No disclaimer or anything or even stating the obvious difference of sensor size. He makes it seem like he is comparing an equal sensor size in an iPhone (a mobile phone) to an equal sensor size in an SLR with the huge lens he showed in the video. Looking through the comments, only very few caught on his propaganda. This is not to defend iPhone but rather to enlighten people to better understand the other technicalities in photography that affect the outcome of a photograph.
Man, you put into the caption that this is iPhone 16 camera meanwhile it is iPhone 15. You did it for the same reason you criticized Apple, more numbers on your video and they got more sales. You lied more than Apple with theirs marketing
Actually isn't a changeable aperture on iPhone more important than the pixels? Seeing many others already have that equipped.
@@dawebslave3571 People don't understand aperture so it's difficult to sell. More megapixels and "more lenses in your pocket" sounds better.
@@dawebslave3571it isn’t. Changeable aperture will mostly degrade the resolution of the tiny lens then adding something. It can help on video to get lower shutter speed when its too much light, but thats it
Imagine he replied "oh sorry, it's hard to distinguish them as they're basically the same", that would be hilarious
Uh the point of this video went WELL over your head. Also with camera reviews finally out, it turns out this is still true. Stop defending a multi-trillion dollar tech company please.
I feel like the video disrespects its audience. What photography enthusiast who comes to a channel like this one actually believes all the event hype around smartphones? We can't possibly be that ignorant. Even among the rookies, we all have our own smartphones, with their limited dynamic range and blown-out highlights, as proof that they don't compare to big rigs.
Tony you never mentioned if you switched the iphone camera to true 48mpx mode (proraw max) or were you testing in default 12mpx mode? I have compared my iphone 13 pro max with my friend's 14 pro max in true 48 mpx mode and the difference in res was plainly obvious
He uses dng from the iPhone in his comparisons so yes he is using the « true 48mpx mode »
He says at 7:06 that he is using “Apple’s DNG format, the highest quality RAW format.”
@@EmersetFarquharson Bei Kameras, die die hohe Bildqualität über das Zusammensetzen mehrerer Bilder erzielen, ein billiges Einzel-DNG-RAW zu nutzen ist so was von dilettantisch. Es zeigt aber, dass die Nerven bei den Herstellern der Klötzer blank liegen.
apple 6mm focal length is actually the megapixel, they got the labels wrong.
🤣
This guy is straight up lying. The iPhone comparison shots with the real camera have been taken in indoor lighting which is not fair, since the iPhone camera is struggling and fighting with the indoor noise compared to the real camera which got a bigger sensor and is therefore not fighting against noise as much as the iPhone does. He should’ve compared them outdoors. Secondly the 5x zoom camera on iPhone 15 pro max is indeed better than the 3x zoom 14 pro max if u zoom out further than 5x. And thirdly the 48mp camera mode on the iPhone is indeed sharper than the 12mp mode, bunch of RUclipsrs have compared and proofed that.
BTW: why does this guy always rant against Apple? Isn’t Samsung and all the other android manufacturers the ones that create 200mp phone cameras? 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄
@@denissssss8579 you didnt listen to what he said. 48mp would be sharper than 12mp on the same phone. thats not the point. the point is, 48mp iphone is not sharper than 12mp real camera.
the 3x is more useful for most scenarios, if you're between 3x - 4.9x the iphone 16 image is horrible.
hes comparing both cameras raw files, so its fair. but sure it may perform ok outdoors but still it wouldn't be any better than a real camera.
@@denissssss8579get more views and likes if you make videos calling out Apple marketing
@@denissssss8579that’s not a resolution issue
If Sony/Canon/etc. integrated half of the non-image related features from the iPhone (theft detection/encryption, backup, etc) that Tony mentioned, they would be a huge step ahead of the other companies. The better quality of a big camera just doesn't outweigh the convenience of having those types of features on my phone. Sure a pro would scoff at that idea, but most people aren't pros.
Just the other day I was telling the wife NOT to use the zoom on her iPhone, just click 0.5, 1, or 3 and move forwards or backwards until she gets the shots she wants - I got that advice from Tony! I'm happy with my 14 ProMax, except for the lightning connector. That is not worth upgrading over, so for the first time I think I won't upgrade and get a cheaper BYOD phone plan, thank you very much.
iphones are really mini computers these days, so incorporating the features in a phone to a camera would require additional processing power equivalent to a phone. The end result would be that you'd have a camera on the market that costs 2x more than the competition with equivalent results. that might work for products like cell phones where convenience and usability are the primary factor in buying, but I doubt that'll work in cameras, where image quality and price are the primary drivers in consumers.
@@1970rsc They wouldn't replace standard cameras of course, but could use to supplement them. SoC's are common these days, putting some logic into an existing camera body need not be an expensive proposition, it's up to the manufacturer to make that choice. Battery life takes a hit of course, but the type of person who would be attracted to this type of product are used to it. Yes photographers won't get much of a benefit since they don't care about convenience apparently, but the creators who use DSLRs would get a benefit since it would improve their workflow. The market isn't as large I understand, but until then people will just put their phones on a gimbal instead of trying to use DSLRs.
@@matt_kelly I didn't think about content creators as part of the camera market, but what you said about that is true. I don't do videos, but I'd assume the work flow is different since they aren't taking 1000s of pictures, but rather, hours of footage broken down into 2-3 min segments that has to be handled different...like a puzzle that fits together instead of 1000 stand alone images. Sony has that ZV-1 camera that looks like a video first/photo second hybrid. Maybe they'll add more "convenience" features into that camera in the next generation if there's a market for it.
