WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:05.320 When the original iPhone was announced, the camera wasn't important at all, barely getting 00:00:05.320 --> 00:00:08.440 a mention from Steve Jobs in that legendary keynote. 00:00:08.440 --> 00:00:13.960 You have a 2 megapixel camera built in, as I said. What mattered at the time was that you could pinch to zoom. 00:00:13.960 --> 00:00:19.440 And so I can just move them further apart and stretch the image. 00:00:19.440 --> 00:00:28.880 That was amazing. And yet, over the 15 years since then, the iPhone evolved from three devices in one to 00:00:28.880 --> 00:00:34.000 four. In that time, we've seen many new features and improvements, leading us to the large 00:00:34.000 --> 00:00:37.880 48 megapixel sensor found in the iPhone 14 Pro. 00:00:37.880 --> 00:00:42.040 When I reviewed it last fall, I noticed that photos taken in RAW are amazing, and that 00:00:42.040 --> 00:00:48.200 photos taken normally look kind of processed. And so it got me curious about the evolution of the iPhone camera. 00:00:48.200 --> 00:00:53.440 Brandon Lee and I went and took photos with every iPhone we could get our hands on. 00:00:53.440 --> 00:00:55.440 My eyes are still burning. 00:00:56.440 --> 00:01:00.800 Okay, so I should first confess that this idea is actually the brainchild of Brandon 00:01:00.800 --> 00:01:06.160 Lee. He's had a never-growing interest in capturing light, so obviously he's curious about the 00:01:06.160 --> 00:01:12.680 iPhone cameras. You want so badly to have something in your head work out in front of a camera. 00:01:12.680 --> 00:01:19.200 And especially at the beginning, it doesn't. That challenge of like, okay, closer, closer, closer, you get a little bit better, you learn 00:01:19.200 --> 00:01:23.680 one thing, you get a little bit better, and then I got addicted to it. 00:01:23.680 --> 00:01:29.360 Over the last 15 years, Apple has made 28 different versions of their iPhone camera. 00:01:29.360 --> 00:01:32.880 And that's not even counting all the software features they add on top of it. 00:01:32.880 --> 00:01:36.220 The iPhone is the most used camera in the world. 00:01:36.220 --> 00:01:41.860 What has Apple chosen to do in the evolution of this product to improve the camera? 00:01:41.860 --> 00:01:49.280 And why? I want to know why. Though as Marcus Brownlee recently demonstrated in his annual camera comparison, the iPhone 00:01:49.280 --> 00:01:52.680 processing is letting it down compared to the others. 00:01:52.680 --> 00:02:02.480 So maybe we can see where and when this trend started. 00:02:02.480 --> 00:02:08.020 To do this, we assembled a wide history of 23 iPhones to take three different photos. 00:02:08.020 --> 00:02:13.160 After a wet West Coast winter snowfall, they are a daytime photo of a building, a nighttime 00:02:13.160 --> 00:02:18.160 picture of me working on a frozen MacBook, and a portrait of me with portrait mode. 00:02:18.160 --> 00:02:47.000 The first photo we wanted to examine is of the Fort Langley Community Hall in Langley. 00:02:47.000 --> 00:02:50.440 I love how de-emphasized the camera is on this phone, like it's just a little dark. 00:02:50.440 --> 00:02:58.600 Because cameras weren't even common on phones at that point. Alright, one, two, three. 00:02:58.600 --> 00:03:01.840 It's like looking, you know, in an old timey photo. 00:03:01.840 --> 00:03:05.680 Old timey potato. Old timey potato with color. I don't even think it's in focus. 00:03:05.680 --> 00:03:09.240 You couldn't even... It's probably a fixed focus. You couldn't pick your focus. 00:03:09.240 --> 00:03:12.600 I don't think anyone thought that the original iPhone was a good camera. 00:03:12.600 --> 00:03:15.720 Okay, so the first iPhone wasn't really about the camera. 