Apple's next iPhone may sport HD-capable front camera, be just 7.9mm thick

Posted:
in iPhone edited January 2014
Apple's sixth-generation iPhone could include a front-facing camera capable of HD resolution, according to a new reported from a trusted analyst insider.

The Cupertino, Calif., company is expected to make "quite a few essential adjustments" to its next iPhone, KGI analyst Mingchi Kuo said in a note to investors earlier this week.

In addition to the move to HD, he believes Apple will also employ a flip-chip (FC) solution for the front-facing camera on the upcoming iPhone. The camera's position would be moved to the middle, he said.

Kuo noted that an HD front camera would better suit the 4-inch display that he expects Apple's sixth-generation handset to have. Currently, the front-facing camera of the iPhone 4S is capable of VGA resolution.

As for the rear-facing camera, Kuo said Apple will likely retain the 8-megapixel camera while improving the aperture range to go up to f/2.2. The iPhone 4S has a maximum aperture of f/2.4. The analyst also predicted that the rear camera on the next iPhone will be noticeable thinner, "making it the most challenging iPhone design yet."

According to his analysis, the new iPhone's rear camera will have a CCM of 5.55mm and a lens TTL of 4mm, down from 6mm and 4.8mm on the iPhone 4S. Apple's suppliers will reportedly face "unprecedented challenges" producing the rear camera component because of the changes to the design.

iPhone cameras


Kuo issued a report in April claiming that Apple will slim down the iPhone to 7.9mm or less. The iPhone 4S has a depth of 9.3mm. The use of an in-cell touchscreen display is expected to shave as much as 0.4mm off the phone.

Sony, which provides the CMOS for the iPhone 4S, announced this January that it had developed a thinner next-generation CMOS. Last month, camera parts allegedly bound for the next iPhone surfaced online. If the parts were indeed authentic, they would suggest that Apple plans to redesign the cameras for its sixth-generation handset.

Apple is expected to launch the new iPhone this fall in either September or October. Some reports have claimed that the device will feature a redesigned form factor and 4G LTE connectivity.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 33
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,438member
  • Reply 2 of 33
    olivierlolivierl Posts: 29member

    Analyst says :


    Next generation product from Apple may increase spec from current generation.



    ...

  • Reply 3 of 33
    mcarlingmcarling Posts: 1,106member


    Better cameras would not be a surprise.


     
  • Reply 4 of 33


    I use Skype in my iPad 3 / iPhone 4 very often (FT a little less, no one uses it). And the camera is VERY important for the overall experience. We avoid using the computer most of the time, at the moment.

  • Reply 5 of 33
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,826member
    philboogie wrote: »
    Never used the front facing camera. Do many people use Facetime or Skype?

    Not at all!

    First; most of the time I don't want people to see me and frankly seeing others doesnt do much for me.

    Second; bandwidth is an issue. WiFi is seldom available and you pay for data usage so why even think about FaceTime or Skype on a cell phone?

    Third; an HD camera makes even less sense considering the two issues above.
  • Reply 6 of 33
    ray bartray bart Posts: 91member
    Apple will buy Facebook - trust me, AppleFace is on the way
  • Reply 7 of 33
    I always use FaceTime so this would be a welcome addition for me.
  • Reply 8 of 33
    williamhwilliamh Posts: 666member


    I don't think many people do.   But judging by the comments, the camera is important to those that do.  I use the front-facing camera for 2 things: to make sure my tie is straight, and occasionally to take a picture of myself.  Usually I am taking pictures of my kids, etc. and don't appear in many.

     

  • Reply 9 of 33
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,438member
    wizard69 wrote: »
    Not at all!
    First; most of the time I don't want people to see me and frankly seeing others doesnt do much for me.
    Second; bandwidth is an issue. WiFi is seldom available and you pay for data usage so why even think about FaceTime or Skype on a cell phone?
    Third; an HD camera makes even less sense considering the two issues above.

