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 🌍 📱 Photos taken with iPhone 16 Pro / Pro Max 🌟 - Worldwide - (2024-2025)
- Thread starter fryfrkhlly
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I have both the 15 ProMax and the 16 ProMax for a while before I return the 15PM.
I took some shots of the Milky Way on both, in night mode for 30 sec exposures on a tripod.
The shots on the 16PM are worse than the 15PM: fewer stars, less sharp, and smearing artifacts.
I took several shots with each phone, both jpg and proraw, and it's the same in all of them, the 16PM is worse.
Even though I was shooting the same sky, the ISO reported in the photos info varied between shots of the same phone and between phones. But I had shots with the 15PM and the 16PM with the same ISO, 3200, shown below, no processing other than cropping in Mac Preview.
Here's a 1:1 crop, 15PM on the left, 16PM on the right. Fewer stars on the 16PM.
Info from the photos app below:
Uncropped images attached, no processing by me, but the MacRumors site automatically scales images so the largest dimension is 2000 pixels. However, you can see the difference even zoomed out.
I'm naturally interested if others can make similar tests. I've seen Shayne Mostyn's video and it looks like he may have the same issue.
I took some shots of the Milky Way on both, in night mode for 30 sec exposures on a tripod.
The shots on the 16PM are worse than the 15PM: fewer stars, less sharp, and smearing artifacts.
I took several shots with each phone, both jpg and proraw, and it's the same in all of them, the 16PM is worse.
Even though I was shooting the same sky, the ISO reported in the photos info varied between shots of the same phone and between phones. But I had shots with the 15PM and the 16PM with the same ISO, 3200, shown below, no processing other than cropping in Mac Preview.
Here's a 1:1 crop, 15PM on the left, 16PM on the right. Fewer stars on the 16PM.
Info from the photos app below:
Uncropped images attached, no processing by me, but the MacRumors site automatically scales images so the largest dimension is 2000 pixels. However, you can see the difference even zoomed out.
I'm naturally interested if others can make similar tests. I've seen Shayne Mostyn's video and it looks like he may have the same issue.
Attachments
I returned my iPhone 16 Pro Max for the same reason. I do no really understand why a brand-new phone produces photos worse than the previous generation. To be fair, I don't think the 16PM takes "worse" photos... it's just the photos don't look as sharp as photos taken with 15PM or 14 Pro. At first, I thought maybe Apple reduced the default sharpening on the 16PM... but when I cropped and viewed the photos, many fine details, especially distant signs and words look fuzzy and almost unreadable when taken with the 16PM.
It’s most likely a software issue. The ultra wide camera used by the native camera is less sharp compared to the same image taken with the ProCam app, which is what I mostly use. This proves that it’s not a iPhone 16 pro issue, but software. I’m sure it will be resolved soon.
Post in thread '🌍 📱 Photos taken with iPhone 16 Pro / Pro Max 🌟 - Worldwide - (2024-2025)'
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...max-worldwide-2024-2025.2437160/post-33432605
App:
‎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
Last edited:
This is not what I see with my 15 pro max vs the 16 pro max
Post in thread '🌍 📱 Photos taken with iPhone 16 Pro / Pro Max 🌟 - Worldwide - (2024-2025)'
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...max-worldwide-2024-2025.2437160/post-33432605
Were both iPhones on the same iOS version? It's not mentioned, unless I missed it.
I just took some photos again of the night sky, now my 16 pro max shows fewer stars than the 15 pro max.
The last update I did on this iPhone was shown as iOS 18.0 which included security updates, 420mb in size (give or take). The sky looks different now after this update, fewer stars. I hope this gets undone. I just read that iOS 18.0.1 is about to drop to fix bugs…
I’m hoping that iOS 18.1 will make the camera better.
The last update I did on this iPhone was shown as iOS 18.0 which included security updates, 420mb in size (give or take). The sky looks different now after this update, fewer stars. I hope this gets undone. I just read that iOS 18.0.1 is about to drop to fix bugs…
I’m hoping that iOS 18.1 will make the camera better.
Last edited:
Elvis' pink Caddilac across the street from Graceland 2 days ago.
I found this interesting. I have two iPhones both 16 pro max, Desert titanium and natural titanium. Both phones were just tested at the night sky using ProRAW. The Desert titanium records more stars than the natural titanium under the same conditions. So it’s either software or hardware issue. They also record a slightly different white balance. The Desert titanium sees more stars.
