Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Iphone Apple

Apple Acknowledges iPhone 5 Camera Flaw 472

Posted by Soulskill
from the it's-not-a-bug-it's-a-feature dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Many iPhone 5 users are complaining that its camera is adding a purple flare to their photos. Speculation is that it's caused by the new sapphire lens cover that Apple touted as 'thinner and more durable than standard glass with the ability to provide crystal clear images.' Apple's response to those who've complained? 'The purple flare in the image provided is considered normal behavior for iPhone 5's camera.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Acknowledges iPhone 5 Camera Flaw

Comments Filter:
  • by sarbonn (1796548) on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @07:23AM (#41536711) Homepage Journal
    I've been an Apple fan of its peripheral devices for a few years now. I got in on the original Iphone and ever since then have bought quite a few of the products that Apple puts out. The problem in almost all of their launches is that they have initial problems, clean them up, and then things work out great for those who like their products. The only real part of the problem is that people want the next thing right now rather than waiting a month or so and figuring out if the device is everything they hoped it would be. Because of that, I don't really have a lot of sympathy for buyers until after the warming period has ended. I'll probably buy an Iphone 5 myself, but I'll buy it AFTER they've worked out the kinks, making it the phone I want rather than the phone that I MUST HAVE.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @07:25AM (#41536731)
    Antennagate: Such a non-issue that they had to give every single person a case.
  • Re:What? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Joce640k (829181) on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @07:26AM (#41536741) Homepage

    The iPhone4 didn't do this. It took great photos, as good as most consumer-level cameras.

    Apple told everybody the camera in the iPhone5 was better. Turns out they messed up and it isn't. They're being held responsible for their claims, why does that surprise you?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @07:26AM (#41536747)

    Or more like - every camera can have that issue, it's optics. Thank Gizmodo for generating
    more page views from a non-issue now thw "map gate" and "scuff gate" aren;t the latest whine.
    This has been addressed better over a week ago.

      http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/09/26/the-iphone-5s-camera-suffering-purple-haze-flaw-not-fast/

  • Re:Simple (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Speare (84249) on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @07:32AM (#41536821) Homepage Journal

    They are holding it wrong.

    While it's a predictable joke after Antennagate, there is a kernel of truth here. It's a challenge for all cellphone cameras, not just Apple's, to capture the light you want and to weed out the stray light you don't want.

    On a dedicated camera, the lens is typically recessed. This does two things: avoids light from the side to bounce around in the optics, and avoids fingerprints on the lens itself. Light from the side, and finger oils on the lens, are big contributors to lens flare. Combining side light and oils on the optics is a recipe for DIY Instagram photos.

    On a cellphone, especially Apple's, they try hard not to have recessed areas on the case. It makes the whole phone thicker than it needs to be, and it catches pocket lint and sharp objects like keys or pencils. Luckily, a really flush surface is fairly easy to clean.

    So that leaves the side light. If the brightest light sources are behind you, no problem with side-light lens flare. (It may make it harder to see the preview screen though.) If you have a strong light off to your side, and it may be able to fall on the lens, then cupping your hand into a primitive gobo or shield will help a lot.

  • Re:Simple (Score:3, Insightful)

    by dreamt (14798) on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @07:33AM (#41536833)

    Actually, the probably are -- as I posted below, the iPhone 5 picture is looking much more towards the sun (given the amount of tree in the pictures) than the others by at least a few degrees, so yes, the person is holding it wrong. No digital camera can make up for looking directly into the sun. Poor photographer = poor picture.

  • wonder how long? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by arbiter1 (1204146) on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @07:33AM (#41536841)
    Apple blamed the end user for the issue til they finally fessed up that it was their hardware/software? They did it with the whole antenna and grip of death that cause massive connection issues.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @07:37AM (#41536897)

    Yes, we expected excuses from the fanbois. Thing is, how a camera handles bright light sources in or just outside the picture is an item on the checklist for a good camera. Purple flares from the lens coating, lines from saturated CMOS sensors, etc, are things that one might expect from a cheap "has a camera because every phone must have one" cellphone, but not from the flagship product of an expensive brand. These artifacts are pathetic and the excuses even more so.

  • Re:Stupid human! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @07:45AM (#41536961)

    That is not Chromatic abberation, that would merely be a fringing on one side or the other. It is true "Flare".

