This is not a thread to criticize Apple, so don't worry I'm actually posting this at the behest of my wife. She's a huge iPhone fan, but has been less than thrilled with the results of her photos taken with her 4S.

The main issue is that indoor shots are blurry and a little yellowed. Is anyone else seeing that? I realize that low light photos are still extremely difficult for the cameras on these phones, but I thought these latest iPhones and Android phones were supposed to be a little better, and she seems to be getting worse results. In particular, whenever I've used her 4S to take a photo, the autofocus seems to go crazy whether we're inside or outside.

Is anyone else having these issues?

Are you sure your wife didn't get an iPhone 4 instead? Crappy photos sounds like the iPhone 4's standard.

How about a sample?

A sample would be good, and if possible, an identical shot from some other camera.

With my personal experience, every shot off the 4S has been better then the 4, (and I'm nowhere near as critical as Bruno, the 4, for being a thin phone in your pocket wasn't bad).

My initial thought with the little information here is possibly a defective 4S. Might be worth going to an Apple store, or somewhere else with a 4S on display and do direct comparisons. A lens out of alignment could possibly causing it, especially if the autofocus is going crazy.

The critical aspect comes because for the most part, if I'm out with my wife, we will also have a Canon Elph with us. If the intent is to take a photo that we'd like to do something with and keep, it makes a lot more sense to use the Canon, as it will always, without question, take a far better photo. And that's ignoring the fact that it's also higher resolution and faster to capture the frame.

If you have a point and shoot with you, it's always going to produce a better photo, I don't care who makes the camera. If you don't, then the iPhone 4 is better than nothing. And much better than most other phones. It also shoots very nice video - though it's hard as hell to keep the image stabilized.

I was super glad to hear that Apple was making the camera on the 4S a higher priority. I hope they continue with that mentality into the next iPhone and increase quality another order of magnitude.

Sorry Bruno, what a crock of shit!

http://crismatthews.com/blog/2010/08/06/iphone-fashion-studio-shoot-for-videojunkie-co-uk/

Great pictures have nothing to do with the camera you are using.

The iPhone4/4s has very little shutter lag compared to most other compacts I've used.

I have to admit, at this point, I think I preferred the camera in the iPhone4. I find the 4s shots to lack a bit of sharpness and seem a little flat. I would also agree with the colour being off slightly , towards the warm side.

Cheers

Cris

Ah, the issue wasn't with focus, it's something else. There's like a haze to them. I've attached some examples from our Halloween party. Bonus: you can see how the Castle costumes I made worked out (not terrible for Halloween costumes):

Looks like they were taken with flash. Is it in a case ? Some cases can mess with the flash.

If not, I'd say you have a lemon.

And negative shutter lag when you pre focus, I'm not aware of any compact that does that...

Hey Cris, it's your right to be completely wrong. Apparently Apple thought there was room for improvement too, but I suppose they also don't know what they're doing.



Great composition and lighting setups have nothing to do with a camera. A good photographer can produce great photos with any camera. There'sno dispute there. I didn't say good photos could not be made with an iPhone (or any camera).

But if you're going to tell me (or anyone) for a second that you could not have taken those shots with any point and shoot, then I'm sorry, you're talking out your arse.

You may be working as a professional photographer, but plenty of people, myself included have many more years of technical experience when it comes to cameras, photos and digital process.

The images out of any one camera, in the same situation as any other camera, may not be suitable, or as suitable for a particular use. I'm sure you're not gong to replace your full-frame Canon with a phone.



You must not have very much experience with a wide range of cameras. Try turning on the flash on the iPhone4 - which is a real-world, non-studio application that the general population will use.

The only way to decrease "shutter" lag in an iPhone 4 is to prime the on-screen button and then release to take the shot. The same thing can be done with a half-press on the shutter of most P&S, and many will shoot just as fast or faster. The reason the iPhone 4 has any speed at all is because it's not doing very much at the sensor level nor at the processor level while taking the shot.

Take the iPhone out some day, and do a shoot-off with a P&S in identical conditions. You can't compare studio shots to non-studio shots, so level the playing field. Small web-sized photos also look quite decent no matter the camera used. When blown up to full size, it's a different story completely - and yes, I looked at the full size iPhone sample. The lighting, and your talent, made the shot. Not the iPhone. A better result would have been had with a larger sensor and bigger glass on a P&S. You can't cheat physics.

