×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple Acknowledges iPhone 5 Camera Flaw

Soulskill posted about a year and a half ago | from the it's-not-a-bug-it's-a-feature dept.

Iphone 472

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.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

472 comments

Stupid human! (5, Funny)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536633)

Your colour perception is incorrectly calibrated!

Re:Stupid human! (5, Funny)

Vanderhoth (1582661) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536641)

Purple is the new transparent!

Copy THAT, Samsung! (5, Funny)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536801)

Everyone knows that phones really suck at being cameras.
The iPhone5 is obviously best, because it sucks the most at taking photos.

Re:Stupid human! (2, Interesting)

Hadlock (143607) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536813)

Purple is called "chromatic abberation" - you find it in shitty cannon point and shoots from 2004. This is just an example of Apple cutting corners.

Re:Stupid human! (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#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.

Apple self-destructs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41537035)

Apple is on the way down faster than I thought. Lots of profits for the pump-and-dump hedge funds.

Re:Stupid human! (1)

ByOhTek (1181381) | about a year and a half ago | (#41537061)

The Apple Reality Distortion Field - now in a more visible purple color for your continence!

Re:Stupid human! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536653)

That's certainly what Adobe Photoshop keeps telling me.

Re:Stupid human! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536669)

Your colour perception is incorrectly calibrated!

Is it odd that I read that in Morbo's voice?

I guess I'm in the right place.

Re:Stupid human! (3, Interesting)

terjeber (856226) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536745)

Probably meant to be funny, you are right. Color perception in humans is in fact not at all calibrated. We have this brain thing that constantly adjusts our color perception so that we think colors are quite different from what they actually are. Easy to see if you walk into a room at night with white walls. They are yellow if the light is from incandescent bulbs, green if the light is from fluorescent etc.

Re:Stupid human! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536815)

So you're saying we see a combination of the color emitted from the light + the color reflected from the wall? BRILLIANT.

Re:Stupid human! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536839)

Err, no. You do realize that the concept of "color" depends on the light that irradiates an object and what frequencies that object absorbs and reflects?

The brain is the least of your problem. Your optical rods and cones in your eye determine your initial perception of "color".

Re:Stupid human! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536907)

Um, if a white wall is lit with a yellow light then of course it looks yellow. This would be true in a perfectly calibrated colour system. What's weird is that we adapt to remove that tint and see it as white, so we can figure out the underlying albedo from the reflected light, by figuring out what colour the incident light must be. Artists are trained not to do that and say things like "this is lovely purple light - look at that wall" when I'm sitting there thinking "what the hell are you talking about? that wall is plain white"

Transparent Aluminum! (3, Funny)

wireloose (759042) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536951)

In 1986, James Doohan demonstrated a slight purple flare when transporting live sea creatures into/out of transparent aluminum (sapphire) aquariums.

iPhone 5 signature feature (5, Funny)

muon-catalyzed (2483394) | about a year and a half ago | (#41537019)

I am a rich iPhone 5 geared up VIP, my photos have a noble purple sapphire haze you pitiful /. geek.

Re:iPhone 5 signature feature (1)

ByOhTek (1181381) | about a year and a half ago | (#41537099)

You might be mistaking the smoke effect from your "cigarette" for lens effect.

That's more like it! (2)

hawks5999 (588198) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536643)

Somebody is finally channeling their inner Steve Jobs. "You're taking the pictures wrong!"

Re:That's more like it! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#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:That's more like it! (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#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:That's more like it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536953)

Bullshit ....

I'm pretty sure if it were a real issue like you've said they would of invented "purple fuckin haze reduction" years ago like they invented red eye reduction ...

Re:That's more like it! (3, Insightful)

zippthorne (748122) | about a year and a half ago | (#41537029)

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.

Re:That's more like it! (4, Funny)

Whalou (721698) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536811)

It's a feature. You don't need to use Instagram to add a purple tinge to your pictures anymore.

Simple (5, Funny)

Erikderzweite (1146485) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536647)

They are holding it wrong.

Re:Simple (1)

sumdumass (711423) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536683)

Maybe it's not a bug, it's a feature.. Now where have I heard that before? opps wrong company- I think.

