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 17 Pro Gets 24x Zoom With Sandmarc's New Tetraprism Lens
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
TechRunner
macrumors 68030
If it was half the price I'd give it a go for hiking/backpacking, but given I own a camera it doesn't appeal to me at that price point.
masotime
macrumors 68030
I hate all the x zoom notations - tldr; 300mm full frame equivalent with the lens attachment at "true optical" (not "optical quality")
Mousse
macrumors 601
No mention of how much light loss when they use this tack on lens. I'm guessing we're looking at 2 to 4 stops of light loss. Well 💩. Ain't no way you're hand holding the iPhone/lens combo at full telephoto without the image shaking like a jello factory during an earthquake.
If you're going to take a photo with this tack on lens, bring a tripod or a bean bag. If you're carrying all that, might as well get a real camera as a lot of posters suggested. If you want to pack light, get a point and shoot with 10x zoom.
If you're going to take a photo with this tack on lens, bring a tripod or a bean bag. If you're carrying all that, might as well get a real camera as a lot of posters suggested. If you want to pack light, get a point and shoot with 10x zoom.
Ursadorable
macrumors 65816
Give it a few months and it's yours for $74.99 from Woot while supplies last !!!
retrocool
macrumors member
"3x zoom" etc is meaningless and is just a marketing term for people who know nothing whatever about cameras. Thanks for looking up the 35mm equivalent field of view - anyone with any photography experience knows immediately what that means.
I can imagine situations where this would be fun to have, and as bulky as it is, it is obviously a LOT less bulky than a whole other camera with a 300mm lens. A full frame 300mm lens could weigh kilograms.
I also don't understand the people who seem to think they know the optical quality will be dreadful without having seen any tests.
Anyone who knows much about cameras, knows your iPhone has a better camera than those $300 digital cameras. If you want great shots, be prepared to spend in the thousands… and on that note, $200-$300 is dirt cheap for a lens. In fact at that price, I’d question the quality and capability of the lens. A good lens for a real camera can cost triple that or more.
If this lens is actually any good, it would be a nice middle ground for people who don’t want to invest thousands on a dedicated camera but do want the range this lens offers.
Escape Velocity
macrumors newbie
A camera + lens you pay $250-350 for is not going to outperform your iPhone in very many situations. For me it’s been cat and mouse for awhile. I get a new camera, it’s better than my phone at most (but not all) things. Over a few phone models, my phone catches up in more and more places, until I’m left with much more niche situations where my camera is better. Then I upgrade my camera.
The biggest advantage the camera has is the lenses, and there you get what you pay for. Decent lenses are expensive, and if you really want something good you will be spending more, period. Granted, if you stay brand consistent, a lens collection can grow and develop over time, and buying a new camera often doesn’t mean buying new lenses.
Astuces iOS
macrumors 68020
I’ve been working on yeah just that I have some issues with the 0.5 camera… I left this project behind, thanks for reminding me I will see if I can do something.
cjsuk
macrumors 68000
Yeah it will. Damn 16 year old Nikon D3100 is better than an iPhone 17 Pro.
Reading comprehension is obviously not a requirement to comment here. But you two may want to actually read the article before you comment. The lens is screwed onto a case that has 17mm thread mounts. And 17mm mounts have now become something of a standard in iPhone cases, and are available from various vendors. So you're not required to buy Sandmarc's case if you don't want to. So A), if you decide to replace your phone with a newer one, you can just (and probably will have to) get a new case for it, and continue to use this lens with future iPhones, and B) the lens is not "permanently attached" to your case. It's screwed on.
routine_analyst
macrumors 65816
chars1ub0w
macrumors 6502a
I like the idea of the clip, as I don't want to use their case.
Does this also mean it will work on the Pro, not just the Pro Max?
Does this also mean it will work on the Pro, not just the Pro Max?
switz
Contributor
On a road trip to take photos, I take my Leica M-11 camera and six Lieca prime lenses (21, 28, 35, 50, 75 and 90 mm all but one with f/2).
My iPhone 17 Pro Max is used when I leave the Leica gear at home. At least now there is 48 mega pixel density on all three cameras so one has some editing capability on all images.
My iPhone 17 Pro Max is used when I leave the Leica gear at home. At least now there is 48 mega pixel density on all three cameras so one has some editing capability on all images.
