Portrait mode shootout: iPhone 8 Plus vs Google Pixel 2

cant wait for a cameraphone with a 1 1.7 sensor or better ..... thats the point at which ill start using a camera phone

Dec 23, 2017*permalink

as photography defining as comparing 2 cheap $129 point and shoots from 2011...but with poorer iso ability

Dec 18, 2017*permalink

That's not correct. Since these phones are using sensor sizes similar to those point and shoots, but with F1.8 lenses and 9-frame image averaging (yielding potentially over 3 stops of noise improvement), the low light ability is actually better then yesteryear's point and shoots.

That's the beauty of computational photography.

Dec 22, 2017permalink

i stand corrected, but before this latest use of merging thru computational several sensors to improve images. prior to this with one sensor
the iso ability, and iq of a 1 2\3 sensor was better, sensor to sensor ,
with 28 sq mm sensors trouncing a single i phone sensor of 17 .5 sq mm ,& similar android ones..thats one reason why they are using iso 20.
to adress tiny sensor characteristics
further the cellphones were more aggressive and used more computation methods of looking sharper \cleaner\ more sub isolation. but often with a look less true and suggestive of fakery, or over cooking and losing detail, and the artifacts of over sharpening taking their toll.
for a good example of the type of sensor behavior when wedded to superior lenses look at the latest olympus tough iq vs a single sensor cellphone granted its a more expensive camera but the sensor point i was making is still cogent .

for iso , sharpness , and optical honesty and fidelity , it is no contest

Dec 22, 2017*permalink

yahoo2u

Anyone caught using a phone to take photos should be jailed.

Dec 18, 2017permalink

I heard a similar comment decades ago: 'anyone shooting digital instead of film should be jailed.' Of course back then this opinion was more propagated over pints of beer than ubiquitous online forums but, same thing.

Good luck with that mentality my friend.

Dec 19, 2017permalink

Melindra

I agree.
The phone thing will get there eventually, but man, all these photos suck so bad.

The horrible colours, the obvious localised adjustments, the bits and pieces of non blurred objects and parts of objects and the very obviously rough masking and what not -if these images impress you, as a professional photographer, you have got some serious thinking to do.

Jun 22, 2018permalink

(unknown member)

"it's immediately obvious that the camera on the X does a better job at 'cutting around' hair, people and objects than the 8 Plus"
Not very surprising as the tele camera has a shorter focal length.

Dec 17, 2017permalink

It does?

Dec 19, 2017permalink

It does... 8+ is 56mm effecting while the X is 52mm effective.

Also the tele lenses have different apertures, 8+ f2.8 and X 2.4

Feb 15, 2018permalink

sharkcookie

Great article and great examples. Thanks! Pretty amazing how far camera phones have come. The fact that each generation is a completely new device allows much quicker and more radical development and advances. A traditional camera system is always tied down to it's initial design and has to be compatible with all it's lenses.
For non professionals it becomes less and less appealing to buy a traditional camera system.

Dec 16, 2017permalink

zodiacfml

Nice work here. However, I don't see people really interested in the capability. I follow a lot of people in Instagram and they don't this feature. Its quite expected since most posts in the platform shows where they are.
Even the optical zoom capability is not much being used. Most are fine with the digital zoom.
My S8 has a wide aperture and the blurring of the background is decent.

Dec 16, 2017permalink

Chicken and egg, my friend. I believe we now have an egg though, with the newest round of phones.

Dec 19, 2017permalink

aftab

Pixel's subject isolation is much better, iPhone often looks fake.

Dec 16, 2017permalink

kiwiadventure

.1% worry about how perfect it needs to be to take photos. The latest iPhones are as good as it needs to be for 99.9% . All is I know is when I take photo's with my iPhone X these photos will load to my iCloud and all other of my apple products with great looking results
Have your eve herd of Flogging a dead horse just seeing what camera manufacturers are still tying to peddle..

Dec 16, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

That is partially fixed with other means. Like what ie. m4/3 apps for mobile allows is easy transfer of JPEG versions of images to phone, and then they get automatically uploaded to Google Drive or iCloud.

