Phone 18 to feature variable aperture camera and "huge" increase in battery life

[Eric]

A shortlist of features we are aware of:

• Processor: The Pro models are expected to feature the A20 chip, built on the cutting-edge 2nm process, and jump to 12GB of RAM to better handle built-in AI capabilities.
• Camera: The iPhone 18 Pro is tipped to include a variable aperture for the main camera, allowing you to physically adjust light intake for better low-light performance and dynamic range.
• Design: Apple may introduce an under-display Face ID system, leading to a significantly smaller Dynamic Island.
• Connectivity: The Pro models are expected to drop Qualcomm for Apple’s custom C2 modem, delivering better power efficiency and integrated 5G satellite connectivity.
• Colors: Leaks suggest new colorways including Dark Cherry, Sky Blue, and a refreshed Red for the Pro lineup
• Battery: A physically larger battery

You can find more here

iPhone 18 Pro: Three new features could make you want to upgrade - 9to5Mac

iPhone 18 Pro is coming this fall, and three new features could be among the top upgrade motivators for Apple’s latest flagship model.

9to5mac.com

 

[Citysnaps]

Camera: The iPhone 18 Pro is tipped to include a variable aperture for the main camera, allowing you to physically adjust light intake for better low-light performance and dynamic range.

That would be huge if it's a true variable aperture, and permits throwing backgrounds out of focus (similar to the attached photo). Right now I'm skeptical.

 

[Cmaier]

That would be huge if it's a true variable aperture, and permits throwing backgrounds out of focus (similar to the attached photo). Right now I'm skeptical.

All the rumors are that it is an actual mechanical variable aperture. I’ve seen such things while disassembling dozens of chinese smartphones, so they do exist in that size. Not sure how much they can really be used to blur the background given that, due to lens size, you generally want to keep these things open to let in as much light as you can. Guess we’ll see.

 

[Eric]

All the rumors are that it is an actual mechanical variable aperture. I’ve seen such things while disassembling dozens of chinese smartphones, so they do exist in that size. Not sure how much they can really be used to blur the background given that, due to lens size, you generally want to keep these things open to let in as much light as you can. Guess we’ll see.

Agreed, real glass will always be a physical limitation without bulking up the device.

 

[Citysnaps]

All the rumors are that it is an actual mechanical variable aperture. I’ve seen such things while disassembling dozens of chinese smartphones, so they do exist in that size. Not sure how much they can really be used to blur the background given that, due to lens size, you generally want to keep these things open to let in as much light as you can. Guess we’ll see.

What I'm not getting/understanding (I'm still half asleep) is the required physics (for lack of a better word).

On a regular camera, if you want to blur out the background (say when making a portrait like the one above), you want to shoot at large apertures. I don't have the exif handy, but the one above was shot with a 35mm f/1.4 lens, wide open at f/1.4. If I wanted a sharp background with lots of depth of field, I'd stop down to f/11 of f/16 (assuming there's still enough ambient light).

I'm assuming most/all phone cameras with small lenses and no controllable aperture are always wide open. Yet backgrounds are relatively sharp. I get that's it's a ratio - which is why I'm skeptical about blurring out backgrounds on a phone cam.

 

[Cmaier]

What I'm not getting/understanding (I'm still half asleep) is the required physics (for lack of a better word).

On a regular camera, if you want to blur out the background (say when making a portrait like the one above), you want to shoot at large apertures. I don't have the exif handy, but the one above was shot with a 35mm f/1.4 lens, wide open at f/1.4. If I wanted a sharp background with lots of depth of field, I'd stop down to f/11 of f/16 (assuming there's still enough ambient light).

I'm assuming most/all phone cameras with small lenses and no controllable aperture are always wide open. Yet backgrounds are relatively sharp. I get that's it's a ratio - which is why I'm skeptical about blurring out backgrounds on a phone cam.

yes, the same physics applies. The issue is that the effective “f” of these lenses is pretty high as it is, because of their small size (even relative to the size of the sensor).

So the question will be what does Apple intend these apertures to be used for? Will it be the same “default” behavior, but the aperture can close some (e.g. to allow for brighter shooting conditions), or will they increase the size of the lens, and use the aperture to normally keep it somewhat closed, but open it more for portraiture shots?