Matt, something is wrong with the camera on that iPhone4s. It could be the lens assembly, could even be the case, among other things. A quick trip to an Apple store and a few demo shots will probably net your wife and instant replacement.

Yeah, hazy, like a smudge on the lens. Or perhaps the images were taken in very low light so the minuscule sensor is showing off its noise characteristics. I don't know anything about the effectiveness (or not) of the flash strobe on that device.

That's a standard party line from wannabee photographers, so I'm pretty amazed that Chris stooped to use it.

I don't see the vast majority of serious photographers, pro or amateur, running around doing their shoots with iPhones. The image quality and creative control simply isn't there. And contrary to the pretty party line statement, great photos do have a lot to do with the quality of the equipment.

Sure, I can manage a decent composition with any camera, but with two in my bag I'll always go for the one with the larger sensor and better creative controls. The results are simply better, and the ease of getting good photos is way better.

Cheers

Looks like a fun time in the studio. Pity the "full size" iPhone image is out of focus, though -- or rather, it appears to be focussed on her midriff at the bottom of the frame. Lack of a tripod (mount), perhaps?

Cheers

Especially since, in the linked article, he says:

Which seems to neatly summarize Bruno's original point.

Ummm so by your logic then, as the technology advances the pictures that have been taken on lesser gear all of a sudden become rubbish ??? I don't think so. I know plenty of pro shooters who use much worse gear than I have and take better pictures, so explain that is my "better" camera is supposed to help me take "better" pictures.

It's not a standard party line at all, but a realisation that taking great pictures is much harder than buying the best kit and pressing buttons.



Well of course not, professional photography, especially the type I do, is all about giving yourself the best chance to capture an image you see in your head. The better gear helps this happen quicker and more frequently. But it's not to say that a low megapixel iPhone is not capable of capturing a special moment that someone can hold dear for a lifetime. Which has to be the essence of everyday photography right ???

Cheers

Cris

I think you are missing the point of the article. It proves you can take great pictures with a camera as limiting as the iPhone4, it's totally capable, but if you spend £10k on gear you are going to get a technically improved pictures, but not necessarily one that is "better".

You might be better off watching this video that originally inspired me to give it a go...

http://fstoppers.com/iphone

Lee has a much better way of explaining it to the general population than I clearly do.

Cheers

Cris

Well clearly I must be talking out of my arse then. Of course I haven't tried every compact camera on the market, but I've sure come across a few. I've not found one yet that does touch focus and has zero shutter lag.



You know what Bruno, you must be some kind of God, in order to know exactly how many years experience I have with cameras without every meeting me or having a single one to one chat. I don't even see the relevance of this point to the discussion. Are you trying to prove to yourself that your opinion matters more because you held a camera before I did ???

You dismiss the iPhone 4s in favour of a generic spec "compact camera". That is the problem I have with your argument. Of course there are going to be things one can do that the other can't. But that doesn't make it a bad camera. There are plenty of terrible terrible compacts on the market at the moment, the iPhone 4s is a noteworthy camera, and the fact it's built into a phone that you take everywhere is a major bonus. This is the way the market is going and we will slowly see the death of the compact camera all together. Why carry a compact when for most people a camera phone does just as well ???

Cheers

Cris

Seriously ???

That picture is not out of focus.

And if you want to see the setup I was using just watch the video.

Cris, I'm not going to argue this with you. Maybe if you didn't want a strong reaction you'd do best to not poke at people with sharp sticks. If you'd care, please take a look at the various camera web sites and sensor tests including those on DPreview.com. Perform the same tests with the iPhone4.

We're not talking about the quality of photographs based on the talents of the photographer, but simple the quality of the gear. The iPhone4 is a good camera phone and is a passable camera. But it is not, in any sense, a high quality camera.

Touch focus is a feature and not relevant to the quality of the image. Zero shutter lag is something the iPhone, any version, does not have. Even the 4S with supposedly much faster response, does not have zero shutter lag.

My iPhone4 is not better than the worst P&S I have ever used, given the exact same photographic (ie. lighting) conditions. I have used maybe 20 different P&S personally, and can compare what I've used to testing methods on various web sites having reviewed those cameras and others.