You mark photos in camera or with phone. 20 photos full res takes about 1-2min to transfer.

Dec 17, 2017permalink

Igor Pro

The second lens of the iPhone is better for portraits with the perspective distortion and the perspective. But the quality of photos from the Pixel much better, especially in terms of color and contrast. Photos from the iPhone are often too yellow and often have highlights.
It would be nice if Google used the second lens in the following Pixels. That would be the best portrait camera in smartphones.

Dec 16, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

Google uses 1.5x digital zoom in portrait mode. This should be a field of view of approximately 41mm. iPhone 8 Plus has 56 or 57mm. iPhone X has 52mm.

Dec 17, 2017permalink

iPhone's color are usually more accurate vs Pixel's cold greenish cast.

Dec 18, 2017permalink

Igor Pro

iPhone's photos are usually with a yellow tinge. Pixel's photos are usually much closer to reality.

Dec 19, 2017permalink

Reality if you live in the Matrix

Dec 19, 2017permalink

Yes,a second tel lens would benefit the Pixel as by applying 1.5x crop, there is alot of wasted pixels not being utilized. Wonder if there is a hack to use the whole sensor to achieve defocused backgrounds...

Although I do like the colors rendering better from the Pixel, the ability to display it properly is also quite important, and the horrible blue cast is quite unforgivable.

Feb 15, 2018permalink

fake looking subject isolation

Dec 16, 2017permalink

I shoot full frame solely, and I disagree with you whole heatedly. (Not a typo) :)

Dec 19, 2017permalink

scratching my head....[not an itch] :)

Dec 19, 2017permalink

MhtLion

Pixel maybe sharper, but I find its tone and rendering VERY unpleasant.

Hey google engineers... you don't understand Art, do you? As much as I hate to admit, but Apple seems to be the only large tech company (if not only large company period) where fine engineering and Art co-exist.

Dec 16, 2017permalink

Google's artist stacked a burger upside-down and beer foaming hoovering above the beer. You can safely say Google don't have artist

Dec 18, 2017permalink

The bokeh effect seems better implimented on the Pixel, but the color and HDR is better on the iphone.

Dec 15, 2017permalink

Igor Pro

The colors in the Pixel's photo are much closer to reality. The iPhone's pictures are often too yellow.

Dec 16, 2017permalink

But how can you tell that without being there? I have compared photos with my iPhone and that’s one of the few things it does really really well, it gets the color right. Sometimes it looks yellow sometimes it is not but if that’s the way the scene really is to my eye then that’s all that matters.

Dec 16, 2017*permalink

BokehFanatic

Personally, I much more prefer the iPhone due to the ability of using two focal lengths. These differences in portrait modes are rather minor to me.

Having said that, quite impressive what these phones can do. In a few years, it will be hard to spot differences with bigger sensors.

Dec 15, 2017permalink

rockchalker

The photos look convincing except for the edges of the heads in many of shots. The algorithms are obviously not able to cope with fine hair detail, and you end up with shots that look totally photoshopped.

Many of the shots look like they photoshopped people over the backgrounds.

Dec 15, 2017permalink

wakaba

Looks like the Google phone wins over the garrish iphone output.
But the world has moved on. The Essential PH1 updated cam app is now working really well. HDR is spot on. The black and white cam - an absolute treat, 4k very usable. Lowlight is so so and expected if you dont push all the software sliders to the right. Its a photographers phone and a beautiful and very functional object.

Dec 15, 2017permalink

Yes, the world have moved on from your garish and poorly design & engineered Essential Phone.

Dec 18, 2017permalink

XPloRR

Results are clear: Google Pixel 2 portrait mode is superior to the iPhone 8 Plus: Less artifacts, less blown-out whites, better dynamic range (due to HDR always on).

Dec 14, 2017permalink

Mister Joseph

Just got an iPhone 7 Plus. The extra ~50mm lens is useful, especially for video. Could've been better if it's a 75 or 85mm equiv.

