Right, Apple also said it would never increase the size of the iPhone, who needed a bigger!?!?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Next-Generation iPhone Again Rumored to Have 12-Megapixel Camera
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Right, Apple also said it would never increase the size of the iPhone, who needed a bigger!?!?
Right, Apple also said it would never increase the size of the iPhone, who needed a bigger!?!?
The size of the iPhone was not limited by the law of physics. It was just limited by market demands, and that can change with time.
On the other hand, the number of pixels on a sensor of a given size is limited by the laws of physics (optics and quantum physics) and they tend not to change with time. It's not a matter of needing more pixels or not. It's a matter that beyond a certain threshold, it's stupid to add more pixels because they can't record meaningful information (due to diffraction induce by optics laws, due to base noise level induce by quantum physics...).
Honestly, it doesn't matter until Apple includes support for RAW/DNG. and would it kill them to support 12/16 bits per pixel?
----------
Nope, you only need 8.3mp for 4k.
----------
Nope, you only need 8.3mp for 4k.
I just hope it allows us to shoot at 16:9 instead of 4:3... I hate having to crop my 4:3 pictures into 16:9 and not have that wide angle view
You can shoot in 16:9 by double tapping the video. Works great on iPhone 4S.
Last edited:
The 1/3" sensor (if they continue to use it though) isn't maxed out yet. Even at 12MP the current set up is still viable. 1/3 sensors are essentially an 8x crop so it's current f/2.2 is a good choice for them.
Wide open at f/2.0 at 25cm focus distance targeting an 8x10 print
Pixel size is 1.2 µm
Max COC is 4.44 µm
Diameter of Airy Disk: 2.7 µm
Thus diffraction isn't at it's limit.
Now Noise and DR will be altered, but the current NR algorithms on the iPhone are very light and thus why we currently see some noise even at their base ISO. That said, they just need to amp up the NR a bit which they will likely do and they have room to do.
IMO it is still just a me-too game that would likely still put them behind the current competition but it would achieve their 4k with zoom capability and ability to market to that. Marketing....it's Apple's biggest play.
In the end, not surprising. The current camera technology they use isn't earth shattering and didn't introduce anything others haven't been using already so their just keeping up is expected.
Nokia has a 20 megapixel camera which is pretty high rated.......
I don't believe that optics are constrained by any size. It is just a matter of time before new technics / knowledge come available that will push the limited of what used to be possible yet further. Apple recently acquired an Israelian company that is supposed to provide HDR quality camera modules while being smaller than the current iPhone 6 camera (without the lens sticking out of the body).
No, there are absolutely constraints. It's not simply about the sensor though. Actual resolution captured depends on a lot of factors including sensor size/characteristics, lens and its characteristics too.
In the end the actual real world impact will visible but depending on the output medium and size of the output one might never see the impacts or see them as easily. Thus why I could push an image well into the diffraction zone vs another shot in the sweet spot and print or display both and you might never really see much of a difference. Output does matter too.
Must be why Apple has been kicking other camera's ass since before 2013 then... Please get a clue.
so, your saying only so many pixels can be on a sensor, after that, you must make bigger sensors..
This goes against also then what Apple says about "we can pack more pixels onto the same area", or does this only relate to the screen only ?
I would think it would work both ways.
However, the difference then would be Apple pushes it to the end, and then increases, when they *have* to, not when they just feel like it (aka to keep up with the little guy...)
And the camera has gotten way, way better since the 4S, so what's your point?
Photos on iPhone 6 is great...... Aren't we good for that ?
Always room for improvement, but I ain't complaining.. And even if i was, just buy a better camera solves all problems.
But we all want convenient in a single device don't we. Well... we can't have it all.. (some day we have, but our dinner ain't here yet)
Always room for improvement, but I ain't complaining.. And even if i was, just buy a better camera solves all problems.
But we all want convenient in a single device don't we. Well... we can't have it all.. (some day we have, but our dinner ain't here yet)
The fact that Apple managed to patent that just shows how stupid the whole patent affair currently is... What the patent shows is a periscope lens, this is nothing new, you had film camera with that in the 80s... It's unbelievable that the patent office actually accepted to register that - and it's a lawsuit waiting to happen if Apple ever put that patent into action.
Anyway, improvement here only comes from making the sensor bigger (and not that bigger since iPhones keep getting thinner and thinner) and from getting an optical zoom.
----------
Well, you can keep pushing more pixels (actually photosites) into a tiny sensor, it will make the guys from marketing happy. But they won't increase image quality and might actually degrade it.
"This goes against also then what Apple says about " can pack more pixels onto the same area", or does this only relate to the screen only ?"
Yes, the screen in a different thing. Putting more pixels hurts the GPU and the battery, but that's all. After some point, the human eye can't distinguish them anymore.
The problem with the sensor and photosites is really that you have some physical limits : diffraction will limit resolution and the smaller the photosites, the higher the noise and the lower the dynamic range.
Anyway, most people do not need that many megapixels, this is really all about marketing. I used to have a 6mp DSLR (Nikon D200), and I made 40x60cm prints out of it. I even did some 60x90cm. The later are a bit difficult to pull, you don't have any room for crop, but they're doable. I even did some 40x60cm at 1600 ISO with careful post-processing.
That's to say you really don't need that many pixels - 40x60 is already pretty big and I doubt many iPhone users will print that big.
Other that making big prints, pixels are used for cropping - but then, you're also blowing up optical defaults from the lens. Just adding more and more pixels doesn't give limitless crop. Besides, You should really try to compose your shot, cropping after the fact should not be the norm.
What cameras? I think that is subjective.people like you will always think iphones camera is the best mobile camera on the market. Whereas other people will disagree.
8 mp on a camera is laughable. Yes there are other factors that go into a camera picture quality but mega pixel do matter.
If apple's camera is so great then just imagine the breath taking images it could take with a 12 or even 16 mega pixel camera.
----------
By reading this thread it is obvious that if it was up to these folks Apple would still be using a 2 mp camera on iphones.
You mean subjective people like DxO or DP Review ?
"8 mp on a camera is laughable. Yes there are other factors that go into a camera picture quality but mega pixel do matter."
8mp is what you had on Pro DSLR just a few years back. With that kind of resolution, you can print 40x60cm fine arts quite easily. You can You can also print the 4x3m billboards you see on the road or in the subway. You can also print full magazine covers.
I would not call that laughable. Moreover, I'm curious about how many smartphone owners actually print that big...
Most will only display photos on screen. And there are very few displays currently on the market with more than 8mp...
"If apple's camera is so great then just imagine the breath taking images it could take with a 12 or even 16 mega pixel camera."
You work for marketing ? You certainly have bought their snake oil...
Let's assume that you can actually capture the 12 or 16mp for real - which might not be the case, the resolution of the lens can be inferior or the JPEG compression might be destroying part of the extra resolution.
Why would they look different ? A 8mp and a 12mp photos displayed on the web at 600x400 pixels will look exactly the same... Both photos displayed on an iPhone 6+, which has only 2mp, will look the same. Actually, the 12mp version will look a little worse, because the extra pixels come with a price : more noise (but this won't be visible on print or on such a tiny screen as the iPhone 6+) and lower dynamic range (and *this* will be visible on even a tiny screen).
It really isn't. iPhone cameras consistently rank very highly.
That's not how optics work.
Nope. The original iPhone's camera was quite poor. The 3GS's was OK. Starting with the 4, Apple has been competing very well.
MP is just one of several factors in that.
THIS x100! The iPhone rear/'iSight' camera is already very good and has been since the 4s (the first time I finally ditched my compact camera for daytime pics). The front facing camera remains just too low res to be anything other than passable when viewing on on instagram or such on your phone screen.
Selfies have exploded in popularity over the past 18 months, several of my friends even have selfie sticks for group pics... alas the quality of pic just doesn't cut it and it feels like in terms of quality we are going back 10 years. A 4mp+ front facing camera is becoming one of THE most important features currently for young people.
I just hope it allows us to shoot at 16:9 instead of 4:3... I hate having to crop my 4:3 pictures into 16:9 and not have that wide angle view
I hate having to crop 16:9 photos to 4:3 so they look best on my iPad. See how that works?
It makes sense to up the MP because almost all Apple devices are retina now, but I really wish they would follow Samsung and Panasonic's lead with a 1" sensor.
----------
A smaller MP large sensor does more for your photos than higher MP small sensor so by reading your post its obvious you would be happy with a 2MP camera.
Sufficient storage to even take the photo or video, yes. Hopefully at some point the minimum GB size of iPhones will go above 8 (iPhone 5c) and 16GB and get to 32/64 - then the problem goes away for many, due to wifi being able to sync the pictures and (much larger) videos.
Sure, the PPI is the same, but it doesn't mean that the resolutions are the same. The 6 has at least a 720p-750p display and the 6+ has a 1080p display. Apple might have to give up on the Retina display model if they were to play display catchup with everyone since it won't conform to their ratio wants.