Is Iphone Xs Max A Killer Camera?

No

if you can't zoom with it. then i don't want it.

https://www.apple.com/iphone-xs/cameras/
the pictures are nice, but its 12mp. it says dual, but i don't know what that means. and without seeing the 100% view of it, i can't judge anything. but if it improves pocket cameras then fine, but no on that one.


---Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

oh and its a retail of $1000. i can get 3 pocket cameras for that or a pretty good slr.


---Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

"Fine Art" and "The Masses" shall never go together.

No, I have an iPhone 7 which is capable of taking RAW photos also, no app required for that. The problems with cell phones is that you cannot control the aperture setting because they don't have the same type of aperture as a camera.

I recently purchased an app for $5.99 which significantly improves the camera of my iPhone.

I'm sure the camera is great, but dedicated cameras are still the way to go I think. Check out the articles below if you haven't. The second article is about Samsung, but might still be relevant.



https://www.dpreview.com/articles/9077521352/iphone-xs-how-does-the-variable-bokeh-effect-compare-to-a-real-lens


https://www.dpreview.com/news/7031019965/samsung-malaysia-caught-using-dslr-image-to-advertise-galaxy-a8-star-portrait-mode-feature

Depends on what you're doing. A lot of my recent stuff is based on iPhone photos (from a phone a hell of a lot less capable than the XS), but I'm pretty far from traditional photography.

It's pretty amazing what they're doing with the software side of things on the latest phones, though.


—————
bestilled.com

Incidentally, Elisabeth, what do you mean no app required for raw? As far as I know, iPhones can't save raw images with the built in camera app.


—————
bestilled.com

if i needed a phone i'd still look at another brand. because this is a very expensive phone, its high only because its apple and they over charge. a lot of other phones use that dual design, still not sure what the benefits are for. but i'd be buying it because of what other things the phone can do. if i were getting a camera, i'd get a camera, something dedicated always works better. but when i do shop for a phone, a good camera is one of those things i look for. taking pictures on the sly, the phone is best for that.


---Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

Joseph, this article will show you how to take RAW photos on an iPhone or iPad:

https://www.imore.com/how-shoot-raw-photos-your-iphone-or-ipad

I'm thinking about upgrading from my old iPhone 5s - but not to the newest iPhone. I'm thinking an 8 - for the upgraded camera - and "really" to get a new battery.

On the other hand, I may try ordering a replacement battery from Amazon (with tools) for $20 and give that a try. If it works on mine then I'll try in on my wife's phone. If I break my phone - then I'll just need the upgrade sooner. LOL

BTW, I certainly agree with Edward's comment: "Fine Art" and "The Masses" shall never go together.



---------------
~ Bill
BillSwartwout.com

I believe the cellphone camera has indirectly saved the pro photographer but the iPhone (nor any current cellphone) can't be used for what I need a camera to do. I am curious how much he got paid for writing that piece.

Depends what kind of camera you are referring to. Low end P & S? Cell phones already killed that market a few years ago.

People buying a phone to take pictures are interested in posting on Social Media.

Only the laziest "fine art" photographer is going to replace real gear with a phone.

Imagine booking a mult-thousand dollar trip and then just whipping out your phone to take a few snaps.

Or spending all day cooking an amazing meal for a food shot and then whipping out your phone.

Or spending days in the jungle tracking down gorillas and then whipping out your phone.

Or showing up for a wedding gig and .... you guessed it -- whipping out your phone.

.....

I'm waiting for the first artist here on FAA to post an avatar of themselves holding up a phone.

https://fineartamerica.com/featured/beach-life-through-the-looking-glass-az-jackson.html

This image was taken with an iPhone 6 and it is pretty cool. The description of the photo doesn't say this, but the description of the gallery does.

I've shot a lot of good images, including some that have sold here, with an iPhone, as long as I don't try to push the capability of the thing too far. It's always in my pocket, ready whenever I am. I have two apps, Pro HDR X and Camera+, which shoot HDR brackets and RAW respectively. As long as you don't do more than one editing cycle with an image (decompress - edit - recompress and save again), the results are surprisingly good sometimes. That said, I'd always rather have my Nikon with more pixels, multiple lenses, many shooting modes and optical zoom.

I don't plan on buying a new phone any time all that soon. A while back when Apple had that battery debacle on 6S phones, I got a new battery for $29. The guy in the Apple store broke my phone whilst replacing the battery, so they gave me a new one for the $29. Aside from newness, I don't want a bigger one that doesn't fit my pants pocket.