Dec 14, 2017permalink

Rotlex

Honestly, I picked up an iPhone X two weeks ago and have played with the camera extensively. Maybe I'm simple minded, or don't pixel peep, but I honestly believe this phone will finally replace my RX100M3 as a daily shooter, and possibly my vacation camera. It has done a fantastic job in almost any situation I have tried at this point.

Dec 14, 2017permalink

PortraitLover

i have the iphone 7+ and the pixel2. Here is a list of pixel2 fail that i uploaded so you can see how it fails and under what situation.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/codemagnet/albums/72157689766026055

my 2c, is that pixel2 fails in a lot of situation where the iphone 7+ wont, so i would assume the 8/8+/X would fare even better, this has to do with the weak dual pixel use as depth focusing vs 2 cameras.

Dec 14, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

Yes, I have seen a lot of Pixel 2 samples from other users (or even from the dxomark review) where it is very bad. iPhone X/8 Plus doesn't seem to make such bad mistakes.

Dec 17, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

For low-resolution low light portraits it makes sense to crop the sensor (from 1/2.55" to ≈1/3.8") and use a fast f/1.8 lens instead of f/2.8 lens and 1/3.6" sensor. But for more resolution and lossless zoom Google needs to use a dual camera.

Dec 14, 2017*permalink

walker2000

After 2 years of using LG G4, Samsung S7, Huawei Mate 9 and recent iPhone 8+, I agree that smartphone photo quality is good enough for many cases.
But this year, I come back to real cameras (bought Sony A7R2 and Canon 6D2 this year), simply because cameras are much more fun to use, and the operations make a huge difference.

Dec 14, 2017permalink

Crazy Leica Fox

I got distracted by all the cute baby pictures and forgot what the article was about ;)

Dec 14, 2017*permalink

Scrawl78

Thanks for all the great samples included in this review Rishi.

You've answered the key question I had - how do these phone's algorithms handle shooting subjects who refuse to stay still.

When going out with two toddlers, there's no room in the nappy bag for my mirroless these days. Even the RX100 gets too cumbersome.

If I can get this quality with the convenience of a smartphone, that's good enough for me.

Dec 14, 2017permalink

retr01976

I am an iPhone user and while I wouldn’t change brands for the phone camera, I think Apple’s phones produce rather ghastly color (maybe too
much Sony influence ?) The google pixel produces some rather attractive tones.

Dec 14, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

By the way Google's Pixel 2 probably uses approximately the area of a 5.4 megapixels 1/3.8" sensor in portrait mode whereas Apple uses a 1/3.6" sensor. (Google uses 1.5x digital zoom in portrait mode https://research.googleblog.com/2017/10/portrait-mode-on-pixel-2-and-pixel-2-xl.html ) .
This shows that sensor size isn't the most important specification of a smartphone camera.

Dec 14, 2017permalink

I think pixel size is though...

Feb 15, 2018permalink

ZeBebito

Impressive, no wonder compact cameras are a thing of the past. As a full Apple ecosystem user, I really want that 8+...

Dec 14, 2017permalink

KaneS

Thank you for the informative and detailed write up!

Dec 13, 2017permalink

Androole

Now the question is...

Who is going to be the first traditional camera company to come out with a DPAF 1/2.3" sensor and smartphone-quality image processor to allow Auto HDR and bokeh simulations with a pocketable ~24-200mm "travel zoom."

It would be amazing to have the flexibility of real optical zoom with the computational image quality that is starting to be demonstrated in smartphones.

(One can dream...)

Dec 13, 2017*permalink

teddoman

Samsung was in a position to bring some sort of hybrid to market, and indeed their cameras had the most modern touchscreen interface, but alas NX mount is discontinued. Sony makes cellphones too, but their cameras show no signs of influence from the cellphone side.

Dec 14, 2017permalink

XPloRR

Waiting for this a long time: Canon, Sony or Panasonic should bring out a travel compact with DPAF 1/2.3'' sensor with software bokeh and auto HDR. I also hope they use Android OS, so you can do in-camera processing via the available photo-apps. Would surely bring new life into the compact market! Imagine a Lumix compact with "Google Pixel" bokeh and noise-free 6400 ISO and 24-250mm equivalent zoom: result: you can (almost) throw away your DSLR.

