Carlo_M
Senior HTF Member
- Joined
- Oct 31, 1997
- Messages
- 13,392
@DaveF not a comparison, but here's a nice shot I took the other day, straight from the camera's default settings, no post, no advanced settings. I do set my iPhone to HEIC format, though, to save space so I did have to use an Automator Workflow to convert HEIC to JPG because this forum's software doesn't support HEIC. I did zoom in 1.5X and could not detect a visual difference between the original and converted file (though the file size did go up from 2.9MB to 5MB, which is why I choose HEIC). Also I do have "Prioritize Faster Shooting" set to OFF in the Camera settings.
View attachment IMG_6081.jpg
So if this doesn't represent a substantial difference from your typical 13PM result, it is likely not worth the upgrade for you.
Oh I'll add another one from a restaurant the other day. It was during dinner and inside the restaurant it was pretty low-lit (to the point where it was a little difficult to read the menu). I decided to take this shot outside of the front window (I had just gotten my iPhone) to see how it would contend with the dim interior, and the lights outside in the patio, and it was past sundown. The actual photo is un-retouched, and to my eyes the scene looks a tad brighter in the photo than it did in real life (my friend and I thought the same when we looked at the result on my iPhone screen when the picture was taken, so this isn't a Monday morning quarterback observation).
The camera's processing brightened up the inside to bring out features, but didn't blow out the patio lights and details. While I said scene this looks a little brighter than it did in real life, I will say the overall details and relative light levels are pretty representative of what was visible to the naked eye. Just a little overall brighter which one could edit in post by reducing exposure slightly by about 1/3 stop, if one wanted to try and re-create exactly what it looked like. I'd rather have the camera capture all that shadow detail and keep highlights from being blown out, and reducing the exposure in post, than to have it be incapable of capturing the shadow detail or over-exposing the bright areas. In the latter instance you're signed up for a lot more post-processing work in Lightroom and you're not guaranteed to get the same result as the superior in-camera result will get you.
View attachment IMG_5904.jpg
Maybe your 13PM was a much better camera than my 12PM and this isn't impressing you. But for me the improvement of the 15PM is pretty night-and-day compared to my 12PM.
View attachment IMG_6081.jpg
So if this doesn't represent a substantial difference from your typical 13PM result, it is likely not worth the upgrade for you.
Oh I'll add another one from a restaurant the other day. It was during dinner and inside the restaurant it was pretty low-lit (to the point where it was a little difficult to read the menu). I decided to take this shot outside of the front window (I had just gotten my iPhone) to see how it would contend with the dim interior, and the lights outside in the patio, and it was past sundown. The actual photo is un-retouched, and to my eyes the scene looks a tad brighter in the photo than it did in real life (my friend and I thought the same when we looked at the result on my iPhone screen when the picture was taken, so this isn't a Monday morning quarterback observation).
The camera's processing brightened up the inside to bring out features, but didn't blow out the patio lights and details. While I said scene this looks a little brighter than it did in real life, I will say the overall details and relative light levels are pretty representative of what was visible to the naked eye. Just a little overall brighter which one could edit in post by reducing exposure slightly by about 1/3 stop, if one wanted to try and re-create exactly what it looked like. I'd rather have the camera capture all that shadow detail and keep highlights from being blown out, and reducing the exposure in post, than to have it be incapable of capturing the shadow detail or over-exposing the bright areas. In the latter instance you're signed up for a lot more post-processing work in Lightroom and you're not guaranteed to get the same result as the superior in-camera result will get you.
View attachment IMG_5904.jpg
Maybe your 13PM was a much better camera than my 12PM and this isn't impressing you. But for me the improvement of the 15PM is pretty night-and-day compared to my 12PM.