This Apple iPhone 7 rumor just got a lot more credible

“KGI Securities analyst Ming-Chi Kuo sent a note out to clients claiming that Apple will introduce not one but two variants of its next-generation Plus iPhone, which will likely be called the iPhone 7 Plus,” Ashraf Eassa writes for The Motley Fool. “The highest-end variant is said to come with a new dual-lens camera setup, which should allow for dramatically improved image quality and potentially even some interesting features like optical zoom. Although Kuo’s track record is quite good, which means that this report is likely accurate, it gained significant credibility over the last couple of weeks.”

“Apple camera sensor supplier Sony had some interesting commentary around the timing of the adoption of dual-lens cameras,” Eassa writes. “‘For next year, our so-called dual lens — dual camera — platform will be launched by, we believe, from major smartphone players,’ said Kenichiro Yoshida, Sony’s chief financial officer. Yoshida went on to say that ‘the real start, the takeoff of smartphone [sic] with dual lens camera will be in the year of 2017.'”

“Once Kuo spilled the beans on Apple’s plans, IT news website DIGITIMES chimed in with a report that corroborated and added further color to Kuo’s comments,” Eassa writes. “In particular, DIGITIMES says that a number of camera lens vendors, including Largan Technology (which reportedly provides Apple with lenses for more than 60% of its iDevice cameras), as well as Japan- and China-based vendors, ‘have sent dual-lens camera samples to Apple for testing.'”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: The next iPhone’s camera is going to be unparalleled.


  1. Why can’t they turn the lens on it’s side, and create a periscope type configuration. This way they can get optical zoom.

    Maybe this is why we would loose the 3.5mm jack, to get optical zoom. This I would agree as a reasonable trade.

      1. Thank you. Maybe you can review all my posts and tell me how many times I have done this…

        I know the difference… It’s late, I’m tired. Please help me. I would just love to go back and fix this.

        Since you are so concerned, I will give you the job, no questions asked.

          1. It’s a shame we have to fight with technology, when it should be helping us.

            But worst of all are self-righteous bastards who don’t know when it’s the proper time to correct someone. The rudeness is unbelievable.

            You correct your children’s homework. You correct someone you are paid to do so. You correct someone who asks for your input. But you do not correct strangers, pronunciation, unless it’s your own name, or their spelling.

            All you do is set an adversarial condition, needlessly.

            I happen to believe that Apple has some of the worst autocorrection there is out there. But I don’t care. I am delighted you feel so compelled to correct me and iOS and Mac OS, which I have witnessed change whole phrases and words several spaces back.

            I have simply given up. Maybe it bothers you enough that you can’t help being so rude.

            1. Totally agree with you, when you are busy, or just busy thinking about what you are writing and the technology is equally intent ‘helping’ for good or bad, it really is easy to make simple errors especially when you are tired. What is more sad and concerning is that someone would actually bother to create an identity (I assume to disguise themselves) to simply pick you up on it when the sense of what you are saying is perfectly clear. The term ‘pedant’ doesn’t do justice to this person, ‘tosser’ is mostly there however.

            2. No, you offer corrections because errors shine a spotlight on your copy editing and fact-checking. Simple grammar errors signal you don’t pay attention to details, and this raises questions about the thoroughness and accuracy of the information in your posts. Maybe you skipped a fact-checking step or two or didn’t vet your sources.

              Any error distracts from your point and raises credibility questions too.

            3. See that’s what you are missing. I wrote in my own words. I didn’t copy and past or took text from anyone else. The rules of etiquette are, you do not publicly correct or admonish someone. It’s rude and a bully tactic. I will leave it at that. #GrammarBully

            4. In your job I would agree, and in general too. But for quick, conversational comments on a board like this? It’s too much. Especially when the comment section does not allow for editing.

    1. I’ve often thought of that. Put the lens opening on the thin edge of the phone. Now you have two inches of depth to make a real optical zoom lens.

