Here is a 100% crop of 48MP ProRAW naive application comparison of the 14 Pro and 15 Pro. This is why I switched back to the 14 Pro:
14 Pro:
15 Pro:
14 Pro:
15 Pro:
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPhone 16 Pro Max Issues with ProRAW 48 and stock camera app
- Thread starter jajo.j
- Start date
-
- Tags
- camera iphone 16 pro proraw raw
- Sort by reaction score
At least i see no pixelation or low res on 15.
However the clarity and the definition of the 14 pro series are unbeatable.
I miss my 14PM…
My 15 had lower definition too.
I can’t compare with my 16PM because ProRaw Native because is not functional…
But with 16PM and ProCam i have better results than my previous 15PM.
I think with ProCam i have 90/95% the quality i had with my 14PM.
However the clarity and the definition of the 14 pro series are unbeatable.
I miss my 14PM…
My 15 had lower definition too.
I can’t compare with my 16PM because ProRaw Native because is not functional…
But with 16PM and ProCam i have better results than my previous 15PM.
I think with ProCam i have 90/95% the quality i had with my 14PM.
Have been working on some camera comparisons outside of knowing about this thread. While I find the camera system to be great overall, I continue to find the RAW images from the iPhone to be anything but. Like the OP stated, they are over-processed to the point that it absolutely defeats the purpose of taking them from the native camera.
Full Image (resized and converted to JPG for MR) from the 16 Pro using Halide RAW capture.
in all images the focal point was the grove of trees in the background (Left center of image by the grey house)
Deep Crop comparison between camera apps, and other camera sources.
I share my observations as viewed on an iPad Pro 11" OLED screen. All images were taken in RAW modes, but all other settings set to Auto. I 100% know I can get more detail out of all devices going manual, but I am playing a bit of a timing game here.
- Assume you have enough time to react knowing you want the best photo possible (switch to RAW for more megapixels)
- Assume the shot you need is time sensitive, so diving deeper into exposure, ISO, etc isn't possible.
I feel that is a common situation, as it is EXACTLY what happens to me when wanting to quickly grab some street photography images.
Outside of crop and conversion to JPG, photos have no other processing done to them.
Pro RAW crop from 16 Pro Camera App
Observations
- Text looks good and is easy to read all but bottom most sign
- Color temperature is reasonable, slightly warm
- leaf detail is least of 16 pro camera tests
- most apparent noise reduction that can't be undone
- image is the most hazy of 16 pro shots
- AI did not detect the arborvitae in the foreground
16 Pro RAW Photo from Halide Application
- Good text quality, can read all but 84 on the transformer well, or the bottom sign-
- better leaf detail than apple app
- more noise in images but more detail to work with in post
- overall image is slightly less hazy than the native camera app
- AI did not detect the arborvitae in the foreground
16 Pro Raw photo from Pro Cam application (Taken slightly later due to original attempt at 12 Megapixel
- Same auto ISO as the other 2 shots (64) however most overall noise
- Did the worst in text detail
- BEST detail for the arborvitae in foreground. AI offered to identify the plant in iPadOS
- it's close but for iPhone 16 Pro, best color temperature.
Pixel 8 Pro from the 50 Megapixel main sensor, and taken in RAW
Despite selecting RAW, it appears that Google is Google, and does some processing, though I will pass my observations along since most of us believe that Apple too is doing image processing in the sense of removing noise.
- Colors are a bit more saturated on the warmer side
- Best text detail. Only camera that can "kinda" make out the bottom "no on street parking" sign.
- best detail on the Arborvitae (AI also picked up the image and wanted to identify tree)
Still, the processing here limits what can be done in post. Like on the iPhone, 3rd party camera apps produce a more true RAW image.
For Random Comparison (Some others)
Photo from Sony ZV-1 compact camera. originally Taken in RAW (20 Megapixel 1' sensor)
- Detail is better than expected considering Megapixel count
- Text detail is good but can't read bottom sign. #34 on transformer hard to read
- foreground grass detail is decent
- overall neutral color temperature, was honestly the most true to life
- AI identified the Arborvitae
This camera is better suited for full manual as it has physical controls. It was actually (by Sony) mostly intended for video work.
13 Pro, originally taken in RAW (12 Megapixel camera)
- Did better than expected!
- Text quality is only slightly behind the 16 Pro with Halide
- AI identified the Arborvitae
- leaf and gras detail is good
- I like this image better than the default camera app can do on the 16 pro.
Xs Max photo taken from Halide in RAW
- Clearly the worst image here
- Text detail is good for top 2 signs
- grass detail is decent
Full Image (resized and converted to JPG for MR) from the 16 Pro using Halide RAW capture.
in all images the focal point was the grove of trees in the background (Left center of image by the grey house)
Deep Crop comparison between camera apps, and other camera sources.