Veinticinco
macrumors 68020
sherwinzadeh
macrumors 6502
They should make one for the iPhone Fold as sadly it doesn't look like it'll have a telephoto camera.
cjsuk
macrumors 68000
I own a high-quality mirrorless camera and several thousand dollars worth of good lenses for it ranging from a very nice wide-angle to a stabilized telephoto. But in practice the current iPhone Pro cameras are good enough that I rarely get it out.
Part of that is the "the best camera is the one you have with you" adage, which is extremely accurate. But at this point, between the wide lens, high-resolution main, and decent zoom on the telephoto, I can take photos over a much larger portion of the range of my "real" camera than was the case in the past; with all the computational stuff, the photos I get with my phone are not anywhere near as dramatically better as they used to be; and the low-light stabilization and stacking is good enough that the larger apertures and large, stabilized sensor on my "real" camera is no longer the absolute must-have it once was.
Basically, there were pictures--telephoto, wide angle, low-light--that it was possible to take with a dedicated camera and impossible to take with a phone 10 years ago, while the list of things in that category has shrunk dramatically, as has the relative difference in quality of the resulting images.
One of the big remaining items is high-zoom telephoto; the high-res sensor and folded lens on the 17 Pro is a big improvement, but it still has major limits that a big piece of glass on a big sensor does not.
Bolt-on lenses like this are, as a result, really tempting... but having to use their case to attach it, while understandable, is an absolute deal-breaker, and at the point I'd put this big chunk of lens in my pocket I'd probably be just as likely to go and get my dedicated camera, so other than slight convenience in the pipeline it's just not going to give me anything I'll use.
(An aside, the iPhone's exceptionally good automatic HDR is probably its biggest advantage over my dedicated camera, and not to be taken lightly; in challenging lighting situations even with better-than-8-bit dynamic range on my "real" camera the iPhone takes better and more usable photos without having to do any tweaking or adjusting. It was some time ago, but I was in Death Valley in a canyon that had really extreme light differences between the shadowed walls and the sunlit side, and despite having my big camera around my neck I eventually gave up and started using my phone because it was taking better photos. With a tripod and a lot of time, had I been aiming for a professional art shot, I could have taken a range of exposures and post-processed into a good HDR image, but I was trying to enjoy the vacation and take some nice images to memorialize it, not sell a print.)
Part of that is the "the best camera is the one you have with you" adage, which is extremely accurate. But at this point, between the wide lens, high-resolution main, and decent zoom on the telephoto, I can take photos over a much larger portion of the range of my "real" camera than was the case in the past; with all the computational stuff, the photos I get with my phone are not anywhere near as dramatically better as they used to be; and the low-light stabilization and stacking is good enough that the larger apertures and large, stabilized sensor on my "real" camera is no longer the absolute must-have it once was.
Basically, there were pictures--telephoto, wide angle, low-light--that it was possible to take with a dedicated camera and impossible to take with a phone 10 years ago, while the list of things in that category has shrunk dramatically, as has the relative difference in quality of the resulting images.
One of the big remaining items is high-zoom telephoto; the high-res sensor and folded lens on the 17 Pro is a big improvement, but it still has major limits that a big piece of glass on a big sensor does not.
Bolt-on lenses like this are, as a result, really tempting... but having to use their case to attach it, while understandable, is an absolute deal-breaker, and at the point I'd put this big chunk of lens in my pocket I'd probably be just as likely to go and get my dedicated camera, so other than slight convenience in the pipeline it's just not going to give me anything I'll use.
(An aside, the iPhone's exceptionally good automatic HDR is probably its biggest advantage over my dedicated camera, and not to be taken lightly; in challenging lighting situations even with better-than-8-bit dynamic range on my "real" camera the iPhone takes better and more usable photos without having to do any tweaking or adjusting. It was some time ago, but I was in Death Valley in a canyon that had really extreme light differences between the shadowed walls and the sunlit side, and despite having my big camera around my neck I eventually gave up and started using my phone because it was taking better photos. With a tripod and a lot of time, had I been aiming for a professional art shot, I could have taken a range of exposures and post-processed into a good HDR image, but I was trying to enjoy the vacation and take some nice images to memorialize it, not sell a print.)
Last edited:
Years ago I remember joking around and creating a fake product release for something like this as a joke. Never imagined this would eventually become a real product.