@@1970rsc Yeah content creators are a different market than pro photographers, I think they would be interested in something that has similar (or even less) conveniences of a phone, but with better image quality. The ZV-1 camera is an interesting product for that, and is being marketed as such. As you say, I guess we will have to see what the market is for it.
I'm not a pro photographer. For my wife and I, the better quality of a big camera far, far outweighs theft detection/encryption, backup, etc. Most that can be had in other ways with a big camera if they are important (in our case they are not important).
People watching the videos and top trending photos will be perfectly fine with image quality from iPhone 16.
Apple didn't advertise iPhone as a replacement for long-range wild-life photography or for taking picture of words on a paper across the street. lol
Thank you very much for this honest review!
I didn't know about the cropping factor of the iPhone 15 Pro Max and both 16 Pro models untill seeing your video, nor did I ever saw anyone else talking about this in other reviews. I am thinking about upgrading to an iPhone 16 Pro from an iPhone 12 mini but your video made me somehow sceptical. Given the facts, would you even say that the iPhone 15 Pro base model camera is superior to that of the 15 Pro Max and both 16 Pro models due to the cropping issue?
the day apple would have a real camera's 48-megapixel image quality, they would crop in a 100x and call it some fancy words.
“The Moonshot”
Introducing iPhone 18 Pro Max | Reach New Heights
The revolutionary new feature of the iPhone 18: the 100x zoom with a stunning 96MP camera. This feature allows users to capture ultra-detailed, high-resolution images even from extreme distances, bringing the unreachable within reach. The campaign takes inspiration from the idea of shooting for the moon, both literally and metaphorically, positioning the iPhone 18 as a device that pushes the boundaries of what’s possible in mobile photography.
I don’t think I’ll upgrade to the latest iPhone this year. Previous years I use to upgrade my iPhone because of the camera improvements but this year I got me a full frame camera and I really don’t see a need to upgrade this year.
I got the iPhone 15 Pro, it is pretty good (I got the regular Pro over the Pro Max based on Tony's recommendation last year), and I got it for the Camera and USB-C port. The USB-C port is a big upgrade and has allowed capabilities with other systems that I didn't except (like being able to stream 4K and full surround sound to my AVR). I still have my Sony A7CR
Yeah I agree the iPhone 15 pro was a good upgrade because of the usb c port but this year not so much unless you’re upgrading from an older phone and you don’t have or like to use a real camera. I would say don’t upgrade unless you have to have the latest and greatest tech.
I'm still on an 11 pro and have been content. I hate the phone ergonomics for taking photos, and even adding buttons is not going to help me on that.
Hey guys, wondered if you could help? Am I actually getting a camera upgrade by going from the 12 Pro to 16 Pro? If so, by how much?
I have a sony a7iv, still use my phone 95% of the time
Why won't they be honest with their customers and say it's good for a phone instead of the 48-megapixel nonsense.
Because that’ll open up the door for competition to post numbers that beat theirs, and if they have to prove their case with data, they’ll expose the methods that prove why they’re so much worse than real cameras - and why some peer phone cameras might be a better choice for some (different balance of lenses, different image processing).
MP is resolution and it is 48MP… higher numbers never made cameras good, which is why iPhones stuck with 12MP for so long when Androids had moved on. Anyone with half a brain should understand phone cameras will never match a real DSLR etc. Even my ancient budget T2i destroys modern phones lol
waait until you hear about samsung 200 mp
This guy is straight up lying. The iPhone comparison shots with the real camera have been taken in indoor lighting which is not fair, since the iPhone camera is struggling and fighting with the indoor noise compared to the real camera which got a bigger sensor and is therefore not fighting against noise as much as the iPhone does. He should’ve compared them outdoors. Secondly the 5x zoom camera on iPhone 15 pro max is indeed better than the 3x zoom 14 pro max if u zoom out further than 5x. And thirdly the 48mp camera mode on the iPhone is indeed sharper than the 12mp mode, bunch of RUclipsrs have compared and proofed that.
BTW: why does this guy always rant against Apple? Isn’t Samsung and all the other android manufacturers the ones that create 200mp phone cameras? 🙄🙄☹️
@@denissssss8579why are you copying and pasting and replying to every comment? Does it bother you so much?
thank you for being the first one doing this side by side comparison, teaching people the difference between heavy post processing and actual resolution
Even I can see that soon the iPhone will take a crappy phone pic, but the software will identify and digitally reconstruct(make up) the background and subject in glorious IA beauty. Then megapixels wont matter. If the rest of you can't see this coming, you're blind.
@@forrestunderwood3174 I am sure AI will be used more and more to improve image quality doing things a small sensor can't achieve, but this is impacting realism and photos are already looking less and less natural. the solution to photo's overprocessing problem, is not to process them more. people in the future may like more imperfect and less artificial looking pictures.
@@forrestunderwood3174 I am sure AI will be used more and more to improve image quality, this is impacting already how natural the photo looks. the solution to photos' overprocessing is not more processing. maybe people from the future will start liking straight of camera pictures, with some imperfections and so more character.
@@forrestunderwood3174 Die sehen das schon. Genau deswegen wird doch solche Comedy geschaltet. Die glauben, dass wir es nicht sehen.
