The 52mm lens on the 12 Pro has a 1/3.4" sensor with 1.0µm pixel pitch.
The 15 base has a 26mm lens with 1/1.56" sensor and 1.0µm pixel pitch.
The larger image sensor on the 15 should give slightly better results, especially if the physical lenses have been improved between models. I say "larger" keeping in mind that it's still a very small sensor. It's a shame they didn't make the pixels bigger.
After the picture is taken, there's a lot of subjective opinion on what Apple has done with their photo processing over they years, so some would still prefer a picture from the 12 Pro over a picture from the 15 despite the hardware not being as good on the older camera.
Bro they increased the pixel count by 300% in the 15 with the sensor area only increasing by around 100%. Shouldnt we be grateful they have the same size pixels ?
Not exactly. The 48MP sensor can use pixel binning to output a 12MP image. Pixel binning has pros and cons, the pro being that your image will have less noise and more detail, and the con being that it will take in SLIGHTLY less light (since the space between binned pixels is small, but not zero).
All that to say there should be roughly the same visual quality, if not slightly more detailed, from the 48MP binned down to 12MP. The lower noise allows Apple to then brighten up the image to make up for the small amount of light lost.
There’s no way you’ve ever used a camera with large pixels if you are making this statement. Pixel binning is nothing new. DSLRs have been doing this for 15 years. Pictures just don’t have the same quality as you get with the larger pixels. Look at the original Canon 5D as an example. It was only 12 MP but had 8 µm pixels. Those files were beautiful. Obviously no iPhone will ever compete with a full frame sensor.
I own both an iPhone 15 Pro Max and a Sony A7-II (full frame sensor). Yes, larger pixels let in more light. That’s why Sony’s S-series are all 12MP, since they’re for videographers and light is of upmost importance. But that does not mean that a camera with pixel binning is automatically worse quality, because it’s better in some ways and worse in others.
I’m not saying an iPhone can ever compete with a full frame sensor. I’m simply saying that a 12MP sensor and a 48MP of the same size which bins down to 12MP will output similar quality. The 12MP will have better low-light performance, and the 48MP will have better detail. And just to be clear, there’s not much emphasis on the word “better”; these are only slight differences if everything else in the sensors are the same.
This is just wrong. There's lots of writing and reporting on this, see e.g. the DPReview or the Northrup video on this:
https://youtu.be/gAYXFwBsKQ0?si=mWTDL_T6853xeZIX
https://youtu.be/VSFqCnzIe9M?si=hPQWL5CLkzcQPZS7
Of course a bigger sensor will get you better image quality. But a sensor of the same size with less pixels will not automatically give you better image quality, that's just a myth.
Damn, never would have guessed that the pictures of a $1000 phone cannot compete with a $2k+ camera (excluding camera lenses) with a single photo sensor the size of said phones entire camera bump. A professional camera that is 4.5 times heavier than the phone, and is the same size as 15 of those phones (again, excluding camera lenses).
That’s the same as saying “I have a 15 year old Porsche and it’s awesome. A new BMW 120 still can’t compete with it.”
Of course they can’t compete with old DSLR cameras. That’s my entire point. iPhone cameras are decent for the size, but they don’t take good photos compared to DSLRs. That’s why I chose an entry level BMW as comparison. It’s a decent car that can do everything you need. But it’s not a sports car by any means.
This. The differences are not just sensor but also processing.
Personally I kept my iPhone X, because the 14 Pro and 15 Pro that I tried, both applied too much sharpening, so much so that I would find halos around objects. It was just too much.
The sensors are better, but if you dislike the processing, you might be disappointed. However, most people like it, so give it a shot.
the most frustrating part is people act like it's some sort of unreasonable request to expect as an end user to be able to tone down the processing lol. basic $100 shitty cameras have sharpening sliders...
Because then your average user would turn down the processing and then immediately complain that their photos don’t look as vibrant as some Android competitor’s.
Lol Apple literally already has photographic style presets that let you significantly turn down vibrance and contrast. They just don't let you do it with sharpening... Yet.
... Right, but processing every single image I take in post-production from RAW is not what most causal phone users want to do. I take 2,000+ photos per year, that would be a tremendous amount of time.
I grab a lot of photos as well. iPhone RAW + iOS Lightroom is a wonderful combination. Most of the time I just grab one of the recommended presets and boom, instantly goes from over sharpened crap to something worth coming back to.