Another factor is that because of computational photography, right now Apple wants each of the three sensors to essentially have no background blur - if the lens is blurring the background, that’s less information that the sensor has about the background, and less information that the processing can use to combine it with information from the other lenses.

So the long and the short of it is we actually have no idea what Apple intends to do with this, or what effect it will have.

 

[Eric]

What I'm not getting/understanding (I'm still half asleep) is the required physics (for lack of a better word).

On a regular camera, if you want to blur out the background (say when making a portrait like the one above), you want to shoot at large apertures. I don't have the exif handy, but the one above was shot with a 35mm f/1.4 lens, wide open at f/1.4. If I wanted a sharp background with lots of depth of field, I'd stop down to f/11 of f/16 (assuming there's still enough ambient light).

I'm assuming most/all phone cameras with small lenses and no controllable aperture are always wide open. Yet backgrounds are relatively sharp. I get that's it's a ratio - which is why I'm skeptical about blurring out backgrounds on a phone cam.

It all stays in focus so well due to the small size of the sensor. When you use portrait mode (or something similar for background blur) it does it through software changes, in fact they employ a lot of cool software tricks but will never be able to match a real lens and a real sensor of a genuine SLR or mirrorless camera in such a small form factor.

 

[Herdfan]

I get that's it's a ratio - which is why I'm skeptical about blurring out backgrounds on a phone cam.

Can it be done with software? ie you tell the camera to use a more open aperture and the software decides what the focal object is and blurs the rest.

 

[Citysnaps]

Can it be done with software? ie you tell the camera to use a more open aperture and the software decides what the focal object is and blurs the rest.

You can, to some extent via the "portrait" option. But it just doesn't feel right, not being able to control the amount of blur (at least on my iPhone 16 PM). It's much better with a regular camera and a large aperture lens. My favorite is a 35mm f/1.4 - it's the only lens I use.

I still have to be aware of environmental context. Often when shooting portraits of strangers I hit up on the street, I don't want too much background blur, feeling the context of the location being somewhat important. Sometimes I don't want any background blur. It just depends...

 

[Cmaier]

Can it be done with software? ie you tell the camera to use a more open aperture and the software decides what the focal object is and blurs the rest.

It could, but unless the variable aperture is such that the widest-open it gets is much *more* than what the current effective aperture is, it won’t blur anything. For example, the current telephoto lens has a 35-mm equivalent fixed aperture of something like f8.0. With a real full-frame camera, you aren’t going to get any background blur at f8.0. You’d want something like f2.8 or f2.0, at a maximum.

But making the aperture “variable” doesn’t suddenly make it possible to achieve f2.8. The lens only lets in so much light because of its size, and that puts a bound on the effective aperture. So if Apple intends the variable aperture to add blur, then it also needs to greatly increase the size of the lens.

 

[Eric]

This tells the story, the smaller sensor size means it can't take advantage of the optical features (even if the iPhone had bigger glass) and variable apertures. Being Apple I'm sure they will make use of it the best way possible but it seems like it will always be a limitation on smartphones as glass and sensors can't be scaled in this way.

 

[Cmaier]

This tells the story, the smaller sensor size means it can't take advantage of the optical features (even if the iPhone had bigger glass) and variable apertures. Being Apple I'm sure they will make use of it the best way possible but it seems like it will always be a limitation on smartphones as glass and sensors can't be scaled in this way.

They can kind of get away with it by combining the images from multiple smaller sensors, to effectively create a single larger sensor, but in the configurations they’ve done so far this can only buy them a small amount. (same principal applies to your eyes.). I think, long-term, they will add additional sensors for this reason, as it’s really the only thing they can do unless they are willing to make the device much thicker. FWIW, i’d be very interested to see what Apple could do if they made a real camera. Say a micro 4/3 sensor device that slips in your pocket but can run apps and has a real lens.

 

[rdrr]

They can kind of get away with it by combining the images from multiple smaller sensors, to effectively create a single larger sensor, but in the configurations they’ve done so far this can only buy them a small amount. (same principal applies to your eyes.). I think, long-term, they will add additional sensors for this reason, as it’s really the only thing they can do unless they are willing to make the device much thicker. FWIW, i’d be very interested to see what Apple could do if they made a real camera. Say a micro 4/3 sensor device that slips in your pocket but can run apps and has a real lens.