Dec 14, 2017permalink

G1Houston

Or for a traditional camera makers to make their UIs and image processing in the camera a quarter as good as these phones?

Dec 14, 2017permalink

Androole

I dunno, UI definitely favours traditional camera makers right now, in my experience. At least my Panasonic is a lot nicer to use than any smartphone. Most of that is ergonomics.

Dec 14, 2017*permalink

Sam808

I don't think both Iphone 8 and Pixel 2.can produce a better blured photo than my old Nokia 808.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

Mark Turney

No but they do fit in your pocket 😉.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

XPloRR

Impossible. I guess you mean with macro photos.

Dec 14, 2017permalink

Sam808

@xplorr why impossible? Considering much larger sensor size 1/1.2" and aperture f/2.4.

Dec 14, 2017permalink

The 808 does fit in your pocket Mark Turney. Infact the overall footprint of the 808 is less than the pixel or iphone.

Feb 15, 2018permalink

BobORama

I assume some time in the future depth mapping will get to the point where this can be done in a less ruthless, brute force way and truly emulate a depth dependent bokeh. What we see today is more of a "quick hack" level of refinement of the process.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

NJOceanView

Interesting comparison. To me, the Pixel's drawbacks are 1) the need to show all faces sharpened even if they are different distances from the lens; 2) the low-res-then-uprez processing method; and 3) the color tinting. But its strengths are 1) its faster lens; 2) its constant HDR; and 3) the pretty realistic quasi-fake front camera PM simulation.

I don't know if there's any technical way to shoot both cameras simultaneously for a perfect comparison, particularly since the Pixel is wide and the iPhone is tele, but that would be a great way to really do an A/B analysis.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

Really interesting analysis/comparison Rishi, far better read than what most tech sites will manage (duh). I'm still not sure I'd gravitate towards portrait mode on either (and my original Pixel will easily last me another 1-2 years), but it's still a good read and I wouldn't mind seeing more of this. A low light comparison vs 1" compacts could be very interesting...

Dec 13, 2017permalink

teddoman

These annotated photonews pieces are usually pretty light. "Check out the new products Sony is introducing at this show. Looks pretty exciting." That's what I associate with this format.

This was a great piece showing how computational photography actually looks in real photographs, showcasing the big 2. At some point, someone should recycle these pieces as a full blown intro to computation photography.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

james s. kennedy

As a camera, my iPhone 8+ has more capability than I do as a photographer. I am color blind, for gawd’s sake. The only reason I have additional cameras is because of zoom lenses. I have concluded that artistic skill is something you are are born with, or not. I was not. If I can keep all this in mind, it will save me a lot of $$$. I am 81, and hope to find a good home for my Leicas and Vogtlanders.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

ZeBebito

James, I offer my good home to take care of those cameras :)

Dec 14, 2017*permalink

FlyinDoc

Sony has had Multi Frame Noise Reduction for years and years, though without Pre capture. And you can't combine it with HDR. They also have an Anti Motion Blur scene mode, which raises the ISO, gives you a fast SS, shoots multiple frames, combines them and removes motion artifacts all instantaneously. I'm sure other cameras have similar technologies too. But yeah, the proliferation of the usable portrait mode on smartphones means even the 1inch sensor compact will be superfluous.

But hey, you can't shoot video with shallow DoF on a smartphone, can you?

Dec 13, 2017permalink

They didn't (or haven't) continued developing the algorithms and processing for those modes tho, just attempting it and then letting it wither is kinda fruitless...

I remember several of those modes on a Sony P&S I had over 5 years ago (HX5 or something? probably in my gear list) I'm not picking on Sony either, several of the major camera makers have taken stabs at these modes without committing to improving them over time.