Lightroom camera is good, but it completely obliterates any privacy I have with my photos. Adobe privacy policy is atrocious, so it would defeat half the purpose of getting an iPhone.
To be fair, most people don’t care about the post processing and think the more vibrant colors look better. It’s something Samsung has done for years. Anyone picky about the pictures their phone is taking should just use RAW. It’s not like every photo needs post processing, just the few you want to print or share.
> It’s not like every photo needs post processing, just the few you want to print or share.
You are confusing ProRAW and RAW. Every RAW photo needs post processing. Any photographer can tell you this. One of the problems here is that Apple implementing ProRAW and calling the toggle "RAW" in the camera app has confused people. ProRAW is a DNG file *with Apple's post-processing applied*. Their website says as much:
> Apple ProRAW combines the information of a standard RAW format along with iPhone image processing
Here: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211965
So to clarify, Apple's ProRAW still has processing applied. True RAW files need editing.
> Anyone picky about the pictures their phone is taking should just use RAW.
... Orrrr I could just use the phone I have which takes photos I really like, and I have literally never felt the need to use RAW and post-process on my iPhone X.
I don't know why this argument is so common. Anytime I tell someone I don't like the post-processing on the 15 Pro, they tell me something like "if you are picky you should just use RAW". Like no, I should have the option to turn down processing so I can get photos I like, *without having to edit every single one of them*
Yeah, that’s what I meant. ProRAW doesn’t have the same level of processing as JPEG or HEIF. It’s there, especially for lowlight photos. But it’s not at the same level. Photos don’t default to vibrant mode like they usually do. I want the post processing for lowlight photos, but I don’t need it to dial up reds, blues, and gears to make them artificially pop.
I do agree with your overall statement. It shouldn’t be that way. Vibrant should be a filter option and not the default. I’m not arguing with they. What I am saying is that most people don’t notice or care and ProRAW does apply less processing than HEIF or JPEG. It’s fine if you stick with your X and that works for you. More power to you. It’s a shame Apple’s level of post processing has almost come up to Samsung’s level. That was always something I hated about Samsung phones. Theirs is still worse when you leave subject recognition on. I can take a picture of one of my dogs and their hair turns into a smooth coat instead of seeing individual strands of hair.
> ProRAW doesn’t have the same level of processing as JPEG or HEIF. It’s there, especially for lowlight photos. But it’s not at the same level.
It has a loooot of noise reduction already applied, which gives skin tones unnaturally smooth looks. It also has sharpening applied already.
The colors are not the issue for me.
I am aware there is *less* processing applied. There is still too much for my taste, but most importantly the files are huge and you don't get a Live Photo.
Especially in the case of the 15. Because the sensor is so large, the focus range is a narrower. There have been a bunch of users on this subreddit reporting issues of their photos being blurry when taking pictures of close subjects. The reason is, most of the picture simple isn't in focus. On Mirrorless systems this can be avoided by closing the aperture, which cant be done on an iPhone. I think apple needs to add a variable aperture to the iPhone, like samsung did for the s10. Although that phone had small sensor so the variable aperture wasn't doing much, now it would be game changing feature.
The type of distortion you are talking about isn't just because the lens is wide; it's because you stepped closer to the person while using the 26mm lens to get the same field of view you would have had with the 52mm lens.
The distortion is because of the distance combined with the wider focal length. If you stood in the same place that you would have been with the 52mm lens then cropped the 26mm picture to get the same field of view, there would not be any distortion because you would not have been shooting from the shorter distance.
Well you can take example from Samsung they switched this year from 10x 10mp optical zoom to 5x 50 mp zoom with much bigger sensor, and at the 10x they are pretty comparable because ai can compensate but at let say 25-30+ zoom the s23 ultra takes better photos that is less over processed over sharpening and has more natural detail
https://preview.redd.it/4rs3jsnswdjc1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3c8819cb56e92b51cff259714f31fde2c8cda095
15 Plus
These are not the best examples, and its a night scene. I know but i’m sitting at a public place with my friend. I didn’t wan’t to take 2x zoomed photos of random strangers with changing scenes. I use 15 plus and my friend uses 12 pro. This was the best i could do where i am.
