A future iPhone may get a 200MP camera -- eventually

AppleInsider

A future rear camera for the iPhone could get a giant upgrade, with a prolific leaker claiming Apple is testing a 200-megapixel sensor.

The rear cameras on Pro iPhone models are likely to get high-resolution sensors first.

Apple has periodically improved the physical hardware of its camera sensor, alongside computational photography changes. While Apple's current cameras include 48MP sensors, it is also looking to add even higher resolutions in the future.

According to "Digital Chat Station" on Weibo on Tuesday, Apple is testing a 200-megapixel camera sensor. The post doesn't go into detail, such as which camera it will be used in or when it will arrive, but that it will be a stratospheric resolution.

It is also unknown where the sensor is being sourced from, but the likely candidate may be Samsung. Its flagship Galaxy devices frequently include high-resolution cameras, up to 200 megapixels in models like the Galaxy S25 Edge.

Since Samsung's subsidiaries are participants in Apple's supply chain, it means there's a chance Samsung's cameras are being considered for future inclusion in the iPhone.

A high resolution eventuality

While testing a sensor is no guarantee that Apple will actually use it in a future model, there's a good chance for it to become a reality, eventually. Just about every iPhone rumor can be true, on an infinite timeline, and Tuesday's prediction doesn't have a target date.

Apple has been gradually improving the cameras in its Pro models, with the main Fusion and Ultra Wide cameras using 48-megapixel sensors each in the iPhone 16 Pro range. Though the Telephoto in the iPhone 16 Pro is still only a 12MP sensor, the version in the iPhone 17 Pro has been the subject of similar upgrade rumors.

It's not just the rear cameras that have been discussed by leakers. There have even been discussions about the front-facing camera on the iPhone 17 family going from a 12MP sensor to a 24MP version.

Since Apple uses the imaging capabilities of the iPhone heavily in its marketing efforts, it stands to reason that it will keep making the cameras better in various ways. Apple has a vested interest to keep ahead of the curve with its hardware, and to offer the best photographic experience possible.

It may not be immediate, but eventually the 48MP sensors will be switched out for something better, and whatever replaces them will get changed down the road too.

A 200MP or better sensor is almost certain to happen. The real question is when it will take place.

Rumor Score: Possible

Read on AppleInsider

tht

Broken record. I would like to have cameras that are flush with the back please. Like, put 4 or 5 24MP cameras of varying focal distance, color, aperture etc and fuse them all into a 24 MP image. Nokia tried years ago, but it was too slow. The computing power should be available now, plus they can shortcut it with a trained ML model now.

The size of the lens are just every increasing, both in Z-height and in number.

9secondkox2

And one beyond that may get a 1000 mp camera -at some point.

amusingfool

It certainly seems inevitable that this will arrive at some point.  And I hadn't been paying enough attention to Samsung to realize they have shipped one.  But it seems weird to ship it now, when not even an $8k Hasselblad medium-format camera will get you over 100MP (and only one full-frame model will get you over 50MP.  Most are 24-48MP).  I feel like the only reason you get something even usable with that kind of resolution on that small a sensor with such small lenses is a combination of AI post-processing and pixel binning.  And if you're just going to be binning the pixels, you'll do better to have fewer pixels because there will be fewer interstitial lines on the sensor leading to more usable surface space.

jellybelly

I tend to agree with ‘Amusingfool’.

The Canon R1, which just got Camera of the Year at Japan’s Grand Prix 2025, and costs about $6300 US without a lens is 24 MP.  

And it is a really good top of the line camera.  Some equally expensive cameras are also 24MP and some might go up to 48 MP. 

I don’t get the 200MP thing. Larger pixels can record a larger dynamic range than smaller pixels—i.e. record really bright light and really low light in the same photo.  

But I’m not up on the latest engineering and physics of these new sensors and software. Taking multiple shots for one photo and using software to get a great photo works well. But you’re not going to take rapid shots in low light or of fast moving objects (sports).  

