Sidebar Sidebar
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]

KillaMac said:

Is only partial with the rest being glass. Apple got cheap.
Click to expand...
Yeah..i just saw that via youtube. It's coated...not fully sapphire..sneaky apple.
[doublepost=1475343953][/doublepost]
KillaMac said:
Yep, but Apple isn't telling the full truth.
[doublepost=1475333992][/doublepost]

No, it's glass not sapphire. The 1 million dollar machine verified that. Did you not watch that video? The watch is all the way sapphire. It's been tested already.
Click to expand...
Not all business companies are truthful.

EDIT: Actually, sapphire is the outer part and the lens is the internal part...at least that what's the guy said.
 
Last edited:
disappointing and definitely making me think twice about laying my phone down on a table etc. You'd think the fact that the camera lens is exposed that Apple would at least go the full whack with good quality sapphire. Then again how many threads do you see or people complaining about a scratched lens?
 
  • Like
Reactions: sunking101
Ries said:
It is a anti reflective coating on the inside. But the lens is all sapphire, just a very bad quality (lots of impurities). Apple cheaped out.
[doublepost=1475329642][/doublepost]

Not laminated, it is impure bad quality, just to nikkel and dime us even more. Like the video, I wonder if the watch sapphire is the same impure stuff.
Click to expand...

Check at the 4 minute mark of the video where the patent language is read. I'm referring to that. If the engineering changed or final product did, then so be it. I'm certainly more knowledgeable after watching his video, that's for sure.
 
Last edited:
Dumb move.

This is probably one of the most scrutinized devices in the entire tech world. Why lie if the truth will come out sooner or later and hurt you?
 
the expectation is that its the same hardness and quality as the watch crystal. Thats the ONLY reason why people were excited it was on the phone. Anything less is puffery. I call it lying.

Apple has clearly deceived its customers.
 
End of the day who cares, but video was good. Should add a better title as I want initially going to click.
 
KillaMac said:
I did multiple times and he said it's glass with a thin layer of sapphire laminate.
Click to expand...

I seriously hope english is not your primary language then, because if you watched the video multiple times and still don't get it, you need help.

He ->THEORIZES<- in the middle of the video it could be glass with a thin layer of sapphire. He tests that theory (the picture with colours) and finds that it is WRONG. The cover is a reflective coating, a VERY thin sheet of glass and sapphire with carbon impurities. For ****s sake, he even shows you several times that the cover contains less than 2% glass.
[doublepost=1475348624][/doublepost]
pat500000 said:
It's just coating.
Click to expand...

The coasting is on the inside, there is NO coating of any type on the outside.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ntombi, chrizzz09, Domen151 and 2 others
  • Like
Reactions: chrizzz09, Domen151, miss.manson and 1 other person
It might be that having pure sapphire glass can produce purplish image.
I remember this was the issue before on the iPhone 5 where you can visibly notice your images contain purplish glare when you took a picture on a sunlight.
 
Well pure or not pure saphire, but screen on my 6s plus has many little scratches, but home button and camera lens cover has nothing on them. Good enough for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ntombi
xotigu said:
It might be that having pure sapphire glass can produce purplish image.
I remember this was the issue before on the iPhone 5 where you can visibly notice your images contain purplish glare when you took a picture on a sunlight.
Click to expand...

Could be they changed the cover from iPhone 5S and onwards. The video doesn't scratch test a iPhone 5, only iPhone 5S and no one seems to complain about purple haze since the 5S.
 
Taco1933 said:
Come on guys. He clearly says the majority of the lens is aluminum oxide. The thin layer is niobium and silicon and thats on he inside.
Click to expand...
It's expected to have scratch level of 6-7? (btw..i don't really care about sapphire issue...just found the video interesting)
 
pat500000 said:
It's expected to have scratch level of 6-7? (btw..i don't really care about sapphire issue...just found the video interesting)
Click to expand...

It is supposed to be as good as the watch (both sapphire). It should not scratch before a 8-9.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pat500000
KillaMac said:
Again, it's mostly glass with a thin layer of sapphire. Stop trying to defend the iPhone when they cheeped out and not put a full sapphire lens.
Click to expand...

