Good for Apple. I expect the trolls to get giddy as **** over this news, as it allow them to highlight the superiority of their X android phone over the meaningless bullet point.(as they've done thousands of times on this forum)
Megapixels matter, but only to a point. I'm sure if they are not adding pixels this year they have their reasons. Phones are very thin, anyway. Perhaps phone manufactures including Apple should consider stacking the cameras vertically inside their phones so they can put in better cameras than the physical thickness will allow.
The problem is the number of photosites in the sensor. When they are densely packed, which they are in all small sensor phones (and point-and-shoots), they generate heat. Heat makes for noise. All other things being equal, a 16MP sensor will have far better high-ISO (low light) performance than a 32MB sensor.
So if you increase the MP count without increasing the size of the sensor, you decrease quality. A Nikon D1 camera from 1999 with 2.74 effective MP will still provide far better images than those from any of today's cellphone cameras and in some cases better quality than much larger cameras with higher MP counts.
Unfortunately, most consumers are idiots and buy into the myth that more megapixels = better quality. Even those who buy full-frame DSLRs fall into this trap. It's because it's a simple concept to understand ("oh..a higher number...that must be better").
Although it's very cramped inside the phone, I would definitely like to see Apple provide a larger sensor and a larger lens in future generations of the iPhone, especially if they increase the screen size in future models. In fact, what would be great is if Apple made it so the lens was removable and one could screw in different lenses (instead of putting an accessory lens on top of the built-in lens). But Apple will never do that because they don't like "seams" in the surface of their products.
Of late, Apple seems to be making incremental improvements to their products. I'd like to see them once again be far more aggressive coming up with new concepts and ideas.
Consumers are idiot face it, higher numbers are always better don't people know that already....
Apple has never played the specmanship game, yeah it cost them in the 90's since consumers mostly did check list buying, they would buy the product which had the most amount of features in the check list at the lowest cost. Apple change the game in the 2000's to it all about the experience not about the bits and bytes, MHz and GHz and the list goes on.
Only Geeks worry about this since and as we know Apple is not worry about what the geeks thinks since they only represent a small portion of the buying public.
Better 8MP of goodness than 30MP of crap. Indeed if it improved low light perf and S/N I'd be happy if there were a 5MP setting, which is more than enough for on-screen viewing.
They can perform what is called "binning" the sensor perfectly at 25% the number of pixels. That does make it pretty low resolution at 2MP though. They can do binning at other resolutions in between, but you have to do lots of processing to map the uneven pixels and that impacts the purity of the image. Doing the 2MP allows four sensor pixels to provide data for a single image pixel. So you get light from a much larger surface area of the sensor and this makes a dramatic quality difference in low-light. I am surprised Apple has not enabled a mode for this. It could be one more swipe in the camera app and would allow for better low-noise photos in low-light. Maybe even a long exposure mode at 2MP for some awesome iPhone night photography.
Apple is doing the right thing here. Nobody really pays attention to the megapixels anymore - all people want is a good picture. Apple should have no trouble convincing the average consumer that less megapixels means better pictures.
Exactly right. Except that educating the consoomer is not a trivial thing.
Three days ago I tried out a Nikon Coolpix S02 (13 megapixels) and took identical shots with it and with my 8 MP iPhone 5, and it's clear that the iPhone pictures were far superior. The 13 MP Nikon photos were fuzzy to the point that they had an effective clarity HALF that of the iPhone. For a device weighing the same and having no other functions than taking snapshots, I can't recommend it. At all.
You'd be better off buying a broken iPhone 5 (provided it still takes photos and can offload them somehow) without a cellular carrier, and just use it as a camera. Far superior. And probably cheaper.
What is "conservative" about improving the image quality and functional capabilities of the camera? The megapixel race ended in high end DSLR cameras years ago.
You're right. A $6,500 Nikon D4s is 16.2 Mp. A $8,000 D3x is 24.5 MP. Wouldn't surprise me to see the next Samsung Galaxy "whatever" advertise itself as the best camera on the market at 28 MP. Sad thing is people (the press) will fall for it hook, line, and sinker.
My next Android phone will have a 65 megapixel camera! Try and beat that suckers!
As I sit here in my parent's basement, I can't wait to be able to capture the lovely view of my four grimy walls utilizing all 65 heavenly megapixels.
