or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Source: Apple drastically reduces orders for iPhone 4 camera flash
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Source: Apple drastically reduces orders for iPhone 4 camera flash

post #1 of 28
Thread Starter 
Apple's next-generation iPhone could feature a new LED camera flash module from a different manufacturer, a person familiar with the company's supply chain has told AppleInsider.

Apple is said to have "greatly reduced" orders of Philips LED flash components in the last one to two months. This person, who has provided accurate information on Apple's iPhone in the past, said the change "may" be a sign that Philips LED flash will not be used in the upcoming fifth-generation iPhone.

Rumors among Apple suppliers have led to claims that the new supplier of LED flash for the so-called "iPhone 5" will be a firm based in Taiwan. However, that bit of information was characterized as "highly unconfirmed."

LED flash first appeared in last year's iPhone 4. Six months before the device was unveiled AppleInsider revealed that Apple was shopping for LED camera flash components, and that Philips' Lumileds Lighting sector was the front-runner.

In May, an alleged iPhone 5 case from a third-party overseas accessory maker showed the LED camera flash moved to the right on the rear side of the device. Separating the camera lens and flash can result in improved picture quality with reduced red-eye effect.

In addition, a camera component claimed to be for the anticipated iPhone 5 also revealed in May showed the lens without an attached LED flash. That's different from the iPhone 4, in which the camera lens and flash are part of the same component.



Numerous reports have indicated that Apple's next-generation iPhone will sport an 8-megapixel camera, improving on the 5-megapixel shooter found in the current iPhone 4. One recent report claimed that Apple would turn to OmniVision for 90 percent of the 8-megapixel camera sensors in the fifth-generation iPhone.

Apple's deals with component suppliers have come later than usual this year, as the company is operating on a new, later timeframe to launch its next iPhone. Some reports have suggested the next iPhone may not be available until late September, or about three months after the iPhone has gone on sale in the U.S. in years past.
post #2 of 28
I just hope to goodness Apple don't get embroiled in a megapixel war with Android manufacturers in the coming years. 8MP is plenty for this calibre of optics. I'd even say 5 was. I'm glad Steve Jobs is a photographer himself and probably knows this.
post #3 of 28
Quote:
This person said the change "may" be a sign that Philips' LED flash will not be used in the upcoming fifth-generation iPhone.

And yet, Philips' flash still provides better performance than Adobe's...
post #4 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonamac View Post

I just hope to goodness Apple don't get embroiled in a megapixel war with Android manufacturers in the coming years. 8MP is plenty for this calibre of optics. I'd even say 5 was. I'm glad Steve Jobs is a photographer himself and probably knows this.

He does know. Have you never watched the keynote where he was talking about megapixels?
post #5 of 28
I reckon that the fact that apple is finally allowing the volume up button to take pictures gives the rumor of a seperate flash on the opposite site some credit.

It will allow people to hold the iPhone on it's frame and therefore away from both the camera and flash. I imagine quite a few people covering the flash otherwise.

What do you guys think?
post #6 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonamac View Post

I just hope to goodness Apple don't get embroiled in a megapixel war with Android manufacturers in the coming years. 8MP is plenty for this calibre of optics. I'd even say 5 was. I'm glad Steve Jobs is a photographer himself and probably knows this.

And yet how the iPad 2 camera was acceptable by Apple standard remains a mystery to me. I don't mind the low pixel count, but my 5 yr old 2MP Sony Ericsson phone took much better pics than the latest gadget from Apple.
post #7 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCE10 View Post

And yet how the iPad 2 camera was acceptable by Apple standard remains a mystery to me. I don't mind the low pixel count, but my 5 yr old 2MP Sony Ericsson phone took much better pics than the latest gadget from Apple.

