200MP Telephoto iPhone Lens Unlikely to Arrive Before 2028

[MacRumors]

Apple is unlikely to add a 200-megapixel telephoto camera to the iPhone before 2028, despite having already tested such a sensor in prototypes, according to leaker Digital Chat Station.

In a post today shared on China's Weibo social platform, the leaker said Apple has evaluated a 200-megapixel sensor for a periscope-type camera, but adoption remains at least a couple of years away.

The leaker did not give a reason for the time frame, but they have previously referred to Apple's continuing focus on improving optical flexibility and low-light performance, rather than a jump in raw resolution. This year's iPhone 18 Pro is expected to feature a 48-megapixel main camera with a variable aperture, alongside a 48-megapixel telephoto camera featuring a longer focal length and a larger aperture.

Digital Chat Station's latest post reflects a shift in position. In March, they said a 200-megapixel sensor could potentially ship in an iPhone as soon as next year, but the supply chain evidence no longer appears to support this claim.

Back in January, Morgan Stanley reported that Apple is working to bring a 200-megapixel camera to the iPhone as soon as 2028, so the two independent sources are now more closely aligned on the matter.

Samsung introduced a 200-megapixel rear camera on its Galaxy S23 Ultra in 2023, and the follow-up models also have one. With a 200-megapixel camera, an iPhone would be able to shoot photos with greater detail. The increased megapixel count would also result in higher-resolution photos, which can be cropped further and printed at larger sizes without a loss of image quality.

Digital Chat Station has a large following on Chinese social media platform Weibo, and the account has previously shared accurate information about Apple's future products.

Article Link: 200MP Telephoto iPhone Lens Unlikely to Arrive Before 2028

 

[winxmac]

As someone who previously owned an iPhone 14 Pro Max which has a 48MP main camera, and someone who still uses a Nikon DSLR camera with 24MP sensor, a pixel binned 12MP for a smartphone is already enough. I don't believe that smartphones will ever have a sensor as close to the size of a full frame, let alone APS-C, so even if they reach gigapixels, smartphones will never be able to reach or match the quality of a photo taken by a dedicated camera.

 

[contacos]

Oppo Find X9 Ultra meanwhile already got TWO 🫠

 

[Luis Ortega]

As someone who previously owned an iPhone 14 Pro Max which has a 48MP main camera, and someone who still uses a Nikon DSLR camera with 24MP sensor, a pixel binned 12MP for a smartphone is already enough. I don't believe that smartphones will ever have a sensor as close to the size of a full frame, let alone APS-C, so even if they reach gigapixels, smartphones will never be able to reach or match the quality of a photo taken by a dedicated camera.

I agree. The visual quality from a tiny phone sensor can’t compare to the visual quality from a full frame slr.
They're fine for social media use to record a moment, and be viewed on other devices, but nothing more demanding.

 

[CloudChief]

I agree. The visual quality from a tiny phone sensor can’t compare to the visual quality from a full frame slr.
They're fine for social media use to record a moment, and be viewed on other devices, but nothing more demanding.

Yep I agree with both of you. My 24mp Nikon apsc from 2012 produces better images than my 17 Pro. More megapixels does not mean better image quality. The quality of the pixels matters too.

I think that’s why full manual mode in 3rd party apps is restricted to 12mp by Apple. Each pixel should theoretically gather more information because it’s bigger.

My theory is that they don’t want you to have control over the 24 and 48 modes because of the quality drop off and not being able to control the image quality/processing.

 

[ThailandToo]

I prefer a 200mp ultrawide that can do it all.

 

[Toutou]

The increased megapixel count would also result in higher-resolution photos, which can be cropped further and printed at larger sizes without a loss of image quality.

My 24MP mirrorless camera is dying from laughter. At 48 MP, you’re already well into the diminishing returns, anything over that is just masturbation. I have lenses that cost more than an iPhone that can’t optically saturate a 24MP sensor (i.e. the actual optics aren’t good enough).

 

[Keyser Tomassi]

The author seems to be confused about the 200MP debacle. I follow leaks & rumors very closely and use multiple AI chatbots to translate Chinese text to ensure accuracy. Here's what's going on:

- The previous iPhone-related 200MP camera rumors were related to the Main Camera. That's what BOTH Morgan Stanley and this leaker, Digital Chat Station, were referring to when they said Apple was testing a 200MP module. DCS even provided further details about the sensor size, saying Apple was testing that module with a 1/1.12" sensor. Morgan Stanley said the ETA is 2028, but Digital Chat Station said it could arrive as early as 2027. All of that remains unchanged by today's rumor.

- Today's rumor from DCS is completely new and unrelated to the previous 200MP Main Camera rumor. Today's rumor is regarding the periscope/telephoto lens, which means Apple appears to be testing/considering 200MP for BOTH the Main & Telephoto cameras.

