Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Is the iPhone 'Years' Ahead of Android In Photography? (9to5mac.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the end-of-DSLR-era dept.

Former Google senior vice president of Social, Vic Gundotra, said that Android phones are years behind the iPhone when it comes to photography. In a Facebook post, Gundotra said: "The end of the DSLR for most people has already arrived. I left my professional camera at home and took these shots at dinner with my iPhone 7 using computational photography (portrait mode as Apple calls it). Hard not to call these results (in a restaurant, taken on a mobile phone with no flash) stunning. Great job Apple." 9to5Mac reports: In response to a comment suggesting that the Samsung S8 camera was even better, Business Insider spotted that Gundotra disagreed. He said that not only was Apple way ahead of Samsung, but Android was to blame. From Gundotra's Facebook post: "I would never use an Android phone for photos! Here is the problem: It's Android. Android is an open source (mostly) operating system that has to be neutral to all parties. This sounds good until you get into the details. Ever wonder why a Samsung phone has a confused and bewildering array of photo options? Should I use the Samsung Camera? Or the Android Camera? Samsung gallery or Google Photos? It's because when Samsung innovates with the underlying hardware (like a better camera) they have to convince Google to allow that innovation to be surfaced to other applications via the appropriate API. That can take YEARS. Also the greatest innovation isn't even happening at the hardware level -- it's happening at the computational photography level. (Google was crushing this 5 years ago -- they had had 'auto awesome' that used AI techniques to automatically remove wrinkles, whiten teeth, add vignetting, etc... but recently Google has fallen back). Apple doesn't have all these constraints. They innovate in the underlying hardware, and just simply update the software with their latest innovations (like portrait mode) and ship it. Bottom line: If you truly care about great photography, you own an iPhone. If you don't mind being a few years behind, buy an Android."

26 of 408 comments (clear)

  1. Flame Bait by johnsie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ah, the good old Apple vs Android argument. Always good for click/flame bait on tech "news" sites.

    1. Re:Flame Bait by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's ridiculous to begin with. Comparing a specific phone to a platform? Has there ever been a requirement for Android hardware vendors to only manufacture phones with good cameras?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:Flame Bait by coastwalker · · Score: 5, Informative

      Like most generalizations it applies "in general" to lowest common denominator users. So yes maybe a walled garden appliance works very competently. If that is what you need, then it is indeed the best. If you want a choice of applications to use with your camera then it definitely is not the best. The guy is just spouting marketing speak, or half truths as most critical thinkers will concur.

      --
      Facts are history now plebs have politics for religion on social media.
    3. Re:Flame Bait by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Informative

      The iPhone camera is decidedly middle of the pack for high end phones. It's competitive but far from the best overall. If there is any overall champion it's the Google Pixel camera, which really is light years ahead with their computational photography system that has moved beyond just faster electronics and marginally better lenses. It's also by far the fastest.

      The iPhone camera is good, don't get me wrong. It tends to end up looking artificial, especially in low light conditions, due to the heavy processing that Apple does. But as a point-and-shoot it's fine and gives generally good results most of the time. It just can't match the HDR ability of a Pixel or Samsung camera.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:Flame Bait by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not even about good cameras. It's about a software feature to emulate a defect in large aperture lenses even though the phone has a tiny lens that isn't susceptable to that defect. Nevermind that Google was emulating this same defect with a single lens since 2014 (the feature is only available on iPhones with dual lens cameras).

      The iPhone 7 camera is not synthesizing bokeh in software. Portrait mode combines the sharp image of a face taken with the long lens with the blurred background taken by the short lens.

    5. Re:Flame Bait by torkus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That is *exactly* synthesizing bokeh in software. It's a composite image, modified in software. The DOF on such a small lens makes 'real' bokeh pretty much impossible.

      For what it is, it's handy and despite being a semi-pro photographer myself I very often grab my phone for a picture instead of keeping a real camera handy. Convenience wins over quality most of the time.

      With that said, I consistently get MUCH better pictures from my Samsung than iPhone (I have both thanks to work) and can only view TFA as thinly veiled propaganda. 9 out of 10 dentists agree too. The 10th works for Apple and his NDA prohibits him from commenting ... sparing rumors about the much anticipated iBrush.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
  2. Not really why you'd use a DSLR by mwvdlee · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you use a DSLR to make family photos in restaurants, then yes, your phone has replaced your DSLR.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    1. Re:Not really why you'd use a DSLR by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The end of the DSLR for most people has already arrived. I left my professional camera at home and took these shots at dinner with my iPhone 7

      Translation: Hipsters who used to use a $1,000 DSLR as a $70 point-and-shoot are now using a $1,000 iPhone as a $70 point-and-shoot. The DSLR isn't going away any time soon for anyone who cares about proper photography.

    2. Re:Not really why you'd use a DSLR by msauve · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nothing replaces big glass and its ability to collect light. And, Gundrota's "computational photography" doesn't need a phone - it's just post-processing.