I had a K800i too that had a 3.2mp camera, it was really impressive, especially as it was about 5 years ago. However, it was nearly three times the depth of the iPad. The 5MP camera Apple uses in the iPhone is too big for the iPad, they need more than the 5 or 6mm of depth available to fit. As camera and optics technology improves, no doubt the cameras will become thinner, but right now autofocus higher-resolution ones are too fat to fit in an iPad.
post #8 of 28
I still don't get why these companies don't make their cameras periscope-style to increase focal length -- you'd think that would help with these issues.
post #9 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by iCarbon View Post

I still don't get why these companies don't make their cameras periscope-style to increase focal length -- you'd think that would help with these issues.

That's a good point, though afaik the camera module is wider/taller than it is thick.
post #10 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCE10 View Post

And yet how the iPad 2 camera was acceptable by Apple standard remains a mystery to me. I don't mind the low pixel count, but my 5 yr old 2MP Sony Ericsson phone took much better pics than the latest gadget from Apple.

Can you ever imagine wanting to use an iPad as a camera? Just from a form-factor perspective it's always going to be a third choice after a real camera or a phone.
post #11 of 28
I'm currently using an iPhone 3G (still waiting for new iPhone) and I have to say that the camera is the only thing that I don't like about this phone.

I've played around with the iPhone 4's camera and whilst it is a big improvement, it isn't a patch on my 7 year old Sony T1. This camera is only 5.1 megapixel but the pictures it takes are stunning. Coupled with the high quality lens and 3x Optical zoom, it is still the best compact camera I've ever owned.

If Apple could get the camera on the next iPhone to be anywhere as good as the T1 then I'd be very happy indeed.

Some might say that the iPhone is just a phone and isn't meant to replace a digital camera. I hope Apple come up with something special on the next iPhone. However, with Apple's fixation on making their product thinner, this is just a dream...

...for now.
post #12 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

Can you ever imagine wanting to use an iPad as a camera? Just from a form-factor perspective it's always going to be a third choice after a real camera or a phone.

Correct, my first choice would be my Canon point-and-shoot, followed by the iPod touch. My iPad would be the dead last choice. Heck, I would rather shoot with the P&S and transfer the images to the iPad.

The iPad 2's front-facing camera is for Facetime. The rear-facing camera is suitable for scanning barcodes, maybe some augmented reality stuff. The larger size is not a boon with photography apps like Camera+. The iPod touch's camera is marginally better than the iPad's, however the user operability as a smaller device makes it far more effective as a camera.

The iPad is a great photo review tool though and a wonderful display device for photos and video.
post #13 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

Can you ever imagine wanting to use an iPad as a camera? Just from a form-factor perspective it's always going to be a third choice after a real camera or a phone.

It's not about replacing real cameras with the iPad. The point is, the camera is there, and people are gonna use it. For example, I use Evernote on my iPad and take pictures as visual addition to my notes, and the lack of image clarity bothers me.

If Apple adds a new feature to a product, usually they make sure the feature gives good result. If not, leave the feature out. Remember Apple's comments on leaving out LTE?
post #14 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCE10 View Post

It's not about replacing real cameras with the iPad. The point is, the camera is there, and people are gonna use it. For example, I use Evernote on my iPad and take pictures as visual addition to my notes, and the lack of image clarity bothers me.

If Apple adds a new feature to a product, usually they make sure the feature gives good result. If not, leave the feature out. Remember Apple's comments on leaving out LTE?

Have you used it for it's primary intended purpose of FaceTime chats? It works great.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #15 of 28
I heard Apple uses real "zeros" and "ones" in all of their binaries.
post #16 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elijahg View Post

I had a K800i too that had a 3.2mp camera, it was really impressive, especially as it was about 5 years ago. However, it was nearly three times the depth of the iPad. The 5MP camera Apple uses in the iPhone is too big for the iPad, they need more than the 5 or 6mm of depth available to fit. As camera and optics technology improves, no doubt the cameras will become thinner, but right now autofocus higher-resolution ones are too fat to fit in an iPad.

