raw / tiff

The article talks about developed RAW not RAW. Developed RAW is the app developers terminology for an approximation of RAW within the confines of the hardware. They're not actually claiming that the app captures RAW format but that it does the closest thing to it as far as is possible given the platform.

What a joke

"645 Pro has been developed for professional (...) photographers"

Haha, are you serious? Professional photographers don't use an iPhone to take pictures.

Jack of all trades

Let's face it Smartphones are really a 'jack of all trades' and they pack into their little bundle many functions that more specialised gadgets do much better. My MP3 player sounds better, all of my cameras take better photos, my computer and Netbook have bigger screens faster processing and more memory.

Really these phones are only useful for such functions when you have forgotten to take the more specialised gadget with you.

2 Granny Smiths and a Royal Gala

My local market dose 2 Granny Smiths and a Royal Gala for a Qiuid so one "app" for £1.99 is a bit of a rip off, it's not always cheaper to buy online. I'd try TESCO they have good online prices but the Fruit is a bit tasteless.

From the other side of the fence...

I use both DSLR (nikon D80) and an iPhone 4S. You guys are missing out, big time - there's a huge movement going on here much like the shift from film to digital. I was planning to upgrade the DSLR last year, but decided against it - there aren't any DSLRs on the market that I consider anything other than obsolete. They're like film cameras: the quality might be amazing, but I'm not going back to that now, it's the past and we have something better. Here's my reasoning:

The glass + sensor is small on the iPhone, but adequate in many situations (and you can strap a variety of lenses to it - there's even adaptors for many SLR lenses). It won't cut it for a wildlife documentary, but for most regular situations it's passable.

So, a mediocre camera? No. I prefer my iPhone to my DSLR for regular use - because it's better. Not because of the hardware, because of the software - yes, those apps. A device like an iPhone (and a digital camera too) is 50% software, and the iPhone is just as far ahead on software as my nikon is on hardware.

Look at it this way: If I take my Nikon out, I carry a big, heavy camera around (often with a bag + lenses), shoot away, then come home, spend a few hours editing the shots, then send them off to the web (or print). If I take my iPhone, I'm editing + sharing while I shoot, and then I can head to the pub because I'm done. The Nikon is left looking cumbersome, slow, frustrating, time-wasting... basically yesterday's technology, much like film.

Which takes better photos? Neither - generally the nikon takes better shots (not always!) and always wins when decent glass is needed, but the iPhone apps make shots easy that aren't practical on the nikon. When I did shots of my house (to put it on sale) a while back, I used more iPhone shots than Nikon ones because they came out better.

So, end result: the iPhone photos are good enough, sometimes better (though there are situations when you absolutely need big glass + sensor). It's small enough to fit in a pocket (in fact it's my phone, so it's already in my pocket!), so it's always to hand. It's massively more convenient. And with all the apps available it's enormously powerful too when you want to get creative. In most ways, *it's a better camera*.

Brian's comments are what's rubbish.

Typical comment from an equipment snob.

It's the photographer, not the equipment.

Complain while the world passes you by.

Fast low quality photos

A long time ago when 35mm film was very popular a smaller format came along called 110 film. It was supposed to be more convenient than 35mm film and quicker and easier to use. Where are all the pics taken on 110 film today?

The formats of various media are always changing but not always for the better. When I sold my old reel to reel tape recorder in the early 1970s and went over to cassette tapes it was a downgrade in quality that was very noticeable to me.

Of course 35mm film compares unfavourably with medium or large format film even though the latter are less convenient, more expensive, and have less accessories for their use.

What matters is the final result and how the pic will be used. I've seen some Iphone pics of a wedding. They're acceptable low quality images that will satisfy quite a few people though. I've also seen Iphone pics in newspaper reproduction where quality is restricted by the printing process. Again they will do.

Just as people chose to drive different cars so they will choose different methods of taking photos.

Those that jump on the bandwagon of the 'latest thing' may live to regret it when it comes to archiving their photos.

BTW, I still use film as well as digital cameras.

iPhone camera

What's the fuss?? if a shoe-box is used as a camera ( even without lens) and able to conceive a valuable art image why can't do the same a phone camera. There is no technical limitations if creativity is at stake.

One more thing to keep you busy

One reason people love shooting with phones is because you don't have to worry about RAW. Many professional photographers simply do not have time, or do not want to have time, to fiddle with RAW files from their DSLR, let alone their mobile phone. Apps like this defeat the whole purpose of using a phone as a camera. This is why people love Instagram also. Hit a button, done.