Sony's Dual Camera to See Inclusion in Devices From 'Major Smartphone Players'

[artfossil]

I really hope that Apple isn't planning to turn their most popular phone into a second class citizen just to prop up that phablet monstrosity.
As it is the 6 barely fits my pocket. If the regular size phone ends up missing the 7 series' marquee feature I will probably skip it.

As one who is pocket deprived I can attest that there are other ways to transport one's phone. I've learned not to let my wardrobe dictate my tech needs.

 

[CarlJ]

Still waiting to see an iPhone with one camera lens in each corner of the back of the phone, set up so that it uses any that are unobscured to composite a 3D picture.
[doublepost=1454539984][/doublepost]

As one who is pocket deprived I can attest that there are other ways to transport one's phone. I've learned not to let my wardrobe dictate my tech needs.

How's that Velcro implant on your forearm working out?

 

[Michaelgtrusa]

Bravo Sony. happy it's them.

 

[Manchester85]

Hey there Wall-e!

 

[SgtPepper12]

Same principle is applied to space telescopes, combining multiple telescopes spread over large distances results in a virtual telescope with a much, much larger effective aperture.

No, not the same principle at all. Telescopes (mostly radio telescopes) that operate in that way improve effective aperture by using interferometry, which is an extremely difficult thing to achieve even today and certainly not possible in a smartphone. The combination of the information of both sensors happens only digitally, by accounting for the parallax and averaging the images. You can potentially extract some additional details from the combination of these images (Short: You scale them up, align them as good as possible, average the images and then use a deconvolution filter) and get of course lower noise levels as the number of photons doubles, but it's nothing too dramatic really. It's nothing particularly clever like interferometry.

 

[macduke]

About the same number of people that were super pissed when only the 5.5" iPhone got image stabilisation?

Image stabilisation is almost as 'breakthrough' (enables two to three stops better low light performance for reasonably still subjects)

First of all, I know I was upset about it. But not greatly so. Other tech bloggers were also pretty upset. John Gruber pretty much eats out of Apple hand but he has been fairly vocal about it. But this dual camera system? Not even close! First of all it's a physical appearance difference, which regular users will take notice of. But we're also talking about a whole range of possibilities here. Just a few I can rattle off the top of my head as I've been following this closely over the past couple years:

• Significantly increased image resolution through offset detail merging/stitching
• Ability to have multiple focal lengths for optical zoom capability
• Ability to offset focus to merge images together to create a depth map using highly specialized algorithms that can have selective focus applied to blur out the background more like a professional lens with bokeh
• Ability to take full resolution photos with one camera while the other records full resolution video
• Possible 3D applications, depending on spatial implementation
• Possibility to change the focus of the image in post
• Possibility to combine image noise patterns to cancel out high ISO noise in darker conditions
• Potential for faster autofocus tracking by utilizing the spatial offset to make the depth map and better detect faces using three dimensions

To add to that, Gruber has said before on his show that he heard that the new camera system will bring "dSLR like" image quality. That doesn't sound like a minor difference in stabilization!

There's probably even more benefits than I could just think of! This could be the biggest iPhone camera upgrade ever—so to even consider relegating it to the phone that only has about 25% share of all iPhones is ridiculous. If it takes more money to get them two cameras, just charge more for the damn thing! Or if they really need to tweak their margins, only put the camera in the higher capacity models. But not including it at all is ridiculous.

You articulate your points well, so maybe you can help me understand. Feature parity doesn't exist in Macs. Basically, the more you pay, the more you get. Same with iPads. At the end of the day, the goal for Apple is to get you to spend as much as possible for their offerings. Outside of size, they need something else to entice customers to spend the extra dough on phone. The special features are that something else. I've seen some say that isn't fair. But when has fair been a component of selling products? I don't get it.

