OmniVision's Weak Guidance Hints at Shift to Sony for iPhone 5 Camera?

[MacRumors]

Forbes notes that Apple's longtime camera sensor supplier for its iOS devices, OmniVision Technologies, today offered remarkably weak guidance for the current quarter, suggesting that Apple may indeed have shifted camera orders for the iPhone 5 to Sony.

For FY [Q2], the company sees revenue of $255 million to $275 million, and non-GAAP profits of 52-64 cents a share, well short of the Street consensus at $306.4 million and 82 cents.

The company gave no explanation in the release for the weak forecast; I would note that there has recently been speculation that the company may have lost some of its Apple business to Sony.

Reports dating back over a year have been going back and forth over whether OmniVision or Sony would be the camera supplier for the iPhone 5. As of early June, reports claimed that both companies would be supplying 8-megapixel camera sensors for the iPhone 5, but with OmniVision shouldering 90% of the load. But just a month later, an analyst claimed that production difficulties at OmniVision had resulted in the camera sensors destined for the iPhone 5 failing to meet Apple's required yield rate. As a result, Apple was said to be planning to shift to Sony for the bulk of its iPhone 5 camera sensor orders.

Article Link: OmniVision's Weak Guidance Hints at Shift to Sony for iPhone 5 Camera?

 

[chrmjenkins]

Actually the strongest evidence for a new camera yet. Why would Apple change suppliers when they had no reason to be unhappy with the 5 MP camera in the iphone 4.

 

[andyplace]

The sensor in the current iPhone does have some undesirables --

-- The megapixel count could be higher if they don't want to look inferior in spec comparisons to other phones, (yes, I know megapixels don't matter at all and its all about the sensor and pixel size, but to the average consumer they kind of do matter...)

-- The "green-blob" problem under fluorescent/halogen light

-- The thickness of the sensor itself prohibits making a skinnier phone

-- It is a part that is expected to receive an upgrade each year to something better

 

[jtt2006]

I don't agree

Steve Jobs loves competition and he has taken shots at Sony in the past in comparing the iPhone to the Nintendo re: game content. He is not about to hand his competitor a lucrative contract to make Sony parts for an Apple product. This is just insane speculation and Jobs knows that companies like Sony are waiting to eat his lunch.

I don't think Jobs would go with Sony when they are trying to come up with their own products to compete with Apple.

 

[monoskier]

Steve Jobs loves competition and he has taken shots at Sony in the past in comparing the iPhone to the Nintendo re: game content. He is not about to hand his competitor a lucrative contract to make Sony parts for an Apple product. This is just insane speculation and Jobs knows that companies like Sony are waiting to eat his lunch.

I don't think Jobs would go with Sony when they are trying to come up with their own products to compete with Apple.

One word: Samsung

 

[wywern209]

Steve Jobs loves competition and he has taken shots at Sony in the past in comparing the iPhone to the Nintendo re: game content. He is not about to hand his competitor a lucrative contract to make Sony parts for an Apple product. This is just insane speculation and Jobs knows that companies like Sony are waiting to eat his lunch.

I don't think Jobs would go with Sony when they are trying to come up with their own products to compete with Apple.

just because steve jobs may have taken some shots at the gaming division doesn't mean that they won't make some deals with sony's camera division. a business does what it needs to do.

 

[wikus]

this whole megapixel-count race is idiotic. the higher the pixel count, the more noise the sensor produces in images. what the hell is the point of throwing more megapixels into a sensor when most people never need anything more than 8mp, and thats being VERY generous too;

how often do ANY of you print 8x10s? Rarely? I thought so. Now how often do any of you print anything LARGER than 8x10? Almost nevet? Good. Now that you absolutely dont need 8x10s all that much and definitely not anything bigger than tha especially from a PHONE camera, all of you will be happy to know that a 6mp camera will print an 8x10 JUST FINE at approximately 240dpi, which, past 240dpi, the human eye begins to have trouble seeing differences (at 300dpi and up, its nearly impossible to tell).

So while so many of you are crying for higher resolution, none of you (or us) seriously need it. We'd be doing JUST FINE with a 2-4mp camera sensor as even 2mp will print a 4x6 fairly well (3 is perfect for 4x6).

