1. n8ter#AC's Avatar
    Or simply they prefer photos with colors that jump out at you. There's nothing "awful" about that photo. You just don't like it. Doesn't mean it's a bad picture. We can all agree that it looks unnatural. But I think it's a nice picture, personally.
    The colors are objectively awful when it comes to accuracy. Whether someone likes the inaccurate colors is their prerogative (subjective).

    I didn't say the picture wasn't nice.

    Also, he made the colors that way. I'm almost sure the phone didn't produce tones that off, as Apples ISP is conservative. I would expect something closer to this from a Samsung phone.

    Which is why I made the comment I did.

    I notice people editing iPhone photos to make them look the way a Samsung phone's photos look - straight out of their camera. This means I'm aware that the over saturation is pleasing to many, maybe even the majority of people.

    It could also be that his display does not display the colors the way my displays here do. It may look different to him.

    It just looks "unreal" when I see it. Like something touched up for a marketing campaign for beach resorts.
    09-12-2016 12:51 PM
  2. MonkeyJunky's Avatar
    No. I'm not wrong.

    But I do find it hilarious that you're so fannish that you're going to sit on a forum and argue about it with multiple people.

    Because everyone is wrong but you, right?

    There is no "optical" zoom in this phone. There is only the illusion of optical zoom by jumping for one sensor to another.

    A human being can get almost infinite levels of optical zoom by moving themselves between their location and the subject. This is what Optical Zoom is. It simulates how the human eye would see the subject if the human themselves were to move themselves.

    We do not zoom by switching eyeballs, we zoom by moving close and closer to the subject.

    Cameras accomplish this by changing the focal length. This is why lenses on cameras go in and out of the camera body as you optically zoom. You can zoom to 1X, or 1.2X, or 3.8X, etc. The reason why there is no 1.2x on the iPhone 7+ is because there is no optical zoom - at all. It doesn't zoom between 1.0 and 2.0x. It simply jumps straight to a longer focal length camera sensor to give you the effect of "2x Optical Zoom" when it actually didn't zoom *at all*. It just switched cameras.

    The effect is the same as if you had put your camera in your bag and pulled out another camera.

    Yes, the effect may look like Optical Zoom to you, but it's not optical zoom - at all. It's okay for them to call it that, for the masses to at least try to understand what the effect is. Technically, however, it's not zooming. It's switching cameras. And it's switching to a camera with a completely different configuration than the main camera, as well (different focal length, aperture, etc.).

    I'm not telling you to not be excited about the tech they're introducing in this camera.

    I'm simply telling you that there is no optical zoom on this camera. It only switches lenses and then digitally zooms.

    The end.

    P.S. MonkeyJunky = Fresh account. Maybe I'm just being tr*ll*d?
    I like that you assume I'm all "fannish" as you called it about this new camera. To be perfectly honest with you, I'm not all that impressed with it at all. I think they threw a gimmick on it to garner attention from your average consumer who doesn't know any better and assumes that this new feature is some "super high tech function" they've never seen before, when in reality, all it is is a slightly better (and I use that term loosely since it is such a minuscule achievement) and less efficient, way to have a small zoom function without relying on the incredibly terrible digital zoom smart phones have used for years.

    But you keep telling yourself that I'm geeking out on it if it makes you feel better about explaining EXACTLY what I explained in my earlier posts. The new camera uses a lens to garner a magnified view of the same object the normal camera sees. It accomplishes this by using different optical lens over the secondary camera. This, by definition, is optical zoom. It is NOT an adjustable zoom lens, it is lens with a different focal length (again, something I myself touched on earlier) to garner a zoomed in perspective.

    By switching to the other camera, it is optically zooming in on the photo by a small degree. Everything else is done in the horribly ineffective digital realm. The camera is actually switching to a different camera sensor with a totally different optical lens on it. If you take a DSLR and you put a different lens on it to magnify its visual range, you are using an optical lens to zoom in. This is no different, you just don't have to switch out any hardware, it does it for you.

    And yes, I am new here, and I am an photographer by trade. I'm not here to pick a fight, but when someone starts spouting off about the definition of words and applying them in an overly narrow way, I like to clarify, even if it is met with argumentative assumptions. Optical zoom is a pretty broad definition, and that is what I was trying to relay to you, whether you want to see it or not, it doesn't change the fact that using an optical lens to magnify a picture is a type of optical zoom, its just not adjustable, and no one in this thread (or at least I anyways) was trying to argue that fact.
    09-12-2016 02:27 PM
  3. n8ter#AC's Avatar
    Of course you're a "photographer by trade" ;-)

    Bye, guy.

