I'm surprised that in no reviews of the iPhone 18 camera there is mention of the bad quality bokeh, it has heavy ring shapes that looks like what you'd get from a cheap catadioptric lens.
Edit: e.g. the tree in one of the images in the page: <a href="https://www.dxomark.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/PoleHDR_Deep_AppleiPhone18Pro_DxOMark_05-00.jpeg" rel="nofollow">https://www.dxomark.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/PoleHDR_D...
Only professionals and enthusiasts care about bokeh. And I say that as someone that shoots my 50mm 1.2 wide open.
Previously the blur on iPhone was all software, apparently. I've set mine to do wide open with no bokeh, and i'll put it in after.
But to be honest, the iPhone is the camera I have on me, so the limits are acceptable. Can I force focus it? No. Can I get the glow? No. But iPhone + zoom + crop is better in some ways than my 50mm 1.2 with bokeh.
> Only professionals and enthusiasts care about bokeh.
I mean, consumers would probably just know it as "nice and pleasing blurred background", versus "this blurred background isn't as nice".
I remeber photographers talking about X has "not very nice bokeh" probably since I met a first photographer when phones were monochrome and had no camera. No one beside photographer cared then, no one will care today.
To most people its just blur and they don't care that it is not just blur.
If your assertion was true, it logically leads to "camera quality doesn't matter man, only photographers care about that, to most people it's just pictures"
There are details, all of these are details; but saying that "iphone5-level-cameras are good enough form most people" is both true (obviously it sold and millions were satisfied with it) and false (most people would notice today that iphone5s take worse photos than latest-gen). All the details add up to image quality that _is_ noticeable even to the laymen.
> only photographers care about that, to most people it's just pictures
This is largely true, when it comes to photos of other people/people they care about.
I'm a wedding & family photographer part time, and at nearly every wedding I shoot, the photos the clients and their guests favorite the most from the galleries are usually the quick candid snaps where the subject has an expression they like or are doing something fun. It could be a blurry, grainy, dark mess of a photo and it will consistently be their favorite photo of the day.
For most non-photographers, the subject of the photo is what matters and is all they will notice. Almost no one is making a distinction between bokeh shape, or noise (unless its so obvious as to completely ruin the photo), composition, etc.
All that to say, photo quality is only one very small part of the equation.
I'm not a photographer and I think the bokeh makes the picture look bad because the tree looks so weird that it's distracting. I'm not one who normally thinks about bokeh, but it's glaringly bad.
> But iPhone + zoom + crop is better in some ways than my 50mm 1.2 with bokeh.
Well, yeah. f1.2 is a nice gimmick but opening up so wide rarely translates into better photos. Don't get me wrong - you can get some beautiful portraits with that lens. But in practice, my 24-70 f2.8 zoom lens gets way more use than a 50mm prime.
There's a reason high end phones have multiple cameras on them. It's because not every photo wants to be taken at the same focal length.
I'd much rather a mirrorless camera with a 24-70 than an iphone. A mirrorless camera with just a 50mm prime will take some beautiful photos. And some photos you won't be able to capture at all.
matja · · focus · HN ↗
Edit: e.g. the tree in one of the images in the page: <a href="https://www.dxomark.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/PoleHDR_Deep_AppleiPhone18Pro_DxOMark_05-00.jpeg" rel="nofollow">https://www.dxomark.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/PoleHDR_D...
mannyv · · focus · HN ↗
Previously the blur on iPhone was all software, apparently. I've set mine to do wide open with no bokeh, and i'll put it in after.
But to be honest, the iPhone is the camera I have on me, so the limits are acceptable. Can I force focus it? No. Can I get the glow? No. But iPhone + zoom + crop is better in some ways than my 50mm 1.2 with bokeh.
ValentineC · · focus · HN ↗
I mean, consumers would probably just know it as "nice and pleasing blurred background", versus "this blurred background isn't as nice".
qmr · · focus · HN ↗
The average user may not understand the technical details of bokeh but they will certainly have an opinion on what is pleasing to the eye.
0x457 · · focus · HN ↗
To most people its just blur and they don't care that it is not just blur.
virgilp · · focus · HN ↗
There are details, all of these are details; but saying that "iphone5-level-cameras are good enough form most people" is both true (obviously it sold and millions were satisfied with it) and false (most people would notice today that iphone5s take worse photos than latest-gen). All the details add up to image quality that _is_ noticeable even to the laymen.
thewebguyd · · focus · HN ↗
This is largely true, when it comes to photos of other people/people they care about.
I'm a wedding & family photographer part time, and at nearly every wedding I shoot, the photos the clients and their guests favorite the most from the galleries are usually the quick candid snaps where the subject has an expression they like or are doing something fun. It could be a blurry, grainy, dark mess of a photo and it will consistently be their favorite photo of the day.
For most non-photographers, the subject of the photo is what matters and is all they will notice. Almost no one is making a distinction between bokeh shape, or noise (unless its so obvious as to completely ruin the photo), composition, etc.
All that to say, photo quality is only one very small part of the equation.
OGWhales · · focus · HN ↗
RankingMember · · focus · HN ↗
josephg · · focus · HN ↗
Well, yeah. f1.2 is a nice gimmick but opening up so wide rarely translates into better photos. Don't get me wrong - you can get some beautiful portraits with that lens. But in practice, my 24-70 f2.8 zoom lens gets way more use than a 50mm prime.
There's a reason high end phones have multiple cameras on them. It's because not every photo wants to be taken at the same focal length.
I'd much rather a mirrorless camera with a 24-70 than an iphone. A mirrorless camera with just a 50mm prime will take some beautiful photos. And some photos you won't be able to capture at all.
criddell · · focus · HN ↗
You can’t have bokeh without blur but you can have blur without bokeh.
nomel · · focus · HN ↗
Yes. There are many camera apps with manual focus. Just not the default app.