Mobile devices such as the iPhone are more personal and used in the hand instead of the lap or a desk, which are more of a "one size fits all" affair versus the hand. Can a 5ft human easily use both a 13" MacBook Pro and 15" MacBook Pro? Yes. Can a 5ft human easily use both a 4.7" iPhone and 5.5" iPhone? No, many can't easily or comfortably. Even I as a 5ft 10" male have difficulty with the Plus model and hate it because of how uncomfortable it is to use and store in a pocket. It's the reason Apple is coming out with a new 4" iPhone. I know many women who complain about this all the time and refuse to upgrade.

Here's the deal: The difference between big MacBooks and little MacBooks? Speed. The difference between big iPads and little iPads? Speed. Especially when you factor in that the next iPad Air in March is rumored to support Apple Pencil, have a smart connector, and had a delayed refresh. And the iPad Mini has almost always lagged behind so that's nothing new. iPads also aren't something that you have on you at all times like a phone. Tthe iPhone 6s and 6s Plus are effectively the same speed when you look at Geekbench results. The camera is consistently one of the most used apps on the iPhone when you look at mobile device surveys, and the iPhone often scores the best marks in the smartphone industry for camera image quality. To hold it back on the smaller, historically best-selling model—especially given Apple's own forecasted fall in iPhone sales—seems foolish to me. And even more so given how popular cameras are on smart phones. Why should a smaller person settle for an inferior camera (or inversely settle for a giant phone that doesn't fit in their pockets and they drop all the time because they can't reach their fingers across the display) while their larger friends with larger hands are snapping away with the Gruber-sourced rumor of "dSLR-like" quality photos with this revolutionary new camera system? Especially on a less popular model. This is how you get left behind when competitors copy it across all of their models.

I think there is a balance to be had between feature parity and holding back a viable piece of technology in order to keep feature parity.

One thing Apple hasn't been able to overcome are the laws of physics. The plus models are bigger and therefore has the volume to hold more tech than a non plus model. That's not marketing, that's just physics.

If there is a viable piece of technology that can be brought to market in the next iteration of the iPhone but one that can only fit in the larger model, wouldn't it be better to bring it to market on at least one model rather than leave it out completely?

The iPhone is now a mature product line and it can no longer be all things for all people. This would be like asking why Toyota fragments it's models by leaving features out on certain models.

You know what is marketing? Making an obscenely thin phone. It's only for marketing. Hardly anyone wants or needs an phone thinner than the 6s. It's about bragging. I sincerely doubt that the extra camera module will have as significant impact on battery life through reduced capacity due to interior volume versus Apple making the damn thing even thinner! The die shrink on the A10 alone should be enough to see a battery life increase, making a smaller battery completely viable. I and I imagine many others don't want a thinner phone that could have had a much better camera if Apple wasn't obsessed with making the iPhone thin enough that it can nearly cut me in the coming iteration.

Whew! This was a hell of a post, but a lot of multi-faceted points to respond to. Did anyone actually read this? I mean seriously this was long.

 

[GoodWheaties]

Ah yes the mythical DSLR-like quality. I would just like to know what the hang that is supposed to be. Don't get me wrong I totally want a kicking camera on new iPhones, but anything a small sensor can do, a bigger sensor will almost always do better. No phone out there can hang with a 2005 era 12Mpx Canon 5D even in good light, let alone poor light. Yes it is heavy, unhandy, and generally clunky, but let's not kid ourselves people.

Edit: Using this dual lens for an optical zoom though would be an amazing convenience.

 

[lchlch]

First of all, I know I was upset about it. But not greatly so. Other tech bloggers were also pretty upset. John Gruber pretty much eats out of Apple hand but he has been fairly vocal about it. But this dual camera system? Not even close! First of all it's a physical appearance difference, which regular users will take notice of. But we're also talking about a whole range of possibilities here. Just a few I can rattle off the top of my head as I've been following this closely over the past couple years:

• Significantly increased image resolution through offset detail merging/stitching
• Ability to have multiple focal lengths for optical zoom capability
• Ability to offset focus to merge images together to create a depth map using highly specialized algorithms that can have selective focus applied to blur out the background more like a professional lens with bokeh
• Ability to take full resolution photos with one camera while the other records full resolution video
• Possible 3D applications, depending on spatial implementation
• Possibility to change the focus of the image in post
• Possibility to combine image noise patterns to cancel out high ISO noise in darker conditions
• Potential for faster autofocus tracking by utilizing the spatial offset to make the depth map and better detect faces using three dimensions

To add to that, Gruber has said before on his show that he heard that the new camera system will bring "dSLR like" image quality. That doesn't sound like a minor difference in stabilization!