I've got a TON of Apple stuff. I'm appalled by Apple's deceptive marketing, but since my iPhone 12 is getting long in the tooth, I'll probably grab a 16 Pro. I generally take my R6 Mk II with me most of the time, but my phone is literally ALWAYS on me. I agree with you Tony, that Apple should really try collaborating with a camera/lens manufacturer(s) to get their sensors and optics improved. Hopefully one day, they will.
Sony gibt ziemlich viel Geld dafür aus, damit die Leute nicht mitkriegen, was moderne Smartphone-kameras heute können, finden Sie nicht auch?
I am a photographer and I refuse to switch from an iPhone 11 Pro Max to 16 Because there doesn’t seem to be a lot of changes. And I will say this again. A iPhone camera will NEVER be able to match the level of detail of a big DSLR Camera. Simple
I have the 14 pro max and The 11 pro max pics honestly looked way better.
wont compare it with DSLR, but all I want for iPhone is to fix the problem of its lens inner reflection or flare whatever its called.
Whenever you point to light source at night or sunset, there are light dots.
you are so brainwashed. even 13 pro max will be a huge upgrade. and 14 or 15 or 16 (all 48mpx main lens) are ages ahead of the 11th generation
@@sunlit777 no bro. Only big sensors, more light, more natural depth of field. Other than that everything is just software which includes that fake portraits video. And only a 3X telephoto lens and an ultra wide with Auto Focus. Which I mean who will use that. 😂 iPhone 11 Pro Max is the one and only best iPhone upgrade since iPhone 6 and after that everything is just minor upgrades. I think you are the one who is brainwashed. 😂
@@HarnaiDigital I have just told you that there was a huge leap in resolution between 13 pro max and 14 pro max. Yours is an old generation I don't even want to remember, I had all iphones since 4s and I've taken thousands of pics with each generation
They say they use more megapixels and bin them down to usable size. But if the sensor is tiny, having double the pixels and binning down is exactly the same as if it had bigger (less) pixels
Spot on
Yes and no. For the software magic to happen the pixel binning may be useful, as it makes it easier in post to make the image look cleaner (pixel prediction etc). But if you take shots with an app that produces real raw files, the truth is disappointing, or the software magic gets even more magical... I would like to see more of this true megapixel videos with at least Samsung s24u and the pixel 9 pro. Thank you for this one Toni.
It's physics. An area of sensor will be able to receive a certain amount of light. Whether a manufacturer decides to make that area into a 1000000 mp sensor or a 1 mp sensor is up to them. There's always a sweet spot to sensor size vs resolution for any sensor generation and I would think the top 'real' camera manufacturers would've got it spot on. When the full frame cameras with a sensor likely 20-30 times bigger than the ones in the cellphones have 40-50 mp, the cellphone mp count is already likely too high and out of the sweet spot.
Sagen die das? Wo?
Man kann auch ein hoch aufgelöstes 48 Mpx Foto mit einem 12 Mpx mit Hoher Dynamik kombinieren und im Ergebnis ein sehr scharfes 12 Mpx Bild mit hoher Dynamik erzielen.
Das geht aber nur mit modernen Kameras.
It's true that there isn't much difference compared to the iPhone 15, but I think it's worth waiting for the iPhone 16 Pro Max and switching. Just for the 4K at 120 frames per second, it's worth it-plus, let's not forget that all of this is in HDR, and the video quality we know from Apple is top-notch.
The differences may be minimal, but they're worth it.
I was wondering why my 6 year old Leica D-lux was producing amazingly better photos than my iPhone 15 pro max, but then again I'm not a pro photographer. This video was very enlightening.
I personally like having the iPhone as a compact daily easy to use camera. I don’t expect it to produce professional grade photos and videos. I just want my pictures to look great as opposed to be billboard size fantastic.
Did I miss something? It looks like tests of the IPhone 15 Pro, and not the 16 pro. So which is it?
What do you think? is there any big difference in camera from iPhone models one after another? Some were opposite.
Thanks Tony! Revelatory as usual. I've owned all the iPhone Pro Max models from the 11 Pro Max on. Liked the addition to shoot in log, but as you noted some of the other "great new features" weren't that great like "action mode". Undecided about the 16 Pro Max. Thanks again.
I like this style of review. So which phone is best for photography and video recording right now on the market according to your tests?
More people need to hear this. I only recently switched to iPhone 15 pro max and was very,very disappointing. My sim card only last 3 days in this phone.
In theory, these 48mpx quad-pixel sensors should yield 48mpx of edge resolution (i.e., luminance resolution) but only 12mpx color resolution. The fact that they don't give us 48mpx of edge resolution is probably down to the huge difference in lens quality between the iPhone cameras and the pro camera.
Yeah, I think Tony is a bit misleading. Many cameras use quad pixel sensors, even pro cameras. It’s not as bad as he makes it sound.
And image sensor - something that Tony didn't seem necessary to point out?
No, as luminance is related to the visible spectrum, you need to demosaic in order to get luminance values. There are no white pixels. And when analog binning isn't enabled, demosaicing works worse due to the different color filter array, this leads to artifacts that reduce the level of detail ( worse luminance values) in comparison with a 48 megapixel Bayer sensor.
The color resolution is better than with a 12 megapixel Bayer sensor: As you get a better resolution for red pixels, better resolution for green pixels and a better resolution for blue pixels, demosaicing will lead to more accurate color values.
