iPhone 15 Pro vs iPhone 15: Tested and compared

The 5x is a different camera, so yeah. Still not an optical zoom in the truest sense. Doesn't matter, Apple users will believe anything Apple tells them.

Yes. Yes, it does. A real optical zoom would be able to optically cover the entire sensor surface area at all focal lengths with no computational tricks save for the conventional distortion corrections. I would posit that the interpolated digital zoom that is between even fractions of the sensor size, doesn't deliver the same level of detail as a real optical zoom covering the entire sensor with no AI intervention.

Fuji X-100V has an optical crop, a 35mm and even a 70mm mode where they crop from the center of the sensor to simulate a longer focal length. They don't call it "optical zoom" because it isn't.

Well, I don’t really care how the sausage is made. If I get high quality photos — they can call it what they want :)

If that interpolated noise passes for "high quality" then I guess it's all good. Not in my pocket, it doesn't.

That’s really helpful. But it should really be in the review. Maybe the iPhone 16 will have 4 cameras?

@Richard B you've just explained in one paragraph what several pages of Apple marketing spew has tried to hid, and DPR has then done the mental gymnastics to try to back up.

It's not an optical zoom, period. It's just multiple cameras, and cropped in at focal lengths longer than native for the camera in use. Why does Apple get to use the phrase "Optical zoom?"

If this were Samsung or Oppo or otherwise, they'd get called out on it in about a second.

It’s a shame that Apple resorts to such marketing hyperbole. I just checked their web site and for the iPhone 15 ProMax, Apple claims “.5x, 1x, 2x, 5x optical zoom options”. The 2x “optical” zoom is definitely a crop from the main camera.

Based on my own testing, I think the cameras are all pretty nice in their own right and can stand on their own merits, notwithstanding the limitations of the 12MP size of the ultra-wide and telephoto cameras. The main camera, in particular, can provide nice very clean output at its base focal length. This is especially true if one is willing to shoot in DNG and take the hit on file size. (One shot I took on the main camera which had a lot of scrubby woodland in it hit 130MB.)

With the very good image quality that the phone provides. I fully intend to use the iPhone 15 Pro Max for casual travel photography, but will plan on “zooming with my feet”, rather than use the “optical” zoom that Apple provides.

Note that Richard is presumably talking about the iPhone 15 Pro Max, which has the 5x/120mm telephoto lens. On the iPhone 15 Pro, which is what was used for these photos, the telephoto is 3x/77mm. I didn't have a 15 Pro Max available when working on this article, just a 15 Pro and a 15 Plus.

Re: the phrasing "optical zoom," the emphasis is on the optical part. If Apple said the phone offered an "Optical Crop," most customers wouldn't understand. Non-photographers know "zoom," not "crop" in this context. (Samsung also calls its telephoto cameras optical zoom.) To most people, "zoom" means "change my field of view without moving my feet." And Apple and others replicate the effect of "zooming" between focal lengths; the preview doesn't go black or switch directly between cameras when you tap the 2x or 3x/5x button... it zooms the way you would see when turning the zoom ring on a lens. When it does make the switch, it's then making a capture using that camera's pixels without digital zoom. Hence, the term "optical."

But it's not using all the sensor's pixels and altering the lens FL to zoom. It's using effects to duplicate the zoom.. are those effects optical, or digital? And yes my cheap Android phone does the same thing as it cycles through its two cameras.

Jeff, I can't imagine that the term “Optical Crop” would mean anything to anyone. However, the key word is indeed “optical”. It is an adjective that is used by Apple to describe the nature of zoom that Apple is providing on the iPhone 15. The 12mm, 24mm and 120mm focal lengths each have their own optics and can be considered optical zooms. The iPhone 15’s 2x (48mm) zoom is generated from a crop of the main 24mm camera rather than any lens/optical adjustment. A more appropriate description for the 2x (48mm) zoom would be “computational zoom”.

EmotionBlur, in my case, an iPhone 7 (with an iPhone 4s as backup). And while I take "snaps" with both, when needs be, I use my E-M1 and E-M1 III for "photos".

…and say goodbye to DPR yet again.

I don't mind them advertising (or I'd pay a subscription to go without), and I want them to afford to run the site. But at least on a phone without blocking, the ads cover a significant portion of the screen, and aren't relevant (unless gambling or dog breeds have a connection to photography I'm unaware of).