00:03:15.720 --> 00:03:22.840 So what about the iPhone 3GS? Because it's having a bit of a moment. Okay, so what happened is Brandon sent me this amusing article from Petapixel. 00:03:22.840 --> 00:03:27.760 It's about a group of social media influencers who love the aesthetic of this 13-year-old 00:03:27.760 --> 00:03:36.400 phone. People 20 years younger are using the iPhone 3GS for the aesthetic, which is bizarre to 00:03:36.400 --> 00:03:40.520 me. It was the first phone I have video. 00:03:40.520 --> 00:03:43.960 It's also the aesthetic. What do you think about the aesthetic? 00:03:44.960 --> 00:03:48.840 I'm not convinced, Jonathan. Well, it's got a rough charm. 00:03:48.840 --> 00:03:53.480 No? I want to go right, I want to go right in there. Really get in there. 00:03:53.480 --> 00:04:03.000 I see artifacting, chromatic aberration, zero on detail, moving on. 00:04:03.000 --> 00:04:07.080 Every time I put the four up, I'm so impressed by how much better it looks. 00:04:07.080 --> 00:04:11.080 Do you think it's the retina screen or the camera? I mean, it was a huge leap. 00:04:14.760 --> 00:04:18.320 From here to here. That's pretty significant. 00:04:18.320 --> 00:04:21.720 It was a big deal. It was a big deal, yeah, because it went from 3.2 megapixels to 5. 00:04:21.720 --> 00:04:27.760 I can also see this says Fort Langley Community Hall, 1931. 00:04:27.760 --> 00:04:37.360 So what happened next? Whoa. I've always been curious, where in the iPhone's lifespan did that happen and why did that 00:04:37.360 --> 00:04:40.840 happen and why did no one else even stand a chance? 00:04:40.840 --> 00:04:42.200 Man, that looks good too. 00:04:44.120 --> 00:04:53.240 I think that the iPhone 4S hands down is the biggest jump in quality in the iPhone's lifetime. 00:04:53.240 --> 00:04:58.600 We already get into photos that are pretty respectable even when we hit the 4S. 00:04:58.600 --> 00:05:01.800 Even compared to stuff now? Yes. Oh, wow. 00:05:01.800 --> 00:05:08.320 Well, because now it's harder. If you weren't a pro at photos, you could look at this and it would still hold up to 00:05:08.320 --> 00:05:14.160 some extent. What about buying a 4S for the aesthetic reasons as opposed to 3GS? 00:05:14.160 --> 00:05:19.480 The imperfection is the aesthetic. Yeah. Is this the generation they added the whole color filter thing? 00:05:19.480 --> 00:05:22.720 The color filter thing actually wasn't added with the 5S specifically, it was added with 00:05:22.720 --> 00:05:26.920 iOS 7. Oh, okay. Which I still can't forgive. 00:05:30.600 --> 00:05:34.800 So yeah, what's going on here? I really don't like the 5S. 00:05:34.800 --> 00:05:38.480 To be very clear, this is my subjective opinion of this test that we did. 00:05:38.480 --> 00:05:43.680 There are obviously going to be situations where the 5S probably can beat the 4S in terms 00:05:43.680 --> 00:05:49.280 of its detail or whatever. But when I look at this photo, okay, there's that. 00:05:49.280 --> 00:05:53.240 And then here's the 4S. Yeah, it's way clearer. 00:05:53.240 --> 00:05:57.800 The 5S should be technically a better photo with even all the specs on it, but it's somehow... 00:05:57.800 --> 00:06:02.760 When I look at the 4S and the 5S, I'm almost disappointed at the 5S because I would expect 00:06:02.760 --> 00:06:07.960 the 5S to be better. And this is why I think the 4S is the jump. 00:06:07.960 --> 00:06:11.240 But do regular people agree with Brandon? 00:06:11.240 --> 00:06:15.480 Let's ask a couple of people. Okay, no, definitely the one on the right. 00:06:15.480 --> 00:06:21.280 It's a lot more legible when I zoom in. You're noticing it's clearer, which one do you prefer? 