HDR+ (and it's usability more so than the end result) made a pretty impressive progression from the Nexus 5 to the Pixel (3 year span). On my Nexus 5 I wouldn't have given it much more credit than those specialized camera modes, the results were nice but capture/processing glacial and it couldn't deal with motion.

On my Pixel (which I didn't even buy for the camera tbh, doesn't figure into the top 3 reasons I got it) it's a whole other ballgame, the decision to have HDR+ on and add the default mode is totally justified.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

I agree they're starting to threaten even the 1" compacts, kinda didn't see that coming... 1" compacts should be entry level by now tho, we shouldn't still have a whole segment of smaller sensor compacts and then 1" P&S starting at $500 if not $700.

Are Sony sensors really dictating those prices or are camera makers still living a fantasy? Had 1" compacts come of age sooner I bet prices would be lower by now and the P&S market might not be quite as decimated.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

multisystem

I give up. Some of these photos are shockingly good. I would still rather split my money between a $30 smartphone and a $3,000 camera body/lens combo, but a $1,000 smartphone and a $2,000 camera/body lens combo is becoming increasingly tempting.

I just wish there was an easy way to plug that 1k phone into a big screen monitor and with today's mobile raw conversion and editing apps, turn that into a photo editing PC as well. The processors inside these phones are probably better than desktop chips of only a few years ago.

Dec 13, 2017*permalink

Nah, as fast and as far as phones have come, no phone is faster than say an i5 2500 quad circa 2011. If by a few years ago you meant like over a decade ago, hmm, might be getting closer there. HDMI out was pretty common on most phones even 5 years ago tho, and mouse support is there on Android, but the UI really isn't geared for that.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

The smaller Pixel 2 is "only" $650, so you could spend $2350 on your camera... ;)

Dec 14, 2017permalink

My 2016 Pixel was $850... >_< Between the storage bump (wish they'd do 64GB as base already!) and me (foolishly?) paying for insurance... No regrets on the storage, tho it actually stung more at the time, if only because Google had previously not priced their storage tiers exactly like Apple.

I've paid for insurance a couple other times before (as a monthly fee when I still bought phones on contract), to this day I've never used it and I haven't broken or significantly damaged any of the 5 or 6 smartphones I've owned... But since just about everyone else in the family has killed one or two, I must be due? Heh.

Dec 14, 2017permalink

FJarl

Impulses: funny enough, I recently compared the Geekbench scores (I know, I know, apples and oranges, but still...) of my 2500k sandy bridge i5 and an iPhone 8.

They scored the same.

Dec 15, 2017permalink

Interesting, might be closer than I thought... Geekbench isn't a very broad representation of real world performance under different usage cases tho, at least IMO, but it's still significant. Was that for the multi core score or the single threaded one? I bet the latter would be closer, specially vs a non OC'd 2500K. Phones do tend to throttle much more under prolonged loads too, but that's very variable.

That was a big inflexion point tho, beyond the series 2 Intel hasn't made any huge performance gains with any one i5/7 model line, sure after 4-5 yearly bumps of 5-10% to a current day 7700 or whatever you do end up with a more significant margin; but things had been pretty stale until AMD recently brought their IPC to respectable levels and started pushing the core count for the money envelope.

Dec 15, 2017permalink

The Pixel seems to do better but neither are reliable. If they are going to blur based on depth mapping, it needs to be just depth mapping, otherwise you randomly have rediculous looking focal planes with checkerboard patterns of blur and sharpness.

People are calling this impressive, im not impressed at all (and i own the iphone 8+). When they can actually make it work, i will be impressed.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

Making it work is just a matter of time.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

Human civilization on mars is just a matter of time.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

Well it is, as long as we didn't nuke ourselves out of existence first. :P

Dec 13, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

Some Humans evolving a semblance of intelligence is just a matter of time.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

There's zero reason to go to mars. I don't see it happening.

Dec 14, 2017permalink

BubbaHotepUK

By that logic, there wasn't any reason to go to the Moon either, other than bragging rights.

I want to go to Mars.

Dec 14, 2017permalink

I'd rather solve problems with our own planet first.

Dec 15, 2017permalink

What problems?