A phone is a great P&S camera. Not so much for any serious work. I'm not saying really good art photos can't be taken with one, but there are still limited.

Is this the guy?

If so, I think it is safe to say that the guy has some amount of background and reticence before he would opine thusly.

So the comments that are dismissive of the opinion are misguided, from my point of view.

Of course there is still the concept that "Cameras don't shoot pictures, people shoot pictures." But cell phone cameras are spectacularly better than dslrs of a decade ago (ones that a decade ago would have been astounding to fine art photogs.)

Would I like glass for my phone? Yes.

Would I like it if my cell phone could do what my 360 camera can do? Yes.

Will professionals "whip out" a smaller unit? Don't they now? Who is walking around with a Hasselblad? Who is shooting in 3X4 (?) Who is using a powder flash? The history of photography has consistently been towards miniaturization, less intrusive, more mobile equipment. That will not stop. Pretending that it will is just whistling in the dark.

Tomorrow is coming. Pretending that yesterday is the pinnacle is believing in something that has been disproved each and every day since day ONE.

PLAU
UPD

P.S. His conclusion is that "the iPhone can be used as a fine-art tool for masses". =/= "The masses"

Seems like a small point, but it is half of one six dozen of the other.

I dont do microwave radiation (cell technology), it's bad for your brain. Anything can be used to make art. I went to a photography show at Museum of Modern Art SF and there was an "artist" that only used the cheapest plastic lens camera she could find and make mural sized prints at 20dpi... looked fine from a distance.

Google: The dangers of cell phones

no one is rejecting tomorrow. there is no way i would shell out a $1000 for a 12mp camera that cant even zoom. i can't be wowed by professionally lit model like they show on that website of theirs (apple). there is better tech, and its dedicated tech. like that camera can't compare to an slr. it just won't. the phone tech does trickle down to the better cameras.

i'm not sure why you posted that guys link, he doesn't shoot with a phone.


---Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

Kathy,

Nobody uses a cell phone to talk on the phone anymore. ;-)

It is the most powerful computer one had ever had on their desk, but it's in one's pocket.

PLAU
UPD

I have the iPhone Xs Max. Good phone/handheld computer. As a camera, it will never satisfy my needs. Not high enough resolution. Not enough dynamic range natively. Not enough control over depth of field or shutter speed (don't get me started with "portrait mode"). And as Mike has said, the lens doesn't have the range I want. I'm all for a few good primes, but I want to be able to change as needed. Can't do that on my phone.

I saw this coming, and that is why I started the 'Smart Photo Photography - Artist Group'

https://fineartamerica.com/groups/smart-phone-photography.html

The funny thing is, just when the iPhone starts to produce RAW image files is when Apple stopped supporting the Apple Aperture software.

I posted it, Mike, to show that the guy is not me.

I have only my experience to judge the value of my cameras.

Jason Bradley is someone who knows his way around an f-stop. Dismissing his opinion out of hand (when you don't know what a dual whatever it is, is) is misguided.

He knows what an image is supposed to look like at 36X42. And he is impressed with what it looks like. Me? I like distortion.

I will also tell you that I get 25+mb images on my Galaxy s8+. It is a matter of using the technology to your advantage. I am able to take pictures that are outside the capabilities of ordinary cameras. But that's me. I know next to nothing. But Jason Bradley knows what he's talking about.

That's why I posted his link.

Plus, I like his work.

PLAU
UPD

Wow, Frank, some of the images in your group are stunning! The BEST camera is always the one you have with you. The most expensive professional camera won't do you any good, if you leave it at home. While I definitely prefer a professional camera, in a pinch a cell phone camera is better than nothing!

If you are a thinking, working photographer, your best equipment is with you when you intend to create fine art.

its like, who would you want as your wedding photographer? that guy with a the pro setup? or uncle bob with his new iphone?

---Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

My limited experience with RAW format from phones is that the pictures have way more noise than you would get from comparable ISO's in a SLR/Mirrorless.

Like I said, I do prefer my professional camera! But I don't have it with me all the time. And of course, I would bring it to a wedding!!!!

I use my iphone occasionally for work, for stock and fine art. It is more than just a camera you have with you. I have point and shoots for that. It has capabilities that other cameras don't have. In many situations it is, in fact, the best equipment for the job, and even more so with improvements. I will be looking at replacing my 6+ sometime and will likely own one of these.