Didn't used to be a problem on the site. Of course, it also needed to turn a profit.

Try using a different browser, or even VPN; I see none of this page-blocking annoyance....
(Android/Opera/Europe)

Interesting. The black rectangle taking a chunk out of the screen appears to be a blank "recent videos" (possibly because I've not watched any); I can't imagine why I'd want it sticky even if I had. Affects Chrome and Firefox on Android, not Opera. The obnoxious ads seem to be on this story but not many others, and don't appear if I use incognito or a different browser. Way to reward people who actually sign in...

The ad may be an irritating anomaly. Hope the recent videos thing gets a redesign, though.

FWIW, in my case/sample, it is logged-in.
(I mentioned VPN only for geo-specific advertising; IIRC there were (US-specific) complaints about that before (not sure about being login-specific))
(I doubt the login-data contains any geo-specifics (although theoretically, they could, at first registration & IP-analysis (if not done by VPN right from the start))
(using Opera mostly for being the most consistent in dark-modus (Firefox also good, Chrome/Gmail is not), and being robust & ergonomic with text-zooming (line-breaks, keeping it inside the screen limits))
(using 3 browsers simultaneously anway, just to separate the most visited websites, being faster & more ergonomical/intuitive in switching than within a single browser)

You data goes exactly to the same places it goes with Apple devices. Apple's privacy and "security" claims are a marketing scam. It has been proven many times. Even as recently as last week where various organizations have been using push notifications on users iPhones to spy on them. Privacy is a scam with apple.

My other devices are an iMac and and iPad. So it makes sense to get the iPhone, it has the exact same user interface, the same apps - ZERO LEARNING CURVE, which makes it very attractive to stay with Apple. Just my 2c.

iPhones are not meant for budget-conscious people, apart from the SE.

Personally, I can justify the cost of an iPhone because it’s something I’ll be using every day for three years. That works out at something like $1 or $2 a day.

The lack of a dedicated or universal "back" button or gesture has always been enough to keep me from owning an iPhone. It reminds me of the days when Apple refused to add a second mouse button for...reasons.

You are right, with Apple it's sometimes simplicity of design versus usability.

Having been Apple user for the past 15 years, it never occurred to me that I would need a "universal back button" - sorry my ignorance, what is it used for? I never seen a website that did not have a way back. Is there also "universal forward button" in case you went back accidentally? Just curious....

@4Photos somewhat surprisingly, the back button goes one back in whatever app you're using at the moment.
Sure, most apps have a back button, but it's at different positions and you need to look for it.

I agree that Apple usability is not great in general. I have an android phone and an apple tablet, so I think I can compare. The iPad Air I have has brilliant hardware - fast CPU, great screen, good battery life and charging times. It's just the operating system which is kind of crappy compared to Android. And it has only one button, forcing the user to learn all sorts of unintuitive swipe gestures by heart.

Simplicity of design is not the same thing as usability, but the real genius of Apple is that they sell you additional buttons like an amazing invention, see the extra button on the 15 Pro Max.

"Sure, most apps have a back button, but it's at different positions and you need to look for it."

Exactly. Whenever I have to do something on one of my kids' iPhones, it's always frustrating having to search for the back button in whatever app or screen I'm in. I guess you probably get used to it as an iPhone user though.

But they're kids, so they have to have iPhones, lol. They've just dealt with the lackluster battery life and poor camera performance over the years. It's nice that Apple is finally catching up to Android in those areas.

"Simplicity of design is not the same thing as usability, but the real genius of Apple is that they sell you additional buttons like an amazing invention, see the extra button on the 15 Pro Max."

Exactly. I've had a programable button that I've used as a direct button to open the camera and take pictures for the last few years on Android...first on my TCL 10 Pro and now on my Pixel 6 Pro.

@edgar iOS has two universal back buttons. A swipe in from the left slide of the screen goes back, and some apps like Safari use the right screen as a forward button. And if you swipe left/right on the bar at the bottom of the screen you can go back/forward between apps. I seldom, if ever, use the app’s back button and I find these two back gestures to be more versatile than a single back button.

I just tried it on my daughter's iPhone, and the swipe-left gesture you described is far from a universal back button. Within 30 seconds, I found several instances where it did not work for "back".

