[OtinG]

First, let me say my comments about smartphone cameras (from any smartphone company) are not directed at any individuals. I'm merely venting my frustration at companies like Apple and Samsung and others who are masters of deceptive marketing.

Nothing new in that, heck Canon, Sony, Nikon, and other "major" camera companies have been doing that for decades too. Most people don't understand the physics of cameras, and don't have a need to, so camera companies can make up confusing marketing terms to imply things which are simply not true. For example, a 12mm eq. lens means that if you scaled up that camera and lens to the size of a full frame camera the lens would indeed have a 12mm focal length, which means it would have a FoV (field of view) of about 120°. On a tiny smartphone camera that means the actual lens focal length is more like 1.9mm in order to obtain that same 120° FoV. Most people likely interpret this to mean the physics will be the same for both cameras and lenses. Unfortunately we can't scale photons, so no way those cameras and lenses will operate identically. For one thing, the full frame camera and lens will let in 39x more light, and focus will be greatly affected in the scaled down camera. At any rate, this is just one example of marketing BS used in the camera industry to imply their smaller cameras are just as good as the larger ones (talking about sensor size here). Most people seem to buy into the deception, at least until they actually use the camera in question.

There is no doubt that smartphone cameras in general, at least on the better phones by Apple, Google, Samsung, etc., are quite adequate for most people who buy such phones. But to be honest, you could dig out a 15-20 year old Canon Elf camera, a small, inexpensive ($200) point and shoot camera style that was pushed off the market by the convenience of smartphones having cameras, and the Elf would do much better with its antiquated technology. It is all about light gathering, and tiny equals way less light gathering. We can scale the cameras down small enough to fit in a smartphone, but we can’t scale down photons, so smaller aperture means less light. Again, for most users that is not an issue since they rarely take night sky photos nor print out large prints to hang on their walls. They mostly just view the photos on small screen devices and/or post them on social media. Smartphone cameras work quite well for that purpose. But Apple goes out of its way with total marketing BS to show these cameras as much better than the really are. That is what ticks me off. Go to the Apple website and look at the page for the iPhone 13 Pro and Max. They show several dark scene photos to suggest how good their Night Mode is. Look carefully and you can see that each subject is front lit by artificial light, that every shot appears to have been created in a studio environment, and I guarantee every photo was heavily post processed by professionals. Most users will never come close to matching that quality, even if they cheat like Apple did with their quiet dishonesty.

My point is not that the smartphone cameras are bad. They are good for what they are, and I think it is incredible that they are as good as they are in such a miniaturized package. Kudos to Sony and Apple and all the others who build smartphone cameras that are as good as those in iPhones. But my point is that it is hardly worth buying a new iPhone 13 Pro Max at $1100+ USD primarily to get the incremental camera update. Especially when most of the update is actually BS smoke and mirrors marketing. If anyone wants to buy the newest and best iPhone each year then great, I wish I had the funds to do that. But I read a lot about folks buying into the marketing BS thinking these cameras can compete against prosumer level cameras from Sony, Canon, Nikon, etc. That just isn't true.

BTW, I’m reading a lot of angry comments on the forums from people who had believed Apple would introduce an iPhone camera capable of night sky photography. Sadly that isn't possible due to physics, but they believed Apple's BS marketing and convinced themselves it would happen, even though I doubt Apple ever specifically said it would. Apple is the master at not making false claims directly, but they are great at implying them. Apple has a way of encouraging people to imagine things that can’t be done, that is how good their marketing is. Dishonest IMO, but damn good!

As for as iPhone/iPad RAW goes, I am extremely disappointed in it. The cameras, even when using RAW, simply don't have enough resolution nor do they produce a high enough image quality, to make large prints. Plus Apple has no clue how to create a decent Photo app, so you have to jump through confusing hoops just to get the RAW into a decent RAW editor like Photoshop. A good camera doesn't process the RAW image in camera, BTW. It has to write the image and translate it into a specific RAW format that is readable by photo editing apps. But it shouldn't mess with general post processing settings like white balance, colors, brightness, noise levels, etc. They do mess with those setting in the JPEGs so that the photo taker doesn't freak out if it was a less than good photo. At any rate, I can work magic on almost any RAW photo that is decent, but the smartphone RAW photos are not that great due to lower image quality (mostly because of physics and tiny sensors needed for smartphones) and lower resolution. Trying to upscale them is a lessen in futility. 12MP sounds great if each pixel is huge, like on a Sony a7s full frame camera ($3,500, body only), but is lackluster when each pixel is really tiny. There is only so much you can do with them. They are good for small screens, might even look somewhat okay when viewed on a 4K TV from across the room, but for larger prints and other applications not so much. The larger the screen they are viewed on, the more obvious their defects become.

Again, my point is NOT that smartphone cameras are bad, it is that the marketing of them is dishonest in how that they imply things that simply are not true or possible. Plus they use highly skilled professionals to create the sample photos they show off on their websites, and sometimes they go too far in cheating to get those photos.