    Most likely the sapphire window is letting in more UV and IR light and that is bouncing between the elements in the lens to cause the result seen.

  • by msauve (701917) on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @07:46AM (#41536979)
    The only conclusion logically possible is that he's only had one smartphone in the past 8 years, and it was one of those flawed iPhones.
  • by blahbooboo (839709) on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @07:47AM (#41536993)

    Camera review site (known for not being slanted in their reviews) to the iPhone 5 for an initial review (longer one comparing to other phones will come later) and dedicated a whole page analyzing the flare issue.

    http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6867454450/quick-review-apple-iphone-5-camera [dpreview.com]

    Here's their analysis of the flare issue:

    "Really, our advice is not to worry. Just do what you should do anyway, and avoid putting bright lights near the edge of the frame when shooting."

    Their final conclusion on the 5's camera:

    "The iPhone 5 is a fine mobile device, with an excellent camera. In qualititative terms it's not the best camera out there, and nor is it the best camera on a smartphone (the Nokia 808 has that honor, for now) but it offers satisfying image quality, some neat functions like auto panorama and HDR mode, and - crucially - it is supremely easy to use. It isn't much better than the iPhone 4S, as far as its photographic performance is concerned, but it isn't any worse (notwithstanding a somewhat more noticeable propensity towards lens flare). When manufacturers employ pixel-binning to achieve higher ISO settings we don't normally celebrate the fact, but in the case of the iPhone 5, it gives you greater flexibility in poor light (i.e., you might actually get a picture now, where you just wouldn't with the iPhone 4S) and the drop in quality is unnoticeable when the images are used for sharing/web display."

    Thanks for posting this link. The DPreview camera review is what should have been posted than the usual Gizmodo anti-apple trolling to generate page views...

  • by zippthorne (748122) on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @07:51AM (#41537029) Journal

    Well, yeah, but being a camera with no baffling or shrouds, and a first surface designed as much for scratch resistance as for optical quality, it's going to have big ugly lens flares if the light source isn't diffuse. The only news here is that the big ugly lens flare also has some chromatic aberration.

    If you want to take good pictures, get a camera. A cameraphone is for candids and recording the scene at car accidents.

  • by sFurbo (1361249) on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @07:55AM (#41537077)
    Every smartphone allowed you to short circuit two antenna tuned to work at different frequencies? Oh, you bought Steve Jobs' bad excuse, and is confounding antennagate, the problem caused Apple insistence on letting designers engineer the antenna, with the problem of the human body being a good absorber for cell phone radiation, which is experienced by every phone. Man, that really was a low point for Jobs, talking about a completely unrelated issue, and hoping that people didn't caught on. It seems to have worked in some cases.
  • Re:Stupid human! (Score:0, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @08:02AM (#41537145)
    It didn't take long after Jobs for Apple products to start down the corporate road to shitsville.
  • Re:Simple (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jest3r (458429) on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @08:02AM (#41537159)

    How is it a challenge when this was a non-issue in the iPhone 4 / 4S ??

    Apple shit the bed on quality control this time around. Everyday I read about more problems with my shiny new iPhone5 !!

  • by Kahlandad (1999936) on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @08:14AM (#41537239)

    This isn't a chromatic aberration. Chromatic aberration is when an image isn't focused correctly because different wavelengths (colors) of light refract differentially when entering a new medium (like how a prism separates white light into the full spectrum). When you have chromatic aberrations, objects in the image have a slightly out-of-focus color streaked look to them, like when an old projector TVs didn't have the RGB elements aligned.

    This is a flare, which is caused by the scattering of bright light just outside of the frame as it hits the side of the lens.

  • Re:Stupid human! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by tangelogee (1486597) on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @08:19AM (#41537281)

    I hope you mean convenience...although continence might work for some apple fanbois too! http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/continence [merriam-webster.com]

  • perspective change (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @08:26AM (#41537335)

    look at the branch hanging down from the tree on the right. In the left picture, it is above the top of the "hill", on the left picture it is above the tree, just to the left of the top of the "hill". This shift is perspective means that the cameraman on the left is standing further to the left, and turning the camera more toward the right, that is toward the sun. While I own a GS3, and find it far superior in almost every way to my old iphone, I have to say that this comparison is not fair. I'm not saying that there is not a problem with the lens, that kind of flare is most definitely a problem but, but if we are going to bitch and complain, lets at least back it up with fair examples. There are more than enough of them