Did your camera make phone calls, was it as small of a profile, have apps, a gyroscope, etc. Clearly your camera is a camera. Apple iPhone are all in one devices.

That's like saying, I have a samurai sword that cuts better than my swiss army knife.. Yeah, no shit sherlock.
post #17 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Have you used it for it's primary intended purpose of FaceTime chats? It works great.

The camera "works great" with Facetime because --

1. people generally don't notice visual defects in motion pictures
2. people long have low expectations for video chats, internet bandwidth being a major bottleneck

Those are no excuse for having such noisy and fuzzy still image shots, with still shots being a fundamental feature of iPad 2.
post #18 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Niklas Ohlsson View Post

I reckon that the fact that apple is finally allowing the volume up button to take pictures gives the rumor of a seperate flash on the opposite site some credit.

It will allow people to hold the iPhone on it's frame and therefore away from both the camera and flash. I imagine quite a few people covering the flash otherwise.

What do you guys think?

It occurred to me the other day that it would be extremely cool if - as well as allowing the volume up button to activate the still shutter - the volume down button commenced video recording.

Gosh that would be cool.
15" uMacbook Pro 2.4Ghz 8GB 128GB SSD/500GB 7200rpm, iMac 27" i5 16GB 1TB, MacBook Air 8GB 256GB, iPhone 5s 64GB, iPhone 4 32GB, iPad 4 64GB, Apple TV2/3, iPod Nano 2nd gen, iPod Touch 4th gen,...
Reply
15" uMacbook Pro 2.4Ghz 8GB 128GB SSD/500GB 7200rpm, iMac 27" i5 16GB 1TB, MacBook Air 8GB 256GB, iPhone 5s 64GB, iPhone 4 32GB, iPad 4 64GB, Apple TV2/3, iPod Nano 2nd gen, iPod Touch 4th gen,...
Reply
post #19 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCE10 View Post

The camera "works great" with Facetime because --

1. people generally don't notice visual defects in motion pictures
2. people long have low expectations for video chats, internet bandwidth being a major bottleneck

Those are no excuse for having such noisy and fuzzy still image shots, with still shots being a fundamental feature of iPad 2.

Have to agree, the stills are pretty bad.
Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster by your side, kid.
Reply
Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster by your side, kid.
Reply
post #20 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by ameldrum1 View Post

...the volume up button to activate the still shutter - the volume down button commenced video recording.

That's a damned good idea! You should submit that to Apple.
post #21 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoXoM View Post

I'm currently using an iPhone 3G (still waiting for new iPhone) and I have to say that the camera is the only thing that I don't like about this phone.

I've played around with the iPhone 4's camera and whilst it is a big improvement, it isn't a patch on my 7 year old Sony T1. This camera is only 5.1 megapixel but the pictures it takes are stunning. Coupled with the high quality lens and 3x Optical zoom, it is still the best compact camera I've ever owned.

If Apple could get the camera on the next iPhone to be anywhere as good as the T1 then I'd be very happy indeed.

Some might say that the iPhone is just a phone and isn't meant to replace a digital camera. I hope Apple come up with something special on the next iPhone. However, with Apple's fixation on making their product thinner, this is just a dream...

...for now.

Do you know you are comparing a digital camera with a cellphone camera? The major difference is the lens. Do you realize how much bigger the digital camera lens is than the iPhone 3G? The quality of a picture has a lot to do with how much light the camera captures. The iPhone 4 camera sensor uses bsi technology which gathers twice as much light. That is why the picture is much better than the 3G camera.
post #22 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by roocka View Post

Did your camera make phone calls, was it as small of a profile, have apps, a gyroscope, etc. Clearly your camera is a camera. Apple iPhone are all in one devices.

That's like saying, I have a samurai sword that cuts better than my swiss army knife.. Yeah, no shit sherlock.