    1st: That's what I thought. I don't feel inclined to show myself and don't have the need or desire to see the other person. I did try to 'test' FT just to see what the quality was like. Well, indoors in opoor lighting it is obviously poor. Never tried it outdoors.

    2nd: WiFi is available pretty much everywhere I go (save for my bicycle rides) but Skype should work over 3G, which is available everywhere I go (except for the one least likely spot: the neighborhood where our largest telco's CEO lives - go figure). Dataplans are still cheap, but slowly being capped here in The Netherlands.

    3rd: good point! I wouldn't mind sharing a grainy picture, but for the other party to be able to count my nasal hairs... I don't think so.

    239
  • Reply 10 of 33
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Man I'd love it if they kept the same thickness and added battery as allowed.
  • Reply 11 of 33
    andysolandysol Posts: 2,506member
    I use it when I travel and my 3 yr old loves seeing her 2 yr old neice, uncle, grandpa, grandma, etc.- it's great for kids and those with young kids or those that travel IMO.

    The HD camera would be nice- not necessary, but welcome. Bandwidth isn't a problem as it has to be wifi and mine does fine now (even in most hotels).

    I can say that my kids also LOVE taking pics with their mom and dad while they can see themselves. Funny faces, etc- some of my funniest pics are those.
  • Reply 12 of 33
    cvaldes1831cvaldes1831 Posts: 1,832member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post



    Never used the front facing camera. Do many people use Facetime or Skype?


    As far as I can, Joe Consumer typically uses the front-facing camera for posting pictures of themselves (MySpace, Facebook, Twitter, Path, whatever).


     


    Lots of people use Skype, fewer use FaceTime.

  • Reply 13 of 33
    DaekwanDaekwan Posts: 174member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post



    Never used the front facing camera. Do many people use Facetime or Skype?

    New mockup:

    301


     


    1) That shyt looks SWEET!!!    Wonder how long before Samsung steals it?


     


    2) I dont think many people over the age of 25 currently use the front camera for taking pics.  But younger users definitely love the front camera.  They use it for videochat and most for taking pics of themselves.. we've all seen the duckface pics on myspace & facebook.  Plenty of times I've seen them just taking pictures of themselves with the front camera in public, including group shots.  Making the front camera HD, will definitely strike a big chord with the under 25 crowd who already heavily use the front cam.  As it stands now, the quality & resolution most front facing cameras suck big time.  They look like the grainy old webcams that became popular a decade ago.  Of course Facetime will also recieve a boost from this, as people of all ages use it.  Will definitely be a hit among family members or those in a relationship, seperated from their loved one.


     


    3) Bandwidth isnt a big of deal as you guys are making it to be.  WiFi is available for most to use at work, home, travel, restuarants, gym, etc.  And it will only get more popular, its not like WiFi is going to disappear anytime soon. The big 5 cable companies have announced they will be offering WiFi access to all of their customers in major cities.  Hell.. Even the NFL commissioner has gone on record as saying that WiFi will get installed in all NFL stadiums starting this year.  Secondly, if people find something useful.. they will pay for it.. and 4G/LTE has that capability.  While the cellphone companies are pure evil, they know they offer a must have product.  How many people cant live in todays without a cellphone?  While some people bytch and complain.. most of us pay that big cellphone bill at the end of the month without much thought.  Just like cable companies, cellular carriers will also continually adjust their data plans to make sure things are never TOO expensive for customers to drop their service.  


     


    4) With 4G bandwidth & a HD-front facing camera, expect applications like Facetime to get used alot more use as individuals look to share an experience immediately with a friend, family member, co-worker, etc.  Im not talking about 30 minute conversations, I'm talking about quick 1-3mins length videochats where you just want to share something important, over live video, with something else very quickly.  A picture may be worth a 1000 words, but a video is worth a million.  The corporate world alone would kill for a feature like this, as their employees are able to voicechat quickly & conveniently while on the go.  If you build it, they will come!

