Fast HDR?

[Redfraggle]

I have an iphone 5c. I opted for it because it costs less and seemed more durable since I have small children, so let's not debate that.

I like its HDR quality, but my very nice Canon S95 cannot compete with it and this seems surprising. Maybe it's because the iphone camera is newer tech?

For instance, I can take HDR photos with the phone without a tripod. I cannot ever do this with the Canon. The phone just seems to do this fast enough in camera.


Is there anything out there that can compete with this kind of speed? I know I could just take 3 pictures and do it in software, but I am out and about with two little kids....this is an impossibility most times. Just getting to stop and take a photo is sometimes asking too much.

Feel free to educate if I am misunderstanding the possibilities. I do understand how HDR works, so we can skip that. But if the technology is just not there outside of smartphones, I guess maybe a better phone may be more what I am after.

We're in Japan for a while, so picture quality is important to me. But again, two little kids, so speed and ease are also important.

 

[jaedaliu]

HDR speed has to do with the speed of the imaging chip, and the design of the camera.

You're right that the smart phone camera has new tech. Smart phone imaging sensors are constantly changing. Each generation of iPhone probably has a different imaging sensor than the one before it. Apple chose a sensor that can take 3 images very quickly, and then puts them together in software. It's this focus on quickness that allows for the sweep panorama to work so well.

As for in-camera HDR, that's a decision some "more advanced" cameras won't do because with 3 (to 7) individual pictures, you can do the merging yourself in post processing.

in conclusion: the iphone 5c has a decent camera. However, the true marker of photo quality is the size of the imaging chip.

If instant HDR was important to me, I would:
1) Define my budget
2) Look at modern cameras (and last year's models) that offer that feature
3) take a good look at the one with the largest sensor that fits your budget
3)b) odds are it's got a Sony chip in there, it's what Apple uses, and the instant HDR and panorama sweep are features that Sony has been touting for years.

 

[fralexandr]

newer point and shoots will be better with hand-holdable hdr
the s120 supports handheld hdr
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/1943646620/canon-premium-powershot-g16-and-s120-get-minor-updates
"In addition, the camera’s creative handheld HDR Scene mode automatically combines multiple shots of a scene to help create an image with a greater dynamic range without the necessity for a tripod. HDR Scene mode includes Natural, Art Bold, Art Embossed, Art Standard and Art Vivid options."

 

[Redfraggle]

I do know and understand that sensor size matters. So, I usually lug around my Canon DSLR when I can. As much as I love it, I really print very few shots (although I hope to eventually print out more, but decent places to do so seem to be dwindling). Most of the time, it's just looking at things again on my computer or mobile device.

I considered adding another lens to the two I have, but then I'd have to carry it around.

I'll check some Sony reviews, thanks. Before my DSLR and S95, I had a Sony point and shoot. For a 5MP camera, it took very nice shots. But I outgrew it.

I'll also check the S120.

Doing this stuff post-processing would be nice; but, realistically, I'll probably never get around to doing it. Especially with my imac being in the US and me being in Japan.

 

[Syborg1211]

One thing to consider is the fact that RAW files have much more dynamic range, so there's much less need for HDR if you're willing to take the 60 seconds in lightroom to move the exposure sliders around to create the faux-HDR. I don't ever do HDR these days since I can get all the dynamic range I want out of one good shot with the SLR and RAW.

 

[Redfraggle]

I shoot RAW whenever I can, but I can't always take the time to set the correct settings for the shot I want because of the two little kiddos I mentioned. That's when HDR steps up and does what I need quickly.

The ability to shoot RAW is one of the major reasons I chose the S95 to begin with. Plus I still wanted control over the settings as I could with a basic DSLR. Really, I'd carry the DSLR more often but it's just not feasible when walking around with a kid in a carrier on my back and the things we need.

 

[Syborg1211]

Here are the steps to single shot faux-HDR in 60 seconds:

1) Boost the contrast
2) Lower the Highlights
3) Raise the Shadows
4) Lower the Whites
5) Raise the Blacks

 

[zCypher]

What Syborg1211 said. Just takes a few seconds in lightroom or similar software to edit a picture shot in RAW and get really good results. The phone does a decent job for a quick shot here and there, but you'll get a much better end result from taking the shot with a real camera shot in RAW and then edited properly. It doesn't have to be time consuming, and you don't need to shoot three exposures and merge them for real HDR.

I've had some decent results with doing the long 'real HDR' way too, for sure. But more often than not, I'm actually more satisfied just taking a single exposure and playing with the sliders in lightroom to get the most out of it. It's rare that this method is insufficient, at least that has been my experience.