I use the camera on the iPhone frequently because *I* don't normally carry my D300 around. I'm not happy with the quality of the images and I do think the 4S improves on this - but it's still a camera phone with a tiny sensor and tiny lens. But as mentioned, my wife normally has the Canon P&S which, in all circumstances bests any camera phone.

Ok, I'll try one very last time. In a very civil manor.

The size of the sensor, the specs of the electronics, or the opinion of some guy on a technical review site have nothing to do with making pictures.

Why do I say this?

It's quite simple. At it's heart a photograph is the record of a memory or a moment. That record triggers a memory or inspires a response, this is done not by the technical quality of the equipment but by the angle of view and atmosphere captured.

I do not dispute the technical aspects of any given camera or camera phone.

What I do dispute is the sweeping statement that in all circumstances a point and shoot out does an iPhone. That is simply not true. It may take a different picture, but that picture is not necessarily better.

What makes one picture better than another does not boil down to which had the bigger sensor or better lens. It's subjective. One persons view is different to another.

So I am not saying you are totally wrong. But I am saying making such sweeping statements is.

I just Googled "best iPhone pictures" and instantly found hundreds or creative and inspiring photos. Sometimes when working in a limited technical space it can push creativity way beyond what would be possible when given near unlimited technical ability.

Sometimes a piece of equipment is chosen because of it unique qualities. Today for example, we were shooting for a cover of an industrial magazine. We chose the 8Mp 1D Mk II. It was to hand and gave a certain quality to the image we wanted. The 5D MK II was just too clinical for our subject. On paper the sensor in the 5D MK II is better. But the photograph taken by the 1D MKII was "better" in our eyes. So does that mean I don't know what I am talking about because I am using an inferior piece of equipment.

The failing in your argument that greater technical advancements lead to improved images is the fact that every time a new development is made the pictures already taken somehow become less good. Some of the best images ever taken have been taken on technology that on paper may not be even as good as you point and shoot. Can you see my point there ???

Cheers

Cris

I'd agree with Andy, it's either the case or you got a lemon. My 4s doesn't suffer from this problem you are seeing.

Cheers

Cris

Cobblers, I've met numerous professional photographers with varying degrees of critical and commercial success, and they've all said similar things. One of those people was Don Mcullin, someone who I have a great deal of respect for. The only ones that don't say that are the ones sponsored by the camera manufacturers. What was it they say? All the gear and no idea?

Now that is a good point!

I'll be the first one to say my 85mm f1.2 helps me take great pictures, but it doesn't do it for me. It still takes some real shockers

Cheers

Cris

I'll say one last thing on this topic, because I feel that my earlier statements captured my opinion precisely enough.

When I made those statements, they weren't from a perspective of judging the quality of a photo on an emotional nor artistic level.

Cris' photos, shot with an iPhone are very nice. I don't think anyone will dispute that. And the iPhone can certainly make some very nice pictures in many other circumstances.

This doesn't change my opinion of the iPhone's camera nor how I judged it against other camera-only devices. I'll continue to use the camera on my iPhone 4 and hope that Apple stays focused (no pun intended) on imager quality and features in upcoming iPhone models.

That out of the way, here are a few things that I'd love to see in a new design.

The camera lens moved to where the Apple logo is now on the iPhone 4 (instead of being at one corner). Two LEDs for flash, each farther away from the lens than the single one is now placed. If the volume button remains in the same position as it is currently, provide capacitive touch sensitivity on it, so that when using it with the camera app simply touching lightly it will focus and meter (on the already selected zone for example).

The above will make using the volume button for photos a lot more useful and practical. As software features, allow use of the LEDs as modeling lights which some 3rd party camera apps already have. Allow reducing the size of the meter/focus area.

Cris, I think you are perhaps missing the point that Bruno is trying to make.

Take the photographer completely out of the equation. Set the 4s up on a tripod pointed towards something interesting that will reveal strengths and weaknesses of a camera. Do the same with a "generic spec compact camera" so they are side by side. Set the auto-timers for 10 seconds and stand back and let each camera do its thing.

Then, compare the two images for sharpness, contrast, color balance, saturation, noise, depth of field, etc.