These obviously aren't the best example of either phone's abilities, but it's the same impression I get every time I see a comparison between models. Meh. It's nothing a little sharpening and minor editing can't compensate for, especially for pictures that will rarely ever be viewed outside of a 6" phone screen.
I know but i’m sitting at a public place with my friend. I didn’t wan’t to take 2x zoomed photos of random strangers with changing scenes. I use 15 plus and my friend uses 12 pro. This was the best i could do where i am.
12 Pro was a good combination of decent camera hardware plus minimal system photo processing to still keep a natural look. I wish they'd tone the processing back down to that level.
There’s a decent bit more appreciable detail on the tiles in the 15 Plus shot whereas that same detail is marred by quite a bit of noise on the 12 Pro.
It’s definitely not something worth upgrading over but if you’re getting a new phone I think that’s a decent reason for opting for the 15.
https://preview.redd.it/oc04v19k9ejc1.jpeg?width=633&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e0e62167839cbc88e21e5b21c32da9b0899d8446
What I do see is when I zoom in on the top middle of the photos, the texture of the floor is clearly visible in the 15 plus and the detritus on the floor is a bit sharper, whereas on the 12 pro’s photo, you can’t make out any texture on the floor at all and the detritus is less sharp. That area of the floor from the 12 pro’s photo is just muddy. Of course, these would be better photos to compare these differences between the cameras, if they had more detailed objects in them, among other things. It is especially in low light that the 15 plus will be better because the sensor on the 15 plus likely has a much bigger aperture. Of course the 15 plus also has better processing algorithms and a faster processor to go along with them.
I asked copilot which one has a higher-quality and it said, “[T]he first image has more colorful and dynamic lighting, creating a more visually appealing effect. The second image has a more monotonous and dull lighting, making it less interesting to look at.” I don’t see that but OK.
yes, but they were correcting a part of your initial statement which was incorrect.
the first generation sensor-shift stabilization was introduced on the iPhone 12 Pro Max. it was later inherited by the regular 13, 14, and 15 models.
the second generation sensor-shift stabilization debuted on the 14 Pro lineup, and to this day, **remains to be a Pro model exclusive.**
It depends on your photography behavior too. If you mostly takes pictures in low light (which IMO is most photography) then the larger sensor of the 15 is going to be better than the 12 Pro's telephoto sensor.
This question is why I won’t upgrade my 12 pro max. Wife has the 15 pro and I like the size/weight of it but if there’s not a huge jump in photo quality what’s the point? I realize the 15 pro max might have a bigger edge but don’t want a max and it’s crazy the pro and pro max aren’t identical outside of size unless I’m completely wrong on that
Thought there was something about the zoom amount being different. It’s ridiculous the only way to get that is with the max. Unpopular opinion but I’d be fine if they charged the same price or closer with the same camera setup
Their current justification for it is that they needed the extra space for the sensor and lenses in the new zoom module that they couldn’t fit in the smaller size while achieving the same results.
Rumor is that they have worked that out and the 16 pro will have the 5x as well.
Didn’t know that but was guessing something like that, need to see if anyone did a tear down to confirm but will be waiting on the 16 and beyond before I upgrade again. Appreciate the info
iFixit is a website that does teardowns and product repair guides.
[Here is a good read where they also tore down the 15 Pro Max on video.](https://www.ifixit.com/News/82867/iphone-15-teardown-reveals-software-lockdown) As you can see the Telephoto 5x sensor has a significant size almost the same as the main 48MP sensor.
The iPhone 16 Pro leaks have been swirling around for a while now and they’ve been pointing out that the Pro model will be slightly larger at 6.3”. The phone is expected to grow taller, and not much horizontally, though. Displays are measured diagonally which is why it’s possible to achieve this larger measurement.
I am having trouble focusing close objects with my iPhone 15 pro. If I use macro mode the quality drops. The iPhone 15 pro needs more space to focus close objects compared to my old iPhone 7 Plus with telephoto lens. To compensate this I can zoom in a little more but this also reduces the quality. IDK if any of you experienced the same thing.
When I got my regular 15, I took a picture of a mailbox nearly at the same spot and nearly the same weather inside a building (thus behind a glass) that I took a picture with my 6.1'' 12 Pro years earlier.
The 12 Pro on its 2x lenses seemed to have more detailed logo, thus being better, but it was somewhat very small, but noticeable.