Furthermore, one needs to distinguish when the sensor is used in analog binning mode (then you really only get a 12 megapixel Bayer sensor) or not.
Wie kommen Sie darauf, dass man mit den iphones keine 48 Mpx Auflösung bekommt?
I did a side by side shot in the store with my iPhone 12 Pro (dedicated 2x camera) against a iPhone 15 pro with the (digital crop 2x camera) and found the iPhone 12 beat it every time. The 2x camera is more useful than the 3x and the 3x is more useful than the 5x. So if you want to upgrade to the best iPhone for cameras. Buy the 12 pro.
Basically the newer iPhones are not giving better cameras, they are just trying to compete with Samsungs and the likes zoom cameras but rather than adding another lens they sabotage the key cameras that we all use.
The phones have got bigger to accommodate extra lenses so we should see a reset next year with a new iPhone with 4 cameras hopefully. It’ll probably a different name to signify the change.
This, additionally I've found the 2x way more useful more often than the 5x
The best camera is the one you have in your hand when you need to capture that shot. Thank you.
Exactly. This guys is taking this way deeper than our reality needs.
Honestly, when he doesn't zoom in, I can't tell a difference between the real 48mp camera and the iPhone. Everyone markets their products misleadingly.
Nope best is S24 Ultra
@tiagomaqz nope but then CRAPPLE Fanboys always lie ....they say they don't need a Samsung exclusive but then love it 10 yrs later when Crapple copies it
@@DENVEROUTDOORMAN I suggest you either grow up and learn how to politely debate matters or don't bother contributing.
always detested the fake marketing of phones. if those tiny sensors were any good, they would put them in a mirrorless camera. in this case there is no substitute for size
Apple showed what the iPhone is capable of, I never heard them said the iPhone is better than professional cameras. If I missed that part, please point out where and when Apple said it.
Watch some apple advertisements bro
Thanks for the master class! Very profound! 6 mega pixels inside of a
48 mega pixel file format should be criminal
And then charging you for those extra 42MP on iCloud
@@unstanic exactly, never paid for it, APPLE also makes it hard to transfer files to PC or other apps like Flickr. I have to manually click and drag files to folders small batches at a time because my 14 pro max will disconnect.
@@ilovebohol file and music transfer have been a huge pain with iPhones since the beginning. Switched to android recently cause I had enough, but android is not without its problems unfortunately... Pick your poison I guess!
Your comparison is flawed. A traditional 48 MP camera has a much larger sensor, much larger lens and much larger distance between the lens and the sensor compared to that of an iPhone. This means more light enters the larger sensor (therefor more optical info), a better zoom capability due to larger lens, and a much better focal point (hence better zoom clarity) due to the better distance between the lens and the sensor.
Also, the way you explained quad-pixel is wrong. There are 48 MP on the sensor, and 4 adjacent pixels are combined (pixel binning) to create a 12 MP image which is effectively brighter and has less noise in it. Not the other way round.
If compare a traditional camera with an iPhone, you also need to take into consideration how the camera is bulky, requires different (even more bulky) lenses to function at full capacity, and can only do image/video capture and nothing else. On that note, there are cameras that are very good at image but useless in video and vice-versa, so if you want best of both worlds you have to carry 2 sets of cameras and lenses. On the other hand, an iPhone can do all of it sufficiently well despite it's physical limitations, is portable enough to carry in one's pocket and does stuff beyond just image/video capture.
A general tool like a swiss army knife can't compete with a specialized tool in its specialized purpose in the first place, so the comparison is moot. A comparison between 2 phones with the same limitation (like you did with 3x of 14 pro and 5x of 15 pro ) is a much more practical approach of comparison
True!
I think you just reinforced Tony's point - A 48Megapixel iPhone can't compete with a 48 Megapixel ILC
I think you have no idea what the problem with apples claim is or how the optics and sensors work.
Exactly! This is why Apple shouldn't call the iPhone camera "professional-level"
@@madmikkelsen7008 I never disagreed with his point. I just said the comparison is flawed. A professional should already have enough knowledge about the physics behind the camera to know that the iPhone they buy would never be a replacement for an actual camera, and if they don't, they are on the path to be a professional and learn soon.
I think most folks know iPhone cameras aren’t as good as real pro cameras and can see through Apple’s marketing fluff.
Or we just dont care. The picture quality on most cameras are more than good enough for sharing.
@@orangeyellow-me1pzMy sentiments exactly. I couldn’t care any less about the camera on my cellphone. That’s not what I use it for. 🙂
I don’t know what these „folks” are but probably most normal people do take that already. But there are always some guys and gals that buy this marketing regardless
I am still using an iPhone 14 Pro Max. Mostly because of your video on the iPhone 15s camera. I have been looking at the iPhone 16 Pro Max. I am concerned about its camera. Is it worth upgrading? I do only use my iPhone for photos and videos with the 1x lens selected. Thank you.
Tony, thanks for this clear analysis. Photography wise, is there a big diference between older iPhones and iPhone 15/16?
I don't think so but we'll compare them next week
You are not comparing apples to apples, excuse the pun. A Caterpillar D11T (Bulldozer) has similar BHP to an F1 car, both are vehicles but you can’t compare. Is the D11T “fake” because it can’t compete in a race? Also, price! 1/8 the cost of what you are comparing it to. You are spreading misinformation, no one thinks it is a “professional” camera, it’s just a bloody good camera in a very small package like lots of other smart phones.