DEC (3, Interesting)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | about a year and a half ago | (#41537033)

Unless you were thinking of DEC, you still were getting it wrong. From this Wikipedia entry [wikipedia.org]

"Between 1969 and 1972, Sandy Mathes, a systems programmer for PDP-8 software at Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) in Maynard, MA, used the terms "bug" and "feature" in her reporting of test results to distinguish between undocumented actions of delivered software products that were unacceptable and tolerable, respectively. This usage may have been perpetuated.[5]"

I remember that, as a VAX/VMS Systems Manager in the 1980s, this was a fairly pervasive meme.

Re:Simple (5, Insightful)

Speare (84249) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536821)

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 (4, Interesting)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536977)

Is this why there's a bump where the camera is on the Galaxy Nexus, and the lens itself is recessed in a mm?

Re:Simple (2, Insightful)

dreamt (14798) | about a year and a half ago | (#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.

Other digital cameras manage it fine. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536989)

The one in the expensive Apple iProduct doesn't.

Boom! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536649)

Apple's back, baby! I was worried for a moment with that "our map app sucks use someone else's till ours is better." But here is the perfect Apple response. Oh, don't like the purple flare in your pictures? Hey, bitch, that's what real life looks like. You should thank us for providing you with a way to see the world as it actually is. The only reason you don't see the purple flare normally is because you're a terrible person. Here at Apple we are very concerned with our customer. Noblesse oblige and all that.

What? (1, Interesting)

ledow (319597) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536673)

Serves you right for buying a phone and expecting to take high-end digital-camera-quality images with it.

As a bit of an Apple-hater, I'd love to jump on the bandwagon here, but this is really just a quirk of a particular lens on a device NOT primarily designed to take photos. If a DSLR was doing this, then yeah. But an iPhone? Who cares?

Stop taking pictures with your phone, is the answer.

Re:What? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536713)

Err, no. Many of us have smartphones in order to multi-purpose devices: gaming, messaging, something crazy like phoning, media player and yes, oh yes, a camera.

I can be like Batman and carry six or seven devices including a camera. Or I can progress and have one device with a very decent camera. 5MP or whatever the resolution is, should not be considered a toy or gimmick. They're selling it as a half-decent camera.

They need to deliver a half-decent camera with no funky visual effects.

Re:What? (2)

wed128 (722152) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536765)

Exactly this. I bought my wife an iPhone 4s to replace...her camera. Cell Phone Cameras are getting firmly in the range of "Good Enough", and DSLRs are big and heavy.

Re:What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536723)

So, Apple should have just put a lens cap on it instead of a purple color adding cap? Nobody wants "high-end digital-camera-quality (whatever this means what is digital camera quality?) images" with it. They just want accurate photos without the addition of a purple flare. I don't get your statement. Hey, there's a purple flare on light sources. Should have bought a digital camera if you wanted high-quality photos. Are we talking about the same problem here?

Re:What? (4, Insightful)

Joce640k (829181) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536741)

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?

Re:What? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536899)

Yes, it did. Tinted lens flare is common and dpreview.com finds it in both the old and new models.

They're not expecting to take high-end digital... (1)

QuasiSteve (2042606) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536763)

Serves you right for buying a phone and expecting to take high-end digital-camera-quality images with it.

They're not expecting that.

They're just - rightly so, in my opinion - expecting at least the quality of the iPhone 4s. See comparison:
http://9.mshcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/iphone-haze-comparisonb.jpg [mshcdn.com]

This has nothing to do with people expecting dSLR quality imagery using a cellphone. They're not even expecting point-and-shoot quality. They're expecting reasonable phone quality (for this day and age), and quite often not getting it.

As for taking pictures with your phone in general,I'm sure you can do the Jeopardy routine for "The camera you have with you."

Re:What? (2)

Dupple (1016592) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536777)

But people on't buy a phone to take high end pictures, just a simple point and shoot to 'capture the moment' (was that someones slogan?)

I wonder if this is common across all iPhone 5 cameras or just a particular batch

Aluminium oxide (1)

Kupfernigk (1190345) | about a year and a half ago | (#41537021)

Aluminium oxide (note IUPAC spelling!) has a very high refractive index (over 1.7) and moderate dispersion. Put an alumina window over a wide angle camera lens and I would expect interesting effects from high-angle bright light, because of that high index. So my guess it is a design feature rather than batch related.