      Sounds like the guy responsible for the huge success of Google+ isn't happy about the small size of his golden parachute.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    3. Re:Not really why you'd use a DSLR by mjwx · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The end of the DSLR for most people has already arrived. I left my professional camera at home and took these shots at dinner with my iPhone 7

      Translation: Hipsters who used to use a $1,000 DSLR as a $70 point-and-shoot are now using a $1,000 iPhone as a $70 point-and-shoot. The DSLR isn't going away any time soon for anyone who cares about proper photography.

      Neither are point and shoots. I recently went to the Goodwood FoS with a mate. I had a 4 year old Canon P&S (albeit a quite good one), he had the latest Samsung. He was astounded after the level of quality in my shots of fast moving cars. Furhter more, I can get my camera out of pocket and powered on in less time than it takes me to open my camera app on my Nexus 5 (and yes, I've got a shortcut on the shortcuts bar... I probably should replace it with maps or something as I hardly ever use the camera, but I digress). The P&S simply had better optics, a faster shutter, an optical zoom, faster focusing actuators and better processor and image sensor.

      Whilst it's 100% true that having a better camera wont make you a better photographer, the reverse isn't true. No amount of talent in the world can get good shots out of bad cameras. As the old saying goes, a poor craftsman blames his tools but the corollary is a good craftsman buys better tools. Things have gone back to the way they were, DSLR's are the domain of professionals, P&S are the domain of amateurs, phones are good for non photographers or when you dont have a camera handy.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    4. Re:Not really why you'd use a DSLR by BlazeMiskulin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No.

      That's people taking snapshots. That's not serious (pro or hobby) photography.

      I've taken some great shots with my phone. I'm not saying it can't be done. But a phone that takes a good snapshot in very good conditions (direction of light, intensity of light, level of light, contrast, etc.) will never replace a DSLR which can take advantage of *actual* optics which are designed to deal with various shooting scenarios.

      If you're using your "professional DSLR" to take snapshots at a family dinner, then yes: your phone can do the job. But that's like saying "My Toyota works just as well for getting my kids to school in morning traffic as my Lamborghini does."

  3. If you truly care about great photography by stealth_finger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Buy a camera. If your iphone camera is so great let's see it zoom without losing resolution, or focus some place else. Thought so. Those photos look just like photos from anything. You can tweek them with software all you like but it's essentially a filter. Your iPhone camera is just as limited as any other smart phone camera and showing off glowy pics of your kids isn't going to change that.

    --
    Wanna buy a shirt?
    https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  4. But... by xlsior · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... There is no reason why 'Samsung camera' on a Samsung phone couldn't be equal or better than the iPhone camera - just because it may take them time to convince Google to add it to an official api doesn't preclude Samsung from implementing it themselves. Sounds more like iPhone fanboy rambling than a genuine issue.

  5. Betteridge's Law of Headlines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Betteridge's Law of Headlines clearly states that the answer is 'no' to any headline containing a question. Betteridge's Law proves that the iPhone is not years ahead of Android in photography. Period. End of discussion.

  6. Looks like Gartner has a new client now. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I heard this line of argument before. It used to be Gartner earning its pay from Microsoft arguing that "anything open source can not be up to date ipso facto". Lots of theoretical argument about how streamlined it is to have just one vendor for all applications on a PC, how the look and feel is great, and the UI is inconsistent between various vendors, how much training cost will be saved (very important fudge factor in the bogus total cost of ownership calculations) etc etc.

    Competition? bah! Humbug!. Choices? No one needs them.

    Here this guy is trying to convince us that people who care about photography who mess with SLR cameras, aperture, speed and all those things are easily daunted by a few choices in the Apps.

    The very same Microsoft which was so dismissive of choices became an ardent supporter of competition and consumer choice when it came to standards. With straight face it argued its deliberately misnamed OOXML "standard" is a good because you need competition between "standards"!

    This guy is a photographer. He has just discovered what innovation can be packed on the processing side. Probably he was messing with RAW format picture because he would never "trust" the default jpg converter packed in Nikon and Canon. Now suddenly he is all ga-ga about software doing one button click post processing.

    It is very much possible he is a good photographer. He should stick to his area of expertise and stop assuming being good, or even a great photographer, makes him an expert on computers, software and open source.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Looks like Gartner has a new client now. by Lt.Hawkins · · Score: 4, Funny

      This guy, btw, is the guy behind Google+.

      The very same Microsoft which was so dismissive of choices became an ardent supporter of competition and consumer choice when it came to standards. With straight face it argued its deliberately misnamed OOXML "standard" is a good because you need competition between "standards"!

      According to Wikipedia:

      "Gundotra joined Microsoft in 1991 and eventually became General Manager of Platform Evangelism. His duties included promoting Microsoft's APIs and platforms to independent developers and helping to develop a strategy for Windows Live online services to compete with Google's web-based software applications.

      Gundotra joined Google in June 2007, after taking a one-year delay due to a Microsoft employee non-compete agreement.

      So given the dev cycle for Office 2007 and OOXML, it very much could have been THE SAME GUY pushing OOXML.

      Which just makes your post awesome!