No! The F1 car is the fake, because it can't push as much soil as the D11. Get your facts straight, mister.
Also, how is showing examples misinformation??? I'm sorry you waste money on the newest iPhone every year, but one is born every minute.
And, you can find a "professional" camera and lens for much less than a new iPhone.
Doesn’t the iPhone do the reverse with pixel binning? Taking four pixels at 48mp to make a better quality 12mp photo and not the reverse?
Yes, it does. Tony just has no clue about the tech behind it…
1) Duh.
2) I’ve compared the 15 camera with my 13 mini camera and there’s a noticeable difference. However, I am a full-time, self-employed portrait photographer and the difference is not pronounced. It’s subtle. Still, it is good enough to keep in my pocket for printing photos of special moments (not pro-level shots)-all without having to carry around a pro camera or a quality point and shoot.
3) Duh x2. It’s marketing to the chumps in a “niche” (i.e., humans who are not vocational photographers) that is the masses. In other words, it’s a very good point and shoot that has made incremental advances over the years (even from the 13 to the 15, as stated above). But…it’s marketing. Watch their 14 release…they lie, stating that the 14 Pro has stuff it’s never had before, when the 13 mini had the same stuff. But it’s also truth; the 14 Pro had never existed up to that point, so it really was the first time it had various features.
Finally you show it 100% right, wake up people. It's like you have worthless speakers and you connect a 10.000$ amplifier to them or the other way round.
Great review. Is the 5x fusion zoom same as 5x optical zoom?
Wait, but can you redo the test outside on a sunny day? I'm pretty sure that for a phone size sensor, this environment is a low light one, this test needs to be done in a bright condition
A good camera must deliver under ALL conditions
Let’s be real, most phone camera users don’t know anything about lighting and are probably taking pictures in less than ideal lighting environments 80% of the time. And yet Apple’s advertisement makes it sound like anyone can take amazing photos under any condition. Just like he said in the video, it’s the talent, writer, lighting, etc, that made that weekend video look good, not the iPhone. But the advertisement made it sound like it was basically 100% the iPhone; and that “you can film something like this too, just get an iPhone”. It’ll only lead to disappointment when people realize it takes way more effort and knowledge than simply buying a new phone.
The point of the video isn’t to say “iPhone cameras are garbage”. The point is that Apple’s advertisements are misleading at best. They’re designed to fool people who know nothing about cameras; which is probably over 90% of their consumers.
No photographer will take their advertisement seriously at face value. But what about everyone else? How many people now think that the phone in their pocket is *actually* just as good, or even better than a professional camera? *That* is the issue and point Tony is trying to make. iPhone cameras are great, but not as mind-blowingly amazing as they advertise.
@kevinwang7894 I completely agree with you. But I also think this video is misleading in a way, because in a good light condition that 48mpx raw is actually good, of course not as good as bigger camera but is not this terrible like shown in the video. I just think, as a reviewer, you should show this phone camera in all conditions, and let the viewers see the full picture. I don't know, just my opinion, I would have loved to see in this video also a comparison in a good light.
@@kevinwang7894 Profi-Kameras liefern also nur unter idealen Lichtbedingungen.
Ach - dann verwundert es nicht, dass die kaum noch jemand kauft.
he is in a professional studio and he knows how to light and expose for an image regardless of the lens/sensor 😑
I'm just an average guy who is looking for a great new phone and I've tried all the latest Samsung Galaxy phones and now I'm moving forward to try an iphone for the first time ever. I'm going to purchase a new iphone 16 pro this week
Same for me brooooo I'm scared 😂
Tony’s point isn’t to boycott Apple, just don’t expect the marketing BS about it being pro quality to be true. The 16 Pro is probably a great phone, just not a pro camera
@@yotam6x7 I'm not a pro picture taker ...LoL
Same, I'm an artist and I need neat and bright photos of my work, I've had it with Samsung and pixel and ready to try apple but Idk anymore lol.
go for it, the eco system is amazing and get airpod pro too, those little things are awesome
I can't confirm that, I've done extensive tests myself and only take photos with the main camera in 48 MP ProRAW, mainly in museums and galleries. Since Apple installed the larger Sony IMX803 in the main camera of the 14 Pro, there is a big difference compared to the previous 12 MP iPhones in terms of resolution and the results even exceed some APS-C cameras (Fuji X-Pro 1, Leica X1, Canon 500/600D with prime lenses) as the iPhone has a relatively fast and sharp lens, good image stabilization and noise reduction indoors. It is impressive what Sony achieved 2 years ago. Unfortunately, many users do not use their iPhone's camera to its full potential and shoot in 12 MP pixel binning modes or use the wrong lens.
You're comparing iphone 48mp to iphone 12mp, between these there's a difference but it doesn't mean the iphone 48mp meets the standard, that's what Tony demonstrated. What's the point of stretching a 6-12mp image to 48mp with no detail benefit? To sell you more storage both cloud and physical
And even the DSLR raw could be 2 times more detailed in the same 43mp resolution. So it also doesn't meet the standards but at least it's much closer than the iphone, DSLR raw file size is easier to justify.