There's probably even more benefits than I could just think of! This could be the biggest iPhone camera upgrade ever—so to even consider relegating it to the phone that only has about 25% share of all iPhones is ridiculous. If it takes more money to get them two cameras, just charge more for the damn thing! Or if they really need to tweak their margins, only put the camera in the higher capacity models. But not including it at all is ridiculous.



Mobile devices such as the iPhone are more personal and used in the hand instead of the lap or a desk, which are more of a "one size fits all" affair versus the hand. Can a 5ft human easily use both a 13" MacBook Pro and 15" MacBook Pro? Yes. Can a 5ft human easily use both a 4.7" iPhone and 5.5" iPhone? No, many can't easily or comfortably. Even I as a 5ft 10" male have difficulty with the Plus model and hate it because of how uncomfortable it is to use and store in a pocket. It's the reason Apple is coming out with a new 4" iPhone. I know many women who complain about this all the time and refuse to upgrade.

Here's the deal: The difference between big MacBooks and little MacBooks? Speed. The difference between big iPads and little iPads? Speed. Especially when you factor in that the next iPad Air in March is rumored to support Apple Pencil, have a smart connector, and had a delayed refresh. And the iPad Mini has almost always lagged behind so that's nothing new. iPads also aren't something that you have on you at all times like a phone. Tthe iPhone 6s and 6s Plus are effectively the same speed when you look at Geekbench results. The camera is consistently one of the most used apps on the iPhone when you look at mobile device surveys, and the iPhone often scores the best marks in the smartphone industry for camera image quality. To hold it back on the smaller, historically best-selling model—especially given Apple's own forecasted fall in iPhone sales—seems foolish to me. And even more so given how popular cameras are on smart phones. Why should a smaller person settle for an inferior camera (or inversely settle for a giant phone that doesn't fit in their pockets and they drop all the time because they can't reach their fingers across the display) while their larger friends with larger hands are snapping away with the Gruber-sourced rumor of "dSLR-like" quality photos with this revolutionary new camera system? Especially on a less popular model. This is how you get left behind when competitors copy it across all of their models.



You know what is marketing? Making an obscenely thin phone. It's only for marketing. Hardly anyone wants or needs an phone thinner than the 6s. It's about bragging. I sincerely doubt that the extra camera module will have as significant impact on battery life through reduced capacity due to interior volume versus Apple making the damn thing even thinner! The die shrink on the A10 alone should be enough to see a battery life increase, making a smaller battery completely viable. I and I imagine many others don't want a thinner phone that could have had a much better camera if Apple wasn't obsessed with making the iPhone thin enough that it can nearly cut me in the coming iteration.

Whew! This was a hell of a post, but a lot of multi-faceted points to respond to. Did anyone actually read this? I mean seriously this was long.

The dual camera system requires more area of the phone, which is unrelated to thinness.

 

[Risco]

2-3x optical zoom, SLR level low light image performance.

3D pictures as well?

 

[RobertMartens]

The launch of the iPhone 7 is still multiple months away...

Yes, September is multiple months away. That is true. Feb, March, April, May, June, July, August, September. There are 6 months in between February and September.