I’ve was an NCAA Div I and II sports photographer using two $6,000+ cameras with a third for backup, along with $1500 to $3,000 lenses. So I was spoiled.  But the iPhone has done very well for me.  

I take great non-sports photos with my iPhone and they are often as good as my pro gear.  But not as flexible in more demanding situations, nor as adjustable for getting certain results. 

I’ll go read a review of the Samsung 200MP phone camera.  

I have to wonder if it looks great but pretty much indistinguishable from my iPhone 16 Pro Max 48MP photos. 

tht

Yes, it is looking like the marketing appeal to customers for megapixels have reached diminishing returns. The numbers are big enough such that it isn't meaningful to people anymore. Image quality too. They have gotten so good that people can't tell the difference anymore. Don't think there is much more marketing win left above 50 MP. Maybe 100 MP? I'm pretty skeptical of 200 MP being a big marketing win. Ie, it won't sell the phone.

10 years ago there was a display pixel density race. 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, 800 PPI. Sony has been trying to differentiate themselves with 4K displays on their phones for a while. Nobody has followed AFAIK. I don't think OEMs use resolution to sell phones anymore either. Hardly hear any OEM crowing about it anymore. It doesn't matter to people as display quality has reached good enough for the vast majority of the market.

Camera MP is probably there now, somewhere between 50 to 100 MP, maybe.

The best camera feature for buyers, imo, is probably cloud storage of photos. Boring. Not going to win any marketing campaign awards, but just having your photos always available is big, along with the various features to help with looking for photos.

netrox

The main reason phone makers are adding 200 MP sensors isn’t to take actual 200 MP photos — it’s mostly for 8K video recording.

To record 8K, you need about 33 to 36 megapixels. But small phone sensors don’t perform well at that resolution, especially in low light. That’s why they use 2x2 pixel binning, which combines four pixels into one to improve image quality. To get a binned image with 36 MP, you need a sensor with 4 times that resolution — around 144 MP.

But there’s another challenge: camera shake. Phones move a lot when you record handheld, and to fix that digitally, the phone needs extra pixels around the edges. This gives the software room to crop and stabilize the video without losing resolution. The smaller the sensor, the worse the shake looks, so you need even more headroom — about another 50 MP or so just for stabilization.

Add that up, and you’re at around 200 MP total. So it’s not really about capturing super high-res photos — it’s about making sure 8K video looks clean, stable, and sharp, even on a tiny smartphone sensor.

tht

netrox said:

The main reason phone makers are adding 200 MP sensors isn’t to take actual 200 MP photos — it’s mostly for 8K video recording.

To record 8K, you need about 33 to 36 megapixels. But small phone sensors don’t perform well at that resolution, especially in low light. That’s why they use 2x2 pixel binning, which combines four pixels into one to improve image quality. To get a binned image with 36 MP, you need a sensor with 4 times that resolution — around 144 MP.

But there’s another challenge: camera shake. Phones move a lot when you record handheld, and to fix that digitally, the phone needs extra pixels around the edges. This gives the software room to crop and stabilize the video without losing resolution. The smaller the sensor, the worse the shake looks, so you need even more headroom — about another 50 MP or so just for stabilization.

Add that up, and you’re at around 200 MP total. So it’s not really about capturing super high-res photos — it’s about making sure 8K video looks clean, stable, and sharp, even on a tiny smartphone sensor.

Like Amusingfool and Jellybelly said, 1 big pixel that is larger than 4 pixels combined should perform better. The increased number of pixels buys you detail, but do people want it? 

I think it is a good question to ask if 8K video will be a standard everyone uses. The whole hardware system isn't there yet. 8K monitors and TVs are at the bleeding edge, and it's good question whether they make it to the mainstream. Is a 50" 8K monitor or TV something people would buy? 8K streaming? That is even further out.

entropys

a future iPhone will be in a pair of contract lenses. Eventually.