I share my observations as viewed on an iPad Pro 11" OLED screen. All images were taken in RAW modes, but all other settings set to Auto. I 100% know I can get more detail out of all devices going manual, but I am playing a bit of a timing game here.
- Assume you have enough time to react knowing you want the best photo possible (switch to RAW for more megapixels)
- Assume the shot you need is time sensitive, so diving deeper into exposure, ISO, etc isn't possible.
I feel that is a common situation, as it is EXACTLY what happens to me when wanting to quickly grab some street photography images.
Outside of crop and conversion to JPG, photos have no other processing done to them.
Pro RAW crop from 16 Pro Camera App
Observations
- Text looks good and is easy to read all but bottom most sign
- Color temperature is reasonable, slightly warm
- leaf detail is least of 16 pro camera tests
- most apparent noise reduction that can't be undone
- image is the most hazy of 16 pro shots
- AI did not detect the arborvitae in the foreground
16 Pro RAW Photo from Halide Application
- Good text quality, can read all but 84 on the transformer well, or the bottom sign-
- better leaf detail than apple app
- more noise in images but more detail to work with in post
- overall image is slightly less hazy than the native camera app
- AI did not detect the arborvitae in the foreground
16 Pro Raw photo from Pro Cam application (Taken slightly later due to original attempt at 12 Megapixel
- Same auto ISO as the other 2 shots (64) however most overall noise
- Did the worst in text detail
- BEST detail for the arborvitae in foreground. AI offered to identify the plant in iPadOS
- it's close but for iPhone 16 Pro, best color temperature.
Pixel 8 Pro from the 50 Megapixel main sensor, and taken in RAW
Despite selecting RAW, it appears that Google is Google, and does some processing, though I will pass my observations along since most of us believe that Apple too is doing image processing in the sense of removing noise.
- Colors are a bit more saturated on the warmer side
- Best text detail. Only camera that can "kinda" make out the bottom "no on street parking" sign.
- best detail on the Arborvitae (AI also picked up the image and wanted to identify tree)
Still, the processing here limits what can be done in post. Like on the iPhone, 3rd party camera apps produce a more true RAW image.
For Random Comparison (Some others)
Photo from Sony ZV-1 compact camera. originally Taken in RAW (20 Megapixel 1' sensor)
- Detail is better than expected considering Megapixel count
- Text detail is good but can't read bottom sign. #34 on transformer hard to read
- foreground grass detail is decent
- overall neutral color temperature, was honestly the most true to life
- AI identified the Arborvitae
This camera is better suited for full manual as it has physical controls. It was actually (by Sony) mostly intended for video work.
13 Pro, originally taken in RAW (12 Megapixel camera)
- Did better than expected!
- Text quality is only slightly behind the 16 Pro with Halide
- AI identified the Arborvitae
- leaf and gras detail is good
- I like this image better than the default camera app can do on the 16 pro.
Xs Max photo taken from Halide in RAW
- Clearly the worst image here
- Text detail is good for top 2 signs
- grass detail is decent
Thanks for your input.
For me, at the moment, ProRAW max (native) is unusable.
Apple needs to address this issue ASAP.
However i think that will not happen anytime soon.
I will continue sharing this problem with others and i will keep you guys updated about my open case with apple assistance.
For me, at the moment, ProRAW max (native) is unusable.
Apple needs to address this issue ASAP.
However i think that will not happen anytime soon.
I will continue sharing this problem with others and i will keep you guys updated about my open case with apple assistance.
Which of the ProCam app did you used, as there are several with the same name?
Last edited:
This is the one we use
ProCam - Capture ProRAW photos
Note: ProCam is not free, try the first 10 shots for free and upgrade with a one-time purchase for unlimited access. ProCam only supports photos and does not support shooting videos. ProCam is the ultimate manual camera app for the iPhone with a camera design where simplicity meets functional...
apps.apple.com
Thanks for a great comparison.
I almost completely stopped using ProRAW since they released 15 Pro Max. The reason is simple: noise reduction. That is the key to the entire problem. Apple is doing so heavy noise reduction that 48MP looks like a painting in 100% closeup.
Sure, we cannot expect great detail at 48MP with any smartphone camera because of limitations in the hardware (like lens sharpness etc) but the fact that Apple does not allow 48MP Regular RAW that is 100% unprocessed is completely unacceptable. In my opinion ProRAW should be renamed NoobRAW because Professionals do their own denoising.
A dream would be if Macrumours would write an article about "ProRAW" and why it should not be named "ProRAW". Then perhaps Apple would read it and do something about this mess.
Most likely. I’m the one who first mentioned this app to several members and it got shared a lot. Now if you are concerned with ProRAW quality, this is the app. If you want to shoot regular raw, then use either the pro camera by Moment or ProCamera. Halide is very good also
https://apps.apple.com/us/app/procamera-professional-camera/id694647259
Pro Camera by Moment
Pro Camera by Moment is the manual camera app that gives you full creative control and professional-level performance, all at an affordable price. It brings us closer to what we love about our DSLR and mirrorless cameras – exposure controls, precise focus, rich colors, smooth video, crisp audio...
apps.apple.com
Stock 48 vs ProCam 48
It is clear that ProCam somehow manages to retain a little more detail by doing less noise reduction (text is a bit sharper). Also the dark blue color of the bottle is more accurate on ProCam.