Re:What? (2)

SJHillman (1966756) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536831)

And your computer is made to crunch numbers, stop getting on Slashdot with it.

When you buy a multi-function device, you expect all of its advertised functions to work as close to expected as possible. And the camera is one of the iPhone's big advertised functions. If you want a phone to be a phone, get the $20 Tracfone special. If you want a multifunction device that includes a phone, then you get a smartphone.

Re:What? (2)

terjeber (856226) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536895)

I don't think he expected that, but also he probably didn't assume that he would be prevented from taking perfectly normal pictures with the iPhone 5, pictures that was quite easy to take with the iPhone 4. It's not like its impossible [nationalgeographic.com] to take decent photos with the iPhone. Well, the 4s at least.

Looking forward to the new Nokia

And again (5, Funny)

MrDoh! (71235) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536677)

You're holding it wrong, you want to get lost, these pictures should be that colour, wifi connections should use your wireless bandwidth, battery life is supposed to be that poor if you use it (especially for facebook), those scratches are normal out of the case, this new connector is far better than the old one and adapters are the best you can get. best iPhone ever.

Re:And again (4, Interesting)

cyn1c77 (928549) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536945)

You're holding it wrong, you want to get lost, these pictures should be that colour, wifi connections should use your wireless bandwidth, battery life is supposed to be that poor if you use it (especially for facebook), those scratches are normal out of the case, this new connector is far better than the old one and adapters are the best you can get.

It never ceases to amaze me how many people rush out to purchase a new product with both unreviewed hardware and software and then get upset that there are flaws.

Do you not yet understand that the price for showing off your elite toy is that you are a paying beta tester?

I don't understand (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536681)

why is people still buying Apple products, they are inferior, overpriced and in case of a problem, it will be probably your fault

Another lesson taken from MS... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536685)

Its a feature, not a bug. It's supposed to work like that...

Octarine (4, Funny)

Kentari (1265084) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536691)

The camera is capturing octarine glow! If you don't like it buy an inferior camera uncapable of this magnificent feat!

The we're all wizards (2)

Kupfernigk (1190345) | about a year and a half ago | (#41537039)

If we're channelling sir TP, let me remind you that only wizards can see octarine. Perhaps that's it! Apple didn't employ any wizard testers.

All the other phones do it as we'll (-1, Troll)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536703)

Along with the cheap digital cameras. Even the holy galaxy s3 has been shown to suffer from this. It only happens under rare conditions when the lighting is just so

Like antennagate this is non-isse except for some bloggers looking for page hits

Re:All the other phones do it as we'll (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536731)

Antennagate: Such a non-issue that they had to give every single person a case.

Re:All the other phones do it as we'll (0)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536751)

Every smartphone I've had in the last 8 years has done this
They bought the cases cheap and got some pr out of it

Re:All the other phones do it as we'll (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536793)

Every smartphone you've had had design flaws that required that the company that made them give away cases?

Re:All the other phones do it as we'll (3, Insightful)

msauve (701917) | about a year and a half ago | (#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.

Re:All the other phones do it as we'll (4, Insightful)

sFurbo (1361249) | about a year and a half ago | (#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:All the other phones do it as we'll (1)

Lord Lode (1290856) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536795)

Interesting, we'll instead of well. That's a new one I hadn't seen yet in the series of "their, they're, there", "its, it's", and so on.

Re:All the other phones do it as we'll (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536843)

Show me a comparison photo where the iPhone 5 is similar to other phones. No, it's drastically worse.

Re:All the other phones do it as we'll (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536881)

http://www.itproportal.com/2012/10/01/purple-flare-test-iphone-5-vs-samsung-galaxy-s-iii-vs-htc-one-s/

Bottom line: The latest and greatest iPhone 5 was clearly the worst offender of the bunch.

Re:All the other phones do it as we'll (1)

terjeber (856226) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536949)

Wow. That's just funny. "You're holding it wrong". "All the other guys have the same problem". "It's only in very unusual conditions". Same BS we heard about the antenna. Apart from the fact that it was wrong. Sorry, this is quite bad, particularly considering you don't get the same issue with other cameras in the exact same situation. Tried. Tested. iPhone 5 fails.