It's nice to have a good cellphone camera in your pocket as a backup and yes you can get beautiful photos from them. But I def wouldn't drop all my gear and start shooting with just a phone.

For day-to-day shooting it's probably fine, but for more specialized types of shots it's going to be pretty limited.

if i'm watching a tornado, see something interesting to shoot, that phone in my pocket is a real saver. but as a choice for vacation, its never going to be the phone. it also create weirdly long pictures.


---Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

"its like, who would you want as your wedding photographer? that guy with a the pro setup? or uncle bob with his new iphone? "

Strawman much?

" but for more specialized types of shots it's going to be pretty limited"
So are most lenses. Can you fit a dslr in a guitar body? Can the lenses fit in a hole in a fence? There are millions of uses both general and specialized. And no one said it should replace your other cameras. But for some people, it could be fine as their only camera. .

uther its a real question. the cell phone won't ever replace a real camera period. i would not spend thousands on some guy with a phone. i don't care how clear the images are. there is more than just clarity. lens choice, how well it focuses and handles low light, iso noise, how well it focuses over all, predictive focus, and so on. the phone just can't beat a real camera.

your saying that some how the phone cam is the current tech and its replacing the other things. or that the current is better than the old... and of course it is, not sure i see the point. there are still many things the phone cam will never be able to do..... i do know they are working on a zoom that is flat, using i think oil and electricity, they were able to bend the lens with it. but its still limited.

can you do a race with your street car? sure. will you win? no. you need a specialized car. is the car you have now better than what was out there 10 years ago, sure?


---Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

Uther,

Yes - this is the guy who wrote this article in Outdoor photographer. - http://bradleyphotographic.photoshelter.com/index

He is a pro. He is also running print services - http://bradleyphotographic.
(FINE-ART HAHNENMUHLE PAPERS • CANVAS WRAPS • METAL PRINTS • WOOD MOUNTS • RAW FILE DEVELOPING • PORTFOLIO CURATION • RETOUCHING • CONSULTING).

And he is also doing photo workshops.

As for the article - He proposed to Outdoor Photographer to write the article after he was impressed with XS prints he was asked to print by customers with XS.

"uther its a real question"

No, Mike, it's not.

If a professional photographer shows up with equipment that he needs to create the images he needs to create, that's that.

It is not a choice between a professional or uncle Bob. Except that that was the choice you proffered. It's called a Strawman argument.

You might want to look it up.

You do it all the time, it's a logical fallacy.

PLAU
UPD

your only here to start an argument uther and nothing more.

a pro doesn't show up, you hire them.

i read your other statement as the camera in the phone are getting better than pro stuff.

beyond that i have no idea what your talking about.


---Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

I wouldn’t spend that kind of money on a cell phone camera either.

Now you go to ad hominem.

Mike, I can't do anything about your lack of reading comprehension skills.

So I won't bother trying to.

PLAU
UPD

Bradford I'm thinking more along the lines of things like astrophotography/star trails, smoothing water with ND filters, even just compressing a scene down with a zoom lens or pushing a scene out with an ultrawide lens, that kind of thing.

I acknowledge that phone cameras can be very useful (squeezing into tight spots as you mentioned is a good example), my only point is that I'd never replace my whole setup with one.

Toby,

"the iPhone can be used as a fine-art tool for masses". " {emph mine}

"A" tool. Not "The solution."

You see where I make the distinction?

PLAU
UPD

Could iPhone XS Max be used on a field trip?

Jason Bradley did a testing of it in Yosemite Valley, at Mono Lake and in the Eastern Sierras in California. He posted those photos in his article in Outdoor Photographer.

https://fineartamerica.com/featured/autumn-bliss-maria-coulson.html

Check out this image, I think this will answer your question.

If you are planning to do this, you may want to look into buying attachment lenses for your iPhone. I have never tried them, but supposedly they will enable you to do macro photography and wide angle photography.

* Disclaimer: I still think professional cameras are better.

Of course in many cases "professional cameras are better" despite higher weight and price.

The point is the intrusion of high quality images (done by mass-produced, pocket-size cell-phones) into fine art marketplace is getting bigger and bigger. And that intrusion is accelerating too. Many of such images are on par with images done with pro cameras.