(1) When I opened an app, and swiped left, it didn't take me back to the home screen, like on my Android. (2) When I went into "Photos", swiping left does not go back if there's a picture open. It goes to the picture to the left (if there is one). If there's not a left picture, it just wiggles the current picture a little. (3) It worked *sometimes* in the App store. If I selected an app, I could swipe left to go back to the previous screen. But if I selected a different category at the bottom, such as switching from "Apps" to "Games", the left swipe does not take me back to "Apps" afterward.

So yeah, same old situation of "back" depending on what app you're in and what screen you're on. Kind of chaotic for such a tightly controlled "walled garden" if you ask me.

1 - Of course. It’s the app back button. If you want to go home swipe up from the bottom just like on Android. Im fine with this as I dont want to accidentally go to the Home Screen just because I swiped back one too many times.
2 - When looking at photos swiping left and right go to the prev next photos. When you are in an album the back button takes you back to the top level.
3. Those are top levels of the app and the back button takes you back to the top level.

I have never found it to be chaotic, moving up and down levels within the apps makes sense to me. Some people are fine with software flexibility while others require rigid operational guidelines; neither type of person is correct they’re just different. Android is praised by its fans for not being as rigid as iOS so its humerous when iOS is criticized for not bein rigid enough.

We're all doing it wrong, lol

For me, this is the third year where I’ve asked whether I’d rather have a new iPhone, or a new mirrorless body or lens. $800-1200 can buy a lot of camera or glass. As we are still unable to control basic things like whether the phone automatically lights or refocuses a scene because it thinks it sees a phase, I am still sticking with my older iPhone for snapshots, and happily building my mirrorless kit for the type of control and image quality I want.

I think battery degradation is one of the main reasons people replace otherwise fantastic phones. It's also easy for people to ignore the actual price of the phone when your carrier spreads the cost out over 2 or 3 years. A mere $27 (a month) doesn't sound like much to pay for the latest and greatest phone, right?

what is the purpose of buying every year or less, something which is the same and at a very high price? To show on social media? I'll rather use my money for much more interesting things

I would say because they want to buy it. I have an iPhone 13, its going to be my last iPhone/apple product for a long time. I have in front of me two Pixel 8 pros just waiting for their armor to start using them. No, phones are never going to be as good as dedicated cameras, even as some users claim. There is this thing called physics, light etc. Computational stuff cannot fix physics.

I am getting ready after Christmas to buy some new bodies, lenses etc. WIll I be using my cameras on my phone alot? You betcha.....are they going to replace dedicated cameras for image quality etc, Not a chance. They are just another tool in the sack!
Even mid range phones have decent cameras these days for snapshot/instabook posts. For people who want a serious tool, meh.

"I think battery degradation is one of the main reasons people replace otherwise fantastic phones." iPhone's battery degrades about 5-10% a year so for those who charge the phone once a day at night, this does not impact the usage of the phone, plus one can carry a portable battery bank. At some point, the phone will get too slow because the old phone can no longer keep up with more processing intensive features as each new iOS will bring. Plus usually after about 5 years, iPhone will no longer be covered by software/security updates.

Ok then. I guess I must have just imagined all the phones I've seen with battery life issues.

"I think battery degradation is one of the main reasons people replace otherwise fantastic phones."

That's not so much battery degradation, but carefully planned obsolescence.

Because it never was the battery itself, but the carefully crafted enclosure, AKA device lock-in.
Not sure how many still have a removable battery like the LG G5....

Perhaps a market opportunity for camera manufacturers, a build in battery.
(only the Casio Tryx/TR100 comes to mind)

fairphone is the only smartphone sold today with a removable battery as far as I know. Well, one that is usable anyways.

As we know, apple was syntactically "degrading" batteries to force users into thinking their phones were crapping out and make them purchase new ones. I am sure others were too.

As for the software updates, I have the new pixel 8 pro with 7 years of updates. WIll I have that device in 7 years? probably not, but if I feel I like it that much, I can use it. Wonderful to see long term support. And processors these days are powerful enough to run anything. The days of slow software after updates are gone.

Apple charge £85 to replace the battery in my current iPhone. Which is about 14% of what the phone cost. So battery life didn’t really seem to be a reason swap phones

Not even close.

I own a 15 Pro Max. The amount of AI noise reduction and detail reconstruction it does is so egregious, that the images are full of false detail.