Re:All the other phones do it as we'll (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41537085)

Everyone run to cover, the Apple Defence Force has arrived and they have the reality distortion field set to full power!

Apple is about to learn (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536707)

that returning a defective phone is also considered normal behaviour.

Re:Apple is about to learn (2)

SJHillman (1966756) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536853)

Until they add no returns to their standard EULA, right below not using it to run a nuclear power plant or manufacture biological or chemical weapons.

Is that in the EULA? (3, Informative)

Kupfernigk (1190345) | about a year and a half ago | (#41537079)

The only reason I would buy an iPhone is if I could run a nuclear power plant with it. My compost heap already makes the biological weapons, they're called "flies".

Early adoption problem (4, Insightful)

sarbonn (1796548) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536711)

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.

Re:Early adoption problem (1)

kiriath (2670145) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536789)

A sound and rational statement. I wasn't expecting to see one of those in these commends =D

That's what I do, I say I am going to buy it as soon as it comes out, but my conscience always wears me down and I wind up waiting... just... in... case...

Well said!

I, for one... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536715)

... welcome our new purple-flaring overlords!

(sorry)

So the build it cheap and say sorry later (3, Interesting)

smittyman (466522) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536717)

Wow,

We never did see this coming, They build a cheap phone(y) (what was it again, 180 dollar to build?), sell it for triple the price and as usual everyone camps out at the iChurch to buy it. Sorry but you deserve to be cheated! Only drawback is that apple gets so much money.

Now buy a paper map to point you at the iSun, the big purple customer experience in the sky, so high you think it is Steve looking out over you, his sheep. /rant mode off, sorry, bad hair day ^^

Re:So the build it cheap and say sorry later (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536769)

The total value on the bill of materials does NOT equal the total cost of production, for crying out loud! I'm so sick of hearing that.

purple, the gay color you morons (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536733)

iow only fags should buy an iphon !

Read between the lines (4, Funny)

davidbrit2 (775091) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536755)

The purple flare in the image provided is considered normal behavior for our flawed iPhone 5 camera design.

Apple fans will buy anything! (4, Funny)

mark_reh (2015546) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536759)

Say what you want about poor quality of hardware, software, and customer service, there can be no doubt that Apple's marketing department is the best on the planet. Apple marketing people have truly identified their market and successfully targeted them like no one else in history.

The GOP should have hired a bunch of Apple marketing people to run the Romney campaign- they've proven they can sell flawed products over and over.

No, no, no. (1)

Tx (96709) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536779)

It's not a purple tint, it's a rose tint. Giving a rose-tinted view of everything is absolutely standard for Apple, although they seem to be taking it a bit literally this time.

similar and yet very different pictures (1)

dreamt (14798) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536783)

Of course, these are all similar and yet very different pictures. The iPhone 5 picture is pointed much more directly towards the sun given the amount of the tree that is in the picture. The cloud cover also looks different meaning that the pictures were not even taken at the same time. This argument may be more believable if the pictures were same angle, same time of day, same everything. I'm guessing just about any digital camera will have a large amount of flare when looking directly into the sun.

Re:similar and yet very different pictures (1)

msauve (701917) | about a year and a half ago | (#41537027)

You mean like in the actual article [gizmodo.com] where there are pictures showing that the sun doesn't even have to be in-frame (or present at all, for that matter)?

Go read an actual camera site review of the camera (5, Informative)

sasparillascott (1267058) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536787)

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."

Re:Go read an actual camera site review of the cam (4, Insightful)

blahbooboo (839709) | about a year and a half ago | (#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...

Welcome to the Purplegate! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536807)

If Steve Jobs were alive, heads would roll...

wonder how long? (1, Insightful)

arbiter1 (1204146) | about a year and a half ago | (#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.

Classic entrenched bureaucracy behavior (1)

concealment (2447304) | about a year and a half ago | (#41537119)

Apple blamed the end user for the issue til they finally fessed up that it was their hardware/software

They've been doing that since the 1980s. Remember the Mac IIx motherboards? The failing Mac Plus and SE power supplies? Even back into the Apple // days, this behavior was fairly standard (remember the defective //c motherboards?).