We could not ignore it any longer. We could not restrict it too. The only thing we could do ... is to be aware, to look it up ... and to use it by ourselves, when appropriate.

I just placed an order for the IPhone XS Max. The version I ordered was $1,249.00. This will just be my regular phone with a decent camera.

This model does have a two separate lenses- a telephoto and wide angle.

Here are the specs:

Camera
Dual 12MP wide-angle and telephoto cameras
Wide-angle: ƒ/1.8 aperture
Telephoto: ƒ/2.4 aperture
2x optical zoom; digital zoom up to 10x
Portrait mode with advanced bokeh and Depth Control
Portrait Lighting with five effects (Natural, Studio, Contour, Stage, Stage Mono)
Dual optical image stabilization
Six‑element lens
Quad-LED True Tone flash with Slow Sync
Panorama (up to 63MP)
Sapphire crystal lens cover
Backside illumination sensor
Hybrid IR filter
Autofocus with Focus Pixels
Tap to focus with Focus Pixels
Smart HDR for photos
Wide color capture for photos and Live Photos
Local tone mapping
Advanced red-eye correction
Exposure control
Auto image stabilization
Burst mode
Timer mode
Photo geotagging
Image formats captured: HEIF and JPEG

Elisabeth, thanks for the link. From the article:

"...you can only shoot RAW in third-party apps..."

Personally I've used a few and have settled on ProCam.


—————
bestilled.com

"Wow, Frank, some of the images in your group are stunning! The BEST camera is always the one you have with you."

Yes, Elisabeth, I think its more about the equipment used to print the images more so than what is used to make them .... FAA does it right.

@Uther

"If a professional photographer shows up with equipment that he needs to create the images he needs to create, that's that." I disagree. Its a common discussion I have in my small circle of friends. Someone is paying you lets say $2000 to shoot their wedding, don't show up with a $500 camera with a kit lens - or, a cell phone.

Ed,

But that's also theatrics and flourish and being a part of the show.

The false choice was given. There's no real sense to defend or deflate it.

I'm not saying that it would happen. And we all know that the true skill of photography is the "Photo" part, not the "Graphy" It could be the clearest, cleanest best framed shot in the history of the world, but if the light is wrong, she's going to look like the wedding bell rang, "dung."

Am I wrong?

Yuri,

I will admit that the first few times I read it, I read "Is Iphone Xs Max A Camera Killer?" and/or "Is Iphone Xs Max A Killer of the Camera?"

PLAU
UPD

photography is part person, part camera. the things a better camera can do, can make you a better photographer. and while i can get the right light, and mood etc. there are huge limitations when it comes to phones. the timing of when to push the button, the focus, the depth of focus, the long width they have... all of that makes a difference. and even if your a pro at it, there is only a limit of what a pro can do with a phone.

camera phones have advanced a lot, but you won't get that once in a lifetime shot with it. the timing would be very hard to do with a phone. the the bride and groom kiss and there is a moment and you lost it because you poked the wrong thing at the wrong time. if i went to a photographer to shoot something like that. and he whips out a phone. i would just laugh in his face and walk out of the door.


---Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

A lot of this depends on how much processing is done. I know a person who makes a living (about $450 per pop) with iPhone pix. It involves shooting rural scenes at a distance, murky layers, grungy, brownish colors, murky skies and expensive smallish prints with nice frames. By the time the picture is "finished" the camera is nearly irrelevant as long is the image was basically competent at the starting point. I can't say that it's a style that I like, but it's worth a living to this photog.

I knew someone once who tried to sell his services as a wedding photographer using a Canon Elph. Didn't work out so well when the few prospects he had saw his camera. Good thing he kept his day job.

"Someone is paying you lets say $2000 to shoot their wedding, don't show up with a $500 camera with a kit lens - or, a cell phone."

I know a hand-full of photographers here in Chicagoland, and more and more it seems, who do iPhone wedding photography ..... and top dollar to boot.

Expensive cameras seem to be up against a wall. I know that photo equipment fans and fans of pristine, carefully composed pictures will continue to benefit from an expensive camera, but each day the phone cameras nibble away at a little more of the photo world. It's like termites...they only take little bites, but they keep biting. 10 years ago, camera phones couldn't do much, but today we are having this discussion, revealing that some of us have posted and sold phone pictures. 10 years before that digital cameras were not so good, but now they're great.