I upgraded from an iPhone 7 Plus hoping that the 15 Pro Max would be a quantum leap and I wouldn't need to pack my Z30 around. It's definitely a quantum leap compared to my old cell phone, but not compared to a real camera.

The 5x zoom lens is underutilized depending on EV level or distance. The iPhone, depending on focus distance, switches cameras. If you want to take a hi-res close up, best the phone will do is the 12MP UW cropped down to the normal lens's perspective, then AI upscaled back to 24MP, so your IQ is just complete garbage and looks like it was run through Topaz.

I regret my purchase. The cameras in these things are good for taking quick snaps for work, or friends to just show something quick over text, but to imagine this is a Micro 4/3rds or APS-C replacement is completely delusional.

"My 15 Pro Max has completely obliterated every small format I have."

I'm also gonna have to dissent. When I first got my Pixel 6 Pro, I was really impressed with it, and I got out of the habit of reaching for my real cameras. But last summer I broke out my old (very old) m43 camera and a couple small lenses for a walk with the family, and I was reminded of what I'd been missing: No need for fake bokeh, and there's actual detail when viewed up close or on a large screen.

Yeah, you can get some pretty decent pictures from the high-end cell phones, but it's not the same.

Here's some of the photos from the walk:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/67143901

Terrible Photographer - love your comment! I'm thinking of upgrading my iPhone 7 ... to its third BATTERY!! I simply cannot get enthused about the idea of spending over £1000 to get a "phone" with two (or worse, three) scratchable, exposed, lens surfaces where you will never quite know, on a given moment, which one you are using, with or without digital stretch and AI interpolation.

If I want decent, controllable photographic results, I'll use my OLYMPUS E-M1 cameras, and use the OI.Share app to sync any I want to put online immediately.

Apple has lost it for me when it comes to "Mobile Phones".

The truth hurts, I know.

No one is forcing you to use apples camera app. I use Halide and get wonderful unmolested files, in DNG format nonetheless.

I have a 14 Pro and have been very pleasantly surprised by the quality of landscape and seascape photos it can take in good lighting. With some long exposure apps I can even handhold 10 seconds to blur water and capture light trails. As a small thing you carry in your pocket that weighs less than the smallest FF lens, the iPhone is a great camera for many situations. It's not ideal for macro, portraits, sports, wildlife, and indoor or night photography. Probably it two years, indoor, night, and portraits will be better. In four years, our cameras will be like electric typewriters compared to... smartphones.

Terrible Photographer said: "The 5x zoom lens is underutilized depending on EV level or distance. The iPhone, depending on focus distance, switches cameras"

Wait, I can't *tell* the iphone which lens/camera to use? Screw that noise, I was seriously thinking about the pro.

Looking at the EXIF, the 35mm is not cropped, actually, it is taken with a different phone at a different time (13 sec later). Also, some detail like branches, etc., do not match exactly. It looks like the 24mm is taken with the Plus, the 35mm is taken with the Pro.

@J A C S Good catch! I inadvertently exported the wrong image from my Photos library. I've alerted the editors and sent them the correct image. Thanks.

@Jeff What is the difference between a "direct optical crop" and "image getting cropped"? ...Sounds the exact same to me...

@iDM photography When using the 2x mode, the phone crops to the middle of the sensor, using those actual pixels. It's not upscaling: you end up with a 12MP image. The 1.2x and 1.5x modes are effectively digital zooms, with a dose of computational photography to finish it off. (Apple even says "That's the power of computational photography" on its iPhone 15 Pro webpage.)

Thanks Jeff for that explanation... I suspect that applying the upscaling to the 2x mode didn't give sufficiently good results, and Apple decided to upscale only the 1.2x and 1.5x modes...

@Mr Bolton I think the key is the end resolution. With digital zoom, the camera is cropping into the image... but then upscaling to match the expected resolution. For example, on my Fuji X100V, the native resolution is 6240x4160 (26MP). I can turn the focus ring to get a 2x zoom, take the shot, and end up with the same 6240x4160 resolution image. It's used digital zoom to capture a crop of the sensor and upscaled it to the same resolution.