    If you were "geeking out" on it, you'd probably not be wrong about it.

    I'm not going to argue the obvious any longer. It's not worth it and it's going to serve no purpose but to derail the thread. Believe what you choose to. I'm not here to change your mind.

    Blocked because I don't want to waste anymore of my time discussing this. I'm sure you'd be an aviator next time you replied, if that was mentioned.

    Have a great day.
    09-12-2016 02:28 PM
  4. MonkeyJunky's Avatar
    Perhaps you are just thinking too specifically on the definition of optical zoom. Given there are only two real standards of magnification in photography (optical and digital), what do YOU call the use of an optical lens to garner a zoomed perspective of the same photo?
    09-12-2016 02:38 PM
  5. MonkeyJunky's Avatar
    Of course you're a "photographer by trade" ;-)

    Bye, guy.

    If you were "geeking out" on it, you'd probably not be wrong about it.

    I'm not going to argue the obvious any longer. It's not worth it and it's going to serve no purpose but to derail the thread. Believe what you choose to. I'm not here to change your mind.

    Blocked because I don't want to waste anymore of my time discussing this. I'm sure you'd be an aviator next time you replied, if that was mentioned.

    Have a great day.
    It's ok to walk away from a conversation when you have nothing further to add. I'm not interested in the personal pot shots myself, even if that is what you feel you need to do now. You are/were wrong in the debate between the two of us, and I couldn't really care less if you believe me about my career or not, it really doesn't matter at the end of the day as I still do it day in and day out, and you'll still be either wrong, or strangely misguided with your continued thoughts on what optics are in terms of zoom features on cameras. I guess the photography standards need to add a new section for you to satisfy your overly narrow frame of reference, lol.
    09-12-2016 02:43 PM
  6. Craig's Avatar
    Jumping in very late... I am getting a 7 not a 7+ this time. So I will not be getting the new camera(s). The new cameras with the 28/56 was why I was leaning towards the plus. My hands are just not big enough for the plus, nor is my pocket to hold the phone. Just too much for me.

    I am a Photographer, but closed my studio last June to take a job in Wa. My wife lost her job, and the studios are just not making the same money as they used to make. People can get sub-dslr cameras for a few hundred and with the phones, people don't care as much about pro-photography as before. My $5000 wedding package... others who purchased a camera this year, are offering the same for $200. I can't compete. Most don't care about quality or prints,l so it's moot. Regardless my wife and I got a job where we work and live together, so I closed the studio.

    All that aside, regardless of what others say.. the 28mm/56mm at f1.2 will be an amazing setup. It will take outstanding photos. When the update the background blur (bokeh) in October, the software change for portraits will be awesome. You're roughly getting the same quality from your phone as I pay for a $2500 lens. I have over $15K tied up in lenses. But you're phone is going to do what a $2000 camera and kit lens out of the box can't.

    Enjoy the camera, take amazing photos. No need to argue, the camera is going to be outstanding. Enjoy your purchase, take great images, express yourself and enjoy your new iPhone 7+

    If you don't believe I am a Photographer, check my profile and website and/or ask for my Model Mayhem account. I am not shooting now professionally, but my sites are still live, as I may go back to it part time. I was just again on Japanese TV for Kanya Sessor, no legs no limits, my photos were again featured.

    This post was about you.. the phone, the cameras and a great set up coming to the iPhone plus. Can't wait to see images posted next week for those lucky enough to get theirs this coming week / weekend.

    Enjoy!
    09-12-2016 02:58 PM
  7. MonkeyJunky's Avatar
    Not to mention the ease of use related to the iPhone and it's abilities vs. your every day consumer picking up a DSLR with multiple lenses and a book full of settings to navigate through. People take some incredible pictures with the iPhone, and they do it without the extensive learning curve that most of your mid range to high range DSLR and mirrorless cameras require.

    These smart phone cameras are really blending the lines of what higher end cameras can do with the ease of use of point and shoots. I don't even understand how point and shoot cameras have a market anymore to be honest.
    09-12-2016 03:05 PM
  8. Craig's Avatar
    Not to mention the ease of use related to the iPhone and it's abilities vs. your every day consumer picking up a DSLR with multiple lenses and a book full of settings to navigate through. People take some incredible pictures with the iPhone, and they do it without the extensive learning curve that most of your mid range to high range DSLR and mirrorless cameras require.

