iPhone 6s & 6s Plus

Suzy McKnockers

Suzy McKnockers

Messages
477
Name
Jason
Edit My Images
Yes
So I was in town today to pick up a few things and noticed a sign for the new iPhone... when in Rome i thought... As it turns out its low light performance is better than my D5200!

I know compositionally its not a great shot however I think this phone may come in handy when out and about - definitely time to upgrade my DSLR ha ha

Untitled by Irafusha By Jason Palmer, on Flickr
 
What are you basing your statement on that the iphone is better in low light than the D5300? Unless Apple have launched a secret new sensor then I'm 99.99% sure a teeny phone sensor can out-perform an APS sensor in low light.
 
julianhj said:
Were you able to just stroll in and buy, or was there a queue?
Click to expand...

Just walked in mate - no Q... was about 2pm this afternoon. i also got a goody bag because they thought i Pre ordered... which i didnt.... WINNING !!! ha ha
 
snerkler said:
What are you basing your statement on that the iphone is better in low light than the D5300? Unless Apple have launched a secret new sensor then I'm 99.99% sure a teeny phone sensor can out-perform an APS sensor in low light.
Click to expand...

I actually said the D5200.... but reading your post im thinking i should take the same picture with both and see what the results look like....
 
Jason_Palmer said:
Just walked in mate - no Q... was about 2pm this afternoon. i also got a goody bag because they thought i Pre ordered... which i didnt.... WINNING !!! ha ha
Click to expand...

Nice one. What phone were you using before, and is the camera a worthwhile upgrade in itself?
 
julianhj said:
Nice one. What phone were you using before, and is the camera a worthwhile upgrade in itself?
Click to expand...

Well - bit of a funny one really mate - had iPhones since they were launched in 2007. 2 years ago i fancied a change and went with the galaxy s4... 1 week later I lost it/ had it stolen from a gig... (uninsured) as the same time the other half upgraded so i got her iPhone 4s cats off - so for the past 2 years Iv been using that.. Now I fully up to date with the 6s Plus and pretty happy with it to be fair...

in answer to your question - I guess in absolutely for me... but i never had the 5, the 5s or the 6... so.... !!

Still having a play with it at the moment - these Live pictures are quite a cool feature...
 
snerkler said:
What are you basing your statement on that the iphone is better in low light than the D5300? Unless Apple have launched a secret new sensor then I'm 99.99% sure a teeny phone sensor can out-perform an APS sensor in low light.
Click to expand...

You know what mate - i would say its on par with the d5200 in low light.... just done a couple of shots on each, opened up in light room and their pretty much the same.

I had to knock the nikon up to over 10,000 ISO with a 1/60 shutter speed at 2.8 and the noise is probably less on the iphone.... and thats with a 50mm 1.4 on the Nikon too. Great Camera in daylight.... chocolate fire guard in low light ! i could obviously put the nikon on a tripod and get better results but then that wouldn't be a good comparison... iphone wins i think
 
Jason_Palmer said:
You know what mate - i would say its on par with the d5200 in low light.... just done a couple of shots on each, opened up in light room and their pretty much the same.

I had to knock the nikon up to over 10,000 ISO with a 1/60 shutter speed at 2.8 and the noise is probably less on the iphone.... and thats with a 50mm 1.4 on the Nikon too. Great Camera in daylight.... chocolate fire guard in low light ! i could obviously put the nikon on a tripod and get better results but then that wouldn't be a good comparison... iphone wins i think
Click to expand...

I'll be utterly gob smacked if an iPhone genuinely produces remotely comparable results let alone better in a genuinely scientific test, similar viewing sizes, settings etc. Do you have any examples?
 
Jason_Palmer said:
You know what mate - i would say its on par with the d5200 in low light.... just done a couple of shots on each, opened up in light room and their pretty much the same.

I had to knock the nikon up to over 10,000 ISO with a 1/60 shutter speed at 2.8 and the noise is probably less on the iphone.... and thats with a 50mm 1.4 on the Nikon too. Great Camera in daylight.... chocolate fire guard in low light ! i could obviously put the nikon on a tripod and get better results but then that wouldn't be a good comparison... iphone wins i think
Click to expand...
The only way you can compare properly is to make sure they have the same settings. It's no good testing one at 100 ISO and another at 12,800, 10,000, or even 3200. Exposure is exposure so in theory if your D5200 has to be at 10,000 ISO at 1/60 and f2.8 then the iphone should be 10,000 ISO if it chose the same aperture and shutter. Your iphone may have chosen a slower shutter and therefore reduced the ISO, but this is not a comparison of low light ability, just the ability to be able to stabilise the camera better.

The image stabilisation on my EM5-II is so good I can hand hold at 2s meaning I can keep ISO much lower when compared to my Nikon D750 and therefore would probably give a cleaner image than hand holding the Nikon at 1/60, but in no way shape or form is EM5-II a better low light performer. At ISO 3200 the EM5-II reaches my to,stance of noise, whereas I can still get images I'm happy with at ISO 12800 on the Nikon.
 
Jason_Palmer said:
So I was in town today to pick up a few things and noticed a sign for the new iPhone... when in Rome i thought... As it turns out its low light performance is better than my D5200!

I know compositionally its not a great shot however I think this phone may come in handy when out and about - definitely time to upgrade my DSLR ha ha

Untitled by Irafusha By Jason Palmer, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Really? Can't see anything in that shot it's completely underexposed!

Unless Apple have broken the laws of physics, it won't get near any DSLR in the market for sensor performance. Remember phone snaps are heavily corrected and cleaned in software and are tweaked for the tiny phone screen.
 
Last edited:
Jason_Palmer said:
You know what mate - i would say its on par with the d5200 in low light.... just done a couple of shots on each, opened up in light room and their pretty much the same.

I had to knock the nikon up to over 10,000 ISO with a 1/60 shutter speed at 2.8 and the noise is probably less on the iphone.... and thats with a 50mm 1.4 on the Nikon too. Great Camera in daylight.... chocolate fire guard in low light ! i could obviously put the nikon on a tripod and get better results but then that wouldn't be a good comparison... iphone wins i think
Click to expand...
Absolutely no chance, settings for settings, the phone can't match the massively larger sensor in the Nikon.

Remember the iPhone gives you hugely processed jpegs.

Are you shooting the Nikon raw and properly processing in LR? If not, you're comparing software routines.

And as for processing, you'll hit the limit with the iPhone file WAY before the Nikon raw.
 
Last edited:
To be fair, I don't think the OP is talking about a comparison at the studio level! They've just said that (for them), they get low light results from their new iPhone that they're happy with. We have no indication of their skill with the DSLR so they could be shooting that on full auto too so it would come down to the jpg processing engine which probably is better in the iPhone.

Whilst a camera phone will never be a direct replacement for a DLSR/CSC, it's usually in your pocket so will go to places your bigger kit might not.

Just as an example, this was a grab shot on my old iphone5 one evening when I didn't have my other kit. If it's a choice of no shot or a phone picture I'm happy with this.

ImageUploadedByTalk Photography Forums1443340422.716840.jpg
 
Last edited:
stevelmx5 said:
To be fair, I don't think the OP is talking about a comparison at the studio level! They've just said that (for them), they get low light results from their new iPhone that they're happy with. We have no indication of their skill with the DSLR so they could be shooting that on full auto too so it would come down to the jpg processing engine which probably is better in the iPhone.

Whilst a camera phone will never be a direct replacement for a DLSR/CSC, it's usually in your pocket so will go to places your bigger kit might not.

Just as an example, this was a grab shot on my old iphone5 one evening when I didn't have my other kit. If it's a choice of no shot or a phone picture I'm happy with this.

View attachment 47169
Click to expand...
I totally agree, I'm looking at it from a scientific and technical view only.
 
stevelmx5 said:
To be fair, I don't think the OP is talking about a comparison at the studio level! They've just said that (for them), they get low light results from their new iPhone that they're happy with. We have no indication of their skill with the DSLR so they could be shooting that on full auto too so it would come down to the jpg processing engine which probably is better in the iPhone.

Whilst a camera phone will never be a direct replacement for a DLSR/CSC, it's usually in your pocket so will go to places your bigger kit might not.

Just as an example, this was a grab shot on my old iphone5 one evening when I didn't have my other kit. If it's a choice of no shot or a phone picture I'm happy with this.

View attachment 47169
Click to expand...
Very true, as always said the best camera is the one you have with you. However, there's still no way an iphone is better in low light than a DSLR :p
 
snerkler said:
However, there's still no way an iphone is better in low light than a DSLR :p
Click to expand...

...assuming you're not shooting on full auto in which case there's a fair chance the device designed to be easy to use for millions of people may deliver a 'better' result ;0)
 
stevelmx5 said:
...assuming you're not shooting on full auto in which case there's a fair chance the device designed to be easy to use for millions of people may deliver a 'better' result ;0)
Click to expand...
Which still doesn't mean it's a better performer :p You can get bad results with any camera ;)
 
boliston said:
The exif says it was shot at an iso of only 25 - hardly a "low light" test
Click to expand...
Looks like it exposed for the sky, hense the low ISO and completely dark foreground and lack of detail :)
 
stevelmx5 said:
...assuming you're not shooting on full auto in which case there's a fair chance the device designed to be easy to use for millions of people may deliver a 'better' result ;0)
Click to expand...
No.

Full auto on a DSLR will still deliver a much more detailed and far less noisy image.

As per the exif, the phone shot was **25** ISO! Not a low light shot. And he's comparing it to an ISO 10,000 shot from the Nikon.

Try putting the iPhone up to ISO 10,000 then have another look, it would be awful :) (if it can even go that high, which I doubt!)
 
Last edited:
The point I was making was that the OP appears to have just picked up each camera and taken the photos. Of course the DSLR will outperform the iPhone sensor/lens in any direct technical comparison but it appears that in this 'point and shoot' scenario the OP was happy with the iPhone result.
 
Yeah and there's nothing wrong with that.

But he's openly stating the iPhone beats the APSC in low light (or at least on par), which was the point disputed in a few posts (inc mine)

Then when you look at he exif, he's comparing base ISO on the phone as its exposed incorrectly to an ISO on the Nikon I wouldn't dream of running a crop sensor at. The comparison is just all wrong on every level :)
 
Last edited:
Ok but isn't photography subjective? I don't think anyone's arguing the technical facts regarding sensor size but this isn't DPReview so there's a little bit of real world too :0)

The OP appears to be excited about their new phone and are seeing results in low light that they are happy with versus their DSLR (regardless about the technical reasons why that is the case).
 
I guess it depends how you interpret the OP, but it was this sentence I couldn't not respond to;

"As it turns out its low light performance is better than my D5200!"

When the comparison is so far off it has to be commented on! Saves the OP being disappointed the next time he leaves his SLR at home and just takes the phone for a night / evening / indoor shoot ;)
 
Fair point, definitely a sweeping statement but I don't reckon the OP will be swapping the DSLR for iPhone long term :0)
 
stevelmx5 said:
Ok but isn't photography subjective? I don't think anyone's arguing the technical facts regarding sensor size but this isn't DPReview so there's a little bit of real world too :0)

The OP appears to be excited about their new phone and are seeing results in low light that they are happy with versus their DSLR (regardless about the technical reasons why that is the case).
Click to expand...
As above, the OP stated a fact which was wrong and could be misleading for newbies reading this thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top