I cannot comment for others but I have not had pocket lint in any of my phones charging port for it to not work. I have had dust but it still worked. Why is your pocket so linty or dirty 🤭
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.
iPhone 16e Has iPhone 16 Camera, But Lacks Some Features
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Absolutely! Also in the specs x1 is 48mp, x2 is 12mp – obviously crop and no optical change happens between x1 and x2.
What do they mean by "optical quality" at this point? Anything that is visible is "optical", also any camera in iPhone uses a lens so there are "optics".
The whole presentation was the most misleading Apple launch. Starting with touting iPhone 16 Pro and then presenting 16e saying "performance you expect" ... after showing a long section advertising a different better model
Attachments
Last edited:
Didn't see the response til now but yeah, Apple is misleading on the optical zoom portion as mentioned by turbineseaplane on the comparison page:
If you go to their tech spec pages, however, you can see there is an omission on the optical zoom for the 16e:
I just don't understand how the Fusion camera on the regular 16 can be labeled 2x optical zoom when it should be using the "optical quality zoom" label. You're right that it didn't get much fanfare when it was introduced in the 14P/PM, but I feel like people don't go over the details sometimes. With the 16e having just one lens, it just became more apparent that this is more of a software created zoom than an optical zoom.
Absolutely! Also in the specs x1 is 48mp, x2 is 12mp – obviously crop and no optical change happens between x1 and x2.
What do they mean by "optical quality" at this point? Anything that is visible is "optical", also any camera in iPhone uses a lens so there are "optics".
The whole presentation was the most misleading Apple launch. Starting with touting iPhone 16 Pro and then presenting 16e saying "performance you expect" ... after showing a long section advertising a different better model
I understand the marketing aspect of saying the 2x is "optical quality zoom" but it really is nothing more than a virtual / software created / digital zoom where a 48mp image is taken and the center of the image is cropped down to 12mp. Isn't that just what digital zoom of yesterday was?
As szw-mapple fan mentioned, this virtual zoom was introduced in the 14P/PM models so I'm surprised it wasn't brought up more.
Like I said in a different comment the main difference between optical and digital zoom traditionally was the amount of details lost. In the current setup, traditional digital zoom only occurs when shooting in 48MP ProRaw mode while zooming. By default, both non-zoom and zoom images produced by the phone are 12MP. Because of this the, addition of a second 12MP telephoto lens wouldn’t significantly improve the zoomed image quality (but the difference in focal lengths would impact the bokeh effect in portrait mode).
It’s similar to the difference APS-C and full-frame sensors in mirrorless cameras. An APS-C sensor produces a more cropped/zoomed-in image despite even when using the same lens as a full-frame camera. This is because the APS-C sensor is smaller, effectively discarding some of the data that a full-frame sensor would have captured, while both still produce images with the same megapixel count. In the case of the iPhone, the process feels akin to digitally switching between sensors as needed for zoom. Yes Apple should have used different marketing terms but it’s also not as misleading as many here seem to believe.
The default image produced is 12MP unless you’re choosing to shoot in ProRaw. It will merge 4 pixels into 1 in the final photo for non-zoom photos. Apple even dedicated a segment to explaining how they did the optical quality zoom and pixel merging in the 14 pro launch and no one paid much attention.
As opposed to the quality of digital zoom. A digital zoom would loose details because it stretches a 3MP worth of data back into a 12MP image with some processing at 2x. Here we have 12MP worth of data captured from the sensor during “zoom”. When shooting in regular mode, both zoom and non-zoom image end up with 12MP worth of data in the final photo.
For users who only shoot in regular 12MP mode all the time, this might even be preferable because for the zoom range between 1x and 2x, you’re still getting full 12MP quality as opposed to what we had before which digitally cropped and stretched what was captured from the 12MP 1x sensor.
Last edited:
They did double the base Storage, and as overpriced as those upgrades usually are, that's a plus.
They'll just have to pony up the dough for a 16 then.
In 5 years all cell phones are worthless junk, system upgrades will render them next to useless.
Last edited:
My nieces get what hand-me-down phones they can beg from their uncles and grandparents. It'd take a lot of lemonade stands and babysitting jobs to save up for a brand new iPhone!
I feel like we're presenting points with different emphasis.