You'll find the K800i is a mobile phone from Sony Ericsson.
post #23 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post

Do you know you are comparing a digital camera with a cellphone camera? The major difference is the lens. Do you realize how much bigger the digital camera lens is than the iPhone 3G? The quality of a picture has a lot to do with how much light the camera captures. The iPhone 4 camera sensor uses bsi technology which gathers twice as much light. That is why the picture is much better than the 3G camera.

Yep - the iPhone 4 also has a flash which also helps.

I'm also aware that a digital camera has a bigger lens than an iPhone (due to the size of the phone). I understand that the next iPhone will be the same thickness (or even thinner) than the iPhone 4 but I'm prepared to have a slightly thicker phone with a better camera!!

I'm aware that the iPhone is essentially a phone first - but with all this talk of iCloud and Photo Streaming etc. I think Apple should invest more in this area (which I'm sure they currently are).

For me personally, taking stunning pictures (and recording awesome HD video) is something I want in the next iPhone (as well as better battery life etc). The thought of not having to carry around a separate digital camera/camcorder is something I'm looking forward to!

I have faith in Apple and I look forward to see what they present to us in the near future. Either way, I'll be first in line when the next iPhone is released!!
post #24 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCE10 View Post

Those are no excuse for having such noisy and fuzzy still image shots, with still shots being a fundamental feature of iPad 2.

Where in the world are you getting the notion that still shots are a "fundamental feature"?

For example, at http://www.apple.com/ipad/
the splash page page touts "Thinner, lighter, faster, facetime, smart covers, 10 hour battery"

I would submit these are the "fundamental features" as they are the ones apple chooses to tout. Notably absent is "still shots"

Really, the only mention of still shots is "snapshots" and the photo-booth application, i.e. silly shots that no one gives a rats ass about the quality of, because the quality of the pictures is not the point.

Apple certainly realizes precious few still pictures are ever going to be taken with that camera. iPads have lower profit margins than most apple products, and certainly, as long as it produces good facetime chats, not caring all that much about the still shot quality is certainly a defensible design choice.
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #25 of 28
People really do get hung up on Megapixels and believe that is the sole parameter for good pictures. However, lens quality has a bigger impact on digital picture quality than the amount of megapixels. Even 12 MP cameras can create lousy pictures due to lousy optics.
post #26 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCE10 View Post

Those are no excuse for having such noisy and fuzzy still image shots, with still shots being a fundamental feature of iPad 2.

Doesn't matter now. With Photo Stream just use your iPhone to shoot and iPad to edit. I know there's a minority who love to shoot picture on a clunky form like iPad but Apple can't please everyone. (for a record, I wouldn't even thinking about shooting pictures with iPad)

Off topic: it's interesting to see many people use their iPad2 to facetime, rather than shooting video, when Steve Jobs on stage at WWDC.
post #27 of 28
My 5MP in iPhone 4 is quite alright for pictures.

As I've said before though, shutter speed is always too slow in average outdoor and indoor lighting, so I have to take a few pictures to get one without blur/shake.

As for the flash, fairly unusable for typical restaurant/club pictures because of haziness, and/or red-eye/yellow-eye issues.

Most of the acceptable shots I get indoor, especially in a club, is from just rapid-shooting without a flash, and choosing pictures which are illuminated by other flash bulbs from other cameras. Portraiture (ie. taking pictures of friends etc.) with the iPhone 4 flash is not usually that great.

FWIW 720p HD is nice, with or without the flash. Though having the flash on all the time while videoing in a club is too bright, and not very polite when shooting the DJ.
post #28 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

Off topic: it's interesting to see many people use their iPad2 to facetime, rather than shooting video, when Steve Jobs on stage at WWDC.

Because the iPad2 video quality is absolutely horrible, and indeed the form factor as many might suspect is not conducive to any kind of serious work except for propping it up and doing podcasts/ product demos (even then the video quality is too poor even for YouTube).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Source: Apple drastically reduces orders for iPhone 4 camera flash