 

[Aston441]

First of all, I know I was upset about it. But not greatly so. Other tech bloggers were also pretty upset. John Gruber pretty much eats out of Apple hand but he has been fairly vocal about it. But this dual camera system? Not even close! First of all it's a physical appearance difference, which regular users will take notice of. But we're also talking about a whole range of possibilities here. Just a few I can rattle off the top of my head as I've been following this closely over the past couple years:

• Significantly increased image resolution through offset detail merging/stitching
• Ability to have multiple focal lengths for optical zoom capability
• Ability to offset focus to merge images together to create a depth map using highly specialized algorithms that can have selective focus applied to blur out the background more like a professional lens with bokeh
• Ability to take full resolution photos with one camera while the other records full resolution video
• Possible 3D applications, depending on spatial implementation
• Possibility to change the focus of the image in post
• Possibility to combine image noise patterns to cancel out high ISO noise in darker conditions
• Potential for faster autofocus tracking by utilizing the spatial offset to make the depth map and better detect faces using three dimensions

To add to that, Gruber has said before on his show that he heard that the new camera system will bring "dSLR like" image quality. That doesn't sound like a minor difference in stabilization!

There's probably even more benefits than I could just think of! This could be the biggest iPhone camera upgrade ever—so to even consider relegating it to the phone that only has about 25% share of all iPhones is ridiculous. If it takes more money to get them two cameras, just charge more for the damn thing! Or if they really need to tweak their margins, only put the camera in the higher capacity models. But not including it at all is ridiculous.



Mobile devices such as the iPhone are more personal and used in the hand instead of the lap or a desk, which are more of a "one size fits all" affair versus the hand. Can a 5ft human easily use both a 13" MacBook Pro and 15" MacBook Pro? Yes. Can a 5ft human easily use both a 4.7" iPhone and 5.5" iPhone? No, many can't easily or comfortably. Even I as a 5ft 10" male have difficulty with the Plus model and hate it because of how uncomfortable it is to use and store in a pocket. It's the reason Apple is coming out with a new 4" iPhone. I know many women who complain about this all the time and refuse to upgrade.

Here's the deal: The difference between big MacBooks and little MacBooks? Speed. The difference between big iPads and little iPads? Speed. Especially when you factor in that the next iPad Air in March is rumored to support Apple Pencil, have a smart connector, and had a delayed refresh. And the iPad Mini has almost always lagged behind so that's nothing new. iPads also aren't something that you have on you at all times like a phone. Tthe iPhone 6s and 6s Plus are effectively the same speed when you look at Geekbench results. The camera is consistently one of the most used apps on the iPhone when you look at mobile device surveys, and the iPhone often scores the best marks in the smartphone industry for camera image quality. To hold it back on the smaller, historically best-selling model—especially given Apple's own forecasted fall in iPhone sales—seems foolish to me. And even more so given how popular cameras are on smart phones. Why should a smaller person settle for an inferior camera (or inversely settle for a giant phone that doesn't fit in their pockets and they drop all the time because they can't reach their fingers across the display) while their larger friends with larger hands are snapping away with the Gruber-sourced rumor of "dSLR-like" quality photos with this revolutionary new camera system? Especially on a less popular model. This is how you get left behind when competitors copy it across all of their models.



You know what is marketing? Making an obscenely thin phone. It's only for marketing. Hardly anyone wants or needs an phone thinner than the 6s. It's about bragging. I sincerely doubt that the extra camera module will have as significant impact on battery life through reduced capacity due to interior volume versus Apple making the damn thing even thinner! The die shrink on the A10 alone should be enough to see a battery life increase, making a smaller battery completely viable. I and I imagine many others don't want a thinner phone that could have had a much better camera if Apple wasn't obsessed with making the iPhone thin enough that it can nearly cut me in the coming iteration.

Whew! This was a hell of a post, but a lot of multi-faceted points to respond to. Did anyone actually read this? I mean seriously this was long.

let it all out man, let it all out

 

[Kevin2055]

It will be really stupid if it is only used in iPhone 7 plus !

 

[Yelmurc]

Apple always likes to screw me I got the 6s and my favorite part of it is the camera, if this camera is a significant improvement I may upgrade early. My poor bank account.

 

[gavroche]

I hope this rumour is true, I love the camera on my iPhone and getting DSLR quality photos would be worth the price alone!

I used to love the images from the phone more. Since upgrading from 6 Plus to the 6S (not plus)... the images seem worse. I would guess the lack of optical image stabilization could be to blame, if its not just my imagination. I really hope that the 7 has optical stabilization or both models.

 

[manu chao]

First of all, I know I was upset about it. But not greatly so. Other tech bloggers were also pretty upset. John Gruber pretty much eats out of Apple hand but he has been fairly vocal about it. But this dual camera system? Not even close! First of all it's a physical appearance difference, which regular users will take notice of. But we're also talking about a whole range of possibilities here. Just a few I can rattle off the top of my head as I've been following this closely over the past couple years:

• Significantly increased image resolution through offset detail merging/stitching
• Ability to have multiple focal lengths for optical zoom capability
• Ability to offset focus to merge images together to create a depth map using highly specialized algorithms that can have selective focus applied to blur out the background more like a professional lens with bokeh
• Ability to take full resolution photos with one camera while the other records full resolution video
• Possible 3D applications, depending on spatial implementation
• Possibility to change the focus of the image in post
• Possibility to combine image noise patterns to cancel out high ISO noise in darker conditions
• Potential for faster autofocus tracking by utilizing the spatial offset to make the depth map and better detect faces using three dimensions

Having different focal lengths pretty much excludes most the other benefits because both cameras won't cover the same frame. Modern sensors are already pretty good at eliminating pattern noise (in particular Sony sensors which is what the iPhone is currently using), there isn't a lot that can be gained there. The iPhone 6s already can record full resolution images during video with the limitation that they are cropped to the 16:9 aspect ratio, it doesn't take a big step to go to the capture of the full sensor.

Increased resolution is an interesting application but I think of limited use since the iPhone camera is already noise-limited in resolution when viewed at 100%, even at base ISO. And you cannot have both noise reduction and resolution increase at the same time. This might get useful if it is combined with taking multiple images in quick succession and merge them. Changing the focus in post will by definition be limited to choosing between two focus positions. This can occasionally be useful but overall will be of limited use. Ditto for 3D applications, I don't think that is something that people will use much. I also think the PD AF in the current 6s is already fast enough for most people, same for face detection. Sure, an improvement in both can be useful in some cases but again, overall of rather limited additional use.

The ability to blur the background in a manner that approaches what fast lenses on DSLRs can do might be the most visible feature if it works well.

Overall, these improvements are the logical next steps and together they might amount to the most significant camera improvements (though other things like gaining AF were pretty significant as well). But nothing what I would consider revolutionary. Gaining three stops of low light shooting capabilities (a wild guess for the effectiveness of the IS in the 6(s) Plus) is something I would consider as a much more noticeable improvements (in the situations where it applies, ie, low enough light levels that shooting at base ISO would result in blur by camera shake and a reasonably still subject).

To add to that, Gruber has said before on his show that he heard that the new camera system will bring "dSLR like" image quality. That doesn't sound like a minor difference in stabilization!

And you know full well that this 'DSLR like image quality' is a marketing slogan that is physically impossible to achieve by a dual, 1/3" camera setup.

 

[CarlJ]

Apple always likes to screw me I got the 6s and my favorite part of it is the camera, if this camera is a significant improvement I may upgrade early. My poor bank account.

You know, I have some inside sources, and it turns out Tim Cook actually does have a personal vendetta against you. He's frequently heard wandering the halls at Apple muttering your name under his breath.

 

[AFDoc]

I really hope that Apple isn't planning to turn their most popular phone into a second class citizen just to prop up that phablet monstrosity.
As it is the 6 barely fits my pocket. If the regular size phone ends up missing the 7 series' marquee feature I will probably skip it.