I agree that a 12MP telephoto lens isn't a significant improvement over the 48MP cropped image but it is still a drop in image quality, especially if any zooming is done while viewing a photo. This is where I argue that using the phrase "optical quality zoom" is fine in the marketing material but it's wrong being labeled as optical zoom on the comparison page. I feel "crop zoom" would have been more appropriate and inline with what's happening.
My 2020 SE is 64 GB. I still have 28.53 GB free. I think I can hold out for the next one!
My iPhone 2020 SE is 5 years old and is running iOS 18.3.1. Get your facts straight before ranting. Makes it more convincing!🤣
My iPhone 2020 SE is 5 years old and is running iOS 18.3.1. Get your facts straight before ranting. Makes it more convincing!🤣
Do their Uncles and grandparents have anything in the iPhone 11 plus range?
According to a list I managed to scrounge up, some of those have ultrawide lenses.
I believe the 16 is the first ultrawide to get the 48MP sensor though.
I would have gotten a 16 myself, but I wanted 48MP on the telephoto lens, so I have to wait for a 17.
My Original SE, which is six years old, can't run anything higher than 15, and Apps are constantly being upgraded past that, rendering it less and less useful.
Which is why I'm going to replace it for now with a 16e. I'm displeased with the other 16 models, and if I'm going to pay $1,200 plus for a phone, I choose to do it as infrequently as possible.
However, since you seemed to take offense, I will revise my "rant" to:
"In 6 years all cell phones are worthless junk, system upgrades will render them next to useless."
Would it? If the amount of MPs is the same, and especially since the main sensor can let in more light with ƒ/1.6 compared to what the telephoto lens has at ƒ/2.8, shouldn’t it produce at least comparable quality zoom photos?
I totally agree with this. I was just saying people seem to be making a bigger deal out of this than warranted.
Introduced in 2016, your original iPhone SE is 8 years old, not 6. And if you bought the $399 model with 16GB, you're right that it lacks the storage and processor to run the current OS. But how much support do you think Apple should provide for an 8 year iPhone? As much as your Chevy dealer will support your 8 year old car, or as much as GE will support your 8 year old dishwasher?
It's impossible for Apple to simultaneously keep improving iOS by taking advantage of advances in chip technology while crippling it enough to run on your 8 year old phone. Getting a new iPhone SE should be something to look forward to, not something causing bitterness that the old one doesn't last forever! And your wife would love one of those newfangled dishwashers, while you're at it!
Boy, you're full of unjustified assumptions, aren't you?
I bought my phone in 2018, they were still selling that model, and since I bought a house on the same day, I know exactly how long I've had it. When it was made is not the issue, and I'm making the point that an old phone or computer is useless once the available system is no longer upgraded and Subsequently, Apps no longer run on it.
I bought the 128GB model, which at the time, seemed a fairly generous amount of storage, and it has served me well, but I understand it's time to move on, but I'm certainly not "bitter" about it. I had waited for the 16, and found it inadequate, so now I'll use the 16e in the interim, till the 17 comes out
So exactly what you're taking offense to is a little puzzling, but since you're so easily offended, I'll edit my statement again:
"In 8 years all cell phones are worthless junk, system upgrades will render them next to useless."
And, for the record I have a 2012 MacPro running Sequoia, so there are some things Apple makes that last far longer than Apple intended them to.
No offense intended or implied. I just disagree with one thing: an original iPhone SE is not useless junk because it can't run a current OS. Donate it to a women's shelter. There are plenty of women running from abuse who would love to have it. There's no trade in value, so you might as well take it where it can help someone less fortunate. (and get a tax break if you itemize)
I use it every single day. Wether its on my nightstand, in my car, or to just hold my wallet all day.
What I don't use every day are things like new emoji's and Apple Intelligence, which still get stuffed into every update 🤷♂️
YOU can tell the difference because you’re sensitive to the additional mass. I’ve taped four nickels to a phone before and couldn’t feel a difference. And, I’m glad that 20g isn’t enough to make it a difference for me.
No, you could and, from what you need to feel in order to not be shorted, it’s good that you can! I can’t and it’s both a blessing and a curse. Were I to ever need to buy a 1/4 pound, I’d be in dire straits if they shorted me.