Mac Rumors Editorial Staff - Please feel free to double-check what I said above and edit this article accordingly. Thank you.

 

[ThailandToo]

Yep I agree with both of you. My 24mp Nikon apsc from 2012 produces better images than my 17 Pro. More megapixels does not mean better images quality. The quality of the pixels matters too.

I think that’s why full manual mode in 3rd party apps is restricted to 12mp by Apple. Each pixel should theoretically gather more information because it’s bigger.

My theory is that they don’t want you to have control over the 24 and 48 modes because of the quality drop off and not being able to control the image quality/processing.

Actually, with enough light, a small sensor can be amazing. I would challenge that your 12mp 2012 camera can produce a better image with enough light - with less light, your camera will be better. That’s where small sensors shine - bright lighting.

 

[ThailandToo]

My 24MP mirrorless camera is dying from laughter. At 48 MP, you’re already well into the diminishing returns, anything over that is just masturbation. I have lenses that cost more than an iPhone that can’t optically saturate a 24MP sensor (i.e. the actual optics aren’t good enough).

Tell the JWST crew that’s true. Haha

 

[Turbonow]

I'd appreciate any improvement (optical or digital) in telephoto of next iPhone, rather than the main wide angle which is already good enough.

Yes, focals between 2x to <4x have weak quality, but it can be solved by either 3/2 aspect swipe pano or stitching app, from 4x unit. You can have nice & detailed 3x photos. That works for still images. For 3x moving subjects, try to step forward a little instead.

 

[Niceisnice]

Good that Apple is smart enough to hold on the 200MP marketing. Increasing the pixel count on small sensors does not increase the picture quality!

My 12 year old Fuji X100T takes way better pictures than the 17 Pro, despite being only 16MP.

Even the iPhone X, with 12MP but without "modern processing", took many better pictures than the 17 Pro. If only we could disable all processing on modern iPhones... Of course, we can shoot raw with another camera app, but then it's not practical.

 

[JoeSilver]

Oppo Find X9 Ultra meanwhile already got TWO 🫠

It seems like a (not so) pocketable HAL 9000 (which hopefully is not).

And it comes* with an entire set of Hasselblad accessories which resembles a fully geared camera.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/fileadmin/Notebooks/News/_nc5/oppo-findx9ultra-kit-hasselblad.jpg

*not included in the box, I presume, but as upgrades

 

[Darajavahus]

Who cares, they should focus on having as big as possible sensors, I have an ancient point and shot with just 2MP and in the right conditions photos still look more real than iPhones. Also my 16 Pro makes somehow worse photos than my 13 Pro Max did.

 

[uacd]

Yes, this is exactly what we need: a 2000 marketingpixels camera system!! More AI slop, denoising and “computational photography”! Physics is a hoax, a conspiracy theory. Why do we need actual lens clarity and proper object geometry? let’s cram in more megapixels!!!!

 

[Turbonow]

I've tested almost all combinations of iPhone 17 Pro. Best detail & colour comes from 48 mpx JPG, but not DNG! Btw 48 mpx DNG looks awful with many artefacts, only 12 mp DNG is good but not better than 48 mp JPG. 48 mpx JPG is better but comes with shutter lag, so for moving scenes and computational depth info, then 24 mp must be selected.

Don't expect that 48 mpx file to be equivalent of something out of a new Sony mirrorless camera. At the end, it's equivalent to ballpark of 16 mpx. So you may downres the image to these values (around 5000 px long side) on Photoshop and then apply a modest sharpening. Results at good light at actual focals are comparable to Nikon D300 or D7000.

Nikon 12 mp D300 or 16 mp D7000 were used to print double-spread pages on magazines.

 

[JoeSilver]

I've tested almost all combinations of iPhone 17 Pro. Best detail & colour comes from 48 mpx JPG, but not DNG! Btw 48 mpx DNG looks awful with many artefacts, only 12 mp DNG is good but not better than 48 mp JPG. 48 mpx JPG is better but comes with shutter lag, so for moving scenes and computational depth info, then 24 mp must be selected.

Is DNG the raw file? It's still not clear to me what kind of raw files the iPhone 17 Pro produces, but in any case raw files are generally meant to be edited so no surprise that they are less good than processed images.

 

[uacd]

Yep I agree with both of you. My 24mp Nikon apsc from 2012 produces better images than my 17 Pro. More megapixels does not mean better images quality. The quality of the pixels matters too.

I think that’s why full manual mode in 3rd party apps is restricted to 12mp by Apple. Each pixel should theoretically gather more information because it’s bigger.

My theory is that they don’t want you to have control over the 24 and 48 modes because of the quality drop off and not being able to control the image quality/processing.

Another thing is that, well… it is an old Nikon. They had some of the best color sciences and processing on the market. Very natural.

These days if we compare something like modern Sony or Canon cameras with an iPhone it all looks like tons of sharpened AI slop, simply because companies have ruined their natural color rendition for smartphone-alike image processing that not a single professional asked for. It is sad that they say “shoot RAW” simply if you want natural looking images from 2012 era. Wasting time on RAW means not living a life and enjoying shooting actual photos.

I had tested my 17 Pro a lot and I cannot find a lot of difference between 12 vs 24 vs 48. In 24 and 48 modes image doesn’t look more detailed but more like AI generated slop. In ProRAW it doesn’t change significantly but you can control sharpness and amount of HDR stacking (Apple color profile, 0-200%) in Lightroom Mobile. Decided to revert it to 12 MP JPEG, just for the sake of cross-compatibility. It doesn’t seem to do any pixel binning or stacking either, I don’t really see the difference in low light performance and it is mostly software-locked across all apps and maximum real exposure of the sensor is still 1 second, other exposures are computational/stacked night HDR

 

[uacd]

Is DNG the raw file? It's still not clear to me what kind of raw files the iPhone 17 Pro produces, but in any case raw files are generally meant to be edited so no surprise that they are less good than processed images.

It is an Apple ProRAW in an Adobe DNG container. It can only be opened in new software versions. Theoretically it can be converted to regular DNG but it doesn’t have a lot of information to work with anyway - only level of sharpness, white balance, exposure, a bit of color noise (file comes already denoised) and the level of HDR (Apple Color Profile)

 

[Powerbooky]

As someone who previously owned an iPhone 14 Pro Max which has a 48MP main camera, and someone who still uses a Nikon DSLR camera with 24MP sensor, a pixel binned 12MP for a smartphone is already enough. I don't believe that smartphones will ever have a sensor as close to the size of a full frame, let alone APS-C, so even if they reach gigapixels, smartphones will never be able to reach or match the quality of a photo taken by a dedicated camera.

It's amazing what all the processing can do though, but the a small sensor inside a phone cannot compete with the large size DSLR sensors. The noise amount alone is so much worse on every phone.

 

[The Game 161]

what matters is the sensor size and if it's a big sensor at 200mp then cool it will be great.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

Tell the JWST crew that’s true. Haha

The JWST doesn't have a visible light camera, and it's individual IR sensors are only 4MP.

 

[IIGS User]

As someone who previously owned an iPhone 14 Pro Max which has a 48MP main camera, and someone who still uses a Nikon DSLR camera with 24MP sensor, a pixel binned 12MP for a smartphone is already enough. I don't believe that smartphones will ever have a sensor as close to the size of a full frame, let alone APS-C, so even if they reach gigapixels, smartphones will never be able to reach or match the quality of a photo taken by a dedicated camera.

The last few PM phones I've had take excellent snapshots. Better than any I took with a handheld camera.

I totally agree with you. A dedicated camera will always take better pictures than any smart phone. That's the nature of technology. Back in the day (I'm dating myself, so hang on to your hats) my mom carried a Canon AE1-program with a bag of lenses with her pretty regularly. She loved taking the best quality pictures she could. I had a little Kodak camera that while it used 35mm film, it obviously never took pictures like the Canon she had.

Dedicated technology for any application will always out perform a "compromise". A smart phone camera is a compromise. Less of a compromise than it used to be, but still a compromise.

Last time I went on vacation only camera I took was my iPhone PM 15. It took AWESOME pictures, especially for what it was. Something I could slide into my pocket, use at a moments notice and not worry about.

I take my phone all kinds of places I would never lug a DSLR. Like most people, I take my phone everywhere I go. Now, I am definitely a "amateur" photographer. I don't know all that much about focal length and aperture, etc. But in my experience there's more to taking great pictures in the field than having the best hardware.

Patience, perspective, the ability to read people. Being able to be in the moment. Looking at something and realizing this may make a great photo. Those skills are important too. Depending of course on why you're taking pictures in the first place.

Camera phones today are light years ahead of what regular non photographer folks used to be willing to carry around. And not having to worry about burning film? Awesome. Mom would have loved the digital phtography age, but she never got to see it.

I still have her old AE1 in the house somewhere. And a few lenses for it.

 

[Icehawk]

Waiting for it to go over 9000 so we have to upgrade our apple+ drives.

 

[JoeSilver]

Wasting time on RAW means not living a life and enjoying shooting actual photos.

Hehe, I'm going through that phase and while it is time consuming it's also rewarding. The alternative is to use recipes (film simulations, filters, whatever they are called by each vendor) and they are not always what I want as a result.