Exploring the Science Museum

Despite my geeky interests, I had never visited the Science Museum—a situation I was determined to fix.

Taking photos indoors, particularly in museum settings, can be challenging due to low lighting that necessitates slow shutter speeds, which increase the risk of camera shake.

Some might suggest using a tripod or monopod, but gaining access with such equipment can be tricky, and museum staff are vigilant about maintaining visitor flow.

For that reason, I decided to rely solely on my iPhone at the Science Museum.

Let’s commence with an easy subject.

In a well-lit hall, the iPhone had ample light to work with, capturing the intricate details of the metalwork and the bright windows with clarity.

The iPhone showcased excellent detail without noise, which often plagues images taken in dim conditions. Previously, I relied on wide apertures with my DSLR to maximize light, but that resulted in limited depth of field, often leaving the background out of focus.

To counteract that, I would take multiple shots and combine them using software like Adobe Lightroom. The iPhone, however, utilizes machine learning to achieve this automatically.

That said, the steam engine was an easy target. Let's now examine a more complex subject.

In this scenario, the lighting varied significantly between bright and dark areas, presenting a wide dynamic range, which typically poses challenges for cameras. I would normally need to capture multiple images with different exposures, but the iPhone’s machine learning adeptly handled this task, marking a considerable advantage for Apple.

I captured numerous impressive photos during this visit, and I would confidently use one for promotional materials. At this juncture, I questioned the necessity of my Sony.

But how would the iPhone fare outdoors?

Tower Bridge After Dark

Our hotel was conveniently located near Tower Bridge, making it an ideal subject for nighttime photography.

The following image was taken with the iPhone.

This photograph demonstrates a wide dynamic range. The illumination of Tower Bridge contrasts with the visibility of stars in the sky—a challenging feat given the need to mitigate the brightness of city lights.

Moreover, the entire scene appears in sharp focus, with both distant buildings and nearby structures clearly defined. For landscapes, a greater depth of field is preferable to capture all elements distinctly.

I was pleased with this result, and it was straightforward to achieve. There was no need for a tripod, allowing me to remain inconspicuous, which is a relief when standing in darker areas with valuable equipment.

How does the image hold up when zoomed in?

Upon closer inspection, the detail appears somewhat rough. The iPhone’s machine learning has employed pixel-binning to manage the stark contrast in lighting, which compromises some detail.

Now, let’s see how the Sony performed in a similar shot taken from a distance.

This raw image from the Sony appears darker overall, lacking the visibility of stars. However, the zoomed-in version reveals a different story.

Despite being further away and having a lower pixel count, the Sony’s image is much cleaner. With some adjustments, I was able to enhance the lighting in the foreground and reveal more details in the buildings across the river.

The iPhone’s immediate results may satisfy the casual photographer, but it undergoes extensive processing, limiting further edits. For those with professional aspirations, this could be a drawback.

What about capturing Christmas Lights?

Here’s a shot of the Christmas tree located near Dickens Inn at St Katherine’s Docks. Similar to the Tower Bridge image, it produced excellent results with minimal effort.

However, as with the previous image, zooming in reveals that the iPhone has heavily processed the shot. This resulted in a sacrifice of detail in favor of dynamic range, likely due to the assumption that most viewers will only see these images on mobile devices.

For casual users, this may suffice, but for those requiring images for larger projects, the lack of detail may be problematic.

Does the Sony fare better?

The Sony’s image appears less over-processed, maintaining usable detail even when zoomed in. The bright lights are relatively sharp, and while the shadows are deeper, that can often be corrected with software like Lightroom.

As seen with the Tower Bridge, while the iPhone provides quick results suitable for most, it does produce heavily processed images that limit further editing capabilities—typically not ideal for serious photographers.

Discussing the 48MP Sensor

Indeed, the iPhone 14 Pro Max features a 48MP sensor, which reportedly offers higher resolution than the Sony’s 33MP sensor.

The detail is impressive, even in the shadows, although the image is slightly bright. Unlike some previous shots, this one doesn’t seem overly processed.

To utilize the 48MP capability on the iPhone, switch to ProRaw format while using the main camera, an option available in Settings or the camera menu.

What distinguishes the iPhone from the Sony sensors?

To delve into this, I’ll need to get technical, so feel free to skip ahead if you're not interested.

One major difference is that the Sony sensor can collect more light than the iPhone.

Apple outlines the key features of the Pro and Pro Max cameras as follows: - 12MP Ultra-Wide lens with a focal length of 13 mm and an aperture of f/2.2. - 12MP 2x Telephoto lens with a quad-density sensor, a focal length of 48 mm, and an aperture of f/1.78 (main sensor). - 12MP 3x Telephoto lens with a 77 mm focal length and f/2.8 aperture.

Only the quad-core sensor on the main camera provides 48MP (4 x 12MP), while the other lenses are equipped with 12MP sensors.

Apple typically doesn’t use the main camera in 48MP mode; instead, it employs pixel-binning, which enhances light management at the cost of some detail.

Camera sensors vary in size, and larger sensors can capture more light. Pixels are divided to record detail, meaning that more pixels result in smaller sizes, reducing light collection.

Image quality thus relies on both sensor size and pixel count. Simply boasting a high pixel count does not automatically equate to superior performance, as it requires well-lit scenes to shine.

Pixel-binning allows for the combination of pixels into larger photo-sites, as seen in the iPhone (and Google Pixel 7), where four pixels equate to one photo-site.

With the aid of machine learning, smaller smartphone sensors can appear to rival larger sensors in low-light situations. For further details, refer to this article:

• What is pixel binning? Everything to know about this photographic technique

My Sony a7 IV features a significantly larger sensor than that of the iPhone. Although it has only 33MP, its ability to gather light means it can produce excellent images even in suboptimal lighting conditions.

The Final Verdict

Initially, I was concerned that my investment in a large sensor Sony camera had been in vain. The iPhone 14 Pro Max's camera is impressive, capable of capturing high-quality images under various lighting conditions swiftly and conveniently.

Moreover, when set to 48MP mode, it can produce highly detailed images in adequate lighting. However, this necessitates a trade-off between image resolution and dynamic range, making it challenging to achieve detailed shots in poor lighting.

While the Sony's 33MP sensor captures more light thanks to its larger pixels, it can maintain detail without sacrificing dynamic range.

The iPhone may deliver quick, visually appealing results, but the extensive processing limits potential adjustments. This distinction may be negligible for casual photographers but is crucial for serious enthusiasts and professionals.

The iPhone 14 Pro Max is indeed remarkable, but my camera kit will remain in my possession for the foreseeable future.

I also explored the iPhone 14 Pro Max's zoom capabilities and was pleasantly surprised; check it out:

• Can My iPhone 14 Pro Max Compete With My Sony a7 IV Plus Telephoto?