      Your setup would be to add the mirror so it still has the opening on the back.
      I would think this has been prototyped?

      1. So you would point the phone sideways to take pictures? And for landscape what do you do? Stand next to it and look straight down at the screen? Perhaps they could add an optional old-timey hood to cover everything, into which the photographer sticks his head?

        I think he was suggesting using a mirror to have the lens body vertical, but the aperture still in the current position. That seems like an interesting idea if it’s feasible.

  2. My ten most requested hardware features for iPhone 7:

    1. Fold or stretch from an iPhone into an iPad
    2. 15 feet from transmitter wireless charging and or photon charging
    3. 5G and if Verizon is going to do 1 Gbps then the appropriate chip (not up to 500 Mbps)
    4. Better battery
    5. Faster chips and possible IBM brain chip – want latest gen game play and AI (conversational SIRI at minimum)
    6. 256GB RAM
    7. No antenna lines
    8. 360 degree camera
    9. CO, radiation and radar detectors
    10. Optical zoom

    1. 1. no thanks
      2. not safe, realistic, affordable, nor desirable
      3. next year, maybe. Verizon isn’t ready
      4. YES, this is the #1 request by most users
      5. not sure you want IBM making chips again. It’s mostly just a consulting firm now.
      6. YES, also a very highly requested feature. not everyone can use iCloud, nor want to. more local storage is always desirable especially with high-resolution camera.
      7. Agreed, though aluminum cases will always require some antenna feature
      8. what is a 360 degree camera and why would that be a selling feature for a phone?
      9. NO. This is a phone, not a piece of scientific equipment. Sensors should be 3rd party accessories
      10. Nice idea, but Apple would have to increase the thickness of the phone dramatically to make that happen. Apple has made it clear they don’t think optics are nearly as important as looks.

      1. 1. That’s an incomplete answer. Having both devices is inefficient and a waste of silicon. Yes, there are jobs for devices like an iPad Pro or a truck, but for the majority an iPhone that can be morphed into an iPad Mini or an iPhone Plus that can be changed into a iPad Air is a better answer.
        2. Is there a published paper that has claimed wireless charging is unsafe? Could you post the link?
        3. IBM doesn’t have to manufacture the chips. They could license the engineering.
        4. According to reports Verizon should be ready by Q1 2017. It would be a shame if the iPhone wasn’t 5G ready until late 2017.
        5. 360 degree camera – for VR viewing on a separate device. Why can’t the camera be built into the phone?
        6. The gyroscopes are being used in medical testing to detect certain conditions, the camera is being used as a mirror and the flash is being used as a heart rate monitor, etc. Why can’t other interments be included?

        1. Surely only in recent weeks we saw wireless charging over that range being demonstrated and the option for a future iPhone being discussed. I did wonder if there were any potential health considerations at the time, but certainly the company concerned were happy to demonstrate and propose the concept as an imminent/y available product.

          1. Right.

            As I understood it they were using radio waves. The base station would direct the waves toward the devices that needed it, registering them and adapting to what’s in the room. Therefore the waves weren’t 360 degrees equal, making the process more efficient.

            Radio waves shouldn’t be harmful to humans. Just as it takes energy input to generate the waves, an opposite system should be able to take waves and transfer them into energy. I’m surprised they can make enough energy to charge a device this way, but I’ve been surprised by tech many times before.

            Should be interesting. Especially the efficiency. I don’t see Apple using something that wastes 90% of the energy, for example, to get 10% of it back into a battery wirelessly.

  3. About a decade ago I bought my daughter a Kodak camera with dual Schneider-Kreuznach lenses. The optics were excellent. (It was a few years after that that Kodak went to cheap-rubbish end, which was the end of them.)

    It’s a mouth watering prospect to get a dual lens camera on an Apple product. Yes, effectively they should be able to get a 5 x optical zoom range (say 25mm to 135 mm equiv.) = perfect, and the end of any purpose for a compact camera.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.