I think you'll find that the dedicated camera-only device will outperform the iPhone. And why shouldn"t it? You've got a larger sensor for less noise. You have a much, much larger lens area for light gathering and correction of aberrations caused by trying to squeeze all the lens elements into a 1/8" (or less?) long light path. I think it is miraculous that a telephone can take a picture at all, and that it takes a quite acceptable one is mind boggling. But just as I don't expect my point and shoot camera to do an outstanding job of making phone calls, I don't expect a telephone to make outstanding photographs.

I don't doubt for a minute that you can take better pictures with your iPhone than I can take with my very expensive, very capable point and shoot camera. But, we're comparing cameras here, not photographers.

tanstaafl.

Ok, one final, simple pont. A camera doesn't take a picture, a photographer does. The camera is just a tool, nothing more, nothing special. It's what one does with that tool that matters. The fact that someone else has a sharper tool doesn't make much difference.

Cheers

Cris.

That's the issue right there. We were having a discussion about tools (tool quality, let's say), not philosophy. Both are completely valid points for discussion, but I certainly didn't expect that my comments would be interpreted for the latter when they were most definitely aimed at the former.

I am sure if you are more familiar with one camera vs another one it makes a difference too.

I'm going to ignore all the invective and focus on the photos posted. My own cameraphone really sucks, but this is a completely different world of bad that strongly suggests a manufacturing defect in your specific iPhone's camera.

To be sure, I'd like to see pictures taken in broad daylight, where there's no question that the iPhone camera should be able to take a perfectly fine photo. If it can't, then you know you need to swap cameras.

If the broad-daylight photo is good, then things get more complicated. It's possible, albeit unlikely, that the camera is fine but the LED flash is fubar. Either way, you clearly want to get the thing replaced.

No, I didn't miss the point of the article, though I did think it was a pointless article (even if it was filled with beautiful pictures). It's never been a question that you can take great pictures with a limited camera. People have been doing art shows based on that premise before Apple released even the first iPhone, never mind the iPhone4. Heck... ever played with a pinhole camera before? You don't get much more limited than that!

I thought it was pretty clear that wasn't what Bruno was saying, though. He essentially said the same thing as you -- given the option of using a P&S camera, or a camera phone, the P&S camera will give a better result. It's the same thing you said; you can tell the difference between your iPhone pictures and a really expensive DSLR, and you'd be pissed if you couldn't. Same with a P&S vs. iPhone -- you can tell the difference in image quality. That's not to say you can't make an artistic choice of using one tool over the other, for the specific qualities that it gives.

Yea, again you are missing the point. It won't necessarily give a "better" result just a different one. That is the basis of my disagreement with both yours and Bruno's point. Using a blanket statement that a P&S WILL (that is the important word) give a "better" image. Now that fact is simply not true as you can not judge what I deem to be a better picture.

Cheers

Cris

Cris, you're talking "art" - we're talking tech. And there are many ways to quantitatively judge the quality of an image. That's what most people mean by a better image. Not a more soulful image, not a more moving image, etc.

I don't know why you're now trying to contradict statements you wrote on your web site.

The iPhone 4 cannot handle taking natural light photos in dim environments for instance. That's a severe limitation. This can be mitigated with third party camera apps allowing the LED to be used as a modeling light, but the results are still going to be poor compared to any P&S. Noise, poor focus, soft un-processed image, very poor colour and an inability to make out fine detail well beyond the limitations of its sensor pixel count.

By saying you'd be pissed that you couldn't tell the difference between an iPhone photo and an otherwise identical photo (subject, framing, lighting, composition) from your $$$$ DSLR, you're making a statement (or at least, it reads like you're making a statement) about the quality that each delivers, and that you think the $$$$ DSLR should deliver a higher quality photo than the iPhone, not just a "different" one. I.e. you think it should be "better". That's the "better" I'm talking about. It's already defined in your terms.
Okay, I'll concede that a blanket statement isn't correct. I do have some old digital P&S cameras that wouldn't hold a candle to the image quality offered by an iPhone4. For the large majority of current (and recent) consumer-grade P&S cameras from recognized camera manufacturers however, you're going to get similar differences (though, perhaps not by such a wide margin) as between the iPhone and a DSLR. I.e. "better".

Ummm, I think you will find I am not contradicting a single thing. The article clearly shows it's possible to take great pictures with something as simple as a camera phone. I point out that you can see the difference when using my professional kit, but I am not therefore saying the iPhone pictures are no good, as you wrongly assume I am saying.

