Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
A variable aperture allows the camera to adjust the amount of light that reaches the sensor. This means that in dark environments, the aperture can be opened to receive more light, while in light environments, it can be closed to prevent over-exposure. It also should provide users with greater control over depth of field, which refers to how sharp a subject appears in the foreground compared to the background.
For the photographers, is this a good description about the benefits a variable aperture would bring?

I take a lot of photos on trips. I can’t say I’ve ever thought my photos were overexposed except maybe one in a thousand. Just a preference, but the bokah effect doesn’t interest me.

So anything else this advancement might bring that isn’t being discussed?
 
These test runs on the camera are for the fall 2027 iPhone probably.
Right. Apple works on a next year or 2 year cycle most likely. For 18s they’re ironing out final issues for launch (like colors).

The only way this rumor is true is if they’re leaking something that already has been worked on way before now and it’s being leaked about the iPhone 18 now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cdsapplefan
The iPhone's name states its primary purpose. Basic cell service cell phones exist for under $100.

So one can say the extra thousand(s) of dollars are buying a hand held computer system that is being pushed to be a full blown camera system as well plus more other functionality to numerous to keep track of.

So, if the iPhone camera is not "good"enough for some one's photography needs, the buy a decent camera an and a cheap cell phone. Problem solved.
 
The problem is that smaller cameras give lower image quality.

As someone else remarked, that does not necessarily mean "bad photos", because a photo depends on the photographer, subject, lighting and lots of other things.

However, at some point the technical image quality does matter. The fact that Apple ... design-conscious Apple of all companies .... still retains the horrible camera warts indicates that they are not prepared to release cameras on the latest iPhone that actually give worse image quality than the previous generation.

I personally agree that they could eliminate the warts on at least one model, and accept reduced technical image quality, but then I have a 12mini so I'm clearly an outlier!

Nikon Z 8 is a 45-megapixel camera with a 36x24mm sensor. That's 864mm total area.
iPhone 17 Pro Max has 48 megapixels with a 9.9 x 7.4mm sensor. That's 73mm total area.

864/73 = 11.8

The Nikon Z 8 has nearly 12 times the area of the iPhone sensor, which is why the image quality is higher on the Nikon.

Suppose we wanted iPhone to have the same image quality as the Nikon, adjusted for megapixels?

48 iphone megapixels / 11.8 = 4.06 megapixels.

So were Apple to change the sensor on iPhone 17 Pro Max from 48 megapixels to 4.06 megapixels, iPhone image quality would theortically be identical (in terms of noise levels, light sensitivity, overall image quality) to that of the Nikon Z 8, albiet at reduced resolution (45 vs 4.06 megapixels.)
 
Sorry to disappoint you. Several phones currently have continously variable optical zoom, including Sony Xperia 1 IV. Do your homework before spouting off.

Xperia has a 85-125mm (equivalent) lens. That's a 1.4x zoom lens.

The lenses I linked earlier were 14x and 125x. Quite a bit more than a mere 1.4x. 1.4x is basically a "why even bother" sort of zoom lens.
 
Nikon Z 8 is a 45-megapixel camera with a 36x24mm sensor. That's 864mm total area.
iPhone 17 Pro Max has 48 megapixels with a 9.9 x 7.4mm sensor. That's 73mm total area.

864/73 = 11.8

The Nikon Z 8 has nearly 12 times the area of the iPhone sensor, which is why the image quality is higher on the Nikon.

Suppose we wanted iPhone to have the same image quality as the Nikon, adjusted for megapixels?

48 iphone megapixels / 11.8 = 4.06 megapixels.

So were Apple to change the sensor on iPhone 17 Pro Max from 48 megapixels to 4.06 megapixels, iPhone image quality would theortically be identical (in terms of noise levels, light sensitivity, overall image quality) to that of the Nikon Z 8, albiet at reduced resolution (45 vs 4.06 megapixels.)

I think you are saying, in this comparison, that the "image quality" would be the same if the pixel size in the iPhone were the same as that in the Nikon Z8 ... and surely that's correct in terms of noise and light sensitivity.

However, I think the term "image quality" has to include resolution! I think most people would agree that the "image quality" of a photo taken on the Nikon Z8 was "better" than that on the iPhone.

Your comparison also ignored the lenses on the two cameras, and I think that should be taken into account. The longer real focal length of the Nikon Z8 lenses means their depth-of-field is smaller (i.e. greater bokeh or out-of-focus blur), giving a less flat image compared to the nearly-all-in-focus iPhone photos.

As you correctly point out, we pay a high price in terms of noise and light sensitivity for those small iPhone pixels.
 
  • Like
Reactions: capamac
Xperia has a 85-125mm (equivalent) lens. That's a 1.4x zoom lens.

The lenses I linked earlier were 14x and 125x. Quite a bit more than a mere 1.4x. 1.4x is basically a "why even bother" sort of zoom lens.
No one made any claims about range, except you. You just said continuous variable optical zoom wasn’t feasible or available in a phone. And it is, full stop!
 
Yes but 1.4x ... suppose it were a 1.1x lens. It that a zoom? Techncially yes. But it might as well be a prime lens.
 
A lot of times I find myself between perfect zoom 1x or 2x. So even being able to have a true optical 1.45x for example, is better than doing a crop and digital interpolate.
 
A variable aperture can easily make the aperture *smaller*.

But it cannot make the lens opening larger. You'd need a wider, bigger, heavier lens to achieve this. Which means a bigger camera hump on the phone.

So unless Apple wants to make the camera hump bigger, their only option is to add aperture blades that make the current lens have a _smaller_ aperture. Which means less light. And these tiny iphone sensors already struggle at f/1.7 or whatever. So making it smaller doesn't achieve much of anything.

The depth of field on a f/1.7 iphone lens is already more or less like f/11 on an 36x24mm format sensor, thus there's little need to have a smaller aperture. You could get a couple stops more depth of field, perhaps. Along with the option for a couple stops slower shutter speed in bright light. But the downside to a smaller aperture is increased diffraction, which reduces sharpness.

Plus having an adjustable aperture would increase mechanical complexity of the lens design, add a smidge of weight, probably also increase the cost by a few pennies per camera unit, and increase the liklihood of the camera malfunctioning were the aperture to jam.
Exactly my thoughts. Phones with so small sensors (compared with a SLR), usually anyway shoot with open aperture. The only benefit I see would be for video where you want to keep a long exposure to have some motion blur at a fixed exposure time due to a certain fps.
 
Just buy canon and stick an ios usb in it by now. there you have you camera that works as a phone too device
 
an unnesesary feature that will add price to the iPhone. iPhones are not built for professional photos, they are built for photos where you can understand what is happening.
 
Variable aperture is such a waste of time and effort. Never have I experienced over exposed photo due to too large of aperture. Apple should learn from Samsung on this one.

Variable zoom on the other hand would be useful and innovative.
I agree 100%
 
For the photographers, is this a good description about the benefits a variable aperture would bring?

I take a lot of photos on trips. I can’t say I’ve ever thought my photos were overexposed except maybe one in a thousand. Just a preference, but the bokah effect doesn’t interest me.

So anything else this advancement might bring that isn’t being discussed?
To me, there is no benefit for the photographer. The sensors in phones are so small that the depth of field (shallow depth of field causes bokeh), is large.
“too much light” can be addressed by reducing ISO or going shorther with the exposure time - both, to my knowledge, can anyway not be set by the user for iPhones.

So the only benefit to be able to close the aperture would be to be able to use longer exposure times in bright conditions. Which to me, is only a benefit for a very limited group of people; videographers or photographers that want to create motion blur in bright environments…
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: fatTribble
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.