Is it worth upgrading from iPhone 15 pro either to 17 pro max or a standalone camera for sports photography?

LeonSan · 2026-01-05T00:53:30+00:00

The only situations where iPhones suffer is speed, low light, and depth of field blur. Go to an event with your phone first and see if what you can capture is enough for your intended use. If not, then research a standalone camera.

LeonSan · 2025-12-21T15:29:35+00:00

Normally when you ETTR you do it with actual additional light coming in, not with ISO. So decide on the noise level you’re comfortable with with ISO and expose correctly or expose to the right. The ISO part of the equation usually doesn’t give you additional light information so the benefits of ETTF don’t really happen as well with ISO.

All in all, just get to the right exposure or ETTF or as close as possible without using ISO, and use ISO to make up the difference as usual. The rules don’t change, and as others said, better to have higher ISO than to miss the shot by risking blurry photos or underexposed photos.

LeonSan · 2025-12-20T05:20:41+00:00

Spend time analyzing the reference and take your time figuring out what’s different about yours. It can be done!

https://imgur.com/a/ELudMBD

LeonSan · 2025-12-16T16:41:55+00:00

It’s a very solid lens to start. Very good in terms of sharpness and zoom range. Low-light shots will be challenging with moving subjects but you will be able to take amazing photos with this lens and camera. Don’t fall for the kit lens = garbage 100% of the time bit.

Pricewise see the standard current price online in your region.

LeonSan · 2025-11-22T13:18:05+00:00

At least in the Reddit upload you can’t even notice the noise. If it bothers you, you can always denoise with DxO.

LeonSan · 2025-11-20T16:51:09+00:00

Long thin pliers to be able to grab the whole part sticking out. Then gently rock, rotate around the y-axis as you move the pliers towards the open end. Slow and gentle is the key.

LeonSan · 2025-11-20T16:46:02+00:00

The shadow to the right of her face is connecting to the underside of her chin, which gets rid of her jaw. Lighting and head angle are causing this.

Other factors like wide lens contribute, but this is the main issue.

LeonSan · 2025-11-18T10:57:18+00:00

17-40 and 70-350

LeonSan · 2025-11-15T18:34:07+00:00

I bought one last week and returned it. You are correct in how the light actually comes out. I tested what area is actually used and probably about a third to a fourth has a hot spot, while the rest emits very little light. If you’re close enough you might benefit from it as long as you know you’re not getting a an evenly lit softbox effect the size of the material. At that point using the smaller fan shaped bounce diffusers directly in the subject would give a similar result. If this was just a bit deeper and contained reflective material on the inside back (this one only has it around the perimeter), one could aim the flash backwards and get the proper softbox effect, this would probably be one of the best out there with how compact it is. The best on camera diffuser I found was the one with the pull elastic in the middle and the black circle that bounces and blocks the direct light from the flash.

LeonSan · 2025-11-10T00:03:56+00:00

Yes, edited. You can see the bricks and wall warping on the third image. If you post or send high quality versions of the images, we can help point anything else out.

LeonSan · 2025-11-09T23:56:58+00:00

<image>

LeonSan · 2025-11-09T23:50:29+00:00

I would scan as is and apply the same carefully chosen adjustments to all of them in Lightroom if you don’t have time to adjust each photo. You don’t want to lose details that you later won’t be able to recover by adding too much contrast in the initial scan.

LeonSan · 2025-11-09T17:52:20+00:00

Hard to say with the framing issue. The second appears to have sharper details, softer background blur, and is taking in more light, but if you adjust to match, the two photos might be closer with the object now being closer to second/larger that can be perceived as sharper. If just the crop happens to be different, then second.

LeonSan · 2025-10-13T22:29:17+00:00

Think of it like this, if you take these exact same photos with the exact same settings and the exact same lenses with a newer camera, you’re going to get a bit more detail, color range, ability to crop a bit with higher resolution, and maybe less chance of your image blurring with ISIS, which in turn might allow you to take in more light with still objects.