On the iPhone, the 2x zoom creates a 12MP image, which is the center crop of the 48MP sensor. You get the "zoom" but at the expense of resolution. However, it's not scaling the captured image, so the output is optical. Now, the 1.2/28mm and 1.5/35mm options on the Pro models are definitely digital zoom: in fact, Apple is performing a crop and also capturing a 48MP reference image and blending them to create a 24MP image. But they've been upfront that this is due to computational photography.

(Replying to my own comment since I ran over the character limit: I think that focus ring feature on my X100V is an optional one, but offhand I don't remember where it's enabled.)

No, the key isn't the end resolution... Crop is crop even if after that you upscale the image with the smartest AI algorithms... Any image can be upscaled... The 12MP image you get from the iphone can be upscaled as well using you computer... Let's make a difference between RESOLUTION and DETAIL... If you crop you lose detail... AI upscaling algorithms will try to "invent" detail and in most cases it will look real, but it isn't reality... Don't get that easily convinced by the Apple marketing...

Jeff, thanks a lot for replying. Indeed, that would be awesome!

I'd love to see that as well. I don't expect them to be as good as high end cameras but it would be nice to see the progress. I've find that pixels from smartphones are mushy and get worse as tiny sensors climb in resolution. I wonder how much of that is due to optics or size of photosites.

Speaking of the test scene, DPReview's email newsletter arrived this morning with an update: it's now set up. https://us15.campaign-archive.com/?e=53c919bd39&u=6c818d5d6d006adf8eed5cf6b&id=66e1df081f

Yes, DPReview is now headquartered in Pioneer Square downtown Seattle.

Oh, and Dale wrote an article about setting up the test scene: https://www.dpreview.com/articles/1316027046/setting-up-dpreview-camera-test-chart

Related to this, One potential idea for a future article that would generate a lot of traffic would be a 'iPhone throughout the years' one. Basically once you are done the new studio setup spend time next year just getting all the various iPhone camera models(only ones with different cameras), do the studio scene and when you are done have an article about it(maybe leading up to the iPhone 16 next year). A bit of work but having a database of iPhones in the studio would be pretty popular.

"ergonomics and enjoyment."

I doubt the iKiddies and many older phone aficionados have by now any difficulty with the, to me, tortuously wretched shooting experience of a phone.

The youngsters have nothing else against which to compare and the olders folks can't remember the slimy, ever-shrinking point & shoots with much fondness.

Plus, the results from new phones really provide some eye-candy if one doesn't look too closely.

It is really the stacking and processing power which elevated the smartphone photography most. By stacking, utilising the fast readout of smaller sensor, the phones have caught up with big sensors in dynamic range, and that is the most obvious difference, especially when not pixel-peeping and given the size of smartphone screens and theirs quality i.e. high contras amoled. No more blown highlights etc.

@Cheapo Marx:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Plus, the results from new phones really provide some eye-candy if one doesn't look too closely.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Or too widely.

Yet not just *narrowingly* missing the mark....

The only really surprising thing is a (smartphone) lens *not* called super-duper-wideangle.
I guess even Apple realised their limits in credibility.
(beyond their even more pathetic limits in optics)

I like very much the poetic sadness behind the expression..

"It is really the stacking and processing power which elevated the smartphone photography most. By stacking, utilising the fast readout of smaller sensor, the phones have caught up with big sensors in dynamic range.."

Beautiful nutshell summary. I don't know enough to have deduced that myself.

I just buy second hand. Way cheaper than an I Phone.

"It is really the stacking and processing power which elevated the smartphone photography most. By stacking, utilising the fast readout of smaller sensor, the phones have caught up with big sensors in dynamic range.."

More than 10 years ago, Casio already managed to offer HDR-(ART(!))-Video.
(at a measly 720i/15p(!))
Not much has happened ever since, in that video-stacking department....

So when my 4k capable camera uses a smaller area of its sensor to record higher framerate video than it could by reading the full sensor width, is that also an optical zoom?

Because it's referred to as a 'crop' by every camera manufacturer and tech reviewer, ever.

Mr. Bolton, I agree, this is a crop. In a way it's a digital zoom but without up-res'ing. This is why I asked what Husband 80 meant with 'equal to optical zoom' - with regards to perspective it is.

No, none of those are optical zoom. An optical zoom would use the whole sensor with a longer focal length lens.

(I am "a" documenter ...not "an" documenter. Who needs glasses, clearly)

I disagree. There are plenty of people wondering how the iPhone 15(pro) compares to their current smartphone or even a compact camera they may be considering.

