Did exactly that, it reflected green when I looked at it from an angle. Directly top down it was clear, but move the phone under the light only resulted in a green reflection, no other color.
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.
Camera Lens on iPhone 7 not sapphire. [MERGED]
- Thread starter MarkX
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Did exactly that, it reflected green when I looked at it from an angle. Directly top down it was clear, but move the phone under the light only resulted in a green reflection, no other color.
We are still in the two week grace period.
Anyone wanna use their phones as guinea pig? I would, but my care factor is outmuscled by my laziness...
Anyone wanna use their phones as guinea pig? I would, but my care factor is outmuscled by my laziness...
Usually on the inside. Some are coated both sides to reduce glare further but they subsequently show scratches.
The lens is behind the cover. The lens is not sapphire, has never been. The cover is there to protect the lens and is made of sapphire so it doesn't scratch and makes bad photos. Having a that thick coating on the outside on the sapphire part would be moronic as hell, because it defeats the purpose of having sapphire cover in the first place.
If it had a coating, the blade would have scratched it too.
it does make sense there would be some kind of coating on the very outside for eliminating reflection and/or fingerprints and maybe to repel water, possibly? and in addition to that, it does make sense to use Sapphire for a lens protector - if that protector cracked or scratched easily, there goes your image quality as well as your outer lens element being exposed. by now, these phones do have to endure some normal accidents.
1 - I haven't bought the iPhone 7 or 7 Plus yet. I never buy anything right after it's introduced. I'll prob end up owning three of them eventually since I want a better camera, screen AND battery life (I charge my phones several times a day, I use them so much).
2 - Very few people are capable of and skilled for a honest intellectual conversation.
I encounter this problem often in discussions with others: I say something and I can't tell if they don't understand it and pretend they do or if it they understand it and ignore it because they think the thought they just had after receiving my argument matters more to them even it isn't the right continuity in the conversation.
Please enlighten me. I really don't get this.
3 - Now, I say these videos are sensationalist and a waste of time.
You respond "oh that's because you are biased, on an unconscious level, you wouldn't want to watch it because you already know it's truth you won't like."
How did you go from one to the other? There was no indication in what I wrote that you may be right in drawing that conclusion. So? Are you just projecting or am I missing something?
What I mean is: These silly videos add no value to the point where my feelings or rational conclusion would alter my behavior: bending, sapphire or not etc. And this is because I don't use my phones that way. I take care of my toys and I'll never be in the target demographics of these "test" videos. But plenty of people are and obviously that's great for the author.
Further, I could add that I really wish we could pull the level up a notch.
This is really just not good enough.
I know there are a lot of slobs out there but who gets a brand new toy and proceeds to sit on it (bend test)? Or expose it to sharp objects? *shakes head*
Last edited:
You and I, you and I both.... I don't get it. Sometimes I think are people just trolling - as you can see, I'm a very verbose person. I like to have proper conversations. I don't actually mind being wrong at all - but I like to have conversations, understand all sides of the conversation, be challenged - and hopefully learn something. Whether my point of view is validated or invalidated, both are just as great things!
By extension, I will always backup what I say with my reasoning - try and show people why I think what I do and how I got there. If I'm wrong or if my reasoning is flawed, I'm happy to have others say so - but I at least expect them to explain how and why.
At points in conversations I feel people far too often just say things that absolutely don't stack up - and it's either because they're trolling, they're repeating someone else's thoughts without thinking properly about them, or can't form a coherent argument - and ultimately they just can't bare to be wrong - so they just try and shut down conversation.
It's a shame - because I'm sure most have really good points to add to the conversation and I really want to understand how they got to the place they have. They may show me something I've missed. I may learn something. I don't mind admitting where I'm wrong, but if people can't tell me I'm wrong and back it up properly then I stand my corner!
Way to advance the conversation.
Very well written/ worded. :thumbup:
[doublepost=1474398832][/doublepost]Well, I think it passes for a quick and dirty dismissive method to "win" a debate: you address the audience through the other party and hammer your arguments using whatever is presented to you to bifurcate back to your own ideas. The audience can't tell and/ or won't care.
In those cases, people like that may use "the point is...." "the bottom line is..." etc. or just reword what you say with a complete change of your meaning and pretend they are actually addressed what you said.
I enjoy a good conversation. I know it's vain but there isn't much more to communication if it's done elegantly. You make friends and impress girls that way too.
Last edited:
Oh my god. Did no one in here ever take a photography course?