I say; bring down the resolution to 3 megapixels. Enlarge the sensor @ 3mp to today's standard size (physically) and that will eliminate all heat/noise issues and we can all enjoy DECENT quality photographs, thus eliminating the need to have a secondary camera.

 

[0098386]

this whole megapixel-count race is idiotic. the higher the pixel count, the more noise the sensor produces in images. what the hell is the point of throwing more megapixels into a sensor when most people never need anything more than 8mp, and thats being VERY generous too;

how often do ANY of you print 8x10s? Rarely? I thought so. Now how often do any of you print anything LARGER than 8x10? Almost nevet? Good. Now that you absolutely dont need 8x10s all that much and definitely not anything bigger than tha especially from a PHONE camera, all of you will be happy to know that a 6mp camera will print an 8x10 JUST FINE at approximately 240dpi, which, past 240dpi, the human eye begins to have trouble seeing differences (at 300dpi and up, its nearly impossible to tell).

So while so many of you are crying for higher resolution, none of you (or us) seriously need it. We'd be doing JUST FINE with a 2-4mp camera sensor as even 2mp will print a 4x6 fairly well (3 is perfect for 4x6).

I say; bring down the resolution to 3 megapixels. Enlarge the sensor @ 3mp to today's standard size (physically) and that will eliminate all heat/noise issues and we can all enjoy DECENT quality photographs, thus eliminating the need to have a secondary camera.

How many people here need an i5 processor, or even an i3? Few? I thought so. Now how many people here would need an i7? Almost no-one. Good.
Fast processors are not required for most people. They just suck up loads of electricity and spit out heat.

 

[Truffy]

I say; bring down the resolution to 3 megapixels. Enlarge the sensor @ 3mp to today's standard size (physically) and that will eliminate all heat/noise issues and we can all enjoy DECENT quality photographs, thus eliminating the need to have a secondary camera.

I'd like a phone without a camera, TBH

 

[globality]

this whole megapixel-count race is idiotic. the higher the pixel count, the more noise the sensor produces in images. what the hell is the point of throwing more megapixels into a sensor when most people never need anything more than 8mp, and thats being VERY generous too;

how often do ANY of you print 8x10s? Rarely? I thought so. Now how often do any of you print anything LARGER than 8x10? Almost nevet? Good. Now that you absolutely dont need 8x10s all that much and definitely not anything bigger than tha especially from a PHONE camera, all of you will be happy to know that a 6mp camera will print an 8x10 JUST FINE at approximately 240dpi, which, past 240dpi, the human eye begins to have trouble seeing differences (at 300dpi and up, its nearly impossible to tell).

So while so many of you are crying for higher resolution, none of you (or us) seriously need it. We'd be doing JUST FINE with a 2-4mp camera sensor as even 2mp will print a 4x6 fairly well (3 is perfect for 4x6).

I say; bring down the resolution to 3 megapixels. Enlarge the sensor @ 3mp to today's standard size (physically) and that will eliminate all heat/noise issues and we can all enjoy DECENT quality photographs, thus eliminating the need to have a secondary camera.

Nowadays photos are not only used for prints. A lot of people like me like to view pictures on computer, ipad, digital frame etc. In such case there are differences especially when you wanna zoom in to certain details of a picture.

 

[nylonsteel]

re original article

i have no additional info on the possiblilities but the author makes some good deductions

we will see in the not too distant future

 

[theBB]

How many people here need an i5 processor, or even an i3? Few? I thought so. Now how many people here would need an i7? Almost no-one. Good.
Fast processors are not required for most people. They just suck up loads of electricity and spit out heat.

All well and nice, except higher megapixel cameras do not necessarily have better quality. Often it is the opposite. In your example though, i7 is a better CPU than i5, which is better than i3.

 

[cvaldes]

There are many criteria that can be used to judge a component.

The i7 is a better CPU than the i5 and i3 in terms of raw processing performance, however it trails in terms of cost (it's more expensive), size (it's bigger), power (it's uses more electricity), and heat (it's hotter).