The image quality is not that important to me. I'm partially color blind and I'm not exactly that artistically inclined (I am an Android user after all), but what is important is that I will be able to boast that I have a 65 megapixel camera on my phone when I go and troll forums, because we all know that higher numbers are always better. Don't listen to any Apple fans when they bring up actual real world performance, they are so clueless and brainwashed. It's all about the specs, and I buy whatever has the highest spec numbers for the lowest price of course.
I consider myself to be an expert on judging camera phones, because I can count to at least one hundred, and all I need to do is see which phone has more megapixels. I even buy my t-shirts three sizes too large, because yep, you guessed it, it's all about the specs, and larger is better. And besides, those shirts were on sale, and that's mighty important also, for a savvy shopper like myself.
My new phone will also have an amazing 1,600 x 2,560 display. I don't have any access to any high quality video content, because no way in hell will I ever pay to watch any movie, but when I stream 480p movies from a pirate site, it looks great on my pentile display.
But but...its all about the megapixels! More megapixels, means better photos!!!
/s
Remember the Megahertz Myth? Apple tried for years to convince the buying public that the speed of the processor was only one factor in system performance. Remember the PPC and its RISC instruction set that was more efficient than the Intel X86? But the buying public fell for the “faster is better” argument anyway. Remember when Apple (Jobs) finally succumbed to the myth? I certainly do since I purchased the water cooled G5 tower that leaked and fried the power supply about four years later.
This is the same thing happening again. It doesn’t matter that experts like Andy Ihnatko have declared the iPhone camera the best in the business because of the superior software the runs it. Joe and Judy walk into Best Buy and the sales drone quickly points out that the Samsung product has a 12 megapixel camera while the iPhone “only” has 8 megapixels.
You're right. A $6,500 Nikon D4s is 16.2 Mp. A $8,000 D3x is 24.5 MP. Wouldn't surprise me to see the next Samsung Galaxy "whatever" advertise itself as the best camera on the market at 28 MP. Sad thing is people (the press) will fall for it hook, line, and sinker.
It has more to do with the sensor, which Apple DID update on the 5S - and would be a much less disingenuous way of upgrading the camera. The sensor on phones is already terrible compared to high-end camera - so bumping the pixelage would create a tonne of noise
The more megapixels, the bigger the file size (unless you use a lower quality compression scheme). Apple should continue to focus (no pun intended) on improving image quality within the number of pixels they've got, reducing future pressure to increase the storage capacity of the phone or add a memory card slot. Let the other companies go with their 64MP cameras, and let their customers struggle with memory cards, or limit themselves to a few dozen photos in their phone. After all, old-fashioned 35mm film typically had a limit of 36 exposures.
Megapixel count still helps for digital zoom. Since most phones dont have optical zoom, you cant just discard that spec...
You have a point of sorts though I consider digital zoom to be a bit of a joke. More pixels do lead to better cropping and other pic manipulation , but it generally is better to have good quality pictures to begin with.
In any event I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple add optical zoom or something in the way of interchangeable lenses. Either has far more potential than blowing out the size of the CCD. Further I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Apples sapphire production is destined for camera lenses. I can very much see Apple adding a cell phone to its lineup focused on photography. It could be Tim's secret project.
The more megapixels, the bigger the file size (unless you use a lower quality compression scheme).
I have no problem with file size. In fact more pixels can be a good thing if the quality is there. Beyond that once we have 4K displays 8 megapixels will start to be seen as low resolution. Given that I'd only expect more pixels from Apple if they can enhance quality.
Apple should continue to focus (no pun intended) on improving image quality within the number of pixels they've got, reducing future pressure to increase the storage capacity of the phone or add a memory card slot.
I'd rather have both really. 10-12 MegaPixels would be nice.
Let the other companies go with their 64MP cameras, and let their customers struggle with memory cards, or limit themselves to a few dozen photos in their phone. After all, old-fashioned 35mm film typically had a limit of 36 exposures.
Honestly Apple needs to address the lack of flash in its iOS devices sooner or later. It gets to the point that the pricing for more storage becomes a ripoff.
With a fixed focal length camera, small lense, it is not realistic to expect or demand a camera quality to compete with DSLR cameras. I would like much higher quality, but physics simply won't allow it. If I need the quality and control, I simply must bow to buying and using prosumer level cameras.
Here is my thinking on 4K video. The 8Mpx camera can already is equivalent to a 4K frame. And Apple recently hired that sole developer who wrote a clever app that would allow the device to take something like 10-20 8Mpx images per second. If Apple can use a faster sensor they could probably get that up to 30 still shots per second which would then be 30 frames per second for 4K video.