00:06:21.280 --> 00:06:24.480 Probably the one on the right. What? Thank you, Mark. 00:06:24.480 --> 00:06:27.480 No, that's great. That's exactly the answer I wanted. Oh, the one on the left. 00:06:27.480 --> 00:06:30.480 Really? Yeah. What matters to you in that photo then? 00:06:30.480 --> 00:06:39.800 I think that the photo on the right is just a bit too bright. It looks blurry without zooming in, whereas the one on the left side, I feel like the 00:06:39.800 --> 00:06:43.040 entire photo kind of works a lot better. 00:06:43.040 --> 00:06:46.600 So you prefer the 5S? I do. Honestly, I think I prefer the one on the right. 00:06:46.600 --> 00:06:50.240 I think you look more natural. The one on the left looks a little over-processed. 00:06:50.240 --> 00:06:55.560 I can't really describe it, but it looks maybe too sharp or too...not natural looking, 00:06:55.560 --> 00:06:58.840 I guess. Just to verify, you prefer the 5S? 00:06:58.840 --> 00:07:05.040 Yeah, I think I do. What's interesting here is that Brandon and Mark are the photographers in the group, whereas 00:07:05.040 --> 00:07:10.800 Brandon and Sarah just take photos. I don't know how you tell these different... 00:07:10.800 --> 00:07:14.600 Do you know what this is? Do you know what this is? That's a 13. 00:07:14.600 --> 00:07:17.600 Because I don't. That's a 14 plus. How do you know that? 00:07:17.600 --> 00:07:24.240 When we look at the 10, we see the crunchiness isn't really there. 00:07:24.240 --> 00:07:39.320 And then we move on to the 12 and it's there. 00:07:39.320 --> 00:07:43.040 It's like a lie. That's in your face. I feel like it's going to come out and attack me. 00:07:43.040 --> 00:07:46.040 Here's the 13. Oh, interesting. It's less? 00:07:46.040 --> 00:07:49.040 No. It's very sharp, but it's not as bright. Oh, they paired it back here. 00:07:49.040 --> 00:07:53.840 Well, they paired the exposure back on that. It makes you wonder where Apple has moved their processing since then, and the best 00:07:53.840 --> 00:07:59.920 way to see that is at night. 00:07:59.920 --> 00:08:04.120 This situation was really where I noticed the trend and sharpness. 00:08:04.120 --> 00:08:07.960 Yeah, it's like, that is... It's really coming out. 00:08:07.960 --> 00:08:12.560 Significant. Like, you really can see it. 00:08:12.560 --> 00:08:16.520 Most people are going to pick this one, I think. Do I like this trend? 00:08:16.520 --> 00:08:22.320 I don't know. I will say, I've never really been impressed by my iPhone camera. 00:08:22.320 --> 00:08:29.280 I hate artificial sharpness in photography, and the right side has a lot of that. 00:08:29.280 --> 00:08:37.680 I zoomed into the tree and it just looks bad. It's a lot more manipulated by the software, whereas with the left side here, yeah, it 00:08:37.680 --> 00:08:41.600 feels a lot more like I'm actually staring at the scene that's happening. 00:08:41.600 --> 00:08:47.440 Yeah, you can definitely tell the one on the right does feel a little bit more over-sharpened. 00:08:47.440 --> 00:08:50.480 I don't like it. I like the one on the left for that. 00:08:50.480 --> 00:08:55.640 The left looks more smooth, the right looks more sharp, and I don't like either of those. 00:08:55.640 --> 00:09:00.200 The biggest difference I've really seen this photo is sharpness and texture. 00:09:00.200 --> 00:09:06.240 The left one just looks like it's better. The color temperature and the colors and the dynamic range all look fairly similar. 00:09:06.240 --> 00:09:09.960 I think it looks a little unnatural on the tree, but everything else I think looks pretty 00:09:09.960 --> 00:09:14.720 good. And like I said, my main issue with iPhone sharpening from what I've seen is usually 00:09:14.720 --> 00:09:18.360 when it's just like a close-up photo of someone and like their family or their face or something, 00:09:18.360 --> 00:09:22.200 I find it makes their face look really unnatural. If that makes sense. 