  • by Daemonik (171801) on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @08:27AM (#41537339) Homepage

    I've been an Apple fan of its peripheral devices for a few years now. I got in on the original Iphone and ever since then have bought quite a few of the products that Apple puts out. The problem in almost all of their launches is that they have initial problems, clean them up, and then things work out great for those who like their products. The only real part of the problem is that people want the next thing right now rather than waiting a month or so and figuring out if the device is everything they hoped it would be. Because of that, I don't really have a lot of sympathy for buyers until after the warming period has ended. I'll probably buy an Iphone 5 myself, but I'll buy it AFTER they've worked out the kinks, making it the phone I want rather than the phone that I MUST HAVE.

    There is a flaw in your argument. If everyone is "smart" and waits for the bugs to shake out, then nobody will buy a product when it releases, the bugs won't be discovered before you feel it's safe enough to buy one and quite likely, with dismal initial sales the product will disappear from shelves, ie HP's WebOS tablet or they'll decide it's not worth investing more money into fixing a troubled product.

    So shut your mouth and have some sympathy for the suckers paying up to be beta testers to ensure you get a nice finished product.

  • by Sponge Bath (413667) on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @08:27AM (#41537345)

    The DPreview camera review is what should have been posted than the usual Gizmodo anti-apple trolling to generate page views...

    And yet the unbiased and very informative post by sasparillascott still got some down mods. The anti-Apple hysteria has closed the minds of many to rational discussion of facts.

  • by astrodoom (1396409) on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @09:05AM (#41537725)
    You can't make the argument that it's as good as it gets when the previous version didn't have the problem.
  • Re:Stupid human! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @09:07AM (#41537747)

    That's not how vision works. We see reflected light, at night with either bulb we see the color of the light reflected back to our eye by the wall. The wall is not "white" it reflects white in daylight, yellow in incandescent light and green in fluorescent light.

  • Re:Simple (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @09:11AM (#41537791)

    If you're reading about them instead of experiencing them, you should probably calm the fuck down.

  • by Dishevel (1105119) on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @09:13AM (#41537811)

    I am cool with the iPhone 5 not having a top tier camera.
    But maybe they should not have touted the new lens cover as having the ability to deliver crystal clear images.
    Do not advertise that which you can not deliver. If you think that telling people how awesome your camera is and then pointing to a lens cover that will throw a purple flare on images that have some light source in them and telling people it will deliver crystal clear images I have only two questions for you.
    One. Do you think it is ok for HTC to lie to you about their products?
    Two. Taking into account the answer from one. Do you realize that your ability to critically think has been compromised by your love of Apple?

  • Re:Stupid human! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @09:23AM (#41537983)

    It didn't take long after Jobs for Apple products to start down the corporate road to shitsville.

    Apple products always were like that. It's just that since Jobs reality distortion field went offline, peoples are starting to see all these flaws as real actual problem instead of fashionable features.

    Posting as AC because I don't like easy karma.

  • by WolfgangPG (827468) on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @09:24AM (#41538005)
    The iPhone 4S did not have this problem. The iPhone 5 does. This is a downgrade. It isn't a DSLR vs Cellphone. It is 4s vs 5. It is Lumia 920 vs 5. Apple in the past has produced some of the better cellphone cameras. I don't think anyone here is saying iPhone==DSLR, however they are saying -- 5 should be >= 4S.
  • by astrodoom (1396409) on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @09:55AM (#41538393)
    Yeah, I read the article. I'm not sure you did though. Unless you mean better in some sort of artsy photography sense, because what I see is two pictures of essentially the same scene (shifted a bit). The iphone 4s has a very bright white area where the sun is, the iphone 5 has a bright purple outlining the same area. Forgive me, but I'm really not at all sure what you're claiming is "better". Perhaps you meant a different article?
  • by astrodoom (1396409) on Wednesday October 03, 2012 @12:50PM (#41540583)
    Okay, there's no purple in the 4S picture, so you've definitely lost me. The iPhone 4S and iPhone 5 have the same camera spec-wise, the only difference is the glass vs sapphire cover. I don't think it's a fair statement to say that aside from the obvious flaws in the photo, the sapphire cover is better. That's like saying the car runs great except it stalls every so often.

The meta-Turing test counts a thing as intelligent if it seeks to devise and apply Turing tests to objects of its own creation. -- Lew Mammel, Jr.

Working...