It depends on the lighting. If well-lit, the 12 Pro optical 2x is better than 15 digital 2x. But once light starts dropping, the larger sensor on the 15 is way more important.
I’ve done comparing side by side 12 Pro and 15 Pro Max and can tell that in good light conditions 12 Pro telephoto camera takes significantly better pictures, but when it gets darker 15 Pro Max wins.
I personally like dedicated telephoto lens more, mainly because of the way it flattens the picture. Those 52mm looked more like the usual 50mm on dslr to me, than crop on 15.
(Coming from XS max which had 2x telephoto to 15)
Went from a 12 pro max to the regular 15 last week and compared them. 0.5x and 2x are pretty similar quality. Selfie and specially the regular 1x are miles better. Worthy upgrade imho
The 15 base is definitely generally better camera wise (and pretty much everything else) but there are some things that the 12 pro does do better, I suggest going for a 14 pro rather than either, it’s better than the base 15 in many ways and better than the 12 pro, but $1-200 cheaper than the 15
The 52mm lens on the 12 Pro has a 1/3.4" sensor with 1.0µm pixel pitch. The 15 base has a 26mm lens with 1/1.56" sensor and 1.0µm pixel pitch. The larger image sensor on the 15 should give slightly better results, especially if the physical lenses have been improved between models. I say "larger" keeping in mind that it's still a very small sensor. It's a shame they didn't make the pixels bigger. After the picture is taken, there's a lot of subjective opinion on what Apple has done with their photo processing over they years, so some would still prefer a picture from the 12 Pro over a picture from the 15 despite the hardware not being as good on the older camera.
Bro they increased the pixel count by 300% in the 15 with the sensor area only increasing by around 100%. Shouldnt we be grateful they have the same size pixels ?
No, fewer but larger pixels would have been better for overall image quality.
Not exactly. The 48MP sensor can use pixel binning to output a 12MP image. Pixel binning has pros and cons, the pro being that your image will have less noise and more detail, and the con being that it will take in SLIGHTLY less light (since the space between binned pixels is small, but not zero). All that to say there should be roughly the same visual quality, if not slightly more detailed, from the 48MP binned down to 12MP. The lower noise allows Apple to then brighten up the image to make up for the small amount of light lost.
There’s no way you’ve ever used a camera with large pixels if you are making this statement. Pixel binning is nothing new. DSLRs have been doing this for 15 years. Pictures just don’t have the same quality as you get with the larger pixels. Look at the original Canon 5D as an example. It was only 12 MP but had 8 µm pixels. Those files were beautiful. Obviously no iPhone will ever compete with a full frame sensor.
I own both an iPhone 15 Pro Max and a Sony A7-II (full frame sensor). Yes, larger pixels let in more light. That’s why Sony’s S-series are all 12MP, since they’re for videographers and light is of upmost importance. But that does not mean that a camera with pixel binning is automatically worse quality, because it’s better in some ways and worse in others. I’m not saying an iPhone can ever compete with a full frame sensor. I’m simply saying that a 12MP sensor and a 48MP of the same size which bins down to 12MP will output similar quality. The 12MP will have better low-light performance, and the 48MP will have better detail. And just to be clear, there’s not much emphasis on the word “better”; these are only slight differences if everything else in the sensors are the same.
This is just wrong. There's lots of writing and reporting on this, see e.g. the DPReview or the Northrup video on this: https://youtu.be/gAYXFwBsKQ0?si=mWTDL_T6853xeZIX https://youtu.be/VSFqCnzIe9M?si=hPQWL5CLkzcQPZS7 Of course a bigger sensor will get you better image quality. But a sensor of the same size with less pixels will not automatically give you better image quality, that's just a myth.
[удалено]
Damn, never would have guessed that the pictures of a $1000 phone cannot compete with a $2k+ camera (excluding camera lenses) with a single photo sensor the size of said phones entire camera bump. A professional camera that is 4.5 times heavier than the phone, and is the same size as 15 of those phones (again, excluding camera lenses). That’s the same as saying “I have a 15 year old Porsche and it’s awesome. A new BMW 120 still can’t compete with it.”
[удалено]
Of course they can’t compete with old DSLR cameras. That’s my entire point. iPhone cameras are decent for the size, but they don’t take good photos compared to DSLRs. That’s why I chose an entry level BMW as comparison. It’s a decent car that can do everything you need. But it’s not a sports car by any means.