In a separate review (the Sony a7CR), Richard Butler noted that they're still setting up the studio test scene after DPReview had to relocate to a new location following the Gear Patrol purchase. I'm hoping we can get the iPhones in there when the time comes.

Lowest common denominator.

Yep, sometimes the market share could be influenced by whether the most influential camera review site in history of digital photography actually bothers to review something or not.

It is not one way street. It is the same paradigm like with everything you buy today. I.e. unfavorable or no reviews of one product on amazon will sway buyer to similar product of a competitor if it has favourable review/s. Not reviewing Panasonic S5 II timely could have easily hurt it sales as one can easily conclude, if it is not worth reviewing on DPreview, it is possibly not that great to bother with.

It could well be non-intentional bias, but it is a bias nevertheless. I think some of the folks on here would say the same of some Pentax releases. Once you become as influential as DPreview, and DPreview is arguably the most influential camera review site in history of digital photography, you have to be careful to not to damage others by acts of ommision too, else you are going to lose credibility and manufacturer interest. With great power comes great responsibility.

Vit you really are on a promote Panasonic spree this week. And now on an article about cell phones…. Anyway Good luck in the fight…

Yep, I obviously feel strongly about that. I want Panasonic to be as competitive as possible because they have the best control scheme, and therefore overall ergonomics, of any camera manufacturer. And if they don't sell well, it would be shame seeing them go. And to help them to sell well, they need the most in-depth review possible on the most influential photography gear site. Simple as that. I am drumming so I can enjoy their products for years to come :-D

@Vit Adamek:

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/8615681274/iphone-15-pro-vs-iphone-15-camera-test?comment=1868872837

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Instead of not one, but *two* remarkably lousy wide-angle smartphones being compared, I would prefer DP to at least bring into the limelight the not one, but *two* more 9mm FF wide-angle(brand)s, hitting the market(news elsewhere) months ago already....

Or: all a DP-only-reader would know today is that only 1 such lens (Laowa) exists; no choice, no comparison, while being brieved at length about the differences between 2 lousy smart-phone wide-angles.

Not really the equivalence (ha) of dancing on the head of a needle, but darn close in usefulness (and pain).
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

If I were looking for a camera I’d go for that Panasonic model. But millions more buy iPhones.

@J0n Sn0w:

Follow the lemmings.

From cliff-hangers to cliff-jumpers.

Lemmings take more photos today than anyone else.

Yes, that is what makes lemmings spectactular; their sheer quantity, and only that.
(and speed....although mostly in the speed of being forgotten....like pixels on a beach head)

I would not call it wrong priorization, but as a Panasonic S1 and S5 user I would also like to see the S5ii-review. Admittedly there are a larger number of camera reviews to be finalized, not just Panasonic cameras. And the list forlenses is even konger. Let's hope for 2024 after the new studio scene is set up, and perhaps streamlined processes can ease the job.

Maybe DPReview sees the S5ii as so similar as the G9ii (something they alluded to in their first impressions) that they are going to review both together, like they did for those two iPhone 15's.

I'm being sarcastic here, but you never know...

@MikeRan noting the absence of a real review on the first full frame Panasonic camera to feature phase detect autofocus, is a quite fair call. Why are we getting article after article about the new iPhone when there are a variety of real cameras awaiting review on this website that's supposed to be about cameras and not iPhones.

If I want iPhone content, I'll got to Apple sites. I want camera content, so I come here. I read quite a bit in this forum about cameras I don't even have, and have learned a lot. Maybe it's because I'm not an Apple user, but I feel like their tech gets tons of coverage everywhere, and one marketroid-enhanced review here should be adequate.

Tell me about the new S5 II. I'm here for that kind of content, because I know that cropping into the center of a sensor to use fewer pixels in simulating a longer focal length is not and never will be "optical zoom." It's a crop. It's digital zoom.

That’s fair.. I replied because Vit was posting multiple times in multiple articles about his lack of Panasonic coverage…. Anyway I guess he gave up because he just bought an R8. I guess he couldn’t find enough info about the Panasonic…

Also there is lots of coverage of iPhones and their cameras, but generally all the camera coverage sucks and is very surface level stuff, like megapixels and features. I come to DPR to find out if the pro upgrade is worth it over the non pro. I don’t trust Macworld to give me a good assessment.