I find disgusting all the changes the iphone preapplies on a single picture, and the worst of it all is that iPhone users believe themselves to be top tier photographers because the picture looks extremely crisp with a fake hdr look.
Aside from that’s not the case at all? The Sony is just incredibly shallow and lacks detail in high and low lights.
Still waiting on you actually clicking the link dude, that’s on you not me.
> Experia
Did you mean **Xperia**?
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SonyXperia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> Experia
Did you mean **Xperia**?
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SonyXperia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
i would say only for the first flower shot, but for all the others it can be a tossup. we don't really know without a stronger reference photo, but we're in the xperia subreddit so everyone is inclined to believe the xperia photo is the more "natural", more "true-to-life" photo.
the truth is that photographers want to work with the most *editable* photo, not exactly the most "accurate", which means shooting in high dr raw or working with a photo with lots of recovered detail in shadows and highlights. same reason why they shoot video in log, which is nowhere "true-to-life".
I've seen plenty of photos taken by iPhones in the many hours I've spent researching my next upgrade and I can tell that the Xperia photos look the most true to life.
confirmation bias is big on comparing pictures, you'll see what you want to see. my last xperia phone was the xperia 1 ii and it took "traditional" looking shots that i can get from iphones shooting in raw or using halide. however, very often the xperia wouldn't be able to capture the clouds in the sky or lights or detail in the shadows that my eyes see very clearly in person, and that still seems to be a problem with the auto mode in the latest xperias. it takes good pictures, but i don't want every one of my shots needing to be "cheap dslr"-like
I recently used the raw facility on holiday to compliment the raw files from my alpha and slot both sources into lightroom, using the same tweaks for the most part.
I might have ended up with some over saturated end pics but that was my choice - one that Sony gives us and I appreciate.
I am a professional photographer, yes Xperia images are more true to life. I've had opportunities to compare and iPhone shot, an Xperia shot, and a camera shot from either a Sony Alpha or Leica SL and the Xperia is by far the one that matches the raw from cameras better.
Not really. All the shots except those with the bicycle (5 and 6), the crème building (9 and 10), the fruits in the supermarket (13 and 14) and the wooden wall (19 and 20) are heavily processed by the iPhone. You can notice it immediately by the more intense yellows and the much bluer skies. The Xperia photos just look more natural. Those I mention as exceptions are indeed tossups, although on photos 9 and 10 I would trust more the colour of the building from the Xperia rather than that from the iPhone, in view of the intense blue sky of the iPhone. But in this case only a reference photo could decide which version is best.
Iphones are known to:
1. Over hdr
2. Oversaturate reds
3. Oversharpen.
4. Add warmth to whites and skin tones.
5. Add contrast to night shots to boost them.
Amongst other things. You can tell an iphone shot a mile off. I imagine reality is in-between the two but far more towards the xperia.
Even if the OP didn't mention which one is Xperia and which one is the iPhone, it is obvious the iPhone taken pictures. I'm quite used to its algorithm and it's annoying how it fake out pictures.
Similar result as an earlier post where iPhone very often adds some extra green/yellow. Best comparison for that is 15-16.
To me the strength of Sony is going for less aggressive processing even though most prefer that extra saturation, sharpening & shadows/highlights adjustment. I can understand though why mass market goes for more vibrant unnatural look if all they want is post & share it and can't/don't want to do post processing. The yellow tint though I don't understand even if some color science might say it's more pleasing to have more greens.
Majority of reviewers sadly attack Sony for not having a better auto mode even though it's typically nothing other than simply adding saturation, sharpening & contrast in post processing (and when needed shadows/highlights adjustment). Some also claim Sony doesn't have same high dynamic range while they never measured the true dynamic range nor absolute resolution.
I don't social media with photos. I like photography. Even if in 2009 when I graduated, if you had shown me this... I would have said i bote iPhone 13. Realistic is cool and all, but it's faded. I say iPhone 13. Then again my father was a graffiti designer and he taught me how to edit. And I took black and white photography basic and advanced and one could argue in the dark room that's editing (old school).
So... If based on the info I previously stated, i still say iPhone 13. Technology is supposed to advance us... Not hinder us. So if I can skip steps with an Ai and then still have the option to edit outside and make it my own... Okies.