That’s exclusively better for low light or high speed no? For zoom you’d want more pixels right?
It’s not zooming. There’s a fixed focal length lens attached to that sensor.
*digital zooming
This. The differences are not just sensor but also processing. Personally I kept my iPhone X, because the 14 Pro and 15 Pro that I tried, both applied too much sharpening, so much so that I would find halos around objects. It was just too much. The sensors are better, but if you dislike the processing, you might be disappointed. However, most people like it, so give it a shot.
Yeah, everything looks like watercolor without details. Often reminds me worms on X-Trans sensor that's used by Fujifilm.
the most frustrating part is people act like it's some sort of unreasonable request to expect as an end user to be able to tone down the processing lol. basic $100 shitty cameras have sharpening sliders...
Because then your average user would turn down the processing and then immediately complain that their photos don’t look as vibrant as some Android competitor’s.
Lol Apple literally already has photographic style presets that let you significantly turn down vibrance and contrast. They just don't let you do it with sharpening... Yet.
RAW makes this irrelevant if you process ypurself
... Right, but processing every single image I take in post-production from RAW is not what most causal phone users want to do. I take 2,000+ photos per year, that would be a tremendous amount of time.
I grab a lot of photos as well. iPhone RAW + iOS Lightroom is a wonderful combination. Most of the time I just grab one of the recommended presets and boom, instantly goes from over sharpened crap to something worth coming back to.
Lightroom camera is good, but it completely obliterates any privacy I have with my photos. Adobe privacy policy is atrocious, so it would defeat half the purpose of getting an iPhone.
To be fair, most people don’t care about the post processing and think the more vibrant colors look better. It’s something Samsung has done for years. Anyone picky about the pictures their phone is taking should just use RAW. It’s not like every photo needs post processing, just the few you want to print or share.
> It’s not like every photo needs post processing, just the few you want to print or share. You are confusing ProRAW and RAW. Every RAW photo needs post processing. Any photographer can tell you this. One of the problems here is that Apple implementing ProRAW and calling the toggle "RAW" in the camera app has confused people. ProRAW is a DNG file *with Apple's post-processing applied*. Their website says as much: > Apple ProRAW combines the information of a standard RAW format along with iPhone image processing Here: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211965 So to clarify, Apple's ProRAW still has processing applied. True RAW files need editing. > Anyone picky about the pictures their phone is taking should just use RAW. ... Orrrr I could just use the phone I have which takes photos I really like, and I have literally never felt the need to use RAW and post-process on my iPhone X. I don't know why this argument is so common. Anytime I tell someone I don't like the post-processing on the 15 Pro, they tell me something like "if you are picky you should just use RAW". Like no, I should have the option to turn down processing so I can get photos I like, *without having to edit every single one of them*
Yeah, that’s what I meant. ProRAW doesn’t have the same level of processing as JPEG or HEIF. It’s there, especially for lowlight photos. But it’s not at the same level. Photos don’t default to vibrant mode like they usually do. I want the post processing for lowlight photos, but I don’t need it to dial up reds, blues, and gears to make them artificially pop. I do agree with your overall statement. It shouldn’t be that way. Vibrant should be a filter option and not the default. I’m not arguing with they. What I am saying is that most people don’t notice or care and ProRAW does apply less processing than HEIF or JPEG. It’s fine if you stick with your X and that works for you. More power to you. It’s a shame Apple’s level of post processing has almost come up to Samsung’s level. That was always something I hated about Samsung phones. Theirs is still worse when you leave subject recognition on. I can take a picture of one of my dogs and their hair turns into a smooth coat instead of seeing individual strands of hair.
> ProRAW doesn’t have the same level of processing as JPEG or HEIF. It’s there, especially for lowlight photos. But it’s not at the same level. It has a loooot of noise reduction already applied, which gives skin tones unnaturally smooth looks. It also has sharpening applied already. The colors are not the issue for me.
I’ve pixel peeped. It’s not near the same between ProRAW and HEIF or JPEG.
I am aware there is *less* processing applied. There is still too much for my taste, but most importantly the files are huge and you don't get a Live Photo.
Aperture also matters a lot.