    These smart phone cameras are really blending the lines of what higher end cameras can do with the ease of use of point and shoots. I don't even understand how point and shoot cameras have a market anymore to be honest.
    I shoot only manual settings, and change lenses often. So you're 100% right, getting things right takes a lot of time on a DSLR. I agree point-shoot will be dying a fast death, but full frame and some crop sensor DSLRs will still remain. We still need other lenses and are in other situations that a iPhone or Samsung will never suffice. The demo of the camera at the keynote was good. I also feel that the flash over killed some images and I saw some areas that I felt were blown out. Overall though, and amazing camera.
    Ledsteplin and MonkeyJunky like this.
    09-12-2016 03:16 PM
  9. kilofoxtrot's Avatar
    Adobe DNG Raw! Thats nice! About time!
    DianaAW likes this.
    09-12-2016 08:38 PM
  10. Craig's Avatar
    Adobe DNG Raw! Thats nice! About time!
    Since my flow is from Camera (.CR2) to Adobe Bridge to Camera Raw (9), to Photoshop CC, having the ability to save RAW is a nice feature. Will I use it.. not often if at all. I can't imagine why I would, unless I feel it's a shot I will either want to feature / sell. If I happen to be somewhere and find an amazing scene, or a great old barn and I don't have my camera (or my backup kit that I leave in the car)... then sure.. RAW is good. However I am waiting for all the people to save RAW files and then at a loss what to do with them. I am not sure many will realize what RAW means. We will see, will be interesting.
    09-12-2016 09:45 PM
  11. erwaso's Avatar
    The phone can zoom in. That's cool on its own lol.
    09-12-2016 09:51 PM
  12. Craig's Avatar
    The phone can zoom in. That's cool on its own lol.
    Zoom is an interesting word in this case.. remember you have two camera lenses 28mm and 56mm. Your eyes basically see at 35mm. So you have a slightly wide angle lens and a somewhat telephoto lens. Those optics are fixed. Anything past that is software / digital zoom. Depending on how good the camera software is, and the sensor is.. will decide the clarity of the image and the amount of noise within the image.
    09-12-2016 10:12 PM
  13. BreakingKayfabe's Avatar
    Zoom is an interesting word in this case.. remember you have two camera lenses 28mm and 56mm. Your eyes basically see at 35mm. So you have a slightly wide angle lens and a somewhat telephoto lens. Those optics are fixed. Anything past that is software / digital zoom. Depending on how good the camera software is, and the sensor is.. will decide the clarity of the image and the amount of noise within the image.
    I'm not much of a camera aficionado but I think that second lens would have been a lot better with at least 75mm-85mm zoom. Kinda sucks that Apple couldn't get it to there, but I'm sure it'll suffice as it stands at the moment.
    Craig and MonkeyJunky like this.
    09-13-2016 12:49 AM
  14. Craig's Avatar
    I'm not much of a camera aficionado but I think that second lens would have been a lot better with at least 75mm-85mm zoom. Kinda sucks that Apple couldn't get it to there, but I'm sure it'll suffice as it stands at the moment.
    85mm F/1.2 with IS is a $1900.00 lens. One of the best portrait lenses out there. I have an 85mm F/1.4, but the 1.2 was out of my price range. I use my 50mm F/1.4 often, especially for boudoir. That being said, if Apple could have pulled off an 85mm F/1.2 I may have caved and got the iPhone 7+ over the 7. That would have been amazing. Not sure if they an get that lens that small. Hmmm.. we will see what the future brings.
    09-13-2016 02:04 AM
  15. kilofoxtrot's Avatar
    Since my flow is from Camera (.CR2) to Adobe Bridge to Camera Raw (9), to Photoshop CC, having the ability to save RAW is a nice feature. Will I use it.. not often if at all. I can't imagine why I would, unless I feel it's a shot I will either want to feature / sell. If I happen to be somewhere and find an amazing scene, or a great old barn and I don't have my camera (or my backup kit that I leave in the car)... then sure.. RAW is good. However I am waiting for all the people to save RAW files and then at a loss what to do with them. I am not sure many will realize what RAW means. We will see, will be interesting.
    It appears that you need a 3rd party camera app to take advantage of RAW capture. I am looking at the Obscura camera app.
    09-13-2016 09:28 AM
  16. Craig's Avatar
    It appears that you need a 3rd party camera app to take advantage of RAW capture. I am looking at the Obscura camera app.
    Yes, never really played with non-Adobe Photoshop based RAW editors. There should be some good ones out there. Remember RAW its' RAW, need to adjust a lot to make the photo look just right. With JPG the camera assumes the best imagine it can, and tries to deliver that. You make a few adjustments or filters and you're good to go. With RAW it could be everything from light to shadows, to hue to saturation and luminosity on each color etc.. Here are a few screen shots from Adobe Camera Raw to get a hint of what (May or May Not) be needed to start editing. Just the raw part, then the rest I do inside Photoshop.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	raw.jpg 
Views:	26 
Size:	259.6 KB 
ID:	111459
    09-13-2016 09:53 AM
  17. Evilguppy's Avatar
    I have a new model: there's a huge, beautiful bobcat that has taken residence near our cabin.
    I want to try to photograph him now with my 6 Plus and later with my 7 Plus to compare.
    Any excuse is good to get to know this big cat while not interfering with his being wild and untamed, hehehe.
    09-13-2016 10:10 AM
  18. n8ter#AC's Avatar
    The workflow for RAW is just as terrible as the workflow for FHD/4K video on the devices, which is incredibly disappointing.