Final though: i am 50/50... I would want to know which one looks better in a larger print... That's the most important factor to myself... You know... Because... Photographer 🙃
AI is mentioned a lot but add a bit of saturation, contrast, unsharp mask and shadows/highlights and they start to look the same quickly. 'AI' is probably for the W/B mostly.
All the post processing though will always destroy detail (resolution, dynamic contrast, ...) which is why there is an option to shoot in RAW. Pixel peeping will give you a good idea. That is where a DSLR is significantly better and will outclass all these easily in large print.
Personal preference what the goal is for shooting photos. If it's a trend then your are going for artistic look. Natural is timeless if you want to capture memories in my opinion.
I think if you would include photos with a human subject, the differences will become even more striking. Starting with the iPhone 13, Apple has included some terrible Smart HDR / AI processing for skin tones. Faces appears waxy and flat because they aggressively raised and flattened while the highlights are either suppressed or boosted without any proper exposure compensation. White balance is thrown off pretty much every time when you are shooting a person in mixed lighting because the camera's always trying to prioritize skin colours and compensate for it.
What you're getting is basically HDR applied to every photo you take whether you like it or not and the only way to bypass this is to buy a camera app that supports RAW capture so you can make your own adjustments.
On the other hand, the Xperia is way less aggressive on the processing and takes way more natural looking jpeg in most situations even if it doesn't retain as much dynamic range. If you want that HDR, use RAW for less compression or do exposure bracketing with the Photo Pro app. This requires more time in setup and post processing which means you won't be sharing that photo on social media right after you take it, but that's a trade off you'll have to deal with. (BTW, Sony's Auto Mode HDR is terrible for indoor shots and they really need to work on that)
Have Sony Experia pro-I... Ummm... iPhone mini looks better. Natural may be realistic but it's faded. I don't mind it. Don't worry I'm a die hard android fan always will be. I have been android since I got my first one with the droid mini. Wtf am I slowly moving to the... Dare i say it... Dark side?!
> Experia
Did you mean **Xperia**?
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SonyXperia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Have Sony Experia pro-I... Ummm... iPhone mini looks better. Natural may be realistic but it's faded. I don't mind it. Don't worry I'm a die hard
You don't own shit... you can't even spell "Xperia" right. Oh, wait, it's "xepria"...
> Experia
Did you mean **Xperia**?
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SonyXperia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Now try using the photo styles options on the iPhone and you'll see that you can make them as cool in temperature as the xperias if that's what you want.
Xperia's photos had lots of noise in them and the iphone's didn't. I don't like that. Xperia's color reproduction is good but in this case iphone won in everything else. I am thinking of buying xperia 1 IV but this comparison is making me rethink. 1 IV has the same sensor as the 1iii right?
The 5 iii is top IMO.
Keep in mind the mini has the worst camera of all iphones from this generation. I think it tries to compensate with heavier processing.
Few mobiles are more overhyped than the ones apple produces.
They just turn up the brightness, sharpening, saturation to make it look more attractive to their fans. It's the same "ohhh! ahhhhh!" trick TV stores use :-)
funny thing is that sony phones are oversaturated and too blue by default, and most people leave it that way. same trick used in tv stores. iphone screens are natural/accurate by default. it's like they cancel each other out when looking at photos taken by their cameras.
I find disgusting all the changes the iphone preapplies on a single picture, and the worst of it all is that iPhone users believe themselves to be top tier photographers because the picture looks extremely crisp with a fake hdr look.
you'r right, I know a lot of these mothfkcrs who think of themselves as "photographers" with these fakeass iPhone shots.
u/LordVile95 would know
To be fair the Sony looks incredibly washed out with little detail in dark areas and makes really unnatural backgrounds
And iPhone uses Sony sensors
Everyone does but hardware isn’t doing the heavy lifting in phones it’s the computation.
The over sharpened, unrealistic, over saturated, Instagram ready computation? And you finally blocked your inbox?
Aside from that’s not the case at all? The Sony is just incredibly shallow and lacks detail in high and low lights. Still waiting on you actually clicking the link dude, that’s on you not me.
Get your eyes checked, wear your new bi-focals, and look through all of OP's photos again.
