Other Will iPhone 17 finally shoot 8k?

[ToddH]

Who out there is just dying for “8K” anything? There’s no standard yet for television resolution. The sensors on an iPhone barely shoot true 4K, and on these small screens you’d be hard pressed to tell the difference between 4k and 1080

I can put a well done 1080p bluray on my calibrated tv and it looks better than UHD. What is the purpose of 8K?

Right but 8K provides more room to crop video when editing because of its larger format. Just like cropping a 48mp image to get a 24mp etc. 8K will be best for that instead of viewing on a huge screen. My S25 Ultra shoots 8k, I can't tell the visual difference between 8k & 4k on the S25 display screen, but looks great though. Maybe next year for iphone...

 

[Moreplease]

To this day, most cine cameras in Hollywood do not capture in 8K.

That’s with hundred-million-dollar budgets, unlimited storage, the immediate target display being a 30 ft cinema screen, and some concern about how the movie will look in 20 years on whatever display tech we have then.

 

[uacd]

Why do you need gimmick of 8k on iPhone with a such small camera lens?
Professional movie cameras manage to 1080p output way better comparing to 4k compressed iPhone video.
Apple should significantly improve lens size and other features to have a great quality!

Ability to digital zoom and crop more, as well as pixel binning into 4k would potentially give twice better IQ/better bitrate.
In general, 2025 was high time for Apple to jump on 8k bandwagon. They have first introduced 4k back in 2015, ten years ago. With modern technology, processors that they claim are "desktop-level", new 48MP camera modules it is more than possible.

Professional cameras vs iPhone is not even a question. They have much larger sensors, real lens and so on. But the problem is that pro cameras are usually not weatherproof, and iPhone in comparison is. Would be a pity to lose 5000$+ camera to rain, snow or dust. With iPhone? Not so expensive in comparison, even if in some rare occasion it gets eaten by condensate. Plus iPhone or any other smartphone is pocketable, always with you device.

If I was to say more, 9 megapixel Osmo Pocket 3 shoots 5 times better 4k footage than any iPhone, and it costs dirt cheap nowadays. All due to 1 inch sensor and real lens. Unfortunately it has few downsides - 20mm equivalent lens (wide), camcorder-like form factor (not ideal for universal use like photo+video) and no weather sealing whatsoever, even dust and sand can kill its stabilization system

 

[Trausner]

Well, that didnt happen… too bad. I was almost thinking i missed the video part for th iPhone 17 pro. I thought the internet must have cut out. They just told os about a new codec that almost no one will ever use and some sync feature that almost no one will ever use… I guess one can hope for next year. It’s time to replace my iPhone 8. I guess I’ll just buy an iphone 15 pro max instead a 17 pro max. Both phones have almost identical videography capabilities.

 

[Moreplease]

I guess I’ll just buy an iphone 15 pro max instead a 17 pro max. Both phones have almost identical videography capabilities.

Not at all. The 17 Pro (and 16 Pro) has double the readout speed of the 15 Pro. That makes a big difference in rolling shutter artefacts and also slow-motion capability.

8K (and especially ProRes RAW 8K with full colour information) is meaningless on a Quad Bayer sensor with ‘only’ 48 megapixels, since such a sensor has no more colour information than a regular 12-megapixel sensor (4K worth). I suppose that is why Apple has not done it although iPhones have had the readout speed and processing power to trivially do 8K video for many years now.

 

[uacd]

Not at all. The 17 Pro (and 16 Pro) has double the readout speed of the 15 Pro. That makes a big difference in rolling shutter artefacts and also slow-motion capability.

8K (and especially ProRes RAW 8K with full colour information) is meaningless on a Quad Bayer sensor with ‘only’ 48 megapixels, since such a sensor has no more colour information than a regular 12-megapixel sensor (4K worth). I suppose that is why Apple has not done it although iPhones have had the readout speed and processing power to trivially do 8K video for many years now.

Totally makes sense now. I also thought about this: aren’t these 48MP sensors actually bloated ones?

The fact is, it is still impossible to get 48MP non-denoised RAW stills, only ProRAW ones. As well as smh 12MP binned photos often look better than 48MP ones, that’s without mentioning that night mode photos are unavailable at 48MP: sensor switches to 12MP and makes large pixels by combining different ones.

To me it doesn’t make sense that they even have these sensors. 12MP but with larger sensor would have been plenty, anyway these 48MP quad bayers cannot shoot 8K, so there is totally no gain out of this resolution, just more noise sometimes and higher reliance on computations

 

[Trausner]

Not at all. The 17 Pro (and 16 Pro) has double the readout speed of the 15 Pro. That makes a big difference in rolling shutter artefacts and also slow-motion capability.

8K (and especially ProRes RAW 8K with full colour information) is meaningless on a Quad Bayer sensor with ‘only’ 48 megapixels, since such a sensor has no more colour information than a regular 12-megapixel sensor (4K worth). I suppose that is why Apple has not done it although iPhones have had the readout speed and processing power to trivially do 8K video for many years now.

Yea, the 48 mp sensors are not real. They are just 12mp and thats why 4k is the maximum. Though Samsung somehow pulls it off. Their 8k videos have more information than their 4k, and that all in a small phone package. Im not trying to compete against cinema cameras but i like to film interviews and be able to zoom into faces in post without loosing the 4k quality. That would be possible on an Ultra. I just wouldnt wanna switch to Android (unless it’s GrapheneOS).

As for the readout, that is only used for the 120fps. And that has been around since iphone 16 pro. It might be a useful feature for some but i barely ever need anything to be slowed down. And if, usually 60FPS to 30FPS is plenty and that, my 8 year old iPhone 8 can also film 4k in 60fps.

Besides 120fps, i dont think there has been any change. The sensors are almost equal quality in all three phones. If you refrain from 120fps slow motion and make videos with all three cameras, im sure most people would not be able to point out which was done by which Phone.

I personally just dont like to support this minor upgrade strategy of apple and feel like i get best value for money out of a 15 Pro Max.

 

[UKTechGuy]

I think apple seriously need to sort out all the flares, ghosting and reflections in their video before worrying about 8k.

They call it a professional camera but it’s not so professional with the state of all the flaring that’s still an issue since the 11 series.