Skip to main content

Apple details new iPhone 6/iPhone 6 Plus iSight camera

Packed inside the new iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus is a new iSight camera with new sensors and focus pixels which allows for autofocusing up to twice as fast. Panorama photos can now include up to 43 megapixels in each photo. The big story here is the iPhone 6 Plus’s camera, which will support optical image stabilization. Rather than relying only on digital image stabilization, the camera borrows a technique from DSLR cameras allowing the sensor to move up and down and side to side.

The iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus also pack in improvements to the video with support for 1080p shooting at 60fps or 30fps. Slow-motion video can be captures at 240fps or 120fps. The front camera also enjoys new features including burst mode and single shot HRD mode.

 

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

You’re reading 9to5Mac — experts who break news about Apple and its surrounding ecosystem, day after day. Be sure to check out our homepage for all the latest news, and follow 9to5Mac on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn to stay in the loop. Don’t know where to start? Check out our exclusive stories, reviews, how-tos, and subscribe to our YouTube channel

Comments

  1. Spencer Morse - 10 years ago

    I don’t care about the “stabalization.” I just want to be able to zoom-in on my photos and see incredible detail, like I can on my friend’s S5! They didn’t even bother to bump-up the megapixel count, and yet they improved the low-lighting software (shakes head in dissapointment)…

    • Raymond J Holroyd - 10 years ago

      some people are never satisfied, although I agree, but they’ll never be a product that satisfies everyone

      • Spencer Morse - 10 years ago

        It’s not that I’m not satisfied– I am! I’m just very dissapointed that they didn’t increase the megapixel count (and spare me the “Megapixel’s don’t matter” BS; for this argument, it DOES matter), and yet they improved on the low-lighting software. I love the Apple Pay features; I love the capabilities of the iWatch; however, the camera was a letdown…

      • Edison Wrzosek - 10 years ago

        @Spencer,

        Yeah sorry, but the MP argument is not BS, you’re assertion that it’s BS is what’s BS…

        Being a Nikon DSLR and Canon PowerShot user, I can attest to larger sensor sites and better lenses being more critical than packing in more MP onto such a tiny sensor and introducing more luminance and chromatic noise into the image. I thank GOD that Apple didn’t listen to the MP pundits like you and stuck to their guns like Nikon did in their DSLR’s and kept their cameras at 12MP until the technology advanced enough.

        Right now I care more about the lens protruding, and not the sensor being 8MP. Unless you need to create billboard-sized prints, 8MP is sufficient, especially if at the per-pixel level there’s less noise and better detail.

      • Spencer Morse - 10 years ago

        CHALLENGE ACCEPTED 8-)

        First of all, you didn’t have to be a complete DOUCHE and call me an “MP pundit”. I completely understand that MPs don’t “entirely” matter; it’s the processors and the lenses that are the most important features on a camera. However, my original argument was that they should have increased the MP count, just a liiiiittle (1 or even 2MPs), to account for the noise I see when I digitally zoom-in on my iPhone’s photos, but they didn’t, and thusly I am slightly dissapointed. Still, the fact of the matter is that MPs DO matter– just not at all levels. Let me break it down for you, since you were douchy enough to call me a MP pundit:

        For 90% of the people out there, I completely agree that MPs don’t matter anymore. But there are 3 types of consumers out there that the “MP argument” applies to: Consumers, Prosumers, and Professionals.

        If you’re prosumer or professional, then yes, you should care about the sensor type, image processor, chromatic aberration, high-ISO noise processing, and other ISO-related features. Knowing that you may/may not have an incredible optical zoom on your pro/prosumer camera, you’re probably going to care about the difference between an 8MP RAW photograph taken on your T1 vs a 14MP photograph taken on your 60D– if your lens is crap/not crap.

        If you’re a 100% bonified consumer-level photographer, in regards to the argument, “Megapixels don’t matter,” there are only 2-things that you should care about: Shutter latency, and optical zoom (that last one is relivant to our discourse). The iPhone’s zoom– and it’s certainly not optical– is crap; admit it, it’s pure CRAP. THIS is what I was talking about in my original statement; knowing that the optical capabilities of the iPhone’s lens is crap– yet the other areas were recently improved upon– why wouldn’t Apple simply increase the MP count on the sensor is used, for a better DIGITAL zoom??