In fact in some ways the iPhone got the pictures much easier than the pro kit. It was pretty simple. It wasn't something we spend loads of time on, Stef wanted to practice her presenting skills and I had seen Lee's blog pst and wanted to give it a go. I was amazed just how versatile and easy to use the iPhone was in that situation. It was able to take pictures quickly and focusing was a doddle. I feel confident to say that under those particular conditions the iPhone would beat the average point & shoot just on shutter lag alone.

Cheers

Cris

Another possibility occurred to me as to what could be causing that problem. It could be that the flash is being partly covered with a finger. I just managed to reproduce similar pictures by partially covering flash.

Well spotted that man! I too can reproduce the exact look to the photo posted by taking a picture using the + volume button.

The natural place where my middle finger falls when holding the iPhone in this position, comes too close to the flash and must be flashing back over the sensor. My finger doesn't cover the lens though.

Let me guess I point an shoot would never do this

Cheers

Cris

Ever since the 3S there has been zero shutter lag on the iPhone (assuming you're already focused).

It constantly captures full res pictures and scales them for the preview screen, so when you hit the shutter button (actually, when you release it - that's a top tip), the image on the screen is the one that's captured.

Other phones are starting to work the same way now...

I've actually measured a tiny bit of negative shutter lag on my 4

Interesting, measured as in scientifically, or by eye. The only reason I ask is I'm trying to figure out how to determine the actual exposure time of a manually 'bulb'ed shot on my camera without using the EXIF data generated by it.

Measured by pointing it at a timer running on my pc screen, as documented in a thread on here somewhere.

I didn't get the impression that he was saying they were no good, but perhaps that's because I generally turn on my hyperbole filter when reading Bruno's posts.

I'm turning my hand to bramping. But as a poor lowly Nikon user, nobody's made a controller to do it yet, unlike the Little Bramper for the Canons.

I'm concerned that as the shutter speeds increase, something relying on a display on a screen (LCD or CRT) isn't going to work properly.

For those, like me, who never heard of bramping: Little Bramper

Sorry, should've linked it.

Don't be so hard on yourself. Nobody yet makes better cameras.

Ahh, here it is http://empegbbs.com/ubbthreads.php/posts/344683

(Made me curious)

Was the screen an LCD or CRT? The "negative" lag might have been LCD rendering lag. It's usually small enough that most people never even notice these days, but shows very clearly with a CRT and LCD rendering the same image and a high speed camera. Some graphics programmers like to go to extremes when measuring this

I think we have a winner! I just asked my wife to show me how she takes pictures on her phone. Her finger wasn't covering the flash, but it was getting a kind of close to the lens. Strangely, it wasn't close enough to get in the shot, but it might be close enough for the light from the flash to bounce off her finger.

Thanks for the help, folks! Chalk up another victory for the empeg board!

This is one of the reasons I'd love to see the camera located where the Apple logo is - though it's likely not a possibility due to the depth of the sensor and lens package. Without making a much thicker iPhone or an ugly hump anyway.

Bruno, I am waiting for your come back here to tell Hugo he is clearly wrong. Whats up ???

Could there be the slightest possibility you were wrong and had no idea what you were talking about? Surely not?

Cheers

Cris

I'll ignore that and not go there thanks.

Cheers

Cris

Vague but not exact Nikon equivalent: Sofortbild. Mac-only but exceptionally handy.

I've already said it before Cris, turn on the flash.

With regards to no flash, if the software is saving an image from an instant before it actually detected you removing your finger from the screen, then that will approach zero lag. If it's not, then as small as the apparent lag may be, it's still not zero. And if like most people, one first pre-focuses/meters by tapping the screen and then presses the shutter button, it's far from zero.

That aside, none of this affects the quality of the images produced by the sensor, so don't think for a second that my initial argument has somehow been subverted.

Yes, because the fact that I, among millions of other people on the Earth, believe that Nikon produces the finest cameras is all about you.

Is it possible that I can ever say anything without you taking it personally? It's getting really old.

Classic, despite a pretty clear statement from someone who we all know has a pretty deep understanding of the technology in the iPhone, still you contest a point. Brilliant!

If it's written in software, if it's executed by a machine, it can be timed. If it can be timed, it's not zero. It may be close, but it's not the same thing. This isn't an abstract theory.

