Posted on 01/13/2015 11:09:05 PM PST by Swordmaker
Irony is so sweet. Code Toad is hoist on his own petard.
Exactly "So what?" are you referring to? If you are not happy with the default focus point the camera software has selected as the most prominent object in the center of the field of view, you can simply tap where you want it and it instantly focuses there. . . and you can select multiple focus points. The iPhone6 will select the most prominent point in the field of view to focus on, assuming that is what you intend to photograph. If it is not, then merely direct the focus elsewhere.
Exactly what are you inferring from what you claim the article is implying that is not explicitly stated?
That's not what the reviewers are saying.
CameraThe Droid Turbo comes with a new, 21-megapixel camera that comes with a lot of promise, and support for 4K video recording, while the iPhone 6 has a fast, and consistently great 8-megapixel shooter
Motorola uses a 20.7-megapixel sensor on the Droid Turbo, with a fast, f/2.0 lens on top. The iPhone 6, on the other hand, features an 8-megapixel 1/3” sensor, with larger-than-average 1.5 micron pixels and “Focus Pixels” - Apple’s term for phase detection. On top of it is an f/2.2 lens with sapphire protective glass.
Looking at the camera app, Motorola still goes with a fairly simplistic user interface with a dial for all settings that you access by swiping from the left. The rotary action on it is not among the fastest camera interface, and it can be plain annoying for those looking to manually adjust settings in the camera. The iPhone 6, on the other hand, comes with the traditional for Apple simplistic app, but with the addition of exposure fine-tuning which is a great feature to have. Plus, the company bundles in a lot of earlier iPhoto images right in the gallery app, so you can make some pretty profound edits right from that application. . .
When it comes to image quality, we have very nice shots in almost all conditions with the Droid Turbo. Outdoor shots come rich in detail, with a nicely balanced dynamic range, and well toned colors. The iPhone 6 in comparison falls a bit short when it comes to detail, but features similarly good images outdoors. In lower light, indoor or in night shots, noise creeps in the Droid Turbo shots. Even if you scale them down to 8-megapixels, there is still plenty of noise, while the iPhone delivers clearer shots. The amount of usable detail is on par though.
We should, however, note that in one particular mode the Droid Turbo disappoints. That's panorama, where photos are captured with a low resolution of just around 2MP and are stitched poorly, plus they come with not so good colors. The outstanding iPhone 6's 43-megapixel panoramas, on the other hand, look all the more impressive when compared with the poor Droid Turbo panoramic shots. . .
In terms of video, the Droid Turbo can (sic) recording 4K at 24 frames per second (fps), or 1080p, while the iPhone 6 is not physically capable of shooting 4K, and instead captures 1080p videos at either 60 fps or 30 fps. Comparing apples to apples, or 1080p at 30fps, both the Droid Turbo and the iPhone 6 do a fairly good job, but detail on the Motorola's handset is a bit softer and while it does capture crisp audio, voices tend to sound too quiet.— Source: Motorola DROID Turbo vs Apple iPhone 6— PhoneArena.com: 03 Nov 2014
Actually, the iPhone 6 and 6Plus can take 4K video, but Apple leaves that to 3rd party Apps.
As to your vaunted screen on your Droid Turbo, PhoneArena's review says this:
DisplayThe 5.2“ Quad HD screen on the Droid Turbo is one of the sharpest out there, but it's ruined by inaccurate colors , while the not-so-sharp iPhone 6 has pleasing colors
The Motorola Droid Turbo comes with a 5.2-inch AMOLED display with a resolution of the impressive 1440 x 2560-pixels (Quad HD), while the Apple iPhone 6 features a slightly smaller, 4.7-inch screen of the IPS LCD kind, but with a much lower, 750 x 1334-pixel resolution. The Droid Turbo’s screen is remarkably sharp, with a pixel density of 565ppi, one of the highest we’ve seen on a smartphone, whereas the iPhone 6 features pixel density of 326ppi, decent, but definitely not on par with the one of the Turbo. In practical terms, this is a difference that is best seen during reading, when looking at text in tiny fonts, and is not all that evident in other cases.
Looking at colors, we’re not impressed with the AMOLED screen of Droid Turbo, though. It has excellent color temperature with accurate greyscale balance, but colors are way oversaturated, but inaccurate.The improper gamma also gives it an additional “contrast boost”, which is not accurate as well. The iPhone 6, on the other hand, has a slightly cold, bluish whites, but for all else it is pretty accurate.
For outdoor viewing, the Droid Turbo is rather tough to read with the sun present. The iPhone 6 is much easier to use outdoors. That's mostly thanks to its excellent maximum brightness of 600 nits, while the Droid Turbo is mediocre in this aspect, peaking at just 248 nits when measured displaying all-white screen.
