Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
67,645
38,074


It's been a week since Apple released the iPhone 16e, its new low-cost (but not as low-cost as before) smartphone. The iPhone 16e has many of the same capabilities as Apple's flagship iPhones, but it is lacking in some key areas to save money. So, is it worth the savings? MacRumors videographer Dan Barbera spent a week with the iPhone 16e as his main iPhone to see what he could live without.


At $599, the iPhone 16e is quite a bit more expensive than the iPhone SE 3 that it replaces, but it offers a current-generation A18 chip, an all-display design with Face ID instead of Touch ID and OLED technology, a 48-megapixel single-lens rear camera, long battery life, USB-C, and safety features like Emergency SOS via Satellite and Crash Detection, all of which were not in the iPhone SE.

Most iPhones have had two or more cameras for several years now, so the single-lens camera on the iPhone 16e is surprisingly subtle and makes for a clean, minimal design where the camera isn't the dominant feature drawing the eye. There's also less weight with the slimmed down camera setup, so it doesn't feel heavy in the hand. You can only get the iPhone 16e in black or white, but they're classic colors.

Since Apple slimmed down the bezels with the flagship iPhone 16 lineup, the bezels on the iPhone 16e are more noticeable, but that's something that will mostly only come up when it's right next to an iPhone 16. Apple modeled the iPhone 16e after the iPhone 14, so it's also got a notch instead of a Dynamic Island. The OLED display doesn't support 120Hz, and it's not quite as bright as what you get with the iPhone 16. You're also not going to get the always-on display, and if that's something you're used to, you might miss it. But if you've never had that functionality, you won't know the difference.

There's no Camera Control button, but you do get an Action Button and support for all of the Apple Intelligence features, including Visual Intelligence. It's just activated from the Control Center or Action Button instead of Camera Control. The Camera Control button isn't something most people will likely care about. The A18 chip is basically the same chip you get in the iPhone 16, but with one less GPU core, a change that's not super noticeable.

Apple added a USB-C port for charging, but one major absence is support for MagSafe and Qi2. There is no magnetic ring in the iPhone 16e, so it does not work with all of the magnetic accessories that have come out for iPhones over the last several years. It's also limited to 7.5W charging speeds instead of the 15W you can get with MagSafe or Qi2, and that's a big downside.

If you've never had MagSafe, you won't mind charging primarily with a cable, but if you have MagSafe accessories already, it's going to be a downgrade.

The 48-megapixel camera is about the same as the camera in the iPhone 16, and it can take 1x and 2x photos. You don't get a Telephoto lens with 5x zoom or an Ultra Wide lens with 0.5x zoom and macro photo capabilities, but those are more niche camera features that are more nice to have than essential.

The iPhone 16e has one unique component, and that's Apple's C1 modem. So far, it seems to be performing about the same as Qualcomm's modem chip, though there is no support for the faster mmWave 5G networks. We didn't see any notable speed difference between the iPhone 16 and iPhone 16e when testing the devices on Verizon's network, but the C1 modem actually seemed to be more reliable in some instances where signal was low.

Did you get an iPhone 16e? Let us know what you think of it in the comments.

Article Link: Review: A Week With iPhone 16e
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jumpthesnark
Question: If you disable Apple Intelligence, does the Action Button do anything? The article makes it sound like it’s just tied to AI.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: iGüey
Personally, I’d have added MagSafe and kept the same price OR no MagSafe but price it at $549 or $579.
Yes - it makes no reasonable sense not to have Magsafe.

Apple's excuse was Magsafe is "most people in the iPhone 16e's target audience exclusively charge their phones by plugging them into a charging cable"...Well no crap, if don't you offer them Magsafe charging, they can't use it. I know Magsafe isn't the only way to charge wirelessly, but honestly it should be.
 
Good phone at a good price. You buy it, you'll be able to use it for half a decade at least, and likely long beyond that because of Apple iOS support. Way better value than some of the 'droid phones that are abandoned within a year of launch.