@@ИванИванов-я9ы8н With the 13 Pro and its 12MP, I can't achieve the same resolution as with a 48 MP quad-bayer sensor. With my DSLR and Mirorless full-frame cameras, I don't save the RAW files in the camera or permanently on the SD card. RAW files are saved and archived twice on hard disks. Anyone who buys a larger iPhone memory or iCloud for this reason takes very few photos. I also don't carry all my film negatives around with me in my camera bag. 48MP quad-bayer gives a bit more resolution in sufficient light than a 12MP smartphone sensor. And with simpler APS-C cameras, you often have neither effective image stabilization nor equivalent noise reduction for freehand indoor shots.
Tony I’m about to upgrade my iPhone, based on this video, I’m not sure whether I should just upgrade to the iPhone 14 promax or the 16 promax… mostly I’m looking for the sharpest resolution. now that you have the 16 promax, what are your thoughts? Thank you., td
Based on this video 😂😂😂 no brain of your own then ? Refuse to do research and follow the sheeple mate
Apple brings out a couple new colors and thinks that is a big deal. Then NOBODY notices a 20 percent increase in CPU power. To be noticeable to the average user the increase needs to be a least 50 percent. And then... A BUTTON as a great innovation? I am an iPhone 15 pro max user but the silly Apple hype is bugging me. Oh yes, SIRI still sucks big time and no improvement yet.
14:59 totally agree 👍 and upsetting to see your analysis🧐 hopefully they will be listening 👂 to you, wandering if you checked the Sony phone?
Physics!
I'm a cinematographer since 1992, I'm an iPhone user since 2007, and I definitely agreed with you. Apple iPhone it's just Marketing!
Kameramann ersetzt dann die Sachargumente.
What's so bad about minor improvements every year for a product that's already pretty damn good? I mean you don't need 200 megapixels like most of the android phones have and yet they make mediocre photos compare to iPhone's 48 megapixels (and some even lose to previous 12 megapixel iPhones). The phones have gotten so much better at this point that there's not that much that you can improve. Nobody wants a damn under screen camera, I don't mind that pill shaped cutout. I don't understand what else people need from a phone. It calls, it makes GREAT photos, it has a pretty decent battery life even compare to android's with 5000 mah batteries, it has its own unique design that doesn't resemble any android phone, it's got a great powerful chip that outperforms Snapdragon most of the time (at least in benchmarks).
Agree. The iPhone is always beautiful and sleek and Apple’s ecosystem is the best! People
Expect every year to have big changes. That would not be good actually bc your current phone would be so outdated. If you have a phone that is 3-4 years old, the 16 would be a good upgrade. If you have a 14 or 15, you can wait 1-2 years if you are not impressed with the 16.
@@MC-tt4mw Absolutely correct. Valid point my friend.
I’ve been waiting to upgrade my iPhone 12 Pro Max with a broken lens for the 16… should I just get the 15? Or 14? Your video alluded to the 14 being better images? I tried taking my Sony DsLR with me when mountain biking… but it was too heavy and I walked a lot worried I’d crash & break it. But mountain biking is when I get really good photos for my work. So I was hoping 16 camera would be great. Darn! 😔
I appreciate all of your reviews!! 👍
Reading more comments. Perhaps I finally get lens fixed. Apple guy told me it would be $600 & just get a new phone. 🫣
This is how I found you over 10 years ago. You spoke always the truth. Thank you, Tony. 💙🙋🏼♂
very confused now, other photographers saying it’s a great camera with sample pictures looks breathtaking.
It depends what zoom you are using. At optimal settings and lighting the quality is great!
You can take a great photo with any shit camera. Better cameras just increase your advantages and options, not everybody can instamagically benefit from those advantages. You use what works for you. If iphone works for your usage, thats gold. If your workflow is hurt by the quality difference, you start carrying around 4kg of electronics and lenses and an extra bag.
If I understood correctly, camera is delivering 100% of possible quality if you use nominal focal length of given lens. And there are 3 lenses, not more. So, if you use wide, then you get 100% quality, but between wide and 1x, you'll get crop (decreased quality). Then again 1x is fine, it's the standard lens, and then you have 5x lens. So more you zoom closer to 5x, the lower quality you get (when you reach 5x, you're switching from standard lens to tele lens and quality should be best possible for given lens).
It's like this with every camera, the bad thing is that on camera app you see 2x zoom, so you're eager to use it if framing is right... but, you get decreased quality. Best is to stick to nominal focal length of given lens. Did I get it all right? Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
@@jmydythat is basically correct, there is a decent chance the lighting and focus will be better if you are cropping in on something it doesn’t recognise that it should be focused on (like taking a photo of a building rather than a face) but other than that the results will be about as good if you crop in post.
Apple markets to the average user within some pro functions sprinkled in. It’s doing exactly what it needs to do for the people that use it.
Tony, I have a special respect for you, because back in 2015, I watched your videos and learnt photography. You're an excellent teacher and a legend., ❤
Can you PLEASE do this with all the top end phones? Would love to see where my pixel ends up in comparison.
Same misleading marketing applies to all of them right now.
I think maybe the Sony Xperia is the only one with a 1" sensor? correct me if I'm wrong.
On the go social media content and what have ya, the video capabilities on these phones very good, and I use it along side the r5+85mm. Best of both worlds.
Oh I'm quite sure they all mislead but curiosity in seeing the comparison directly would be nice from a great camera reviewer. Typical tech reviewers ways of measuring camera performance is just bleh for anyone really looking for details.
Yep, I’m curious where pixels end up.
Great awareness Tony. Please compare which smart phone has the best image.