Something like that. The current 8MP sensor on the iPhone 5s is 4:3 ratio, so the 16:9 area used for HD video is cropped to a smaller area. DSLRs that shoot video do that. To get 8MP from video--specifically 2160p 16:9, they would have to either:
(1) use a native 16:9 sensor 8MP chip, which would crop 4:3 or 3:2 ratio photos to less than 8MP, or
(2) use a 4:3 sensor at greater than 8MP in order to attain 2160p without reducing the megapixel count for 4:3 and 3:2 ratio photos.
Comments
The megapixel race ended in high end DSLR cameras years ago.
What did this megapixel race end up at (on average)? Was it around 8 MP?
Megapixels matter, but only to a point. I'm sure if they are not adding pixels this year they have their reasons. Phones are very thin, anyway. Perhaps phone manufactures including Apple should consider stacking the cameras vertically inside their phones so they can put in better cameras than the physical thickness will allow.
The problem is the number of photosites in the sensor. When they are densely packed, which they are in all small sensor phones (and point-and-shoots), they generate heat. Heat makes for noise. All other things being equal, a 16MP sensor will have far better high-ISO (low light) performance than a 32MB sensor.
So if you increase the MP count without increasing the size of the sensor, you decrease quality. A Nikon D1 camera from 1999 with 2.74 effective MP will still provide far better images than those from any of today's cellphone cameras and in some cases better quality than much larger cameras with higher MP counts.
Unfortunately, most consumers are idiots and buy into the myth that more megapixels = better quality. Even those who buy full-frame DSLRs fall into this trap. It's because it's a simple concept to understand ("oh..a higher number...that must be better").
Although it's very cramped inside the phone, I would definitely like to see Apple provide a larger sensor and a larger lens in future generations of the iPhone, especially if they increase the screen size in future models. In fact, what would be great is if Apple made it so the lens was removable and one could screw in different lenses (instead of putting an accessory lens on top of the built-in lens). But Apple will never do that because they don't like "seams" in the surface of their products.
Of late, Apple seems to be making incremental improvements to their products. I'd like to see them once again be far more aggressive coming up with new concepts and ideas.
Consumers are idiot face it, higher numbers are always better don't people know that already....
Apple has never played the specmanship game, yeah it cost them in the 90's since consumers mostly did check list buying, they would buy the product which had the most amount of features in the check list at the lowest cost. Apple change the game in the 2000's to it all about the experience not about the bits and bytes, MHz and GHz and the list goes on.
Only Geeks worry about this since and as we know Apple is not worry about what the geeks thinks since they only represent a small portion of the buying public.
Better 8MP of goodness than 30MP of crap. Indeed if it improved low light perf and S/N I'd be happy if there were a 5MP setting, which is more than enough for on-screen viewing.
They can perform what is called "binning" the sensor perfectly at 25% the number of pixels. That does make it pretty low resolution at 2MP though. They can do binning at other resolutions in between, but you have to do lots of processing to map the uneven pixels and that impacts the purity of the image. Doing the 2MP allows four sensor pixels to provide data for a single image pixel. So you get light from a much larger surface area of the sensor and this makes a dramatic quality difference in low-light. I am surprised Apple has not enabled a mode for this. It could be one more swipe in the camera app and would allow for better low-noise photos in low-light. Maybe even a long exposure mode at 2MP for some awesome iPhone night photography.
Tim,
Can you please make this happen?
Thanks
Apple is doing the right thing here. Nobody really pays attention to the megapixels anymore - all people want is a good picture. Apple should have no trouble convincing the average consumer that less megapixels means better pictures.
Exactly right. Except that educating the consoomer is not a trivial thing.
Three days ago I tried out a Nikon Coolpix S02 (13 megapixels) and took identical shots with it and with my 8 MP iPhone 5, and it's clear that the iPhone pictures were far superior. The 13 MP Nikon photos were fuzzy to the point that they had an effective clarity HALF that of the iPhone. For a device weighing the same and having no other functions than taking snapshots, I can't recommend it. At all.
You'd be better off buying a broken iPhone 5 (provided it still takes photos and can offload them somehow) without a cellular carrier, and just use it as a camera. Far superior. And probably cheaper.
What is "conservative" about improving the image quality and functional capabilities of the camera? The megapixel race ended in high end DSLR cameras years ago.
You're right. A $6,500 Nikon D4s is 16.2 Mp. A $8,000 D3x is 24.5 MP. Wouldn't surprise me to see the next Samsung Galaxy "whatever" advertise itself as the best camera on the market at 28 MP. Sad thing is people (the press) will fall for it hook, line, and sinker.