And really, how many people out there know how to jailbreak a phone to update one of these 'droid cheapies to upgrade to the latest version of clean Android? You think the average consumer knows how to configure a boot loader? How about selecting a ROM that's not a crypto-stealing mod clone? This is why the iPhone 16e exists, in my opinion.
 
I upgraded my iPhone SE 2nd generation to the 16e when the latter came out. I love having Face ID instead of the somewhat unreliable Touch ID, but I do miss the Home button. I also wish MagSafe had been included, but overall using the 16e has been a nice experience.
 
Good phone at a good price. You buy it, you'll be able to use it for half a decade at least, and likely long beyond that because of Apple iOS support. Way better value than some of the 'droid phones that are abandoned within a year of launch.

And really, how many people out there know how to jailbreak a phone to update one of these 'droid cheapies to upgrade to the latest version of clean Android? You think the average consumer knows how to configure a boot loader? How about selecting a ROM that's not a crypto-stealing mod clone? This is why the iPhone 16e exists, in my opinion.

I love hearing the 5 year old propaganda about Android when I visit the forums here. In reality, a phone like the Samsung A16 5G - which costs $200 unlocked - will receive 6 years of software updates. Next?
 
My 16e comes on Monday. It’ll be the upgrade from my 13 pro max. I was honestly looking for something a bit cleaner. Massive camera bumps and required cases have long bothered me. I do use a wireless charging stand but it is only qi1 itself so this worked out fine. I will be getting a wallet case for it and while I don’t need it the case adds the magnets back in for mag safe if I ever use it.

The upgraded screen and Face ID are pretty much the upgrades I needed so it felt right to me!
 
After comparing it with the 16pro, decided to go with the 16pro. There are just too many gotchas with this phone. If I'm going to upgrade, it's not enough that there are missing modern features are something I don't have and therefore I don't know what I'm missing. Among things not mentioned is that it's fricking USB2 speed connection. Also I need 256GB which is what my old iPhone has so that it means it is $699 for this phone not $599.
 
whats so good about magsafe ? It still charges wirelessly. I've had magsafe on my last 2 phones. never used it.

The magnets keep the charging coils in perfect alignment so charging is faster and more reliable and efficient. Plus you can easily attach your phone to car mounts, wallets, battery banks, etc., using the magnets. It's very useful once you embrace it.

You can easily retrofit the magnets onto the iPhone 16e using a case, so really all you miss is the faster charging speeds that Magsafe/Qi2 offers.
 
Yes - it makes no reasonable sense not to have Magsafe.

Apple's excuse was Magsafe is "most people in the iPhone 16e's target audience exclusively charge their phones by plugging them into a charging cable"...Well no crap, if don't you offer them Magsafe charging, they can't use it. I know Magsafe isn't the only way to charge wirelessly, but honestly it should be.
No, I think what they mean is that cost conscious customers aren't likely to pay extra to buy MagSafe/wireless chargers. I'm like that -- I currently have a 15 Pro Max, which I got for a nice price used when the 16 family of iPhones came out, but haven't bothered to get a MagSafe charger for it, and am charging it by plugging it in to USB C. I was planning to use the same cable to charge my AirPods, but I found they can be charged with the Apple watch charger.

Is wireless charging more convenient? It's nicer, but the charging pad takes up space on my nightstand, whereas the usb cable takes up practically no space. So I'm not bothering to spend time and money buying a MagSafe charger -- and the target audience for the 16E are mostly like this.
 
Yes - it makes no reasonable sense not to have Magsafe.

Apple's excuse was Magsafe is "most people in the iPhone 16e's target audience exclusively charge their phones by plugging them into a charging cable"...Well no crap, if don't you offer them Magsafe charging, they can't use it. I know Magsafe isn't the only way to charge wirelessly, but honestly it should be.
Were you planning to buy an iPhone 16e? If so, how much more would you be willing to pay for MagSafe charging? If you say it should be included for the same price, your response will be discarded as being unrealistic.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.