You can have raw/Bayer Tiffs, I've worked with them. But the typical meaning is one with the raw pixels via color filter array (eg bayer8), and need debayering (to get the usual rgb8). The problem is vendors all seem to have their own definition of what RAW means nowadays. I think we are on the same page but commenting past each other. Yes I'm aware, I've had to debayer imagery from industrial cameras and worked on media forensics. I will not make technically better pictures with it, but in my case other aspects outweight this. No more always lugging around 2.5 kg of Nikon D750 with 24-120 lens and good bag. That all being said, I will invest into some top-end phone next year mainly due to its camera power these days and convenience of always having it with you, and sharing kids photos with family instantly. Counter-intuitively, holding a bigger camera system steady for a good shot is easier commpared to lightweight, awkwardly-shaped phone. That's not a "master" level, more like experienced beginner.Īnd even in the case of ignorant users, all cameras these days have auto setting which is actually pretty good and you can take final jpegs from it, ignoring the power of raw edit completely. Its not a rocket science, just keep doing it.
And even if you don't actively try to improve yourself, just using the camera will get you there (somewhere) eventually. You don't invest often 5k into photo equipment and then be oblivious of what options it gives you. Of course if you compare a clueless FF user with clueless phone user, phone can win but thats an unfair comparison.
#Facefilter pro 3 max resolution import full
You have much much better starting point with a full frame. You just need to open any night photo on bigger computer screen instead of just phone. Yes and no - even latest iphone 13 pro / nexus 6 cameras will produce shots that are blurry in shadows due to aggressive noise reduction or let some fugly color noise pass through the alghoritms. So I think what you really mean is that you want the camera to produce an image that appears on a screen as much like what you saw with your eyes as it can. There are often user-selectable profiles that each have a bit of a different look, much as different film stocks produce different looks (Fuji cameras actually call their profiles "film simulations" and name them after the company's film stocks). There's no such thing as "no filter" in digital photography even the "unprocessed RAW" is one program's opinion of how 12 bits per channel should be rendered at 8 bits per channel to display on your screen (as well as downsampled and compressed, in this case). When using a dedicated camera and generating a JPEG in the camera, a similar set of steps is applied automatically. Here's a set of seven images taken at steps along the path starting from as close as a JPEG can represent to the raw sensor data to a finished image that reasonably represents how my eyes saw the scene: The tint and color temperature of light sources vary greatly. A camera sensor usually has more dynamic range than the display can represent. Pictures shouldn't be edited by default