Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
man... i really don't want to pay an extra premium to get a better camera on the iPhone. it's already going to be expensive. and i'm sure AT&T is going to have quite the bundle with MMS included...
 
I think the front camera make sense cause it means people can do international video calling w/ skype and such :D
 
The quality of most camera phones I've used recently (Nokia N73 and iPhone 3G) remains poor at best.

The photos are so grainy they're practically useless, except for 'emergency' use.

If camera phones start achieving the quality of entry level P&S cameras, I'll care to listen... IF it EVER happens due to size and energy constraints.

Until then, a cell camera remains to me at least, a pretty useless feature.

You may want to take a look at this group on Flickr:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/takenwithiphone/

As with any small camera, if there is plenty of light you can actually get very good results.

The iPhone has taken a lot of heat for only having 2MP, and fixed focus, but even with that you can get pretty good pictures of the light is right.

All cameras suck at indoor photos unless they have a decent Zenon-flash
 
Ladies an gents....a 3.2 in front and a 5 in back? How thick would that make the phone?
sensors are tiny and they wouldn't be stacked one on top of each other so the thickness of the phone wouldn't suffer at all.

Honestly, I don't know how many people would actually use video ichat from their phone. Is it that in demand?
I use to be anti video chat but i'm beginning to like the idea. Surely someone with an iPhone with video chat will try and get their significant other to also buy an iPhone if they don't already have one.

the 5mp camera is going on the new, much rumored 9inch touch screen device coming out late 2009.
Why would a laptop have a higher megapixel than a portable device that is about the size of a point and shoot camera? No one is going to wip out their netbook and akwardly point it away from them to capture a photo-op. iPhone should get the better camera because it's going to be used as a camera much more than a laptop. But who knows.
 
The quality of most camera phones I've used recently (Nokia N73 and iPhone 3G) remains poor at best.

The photos are so grainy they're practically useless, except for 'emergency' use.

If camera phones start achieving the quality of entry level P&S cameras, I'll care to listen... IF it EVER happens due to size and energy constraints.

Until then, a cell camera remains to me at least, a pretty useless feature.

gotta agree with this. The number of megapixels doesn't matter when the rest of the components aren't up to par.

Also, all of those of you who want the front-facing camera - would you really video chat on your phone? I can't imagine ever wanting to do that.
 
Makes sense that a possible netbook might include a 5 mp camera. If you have something that portable, including a camera with pics going directly to iPhoto makes more sense that carrying a camera as well and having to import.
 
this is quite amusing, whilst sony ericsson is gearing up to put their 12MPX idou on the market apple is putting a 3.2 sensor in their newest product... no offence apple but you should seriously catch up with the competition
 
It doesn't matter how many pixels you record, or even (within reason) the quality of your sensor. What makes or breaks image quality with current digital imaging is the optics. Which are constrained by physics, I'm afraid. Even with autofocus, cameraphone images with ittybitty lenses will always pretty much suck.
 
Exactly. Most people realize don't realize this is purely a physics problem. Unless you have a lot of light or a bigger lens, a larger MP count sensor isn't going to help—you'll just get bigger, grainy photographs. That pinhole iPhone "lens" is simply crap. Most people would hate to have the iPhone get bigger to accommodate a bigger lens either... so your problem compounds.

And the other problem with more megapixels is the chip manufacturers have to squeeze more photosites into the same area. They've gotten better at this the last few years but the smaller the photosite (think a light "bucket") the less light it will capture. That's partly why DSLRs blow away point and shoot cameras (the other is the bigger lenses). So sensor size is also a factor.
 
this is quite amusing, whilst sony ericsson is gearing up to put their 12MPX idou on the market apple is putting a 3.2 sensor in their newest product... no offence apple but you should seriously catch up with the competition

Apple is the one everyone is catching up with. Just because someone puts a 12MP in their phone and neglects everything else, doesn't make it something to catch up to. But then there are those who always fail to see the bigger picture and focus on spec for spec.
 
This is good news, a great addition to the iPhone would be an improved camera. I'm going to stick my neck out and say that the two sensors are for two models of phone. Good and Better levels of spec if you will. I think they'll both be similar sized but will be differentiated on price by features like this.
 
Move from Aptina (formerly Micron Technology) to OmniVision - Digitimes info being translated into English, does it necessarily rule out an iPhone having the 5Mpixel?
Wouild be interesting to get the physical sizes of the current sensor and bits, versus the 5/3Mpixel from Omnivision. Any current phones out there with Omnivision?
 
New iphone?

Should I wait for a new iphone or it's a good choice buy the Iphone 3g??

Any tips?
 
Would be nice if they updated the iSight to support HD resolutions. Get it all unified and such in widescreen.
 
I'm a little disappointed. I would have wanted to see 5mp in the iPhone. I guess it really didn't matter with a small sensor. If this is the case then I hope apple really improves the software and adds a LED flash.

The 5mp lens is probably for iChat HD in the next-generation MacBooks.

I throw my hat into the camp loving to have a front facing camera. A lot of people would use it if only for skype.
 
Bring it on... And yeah 5M+flash on the back and 3.2M on the front is perfect for a 3G phone. I can't wait for the new iPhone. And the best of all is that I'm going to the US. And will get my first iPhone there :D
 
3.2 is really weak unless its a carl zeiss lens with xenon flash which it won't be. Looks like i'll be hanging on to my 3G and/or getting a Pre.

Oh and it wont be two lenses in one device like a lot of people are hoping. That would make too much sense and we all know Apple likes to 'Think Different'
 
Has anyone thought the 3.2 is for front facing and the 5 is for the photographing side?

Apple may be putting the first quality front camera for really HQ video chats

edit- someone beat me to it!
 
and truth to be told,
even with my current 2m iphone3g camera, it has much much better low light performance than those so called high pixel cell phone cameras. such as blackberry, nokia(compared the photos taken by them side by side).

The quality of most camera phones I've used recently (Nokia N73 and iPhone 3G) remains poor at best.

The photos are so grainy they're practically useless, except for 'emergency' use.

If camera phones start achieving the quality of entry level P&S cameras, I'll care to listen... IF it EVER happens due to size and energy constraints.

Until then, a cell camera remains to me at least, a pretty useless feature.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.