Took longer than I thought for one of these posts to pop up......Thought there'd be a lot more in here whining about this. You folks like to bring this point up every time they have room to put things in a bigger phone and not the smaller "most popular" phone as you say. I'd love to be able to seat my entire family in a Porsche 911 but it's not going to happen.... I have to spend more money on a bigger model if I want to do that. Lots of things come in different models that have exclusive features do you complain about those items as well?

I love the fact they put "better" options in the bigger phone if only to see these types of posts.
[doublepost=1454551416][/doublepost]

TL;DR: It would be a shame for Apple, especially in their current negative forecast climate, to release such a breakthrough new camera system on only their more niche, phablet-sized device. Makes me worried, but I'll wait and see what really pans out.

What's so hard to understand.... there is more space in the bigger phone therefor easier to put in bigger, possibly better components, than in a smaller phone.

So sorry the laws of physics has you sad but it's really not a conspiracy by apple to force you folks to buy bigger phones.
[doublepost=1454551520][/doublepost]

Unfortunately I think that the way its going. They already began the trend with the 6+ which featured Optical Image Stabilization, which the regular 6 did not.

I'm with you - Personally I think its BS.

LoL another one.
[doublepost=1454551581][/doublepost]

I have to agree with this, I don't see why the 7+ should get features which users of the 7 would also want. I could understand if Apple wanted to differentiate between the iPhone 5se and the iPhone 7 but not when both models are supposed to be the top of the line. For me the argument between buying a 7 and a 7+ is screen real estate and a bigger battery, which is the reason for the extra $100.

If Apple wanted to create a cheap 7 and more expensive 7 with extra features then fine you have a choice but if you don't want to larger phone for aesthetic reasons then you're left with no way to get things like OIS and dual camera.

Ummmm maybe there isn't room in the smaller phone?
[doublepost=1454551624][/doublepost]

The Plus model is also a bit thicker which allows for more depth for the camera module (the difference is small but relative to the size of the camera module it is significant enough).

Give this guy a cigar!!

 

[Virinprew]

Took longer than I thought for one of these posts to pop up......Thought there'd be a lot more in here whining about this. You folks like to bring this point up every time they have room to put things in a bigger phone and not the smaller "most popular" phone as you say. I'd love to be able to seat my entire family in a Porsche 911 but it's not going to happen.... I have to spend more money on a bigger model if I want to do that. Lots of things come in different models that have exclusive features do you complain about those items as well?

I love the fact they put "better" options in the bigger phone if only to see these types of posts.
[doublepost=1454551416][/doublepost]
What's so hard to understand.... there is more space in the bigger phone therefor easier to put in bigger, possibly better components, than in a smaller phone.

So sorry the laws of physics has you sad but it's really not a conspiracy by apple to force you folks to buy bigger phones.
[doublepost=1454551520][/doublepost]
LoL another one.
[doublepost=1454551581][/doublepost]
Ummmm maybe there isn't room in the smaller phone?
[doublepost=1454551624][/doublepost]
Give this guy a cigar!!

Not enough room?
Here is an idea. Make the phone a little thicker. Increase the thickness of the battery. Decrease the width of the battery. Volume = surface area x thickness. So it gets the same battery life. Simple math. Now the phone has more x-y space for the camera module and so it can have OIS and dual sensors. And frankly more z space as well. So the camera won't have to stick out.
Anyone with me?

 

[hiddenmarkov]

Better low light images, optical zoom, more megapixels , etc.

Supposedly. No specs on this really. Or RL shooting.

Also need to factor in....


DSLR's high iso (low light) performance comes from on body electronics filtering. Same with mirrorless. hardware/ embedded software processes before the file is written. Its this hardware that adds bulk to the dslr bodies. Even mirrorless as well (they just remove mirror box assembly and in body autofocus motors). Not seeing apple add bulk for better iso filtering hardware. Its not lens based.

At some point even my Nikkor 50mm 1.2 Ai-s (yes I like the old school Nikon manual focus glass for those who know of this lens or Nikon's naming schemes) can only suck in so much light wide open before I start moving up the iso scale.



