You don't need a "special" USB-C cable, just one capable of USB 3 data. Apple has long provided USB-C charging cables capable of only USB 2 data transfers.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Explains Why iPhone 15 Pro Max is Limited to 5x Optical Zoom
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra may disagree. Besides. anyone who wants great photo camera should not be using smartphone in a first place.
Because we like to drip feed everything. Samsung have has 5X since 2020 and 10X since 2021. Huwawei had it even before Samsung. Oh well the joys of being in the Apple ecosystem.
Using a faster shutter speed requires a wider aperture, higher ISO, or more light. Apple is already pushing the technological and physical boundaries on all of the above.
That’s not it Apple just deliberately hold things back. It’s not that they can’t do it
They chose not too. Because they need to hold things back to get people to upgrade. Apple could easily match Samsung’s camera tech but chose not to as people will buy apple’s phone regardless.
Probably missing from the regular Pro because then they'd had to have gone to 256 base storage which would mean raising the starting price by $100 as they did for the Pro Max.
Again, tradeoffs… A 200mp sensor that fits in a smartphone will have tiny photoreceptors, which means reduced low light performance and dynamic range.
There is nothing wrong with the speed of Samsung phones. Sure the latest A series chip will smoke the latest snapdragon or exynos chip in benchmarks, however they are still plenty fast. The last snapdragon chip will handle anything you throw at it. Hell the iphone doesn't even do split screen apps and has no Dex counterpart despite all the power of the chip.
Really, so what was the huge advantage to the Pro model in the last 3 or 4 years, oh master? A 75" tv costs more than a 40" due to the difference in size — EXACTLY what would justify the price difference between a Pro and a Pro Max.
So what would be so wrong with that? It's 2023 — are we really going to miss 128?..
Those fast zoom lenses are not only more expensive, but also much larger and heavier. Unless it’s from a crappy lens maker who will deliver a smaller, cheaper, and lighter package with substantially compromised image quality.
There’s no magic bullet. Every design choice comes with tradeoffs. Even the most expensive lens will have drawbacks besides the price which will make it less suitable for some use cases.
Apple is making design decisions to benefit their customers, most of whom are not professional photographers. Lots of camera enthusiasts have abandoned their dedicated cameras over the last several years because smartphone cameras provide good enough results for the most common use cases, along with incredible portability and ease of use. Not to mention the fact that the phone is always with you, including times and places where you wouldn’t dream of lugging big and heavy photo gear.
They can do this by paying a license fee (you will ultimately pay). 10X means another camera assembly and the move of the current lens back to 3X for portraits.
Agreed. I used it back on the 21 ultra and even then it was stable. The Samsung watches can also measure blood pressure and the Apple watch can't seem to do that. Waited all these years for better zoom on the iphone and still not close to Samsung.
The gains in zoom by Apple have been pitiful. We had 2 x on the iphone 7 in 2016. Then had to wait until another 4 years to get to 2.5 x zoom. Then the following year got a measly 3x when Samsung already had 10X by that point. Now 5 X two years later.
That's not really the same thing. For most people (at least who I talk to, and read here), the Pro and Pro Max have generally been considered equivalent; some people just prefer a larger screen, some really dislike the larger screen. I, and many other people, fall into the latter category; the extra cost has been to compensate for the larger screen, not because it is a superior or more premium product. Come to think of it, if the Pro cost $100 more than the Pro Max, I'd probably still spend the extra money for the smaller one.
Many people would be happy to spend pay the price of a Pro Max for a Pro with the same features, at least with respect to the camera. I'm probably one of them, though the diminished quality on the 3X end definitely gives me some pause.
I can answer this one:
1: getting it out-of-the-way, money.
2: USB 3.2 cables are much thicker and much more hard to coil than 2.0 or power only cables, taking up more space in the packaging that Apple is constantly going on about shrinking the size of.
3: USB 3.2 cables are much more fragile, because of the extra wiring needed for the increased data speeds. For cables almost exclusively used for charging only, it’s not really necessary to include a more fragile component.
4: because literally none of their competitors include 3.2 cables in the boxes.
Samsung‘s latest $1200 flagship? USB 2.0 in the box.
Their latest $1800+ foldable? 2.0 cable in the box.
The Google Pixel line of products? 2.0 cables in the box at all pricepoints.
Existing Apple products like iPads and M1 MacBook Airs that ship with a USB-C cable? 2.0 only.
If their competitors don’t have it, their customers won’t use it and it’s more expensive and fragile, literally what is the benefit?
I watched some of that video. It was weird how he showed a clip from a previous video showing him praising the Samsung for how much better its telephoto images are than the iPhone 14 Pro, only to then complain about the lens configuration on the 15 Pro, which is a closer match to the Samsung.
He has some good points about how misleading Apple is when marketing their camera capabilities, but he’s being sensationalist.
The S23 Ultra has a very big telephoto lens. For its size. But in dedicated cameras you can find far more bigger zooms than that. It’s not Apple’s or Samsung’s fault. Is just physics. All other aspects of iPhone may improve in the future with the aid of AI but zoom is a lost case. Perhaps a foldable iPhone in the future which will have more room to incorporate a bigger telephoto lens surpass the 10X limit but don’t expect miracles.
I'd say that's because you get more if you pay more.I would be more curious to find out why 5x zoom is limited to the iPhone 15 Pro Max
Based on the reviews I’ve seen, the iPhone 15 Pro camera outperforms the S23 in many settings.
As I was going through the reviews yesterday and cross referencing against other sites, I saw that, too. It does appear that the Android world reached out into the 5x world and beyond, but most have settled back to 3x or 3.5x with 10x being an outlier. As with most things Android, it’s about which bullets are important and it seems that “all the x’s” doesn’t drive as many sales anymore.I think it’s interesting that this started spreading as soon as the iPhone 15 series was announced…
Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra Might Come With a Camera Downgrade
Samsung might revamp the telephoto camera on the Galaxy S24 Ultra.www.gadgets360.com
Would definitely be an interesting move, although not the first backtrack from Samsung.
You can put it on a tripod or something similarly for 10x. No human hands required to steady it.
Agreed. I used it back on the 21 ultra and even then it was stable. The Samsung watches can also measure blood pressure and the Apple watch can't seem to do that. Waited all these years for better zoom on the iphone and still not close to Samsung.
The gains in zoom by Apple have been pitiful. We had 2 x on the iphone 7 in 2016. Then had to wait until another 4 years to get to 2.5 x zoom. Then the following year got a measly 3x when Samsung already had 10X by that point. Now 5 X two years later.