        Bottom line: Thanks for being a douche and telling me what I already know about cameras; MPs DO matter when the optical zoom is pure crap (or non-existant). That’s part of the reason why you see higher MP-counts on phones like the Samsung S5 (only part).

      • Edison Wrzosek - 10 years ago

        Wow, I don’t recall issuing a challenge to you… My comment was not open-ended, and more or less firmly definitive.

        BTW, calling you a pundit of megapixels:

        “an expert in a particular subject or field who is frequently called on to give opinions about it to the public”

        Does NOT, by any means or justifications, deserve being called a douche:

        “A douche is a device used to introduce a stream of water into the body for medical or hygienic reasons, or the stream of water itself. Douche usually refers to vaginal irrigation, the rinsing of the vagina, but it can also refer to the rinsing of any body cavity. A douche bag is a piece of equipment for douching—a bag for holding the fluid used in douching.”

        By using that derogatory reference, you essentially prove you’re overly sensitive, and somewhat overbearing of your knowledge, especially after reading your little “article”, which proves my point of you being a MP pundit, by it’s very definition. I guess I must have caught you at that time of the month.

        Now, to rebut your little article…

        Your assumption that Apple “should have increased” the megapixel count on the iP6 sensor attempts to imply that you know better than the engineers at Apple and Sony (who made the sensor for Apple) as to what is appropriate for the device to ensure upmost image quality, and what can actually fit into the device. When building a smartphone camera, usually digital zoom is the only option available, as current technologies in lens optics required for optical zoom mechanisms are too large to fit into a device that has to pack a full camera and optical assembly into a chassis that is 6.9-7.1mm thick. You cannot speak to this effect because I highly doubt you’re on Jony Ive’s team, nor do you work in such an industry to begin with based on your ignorant comments to the point, therefore are not sufficiently qualified to tell Apple what, and what not, to put into their device.

        If you want to call out the iPhone’s digital zoom for being crap, then call out EVERY OTHER SMARTPHONE CAMERA for having the same deficiency, minus the Nokia Lumia 1020. However even in the case of the 1020, the zoom is faked, because the FoV of the sensor is simply decreased in order to simulate a zoom-in of the image; a zoomed photo on the 1020 has a much lower overall MP rating than full FoV, and that to me is also JUNK. Why? Because when I zoom, I want the full resolution, not some crippled, faked, cropped image. While I am no fan of digital zoom, and never have been, the bicubic interpolation used by the iPhone ISP is no slouch, and does an adequate job, with the approximate quality of other phones in its class, perhaps slightly better now that it contains a better ISP and noise reduction algorithms. Do you, by chance know, the physical size difference between the sensor in the 1020 vs the iP5S and 6+? A sensor of that size would NEVER fit into a phone the size of an iPhone, at least not for many years to come until the sensor technology improves and manufacturers find ways to control sensor noise more efficiently.

        The average consumer typically views their images on-screen, or with their friends on Facebook or Instagram in this day and age; those consumers don’t care what you hand them, because in those mediums, almost any smartphone camera will do. But to those who choose to take the photos they snap and actually make something of them, such as photo books for family and friends, high-quality edits for artistic purposes, printing, you want that proper balance between sensor noise and megapixels. 8MP has for a long time been sufficient for large prints, and as long as the sensor is good, excellent digital images. Almost every camera manufacturer, until just recently, was in a megapixel race using sensors less than a square centimetre in diameter, yielding shit quality. Now they’ve rolled back the dial and reverted to 8-12MP sensors, because they realized the cameras were creating images that looked worse than 5MP shooters with larger sensors from 3 years prior. Cell phone makers haven’t caught on to this trend, and as most are fighting the likes of Samsung to look good on spec sheets, haven’t stopped to think whether it was actually a wise course of action. So far only Apple has stayed the course and is sticking with lower MP sensors which yield lower noise levels in order to provide the consumer with superior image quality.

        BTW, shutter latency is all but mute on the iPhone 5S and 6/6+, I get nearly-instant actuation of the shutter on my 5S, which is orders of magnitude better than on ANY Android device.