Dec 15, 2017permalink

cchen2

Really well done comparison with lots of samples. Really helpful advice for maximizing dynamic range with the iPhone portrait mode. Thanks so much! Wish there were more comparisons like this. I've always hated how the iPhone blows out highlights like crazy.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

When you enable HDR manually, it's much better (my experience with iPhone X)

Dec 13, 2017permalink

It's not like these are going to fool anyone coming from a big sensor and a pile of fast primes when viewed large. But on instagram or in a typical small album/book where most of the population views their photos? These are getting awfully close!

Dec 13, 2017permalink

steelhead3

A very thorough + and - review...it is amazing how close to analog lenses and FF cameras these little computers have become.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

Podz

Quite impressive if you look at the jump from 5c.
I would really like to see an in-depth comparison between the latest flagship smartphones and 1" cameras.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

I don't understand why he chose a different field of view...

Dec 13, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

You mean with the 5c?

I assume both pics were taken at approx the same distance, so no choice really.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

I think it's because the Pixel 2 portrait mode applies a heavy crop, there's no way the 5c had a lens that much wider, he might've moved some as well but I think the crop explains some of the disparity.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

jbroehl

Apologies in advance if this is a newbie question, I've been on Android for a while and not following Iphones very closelyWhy is the 8 plus considered but not the regular 8? Better camera than the regular 8?

Dec 13, 2017permalink

IR1234

Same camera iirc.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

Iphone 8 doesn't have the second camera that is used to create the portrait mode pictures. Only the 7 Plus, 8 Plus and X has that. So the regular smaller 8 cannot take pictures with the simulated bokeh/blur.

Google can do it with the one camera, but Apple's method needs 2 cameras (And provides more reliable results, IMO)

Dec 13, 2017*permalink

nxtiak

Because the iPhone 8 only has a single back camera, it can't do portrait mode, iPhones require two cameras for portrait mode to do the blurring ability. Those are only on the Plus models and the iPhone X.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

Overall the results from both are very good. Not that I am going to buy it but I think the iPhone 8 pips the Pixel.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

juanmaasecas

I much prefer the iPhone look.
All the pictures from the Pixel have this oversharpened, unrealistic and really digital appeal, and also the colors/white balance are much worse than in the iPhone.
Portraits don't need that much HDR, people are ugly with too much dynamic range. The iPhone always have the perfect point in contrast and tones.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

I don't have the Pixel 2, but Google says that the Pixel 2 applies 1.5x digital zoom in portrait mode. I think this increases over-sharpening. Apple's HDR is very important for portraits, but the default setting (HDR Auto) mostly chooses HDR off. Without Apple's HDR you often get portraits with blown highlights. Occasionally the entire background is white (indoors)!

Dec 13, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

So actually the Pixel 2 uses a 5.4 megapixel sensor in portrait mode.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

snapa

If all these pictures were taken before the upgraded from Android Oreo 8.0 to 8.1 for the Pixel 2, they are already obsolete. My Pixel 2 just received the update 2 days ago and the images it take are very noticeably better.
https://www.androidauthority.com/google-pixel-2-xl-oreo-beta-stable-build-821522/
https://www.androidauthority.com/pixel-visual-core-808182/
The Pixel 2 phones cameras are now (without a doubt) better than any iPhone!

Dec 13, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

What is better?

Dec 13, 2017permalink

snapa

There is now an HDR+ Enhanced mode which increases sharpness, gives less blown highlights, brings out shadows better and gives overall better IQ.
If you would like to see some comparison images before & after the upgrade, this site can explain in very good detail (with pictures) better than I can:
https://www.slashgear.com/pixel-2-visual-core-activated-camera-update-magic-28509578/
All I can say is I am VERY impressed what this camera is capable of now!

Dec 13, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

The new samples rather look worse in my opinion: Overblown background

Dec 13, 2017permalink

JanMatthys

Are these phomeras convenient?...Yes, are the pictures better than a $300 P&S camera? ....No ....... does the average instant-gratification consumer care?......No

And now to sports with Jim...

