[nlanier]

As a professional photographer, comparisons like this drive me absolutely insane, especially when they are called "incredible".

Look, the iPhone 4s processes images with in-camera software and does it aggressively so images look pretty to the average user. They are over-saturated and over-sharpened. And the lack of detail captured by the small sensor all but negates the possibility of any REAL post processing.

I get it. The consumer doesn't care. They just know the pictures look pretty. The practicing photographer knows better.

The video comparisons are even more futile. The depth of field, flexibility, and low light performance of the 5D Mark II is so far beyond the iPhone 4s it makes my head spin.

We are headed into exciting times when a device smaller than a deck of cards will replace a device the size of a toaster. I know. But we aren't there yet. Really, we aren't even close.

[CWuestefeld]

Everything you said is true, however:

The best camera is the one you have with you.

I, for one, don't carry my DSLR with me everywhere, but I almost always have my phone. I'd like to know that I'll be able to get something when that one-in-a-million shot presents itself.

For me, I take my DSLR out when it's my intent to do photography. When I'm doing something where I think something might present itself (e.g., on my bike), I carry a compact camera if I've got room and won't endanger the camera too much. But I'll almost always have a phone with me.

[nlanier]

I understand this and I agree with you. I don't even deny that the 4s has a great camera. It does! But to compare it to an S95 and a 5D Mark II isn't a story that's ready to be told. I wouldn't have said a peep if they just showed the iPhone 1-4s comparisons. That's the story - Small sensor technology is rapidly advancing and it's great! BUT it's not a replacement for the niche the s95 fills. The image presented here of the city is the most striking example of that.

[asto]

I thought they just brought the 5D Mark II to show how much the iPhone has caught up to photos taken with a camera. And not to say "hey! we're there now, the iPhone can replace a really good DSLR"

[tsunamifury]

Actually as a former professional photographer myself I know that you are absolutely right about the still image, but actually a bit wrong when it comes to the video.

The 5DMKII only resolves about 560 to 600 lines of resolution and interpolates them to 1080p. Source: http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/article.php/20 Source: My eyes

So while the still images of the 5D are several orders of magnitude better than a 5D at resolution, I'd guess the true 1080p resolution of the iPhone 4S is probably slightly better than the 5D -- baring control of DOF.

[zobzu]

on the other hand everyone will tell you "its a phone not a DSLR its normal that it auto processes" then tell you "look its as good as the DSLR!"

annoying ain't it :-)

But most importantly, this comparison is just bad. The key picture is taken differently with different light and different settings even on the camera

they're doing their best to hide the reality: a DSLR, even on all auto is far better than the 4S or any other phone, and its easy to see, on "regular" pictures, even for novices, the difference is huge.

[gbog]

May I ask you, as a professional photographer, what do you think about the eruption of strong effects in photos shared with instagram. I fell like it is something fake, that it will look weird or stupid in a few months.

[nlanier]

I think it's unfortunate but I can understand it's appeal and why people like it. Anyone can turn a crap photo into an appealing image with the application of a filter. Who wouldn't love that? It's like MSG for photography.

It doesn't bother me nearly as much as poorly done High Dynamic Range images. . .

[gbog]

Well, a maybe better comparison would be some sound effects heavily used in the eighties. I don't know nothing about photo, that's why I ask, but about sound I know a bit more, and there you have two kinds of effects:

1- The normal enhancements you are not supposed to hear. Maybe a bit of reverb or compression. For these effects, in my experience, the proper way to tune it is to turn the knob until you hear it, and then turn it back half ways.

2- The exceptional strong effect that is part of the sound. Here, you should turn knobs to their max, it will make a different sound.

The "instagram" plague looks to me like if everyone in every music would suddenly add 150% of one type of reverb, and everyone would blindly think it is great, and in two years none of these will be heard (seen) without laughing.

[CWuestefeld]

Butting in where I wasn't asked -- I think it's stupid, I don't use these in my Android.

Artistic interpretation of images is great. But the display of a phone (especially a smaller display as on an iPhone) just doesn't let you do it effectively. Between the low resolution, and the fact that you're probably in an environment that makes it all but impossible to accurately judge contrast, sharpness, and color, the results are pretty much guaranteed to be garbage.

If you want to do this kind of thing, go ahead. But to do so, put it on a real monitor so you can see what you're doing.