      --
      -- My Sig is a P228.
  7. iPhone module is made by Sony... by Nocturrne · · Score: 5, Informative

    The post is flame bait, whatever. Sony phones have cameras that are years ahead of the iphone. That said, nobody who knows anything about photography expects a phone to replace a DSLR. The sensors and lenses simply cannot be even remotely similar, due to size limitations in phones.

  8. Apples and Oranges by sciengin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Iphone is Hardware, Android is Software. How could a serious comparison be made?
    Yes, I am aware that the writer probably meant "Iphone is years ahead of smartphones running android" but that just shows the faults in his argument.

    Imagine I make a movie-grade camera which runs android (not too far off, considering the wealth of functions those cameras tend to have): Boom, now "Android" is at least 30 years ahead of any Iphone.

  9. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  10. Plenty of iPhone camera apps by sphealey · · Score: 4, Informative

    = = = Should I use the Samsung Camera? Or the Android Camera? = = =

    That makes no sense whatsoever. I have an iPhone and I have 8 or 10 camera apps. Each one has strengths and weaknesses, including the standard Apple Camera app. In fact over the last 3 releases Apple has been opening up more of the camera APIs and functions to app developers, resulting in more camera apps rather than fewer.

  11. Re:It's not a minor accomplishment... by Lt.Hawkins · · Score: 4, Insightful

    OP literally dedicated a paragraph to point out that a DSLR is better overall, so I don't get your snark. He'd clearly not do what you propose.

    But the best camera is the one you have with you, and 99% of the time, for 99% of people, that's the camera on the phone. Most photographers had long ago figured "decent depth of field needs a real lens and a wide aperture. It's physics and optics." which is 100% still true, but Apple managed to approximate the effect on a phone in a good enough way that, while the technical quality (pixel count, optical sharpness, optical clarity, etc) isn't too different, the aesthetics of many pictures just got a notable kick.

    Cool is cool, regardless of platform. I'm still sticking with my Nexus, but i'll give Apple a tip of the hat when appropriate.

    --
    -- My Sig is a P228.
  12. Re:It's not a minor accomplishment... by stephanruby · · Score: 4, Informative

    They brought "depth of field" to small-sensor photography, and that is no easy task. "Depth of field" is what gives you that effect of a foreground in focus and a blurry background (or vice versa, like in some movie transitions).

    I think you meant to say HTC and LG brought "depth of field" to small-sensor photography on Android two years ago.

    And yes, the iPhone camera sensors, which are made by Sony, are pretty good also.

  13. Re:It's not a minor accomplishment... by TuringTest · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So what? The suggestion in the article is that the era of dslr is on its way out to be replaced by (i)phones, this guy says the camera software is getting really good. I say that's great for snapping your kids or your dinner but it's not a replacement (not that op is suggesting it is). People aren't doing it the professional way though are they? They're just getting professionalish results in certain settings. Which again is great but limited.

    Article says "the end of the DSLR for most people" (emphasis mine), and I'd say they're exactly right.

    If this technique arrives to lower-end phones, the people who buys a DSLR for family photos and lacks the skills to use it properly will now be better served by a camera phone that provides results equivalent to a DSLR on automatic.

    --
    Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
  14. Apple or PIxel comparison by XXongo · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Not clear Pixel is better than the Apple. Long comparison of different kinds of photos at cnet: https://www.cnet.com/news/goog...

    Their bottom line is:

    If you tend to shoot portraits and that's what matters to you most, the iPhone 7 Plus is an obvious choice. Portrait mode is dSLR-esque, and we only expect it to improve by the time it gets a public release. But if brighter colors, sharper detail throughout the backgrounds of photos and capable low-light photography is more important, it's the Pixel. I have to admit, I initially thought Google over-promised on its new flagship -- especially after those disappointing Nexus cameras -- but I was wrong. It's a new chapter for Google phones and this one earned its name.

    1. Re:Apple or PIxel comparison by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What makes the Pixel camera so great is that it gets really good results with just point-and-shoot. You don't have to think about lighting or trying to hold it super steady for maximum HDR or whatever. And sure, the iPhone might give slightly better results in portrait mode with good illumination and no touch-up afterwards, but if light is poor or you are willing to press the one-touch fix button in the gallery app then the chances are that the Pixel will give better results for you.

      My ultimate test is my black cat. It's rare for a phone to be able to get good pictures of him where you can even see where his limbs are. Normally he's just a big ball of black fur on phones.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  15. Re: Fuck off with the iPhone masturbation by chispito · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What you are describing is an interchangeable lens camera (ILC). A DSLR must have a mirror by definition. Vibration is not the primary motivation for removing the mirror, it is overall system size and weight reduction, as this allows a much smaller lens and body. (moving the back of the lens closer to the focal plane allows more compact lens designs, especially on the side end). Also, to clear up a misconception, mechanical shutters are alive and well, though many cameras offer digital shutters as an optional shooting mode. And there are drawbacks to mirrorless cameras, as they focus more slowly and some people do not like looking into an eyepiece monitor instead of looking through the lens optically.

    --
    The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!