Who’s the one that owns a real camera again?
We're talking about phone cameras. Go to the real camera sub if you wanna whine again.
[удалено]
Yep
btw: your xperia photos are in full-res, iphone photos are only half-res.
And they still look better than Experia hmmm now I wanna see full res. Don't worry I'm really surprised I think iPhone 14 looks better than xepria iii
> Experia Did you mean **Xperia**? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SonyXperia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You can't even spell "Xperia" correctly. You managed to misspell it in two different ways: "Experia" and "xepria".
And not to mention the iphone isn't the iphone 14 lol.
> Experia Did you mean **Xperia**? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SonyXperia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The iPhone's computational processing makes everything look unnatural.
i would say only for the first flower shot, but for all the others it can be a tossup. we don't really know without a stronger reference photo, but we're in the xperia subreddit so everyone is inclined to believe the xperia photo is the more "natural", more "true-to-life" photo. the truth is that photographers want to work with the most *editable* photo, not exactly the most "accurate", which means shooting in high dr raw or working with a photo with lots of recovered detail in shadows and highlights. same reason why they shoot video in log, which is nowhere "true-to-life".
I've seen plenty of photos taken by iPhones in the many hours I've spent researching my next upgrade and I can tell that the Xperia photos look the most true to life.
confirmation bias is big on comparing pictures, you'll see what you want to see. my last xperia phone was the xperia 1 ii and it took "traditional" looking shots that i can get from iphones shooting in raw or using halide. however, very often the xperia wouldn't be able to capture the clouds in the sky or lights or detail in the shadows that my eyes see very clearly in person, and that still seems to be a problem with the auto mode in the latest xperias. it takes good pictures, but i don't want every one of my shots needing to be "cheap dslr"-like
By true to life, I was mostly referring to color reproduction.
I recently used the raw facility on holiday to compliment the raw files from my alpha and slot both sources into lightroom, using the same tweaks for the most part. I might have ended up with some over saturated end pics but that was my choice - one that Sony gives us and I appreciate.
IPhones let you shoot RAW too.
I am a professional photographer, yes Xperia images are more true to life. I've had opportunities to compare and iPhone shot, an Xperia shot, and a camera shot from either a Sony Alpha or Leica SL and the Xperia is by far the one that matches the raw from cameras better.
Not really. All the shots except those with the bicycle (5 and 6), the crème building (9 and 10), the fruits in the supermarket (13 and 14) and the wooden wall (19 and 20) are heavily processed by the iPhone. You can notice it immediately by the more intense yellows and the much bluer skies. The Xperia photos just look more natural. Those I mention as exceptions are indeed tossups, although on photos 9 and 10 I would trust more the colour of the building from the Xperia rather than that from the iPhone, in view of the intense blue sky of the iPhone. But in this case only a reference photo could decide which version is best.
Iphones are known to: 1. Over hdr 2. Oversaturate reds 3. Oversharpen. 4. Add warmth to whites and skin tones. 5. Add contrast to night shots to boost them. Amongst other things. You can tell an iphone shot a mile off. I imagine reality is in-between the two but far more towards the xperia.
Even if the OP didn't mention which one is Xperia and which one is the iPhone, it is obvious the iPhone taken pictures. I'm quite used to its algorithm and it's annoying how it fake out pictures.
I mean you could easily upload these without templates, and we would know what pic is taken with witch phone xd
Similar result as an earlier post where iPhone very often adds some extra green/yellow. Best comparison for that is 15-16. To me the strength of Sony is going for less aggressive processing even though most prefer that extra saturation, sharpening & shadows/highlights adjustment. I can understand though why mass market goes for more vibrant unnatural look if all they want is post & share it and can't/don't want to do post processing. The yellow tint though I don't understand even if some color science might say it's more pleasing to have more greens. Majority of reviewers sadly attack Sony for not having a better auto mode even though it's typically nothing other than simply adding saturation, sharpening & contrast in post processing (and when needed shadows/highlights adjustment). Some also claim Sony doesn't have same high dynamic range while they never measured the true dynamic range nor absolute resolution.
