Other The iPhone 15 2X telephoto scam

[Nozuka]

I don't think Apple can win here. There is a conflict between "technically correct" and "peoples expectations".
As has been said many times, even "Zoom" is technically a lie if you use different cameras to reach that result and i remember there were topics just like this back when they first started using another camera for it. And now that time has passed, it seems to be an acceptable term.

As for "todays" problem:
If they call it Digital Zoom, people will expect it to be the same as if they just digitally zoom in. (Meaning: Upscaling and terrible quality)

If they call it Optical Zoom, people get annoyed.

If they just call it Zoom, people will wonder if it isn't just a digital Zoom. (again, expecting terrible Quality)

If they invent a new word for it, people will also be confused.

In the end, the consumer just wants an easy way to "Zoom In", without getting terrible Quality. Apple found a neat solution for it, but there isn't really a word for it that is technically correct and also tells people what results to expect.

 

[ctjack]

So do we get RAW 48MP for Iphone 15 base? Or is it a differentiating factor between the Pro?

 

[RedTheReader]

This discussion will be relegated to the status of “audiophiles” arguing over whether they can truly make a distinction between formats/bitrates while everyone else is actually enjoying the music 🤷‍♂️

I truly resonate with this. I didn’t appreciate what I had while I had it, and now a loud sound incident has left me with hearing that’s substantially worse than before. You shouldn’t waste time arguing about the tech or the format, you should just enjoy the stuff while you can.

 

[cicalinarrot]

There is no optical zoom on any smartphone. Period. They all use prime lenses.

That has been debated in at least a dozen messages.
What we call an optical zoom in smartphones is never (or very rarely?) a zoom lens, as in proper cameras. Calling it a zoom is somehow technically inaccurate but, since it's universally used and understood, it's acceptable. It's as much "not a real zoom" as a digital zoom. But what causes the zoom is not digital (something about processing the 1X image digitally), so calling it optical is fine since it simply uses a different sensor with a different lens. So, since there's a different lens and a different analog image involved, we call it optical zoom. Not the same meaning as the zoom on a standalone cameras but it's not confusing.
While many people are confused if you call "optical zoom" some digital processing that you do on the image.

I think the key thing is the term "lens" is never used...

If I hadn't stated this somewhere else, the "2x Telephoto" as opposed to "3x Telephoto Camera" name, the "optical quality"... that's stuff Apple got us used to. It's all "technically true" stuff. Fine.
What I'm mad about is that I'm supposed to use the specifications to be able to understand what's behind the marketing name, so when they just say "telephoto", I can ask myself "wait, is it optical or digital"? And their answer is "optical", an "optical zoom". After reading that, I had to dig a while to understand what it actually was (and frankly couldn't find the words you quoted neither in the store, the presentation page or the specs).

 

[cicalinarrot]

I meant it will be a distinction without a difference (when it comes to phone cameras) soon enough.

This discussion will be relegated to the status of “audiophiles” arguing over whether they can truly make a distinction between formats/bitrates while everyone else is actually enjoying the music 🤷‍♂️

I feel that feel but... I'm the guy who's saying the cable is "24K gold plated" and not "24K gold". Not the guy who pretends a digital gold cable makes any difference
It's about marketing misuse of words, I'm sure the feature is cool, but I want them to call it with it's proper name, at least in the specifications.

 

[dallegre]

I truly resonate with this. I didn’t appreciate what I had while I had it, and now a loud sound incident has left me with hearing that’s substantially worse than before. You shouldn’t waste time arguing about the tech or the format, you should just enjoy the stuff while you can.

It's possible to do both!

 

[motrek]

Once again, not what I said. I clearly said they could call it optics if there's a moving lens or a different lens with another sensor responsible for the zoom. But since I were talking about the same sensor, that had to be the only solution to make their words mean what they claim. You keep extracting a small part of what I say and forgetting the rest.
...

I extract the parts that are wrong and reply to those. If you want me to stop doing that, stop posting s**t that's wrong.

 

[cthompson94]

That has been debated in at least a dozen messages.
What we call an optical zoom in smartphones is never (or very rarely?) a zoom lens, as in proper cameras. Calling it a zoom is somehow technically inaccurate but, since it's universally used and understood, it's acceptable. It's as much "not a real zoom" as a digital zoom. But what causes the zoom is not digital (something about processing the 1X image digitally), so calling it optical is fine since it simply uses a different sensor with a different lens. So, since there's a different lens and a different analog image involved, we call it optical zoom. Not the same meaning as the zoom on a standalone cameras but it's not confusing.
While many people are confused if you call "optical zoom" some digital processing that you do on the image.

If I hadn't stated this somewhere else, the "2x Telephoto" as opposed to "3x Telephoto Camera" name, the "optical quality"... that's stuff Apple got us used to. It's all "technically true" stuff. Fine.
What I'm mad about is that I'm supposed to use the specifications to be able to understand what's behind the marketing name, so when they just say "telephoto", I can ask myself "wait, is it optical or digital"? And their answer is "optical", an "optical zoom". After reading that, I had to dig a while to understand what it actually was (and frankly couldn't find the words you quoted neither in the store, the presentation page or the specs).

