WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
266 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hello!

I was able to use my works camera for a few days and ended up taking more photos of my watch instead of stuff for work (oops). Now that I might be a little addicted to how well these photos turn out, I'm looking at some of the additional lenses for my iPhone. Now obviously I know the photos won't look as good as the Nikon DSLR, but will they still turn out better than just my normal iPhone? Thanks everyone

Was looking at something like this: https://www.amazon.com/iPhone-Telephoto-Fisheye-Samsung-Smartphones/dp/B07B4TN3LL/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1535986414&sr=8-7&keywords=iphone+lenses+for+iphone+8+plus
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,421 Posts
Those things use cheap glass so you lose some sharpness, contrast, colour, etc. What they do, is offer you different perspectives compared to the fixed focal length of your phone. I have a cheap pair that I used a couple of times for macro shots of my watches and was happy enough to post to instagram, here on WUS, etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,372 Posts
As above. They’re okay for doing macro work but not so much for broader landscape work. As above though they have use cheap glass so you’ll lose quality which will be more pronounced when the lighting isn’t right.

That being said for $26 definitely worth buying to try, it could give you exactly what you’re after
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
528 Posts
They are junk, plain and simple. Did you see the photos? iPhone photos are already a huge compromise compared to a mirrorless / DSLR. This is just the icing on the pile of crap. A good lens is North of $1,000, often $2,000 and more. For $26 all you get is a piece of plastic garbage made in China.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
191 Posts
I say it depends: with excellent light, the results are really good, close to the APS-C capability even if you print in A3 size. I'm quite the camera guy with a collection of Fujifilm lenses, but with good light the best camera is the one you always have with you: your phone's.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,521 Posts
You can get decent macro shots using the clip on lens on iPhone







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
528 Posts
You can get decent macro shots using the clip on lens on iPhone







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just because they zoom in, they are not decent, at all. Blurry / out of focus, terrible and blocky bokeh, many details missing, motion blurriness, you name it. I wouldn't print or post any of those other than on your average WRUW thread maybe.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
528 Posts
I say it depends: with excellent light, the results are really good, close to the APS-C capability even if you print in A3 size. I'm quite the camera guy with a collection of Fujifilm lenses, but with good light the best camera is the one you always have with you: your phone's.

ROFL All around.

You have no clue of proper photography if you seriously think that these $30 plastic crap adapters produce APS-C quality images.

PS: the best camera (and lens) is the best you can afford. Walking around with a freakin phone does make you everything BUT a camera guy!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,521 Posts
Just because they zoom in, they are not decent, at all. Blurry / out of focus, terrible and blocky bokeh, many details missing, motion blurriness, you name it. I wouldn't print or post any of those other than on your average WRUW thread maybe.
Please don’t feel the need to be polite. Tell us how you really feel......


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
185 Posts
Try this with your phone; let alone this crap shot adapter made in China...
Posts rude and condescending comment, proceeds to post pictures that are mediocre at best, and not at all obviously better than photo that are being criticized.
Maybe work on taking better photos with your "good" lens and less time being rude. Being an ass has nothing to do with the liberal media, and all about reflecting a poor upbringing and personal etiquette.

To the OP. I find that the clip on lenses themselves aren't inherently bad typically (especially the macro ones), it's the alignment with the actual phone camera that results in the off axis issues that you can see in the photos posted, which can be aesthetically pleasing. Unfortunately I'm too OCD on lens performance for me to use these clip on lenses, but others find them fine, and getting the shot with flaws always beats not getting the shot in the first place. FWIW "Moment" branded clip on lenses seem to be very well regarded, and would likely be significantly better than what you've linked.

My advice is to spend some effort in lighting of the watch really nicely, using your regular phone camera at its closest focusing point, and crop in a little. With plenty of light, the image quality of the phone vs dedicated camera is closer, and unless you're going to actually print large photos, cropping some will result in images that are plenty sufficient for personal, and dare I say it, social media enjoyment.

I happen to enjoy spending Patek money for camera stuff that I enjoy using, but these days that isn't even remotely necessary to get decent photos.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
528 Posts
Posts rude and condescending comment, proceeds to post pictures that are mediocre at best, and not at all obviously better than photo that are being criticized.
Maybe work on taking better photos with your "good" lens and less time being rude. Being an ass has nothing to do with the liberal media, and all about reflecting a poor upbringing and personal etiquette.

To the OP. I find that the clip on lenses themselves aren't inherently bad typically (especially the macro ones), it's the alignment with the actual phone camera that results in the off axis issues that you can see in the photos posted, which can be aesthetically pleasing. Unfortunately I'm too OCD on lens performance for me to use these clip on lenses, but others find them fine, and getting the shot with flaws always beats not getting the shot in the first place. FWIW "Moment" branded clip on lenses seem to be very well regarded, and would likely be significantly better than what you've linked.

My advice is to spend some effort in lighting of the watch really nicely, using your regular phone camera at its closest focusing point, and crop in a little. With plenty of light, the image quality of the phone vs dedicated camera is closer, and unless you're going to actually print large photos, cropping some will result in images that are plenty sufficient for personal, and dare I say it, social media enjoyment.

I happen to enjoy spending Patek money for camera stuff that I enjoy using, but these days that isn't even remotely necessary to get decent photos.

Typical liberal. I'm being honest, you call me rude, and then you call me names. What's next? Calling me racist as well?

You have ZERO clue of proper photography.

Why don't you buy yet another 50 bucks made in China crap shot watch on eBay and tell us what you know about watches..?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,737 Posts
As a professional photographer I can tell you, buy a camera. I've seen so many people shooting once of a lifetime photos on a phone or a tablet. Those things have a sensor the size of a pinto bean. The lenses are not much better. As far as the accessory lenses you're looking at, any time you add non optical glass in front of a camera lens you degrade the quality. That quality is already degraded by using a tiny sensor. Sure that phone image looks good on the internet but print a poster from that once in a lifetime shot. It ain't happening. The passion of football, not shot on an iPhone

smu4.jpg smuh.jpg
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
528 Posts
I say it depends: with excellent light, the results are really good, close to the APS-C capability even if you print in A3 size. I'm quite the camera guy with a collection of Fujifilm lenses, but with good light the best camera is the one you always have with you: your phone's.

Since we are having people in this thread buying into this false nonsense...

An APS-C mirrorless, such as those from Sony, Fujifilm, and Canon will get you a 4.6EV advantage over the iPhone X. So even with an f/3.5 “kit” lens, these will still have a 2.6EV light advantage. And with the 24 megapixel “sweet spot” in APS-C cameras these days, that’s a pixel density of 65,217 pixels/mm², a 10.5x potential resolution advantage.

And finally, full-frame mirrorless, the Sony A7 and A9 series, or the Leica SL series. The full-frame sensor will offer a 5.4EV advantage over the iPhone X, there’s nearly 50x the area on a full-frame vs. iPhone X sensor. Mirrorless full-frame cameras run from 12 megapixel to 24 megapixel to 42 megapixel, 13,888 pixels/mm² to 27,778 pixels/mm² to 48,611 pixels/mm²… that’s an advantage of 14x to 49x.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top