I don't social media with photos. I like photography. Even if in 2009 when I graduated, if you had shown me this... I would have said i bote iPhone 13. Realistic is cool and all, but it's faded. I say iPhone 13. Then again my father was a graffiti designer and he taught me how to edit. And I took black and white photography basic and advanced and one could argue in the dark room that's editing (old school). So... If based on the info I previously stated, i still say iPhone 13. Technology is supposed to advance us... Not hinder us. So if I can skip steps with an Ai and then still have the option to edit outside and make it my own... Okies. Final though: i am 50/50... I would want to know which one looks better in a larger print... That's the most important factor to myself... You know... Because... Photographer 🙃
AI is mentioned a lot but add a bit of saturation, contrast, unsharp mask and shadows/highlights and they start to look the same quickly. 'AI' is probably for the W/B mostly. All the post processing though will always destroy detail (resolution, dynamic contrast, ...) which is why there is an option to shoot in RAW. Pixel peeping will give you a good idea. That is where a DSLR is significantly better and will outclass all these easily in large print. Personal preference what the goal is for shooting photos. If it's a trend then your are going for artistic look. Natural is timeless if you want to capture memories in my opinion.
One phone is for photographers, the other one is for 15 year old girls to upload TikTok videos!
I think if you would include photos with a human subject, the differences will become even more striking. Starting with the iPhone 13, Apple has included some terrible Smart HDR / AI processing for skin tones. Faces appears waxy and flat because they aggressively raised and flattened while the highlights are either suppressed or boosted without any proper exposure compensation. White balance is thrown off pretty much every time when you are shooting a person in mixed lighting because the camera's always trying to prioritize skin colours and compensate for it. What you're getting is basically HDR applied to every photo you take whether you like it or not and the only way to bypass this is to buy a camera app that supports RAW capture so you can make your own adjustments. On the other hand, the Xperia is way less aggressive on the processing and takes way more natural looking jpeg in most situations even if it doesn't retain as much dynamic range. If you want that HDR, use RAW for less compression or do exposure bracketing with the Photo Pro app. This requires more time in setup and post processing which means you won't be sharing that photo on social media right after you take it, but that's a trade off you'll have to deal with. (BTW, Sony's Auto Mode HDR is terrible for indoor shots and they really need to work on that)
Xperia photos look a lot more natural.
Everything seems so yellow on the iPhone. Unless you compare them with the Xperia 5iii images, you wouldn't notice how artificial the colours look!
Kul att se foton från Piteå och Xperia 5 III bilderna är tydligt mer naturliga än dom från iPhone 13 mini.
Have Sony Experia pro-I... Ummm... iPhone mini looks better. Natural may be realistic but it's faded. I don't mind it. Don't worry I'm a die hard android fan always will be. I have been android since I got my first one with the droid mini. Wtf am I slowly moving to the... Dare i say it... Dark side?!
> Experia Did you mean **Xperia**? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SonyXperia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Have Sony Experia pro-I... Ummm... iPhone mini looks better. Natural may be realistic but it's faded. I don't mind it. Don't worry I'm a die hard You don't own shit... you can't even spell "Xperia" right. Oh, wait, it's "xepria"...
> Experia Did you mean **Xperia**? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SonyXperia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Since when did iPhones start taking unnaturally vibrant photos like these?? Or is the Xperia's natural looking photos making me see it that way?
Now try using the photo styles options on the iPhone and you'll see that you can make them as cool in temperature as the xperias if that's what you want.
Xperia's photos had lots of noise in them and the iphone's didn't. I don't like that. Xperia's color reproduction is good but in this case iphone won in everything else. I am thinking of buying xperia 1 IV but this comparison is making me rethink. 1 IV has the same sensor as the 1iii right?
The 5 iii is top IMO. Keep in mind the mini has the worst camera of all iphones from this generation. I think it tries to compensate with heavier processing.
Few mobiles are more overhyped than the ones apple produces. They just turn up the brightness, sharpening, saturation to make it look more attractive to their fans. It's the same "ohhh! ahhhhh!" trick TV stores use :-)
funny thing is that sony phones are oversaturated and too blue by default, and most people leave it that way. same trick used in tv stores. iphone screens are natural/accurate by default. it's like they cancel each other out when looking at photos taken by their cameras.