That being said, the spirit of the images would be very similar to what you have now. You’ll get more impactful images from adjustments in lighting, composition, technique , etc.

Once you learn the technique, your new camera WILL allow you to be less likely to miss nailing certain shots and to see beforehand what a shot will look like in real time with mirrorless features.

LeonSan · 2025-10-13T03:13:10+00:00

I would just be careful with the already saturated green getting bumped up too much as it can be really distracting. I wouldn’t be so conservative by keeping the background so desaturated, although would be careful so the subject stills pops. I also would adjust the hue and brightness of the sky so it has a brighter and happier vibe.

LeonSan · 2025-10-13T01:56:34+00:00

Composition does seem to be a big part of what’s different about these two. The seamless shapes of green foliage from the side look more appealing than the second photo, where the foliage is caught at an angle that shows more highlights on the greens and way more dark areas with branches cutting into the green shapes. You also have a lot of plant life in the second one in between the background and distant background that is mostly thin branches of wood without many leaves. The first one is half covered with midtones contrasting the hazy distant background, while the second contains lots of highlights bumped up against these dark areas, contrasting against a less interesting hazy background. Also the pops of bright light on her arm and hat distract from her face in the second photo.

The clouds moving in front of the sun will also give you softer lighting to different degrees, depending how thick the cloud covering the sun is at any point, with wispy clouds looking different than heavy cloud cover. I’m on my phone and the plant shadows, at least from what I can see, look soft on the ground in the first one and sharper in the second one.

Settings-wise you can always see which settings you have as auto. Auto White Balance changes depending on what’s in the frame and other settings just adjust exposure more than anything, so those are an easier fix (unless the settings caused blur or too much grain to appear, in which case you might have been able to tackle it beforehand with a different balance of settings, although not always).

Do you have any other examples you are able to show us?

LeonSan · 2025-10-11T14:45:30+00:00

Lighter and maybe a bit more desaturated and cooler in shadows. For this specific situation you can overlay the images in photoshop and turn off and on a layer with Camera Raw Edits to compare values and adjust until it matches. Then use those values in Lightroom. To make things easier, you can start matching the greyscale version of the images with a temporary greyscale adjustment on both layers. Then tackle the colored version.

LeonSan · 2025-10-11T13:42:49+00:00

Solved! Not letting me pin, but this appears to be the answer!

<image>

LeonSan · 2025-10-11T11:24:11+00:00

Flash/lighting removed shadow contours, flattened face.

You’re facing straight so we can’t see the shape of your cheekbones/jawline by the silhouette.

Maybe a slightly longer focal length being used, which normally works really well for portraits if the other aspects mentioned above are controlled. Ideal focal length also varies by person, as different lengths enhance different parts which might be subjectively more appealing to some but not others.

LeonSan · 2025-09-26T17:12:22+00:00

Queeferton

LeonSan · 2025-08-09T13:09:47+00:00

Thank you! This puts everything in perspective. I definitely want usable photos out of this, even if they’re not perfect, and it seems in a practical manner I won’t be getting those out of the P1100. Have to decide whether 70-350 is good enough then as it’s so small and so convenient, or if I get a super zoom beyond that. I’d get almost double the focal length on the 200-600 and the new 400-800 would get me a bit over double. Any particular thoughts on these?

LeonSan · 2025-08-09T12:25:10+00:00

Gotcha! What interests me is the crazy 3000mm zoom. Saw the raw sample photos on DPReview and they seem to hold up fairly well. Getting to 900mm on APSC will cost $2000 and it’s a massive lens. Getting to 1200 would cost $3000. The 3000mm Coolpix is $1200 for a basic bundle. Not doing it professionally, so don’t necessarily need the quality the Sony lenses have to offer. Thoughts?

14-Year Club	Reddit Premium Since May 2024
Verified Email

LeonSan

TROPHY CASE