An Apple camera phone with an A mount. Mag attached an extra battery/remote trigger/grip.

 

[Herdfan]

An Apple camera phone with an A mount. Mag attached an extra battery/remote trigger/grip.

Or an action camera (think GoPro) with Apple integration and editing.

 

[Eric]

They can kind of get away with it by combining the images from multiple smaller sensors, to effectively create a single larger sensor, but in the configurations they’ve done so far this can only buy them a small amount. (same principal applies to your eyes.). I think, long-term, they will add additional sensors for this reason, as it’s really the only thing they can do unless they are willing to make the device much thicker. FWIW, i’d be very interested to see what Apple could do if they made a real camera. Say a micro 4/3 sensor device that slips in your pocket but can run apps and has a real lens.

Yeah I don't think anyone can argue with the fact that these devices (including Android) have changed the game by putting a really decent camera into the hands of every user. I think buying a real camera is ideal for those who want something more, they're just not intended for that kind of use. I too would like to see Apple get in the pro camera game with their attention to detail and quality.

 

[Cmaier]

Yeah I don't think anyone can argue with the fact that these devices (including Android) have changed the game by putting a really decent cameras into the hands of every user. I think buying a real camera is ideal for those who want something more, they're just not intended for that kind of use. I too would like to see Apple get in the pro camera game with their attention to detail and quality.

I’ll tell Ternus to buy Leica. I hear it’s for sale.

 

[Herdfan]

Yeah I don't think anyone can argue with the fact that these devices (including Android) have changed the game by putting a really decent camera into the hands of every user.

Except that I, and I am sure many others of my generation, are so thankful not everyone had a camera while in HS/college.

 

[Yoused]

If I understand rightly, one of the key issues here is focal length. In a SLR or proper small camera, you can have a lens/aperture combination that allows for reduced depth-of-field, whereas the form factor of the phone makes this dynamic problematic. It would seem that some sort of mirroring scheme to a sideways CCD might address this somewhat (and perhaps also allow the use of a common sensor for the front camera), but the CCD would probably have to have a different shape.

 

[Citysnaps]

Some of my best photographs were made with iPhones. Simply because I always have one with me. And I never know what I'm going to encounter when I'm out and about.

I try explaining that to people at the other forum who believe photography is about owning and using the best gear. To which my reply is something of the form of photography is about seeing, being able to read light, life experiences, imagination, being able to compose a frame, contemplating potential narratives a viewer might come up with telling a story of sorts, recognizing gesture, deciding which elements should drop into the shadows creating mystery to stimulate a viewer's imagination, and on and on. Some people get it, many don't over there.

 

[Cmaier]

If I understand rightly, one of the key issues here is focal length. In a SLR or proper small camera, you can have a lens/aperture combination that allows for reduced depth-of-field, whereas the form factor of the phone makes this dynamic problematic. It would seem that some sort of mirroring scheme to a sideways CCD might address this somewhat (and perhaps also allow the use of a common sensor for the front camera), but the CCD would probably have to have a different shape.

There are lots of phones (including new iphones) that use “periscope” lenses to get more distance between the two lens surfaces (the periscope is sort of like an S-shape, typically). I don’t know of any that rotate the sensor (cmos - CCD’s haven’t been used much in many years) perpendicularly, probably because nobody has yet wanted to make a phone thick enough to benefit from that. I’ve been taking apart a lot of Xiaomi phones to examine their cameras (they have some sort of a deal with Leica), and even the Xiaomi phones with giant camera bumps still align their sensors parallel to the screen.

It’s been a long time so I may have this wrong, but my recollection is that you need an aperture diameter that is equal to the focal length divided by the f-stop.

I think the true focal length of the telephoto lens is something like 20mm, so for f2.8 you’d need something like a 7mm aperture. I think that’s doable on an iphone, but it’s trickier than it sounds because you also need the periscope in order to get that distance, so the total volume of polycarbonate for that is going to be much bigger than it would otherwise be.