Phone cameras (Page 2): I did a 12 X 16 metal print from an iPhone image recently and it came out fine.

Fredrick Loc: Former NYC, now San Francisco Bay Area

petego4it wrote:

How large a shot can you tack sharp print using a phone camera? And which ones are best?

I did a 12 X 16 metal print from an iPhone image recently and it came out fine.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

petego4it wrote:

How large a shot can you tack sharp print using a phone camera?

One would first need to define exactly where "tack sharp" begins, and what it means. It has become a buzz word many like to inject whenever they are in some way impressed by sharpness.

Edia Loc: Central New Jersey

petego4it wrote:

How large a shot can you tack sharp print using a phone camera? And which ones are best?

My IPhone 12 Pro Max has wide angle and telephoto lens to 2.5x. It also has in body stabilization. In good light, all photos are tack sharp. In low light, stationary subjects are also in focus. But moving subjects will blur. My philosophy is that the best camera is the one you have with you. Since I carry my phone with me at all times, I am never at a loss to take the shot when the opportunity arises.

one_eyed_pete Loc: Colonie NY

Twice I've placed high in monthly photo club competitions with 11"x14" prints I spontaneously captured my Samsung S10+ when I didn't have my camera with me. I'm not sure they would look good 16"x20" or larger but they were very sharp at 11"x14".

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

petego4it wrote:

How large a shot can you tack sharp print using a phone camera? And which ones are best?

It depends on the sensor and if you shoot RAW. 13mp sensor should allow you to print an 11"X16" if shot properly. Key words here are "if shot properly". And remember pixel peepers don't view prints at proper viewing distance. You could possibly go to a little larger print, but the image will not hold up as well under pixel peeping.

As far as which ones are the best, smartphone cameras are no different than any other camera. They all suffer the same pros and cons that any sensor of a particular size suffers. Apple and Samsung have some of the best but are not the only ones. Depth of field for a specific aperture is large on smartphones as compared to larger sensors. Because they have smaller pixels than larger sensors, ISO/noise is higher. The smartphone manufacturers have installed software/firmware the that works wonders on the ISO/noise issues but it is not perfect.

If I were purchasing a new smartphone for it's camera, I would decide the minimum required pixels for my needs. At the same time of deciding megapixels, I would decide Android or Apple. After that, I would read as many reviews as possible about the phones/cameras candidates. I would make sure that the camera can shoot RAW. And if possible, shoot RAW+ JPEG like my smartphone camera can. Just treat the purchase of the smartphone as if it was also the purchase of a new camera and you cannot go wrong.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

Longshadow wrote:

Are there any devices that will not have a 4x6 print look great (not enlarged)?

Maybe a few $25/$50 kid cameras but even those look pretty good at 4X6.

ialvarez50

The size of the sensor! On a phone the 12MP sensor is smaller than your pinky nail. On a camera with 12MPs the senson can be 10 times bigger.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

ialvarez50 wrote:

The size of the sensor! On a phone the 12MP sensor is smaller than your pinky nail. On a camera with 12MPs the senson can be 10 times bigger.

How many angels can dance on a pixel? For that matter, how many pixels are in a dot?

As a UHH community member, you never seem to use <quote reply>, so the entire internet is always at a loss for the purpose of your non sequitur posts. Are you saying a phone can't print very big because the iPhone 6 with 12 million pixels that are smaller (??) than the same 12 million pixels of a camera? What camera? Why?

So how many more angels are dancing for the DSLR than the phone? Does the count of angels get 'cropped' for DX style cameras?

ialvarez50

CHG_CANON wrote:

How many angels can dance on a pixel? For that mat... (show quote)

Keep thinking that way. My old EOS 1 that I purchased in 2004 has 8 megapixels (8!!!) and with this camera I can still take infinite better photos than any phone with 12MP!! I can blow the photos up to 16x24 and they look great. Recently I had this camera converted to infrared only I can send you photos here but I am not sure its possible.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

ialvarez50 wrote:

Keep thinking that way. My old EOS 1 that I purchased in 2004 has 8 megapixels (8!!!) and with this camera I can still take infinite better photos than any phone with 12MP!! I can blow the photos up to 16x24 and they look great. Recently I had this camera converted to infrared only I can send you photos here but I am not sure its possible.

Your lack of ability to use a 12MP phone for successful photography doesn't define the limits of anyone else ... The artists creating these images are successful, even award winning:

https://www.usatoday.com/picture-gallery/tech/2020/07/27/iphone-photography-award-2020-winners/5519004002/

User ID

CHG_CANON wrote:

Is there someplace in your phone to change this 72ppi setting? Is this 72 ppi phone setting different than your DSLR? Where in your DSLR can you change this ppi setting?

BTW: how many pixels fit in a dot? Curious minds are always asking and never seem to find someone that knows.

Mebbe if you looked *outside* of our in-house cadre of “online experts” ...

As to how many pixels in a dot, for that one perhaps ask Zen master.

User ID

one_eyed_pete wrote:

Twice I've placed high in monthly photo club competitions with 11"x14" prints I spontaneously captured my Samsung S10+ when I didn't have my camera with me. I'm not sure they would look good 16"x20" or larger but they were very sharp at 11"x14".

Any large print that looks pretty good will look exactly twice as good printed twice as large. Thaz the Law of Looking Good.

User ID

rook2c4 wrote:

One would first need to define exactly where "tack sharp" begins, and what it means. It has become a buzz word many like to inject whenever they are in some way impressed by sharpness.

I think you’ve nailed it. Tack sharp means impressively sharp. So thaz exactly where tack sharp begins. It begins with viewers’ impressions that it looks really sharp.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

ialvarez50 wrote:

Big deal, know all that moron. But that was not the question, was it? I have used ALL TYPES of cameras and anything else that I can take pictures with. I also been teaching photography for 25 years. You are the one that thinks that 12MP phone cameras with a sensor the size of my pinky nail are better than a full-frame 12MP sensor.
STOP messaging me I hate to talk to idiots.

Seems that Ignorance is a delicate fruit, touch it with the slightest bit of truth and the bloom is gone.

petego4it Loc: NY

thanks all. Lots of good info and perspective here! And in general, phone cameras are better than I thought for enlargements per this info.