And while I respect Hugo's insight, it doesn't provide a complete explanation for which frame of the "always filming" is actually stored.

With regards to the camera specifically, it's also been published that the sensor can't capture full resolution as quickly as it can "HD" resolutions. Which translates to potentially many frames per second, but not infinite, not 60, and not 30. So whatever number that is is also going to play a factor here. If your release happens between capture intervals, which frame is used? The previous (if buffered) or the next?

And again, try it with flash on.

I'm still not sure why this semantic argument is now the most important, because it's not relevant, the same as other features such as touch focus. Are you simply trying to make a point that I'm wrong about something? I don't have all the information, so I can't say how it's all working with 100% certainty. And I'd never make the claim that I'm always correct about anything.

I'm finding the personal attack/defense discussion threads extremely boring. I suspect anyone not directly involved would also prefer to watch paint dry. If you know it in your heart that I'm always wrong, be content with that knowledge and celebrate it without having to muddy the discussion with personal attacks. I know that some people will always disagree, and when it comes to things Apple, it doesn't seem to matter whether I'm praising or criticizing. The tech is always going to be great or terrible (or somewhere in between) - but always whatever the opposite of my opinion is on the matter.

Yeah, I understand why they put it where they put it, but it's extremely close to the edge. The placement makes it a challenge to hold it, and now when she takes a picture she ends up looking like she's trying not to touch her phone She's holding all the sides with the tips of her fingers.

Matt, tell me about it! Is she using it with the camera to her left (volume buttons at the bottom) or to her right (volume buttons on top)?

I find it a much bigger challenge using it the "new" way with volume buttons up and the lens on the right. The lens is in just about the worst place it could possibly be to hold the camera in this orientation *and* use the volume UP button as the shutter release.

No no, but when you make such absolute statements about things you need to be able to justify them.

I don't get where all this guff about personal attacks is coming from ??? I'm not attacking you, at all. Simply pointing out holes in your statements of fact and calling bull shit when I see it. What exactly is wrong with that ???

Cheers

Cris

? I do make a point of backing up statements through explanation, examples, what-have-you.

Saying someone is "full of shit" is a personal attack. While I don't consider the forum a place full of "strangers" and I post as if I'm among friends, you don't know me, Cris. You don't get to say stuff like that the same way I might say it to one of my buddies or visa versa. My reply to that wasn't any better and at no point did I say it was.

If you want to try and back up your position of disagreement with something anyone has said/written, don't do it by trying to change the playing field or topic. With regards to the comments of the iPhone4 camera which prompted this whole mess, your example photos, which I assume were your backing, had little to nothing to do with anything I'd ever written about the subject. I never said that the iPhone 4 could not take any decent pictures at all. Especially ones under controlled lighting.

Again, in the case of the iPhone 4, if the statement was absolute, it's because the facts are absolute on this topic. But if your interpretation leads you to believe I meant something different than I wrote or intended, the first step would probably be to let me clarify rather than to tell me I'm full of shit.

In case you were specifically (in this case) referring to the Nikon comment, I suggest only that you look at the context of that reply to figure out why I wrote it and why I did so in that manner.



Something about glass houses, pots and kettles.

I never said you were full of shit, I said that statement was a crock of shit. Different thing.

Cheers

Cris

I wasn't actually. I assumed that was some kind of joke, therefore my light reply.

But the very fact you think it may have been, kind of proves my point. You like to make wide fleeting statements of fact and then defend then even in the face of stronger counter evidence. I don't know why you choose to right that way but you do. Sometimes, just sometimes people are going to pull you up on it. And even though you may twist words to make out that they are making a personal attack it doesn't mean your original point is still correct. Or the manor in which you made it acceptable.

Cheers

Cris

I think you're wrong there. I find these threads fascinating.

Part of the reason I haven't been here much was the lack of participation on this BBS. Specifically, the people I'm personally interested in hearing from. They've mostly moved on in some way, so there are other avenues of communication.

I have a theory that you've always been posting your opinion as fact, but as people left the BBS, it became harder to ignore. You're currently one of the most prolific posters here. Unfortunately, I feel like I have to fact-check almost anything you say. I can't be the only one.