  • Reply 14 of 33
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Come on, analysts. Do we have to mock you for the Megapixel Myth as well as the Megahertz Myth?

  • Reply 15 of 33
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 1,980member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post





    Not at all!

    First; most of the time I don't want people to see me and frankly seeing others doesnt do much for me.

    Second; bandwidth is an issue. WiFi is seldom available and you pay for data usage so why even think about FaceTime or Skype on a cell phone?

    Third; an HD camera makes even less sense considering the two issues above.


    This HD capable front facing camera will make doing FT and displaying on a HD TV with the new AppleTV a very good user experience.  

  • Reply 16 of 33
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,215member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    Better cameras would not be a surprise.


     



     


    Back camera sure, but front. It would be a surprise. That camera is included for video chatting, not actual recording. To supercharge it with some mega pixel HD camera just seems like unnecessary spec wanking for the job and that's not Apple's style. Especially with the way that folks are clamoring to be able to do FaceTime over cell data. More folks don't have unlimited data and such uses will eat up a tier plan fast. With HD level video it goes even faster. Doesn't seem logical

  • Reply 17 of 33
    aaarrrggghaaarrrgggh Posts: 1,580member
    philboogie wrote: »
    Never used the front facing camera. Do many people use Facetime or Skype?

    New mockup:

    Video conferencing is an order of magnitude better on the iPad, but it is still useful on the iPhone. It even made me buy Facetime for my iMac at work. One of the things I like the most is having the two cameras and being able to switch between them to show people things. For me, it is complicated on the iPhone because my $3 Hong Kong case is close enough to the lens that it tints the shots, so it needs to be peeled back for use.

    As for the mockup... cool and all... but I would much rather have edge to edge screen-- features that add width like rounded edges make it more cumbersome to use.
  • Reply 18 of 33
    aaarrrggghaaarrrgggh Posts: 1,580member
    charlituna wrote: »
    Back camera sure, but front. It would be a surprise. That camera is included for video chatting, not actual recording. To supercharge it with some mega pixel HD camera just seems like unnecessary spec wanking for the job and that's not Apple's style.

    ...but it isn't that great of a camera. Expectations have risen, and the current offering is limiting. If it can accommodate low light better and be less grainy in moderate light it is a win.
  • Reply 19 of 33
    antkm1antkm1 Posts: 1,441member
    Seriously AI? A typo on the heading in big bold red letters? Someone needs to be demoted to trash duty for that. The editing of these articles has gotten worse and worse since I've been reading.

    Edit: thanks for fixing "thicj"

    Speaking of things that have only gotten worse over time, the iPhone camera (for indoor use, strictly speaking) has been freaking abismal ever since they added a flash, and has decreased in usability since the gen 1 iPhone, which took amazing indoor shots. The light balance on the gen1&2 iphones had such better light balance and much less fuzz than the current ones do. Sure they updated the software and more megapixels and added a flash, but I used to be able to take fairly good ( if not great ) indoor shots at museums with my iPhone 3G but when I got the 3GS I Instantly noticed a fuzziness and diminished light balance. Then when I got the iPhone 4, the indoor shots were higher resolution fuzz, not to mention that the flash severally over exposes the images, like this dude's nose above. My 7 year old Nikon point-and-shoot 7mp takes way better indoor shots, with or without a flash.

    Now I will say that outdoor pictures has gotten better with each new release, but camera tech. under day lighting is pretty hard to mess up.
  • Reply 20 of 33
    sleepy3sleepy3 Posts: 244member


    What's the point reducing the thickness if it will still not have the useless title "thineest smartphone in the world" Its like what? 6.something mm now?


     


    Makes MUCH more sense to keep the same thickness and put a battery that lasts three days in there. 


     


    The thickness race is over. Phones are plenty slim enough. When you have to quote your thickness in tenths of MILLIMETER (!!!!), then its kinda ridiculous. Soon it will be "well my phone is 10 microns thinner than yours"


     


    Big Batteries FTW. 

Sign In or Register to comment.