I agree with the others, you have it backwards. It's the low quality sapphire that's really the issue, not because it's a laminate. The laminate is on the inside for AR, and is the one that's made of glass.
 
pat500000 said:
It's expected to have scratch level of 6-7? (btw..i don't really care about sapphire issue...just found the video interesting)
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's just poor quality sapphire. Apparently a lot more impurities than the watch crystal. In truth it's probably not any better than glass, but it is technically sapphire.

And I'm with you. I don't really care either. The chances are near zero I'll ever need a sapphire lens cover. Hugely important on a watch. Not so much on a phone
 
  • Like
Reactions: pat500000
I watched the video and it seemed to be in line with what you would expect in composition for a phone camera lens.

They may have modified the composition of the synthetic sapphire to make it more capable of transmitting white light. Then there is an anti reflective coating on the inside so there is no back reflection off the sensor.

I wouldn't say it is low quality sapphire, but rather modified for optical use. When you look at a high quality sapphire watch crystal you can see how it has a slight cast to it which would probably not be ideal for photography.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ATC, 5105973, rGiskard and 1 other person
A lot of people here need to take chemistry/geology/physics classes before they open their mouths. The lens cover is actually BETTER because it has "impurities". Extremely pure sapphire is very reflective. That's why the stainless steel Watch face is a little harder to read in full sun than the aluminum. The fact that Apple is able to achieve a sapphire lens cover that is basically as non reflective as glass but significantly more scratch resistant is a WIN not a fail. The purpose of the lens cover isn't to be a pristine gemstone. It's to let in light as purely as possible and to protect the inner elements of the lens. Apple's cover is essentially *perfect* for that task as can be. No matter how many people on MacRumors say "romg zomg the qualities will never be the same".
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: miss.manson, ATC, metsjetsfan and 7 others
Bbqthis said:
A lot of people here need to take chemistry/geology/physics classes before they open their mouths. The lens is actually BETTER because it has "impurities". Extremely pure sapphire is very reflective. That's why the stainless steel Watch face is a little harder to read in full sun than the aluminum. The fact that Apple is able to achieve a sapphire lens that is basically as non reflective as glass but significantly more scratch resistant is a WIN not a fail. The purpose of the lens cover isn't to be a pristine gemstone. It's to let in light as purely as possible and to protect the inner elements of the lens. Apple's cover is essentially *perfect* for that task as can be. No matter how many people on MacRumors say "romg zomg the qualities will never be the same".
Click to expand...

The problem is it isnt more scratch resistant. So why even bother? To sell phones and pump up spec sheets is why.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mrex
Ries said:
I seriously hope english is not your primary language then, because if you watched the video multiple times and still don't get it, you need help.

He ->THEORIZES<- in the middle of the video it could be glass with a thin layer of sapphire. He tests that theory (the picture with colours) and finds that it is WRONG. The cover is a reflective coating, a VERY thin sheet of glass and sapphire with carbon impurities. For ****s sake, he even shows you several times that the cover contains less than 2% glass.
[doublepost=1475348624][/doublepost]

The coasting is on the inside, there is NO coating of any type on the outside.
Click to expand...

Dont waste your breath. Some people want to complain for the sake of complaining.

This makes ZERO difference to anyone; and there was no possible way they were using real hunks of 100% sapphire for cost and the fact that pure sapphire is INCREDIBLY fragile being so hard.

One drop would be a ton of cracked camera lenses. Same reason they ditched the sapphire screen idea among other things.

And it's not false advertising. You "aluminum" devices are not 100% aluminum; more like 90% with iron, nickel and other metals. An alloy. No outrage there calling it aluminum body. Alloys are used throughout industry and still called their major element in naming. Look at chocolate, chocolate is nowhere near 100% chocolate as it'd taste bad but still all named chocolate; whether it is 40% cocoa or 70% cocoa.

People need to pull their thumbs out of their posteriors and find something better to do with their lives than nitpick and complain. Please do return your iphones in the 14 day period if it is THAT big of a deal and move on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: miss.manson, Mr Retina, Ntombi and 4 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back