    Drag a DNG out of Apple Photos on OS X, and you get... a JPEG. Want the DNG? "Show Contents" and dig for it or go to iCloud.com (on your iMac, mind you) and download it from there. There doesn't seem to be any really good RAW support in Photos on iOS and there is no indication in the app which Photos are RAW and Which are JPEGs).

    It's like no one at Apple actually used the devices for this. They just threw some stuff together to tick off a few more feature boxes.

    Still the worst smartphone platform on the market for Photography/Videography workflow.

    I feel like I'm using a cameraphone marketed towards professionals, but designed for people with a mental handicap.

    EDIT: Does anyone know if iPhoto will Sync the RAW images from the iPhone to the Mac?
    09-13-2016 01:45 PM
  19. kilofoxtrot's Avatar
    The workflow for RAW is just as terrible as the workflow for FHD/4K video on the devices, which is incredibly disappointing.

    Drag a DNG out of Apple Photos on OS X, and you get... a JPEG. Want the DNG? "Show Contents" and dig for it or go to iCloud.com (on your iMac, mind you) and download it from there. There doesn't seem to be any really good RAW support in Photos on iOS and there is no indication in the app which Photos are RAW and Which are JPEGs).

    It's like no one at Apple actually used the devices for this. They just threw some stuff together to tick off a few more feature boxes.

    Still the worst smartphone platform on the market for Photography/Videography workflow.

    I feel like I'm using a cameraphone marketed towards professionals, but designed for people with a mental handicap.

    EDIT: Does anyone know if iPhoto will Sync the RAW images from the iPhone to the Mac?
    Apple Photos is an abomination to me. I only use it for "snap shots".

    It looks like Adobe just released Lightroom Mobile 2.5 which has a Camera that takes DNGs. I am thinking I can sync the DNGs with Adobe Cloud into my Desktop Lightroom install and skip Photos.

    Media Alert: Adobe Releases Lightroom for Mobile 2.5 Enabling Mobile DNG Raw Photography on iOS 10 | Adobe Newsroom
    wibawad likes this.
    09-13-2016 03:05 PM
  20. John Yester's Avatar
    • If you have the Download Originals to this Mac option turned on in Photos (Photos > Preferences > iCloud > Download Originals to this Mac), then your RAW files are always present in Photos on your Mac.
    • If you have the Optimize Mac Storage option turned on, then your RAW files are stored in iCloud Photo Library. Photos will save disk space on your Mac by displaying optimized JPEG versions of your RAW images. If you edit an optimized image on your Mac, Photos will download the RAW file for that image.
    • When Photos downloads a RAW image from iCloud Photo Library, it creates a new full-sized JPEG for optimal viewing on your Mac. It won't replace the RAW and embedded JPEG file already stored in iCloud. iOS devices will view the embedded JPEG.
    • RAW files that you store outside the Photos library (for example, in your Pictures folder) are always present on your Mac, but aren't stored in iCloud and won't be up-to-date in the Photos app on iOS devices.
    09-13-2016 03:11 PM
  21. n8ter#AC's Avatar
    The workflow for RAW is just as terrible as the workflow for FHD/4K video on the devices, which is incredibly disappointing.

    Drag a DNG out of Apple Photos on OS X, and you get... a JPEG. Want the DNG? "Show Contents" and dig for it or go to iCloud.com (on your iMac, mind you) and download it from there. There doesn't seem to be any really good RAW support in Photos on iOS and there is no indication in the app which Photos are RAW and Which are JPEGs).

    It's like no one at Apple actually used the devices for this. They just threw some stuff together to tick off a few more feature boxes.

    Still the worst smartphone platform on the market for Photography/Videography workflow.

    I feel like I'm using a cameraphone marketed towards professionals, but designed for people with a mental handicap.

    EDIT: Does anyone know if iPhoto will Sync the RAW images from the iPhone to the Mac?
    You do realize that this information you're quoting is virtually worthless, right?

    The issue isn't that they aren't there, it's that they're "practically inaccessible" on the device.

    You cannot get the 1080p or 4K Video, or the DNG RAW files out of Photos unless:

    1. "Show Contents" on the Photo Library and crawl through it until you find the specific file you need, or

    2. Go to iCloud.com and download from there.

    Additionally, getting them from iCloud.com is cumbersome because you have literally no indicator which file is RAW and which file is JPEG, which is an issue if you're shooting RAW+JPEG. So, you have to Get Info on every similar pair to pick out the format you want.

    The issue has nothing to do with whether or not the system downloads them. It does, but they're basically still locked away in a box and not easily accessible (so much trouble, that it isn't worth using it at all). I've already posted on this issue regarding video, in the past. I wouldn't be surprised if you replied with the same quote...

    Unless you can show me a video of you dragging a DNG, 1080p or 4K video out of Photos to your Desktop (or another folder in Finder); in which the software doesn't automatically transcode/compress it to JPEG or a 720p video, nothing in that quote is of use in this situation.

    I don't bemoan the enthusiasm to help; but if the solution was that trivial, this would not be a concern at all. I do know how to read.

    Tip: You cannot, so don't bother. IT works the way I say it does. Drag a DNG out, it becomes a JPEG. Drag a 1080p or 4K video out, it becomes a 720p video. Need the original? Crawl through the Library (good luck with a large library), or download from iCloud.com. Really no point even downloading originals at all, to be quite frank.
    09-13-2016 03:25 PM
  22. n8ter#AC's Avatar
    Apple Photos is an abomination to me. I only use it for "snap shots".

    It looks like Adobe just released Lightroom Mobile 2.5 which has a Camera that takes DNGs. I am thinking I can sync the DNGs with Adobe Cloud into my Desktop Lightroom install and skip Photos.

    Media Alert: Adobe Releases Lightroom for Mobile 2.5 Enabling Mobile DNG Raw Photography on iOS 10 | Adobe Newsroom
    How does the iPhone sync photos to a Windows Machine. Is it through iTunes and to the Pictures Folder? I may be able to get around it by simply not using a Mac and using my Windows Notebook instead, along with ACDSee Pro, which is on sale through the end of today.

    If I can sync the photos directly off my iPhone to my PC.
    09-13-2016 03:33 PM
  23. kilofoxtrot's Avatar
    All I have is a 6... I just shot a 1080p movie at 30fps and was able to AirDrop it to my Mac. The .mov file is 1080  1920


    Pretty easy operation.
    09-13-2016 03:34 PM
  24. victormb's Avatar
    hope I get one soon
    09-13-2016 03:35 PM
  25. n8ter#AC's Avatar
    All I have is a 6... I just shot a 1080p movie at 30fps and was able to AirDrop it to my Mac. The .mov file is 1080  1920


    Pretty easy operation.
    Workarounds are not solutions, and I have have a bad experience with AirDrop in the past (recent discussions were had on this topic).

    Also completely ignores the actual issues I bought up :-P

    But it's obvious that the solution is to either workaround the issue, or switch devices or workflow to something that works.
    09-13-2016 05:01 PM
68 123

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-10-2016, 06:53 AM
  2. how do I load an old Canon camera disc into the iPhoto file
    By iMore Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-06-2016, 07:59 PM
  3. isight camera not connected
    By iMore Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-06-2016, 10:08 AM
  4. The Talk Show 166: John and Rene read the iPhone 7 event tea leaves
    By iMore.com in forum iMore.com News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-05-2016, 09:22 PM
  5. does iMac have a built in QR reader that uses the iSight camera?
    By iMore Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-05-2016, 03:15 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD