New Yorker: "With the iPhone 7, apple changed the camera industry forever"

[Pioneer]

I HATE telephones!

People that I really care about know how to get in touch with me.

Why would I buy a camera that allows people to call me?

Besides, I am still trying to learn my own style.

If I keep changing cameras that do it all for me every three years I will NEVER learn my own personal style.

Jeez.

Besides...I need that $700 for more film. There are priorities in life and the i-Phone is not one of mine.

 

[daveleo]

For me the killer negative aspect of cell phone cameras is the handling.
I find mine (and others) to be not photographer-friendly when it comes to selecting and adjusting ISO, Speed, aperture, etc etc etc. It's all possible, but hellish.
They make nice to extremely-nice pictures but I just don't like (actually I hate) how they handle as cameras.

 

[MCTuomey]

brilliant phone, making it less likely than ever the non-cognoscenti would need a dedicated camera and more likely than ever the cognoscenti will put it to creative use.

i wonder how long before these phones fire off-camera lighting.

 

[mpaniagua]

It's an Acratech GP head. Very light, very strong, and very versatile.

G

Thanks Godfrey

 

[KM-25]

It's an Acratech GP head. Very light, very strong, and very versatile.

I might sell mine, the dampening is not very good and hitting the right tension is kind of hit and miss, too many "flops" for me. It's pretty and light but my good old Arca Swiss B1 head blows it away.

 

[Godfrey]

I might sell mine, the dampening is not very good and hitting the right tension is kind of hit and miss, too many "flops" for me. It's pretty and light but my good old Arca Swiss B1 head blows it away.

I've had no problem with the friction damping, seems quite simple and reliable for me. I bought it for its ability to be a normal head as well as work in gimbal mode with heavy, medium long lenses, or be flipped upside down for panorama shooting.

My more standard head is an Arca-Swiss Monoball P0. It's much simpler to operate. 🙂

G

 

[Jdi]

I'll wait for the first class action lawsuit (correct term? - I'm not an US-citizen), when the customers realize, that this magic DOF-feature is a Software-only-feature, not some ability of the hardware, which will be delivered as a SW-update later. Also, that this SW is able to detect faces (by machine learning algorithms) and only simulates DOF (which will be okay for many fancy snapshots, although you can already see the limits of feature-separation of image content in Apples own examples, for example, where hair starts to be indistinguishable from the surroundings), but not for, say, a nice DOF-shot of landscape or still-image. I hear them: "The DOF in my camera is broken! Apple must replace it!" - All of these details and the technical/algorithmic reasons for them are not mentioned, in the article... So, I have a little doubt about the predictive power of that piece.

First they'll have to learn what dof is. The supporting Eco system will tell them. And it will have nothing to do with aperture blades. I doubt Apple is worried.

 

[Steven Schwartz]

What's with the rending of fabric and gnashing of teeth? Are you afraid the government is going to come and take away your "serious" cameras? Are you threatened by the idea that any fool can make a well exposed, properly focused image with absolutely no knowledge of any of the basic principals of photography? The cameraphone is merely a tool. Do you go on large format forums and complain that 8x10 view cameras are lousy for taking pictures of your rambunctious kids?
The smartphone is actually a miraculous photographic device. Good for birds in flight, action sports photography? Not so much. There has never before been a camera that combines ultimate portability and image quality the way a smartphone does. A Minox A actually made a bigger bulge in your pocket and put out a pretty poor print above 3x5. I don't see much correlation between equipment types and artistic mastery. I've seen gorgeous iPhone photos and really lame images made with Linhof Technoramas. Witness the silly iPhone photo campaign. There are some beautiful images shot with the iPhone that obviously could have been taken with almost any photographic device. The trick is that you are more likely to have a smartphone with you at any particular moment than even a Leica CL or Sony RX100.
It's also pretty amazing that you can do some pretty sophisticated editing right on your phone (if you have made a deal with the devil and have abandoned analog) My preferred general photo tool of choice is a Leica IIIb with 50mm Elmar, but I'm thrilled that at any moment in time I'm likely to have access to my iPhone and its astonishing capabilities.

 

[ferider]

The Huawei p9 was released in April, in collaboration with Leica no less. Huawai has 8.5% of the global smartphone market share, where iPhones are less than 13%. In 2015, more than 81% of cell phones were running Android.

From the article: "But Apple’s iPhone 7 Plus is the first major phone to marry the dual-lens system to immense computing capabilities."

Navel gazing is all I can say.

 

[Godfrey]

What's with the rending of fabric and gnashing of teeth? Are you afraid the government is going to come and take away your "serious" cameras? Are you threatened by the idea that any fool can make a well exposed, properly focused image with absolutely no knowledge of any of the basic principals of photography? The cameraphone is merely a tool. Do you go on large format forums and complain that 8x10 view cameras are lousy for taking pictures of your rambunctious kids?

The smartphone is actually a miraculous photographic device. Good for birds in flight, action sports photography? Not so much. There has never before been a camera that combines ultimate portability and image quality the way a smartphone does. A Minox A actually made a bigger bulge in your pocket and put out a pretty poor print above 3x5. I don't see much correlation between equipment types and artistic mastery. I've seen gorgeous iPhone photos and really lame images made with Linhof Technoramas. Witness the silly iPhone photo campaign. There are some beautiful images shot with the iPhone that obviously could have been taken with almost any photographic device. The trick is that you are more likely to have a smartphone with you at any particular moment than even a Leica CL or Sony RX100.

It's also pretty amazing that you can do some pretty sophisticated editing right on your phone (if you have made a deal with the devil and have abandoned analog) My preferred general photo tool of choice is a Leica IIIb with 50mm Elmar, but I'm thrilled that at any moment in time I'm likely to have access to my iPhone and its astonishing capabilities.

Well said. I agree completely. 🙂

G

 

[froyd]

I am reassured to see I'm not the only one who dislikes the handling and experience of using cellphones for photography (and I expect I equally would dislike using a camera to make a call or access a website).

 

[kxl]

iPhone 6, hand held
ISO 32 @ f/2.2 @ 1/120 sec @ 4.15mm

Click here for full resolution image.​

G

If succeeding generations of smart phones insist on incorporating cameras, then why not just start with this body, and incorporate smart device features into it? 🙄

 

[Peter Jennings]

As far as I know, the DOF in Portrait mode supposedly utilizes the dual lenses in the iPhone 7+, which is why it'll only be available for the 7+. The background blur is from one lens while the subject is taken with the other lens. Of course, software is what combines it all together, but it isn't fake bokeh.

 

[Dante_Stella]

I am reassured to see I'm not the only one who dislikes the handling and experience of using cellphones for photography (and I expect I equally would dislike using a camera to make a call or access a website).

Far from the only one. I find it really hard to hold an iPhone to take a picture without knocking the mode to square (or worse), and using an on-screen button to shoot the picture somehow makes it worse. It's a slippery object with nothing to orient it in your hand. Things like iPhones are absolutely piss-poor designs where simple inhibits function. Plugging in iPhone lightning charger into a phone while you are driving is a prime example. Yes, it can be flipped, but the real issue is locating the hole.

These are not very impressive cameras in anything but bright light (there, they are competitive with almost anything). And fundamentally, a camera with a fixed aperture will never afford any real control, and physics constrain the s/n of a sensor that small. The new iPhone 7 camera is incremental.

And these phones are not cheap; a Sony A6000 with a lens is cheaper than an iPhone 7 and shoots rings around the Apple product. And these days, the cost of the phone doesn't just get rolled into your next phone plan renewal. My conclusion about the 7 is that it is a jump up from the holdouts from the 5s and people like me who emit a malfunction field that breaks phones.

Dante

 

[Tijmendal]

It's an Acratech GP head. Very light, very strong, and very versatile.

G

And very expensive 😉

 

[Godfrey]

If succeeding generations of smart phones insist on incorporating cameras, then why not just start with this body, and incorporate smart device features into it? 🙄

It would be just a mite bit annoying to have 12 people carry that into a business meeting. There would be such a clutter on the conference room table... !

G

 

[Godfrey]

And very expensive 😉

Not at all. It's about $400, that's average for what a head with this load carrying capacity and build quality costs. Not everyone needs a head rated for a 26lb load, or for long telephotos—that's what this head is designed for.

Now if you want to say something's expensive, look at this one:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1029552-REG/arca_swiss_8501003_1_c1_cube_geared_head.html

G

 

[Peter Jennings]

The game changer was then Apple introduced no exchangeable batteries with so-so capacity and lifespan. It became non eco friendly luxury item, to be thrown away every three years.

For those who could afford 700 USD two nothing special lenses, 12mp, very small sensor camera (mediocre) it is camera to be one. For three years. But I can't afford nothing special camera and somewhat cool, sometime ridiculous phone for 700 USD every three years... Have to move closer to New Yorkers to be able to.
In meanwhile I need to learn how to crack iPhone 5C to be able to put new battery in...

No need to throw it away after 3 years. You can sell it on ebay for $300-400 or pay a small fee to have a professional put in a new battery for you and keep using it. The resale market for Apple stuff is vibrant, so I don't think a lot of iPhones are going into landfills...

 

[Huss]

I HATE telephones!

People that I really care about know how to get in touch with me.

I'm still waiting for a response to my carrier pigeon that I sent to you.

You have so far ignored:

1/ the message in the bottle
2/ note wrapped around a rock
3/ note attached to an arrow
4/ smoke signals
5/ and now Cecil

 

[segedi]

The writer seems to think that Apple is innovative and lack of money stifles innovation. I disagree with both points.

I also disagree that camera companies are doomed. Who would have thought that film would still be in use in 2016?

I'm sure the new phone's camera will be the best that Apple had put out there. But would you expect anything less? While phones are convenient, I also agree they are not enjoyable to use as a camera.