Granted that the latest iPhone is darn expensive, but my cheap 6S is still working quite well and has shot recent sales and each day the technology of an expensive phone creeps down the price ladder. With better in-phone software that anticipates a lot of difficult lighting, better editing on our computers, better reproduction, I have to admit that I see a shrinking need for a heavy bag full of cameras and lenses. It's sad because I like those gadgets, but it reminds me of the transition from limited, toxic creation of daguerreotypes to glass plate negatives, from glass plates to film, from film to digital and now from big digital cameras to small ones.

In the case of the wedding photog, that and formal portraits might be the last hold-out for big cameras.

There is a detail objective comparative review of cell phone cameras' advances in last 5 years - "This is How Smartphone Cameras Have Improved in the Past 5 Years" (https://petapixel.com/2018/02/08/smartphone-cameras-improved-past-5-years/).

Note that this review was published on Feb 8, 2018 and does not include iPhone XS Max.

Here is the conclusion from that article.

^^^^^^^^
Here’s DxOMark‘s summary of the current state of the camera industry:

"Looking at the past 5 years of smartphone camera development, we can see that camera hardware and image processing are evolving alongside each other and at a much faster pace than in the “traditional” camera sector.

DSLRs and mirrorless system cameras are still clearly ahead in some areas — for example, auto exposure, but in terms of image processing, Canon, Nikon, Pentax and the other players in the DSC market are behind what Apple, Samsung, Google, and Huawei can do.

Thanks to their hardware advantages, the larger cameras don’t actually need the same level of pixel processing as smartphones to produce great images, but there is no denying that the performance gap between smartphones and DSLRs is narrowing."
^^^^^^^^

The termites are nibbling at the wood. I agree with Frank on the fact that "The BEST camera is always the one you have with you" and that's why I have lots of pictures in my phone. If both are with me, I'd always pick the "big" camera, but I recall my first digital camera some years back. The sales person in a real photo store told me that it shot 5 megapixels and who could possibly ever need more. At this point, it's the optics, options and flexibility (not to mention equipment geeks) that keeps the market for big cameras around at all, but damn, think about 10 or 15 years down the line, when I'm walking around, feel a buzz in my pocket and Siri tells me that GPS has located a great shot and that I should pull out my iPhone 30S and aim it 25 degrees east of north, mid point level with the horizon, horizontal orientation, to get a great shot. All I have become is transportation for this digital photo artist.

I got one... I don't know how to break this to Apple owners, but this camera (at least so far as I have been able to discern yet. ) STINKS!

The Galaxy S8+ camera is light-years ahead of this camera.

This camera may be really good for the very narrow range of uses it has available to it. But it is no where near as versatile as the S8+.

Maybe someone will tell me differently. Maybe there are Apps for this or that.

The photo suite has some pluses. One being when you have a sliding scale of intensity, the range shows in miniatures as you're adjusting it. That's nice, so you don't have to go there to see the extremes. Also, since the gradations are already calculated, it is much faster to go to the next. Navigation on the iP is very sensuous. navigation is easier. but your choices are limited. And there is no way to save step by step. When I edit a photo I might have a dozen avenues I went down or one avenue with a dozen steps. With the iP you only have the image you ended with.

You could save step by step if you used your cloud and a library. but the time involved with uploading and then erasing then downloading as a new file and then going back into editor... But that's a lot of work that I don't have to do with the S8+

I'd be interested to hear what others have to say about there's .

Not, Is it better than a DSLR, but how do you take pictures with it? Can you get it to do tricks?

I have to say, I've been noticing a few headshots lately that look very similar and rather fake looking.

They either have a black background or a boken / faded background.

They stand out because of their curious similarity and something off about them.

I'm guessing we'll start seeing a lot of these fake optic effects as these cameras become used more and more.

All the better for photographers with real lenses and knowledge of lighting.

......

"This device saved me a lot of time and effort. All I have to do is push this button." - said no real artist ever.

I don't especially care about an Android-iPhone cat fight as much as the fact that, in general, phone cameras are much better than they were 10 years ago, with no end in sight. In regard to big, expensive system cameras, they now can shoot in ways not imaginable 10 years ago, when they were just up to snapshots. If I were running Nikon or Canon, etc, I'd be working on a phone camera and getting very nervous, lest my cameras end up like stand-alone calculators.

Doug, I don't think Nikon and Canon will be creating a phone for their established base of professional sports, wedding, fashion, wildlife, advertising photographers anytime soon.

