iPhone 11 Pro The ultra-wide camera in the iPhone 11 models is fixed-focus, doesn't support Raw capture

[vngannxx]

Via DPreview

The ultra-wide camera in the iPhone 11 models is fixed-focus, doesn't support Raw capture

Halide developer Ben Sandofsky has discovered the ultra-wide camera on the iPhone 11 models is fixed-focus and doesn't yet support Raw capture.

www.dpreview.com

 

[moderniste]

I wonder if they're right about distortion being the reason. Either way, I'd be curious to see what the raw images really look like.

 

[mi7chy]

Ultra-wide angle camera distortion correction has already been achieved on phones with computational photography.

https://www.dpreview.com/news/05132...-face-distortion-method-for-wide-angle-lenses

 

[unchecked]

Via DPreview

The ultra-wide camera in the iPhone 11 models is fixed-focus, doesn't support Raw capture

Halide developer Ben Sandofsky has discovered the ultra-wide camera on the iPhone 11 models is fixed-focus and doesn't yet support Raw capture.

www.dpreview.com

That would explain a lot. I thought maybe ios13 is broken and doesn’t focus and that’s why the images look softer than the other two lenses.

 

[Toonartist]

The thing is, even on a full frame camera (large sensor) you can set focus once and forget about it (10mm lens). You adjust the focus once and set the aperture so you get excellent front to back sharpness and everything from 2 feet to infinity is in focus.

With a very small sensor, it is very hard to not have everything in focus even on a standard 35-40mm lens. It took considerable effort by Apple to add shallow Depth of Field with the portrait lens. Most of which is done computationally. What will alter that is the minimum focus distance. It may have a near/far option in terms of focusing.

As for distortion and no raw. Ultra wide angle lenses by their very nature are very hard to design without distortion and even when you have a very good lens (£2k plus) which has excellent rectilinear control, it is also very easy for the user to add distortion by moving away from the horizontal / vertical axis.

Ultrawide angle lenses will also have larger bulging front elements that basically correct the distortion and fixed hood to protect the lens and prevent glare. A rectilinear lens is not going to be possible or probably wanted (it will make the phone a lot thicker) and would add £1k's to the cost of the phone. So, for the convenience of having a UWA lens in a phone you have to accept lens distortion and the camera will use a lens profile to correct it... as is the case for a lot of UWA lenses £1k or less.

So, in this case Raw files will not be available as they would not look great at all and people would complain about the quality without understanding the physics. Quality vs Convenience.

 

[delta0]

I’ve tested ultra wide lens and can confirm it does not change focus from a near to far object. Both stay in focus because the lens aperture is smaller (f/2.4) vs the wide lens which has larger aperture (f/1.8).

 

[unchecked]

The thing is, even on a full frame camera (large sensor) you can set focus once and forget about it (10mm lens). You adjust the focus once and set the aperture so you get excellent front to back sharpness and everything from 2 feet to infinity is in focus.

With a very small sensor, it is very hard to not have everything in focus even on a standard 35-40mm lens. It took considerable effort by Apple to add shallow Depth of Field with the portrait lens. Most of which is done computationally. What will alter that is the minimum focus distance. It may have a near/far option in terms of focusing.

As for distortion and no raw. Ultra wide angle lenses by their very nature are very hard to design without distortion and even when you have a very good lens (£2k plus) which has excellent rectilinear control, it is also very easy for the user to add distortion by moving away from the horizontal / vertical axis.

Ultrawide angle lenses will also have larger bulging front elements that basically correct the distortion and fixed hood to protect the lens and prevent glare. A rectilinear lens is not going to be possible or probably wanted (it will make the phone a lot thicker) and would add £1k's to the cost of the phone. So, for the convenience of having a UWA lens in a phone you have to accept lens distortion and the camera will use a lens profile to correct it... as is the case for a lot of UWA lenses £1k or less.

So, in this case Raw files will not be available as they would not look great at all and people would complain about the quality without understanding the physics. Quality vs Convenience.

Yes but the out of focus areas are apparent when things aren't at infinity. Say in this example the shack is out of focus with the one taken with the normal 26mm lens as a reference. You can see it's terribly soft even without pixel peeping.

 

[Toonartist]

Certainly can. It doesn't look like "movement" out of focus either.

As I mentioned earlier, to accommodate closeup focus / distance it could be a simple toggle that flicks between them. The manual focus throw on a FF lens would only be small so my gut feeling is that if something had been in the extreme closeup in this instance it would have been in focus.

Distance to subject is one of the tools used to gain out of focus areas for separation from subject and background. My feeling is their coding isn't selecting the right option... for instance, the gravel nearest the lens is more in focus compared to objects in the distance.

Edit. Forgot to ask, is it doing that in all UWA or just one or two?!? If it's all then there maybe an issue with the lens on your phone!

 

[Toonartist]

I’ve tested ultra wide lens and can confirm it does not change focus from a near to far object. Both stay in focus because the lens aperture is smaller (f/2.4) vs the wide lens which has larger aperture (f/1.8).