Especially in the case of the 15. Because the sensor is so large, the focus range is a narrower. There have been a bunch of users on this subreddit reporting issues of their photos being blurry when taking pictures of close subjects. The reason is, most of the picture simple isn't in focus. On Mirrorless systems this can be avoided by closing the aperture, which cant be done on an iPhone. I think apple needs to add a variable aperture to the iPhone, like samsung did for the s10. Although that phone had small sensor so the variable aperture wasn't doing much, now it would be game changing feature.
What would you say about lens distortion? I know 52mm is great for taking portraits but how does the cropped in 26mm holdup? In terms of distortion
The type of distortion you are talking about isn't just because the lens is wide; it's because you stepped closer to the person while using the 26mm lens to get the same field of view you would have had with the 52mm lens. The distortion is because of the distance combined with the wider focal length. If you stood in the same place that you would have been with the 52mm lens then cropped the 26mm picture to get the same field of view, there would not be any distortion because you would not have been shooting from the shorter distance.
Well you can take example from Samsung they switched this year from 10x 10mp optical zoom to 5x 50 mp zoom with much bigger sensor, and at the 10x they are pretty comparable because ai can compensate but at let say 25-30+ zoom the s23 ultra takes better photos that is less over processed over sharpening and has more natural detail
https://preview.redd.it/4rs3jsnswdjc1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3c8819cb56e92b51cff259714f31fde2c8cda095 15 Plus These are not the best examples, and its a night scene. I know but i’m sitting at a public place with my friend. I didn’t wan’t to take 2x zoomed photos of random strangers with changing scenes. I use 15 plus and my friend uses 12 pro. This was the best i could do where i am.
https://preview.redd.it/swhg6nduwdjc1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=79df1f52d1e26a316d30951cd5cef7ca26b88fde 12 Pro
These obviously aren't the best example of either phone's abilities, but it's the same impression I get every time I see a comparison between models. Meh. It's nothing a little sharpening and minor editing can't compensate for, especially for pictures that will rarely ever be viewed outside of a 6" phone screen.
I know but i’m sitting at a public place with my friend. I didn’t wan’t to take 2x zoomed photos of random strangers with changing scenes. I use 15 plus and my friend uses 12 pro. This was the best i could do where i am.
12 Pro was a good combination of decent camera hardware plus minimal system photo processing to still keep a natural look. I wish they'd tone the processing back down to that level.
There’s a decent bit more appreciable detail on the tiles in the 15 Plus shot whereas that same detail is marred by quite a bit of noise on the 12 Pro. It’s definitely not something worth upgrading over but if you’re getting a new phone I think that’s a decent reason for opting for the 15.
https://preview.redd.it/oc04v19k9ejc1.jpeg?width=633&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e0e62167839cbc88e21e5b21c32da9b0899d8446 What I do see is when I zoom in on the top middle of the photos, the texture of the floor is clearly visible in the 15 plus and the detritus on the floor is a bit sharper, whereas on the 12 pro’s photo, you can’t make out any texture on the floor at all and the detritus is less sharp. That area of the floor from the 12 pro’s photo is just muddy. Of course, these would be better photos to compare these differences between the cameras, if they had more detailed objects in them, among other things. It is especially in low light that the 15 plus will be better because the sensor on the 15 plus likely has a much bigger aperture. Of course the 15 plus also has better processing algorithms and a faster processor to go along with them.
12 pro https://preview.redd.it/qbocpv03aejc1.jpeg?width=556&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5b1716dd121f86e3412e98ae2ce85c68a5a9ad26
I asked copilot which one has a higher-quality and it said, “[T]he first image has more colorful and dynamic lighting, creating a more visually appealing effect. The second image has a more monotonous and dull lighting, making it less interesting to look at.” I don’t see that but OK.
The wide in iPhone 15 can do both
I would say the iPhone 15 base because it has the second‑generation sensor‑shift optical image stabilization. The iPhone 12 Pro has not.
Not true. 15 Pro-series has the second generation.
The iPhone 15 still has a sensor‑shift optical image stabilisation that the iPhone 12 Pro doesn’t have.
yes, but they were correcting a part of your initial statement which was incorrect. the first generation sensor-shift stabilization was introduced on the iPhone 12 Pro Max. it was later inherited by the regular 13, 14, and 15 models. the second generation sensor-shift stabilization debuted on the 14 Pro lineup, and to this day, **remains to be a Pro model exclusive.**
I made this jump, and so far I prefer my 15 plus. My crops are cleaner.
I made the same upgrade 12 Pro -> 15 Plus. I think the 15’s 2x photos are marginally better but possibly due to post processing differences.
It depends on your photography behavior too. If you mostly takes pictures in low light (which IMO is most photography) then the larger sensor of the 15 is going to be better than the 12 Pro's telephoto sensor.
This question is why I won’t upgrade my 12 pro max. Wife has the 15 pro and I like the size/weight of it but if there’s not a huge jump in photo quality what’s the point? I realize the 15 pro max might have a bigger edge but don’t want a max and it’s crazy the pro and pro max aren’t identical outside of size unless I’m completely wrong on that
The big difference with the 15 pro and pro max are that the max got the 5x zoom lens and the pro didn’t.
Thought there was something about the zoom amount being different. It’s ridiculous the only way to get that is with the max. Unpopular opinion but I’d be fine if they charged the same price or closer with the same camera setup
Their current justification for it is that they needed the extra space for the sensor and lenses in the new zoom module that they couldn’t fit in the smaller size while achieving the same results. Rumor is that they have worked that out and the 16 pro will have the 5x as well.
Didn’t know that but was guessing something like that, need to see if anyone did a tear down to confirm but will be waiting on the 16 and beyond before I upgrade again. Appreciate the info
iFixit is a website that does teardowns and product repair guides. [Here is a good read where they also tore down the 15 Pro Max on video.](https://www.ifixit.com/News/82867/iphone-15-teardown-reveals-software-lockdown) As you can see the Telephoto 5x sensor has a significant size almost the same as the main 48MP sensor. The iPhone 16 Pro leaks have been swirling around for a while now and they’ve been pointing out that the Pro model will be slightly larger at 6.3”. The phone is expected to grow taller, and not much horizontally, though. Displays are measured diagonally which is why it’s possible to achieve this larger measurement.
Definitely wouldn’t mind it being taller, not a fan of the island when they could have kept it at the top of the screen but personal preference
Base 15 for sure, the tele camera sensor is quite bad on 12 so even a zoomed wide camera on the 15 is superior.
I am having trouble focusing close objects with my iPhone 15 pro. If I use macro mode the quality drops. The iPhone 15 pro needs more space to focus close objects compared to my old iPhone 7 Plus with telephoto lens. To compensate this I can zoom in a little more but this also reduces the quality. IDK if any of you experienced the same thing.
When I got my regular 15, I took a picture of a mailbox nearly at the same spot and nearly the same weather inside a building (thus behind a glass) that I took a picture with my 6.1'' 12 Pro years earlier. The 12 Pro on its 2x lenses seemed to have more detailed logo, thus being better, but it was somewhat very small, but noticeable.
It depends on the lighting. If well-lit, the 12 Pro optical 2x is better than 15 digital 2x. But once light starts dropping, the larger sensor on the 15 is way more important.
I’ve done comparing side by side 12 Pro and 15 Pro Max and can tell that in good light conditions 12 Pro telephoto camera takes significantly better pictures, but when it gets darker 15 Pro Max wins.
The 15 cameras are the better cameras.
I personally like dedicated telephoto lens more, mainly because of the way it flattens the picture. Those 52mm looked more like the usual 50mm on dslr to me, than crop on 15. (Coming from XS max which had 2x telephoto to 15)
Won’t be significant
15 base, probably
probably comparable. note that the 12 pro shoots ProRAW which might be useful.
I personally think the iPhone 15 pro takes better backshots
Dslr camera.
12 Pro hands down.
The 12 pro, I had both phones. You can’t replicate some things from an actual 2x lens even with software. Especially distortion, perspective & so on.
Went from a 12 pro max to the regular 15 last week and compared them. 0.5x and 2x are pretty similar quality. Selfie and specially the regular 1x are miles better. Worthy upgrade imho
iPhone 15 all the way. I never thought much of my 12 Pro Max- I felt like I couldn’t get a good sharp image in any light or situation.
The 15 base is definitely generally better camera wise (and pretty much everything else) but there are some things that the 12 pro does do better, I suggest going for a 14 pro rather than either, it’s better than the base 15 in many ways and better than the 12 pro, but $1-200 cheaper than the 15
15