I'm not so sure about that, but I'm thinking more of something like supplying the next camera for an iPhone. I have third party attachable lenses for my phone, so part of that is already there. I don't think that the big equipment is going away all that soon, mainly because a lot of people ARE wedded to equipment, kinda like people who still shoot on film. The other side of it, however, is that I recall when hi-def TV was first a thing and part of what held it back was that the cameras were big, heavy, required a sturdy support and cost something like $50K in the money of that era. Of course, we know now that you can shoot 1080P video on hand-held devices that you carry in your pocket. The technology to do these things just hasn't stopped evolving and probably has some more quantum leaps in the not too distant future. When I first started doing IT work back about 1990, like a lot of people, I thought there was some end in sight, like how passenger cars on highways today don't go any faster than they did in 1970. That end was an illusion. Better cameras in smaller devices, artificial intelligence in software are all happening now.

Being somewhat of a stubborn humanist, I still do my own photo editing, but all of my software has some sort of magic button that crops, rotates and "enhances" images in one click. I'm vaguely unsettled that those buttons work better than I want them to, and I also see a clear path to my own obsolescence as that sort of software evolves.

A camera with the highest-end optics and the processing power of the new phones would be incredible.


—————
bestilled.com

"Do you have an experience with this iPhone? Any plans to use it?"

I have an iPhone 8 Plus so can't comment on how much better the XS is. Not my main camera but I don't always have my camera on me so my phone is more for opportunistic shots. With an app like Camera+ or ProCamera it can shoot RAW for nondestructive creative editing, The quality of the 8 is perfectly capable of producing small to medium fine art prints.


"the iPhone can be used as a fine-art tool for masses".

Reading through the post I'm seeing pros-use-pro-equipment comments. Are pros really your competition now? Or is it the bazillion non-pros using their phones to sell, or give away for free, nice sellable photography? Do fine art print buyers care if a photo was taken with a $50K Hasselblad, $100 used entry level DSLR, or phone? Probably not. I've sold quite a bit and never had a buyer ask what camera I used before buying a print. Plus FAA has http://mobileprints.com for selling fine art prints from phones.

Yep. When Apple's battery debacle happened, I was about due for a new phone, but got a duplicate 6S for $29 instead, so I'm using cell tech that's several versions old now. I'm enough of an equipment geek to clearly understand what its technical shortcomings are and prefer to use my Nikon DSLR, but when I don't have that I use what's available. My experience is that between FAA and other site customers seeing our merch on standard monitors from Staples, and the fact that they don't know what the picture COULD be, as long as I don't overreach with my phone, it's not a problem. Nothing has been returned, no negative feedback has been received.

IMO, at the very least, 50% of the final product is in the editing and, as long as I don't do more than one edit-save cycle, the quality of jpegs are fine for the size of prints I do. I've bought some of my own prints and I can't say that the same photograph shot on my fancy camera, edited the same way, would have had a better final product. I will grant that I have a lot more shooting options on my Nikon but that's the key. Don't use a phone camera beyond it's capability. My phone has apps for bracketed HDR as well as RAW, so the range of possibilities goes way beyond snapshots and selfies. This is really a plus for photographers. I don't have to be completely high and dry if I'm not carrying a backpack full of gadgets and I have a camera with me 24 x 7. Nothing about this is bad except for the future of big camera companies. There's nothing photo-gadget fans can do about it anyway, so we might as well jump on the train before it leaves the station.

It doesn't matter how qualified these writers are - they always overstate the facts. Yes, under perfect conditions for that type of camera (closeups, the right light, etc.) With a lot of experience they know the conditions they need but they will never tell you how many shots they had to make to get the "perfect" one. It's like movie reviews - most write for the uneducated general public. Supporting the big companies has its rewards. I agree the better phone cameras have a place, a narrow one but a place in the tool box.

Doug, why not change the camera file jpg to png? Shouldn't that make the file edit infinite?

I'm guessing that it's a matter of personal style. Yeah, I could shoot everything in a raw format and then edit the heck out of them over and over, but for me, I find that having sequential sessions on the same picture doesn't work. It's a go in one editing session, or, it's one of the gazillions of pictures that never make it off the memory card. Sometimes I don't like it later, but when that happens I generally use the feature in Apple Photos that allows me to go back to square one and then just do it over or delete it or try again. I'm not much on belaboring.