Camera Usability

It still takes almost two seconds to activate the camera on the 4, which is enough time to miss whatever it is you’re trying to grab a photo of. Thanks to the iOS 4 update however, the shutter is almost instantaneous. The difference appears to be that the photo is committed to memory but not fully written to NAND, whereas before the photo would be written to the Flash before you could take another picture. Power loss in the middle of snapping photos seems pretty rare on a smartphone so the tradeoff, if I’m correct, makes sense.

Apple opted for a lower noise rather than higher resolution sensor in the iPhone 4 and it did pay off. The main camera shoots photos at 2592 x 1936 compared to the EVO 4G’s 3264 x 1952, but the resulting images are far less noisy - particularly in low light situations:


HTC EVO 4G - Low Light


Apple iPhone 4 - Low Light

The 4’s main camera, like the HTC Incredible and EVO 4G, is a decent replacement for a point and shoot if you’re primarily outdoors. You’re still going to get better image quality out of a good point and shoot, but the tradeoff is convenience. The limitations are significant.

Because you rely on the iPhone 4’s software controlled aperture and shutter speed you don’t have the ability to properly expose the image. You have to rely on Apple’s algorithms, which tend to either overexpose outdoors or miscalculate white balance with non-halogen light sources.

This is an example of a photo taken outdoors that’s more washed out than it needs to be:

And many of you picked up on the white balance issue I snuck into our EVO 4G review yesterday:

Regardless of where I tapped to focus, I could not get the iPhone 4 to set a proper white balance in our photo box.

While I was watching the screen, the iPhone 4 would alternate between yellow and white for the background color. It seemed to be trying to calculate the white point but was just being thrown off by the type of light. If I timed the shot right I could snag the photo while the iPhone was switching between white balance points:

I also had this problem in my office which uses LED can lights.


This is far more yellow than it should be

While Brian didn't have the same problems I did, Brandon Hill (DailyTech Editor in Chief) did. It seems to be very dependent on the type of lighting you have and even then it seems to vary based on the type of CFLs. And unlike the EVO 4G, there’s no way to manually set a white balance on the 4.

For overall image quality though I have to hand it to Apple, the iPhone 4 does do a better job than the EVO 4G or other phones I’ve used. Take a look at this shot inside my house:

The colors in the iPhone 4 shot are on point. The green is correct, the wooden floor is right and the black is, well, black. The EVO 4G didn’t do so well on this test by comparison:

The 4’s camera isn’t perfect, but it does appear to handle colors better than the EVO (with the exception of my white balance issue) and delivers lower noise photos.

Compared to other phones the 4 does similarly well, besting the 5 megapixel camera in the Motorola Droid easily in terms of color reproduction and sharpness. Though the HTC Incredible previously was a top performer alongside the N900, the iPhone 4 makes the Incredible look a bit oversharpened and artificial. Compared to the 3GS, the iPhone 4's improvement is obviously dramatic, as shown in the gallery below.

Video is recorded at 1280x720, in H.264 with AAC mono audio. We measured a bitrate of 1.35 MBps, outclassing all the other smartphones we've tested.

iPhone 4

iPhone 3GS

HTC Droid Incredible

Motorola Droid

Nokia N900

What's interesting is that the iPhone 4 appears to crop the sensor down for video recording, taking the center most 1280x720 pixels instead of scaling down the entire image size. The result is that the focal length for video recording is notably longer than when taking photos.

You can see the difference is quite notable standing in the same place. Perhaps the A4 SoC lacks the compute power to apply a scale and encode at the same time, necessitating this crop. Whatever the case, video shot with the iPhone 4 still looks very good at the promised and delivered 30 FPS. Move the camera around enough, and there's still screen door effect from the rolling shutter like any CMOS sensor is going to give you - it's a fundamental problem no phones are going to get around soon. Its also right there in the specifications page for the camera SoC; rolling shutter.

Similarly, iPhone 4 does give you 5x digital zoom, though we still maintain you're better off taking photos at native resolution and messing with them later with better interpolation algorithms.

Welcome to 2010, Apple Upgrades its Camera FaceTime
Comments Locked

270 Comments

View All Comments

  • Charlie22911 - Wednesday, June 30, 2010 - link

    The EVO does not really bring anything new over previous highend phones like the HD2, Droid, or Nexus One aside from the front camera. Android phones are a dime a dozen.

    - Former Droid owner
  • JAS - Wednesday, June 30, 2010 - link

    Had AnandTech's review concluded that the iPhone 4 is a terrible product, would you complain that the reviewers have a bias *against* Apple?

    I've read the review a couple times and see it as nothing but fair.
  • g5isalive - Wednesday, June 30, 2010 - link

    I registered just to thank you for finally getting to the meat of the iPhone reception issue. Absolutely the best evaluation I have read.
  • k.alexander - Wednesday, June 30, 2010 - link

    Hear, hear! I did the same. I have not read through the full review, but the page on the antennae issue is by far the most thorough and thoughtful think I've seen from looking all over the web. Great Great Work!
  • mczak - Wednesday, June 30, 2010 - link

    Looks like a glaring omission, however I'm not convinced yet it would actually improve matters a lot. The bumper case not only insulates but also adds distance between your fingers and the antenna.
    I think it would be an interesting experiment to actually try this out, with some duct tape as insulative coating for instance...

    btw I think that bumper case is _vastly_ overpriced. For that price I'd expect it would at least properly work with the dock connector, but as is that's not really good value...
  • kmmatney - Wednesday, June 30, 2010 - link

    It works with an "Apple" dock connector - just not with third party connectors that make the connector too large. I'd probably just file down my cheap third party connectors before paying for an overpriced Apple accessory.
  • MurderMostFowl - Wednesday, June 30, 2010 - link

    In the signal Attenuation chart.... Is that iPhone 3GS "open palm" figure correct? 0.2 dB... I would think that kind of reception wouldn't be possible. since it is better than the other two devices by a massive amount ( remember dB is not linear )
    it must be an error, no?
  • eyk03 - Wednesday, June 30, 2010 - link

    This review is just phenomenal, I love it. So much more objective and in-depth than the 27 word reviews that Walt Mossberg or David Pogue deign to fart out.
  • spunkybart - Wednesday, June 30, 2010 - link

    Finally someone sits down and does some tests!

    I love, love your use of the Star Trek "ugly bags of mostly water" line, lol!

    I found it very interesting that your first thought was that the external antenna should have been coated -- that could have been a very easy thing to have done during manufacturing, so it sounds like Apple totally messed up on that decision!
  • InterHmai - Wednesday, June 30, 2010 - link

    This was an incredibly well detailed review, thanks for all the hard work!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now