        Your final mention of the Samsung Band-Aid 5 is quite amusing… Samsung has never been about making what’s best for the consumer, they’ve always been about “being first” and making themselves look good on a spec sheet. As I stated earlier, on a side-by-side comparison of images taken with a iP5S vs SGS5, despite the double MP count, when zoomed to 1:1 view, the iPhone still renders better images, with less distortion, better clarity, and less luminance noise, which in turn generates a cleaner, more pleasant image. There is a reason iPhone pictures are #1 on every photo site.

        Now, I suggest you go along about your business and do not pursue this any further. This would only result in further comments from me crushing your lack of knowledge and further embarrassing you on this forum.

        And yes, now I’m being a douche, had to oblige.

      • Jack Gnasty - 10 years ago

        @ Edison
        Dude, take a chill pill. You really do sound like an ass telling someone else what should or shouldn’t be important to them. I think what you mean to say is “Megapixels don’t matter to me…” What you may not be aware of is that better sensors do exist. Sony, which makes Apples current sensors, has a higher pixel count sensor with all of the bells and whistles available today. Apple is holding it back for another year. What’s wrong with being disappointed about that?

        You be happy with mediocrity, some of us will push for more.

      • Edison Wrzosek - 10 years ago

        @Jack,

        Again another person that is overly sensitive, and speaking about something they’re not informed enough about to make an intelligent statement, gotta love it…

        Did you stop to think for one second, that perhaps there are reasons other than physical sensor size as contributing factors here? Higher megapixel sensors often drain more battery by way of more intensive data processing required by the ISP on the higher resolution images, more power drain due to increased data travelling along the system bus, more power used by the on-board storage to read and write the higher resolution images, the list goes on.

        And to imply I am happy with mediocrity is incorrect, as I want the best image quality I can get, and that’s what the iPhone delivers, because of their decisions in holding back to lower resolution sensors with less site noise, better tone mapping, dynamic highlight range, and per-pixel detail and clarity. On the other hand, I can claim those who don’t care about quality images and just go after the megapixel fad are the ones who strive for mediocrity.

    • Jack Gnasty - 10 years ago

      Completely agree. I was hoping for a 10 or 12MP sensor, would have been nice on the 6+. Most likely holding it back for another year.

      The problem for the prosumers is that were competing with other types of users for features. It would seem Apple has been more focused on the kids riding skateboards with the slow-mo and stabilization. I don’t want a Go-pro, I want something for better photography.

    • Caroline Nguyen - 10 years ago

      I agree, MP do matter until optical zoom arrives on mobile device. Edison is just way too fanboyish to admit it. He justifies whatever Apple puts out but will contradict himself when Apple follows again, instead of leading. Just like this:

      https://bgr.com/2012/02/13/samsungs-galaxy-note-is-the-most-useless-phone-ive-seen/

      BGR Apple fanboys totally diss on large screen phones because Apple didn’t have them.

      Two years later, they admit they were fanboys and were wrong:

      http://news.yahoo.com/truth-hurts-apple-fans-thank-samsung-big-iphone-204510402.html

      When Apple moves up in MP like everyone else, Edison again will justify Apple’s actions as every good fanboy should.

  2. I took a picture in my iphone 5s and samsung galaxy s5 at the same time. I put it on my monitor and zoomed in to the pictures. Guess what 5s had better detail than s5. If you think mega pixel matters too much you are absolutely wrong.

    • Spencer Morse - 10 years ago

      Megapixels don’t “entirely” matter, but when you increase the megapixel count that means it’s harder to process low-lighting shots. That said, see my comment above (they improved the low-lighting software, but not the megapixel count). Megapixels DO count, but they’re entirely missunderstood. Regardless, if you’re so confident in your claim (iPhone 5s vs S5) why don’t you post your two pictures– I don’t think you can do it here. Do it on Flickr or something– and let the audience be the judge ;-)

      • Edison Wrzosek - 10 years ago

        Sorry, I’ve seen head-to-head picture comparisons between the iP5S and SGS5 on sites like DPReview and Flickr, and the 5S blows the S5 out of the water, especially where noise levels and colour rendition is concern.

Author

Avatar for Zac Hall Zac Hall

Zac covers Apple news, hosts the 9to5Mac Happy Hour podcast, and created SpaceExplored.com.