Admiring Light
Menu
  • Home
  • Review Index
  • Shop Talk
  • Technique and Vision
  • Opinion
  • Portfolio
  • Site Index
  • About
    • Privacy Policy
Menu

Super Quick iPhone 5 Low Light Test

Posted on September 21, 2012 by Jordan Steele
The 8 megapixel shooter on the new iPhone 5

Like millions of other people, I got a new iPhone 5 today.  While there are a number of improvements to the phone itself, since this is a photography site, I thought I’d give a quick peek at the camera.  I will probably do a review of the iPhone 5 camera in the future, comparing it to the iPhone 4S.

Tonight, though, just a quick shot.  Both the iPhone 4S and the iPhone 5 share nearly identical hardware…they are both 8 megapixel sensors on a 1/3.2″ sensor with a 5 element f/2.4 lens.  However, the iPhone 5 has a few tweaks that are supposedly better in low light.

For this shot, I shot with both the iPhone 5 and the iPhone 4S side by side and shot at the same time.  The iPhone 5 shot is a little earlier just because it takes shots essentially instantaneously, while the 4S lags a little bit.    Below are 50% crops from the image.  iPhone 4S on top, iPhone 5 on the bottom.

As you can see, low light shooting is indeed improved a little on the iPhone 5.  While it obviously won’t compare to a mirrorless CSC, DSLR or even a high end compact, it doesn’t fare too poorly.  There is a little more detail in the iPhone 5 shot, with better separation in her hair, as well as much better contrast.  Noise is a little better controlled as well.  Not too bad.

iPhone 4S vs iPhone 5 low light test. iPhone 4S on top, iPhone 5 on bottom. Click to enlarge.

1 thought on “Super Quick iPhone 5 Low Light Test”

  1. Vane says:
    November 16, 2012 at 2:41 pm

    This is a little gem. It’s a tad preicy compared to APS-C lenses but at least the European price is the same as the US price so Europeans are not getting ripped off on this occasion. This is a surprisingly small and light lens smaller and lighter than a 45mm or 50mm lens would be on APS-C. Build quality appears to be quite nice with a metal lens mount it’s a mix of metal and plastic but feels good and solid in the hand and in use. Olympus skimped a bit on a few things it costs another a330 for the optional (and plastic !) lens hood, there is no lens case or pouch either. But what you do get is: a lens that focuses quickly and quietly on both Panasonic and Olympus bodies (currently testing it on my Pannie G3); a VERY sharp lens the centre is sharp at 1.8 plenty good enough for portraits, and the edges quickly sharpen up when stopped down a stop or two, allowing you to use the lens more widely for architecture, travel and other shots as well. It’s as a portrait lens that it really shines (in my view) providing a 90mm 35mm equivalent field of view, which is great for portraits. The bokeh (quality of out of focus areas) is very pleasing not the very best, but nevertheless very nice. It’s certainly a step up from the 14-42 or 14-45 kit lenses at the 45mm end (sharper, better bokeh, faster) and gives the much more expensive Pansonic-Leica 45mm a run for it’s money (though lab tests show the Panasonic lens has better MTF resolution figures under some circumstances). The fact that this lens keeps selling out quikcly speaks for itself reall- I don’t know of anyone who has bought it and been disappointed. The only thing you have to watch out for, just as a littleuser tip, is that when shooting portraits at 1.8, often the in focus zone/depth of field will be pretty shallow I have a few examples where one eye is is focus and not the other, or part of a face is in focus and not the other the key is ensuring that what you want is in focus is indeed in focus sometimes this means experimenting with different focus modes and not, for example, just relying on face detect autofocus. Overall, a great lens a brilliant addition to the micro 4/3 lens line up well done Olympus !

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Follow Me:

Follow Us on FacebookFollow Us on RSSFollow Us on InstagramFollow Us on Mastodon

Most Popular Posts

  • "Full Frame Equivalence" and Why It Doesn't Matter (288)
  • Fuji X-Pro 2 vs. Sony A7 II: Noise Comparison (70)
  • Fuji 56mm f/1.2 vs. Panasonic Leica 42.5mm f/1.2 Nocticron (63)
  • Review: Metabones Speed Booster (Canon FD to Fuji X) (56)
  • Review: Olympus OM-D E-M5 (48)

Recent Comments

  • Eric Wojtkun on My Favorite Photos of 2022
  • Jordan Steele on “Full Frame Equivalence” and Why It Doesn’t Matter
  • Leon on “Full Frame Equivalence” and Why It Doesn’t Matter
  • Clarke jones on Review: TTArtisan 50mm f/1.4 ASPH (RF Mount)
  • Anonymous on Sony A7 III vs. A7 II – Noise Comparison

Archives

©2023 Admiring Light | Theme by SuperbThemes
We use cookies to personalize content and ads and to analyze our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with advertising and analytics partners who may combine it with other information that you’ve provided to them or that they’ve collected from your use of their services. You may consent to the use of cookies or opt out. Accept Reject Read More
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled

Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.

SAVE & ACCEPT