My XMB
Not logged in [Login - Register]
Go To Bottom

Profile for AlexisGwen
Username AlexisGwen
Registered: 30-9-2024 (0 messages per day)
Posts: 0 (0% of total posts)
Avatar & Member Status:
Newbie
*

Last active: 1-10-2024 at 05:56 AM

Other Information
Site: http://connervrnn336.raidersfanteamshop.com/iqos-kl-n-hxm-prasb-ka-rn-himth
Aim:
ICQ:
Yahoo:
MSN:
Location:
Birthday: 25-12-1971
Bio: Apple users are fuming affter a new stunt appeared tto show the camera
quality in iPhones hass not changed since 2021. 

A tech influencer user shyared two videos - one in a park and one in a city - with four generations of iPhones lined up
to simultaneously capture the exact same shot - from the iPone 13
Pro to the iPhone 16 Pro.

Viewers criticized the fact the difference in quality appeared to be miniscule - despite the $600 difference between the newest model
and tthe 13 Pro.




A tech influencer has compared thee camera quality of
four generations of iPhones





Viewers complained that there didn't seem to be any differences
in the camera quality sonce the 13 Pro was released in 2021

It aso comes despite Apple marketing around the Pro models heavily focusing on camera quality.


In the TikTok videos, @yuta.tj23 lined the phones up on tri-pods
to scan the buildings in what appears to be a city
center.



Reead More

Apple discontinues THREE popular iPhone models after announcing new smartphone


Somme people did notice the differences - but they were
consistejt with some saying the older models actually looked better.


One person commented: 'Why is the 13 pro better in handling light
sources like the sign on the building?'

Another person pinpointed the same difference, in favor of the older model, writing:
'The 13pro looks much better specifically with the white light reflecting on that
yellow sign.'

However, the majority of viewes asked what the difference between thee video quality was, whule one questione if Apple should consider conducting thiks same
test.  




A TikToker posted two videos showing the similarities between the iPhone 13 Pro,
14 Pro, 15 Pro and newly released 16 Pro

Thee second video shows @yuta.tj23 running through a park with the
four iPhoone midels on tthe tri-podto see if the speed and angle
made a difference.

Viewers responde aand collectively agreed, they all look
the same, while one person broke down their review off
the camera quality aand said: '13 pro till this day looks amazing.
14 pro looks a tad bit better.

'15 pro looks the same as the 14. 16 you can see a difference it's has
a muhch cleaner image but not by leaps and bounds but slightly noticeable.'


Be the first to commentBe one of the first to commentComments

Are YOU dissatisfied by your iPhone's camera quality?


Comment now
For years, Apploe has boasted about its premium iPhone
devices and claimed its cameras are getting better over time. 

The Prro phones cost between $400 and $700 more than their standard counterparts, with an iPhone 16 Pro costing
upwards of $1,600 for one terabyte of storage.


Ahead of the iPhlne 16's launch earlier this month, Apple's vice president of
Worldwide iPhone Product Marketing, Kaiann Drance claimed the phone
will deliver a more poowerful and personal experience to users.














View this post on Instagram






















A post shared by ゆうた��iPhoneカメラ (@yuta.tj23)





Drabce said Apple was doing this by offering 'new ways to discover the world around you and capture
memories using Camera Control [and] a 48MP Fusion camera that
gives you two optical-quality cameras in one.

'This is the peefect time for customers to upgrade or make the switch to
iPhone.'

Yet after watching @yuta.tj23's TikTok video, users aplpeared to be
less sure affter noticing the similarities between the models, with one
person writing: 'Hmm, so I really don't needd to upgrade.'
Current Mood:
Forum most active in: No posts made yet.
Last Post: No posts made yet.

Other Options
Search for all posts by this user

  Go To Top

Powered by XMB
XMB Forum Software © 2001-2021 The XMB Group
[Queries: 14] [PHP: 22.6% - SQL: 77.4%]