00:09:22.200 --> 00:09:27.480 I pick the newer phone every single time, I think. So I guess Apple does their research. 00:09:27.480 --> 00:09:31.080 And they're improving the camera for you. 00:09:31.080 --> 00:09:35.000 So the processing is getting quite overt on the newer iPhones. 00:09:35.000 --> 00:09:38.520 But with the last three pro models, that's not the end of the story. 00:09:38.520 --> 00:09:44.520 The last thing I want to touch on here, with this photo. 00:09:44.520 --> 00:09:51.160 48 megapixels, pro-raw. That is where I think Apple has really changed the game. 00:09:51.160 --> 00:09:55.640 That's much more natural looking. And I will be damned. 00:09:55.640 --> 00:10:01.160 Look at your jacket, look at your face, the light here, the range. 00:10:01.160 --> 00:10:04.360 This is not even, this doesn't even look like a low light photo anymore. 00:10:04.360 --> 00:10:10.720 We went from here to here, man. 00:10:10.720 --> 00:10:16.960 This looks really good. Pro-raw plus the 48 megapixel is now where the iPhone shines the most. 00:10:16.960 --> 00:10:20.160 Most people are going to pick this one, I think. 00:10:20.160 --> 00:10:23.400 For the software gimmicks on the iPhone, the most photographic is portrait mode. 00:10:23.400 --> 00:10:28.200 Okay, so what we're doing right now is I'm sitting on ice to try out portrait mode, 00:10:28.200 --> 00:10:35.160 which was introduced on the iPhone 7 Plus, and provides kind of a simulated shallow depth 00:10:35.160 --> 00:10:40.520 of field, which you would get in a DSLR camera with a much bigger sensor. 00:10:40.520 --> 00:10:45.360 So this clearly, the Sony A9 Mark II, very expensive mirrorless camera. 00:10:45.360 --> 00:10:49.680 This is the baseline. This is where you'd want it to be. This is the ideal situation. 00:10:49.680 --> 00:10:54.080 So with the introduction of the XR, they had the main camera only, but they wanted to give 00:10:54.080 --> 00:11:01.000 portrait mode a chance. And so they introduced an algorithmic base portrait mode, which reads that I'm a person, 00:11:01.000 --> 00:11:08.040 tries to figure out my outline, and then apply this bokeh effect around that. 00:11:08.040 --> 00:11:12.400 It uses the main wide camera, which contradicts how portraits have been traditionally taken 00:11:12.400 --> 00:11:16.800 with a more telephoto lens. So it certainly has a look, because you have to move the camera closer, and then you get 00:11:16.800 --> 00:11:20.280 barrel distortion, which is unflattering to the face. 00:11:20.280 --> 00:11:27.400 How close does the iPhone get? The iPhone is capable of producing something that could dupe somebody. 00:11:27.400 --> 00:11:31.760 This is a very clear issue right here. This is an improvement. 00:11:31.760 --> 00:11:35.680 Still some trouble here. That is a really challenge. Really just a very hard spot. 00:11:35.680 --> 00:11:44.000 I don't think any of them got it here. But the fall off on your head is much better, because it was just like a blob of blood, 00:11:44.000 --> 00:11:47.840 which is what makes you look photoshopped. This is portrait mode on the wide. 00:11:47.840 --> 00:11:51.440 Oh my goodness. Even on the 14th. So this is what I mean. 00:11:51.440 --> 00:11:57.000 I placed the tripod down, we stood you in a spot, and then you weren't close enough. 00:11:57.000 --> 00:12:00.480 The use case for it is slimmer because of the practicality. 00:12:00.480 --> 00:12:05.240 You have to meet Apple's parameters for the ideal shot. 00:12:05.240 --> 00:12:08.640 Which one would I pick? I don't know. 00:12:08.640 --> 00:12:12.680 The left side just has a bit more of a blurred background on the right side. 00:12:12.680 --> 00:12:16.120 And then, yeah, on zoom, the right side is a bit sharper. 