As a consumer device, the iPhone 4S has one of the better cameras, but for people who make a living doing video, it’s just not up to snuff.

Try the both of them in poor lighting conditions, for example. 

In the daylight, you can’t see much difference between cameras. 

This is a 2006 comparison between a $150 and a $5000 camera:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/150-vs-5000-dollar-camera.htm

Of course, if you spend several grand and your needs can be satisfied with an iPhone, you’re not that clever.

Here’s the real news:  it’s possible to take reasonably good photos and video with your phone, do a bit of post-processing or video editing and show it to everyone online all with something you will have on your person all the time and all for a relatively small bit of cash.  That’s amazing and I love it.

I see the iPhone as the Polaroid of 2010.  It takes a decent photo you can share instantly but if you really want to take a photo use a different camera.

Excellent product review, Robino Films.  You took one specific element and focused on it. Great job. 

The only thing I saw was a “Birds-eye-view” effect. And a lot of people like that. 

The point is, it’s a multi-use device. The hidden argument is now most people, who are not professionals, don’t have to have two devices.

Iphone4; Phone, voice recorder, camera, video, browser, more, more , more…
$400 w/contract + Monthly charges for services.

Canon: Takes pictures and videos….$3,000+

At OWS you have significantly greater chance of having the canon taken from you than your phone. The phone can be encrypted too. 

Oh, Snap!

You and I are on the same sheet here. 

Given no colour blindness – after looking at hundreds of thousands of images technically, critically, for-a-living, you do develop a stable and reliable eye – the Willart Effect becomes ingrained, I suppose.

After a while, you don’t need side-by-side comparison.  Me, I’m not impressed: the iPhone camera might be OK for a phone, but its colour (cough) ‘reproduction’ isn’t that impressive.

First: Adjust your video playback software so that the top and bottom black (I’m assuming) bars black.

At the 0:40 mark: look at the colour fidelity in the shadows and the shadow detail.  The green garbage/recycling bins are magenta(!)-gray on the iPhone.

At the 0:50 mark: Aside from the not-the-right-colour pavement and sidewalks, the Prostate Cancer sign on the iPhone is zebras!

At the 1:20 mark:  Note that now (brighter and closer to midday – see the shadows)  that the iPhone is now showing the pavement and sidewalk as reddish and slightly yellow.

torgeaux:
Yes: given the same field of view, the full-frame sensor’s lens has to be much longer than that of a 1/6th frame sensor.  And because of the longer lens, the FF’s lens needs to be stopped down to achieve the same depth of field.   And yes, given a sufficiently small aperture, you do get diffraction.  

But the iPhone’s aperture is also smaller in diameter (y’know, ‘cuz the lens is also shorter) than the FF’s aperture, no?  Thus MORE prone to diffraction.

Most importantly, the small sensor has NO depth of focus – the focus HAS to be perfect.   Give me the bigger sensor.

I’m curious about the aperture settings.  To get similar depth of field between a camera with a full frame sensor and one 1/6 it’s size, you’d have to stop down the full frame a lot.  So far it would cause diffraction.  Of course, ignoring the strengths of the 5d, compressing the result, you’ll end up still kicking around any camera phone (not just the iPhone).  But, it’s hard to believe this story/video keep getting passed around the blogs without a critical view of the “test.”

no doubt that a camera with a large sensor, wide assortment of lenses, and more control will handily beat any camera phone out there. but i don’t think most folks want to wander around with a dslr in their pocket or pack. a smartphone is nearly always there…

i rarely take out the dedicated camera. and i haven’t owned a slr style camera since grad school… 2001,2002? and that was for film / slides / documentation / etc. i’m not a pro photographer, but i like documenting the things i see in my life. been waiting for a better melding of phone / pda / camera.
i finally jumped from android to iphone when this was released. i’ve found myself using my htc evo as my phone, mail terminal, browser, and camera – and the specs and initial reviews of the 4s’ camera pushed me over to it.

i’d be happy if apple doubled the thickness of the phone and put a real camera in there… double the battery, get the lens and sensor scaled up, and still include all the other features. would happily carry that around…

he characterized the state of the industry as investing massive amounts of money in small, back-illuminated sensors for cellphones. to me it’s no surprise that these sensors are so good just because of the huge demand for them. it’s too bad they are so small – otherwise these guys could really give canon and nikon a run for their money.

maybe all of this will have a positive effect on sony’s DSLRs. but for now these awesome sensors are no good for astrophotography due to their small size and small pixel size.

you can find all of the AIC talks here, if you are so inclined:

http://www.aicccd.com/archive/2010_presentation_archive.html

finally, the small lens on the iPhone is going to be a limiting factor vs. DSLRs, but it still looks damn good.

I’m not really impressed with the “small size” aspect either.  The Canon is an SLR first, camera second, so it has to have the mounts and body shape to support being a camera.  Realistically the same insides could be put into a much smaller body with a fixed lens and be very pocketable.   Or it’d be interesting to see the 4s compared to the video on the Canon S95 or G12.

But on the positive note at least the new batch youtube videos will be better quality thanks to improvements like this.

This video was clearly created to make the iphone look good. Everything was done to avoid encountering any of its camera’s limitations. I wouldn’t call it fair, but it’s pretty impressive still.