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

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."

Comments

Flame Bait

[johnsie]

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

Re:Flame Bait

[K. S. Kyosuke]

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?

Re:Flame Bait

[coastwalker]

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.

Not really why you'd use a DSLR

[mwvdlee]

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

Re:Not really why you'd use a DSLR

[arglebargle_xiv]

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.

Re:Not really why you'd use a DSLR

[BlazeMiskulin]

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."

If you truly care about great photography

[stealth_finger]

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.

But...

[xlsior]

... 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.

Betteridge's Law of Headlines

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Looks like Gartner has a new client now.

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

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.

iPhone module is made by Sony...

[Nocturrne]

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.

Apple or PIxel comparison

[XXongo]

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.