I wouldn't say it is night and day difference in practice though.
It is clear that ProCam somehow manages to retain a little more detail by doing less noise reduction (text is a bit sharper). Also the dark blue color of the bottle is more accurate on ProCam.
I wouldn't say it is night and day difference in practice though.
Same issue here, pixelation, in the first photo....
With more light you should notice a bigger difference, between native and Procam, as I posted yesterday
.
Last edited:
Lately the difference between generations usually comes down to just it. Especially for 14/15/16 series.
Obviously the hardware is capable of producing a better image.
Don’t get me started on new 48mp ultra wide which is bottlenecked by poor bandwidth (they use same connection as for last year 12mp). I guess they’ll just up bandwidth next year and actually use Sony hardware to full advantage.
For curiosity, the results with ultra-wide camera in ProRaw [48] with ProCam is MILES better than the results from Native UW ProRaw.
Thats true, however, this year, ProRaw Max is not just a little worse its just unusable. I can accept that on the first beta of 18.0. Not after an full release. I dont understand either why apple vainglorious themselves with this product with camera quality being exceptional, when the results are what you all can see. It is not ethical neither moral fair.
I use ProCamera from Cocologics best one I stopped using Native since iPhone 12 aggressive noise post processing either way I noticed ProCam has better 48MP ProRaw. But found few bugs as a line on the camera and a wrong flash button also their support email doesn’t work atappsbyab@gmail.com
Attachments
Last edited:
I have now compared 48MP ProRAW from the 14 Pro with the native Camera app and with ProCam and so far I have hardly noticed any difference, both are almost equally good. With the 48MP ProRAW ProCam photos, the conversion to 48MP HEIC also works instead of 12MP as with 48MP ProRAW photos taken with the native app after iOS 18.
The native app takes the image almost instantly, ProCam needs 2-3 seconds for the next capture.
100% crop 14 Pro 48MP ProRAW native app:
100% crop 14 Pro 48MP ProRAW ProCam app:
The native app takes the image almost instantly, ProCam needs 2-3 seconds for the next capture.
100% crop 14 Pro 48MP ProRAW native app:
100% crop 14 Pro 48MP ProRAW ProCam app:
Last edited:
14PM series deliver superb ProRaw results. Thats why you don’t notice any significant difference.
iPhone 15 Pro 48mp Pro Raw Max
Native Camera App Pixelated Locker:
ProCamera from Cocologics:
ProCam from Ashutosh Billa.
The use of ProRAW in ProCamera by Cocologics, despite being set to "natural" mode, appears to apply a considerable level of noise reduction, which can soften the image and cause a loss of fine detail. This is common in digital RAW image processing, as noise reduction can compromise sharpness, but either way a final that I don't seek.
The native camera app, on the other hand, seems to retain more noise aswell as a pixelation on the image - awful. In the case of ProCam, although it offers better resolution and more detailed images, it exhibits more noise and a dull color palette, which can be improved in post-production, especially in programs like Lightroom or Photoshop, by adjusting sharpness, noise reduction, and color saturation.
Native Camera App Pixelated Locker:
ProCamera from Cocologics:
ProCam from Ashutosh Billa.
The use of ProRAW in ProCamera by Cocologics, despite being set to "natural" mode, appears to apply a considerable level of noise reduction, which can soften the image and cause a loss of fine detail. This is common in digital RAW image processing, as noise reduction can compromise sharpness, but either way a final that I don't seek.
The native camera app, on the other hand, seems to retain more noise aswell as a pixelation on the image - awful. In the case of ProCam, although it offers better resolution and more detailed images, it exhibits more noise and a dull color palette, which can be improved in post-production, especially in programs like Lightroom or Photoshop, by adjusting sharpness, noise reduction, and color saturation.
Too many flaws are visible when viewing images at 600% down to the pixel level… too close. The images fall apart. Examine them at 100% on a good monitor for best results.
Even at 80% the pixelation starts to appear. 100% is visible everywhere.
Im relief to know that more people are noticing this flaw.
Im relief to know that more people are noticing this flaw.
It has zero denoise (Regular RAW).
For ProRAW I recommend using ProCam: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/procam-capture-proraw-photos/id1562150140
I recommend both. I use Pro Camera for Regular RAW 12 megapixels which (in my opinion) is how to unleash the full power of the iPhone cameras and achieve the most natural and detailed photos.
ProCam is what I use to shoot ProRAW 48 when I need the extra resolution. But the results are nowhere near as natural as Pro Camera Regular RAW.