Isn't this what HTC has been doing recently?
You people and you fruit fans don't have a clue.
My next Android phone will have a 65 megapixel camera! Try and beat that suckers!
As I sit here in my parent's basement, I can't wait to be able to capture the lovely view of my four grimy walls utilizing all 65 heavenly megapixels.
The image quality is not that important to me. I'm partially color blind and I'm not exactly that artistically inclined (I am an Android user after all), but what is important is that I will be able to boast that I have a 65 megapixel camera on my phone when I go and troll forums, because we all know that higher numbers are always better. Don't listen to any Apple fans when they bring up actual real world performance, they are so clueless and brainwashed. It's all about the specs, and I buy whatever has the highest spec numbers for the lowest price of course.
I consider myself to be an expert on judging camera phones, because I can count to at least one hundred, and all I need to do is see which phone has more megapixels. I even buy my t-shirts three sizes too large, because yep, you guessed it, it's all about the specs, and larger is better. And besides, those shirts were on sale, and that's mighty important also, for a savvy shopper like myself.
My new phone will also have an amazing 1,600 x 2,560 display. I don't have any access to any high quality video content, because no way in hell will I ever pay to watch any movie, but when I stream 480p movies from a pirate site, it looks great on my pentile display.
But but...its all about the megapixels! More megapixels, means better photos!!!
/s
Remember the Megahertz Myth? Apple tried for years to convince the buying public that the speed of the processor was only one factor in system performance. Remember the PPC and its RISC instruction set that was more efficient than the Intel X86? But the buying public fell for the “faster is better” argument anyway. Remember when Apple (Jobs) finally succumbed to the myth? I certainly do since I purchased the water cooled G5 tower that leaked and fried the power supply about four years later.
This is the same thing happening again. It doesn’t matter that experts like Andy Ihnatko have declared the iPhone camera the best in the business because of the superior software the runs it. Joe and Judy walk into Best Buy and the sales drone quickly points out that the Samsung product has a 12 megapixel camera while the iPhone “only” has 8 megapixels.
You're right. A $6,500 Nikon D4s is 16.2 Mp. A $8,000 D3x is 24.5 MP. Wouldn't surprise me to see the next Samsung Galaxy "whatever" advertise itself as the best camera on the market at 28 MP. Sad thing is people (the press) will fall for it hook, line, and sinker.
There are less expensive Nikon's that are 24 MP as well (http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/04/19/Nikon-D3200-with-WiFi-Option)
It has more to do with the sensor, which Apple DID update on the 5S - and would be a much less disingenuous way of upgrading the camera. The sensor on phones is already terrible compared to high-end camera - so bumping the pixelage would create a tonne of noise
The more megapixels, the bigger the file size (unless you use a lower quality compression scheme). Apple should continue to focus (no pun intended) on improving image quality within the number of pixels they've got, reducing future pressure to increase the storage capacity of the phone or add a memory card slot. Let the other companies go with their 64MP cameras, and let their customers struggle with memory cards, or limit themselves to a few dozen photos in their phone. After all, old-fashioned 35mm film typically had a limit of 36 exposures.
You have a point of sorts though I consider digital zoom to be a bit of a joke. More pixels do lead to better cropping and other pic manipulation , but it generally is better to have good quality pictures to begin with.
In any event I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple add optical zoom or something in the way of interchangeable lenses. Either has far more potential than blowing out the size of the CCD. Further I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Apples sapphire production is destined for camera lenses. I can very much see Apple adding a cell phone to its lineup focused on photography. It could be Tim's secret project.
What did this megapixel race end up at (on average)? Was it around 8 MP?
Somewhere around 24MP I believe.
I found a website site, cameraimagesensor.com, ...
Too bad they don't have Canon 6D on the list
Honestly Apple needs to address the lack of flash in its iOS devices sooner or later. It gets to the point that the pricing for more storage becomes a ripoff.
Something like that. The current 8MP sensor on the iPhone 5s is 4:3 ratio, so the 16:9 area used for HD video is cropped to a smaller area. DSLRs that shoot video do that. To get 8MP from video--specifically 2160p 16:9, they would have to either:
(1) use a native 16:9 sensor 8MP chip, which would crop 4:3 or 3:2 ratio photos to less than 8MP, or
(2) use a 4:3 sensor at greater than 8MP in order to attain 2160p without reducing the megapixel count for 4:3 and 3:2 ratio photos.