Dec 13, 2017permalink

There's no $300 P&S that create moderately convincing bg blur is there?

Dec 13, 2017permalink

Forget $300 P&S, these phones cost at least twice that anyway... But are any $700-1,000 compacts with 1" sensors doing any better when it comes to portraits? I'm not so sure... If your standards are web sharing, I'd still put my money on the phones, something I wouldn't have said two years ago.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

I wouldn't even call this moderately convincing, nor would i call it even remotely reliable. Just sayin. I own the 8+ and won't be buying a P&S for the record, but as of now, this portrait mode has zero appeal to me. Course im just one buyer.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

It has zero appeal for your because you probably have higher end cameras and some fast glass, I'm in the same camp, it's still interesting but I just don't care about the portrait mode all that much...

Stop looking at it from that strict point of view for a second tho, try and not pixel peep the artefacts and the occasional errors... This is opening up a facet of photography for people that were *never* gonna buy a higher end camera or don't even know what ILC and fast glass means.

For a large subset of the population it IS plenty convincing and appealing...

Dec 13, 2017permalink

Oh i get that, everybody has their own standards and interests. Im just critiquing in my own space. But for the record if they could make it reliable and consistent, i would use it too. Not necessarily instead of my DSLR but if it's all i had, sure.

Im actually not against phones for the sake of it, i have recently defended their uses for their ability to take advantage of image stacking since they have insane processing power now. I just give my own opinion like everybody, it's all subjective.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

JanMatthys

**A large subset of the population eat's McDonalds and drinks s**t beer, but we don't call that Steaks & Champagne do we? Calling these things "portraits" is the equivalent of using the term filet mignon for a Big-Mac. These are crappy snapshots with defocused backgrounds, bravo!

Yes the masses don't know the difference, they just want fast, convinnient pics which they will add some crappy orange instagram filter to them and upload them to FB

Dec 14, 2017permalink

Kwick1

I’m curious how the iPhone X would compare.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

Very similar camera hardware to the 8 plus, just a slightly faster telephoto lens. The results are roughly identical, although the X can be used in a little bit less light.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

Lan

No doubt very well, up to the point the entire phone shatters. Given the spectacular number of iPhone screens my colleagues get through, making the entire phone out of glass is pure genius; from a revenue perspective ;)

Dec 13, 2017permalink

Just updated the slideshow with some context and a sample from the X. Please check the last two slides. Cheers.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

J A C S

The iPhone photos look like ... photos. Even compared to the A7RII.

BTW, I am own a Samsung phone.

Dec 13, 2017*permalink

Arek Halusko

I own a $100 Samsung J1 with a scratched lens.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

J A C S

And I own yellow socks.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

Definitely a major upgrade in terms of photo quality for the types of applications that people tend to use smartphones for. Most of the artifacts that DPR points out in their examples wouldn’t even be noticed on Instagram or in my family’s group text. Sure if you were to print these out and really look at them there would be clear issues, but I’ve printed exactly zero photos from my smartphone in the last year.

Bottom line: smartphones are always going to be part of my photographic kit, and this is a welcome improvement.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

worldcup1982

The very first photo shows how absolutely wrong this software solution can be.
Her arm is out of focus and yet the head is sharp... With the baby also in focus...
Jeh... That's just awful

Dec 13, 2017permalink

io_bg

Most people wouldn't even notice or care.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

worldcup1982

That's possible.. And sad...

Dec 13, 2017permalink

Eh, I agree it's awful because as photogs/enthusiasts we're trained to look for that, why is it sad tho? Are you lamenting others' low standards or arguing that it really does run the picture? Those two arguments lead to very different roads... The latter one is more interesting IMO, there's a conversation in there about what's noticeable subconsciously even if you're not looking for it etc.

Dec 13, 2017permalink

I noticed it immediately and cringed. The problem is, this depth mapping stuff isn't even working properly if that can happen. I could do the exact same think with a quick PS blur filter, and any phone could do that with face detection.

If they can perfect it maybe it will be useful.

Dec 13, 2017permalink