16 pro max Desert titanium
16 pro max Natural titanium
from what you wrote I understand that some app take RAW files ( not ProRAW )
if you compare that RAW files I guess that would be the "real" sensor and optics results without software manipulation
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max (Stock camera, 0.5x, 14mm, f/2.28, ISO 16, 12.19MP)
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max (Stock camera, 1x, 24mm, f/1.7, ISO 50, 12.19MP)
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max (Stock camera, 5x, 120mm, f/2.97, ISO 50, 11.42MP)
I always use ProRAW. There isn’t any added software manipulation. By the time I open the image in Lightroom, I have the ability to manipulate the image as I see fit. This includes sharpening, white balance etc. Just plain raw from other apps looks horrible most of the time. The lowest ISO must be used & the 48mp option is not available, only 12mp. The only app I prefer to use in Raw is “Even Longer”. This app stacks hundreds of raw files to give a super clean image.. Tripod required with every photo
Not quite true unfortunately. ProRAW is heavily denoised and also sharpened (with sharpness on 0 it still shows signs of sharpening) which is why I always use regular RAW unless I need 48MP.
But it is true that regular RAW require more post processing. ProRAW is quicker in the workflow.
To see "real" sensor and lens output test should be taken in RAW
Lower ISO, good light and some still subject with a lot of details
this way you can understand if the difference in sharpness between 2 phones are hardware or software
Lower ISO, good light and some still subject with a lot of details
this way you can understand if the difference in sharpness between 2 phones are hardware or software
Well, I prefer the look of ProRAW over standard raw. It produces a much higher quality photo for me to meet my standards. Besides 12 megapixels is an old format size and it’s too small for photos these days. No room to crop if needed. I think ProRAW is quite awesome. I really don’t notice much over sharpening and denoise like you mentioned. what I did to get my images the way I want them to look in Lightroom, I would upload the iPhone photo to my desktop Lightroom app and process it there, take those settings and apply them to the phone and create my own preset, depending on which camera I’m using. That way I know I get the best quality after edits.
These tiny sensors don’t do very well with regular raw versus ProRAW, too much noise and the quad bayer sensor output make the pixels too large. they do help with capturing more light, but they reduce the resolution and you are stuck with 12mp. I love ProRAW and I will stick with it. I have a good trained Eye photographically, I’ve been a photographer since 1989 and my first digital camera was the Nikon D1x. I’m so glad we’ve come along way since then. It was a great camera at the time. I’m currently using the Sony A7RV and I love the Sony 50mm f/1.2 G-Master lens.
RAW files should not have a ”look” that can be preferred imho. The purpose with RAW is to preserve as much information as possible. As untouched as possible. If an unedited RAW looks bad that is really a good thing because it means that you have a greater possibility to make it yours and match what you saw at the scene.
ProRAW is already baked - most post processing is already done. Convinient yes, but not flexible.
I so much wish there was a way to capture regular RAW in 48MP.
I know of sensor limitation. I was saying that if you want to understand why one wide angle lens looks bas and the other doesn't RAW could be a way to check real data from hardware
Thanks for the details, I'll try your advice.
RAW files should not have a ”look” that can be preferred imho. The purpose with RAW is to preserve as much information as possible. As untouched as possible. If an unedited RAW looks bad that is really a good thing because it means that you have a greater possibility to make it yours and match what you saw at the scene.
ProRAW is already baked - most post processing is already done. Convinient yes, but not flexible.
I so much wish there was a way to capture regular RAW in 48MP.
I mostly use ProRAW because I usually want quick convenience to capture memories. It handles the lighting for you with HDR and outputs a decent, ready photo. And looks much better than the ugly default HEIF, less sharpened and more natural. So you get that convenience benefit.
But I agree, it's noticeable how much better a true RAW shot is. 12MP RAW* is excellent in good lighting, basically sharper and more detailed than 48MP ProRAW. This is because it's just a clean single frame, where the ProRAW has to combine multiple for an HDR solution. But true RAW requires much more time for shooting and editing afterwards instead of handling everything for you, and you are limited by the dynamic range of the sensor.
*I find on the main sensor, 12MP RAW downsampling from 48MP already injects some of Apple's processing into the pipeline. So 12MP RAW from the main 48MP sensor looks less natural than from the 3x 12MP on 15 Pro. (you might want to use Halide Process Zero if using the main sensor)
Last edited:
