iPhone 15 Pro Max to Feature Rearranged Camera Layout to Accommodate Periscope Lens

[jonnysods]

They also probably do this so when they design icons they can delineate the different models and also to say it isn't a repeat of the one before.

 

[klasma]

They also probably do this so when they design icons they can delineate the different models and also to say it isn't a repeat of the one before.

The MacRumors article doesn’t imply any change in layout, just two of the lenses being swapped in-place.

 

[MacWiz_007]

Tim Apple won't be taking more money from those who buy 3rd party cases, unless the iPhone 15 is going to have some new feature where it rejects 3rd party cases because they're not Apple-genuine or you get bombarded with constant "Important Case Message: Unable to verify this iPhone has a genuine Apple Case" messages

But he will still be making money on the new Apple cases. He thinks you're going to love them!

 

[Lounge vibes 05]

Nice. So thicken the iPhone 14 into an iPhone 5-like case and how much battery fits in that case?

The OP was wishing for a thicker iPhone to get flush with camera and filling the new space with battery for the benefit of much more battery life. I suspect many would take flush camera with much more battery than "as is" if that was an option.

The example I offered was when "perfect" phones had 4" screens and could be purchased for MUCH lower prices than todays phablets at MUCH greater prices. Scale it all and it still comes back to the same opportunity: a camera flush body would have room for more battery. Apple chooses to NOT do that in spite of plenty of consumer angst(?) over the non-flush camera, camera module wobble, etc. Why? My guess is that it is mostly driven by profit maximization, more than anything else.

So while you are technically correct in isolating the point (battery in phablet vs. battery in iPhone 5), you are missing the bigger picture of why we have camera bumps, camera wobbles and what OP was after... and (probably/possibly) why.

This argument is total nonsense, because the iPhone 14 Pro, and the iPhone 13 Pro before it, are both thicker than the iPhone 5.
Once again:
iPhone 5: 7.6 MM
13 and 13 Mini: 7.7 MM
iPhone 14 and 14+: 7.8 MM
iPhone 14 Pro and Pro Max: 7.85 MM
Rumored iPhone 15: 8.3 MM
All of these phones have camera bumps, and all are thicker than the iPhone 5.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Not to mention, the iPhone 14 Pro is thicker than the iPhone 5.
iPhone 5: 7.6 MM
iPhone 14 Pro: 7.85 MM
So the original statement this person made is totally incorrect.
The 15 series if anything is rumored to get even thicker, up to 8.3 mm,a good bit thicker than the iPhone 5.

This argument is total nonsense, because the iPhone 14 Pro, and the iPhone 13 Pro before it, are both thicker than the iPhone 5.
Once again:
iPhone 5: 7.6 MM
13 and 13 Mini: 7.7 MM
iPhone 14 and 14+: 7.8 MM
iPhone 14 Pro and Pro Max: 7.85 MM
Rumored iPhone 15: 8.3 MM
All of these phones have camera bumps, and all are thicker than the iPhone 5.

Again, missing (or redirecting?) the point. It's not about measuring the thickness of iPhone 5 vs. any iPhone "new" and making the idea wrong because "new" is thicker than 5. Take WHATEVER modern phone we want to consider with a camera protrusion. Thicken it to make the camera flush. That's the OPs idea: make the camera module flush again.

Regardless of which phone is chosen to hypothetically do that, this would create substantial new empty space inside, which could be filled- as OP suggested- with more battery, which would result in extending battery life.

Yes, that would be a HEAVIER phone but OP can't get their wish without the phone getting heavier. We can't add much more battery and keep the weight the same. So that's the loss or non-monetary cost in fulfilling this very popular wish. So instead, we get thinner (vs. thickening camera module) such that we have protruding camera modules and table wobble, with LESS (relative) battery to fit within that thinner case. Since there is less battery to fit into "thinner," it is lower unit cost to Apple.

iPhone 5 image simply showed that we once had flush camera modules in iPhones... exactly what OP was seeking.

 

[RickDEGH]

Apple is likely limiting the periscope technology to the iPhone 15 Pro Max because of the internal space needed for the advanced hardware

Somehow, mysteriously, there will be space for next year’s 16 Pro’s milking, after Apple finishes the milking this year.

 

[RickDEGH]

Camera surface area has been growing steadily, at some point the square won't fit especially combined with MagSafe. I'm thinking a vizor design like the Pixel line (or a huge version of iPhone X / 7 Plus).

View attachment 2203079

You just Apple their next design to differentiate for the subsequent 3 or 4 years.

 

[Lounge vibes 05]

Again, missing (or redirecting?) the point. It's not about measuring the thickness of iPhone 5 vs. any iPhone "new" and making the idea wrong because "new" is thicker than 5. Take WHATEVER modern phone we want to consider with a camera protrusion. Thicken it to make the camera flush. That's the OPs idea: make the camera module flush again.

Regardless of which phone is chosen to hypothetically do that, this would create substantial new empty space inside, which could be filled- as OP suggested- with more battery, which would result in extending battery life.

Yes, that would be a HEAVIER phone but OP can't get their wish without the phone getting heavier. We can't add much more battery and keep the weight the same. So that's the loss or non-monetary cost in fulfilling this very popular wish. So instead, we get thinner & lighter such that we have protruding camera modules and table wobble, with LESS (relative) battery to fit within that thinner case. Since there is less battery to fit into "thinner," it is lower unit cost to Apple.

iPhone 5 image simply showed that we once had flush camera modules in iPhones... exactly what OP was seeking.

You’re just saying things.
If we were to totally and completely get rid of the camera bump, the iPhone would probably end up thicker than the original. It would not be OK.
Also, this goes without saying, but the iPhone 5 had a much (much) less capable camera than what we have in phones now.

 

[Falhófnir]

Between 1x and 3x it’s basically cropping, but zooming past 3x is all digital manipulation with noticeably worse image quality compared to an optical zoom.

That's not what was being talked about though? The user I replied to suggested the 3x zoom mode was digital. As I explained it is not.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

You’re just saying things. If we were to totally and completely get rid of the camera bump, the iPhone would probably end up thicker than the original.

With this camera module? Probably.

Extrapolate out to future camera improvements, because camera physics won't change. At some point, Apple and us consumers have to decide that some protrusion is just too much. Else, we'll end up with an increasingly angled, bulit-in, corner "stand" for watching things in portrait orientation.

I'm joking a bit but not too much. Better cameras in the future will beg for even more depth. There is no technical breakthrough to work around camera physics. How much thicker is acceptable for "even better camera" in a phone body? I don't know. I guess we find out in some number of years.

It would not be OK.

In YOUR opinion. There are MANY posts by Apple consumers in many threads wishing for a flush camera AND there are many posts for longer battery life. Some MIGHT be interested in that even at the expense of "thicker" and "heavier." Some already roll with both by permanently putting existing iPhones in battery cases.

Also, this goes without saying, but the iPhone 5 had a much (much) less capable camera than what we have in phones now.

Correct. The image of iPhone 5 was solely used to illustrate that Apple made cameras with flush camera modules. It was not intended to break out millimeter gauges or look up technical specs for head to head comparisons of guts. Apple once made iPhones with flush camera modules. There's one.

Modern iPhones are technically superior to early iPhones in hundreds of ways.

 

[the future]

this is my concern with the 15PM, if it doesn't offer optical zoom - I'm out

Is there any phone with real optical zoom?

 

[subi257]

this is a rumour. You can’t know for sure. Writing about rumors is called lying.

So, they can then just rename the website to "MacLies"

 

[CosmicTris392]

Could we maybe put them in a row so it actually fits on the magsafe charger?

 

[Red Oak]

Still rocking VHS tapes also?

No. BetaMax

 

[subi257]

Is there any phone with real optical zoom?

Huawei....The P30 Pro features three rear-facing camera lenses with Leica optics, including a 40-megapixel lens, 20-megapixel ultra-wide angle lens, an 8-megapixel "periscope" lens with 5× optical zoom. The optical zoom can be combined with software-assisted digital zoom of up to 50x.[5] The P30 Pro also includes a time-of-flight sensor.

 

[msackey]

Iterations are for losers who think Porsche makes a great sports car

LOL. Meh. Oh well

I think iterations can bring refinement and finesse and make an innovative product become more practical and usable and beautiful. I don't want a GoFundMe-like prototype for each revision that Apple comes out, for example. 🤣
😆😁

 

[msackey]

Huawei....The P30 Pro features three rear-facing camera lenses with Leica optics, including a 40-megapixel lens, 20-megapixel ultra-wide angle lens, an 8-megapixel "periscope" lens with 5× optical zoom. The optical zoom can be combined with software-assisted digital zoom of up to 50x.[5] The P30 Pro also includes a time-of-flight sensor.

Hopefully the pictures taken with the optical zoom are great quality.

My iPhone 12 Pro has 2x optical zoom and can go up to 10x digital zoom. I never use the digital zoom because why bother when, if I really needed to, I can just zoom the 2x optical zoom photo to basically achieve the same thing.

 

[the future]

Huawei....The P30 Pro features three rear-facing camera lenses with Leica optics, including a 40-megapixel lens, 20-megapixel ultra-wide angle lens, an 8-megapixel "periscope" lens with 5× optical zoom. The optical zoom can be combined with software-assisted digital zoom of up to 50x.[5] The P30 Pro also includes a time-of-flight sensor.

Try again. The 5x is just a tele with a fixed focal length (like the 3x of the current iPhone Pros), not a zoom.

 

[dk001]

Imagine just thickening the whole phone to match, with a week between charging…

Great workout device. The iPhone 16 ProMax Pounder. 🤣

 

[the future]

Is there any phone with real optical zoom?

Ok, I searched for this and it seems the only phones with real optical zoom are the Sony Xperia 1 IV from last year and the brand new V. They both have regular, ultra-wide and 3,5-5,2x zoom cameras.

If Apple could do something similar, I would probably be in.

 

[jmadara]

they shoulda talent he opportunity to redo the whole horrid looking camera bump all together. The straight line layout other manufacturers use is so much more aesthetically pleasing… and they get 10x zoom

Totally agree. I wouldn't have a problem if the bump was flush with the lenses and across the top of the phone so it would sit flat on a table.

 

[dk001]

I think they ALL could do it. Glomming phone functionality onto a much more physically spacious camera body seems far easier than jamming much more camera into a thin brick for our pockets. It's just that everyone else would likely have to do it with Android while Apple's cut of this would be exclusively iOS.

It does seem like a tangible, new product opportunity for someone able to "think different."

For all those people who want new phones mostly for better camera, I wonder how many would choose much better camera that also happens to cover all of the phone benefits (except pocketability). I don't know that pricing would have to be that different... but the photographs and video could take a giant leap forward if the camera could be freed from trying to work as good as it can within the tiny space of a phone body.

Add to that better software.
Something that Apple has started to lag on.

Next we'll have an AI telling us what the picture is supposed to look like.

 

[darngooddesign]

Is there any phone with real optical zoom?

There are a couple of phones with optical periscope zooms.

 

[usersince86]

Actually, I find myself thinking it's time for Apple to fork this product by ALSO making an Apple-branded camera from scratch on which they "glom on" the phone parts.

The physics conflict of trying to jam better and better camera into a skinny slab phone form factor is only going to get worse. Cameras need depth. Cameras need bigger lenses to let in maximum light, and adjustable/swappable lenses for all kinds of specific wants/needs. Cameras needs a bigger internal "eye" (the sensor) to capture max detail. And even mighty Apple cannot break the laws of physics.

So how about developing an Apple camera without any phone-driven limitations? In other words, clean slate dev of an Apple camera. When Apple has that worked out so that it can take the best possible pictures and video, layer on the stuff that would make it also be a phone (a "flip the script" approach instead of tweaking the same old script).

No, this does not mean holding a camera up to one's ear to make a call (buds with mic work just fine, much like people do with iPhone when they also want to use the screen during the call).

There are already great cameras with good-sized touchscreens on the market...

View attachment 2203126​

Apple could make and brand one of their own, that better accomodates the very real physics of photography and deliver a new kind of camera + phone product instead of only phone + camera products.

Yes, this would NOT be pocketable but probably hang around neck or shoulder as better cameras do now. Those who value pocketable more than better photography could keep buying & using iPhone as is.

This post is also not saying kill iPhone. It's about adding a camera product that can take max advantage of what it takes to capture exceptional photos and video. That can never happen within the limitations of a skinny brick in our pocket.

Through the most important lens to Apple, existing (better) cameras are priced VERY HIGH, so there is likely plenty of Apple-type margin in the established competition so that Apple wouldn't have to be trying to figure out a way to break into something where margins are ultra thin and then get their premium on top (I'm (not) looking at you Apple Television rumor). Pricing seems to already be high enough for Apple to wedge into this market, get their target margin and have a new product line that still leans on core strengths, including iOS, the App Store, etc. Bonus for the beancounters: cameras have endless, high-margin accessories that can be sold: lenses, microphones, flash, etc.

The established "big boys" in that space have no easy way to compete- no phone, phone & app ecosystem, etc- nor piles of photography/videography apps already available that could evolve to work on a much better camera too. They would have to work Android onto their cameras if they wanted to "answer." My guess: like Blackberry and Microsoft on the iPhone debut, the majors wouldn't take this as a serious threat and Apple would enjoy some time to eat some share before the majors realize that they need to directly compete.

iPhone pricing is already getting right into the range for good cameras along this line. And we can all see the pricing trend for the future. So how about it- a fork product that just goes there. People who buy iPhone more for camera would have a gigantic leap opportunity with this fork. People who buy iPhone for mostly non-camera benefits just keep doing what they do.

Would anyone else be interested in this Apple-branded camera product?

Apple did this once, and I suppose they could return to it. But many (most?) people are totally fine with the pics they get from their phones.

Apple QuickTake - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[subjonas]

That’s such a naive statement. Apple is limiting this feature to the pro Max just because it is greedy and wants to segment the market pushing people to more expensive models. Nothing to do with technical reasons.

So many conspiracy theorists in MR.
That wouldn’t bother me except they’re so condescending and arrogantly confident with little to no evidence. Instead of just stating their theory as a theory, it’s, “I found a motive so it’s definitely true, and anyone who believes otherwise is beneath me.”