I used to have this BBS in my bookmarks bar. It isn't anymore. Like I said, there are other factors, but a big one is some of the ridiculous things I see posted here. Just so you know, I'm not singling you out and I don't think Cris is either. The board has become something else over the last few years and it's not as interesting. In my opinion, these camera threads have been the best thing since the Rio Karma launch.

He speaks, the voice of reason

Thank you Rob.

Cheers

Cris

I've used that a lot for tethered shooting. It's a great bit of software, but like you say, it doesn't really do bramping.

The framerate in the viewfinder is the full res capture resolution; it is not the same as LCM refresh, which is fixed at 60Hz. When I say "zero shutter lag", I mean it to refer to it capturing the exact content of the viewfinder when the button is released.

The experience of a user seeing something they want to capture but inexplicably (to them) missing is very frustrating, and something that needed to be dealt with appropriately - in this case by ensuring the image capture and processing pipeline was seriously oversized compared to what other people shipped.

Obviously, what's on the screen will be delayed vs the light hitting the sensor, as the frame has to be sampled, stream out, de-bayer'ed and stored. Scaling is something that happens on the way to the LCM, so that's not another step.

Flash is obviously a big delay because a wimpy LED flash needs to be on for many tens of milliseconds to illuminate the scene.

Possibly I should have prefixed my comment about zero lag with the above, but even an SLR almost certainly has in the same order of "real world->capture" lag due to moving the mirror and so on.

As noted earlier in this thread, a pre-focussed point-and-shoot also has really low "lag". But it sounds like the 4S really does something well there.

Operationally, I don't know how much of a real-life difference it makes -- literally, I don't know because I've never used the 4S's camera. But I would guess that if I started with the phone in my pocket, and pulled it out for a "snap", the total time taken might be a few seconds longer than doing the same action with a dedicated camera.

That's a form of lag that matters to me, as well as the actual "shutter release" lag.

Cheers

It sounds like a good guess, but it would be wrong. With the new lock screen button and the 4S's extra speed, I can take it out of my pocket, focus and take a shot in just under 3 seconds.

And the phone is always on and doesn't have a zoom lens to deploy (obviously a minus point too). And it is small enough to have in my pocket, where as most "compact" camera that are worth carrying aren't really at home in my jeans pocket.

I'm not claiming that the 4S has image quality to rival mid range and above compacts, but it is very fast.

I was going to pull out some numbers to compare against recent compacts, but dpreview seem to have stopped measuring auto focus and shutter performance ?

I really would like to be able to delete images from Photo Stream though

Mmm.. that's quick.

I really hope that Apple add a dedicated shutter button to the next iPhone, that would make it even quicker. Though I'd be surprised if they do.

I'm quite happy with the improvement in "from pocket to picture" time iOS 5 and the 4S brought. This is also an improvement I partially attribute to the competition in the mobile space. One of the priorities for Windows Phone 7 was this speed. They solved it by enforcing a dedicated camera button on every phone. If the device is asleep, even with a pin lock, pressing and holding the button caused the device to go into picture taking mode. The button also had the two stage action most point and shoot cameras have. This competition, along with user feedback likely helped to improve things for iOS users.

It's a fine line between copying another idea with the understanding of why it was a good idea, vs blindly copying everything, but not copying well enough to keep the spirit of the idea alive.

With flash, and focus from my pocket I can get it to just over 5 seconds. Without the flash I'm at a shade over 3 seconds like Andy. Once pre-focused I am also able to continue to take pictures at what feels like 2fps (without flash) which I think is quite impressive, and one of the things I loved the most while doing the little fashion shoot with it.

Over all it's an impressive bit of technology that is my pocket where ever I go, and I never forget to have it with me. No compact camera can beat it on that score!

Edit - I should also point out that the camera app wasn't already running when working out those timings, so included opening the app itself.

Cheers

Cris

In ios5 the volume+ button is the shutter button now. No half press to focus though.

I know, but it practice it isn't very useful. It is on the wrong side of the phone for how I hold it when taking photos. And you can use it to speed up the picture taking process. Ideally if you pressed and held it, it would unlock, focus and take the picture. As it is now you have to unlock, wait for it to focus and only then can you press the physical button to take the shot.

I also find I get more camera shake when using it, especially compared to pressing the on screen shutter button and sliding off to the side while keeping your finger on the screen.