Same for Xperia 1 VI please
Greeeeeat video! You're the one to stand still, when all the other are on bended knees. Great job... I'm curious to know if this problem is just related to iphones, or otherwise to all smartphone photography (as I guess). You could record this video with other top-notch camera smartphone, to say: vivo x100 pro, huawei P70, oppo find x7 pro, honor magic 6 pro...
Hi nice review but I’ve some questions. At a moment you did a review of the Google pixel 7 against the iPhone 14. There the advantage of the main camera at 48mp was obvious against the Google 12mp image. Looking at this review you showed the taken image at 400% (4:30) and it seemed very good to me, was sharp. So did the 48mp IQ drop since the iPhone 14 ?
Did some image tests myself and although the IQ of my iPhone 15pro couldn’t compete against my A7r5 (luckily) the resolution of the iPhone 15pro main camera was not far behind…showing more detail than my images with the A9 (24mp) or RX100m5 (20mp). Used the Sony 24mmf1.4 at f5.6 in sunny conditions.
Why I did these tests, is because I’m seriously thinking for buying a Google pixel pro 8 (not the new one). And for keeping this as “an always with me alternative” when I’m in a situation that I can’t take my gear with me (even not my RX100).
Fake everything in IPhone cameras…megapixels, zoom, bokeh, what’s not to love?
Tony, Apple doesn't care about your whinning in your youtube videos. What really matters is, you still buy iPhone and you use it. End of story.
i did as well. I guess many others also which is right, they dont care.
Telling the truth about Apples (claims) for truth seek is just the right thing to do.
Nobody cares about his whining.
Regarding camera performance, you should compare iPhone with other brands of mobile phones, not with a professional SLR camera. What if all other mobile phones are "disappointing and misleading" as well?
iPhones get slaughtered by chinese cameraphones like the Xiaomi 13 or 14 Ultra, vivo X100 Pro or X100 Ultra, Huawei Pura 70 Ultra, and an Oppo I think also got a 1" type sensor
@@mikethespike056 Nah, check DXO Mark tests. Chinese cameras are far behind, also they use all the same Sony IMX sensors, maybe beside Oppo who made 1" (still sucks donkey dong). Real race is in the software and Apple wins.
The problem is, other brands never advertise their cameras to be as good as a "pro" camera, they don't lie too often. Meanwhile Apple is just doing Apple's thing, they will tell you that their phone is god sent meanwhile it is made in China
This is with every fucking phone, they all crop and nothing can compare to a DSLR sherlock. Why not bash Samsung too then?
correct i also feel the same
Waaaa, let me move the goalposts.
Samsung's turn to be bashed will come around, but it's Apples turn now with the IPhone 16 series on release. Don't cry about it, just accept this as a fact.
DSLRs - waren das nicht die mit den ausgefressenenen Lichtern und der geringen Schärfentiefe?
@@neilmcguinness4422Samsung's turn will never come because this guy only understands smartphones through Apple events; once be fixes that issue he might start making actually informative videos.
While the education here is great, who in their right mind thinks a phone can replace a professional grade camera? Yes there are the masses who could care less, but the ones that do, we all know a phone can never compare. Regardless on what you think, having a phone with some quality is great for those moments you’re not carrying your professional camera.
So how does it compare to other competitors phone cameras and their previous models like 14 & 15 pro max?
Without criticism we cannot grow and get better. We will become stagnant. Apple needs this. The whole of the world needs it.
Misleading like Samsung with their Raw support in ProMode?
Remember the fake moon?
@@Bugside It was real in ProMode, unlike todays raw files.
The sad story in all this is that innovation in mobile phone technology is focused on the camera, not the phone. I don't buy a new smartphone because it has a better camera. I buy it as a communication device and if I can receive and send data reliably even in remote areas, that's what I want. Smartphones with cameras are mainstream. They have already affected camera sales downward and will unfortunately continue to do so.
they focus on camera because of social life being very big part of human beings. and phone maker cant improve your ability to call without connection in "remote areas" because they just use mobile operator towers to send data, which means no towers - no data. phone makers cant do much here.
Buy huawei
Huawei much better lol 😅
@@badkissvlog Nope, Never, Nada, bù
@@ugolovniyrozysk Not so. Elon Musk has revolutionized internet access where you can get connected virtually anywhere globally because of the hundreds of low earth orbit satellites his company has positioned. Cell towers are or soon to be obsolete technology. Voice over internet is possible. I have it in my house. At the very least improve reception in the phone to provide more access.
@Tony, I’m coming from the iPhone XS Max. All I care about is photo quality in raw. What would you say is the best upgrade if not iPhone 16 Pro Max?
I come to you for it all, Tony. This is the second time I’ve upgraded and found the camera performing horribly. I returned the 15 pro and I think I’ll be returning the 16 pro as well, only this time I’ll follow through on the attorney general claim I said I’d file the last time they sold consumers a less than inferior device.
I can't believe that nobody mentions this: The objects in the Sony "24mm" image are roughly 30% larger than in the iPhone image, they use an approximately 30% larger percentage of the frame. This makes the resolution of the Sony sensor appear roughly 30% better than it actually is. So, 43.4 megapixel (not sure which Sony camera this is) appears like approximately 56 megapixel here regarding the level of detail of the objects! This also increased the amount of light by approximately 30%.
And afterwards, iPhone photos were compared by downsampling the approximately 56 megapixel equivalent photos, which again made the resolution of the iPhone look worse than it is because downsampling leads to sharper results at pixel level.