Makes sense. f/2.4 on that size sensor would render everything I'd have thought.

 

[Coffee_Time]

The thing is, even on a full frame camera (large sensor) you can set focus once and forget about it (10mm lens). You adjust the focus once and set the aperture so you get excellent front to back sharpness and everything from 2 feet to infinity is in focus.

With a very small sensor, it is very hard to not have everything in focus even on a standard 35-40mm lens. It took considerable effort by Apple to add shallow Depth of Field with the portrait lens. Most of which is done computationally. What will alter that is the minimum focus distance. It may have a near/far option in terms of focusing.

As for distortion and no raw. Ultra wide angle lenses by their very nature are very hard to design without distortion and even when you have a very good lens (£2k plus) which has excellent rectilinear control, it is also very easy for the user to add distortion by moving away from the horizontal / vertical axis.

Ultrawide angle lenses will also have larger bulging front elements that basically correct the distortion and fixed hood to protect the lens and prevent glare. A rectilinear lens is not going to be possible or probably wanted (it will make the phone a lot thicker) and would add £1k's to the cost of the phone. So, for the convenience of having a UWA lens in a phone you have to accept lens distortion and the camera will use a lens profile to correct it... as is the case for a lot of UWA lenses £1k or less.

So, in this case Raw files will not be available as they would not look great at all and people would complain about the quality without understanding the physics. Quality vs Convenience.

I don't agree. Here is an ultra wide raw. It is possible to have it. Maybe with the new iOs.

20190924_130817

MediaFire is a simple to use free service that lets you put all your photos, documents, music, and video in a single place so you can access them anywhere and share them everywhere.

www.mediafire.com

 

[Toonartist]

I don't agree. Here is an ultra wide raw. It is possible to have it. Maybe with the new iOs.

20190924_130817

MediaFire is a simple to use free service that lets you put all your photos, documents, music, and video in a single place so you can access them anywhere and share them everywhere.

www.mediafire.com

I'm sorry but I'm not opening/downloading anything from someone online that I have no way of verifying who they are and what it is. Nothing personal, I just wouldn't risk my work desktop.

The dng file, what camera is it from? the iPhone 11 Pro? I thought the discussion was that no raws were available?!?

Edit. Also, what were you not agreeing with. Just curious.

 

[unchecked]

The weird thing is in ample light the focus holds up but when it gets darker it completely falls apart. Not like high ISO falling apart, but it just looks out of focus. By right it should still be sharp albeit grainy, but still sharp.

That kinda leads me to believe it’s not hardware but something in the camera’s algorithm is screwing it up and overaggressively applying a blur/denoise and its on the camera level because it’s the same with Halide and the default camera app. Halide doesn’t take raw yet and pictures taken with the 0.5x in the app is still in HEIC.

 

[AppleB]

This Deep Fusion deal that’s coming in a future update supposedly later this fall. Will that affect UW photos?

 

[mi7chy]

This Deep Fusion deal that’s coming in a future update supposedly later this fall. Will that affect UW photos?

Perhaps if it's an artifact of wide angle distortion correction that dedicated image processor can improve upon.

Here's a good read to understand distortion correction capabilities on mobile phone with comparison images.

https://people.csail.mit.edu/yichangshih/wide_angle_portrait/

https://people.csail.mit.edu/yichangshih/wide_angle_portrait/webpage/

 

[delta0]

The weird thing is in ample light the focus holds up but when it gets darker it completely falls apart. Not like high ISO falling apart, but it just looks out of focus. By right it should still be sharp albeit grainy, but still sharp.

That kinda leads me to believe it’s not hardware but something in the camera’s algorithm is screwing it up and overaggressively applying a blur/denoise and its on the camera level because it’s the same with Halide and the default camera app. Halide doesn’t take raw yet and pictures taken with the 0.5x in the app is still in HEIC.

I had a feeling that would be the case. A lot of issues with sharpness are caused by low light and therefore a longer shutter speed due to the smaller aperture. With very good light it will be sharp with the ultra wide. Deep fusion may solve all these issues.

 

[Toonartist]

The weird thing is in ample light the focus holds up but when it gets darker it completely falls apart. Not like high ISO falling apart, but it just looks out of focus. By right it should still be sharp albeit grainy, but still sharp.

That kinda leads me to believe it’s not hardware but something in the camera’s algorithm is screwing it up and overaggressively applying a blur/denoise and its on the camera level because it’s the same with Halide and the default camera app. Halide doesn’t take raw yet and pictures taken with the 0.5x in the app is still in HEIC.

The camera will use on sensor contrast to get things in focus, looks for sharper lines to determine where the focus should be... if it's not fixed. So, as it gets darker the level of contrast will also drop so the current algorithm may be struggling to find what it should focusing on. Probably needs reworking. The fact that it works in good light would suggest, as you mentioned, that it isn't hardware.

Edit. just looking again at those last images. It could also be increase noise reduction on a high iso image that is turning it into a soft mushiness?!?