Display measurements and quality
How about your processor handling all that screen space?
Processor and MemoryThe Quad HD screen of the Droid Turbo puts an extra strain on the processor, and at the end of the day, the Apple A8 on the iPhone 6 outperforms the Snapdragon 805
The Droid Turbo comes with the latest and most powerful Qualcomm SoC: the quad-core Snapdragon 805, while the iPhone 6 is powered by Apple’s own A8 dual-core chip. In daily usage, both do a good job at handling the interface for daily tasks mostly smoothly and fairly lag-free.
The Snapdragon 805 comes with four Krait 450 CPU cores clocked at up to 2.7GHz, while the A8’s two Cyclone CPU cores run at up to 1.4GHz. A direct comparison of clock speeds does not give an adequate representation of the performance power of the two because of the difference in the core size and architecture, and that’s why we we turn to benchmarks to see which one has more power under the hood. The cross-platform GeekBench gives a good idea of how the iPhone 6’s single-core performance is nearly double that of the Droid Turbo, while in terms of multi-core performance, the Turbo has a very slight advantage. The Droid Turbo also features 3GB of RAM, allowing for more headroom with multitasking, while the iPhone 6 has 1 gig.
In terms of GPU and gaming, the Droid Turbo’s performance takes a toll from the higher-res Quad HD display, and on-screen performance is some 70% below that of the iPhone 6.
And THESE are for the lower end iPhone 6, not the iPhone 6plus which has a better camera, better battery, better screen with high resolution. . .
Your Droid Turbo is an OK Android phone, but it is not anyway near superior to the iPhone 6. . . and in fact, according to the reviews, it is blown out of the water by the iPhone 6.
I like the table.
But, for professional results, one needs the right lenses and the ability to fully control the camera. Being able to shoot thousands of photos on a single battery charge is critical too. To use my studio strobes I need to be able to trigger the lights from the camera, and that can't be done with a phone.
I didn't think that kind of professional photography was being done that way. Most of the Pro Photographers using iPhones are in News, Fashion, Art, and Commercial Photography. . . however, I think I see a way for you to make some money with an app. There should be a way to trigger study strobes via bluetooth or WIFI or even the flash on the iPhone. An App for that could be a real money maker. There are a lot of photographers out there that would pay for such an app. . . both iPhone and Android. (Well, not so much in Android, but you could make it Ad ware, there). Look into it. Photography Apps are one of the biggest sellers on the App Store.
Take a look at these results of professional photographers using iPhones:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3246610/posts?page=19#19
They don’t think they need special lenses . . . and you CAN fully control an iPhone’s camera. By the way, what do you think happens when you take a video? Thousands of individual pictures are taken on a single charge. . . at 30 frames per second or more. The iPhone 6 can do it at 240 frames per second.
“There should be a way to trigger study strobes via bluetooth or WIFI or even the flash on the iPhone.”\
Sometimes I absolutely HATE auto-correction. That should read “studio strobes”. . . SHEESH!
Camera phones are real good for taking photos that will not need to be enlarged say to 8 x 10. Plus you don’t have to fiddle around with the settings to get an excellent photo.
A typical photo I take with my LG G3 camera is 4160 x 3120 pixels. I reduce the height to 30% to see it all on my 27” pc monitor and it looks very good. Bigger then any photo I would typically print such as a 4 x 6” print. If I look at it full size the graininess shows up.
My Sony NEX-7 with a APS-C sensor on the other hand blows away the cell phone camera with much better detail not only in daytime photos but also indoor photos. Bigger lens and bigger sensor.
The future is already here as another poster mentioned this camera listed below. This is expensive now but as we know the prices only drop in the future. It has a bigger sensor and high quality lens with zoom.
Panasonic Lumix Smart Camera CM1 - many reviews below.
Full 1” sensor (same as the old 35mm film cameras)
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=panasonic+lumix+smart+camera+cm1+review
Well said. Hobbyist photog here - my D70s is getting long in the tooth for DSLR, but its still far better quality than my iPhone 5s camera. The phone is great to play with, but for serious shooting, I need DSLR + lenses, flash, etc. No comparison really. I will admit a cell phone cam is handy tho!
That's not a phone. It's a CAMERA with a phone stuck on it! LOL!
Video frames are very small, and not suited for print. If you're a sports photographer for example, you need to shoot several full sized photos per second for several seconds at a burst.
You need dials/knobs/buttons on the camera so you can adjust things quickly without taking the viewfinder away from your eye.
Lenses.... that's where much of the image quality comes from in great images (something one might hang on their walls, etc.). Physics limits what can be done with a tiny cell phone lens.