So when does an i7 make more sense than an i3? When superior processing power outweighs the negatives in other criteria. For smaller, less expensive devices, the i3 is the better choice in many scenarios.

Price-performance evaluations are a part of everyday life, not just spec-ing out electronics components. When you fly, do you go first-class or coach? When you walk out the front door, what shoes will be on your feet, what watch (if any) will be on your wrist?

 

[wilsonlaidlaw]

Sony in iP5 or 6 - Maybe

Sony and Zeiss are known to be working on a 10MP module whose image quality will be in a different league to previous phone cameras. Maybe Apple in their search to "be the best by far" would like to be a customer for this module. However, I think it is more likely to be for the iPhone 6 than 5.

I quite agree with the poster who argues that the pixel race is absurd with point and shoot cameras now sometimes having 14 or more MP. Just remember it was not that long ago (about 5 years) that one of Nikon's top professional cameras had only 6MP. I bet the pictures from the 6 MP Nikon are in a different league from the 14 MP P & S cameras.

Like everything in life, you get what you pay for. A 10MP phone camera module, which might wholesale at $10, is never going to take the same quality photographs as the older of my digital Leicas, the M8, (also 10 MP), which cost quite a bit more in 2006 than $10.

 

[carlgo]

Don't suffer from pixel envy. Enjoy the little suckers. They are there for you to use. Don't need them all the time, but they are there and basically at no extra cost.

You can count on the fact that the new camera in the new iPhone will be better in every respect than the old one.

It isn't just marketing. If two mps were better than four, then Apple and the advertising agencies would have no problem telling you that. Reviewers would conclude that, pros would flock to old cameras with 2.4 mps...

But none of that is happening.

 

[wywern209]

Don't suffer from pixel envy. Enjoy the little suckers. They are there for you to use. Don't need them all the time, but they are there and basically at no extra cost.

You can count on the fact that the new camera in the new iPhone will be better in every respect than the old one.

It isn't just marketing. If two mps were better than four, then Apple and the advertising agencies would have no problem telling you that. Reviewers would conclude that, pros would flock to old cameras with 2.4 mps...

But none of that is happening.

2mp is better than 4 if the sensor is the kind found in small things like phones as such sensors become noise prone very very quickly so the lower the MP to a reasonable degree, the better.

 

[Tiggs]

Ouch, their stock dropped 30% on the news. Might be a good buy if its just a rumor.

 

[Dilbert]

I hope this rumours true, I think the cameras in Sony phones are definitely some of the best out there. The W800i I had years ago had a great little camera in it for outdoor shots.

Agree with previous posters, there's a lot more to it than mega-pixels, I shoot weddings for a living and now shoot with a couple of 5D MKII's that are 21 MP but not so many years ago I was shooting with 20D's and 30D's and the image quality isn't that different ...... the amount of space required to store the raw files is though!

 

[OmegaRace]

this whole megapixel-count race is idiotic. the higher the pixel count, the more noise the sensor produces in images.

That is true within the generation, but when you go to the next generation you see better silicon, which, when combined with higher pixel counts should provide roughly the same image quality as the previous generation sensor. Now, if only Sony etc were to improve the silicon and keep the pixel counts steady, then you could see image quality improving between generations.

----------

Sony and Zeiss

Sony has been making big improvements in their sensors lately, if you judge by their NEX cameras. They aren't known for having good lenses however and indeed photography geeks advise buying a manual zoom lens to use with a NEX. So maybe Zeiss is coming to the rescue... or maybe they are the company that's making the so-so NEX lenses.

 

[TMay]

mp equates to digital zoom

I'm fully in agreement with low noise proponents, but one of the advantages of higher megapixels in a camera module without optical zoom is that it would be capable of digital zoom (I'm advocating 2.5) with output that would still look very good on a HD monitor or television.

A 2.5x crop with a 13 mp 16:9 camera module would be feasible if not already available. Whether the current generation would have acceptable noise levels would be a concern.

I would be quite happy with an 8 mp camera module in the next iPhone which would still lend itself to a 2x crop and reasonable noise levels for both video and photos.

 

[accessoriesguy]

I haven't owned a phone in over a month, what am I doing here?