Megapixels....don't matter for normal applications. Even lower MP camera's are fine for most uses. wallets, 8x6" even...well covered by even 12 MP and some levels lower even. Larger megapixel enters the picture when shooting posters and up in size by and large.

Want a really cheap way to get even your current gear (camera or even phone) looking great buy this book. Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson. Read, understand and practice. This tome of knowledge is quite possibly one of the few things you will get most shooters to agree on as the one thing all must do. It will at least help show what your camera does when it does its thing. even if an auto mode shooter (what phones do as well) information can be gleaned from this.

Shooters can argue days on end about bodies, glass, software, technique, etc....this book is one thing we don't argue over lol.. A mere $16 USD and reading/prac ap time will show vast improvements not needing to buy 1 piece of gear over what you have.

Oh and lose the selfie sticks/ arm stretched out odd handholds. good shooting starts with good camera holding. Cameras kind of like rifles. Good control, steady firm hold on it, even ye old fire off a shot on complete exhale...good things happen a lot more often.

Not in 100% control of the stick or camera at strange holding angles, low light, blur should not be a surprise. You will get this blur on even good dslr setups.

 

[yngrshr]

I really hope that Apple isn't planning to turn their most popular phone into a second class citizen just to prop up that phablet monstrosity.
As it is the 6 barely fits my pocket. If the regular size phone ends up missing the 7 series' marquee feature I will probably skip it.

What jeans are you wearing that a 6 doesn't fit? I wear N&F weird guy jeans (so fairly trim fit) and the 6+ fits in my pocket. The 6 easily fits.

 

[uhaas]

Limiting it to the plus is kind of discriminatory against women. My wife takes lots of beautiful photos and would greatly benefit from something like this, but her hands will never work with such a large phone.

 

[ipedro]

I really hope that Apple isn't planning to turn their most popular phone into a second class citizen just to prop up that phablet monstrosity.
As it is the 6 barely fits my pocket. If the regular size phone ends up missing the 7 series' marquee feature I will probably skip it.

You must have really small pockets. I carry my iPhone 6 Plus without a case (as it was intended) and it slips nicely into my jeans. It's when people put huge cases on the iPhone that it gets unwieldy. The slim iPhone 6 Plus fits much more discretely in my pockets than the smaller but thicker iPhone 3G or iphone 4 ever did.

 

[hiddenmarkov]

Limiting it to the plus is kind of discriminatory against women. My wife takes lots of beautiful photos and would greatly benefit from something like this, but her hands will never work with such a large phone.

Size needed for the electronics for this. If offering half of what its rumored to this takes up some space. The larger series phones gives some space to work with.


If partnered with sony best you can hope for is their input about how they got electronics smaller for their say mirrorless systems. That's if sony being generous. I don't see that. they won't want to cut into their stuff. xperia phones and/or their smart phone external lens line thing they have going on. Apple will be jsut another client they support. they will not being opening the information vaults more than they have to.

And based on their "snap on" external lens setup it seems their current secret answer to this issue is put the "good" lens' outside the phone to give that all in one package deal. Good being subjective. best gear for the job can often be whatever gear is on you at the time as the saying goes.



.

 

[Mr. Dee]

I would wait for the iPhone 7s Plus. You know the bugs will be worked out by then.
[doublepost=1454562476][/doublepost]

I can see this feature getting pushed back to the iPhone 7S
[doublepost=1454530574][/doublepost]

Steve Jobs would have a dim view of the direction of the iPhone IMO; he despised fragmentation

iPod Classic, iPod Mini, iPod Shuffle
iMac, PowerBook, PowerMac
MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, iMac, Mac Pro

Not to mention the different SKUs/configurations. All these happened under Steve Jobs.

 

[Tech198]

Only added thing i can see if Apple can really use their software to make images better as they are now currently... or use one lens for the main camera and another lens for control light or something different.