I got the wording from Apple right on their webpage, if you click on the 15 pro overview and then scroll down to the Iguana and click on the zoom in on camera button then scroll down to the first set of info. The other info about the 24mm, 28mm, and 35mm that I mentioned is down a little further.

 

[NT1440]

I feel that feel but... I'm the guy who's saying the cable is "24K gold plated" and not "24K gold". Not the guy who pretends a digital gold cable makes any difference
It's about marketing misuse of words, I'm sure the feature is cool, but I want them to call it with it's proper name, at least in the specifications.

I often tell people a digital signal is digital, all or nothing. Why waste money on fancy HDMI cable when even the cheap ones support the latest and greatest.

I used to joke that if you could find a way to pin out wire coat hangers you could DIY.

 

[motrek]

That has been debated in at least a dozen messages.
What we call an optical zoom in smartphones is never (or very rarely?) a zoom lens, as in proper cameras. Calling it a zoom is somehow technically inaccurate but, since it's universally used and understood, it's acceptable. It's as much "not a real zoom" as a digital zoom. But what causes the zoom is not digital (something about processing the 1X image digitally), so calling it optical is fine since it simply uses a different sensor with a different lens. So, since there's a different lens and a different analog image involved, we call it optical zoom. Not the same meaning as the zoom on a standalone cameras but it's not confusing.

What a bunch of word salad.

Apple says they have optical zoom in previous iPhones, you see different lenses, so you think "optical zoom in a phone must mean different lenses." And that's okay with you for no reason, you just arbitrarily decide that you're okay with it.

Now Apple is saying their new setup is optical zoom and you're arbitrarily deciding that you're not okay with it.

News flash, what they were doing before wasn't optical zoom, and what they're doing now isn't optical zoom either. You being okay with one and not the other is stupid and inconsistent.

 

[dallegre]

What a bunch of word salad.

Apple says they have optical zoom in previous iPhones, you see different lenses, so you think "optical zoom in a phone must mean different lenses." And that's okay with you for no reason, you just arbitrarily decide that you're okay with it.

Now Apple is saying their new setup is optical zoom and you're arbitrarily deciding that you're not okay with it.

News flash, what they were doing before wasn't optical zoom, and what they're doing now isn't optical zoom either. You being okay with one and not the other is stupid and inconsistent.

Zoom = popular parlance for relative AOV change. Optical "zoom" = optical AOV change. I guess it's all semantics, but it's really not hard to understand the validity of his argument. Using the word zoom to mean an optical change in AOV seems more honest than using "optical quality" to mean a sensor crop.

 

[cicalinarrot]

What a bunch of word salad.

Apple says they have optical zoom in previous iPhones, you see different lenses, so you think "optical zoom in a phone must mean different lenses." And that's okay with you for no reason, you just arbitrarily decide that you're okay with it.

Now Apple is saying their new setup is optical zoom and you're arbitrarily deciding that you're not okay with it.

News flash, what they were doing before wasn't optical zoom, and what they're doing now isn't optical zoom either. You being okay with one and not the other is stupid and inconsistent.

There was a different optics involved. That's why I was ok. Here it's a digital processing, that's why I'm not ok. If that's inconsistent to you, I really don't know what to say.

 

[StudioMacs]

The Xperia 1V actually has true optical zoom.

" The camera set-up is complemented by the ultra-wide 16mm, and the telephoto with true optical zoom between 85 and 125mm."

Edit: to add to my case in point to my last reply to OP, Sony states in their advertising true zoom and not optical quality. Sony even specifically states this "True optical zoom lens with no image degradation"

I stand corrected. I wasn’t aware there was a smartphone with an 85mm to 125mm zoom. I guess it’s the only one that isn’t a “scam” in that case /s

 

[StudioMacs]

There was a different optics involved. That's why I was ok. Here it's a digital processing, that's why I'm not ok. If that's inconsistent to you, I really don't know what to say.

The iPhone 15 at 2x produces the same 12 MP resolution the iPhone 14 does at 1x.

The image is not enlarged, resized, and the pixels are not enterpolated.

The iPhone 15 produces a narrower field of view to achieve 2x telephoto at the same resolution that iPhone 14’s main camera achieves 1x magnification.

 

[motrek]

There was a different optics involved. That's why I was ok. Here it's a digital processing, that's why I'm not ok. If that's inconsistent to you, I really don't know what to say.

Why does "different optics" make it okay?

If I own two different cameras with two different fixed fields of view, is it cool to say that I have one camera that does optical zoom?

No, it obviously f**king isn't. If I have two cameras, I have two cameras.

What Apple has done is the PRACTICAL EQUIVALENT of optical zoom. If they use two different cameras to deliver that practical equivalent, then great.

If they deliver the practical equivalent by only reading out a portion of a sensor, then it's just as much the practical equivalent as using a different camera altogether.

 

[dallegre]

Why does "different optics" make it okay?

If I own two different cameras with two different fixed fields of view, is it cool to say that I have one camera that does optical zoom?

No, it obviously f**king isn't. If I have two cameras, I have two cameras.

What Apple has done is the PRACTICAL EQUIVALENT of optical zoom. If they use two different cameras to deliver that practical equivalent, then great.

If they deliver the practical equivalent by only reading out a portion of a sensor, then it's just as much the practical equivalent as using a different camera altogether.

You're correct because the sensor on the telephoto (3x/5x) is inferior to the sensor on the main camera. So in that sense, 2x on the main camera is the practical equivalent to the quality of 3x/5x on the telephoto camera. It is not the practical equivalent in quality to a 2x (48mm equivalent) use of the entire 48mp 1x sensor.

So there we have it. What Apple has done with the 2x is the practical optical equivalent to the quality of the 3x/5x tele. But maybe not, because you'd have to factor in pixel size, sensor area, lens resolution and all that, and I'm not looking up all of those specs...but close enough.

 

[StudioMacs]

It is not the practical equivalent in quality to a 2x (48mm equivalent) use of the entire 48mp 1x sensor.

Apple never claimed it was a 48MP image.

The 2x magnification on the iPhone 15 is the equivalent of 1x magnification from iPhone 14’s 12MP image from the main camera.

The iPhone 15’s “scam” 2x magnification is superior to cropping and enlarging the iPhone 14’s main camera, which is the point some posters here seem to miss.

 

[motrek]

You're correct because the sensor on the telephoto (3x/5x) is inferior to the sensor on the main camera. So in that sense, 2x on the main camera is the practical equivalent to the quality of 3x/5x on the telephoto camera. It is not the practical equivalent in quality to a 2x (48mm equivalent) use of the entire 48mp 1x sensor.

So there we have it. What Apple has done with the 2x is the practical optical equivalent to the quality of the 3x/5x tele. But maybe not, because you'd have to factor in pixel size, sensor area, lens resolution and all that, and I'm not looking up all of those specs...but close enough.

The quality is irrelevant.

If Apple had added a dedicated 2x camera, nobody would be complaining, regardless of the quality of that camera.

These people are just upset that there isn't a separate camera. It's arbitrary and stupid.

 

[cicalinarrot]

These people are just upset that there isn't a separate camera. It's arbitrary and stupid.

It's very easy to feel right when you completely make up other people's opinion.

 

[motrek]

It's very easy to feel right when you completely make up other people's opinion.

Am I wrong?

If Apple had added a separate 2x camera to the iPhone 15, and said that the phone did 2x optical zoom, would you still be accusing them of fraud?

 

[Nozuka]

It's about marketing misuse of words, I'm sure the feature is cool, but I want them to call it with it's proper name, at least in the specifications.

There is no proper name for it.

 

[73CortinaV8]

It’s actually legit optical. The 48mp sensor is huuuge in its physical area compared with the ultra wide and telephoto sensors.

iPhone 14 Pro
Wide using 12mp pixel binning = 2.44micron pixels
Wide at 48mp = 1.22micron pixels
Telephoto x3 = 1 micron pixels
Ultra wide = 1 micron pixels

And drumroll
Wide 2x crop 12mp = 1.22 micron pixels

So your 2x crop is a real 12mp image with 1 real sensor pixel per pixel in the final image (no digital zoom). And it still has a larger pixel to gather light with than either the telephoto or the ultra wide.

Cropping is not the same as an optical zoom

What is the difference between zooming in and cropping?

If I take a photo by zooming in (optical) and cropping a photo without zoom. What would be the difference between the two? I know cropping reduces the photo quality but I'm interested in other

photo.stackexchange.com

 

[motrek]

Cropping is not the same as an optical zoom
...

Cropping isn't digital zoom, either. Digital zoom requires upsampling.

Can people stop talking about cropping, though, please?

Some people seem to think that the phone reads the entire 48MP image from the sensor and then just deletes a bunch of it (crops it) to do the zoom.

But that isn't even necessarily how the phone works. If the phone only reads the values from the sensor that it needs to make the output image, then it isn't even cropping, much less doing digital zoom.

 

[dallegre]

Cropping isn't digital zoom, either. Digital zoom requires upsampling.

Can people stop talking about cropping, though, please?

Some people seem to think that the phone reads the entire 48MP image from the sensor and then just deletes a bunch of it (crops it) to do the zoom.

But that isn't even necessarily how the phone works. If the phone only reads the values from the sensor that it needs to make the output image, then it isn't even cropping, much less doing digital zoom.

Speaking of semantic gymnastics. That's an interesting take.

 

[cicalinarrot]

Am I wrong?

If Apple had added a separate 2x camera to the iPhone 15, and said that the phone did 2x optical zoom, would you still be accusing them of fraud?

You're right here, when you say I wouldn't call it fraud in that case (it would be a zoom function that involves dedicated optics and not a differente digital processing of the very same analog input).
You were wrong in the previous message when you said "These people are just upset that there isn't a separate camera". Nobody here said a separate camera would be preferable, at least in this case. Not sure why you pretended that's my opinion several times. I stated repeatedly that I'm ok with how this solution works, I just firmly believe there's no way it can be called an optical zoom.