However, it's not just Apple. Anywhere you have a bunch of people who are responsible for technology over time, you get an entrenched bureaucracy. Entrenched bureaucracies tend to respond to problems by blaming the user first.

Don't believe me? Go to a *BSD or Linux mailing list and bring up a problem that could be inherent to the OS. The first responses will always be user-blaming, and those people don't even get paid to do it.

Free color glasses (1)

pesho (843750) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536855)

Apple solved the antenna problem with a sleeve. I am sure this purple glare can be eliminated with a pair of colored glasses or contact lenses.

Re:Free color glasses (2)

MachineShedFred (621896) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536955)

Or with software color correction, like they already have in Aperture and iPhoto.

I see a software update coming that will detect the lens flare, and correct it out.

give it a little time (2)

james_van (2241758) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536893)

and instagram will make a filter that adds a purple flar to your images so the hipsters who are too poor for an iphone 5 can get in on the action.

Assumed iPhone 5 would be great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536939)

Looking at the iPhone 4s, I assumed that the 5 would be as good or better. I had planned on upgrading from my EVO 4G, and was planning on giving Apple a chance. I just can't get past these issues; camera, battery, scratches, maps, etc,etc. What in the world? Hello Jelly Bean!

Stop buying into Apple BS (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536963)

If Apple put a piece of turd into an iPhone and people complained about the stench, Apple would say that it's "a normal behaviour of the device".

Yeah, we PLANNED it to stink like this in our design notes.

Simple optics. (3, Informative)

tenco (773732) | about a year and a half ago | (#41536987)

Every optical element shows some sort of dispersion. "Simply" to control when you have the space (like in objectives of real cameras, microscopes or binoculars) but not so easy when your optical element is a simple plate with parallel faces (like a protective glass cover) or a tiny lens. Combine a tiny lens with a tiny CCD and you're out of luck when you hit a difficult to control lighting situation. 8 MP on smartphone "cameras" with tiny optics and tiny CCD-chips is a waste of storage space anyway. You can't get the required optical resolution. Simple physics.

It's a feature! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41536997)

The purple flare is the aura of the great late Steve Jobs, who is adding his very presence to your humble pictures.

Be glad Apple is not charging extra for this feature.

hello (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41537009)

The iPhone 5 is the Walmart greeter of smartphones. It doesn't see very well and gives terrible directions.

Chromatic Aberration (2, Informative)

sbennett57 (100147) | about a year and a half ago | (#41537011)

It is not a flaw with the iPhone camera but rather a limitation of the optics of the camera lens that causes chromatic aberration. This is a well-known phenomenon that is is most prevalent in high contrast situations with any camera (unless you spend $$$ for a high-end lens). Taking a picture with the sun high overhead against a dark background is an excellent way to highlight chromatic aberration. The advice from Apple Support is correct in that the user of camera should recompose their picture rather than stir up controversy with blog posts. You'll also note that the pictures on the link are similar but not framed quite identically, which exacerbates to chromatic aberration. And I won't even get into the ridiculous comparison of the fixed focal length iPhone cameras with a professional level Nikon D300.

For a more detailed description and how to avoid it (or fix it - perhaps with iPhoto which is likely installed on your iPhone)
http://www.tutorial9.net/tutorials/photography-tutorials/correcting-and-preventing-chromatic-aberration/

Stay tuned for the new iPhone 5S (1)

Iconoc (2646179) | about a year and a half ago | (#41537049)

All of this is really strategic positioning ahead of next summer's launch of the all-new iPhone 5S, where they'll start using a great new marketing campaign: "It just works!" It'll be time to turn the crank and ring the cash register again by then.

stop crying (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41537051)

they fucked up. They deal with it the same way all these big companies do. Period.
Annoying? Hell yes. Different than any other company that I have ever dealt with? no.

Look on the bright side. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41537113)

At least now you won't have to use Photoshop to add it in afterwards.

AAHHHH....Doesn't that feel better? (1)

clonehappy (655530) | about a year and a half ago | (#41537117)

Now all the Apple fans who decried that Tim Cook's Apple had gone soft and positively made the wrong decision after admitting failure concerning iOS 6 Maps can sleep better at night knowing he is just as big of a maniac, after all.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...