The more light that passes through a camera lens the better.
Light tends to bounce off of lenses (reflection).
Lens coatings reduce reflection allowing more light through the lens.
A scratch in the lens coating will change the amount of light going through the lens but it will not substantially change the focus of the image.
A scratch in the lens cover itself will bend the light (refraction) going through the lens. Taken to the extreme it has the same effect as a funhouse mirror.
A scratched lens coating is a bummer.
A scratched lens cover is a ruined camera.
The more light that passes through a camera lens the better.
Light tends to bounce off of lenses (reflection).
Lens coatings reduce reflection allowing more light through the lens.
A scratch in the lens coating will change the amount of light going through the lens but it will not substantially change the focus of the image.
A scratch in the lens cover itself will bend the light (refraction) going through the lens. Taken to the extreme it has the same effect as a funhouse mirror.
A scratched lens coating is a bummer.
A scratched lens cover is a ruined camera.
Scratches barely affect image quality. Heck you can even have a crack and it won't really do much cause the camera can't focus that close for us to be able to see the imperfections. It's like shooting trough a fence, if it's not within the focus range, it almost disappears from the foreground.
The worst that could happen is some flare when shooting against bright light and some loss of contrast.
A dirty lens is more of an issue.
The worst that could happen is some flare when shooting against bright light and some loss of contrast.
A dirty lens is more of an issue.
Last edited:
It was a ridiculous example to try and explain to those that can't understand why anyone would use a lens coating less hard than the lens itself.
Your example of the chain link fence is miles off though.
The camera doesn't need to focus on the crack. That's completely irrelevant. A chain link fence doesn't effect light transmission through the material of the lens cover. A crack does. No ifs and or buts about it.
A scratched or cracked lens effects 100% of pictures 100% of the time.
Just because you might not notice doesn't mean it's not there.
I have no idea why people simply can't get it.
Apple isnt cutting pieces of raw sapphire and sticking them on an iPhone. That's ridiculous to even believe.
The "sapphire" is not 100% pure sapphire, but likely some material blend to get scratch resistance to a point but not the brittleness of sapphire. I dont know why this is SUCH a huge deal to make.
Just like the body of your iphone (and various Apple products) is said to be "aluminum" in the description but is really only about 90% aluminum; it also contains iron, zinc, nickel and some other small amounts of metals.
Just like "stainless steel" is not pure steel by any means despite it's name. Stainless steel is alloy of steel mixed with chromium, nickel, molybdenum, silicon, aluminum, and carbon.
Apple isnt cutting pieces of raw sapphire and sticking them on an iPhone. That's ridiculous to even believe.
The "sapphire" is not 100% pure sapphire, but likely some material blend to get scratch resistance to a point but not the brittleness of sapphire. I dont know why this is SUCH a huge deal to make.
Just like the body of your iphone (and various Apple products) is said to be "aluminum" in the description but is really only about 90% aluminum; it also contains iron, zinc, nickel and some other small amounts of metals.
Just like "stainless steel" is not pure steel by any means despite it's name. Stainless steel is alloy of steel mixed with chromium, nickel, molybdenum, silicon, aluminum, and carbon.
It could have said 6 or 9 right?
[doublepost=1474424923][/doublepost]Plus if he wanted to test if it was sapphire, a diamond tester is all you need for a definitive test.
as far as i know, stainless steel can also contain trace amounts of cobalt, which is what gives it a slightly more "blue" tone, versus the "yellow" tone as seen in a zinc alloy.
The point really was just because it's called 'sapphire" doesn't mean it is a chunk of 100% sapphire where Moh's could even be used.
Much more than likely it is a blend of materials similar to the aluminum housing of the iphone which is only 90% aluminum in reality. I dont see anyone screaming Apple lied its not 100% aluminum.
The blend of materials could easily explain why it scratches with a level 6 pick. At the end of the day honestly who cares? 6 is still awfully scratch resistant.
The tech specs state that both the iPhone 7 and 7+ have a sapphire crystal lens cover. What makes you think that Apple is stupid enough to falsely advertise something like that?
Didn't you make this thread a few weeks ago with very similar wording? If it wasn't you then someone else did and long story short, Apple has confirmed via their website that it's a sapphire lens cover.
One of the early reviewers tried scratching the camera cover (the actual lens is not exposed) with some steel pick that was hard, but, supposedly less-hard than sapphire, and, supposedly it scratched, so this started a rumor. Personally, I think it was the coating, but...I suppose it COULD be some issue with the cover...