I know that. The point is that the iPhone's processor is faster than any processor out there. INCLUDING any processor in any camera you can name. It can do burst mode photos at 8 Megapixels at 10 per second if you like. . . or more. What do you call "full sized" photos? What resolution?
Other than the lenses in that new Lumix, and the ones in the Lumia, which are pretty damn good, the iPhone lenses are very good. . . and have been praised by professionals. I am not a professional photographer, but I am telling you that many professional photographers ARE using iPhones for their work. You can claim all you want that they are not. . . but the facts are that they are. . . and they are having no problem making money doing it. Did you even bother to look at the links I provided, or did you just dismiss them out of hand, because you are so sure you are right? Links to a Pulitzer Prize winning Professional Photographer's photos taken with his iPhone? Links to a National Geographic Professional Photographer's photos taken with his iPhone on assignment in Africa. Links to a TIME Magazine COVER taken with an iPhone 4s, not even the latest and greatest, taken with by a Professional Photographer for TIME Magazine on assignment. Or did you just assume they are all FAKES????
They did not need"dials/knobs/buttons on the camera so they could adjust things quickly without taking the viewfinder away from their eyes," CementJungle. They DID their photography with equipment YOU say they couldn't use for Professional use.
I'm not saying you can't use a phone to take photos professionally (for money), I'm saying the images can't come close to the quality (technical quality, not artistic/historic/journalistic merit) of DSLR's (or other types of camera).
I did look, and they looked like cell phone photos... grain/blur, distortion and other bad defects. Doesn't mean they didn't convey a message or have merit from a journalistic standpoint, but they just don't have the quality needed for a fine print.
Grain. Funny.
Time Magazine cover image shot with iPhone: interview with Ben LowyBen Lowy is what photography professionals call a "conflict photographer." He goes where the dramatic stories are, and in recent years has been to Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq and now to the US states knocked hard by Hurricane Sandy. His equipment of choice? Often it's an iPhone 4S, plus some iOS apps for image editing and getting photos to his editors.
Time Magazine likes his work so much that an image he captured with an iPhone recently graced the cover of the publication. Lowy told me by phone yesterday that he has really embraced the iPhone in the last few years.
I asked him if it was embarrassing as a pro to be carrying an iPhone when most of his colleagues are into Nikon and Canon gear. "People don't think twice about it," Lowy told me. "It's a fast little camera and I do like that on a tough assignment." At times though, he says, "pros will push me aside" assuming he is a tourist or amateur.
He's not a photographer who uses a lot of filters, but he does add some grain for effect, and plays with curves and color balance. The results are terrific, and sometimes people are surprised with the modest gear he uses to produce his iconic images.
While in the field, Lowy carries two iPhones (if one fails) and Mophie Juice Packs, since there often is no place to recharge. He also carries a small LED light from Manfrotto.
As for software, he often uses Hipstamatic and Snapseed. When working with Time, he uses the magazine's Instagram account to get pictures back while he is on assignment.
If he has one complaint about the iPhone it is low-light performance. Lowy likes to do a lot of work at "Golden Hour" near dawn or sunset, and he wishes the iPhone would let him control shutter speed and depth of field. "What you are giving up is some creative control. You can do some things with filters, but the iPhone camera does have limitations." Sometimes the iPhone blows out highlights, and that's another thing he has to be aware of. On the other hand, Lowy loves the ability to get pictures out quickly to share them with an eager audience.
I asked him about the iPhone as an artistic tool that competes with expensive camera equipment. Lowy says it is the mind of the photographer that defines the quality of the image, not the equipment. "Everyone has a pen," says Lowy, "but not everyone can draw."
That sentiment is proven when you look at Lowy's images. You can see some of his impressive work at his website, and almost any day in the major news outlets.
Frankly, after looking at Ben Lowy's iPhone photography work for work for Sport Illustrated, ESPN, Harpers, and a host of other magazines, I am of the opinion you literally don't know what you are talking about. You are seeing what your bias WANTS to see. . . and not what is actually there. There are some very beautiful photographs on his website.
He left out one important factor in that equation...luck. What digital technology gives you is ability to take a multitude of shots at no cost, and the luxury of being able to shuffle through the drek to find the perfect lucky shot, and then discard the rest.
In the kind of real-time photography he does, he doesn't have much control over the composition.
In my opinion, the Time cover photo, isn't remarkable at all. I sought out the original, and the complete concropped version shows some guy playing around in the water with the waves breaking in the background, and wasn't quite the cataclysmic event that Time wanted for their cover.
But I wonder what Lowy thinks about Time's dishonest crop job?
Oops, “concropped” = “uncropped”. /facepalm
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