I have the 11 Pro and I always use the fixed lenses and never in between as I know that in between means it’s a crop. Is the 16 Pro functioning the same way or is there a genuine digital zoom in there ?
I am an old-school photographer. Taught Photography in the 70's and 80's. Bought my 35mm Camera in 1964 at Hobby Lobby, I had 50mm, 85mm,135mm, and 200mm lenses on my Kodak Retina Reflex III, Then going to Nam in the late sixties, I bought a Minolta SRT 101 SLR with the same lenses and a 28mm Lens. Lost all the cameras in the Riots in Detroit in 1970. Took lots of pictures during the war there. Started over in 1983, Bought a new Nikon F3 with the 50mm and 85mto 135m and 135. Again boutht the same lenses and Now Zoom Lenseslater bought a Nikon F3 and Sony cameras. The Lenses cost big bucks along with the f/ stop. I agree, my still photos from my cameras far exceed all, not only iPhone cameras.
So what do you think about the camera set up in the Pixel 9 Pro XL. I would love to hear your thoughts, Thank you for this video.
I really appreciate your work pushing back on fake marketing claims. It's really hard for my to understand why there haven't been lawsuits about this since it's an industry wide practice of bullshitting these megapixels.
I'm more worried about how much dust went into that Sony body
I was thinking the same thing, and then I wiped at my screen thinking there was dirt on it (I know I wasn't the only one).
I came here for this comment
@@anthonyjrphoto same hahahahh
This is where you need to understand that it’s a PHONE!! Not a camera. 🙄
yeah this video seems pointless. the camera is incredible for what it is.
Any real photographer already knows that no camera phone could ever compare to a real camera. It’s like shooting film then using a low quality scanner to digitize them. It’s just crap.
Das kommt drauf an. Wer Kutschen herstellt, weiß natürlich, dass Motoren nie mit Pferden mithalten können werden. Genau dieselbe Physik verkaufen uns die Marketing-Abteilungen der Klotzkamera-Anbieter.
I love your videos. But here are two things that make me uncomfortable about this one:
1) Like you mentioned very briefly, the lens quality and sensor size do impact resolution. Couldn't this be the reason for not being able to compare favorable with a FF camera?
2) Don't all smartphone cameras have the same problems?
1) yes. 2) yes
This is incredibly helpful to have broken down. Unfortunately I think Apple is confusing "professional" with "professionally used" as iPhone cameras can be used for and sometimes is used for professional work. But the use cases are more restrictive. People using them as B cameras and vlogging for instance.
Two things I'd be really interested in:
There are external lenses for iPhone that can create new native focal lengths out of the other cameras. Do those help bridge the gap?
Another question is how does the iPhone stack up to budget and compact cameras? Similarly, do external lenses make the iPhone better than pocket cameras?
After using a Sony A7Siii for some professional use I can't imagine traveling with something that massive, so if an iPhone is the best pocket camera I can get then I can save money.
Mate, if you want it to be as good as a professional camera, you should attach a phone to a professional camera, not attaching an average camera to a phone. It's as simple as that. I'm still baffled that some people can actually still fall for this.
Yes, there are movies shot on an iPhone, but it's done for artistic purposes. You can't compare it to an ARRI, RED or a Panavision.
Well you can’t deny that the iPhone Pro models have incredible cameras, also I prefer way more to have a good camera on a phone and can do all of things with that phone plus shoot photos/videos rather than taking 100 different lenses tetraprisms garbage trash in bags full heavy equipments trash
@@jasfx7241 I very much doubt that you're a pro. It all depends on the look you are looking for. Yes, you can make pictures with a "point and shoot" camera, you can certainly use the camera of your phone daily to capture memories, nothing wrong with that, but don't fool yourself that it can bring the quality of a $13 000 camera made for shooting real production movies. It just can not. You can make all clever AI tricks that emulate the effects of having real lenses, but guess what - it will never be real. To get the REAL look, you REALLY need all that "garbage". You can't have your cake and eat it too. There's no free lunch. I'm not saying that your family pictures should look like a Hollywood production, I'm just saying that what they claim isn't real.
The sensor size of the pro is tiny
The sensor size of any phone out there is tiny.
Yeah it’s a phone, you’re never really gonna get a sensor bigger than 1 inch.
It’s almost 1 inch big, what’s ur problem? That’s huge.
@@denissssss8579 I’m just saying he’s comparing a cell phone sensor to a APSC sensor. Ofc the Sony is going to be sharper.
@@nurd45 ok.
I do not know what you did in your tests but if I compare the 12mp iphone 15 pro max 24mm image with an A7S III 12 mpx image with a 24mm lense it has exactly the same amount of detail. iPhone looks even a bit more detailed cause of the contrast tricks they use in the processing pipeline but overall it is the same amount of detail. How you come up with 6mp of detail in the 48 mp or regular 12 mp. I do not understand. What did you do there… It also seems unlogical that the 12 mp sensor (even if much smaller) has less detail with proper lighting… (that 48 is less detailed is of course feasible).
There are many factors in image sharpness. The a7S III is an incredibly unsharp camera because it's video focused and has a heavy AA-filter to reduce moire. Of course, your lens can reduce sharpness, too, depending on which lens you're using.
A fantastic review & one that should make you aware that a phone camera will never replace a real camera!
Totally agree with Tony’s comments regarding Apple to work with the camera manufacturers rather than against them!👍🏼🙏