00:12:16.120 --> 00:12:21.040 I'll say the right side this time. 00:12:21.040 --> 00:12:25.080 Not a lot. Like, the right side is just a bit cleaner. 00:12:25.080 --> 00:12:28.320 Do you use portrait mode? Sometimes. 00:12:28.320 --> 00:12:32.680 I use pictures of my dog. Very specifically. 00:12:32.680 --> 00:12:39.360 I find portrait mode looks very unnatural. I would say initial impressions, I don't see a huge difference. 00:12:39.360 --> 00:12:43.480 It seems like the one on the right is doing better with the little fur on your coat. 00:12:43.480 --> 00:12:46.960 Like it's sharp, and then it goes to blurriness, whereas the one on the left, it's just all 00:12:46.960 --> 00:12:51.160 the same amount of blurriness. So you prefer the one on the right? 00:12:51.160 --> 00:12:54.640 Yeah. They look very similar. 00:12:54.640 --> 00:12:58.680 So it's almost like they try to make it shallower depth of field on the one on the right. 00:12:58.680 --> 00:13:03.640 But then they have this transitional blur so that it doesn't look as like immediate. 00:13:03.640 --> 00:13:09.640 I like aspects about both of them. Yeah, I would say the one on the left, but I do like what they're doing with the one 00:13:09.640 --> 00:13:16.280 on the right a little bit. I feel like the one on the right is the newer phone, and the one on the left is the older 00:13:16.280 --> 00:13:20.200 one. Would you ever use portrait mode? 00:13:20.200 --> 00:13:24.160 I had issues with the clunkiness of portrait mode in the app. 00:13:24.160 --> 00:13:28.760 The quickness of it, I don't think will ever be the new or normal camera, and it doesn't 00:13:28.760 --> 00:13:33.600 inspire a lot of confidence because I know that it can probably fail. 00:13:33.600 --> 00:13:37.560 And so that probability would refrain me from using it regularly. 00:13:37.560 --> 00:13:44.520 I think I just use my normal camera. 00:13:44.520 --> 00:13:47.800 In terms of doing this whole experience, what's been the biggest takeaway? 00:13:47.800 --> 00:13:53.400 I think to me, they're trying to cement the belief that you don't need anything else. 00:13:53.720 --> 00:13:56.960 Especially now with what you know about the 14 Pro, would this be enough to make you 00:13:56.960 --> 00:14:03.000 switch back to iPhone? With my knowledge of how to use the portrait mode on top of it, and the video features, 00:14:03.000 --> 00:14:08.560 and the program, and the fact that you could color correct the image and manipulate it 00:14:08.560 --> 00:14:12.200 however you want, because it is a raw photo that you're getting. 00:14:12.200 --> 00:14:18.960 I don't like iOS, Jonathan. But I'm still strongly considering it, because I do need to upgrade my phone soon. 00:14:19.120 --> 00:14:23.960 And after all this, you would say, if you care about pictures, get an... 00:14:23.960 --> 00:14:31.600 Buy a real camera. It is really cool to see the evolution of a product like this, because it is so historical. 00:14:31.600 --> 00:14:39.520 You really do see that between the 7 Plus and the 11, the difference isn't that drastic. 00:14:39.520 --> 00:14:45.200 And now we're at the 14 Pro. The 48 megapixels is a big jump, but then do they really make another big jump after 00:14:45.200 --> 00:14:48.760 that? We'll find out next year. 00:14:48.760 --> 00:14:52.000 Thanks for comparing every single Mac Address video. 00:14:52.000 --> 00:14:56.080 If you like looking at many photos, give this video a like. 00:14:56.080 --> 00:15:00.200 And if you want to see more photos get taken, you might as well subscribe. 00:15:00.200 --> 00:15:04.320 Now I'm curious, what iPhone camera did you find the best? 00:15:04.320 --> 00:15:08.360 Is it always the latest one, or was there an old iPhone camera you really developed 00:15:08.360 --> 00:15:10.520 an affection for, like those TikTokers?