Comments
chimpaflimp t1_jedlqrf wrote
It could also be badly translated from Chinese
cody4king t1_jec048u wrote
You have to pay more money for more advanced features oh my god no way.
Alexap30 t1_jecuoer wrote
Ehm, sorry, advanced? Huawei had periscope cameras since the P30 Pro (maybe P20 pro), that's like, +5 years ago. Apple shenanigans again.
cody4king t1_jecuxls wrote
Is it more advanced than the cameras in the less expensive iPhone? Yes? Well then it’s exactly what I said.
NextTrillion t1_jedsg06 wrote
>+5 plus years.
Ehm, sorry, 5 years ago? Try 20. Here’s Phil Askey, founder of DPReview (RIP) on the Minolta DiMAGE X in 2002:
>Just when you thought a 2 megapixel, 3x optical zoom digital camera couldn't get any smaller Minolta turn things on their heads (literally) and produce the diminutive DiMAGE X. This shirt-pocket sized digital camera is just 20 mm thin (0.8 in) and 84 x 72 mm (3.3 x 2.8 in) from the front and weighs in (fully loaded) at just 155 g (5.5 oz). With specs like that you'd be expecting a fixed focal length lens, but no Minolta have innovated, the zoom mechanism is actually on its side within the body of the camera with a prism reflecting the image seen through the first lens element (Minolta dub this 'Folded Optics').
I actually prefer “folded optics,” but looks like periscope is likely going to be the way. Suppose it sounds ‘cooler’ or something.
[deleted] t1_jecs9wd wrote
[deleted]
AFerociousPineapple t1_jed76sp wrote
Well you’re in luck if you’ve been waiting for this specific feature it came out on a bunch of phones last year:
Samsung Galaxy S22 ultra, Huawei P50 Pro, Honor Magic 4 Pro, Vivo X80 Pro, ZTE Axon 40 Ultra
Edit: mobile sucks so changed formatting)
[deleted] t1_jeemckr wrote
[deleted]
Sherifftruman t1_jeckd5b wrote
This really sucks as I use my camera a lot and like a smaller phone so having the regular Pro worked for me.
GrayManTheory t1_jedn5iv wrote
All you have to do is wait one more year then.
Sherifftruman t1_jee9fhz wrote
That is ridiculous to artificially keep the two “Pro” phones on different levels.
adamcoe t1_jefqkie wrote
"Apple product will cost more because Apple"
wagninger t1_jeddt2s wrote
I’m mixed…. I hate the current Pro phone size, it’s too uncomfortable for me to hold it in one hand. I would love the mini size, but otoh, if the regular Pro is already uncomfortable, why not go with the Max… ugh
nicetriangle t1_jee4uqs wrote
Just like last time they restricted the best camera to the Max, I will definitely pass on this generation altogether
SohipX t1_jeg6a22 wrote
I love the periscope camera on my Pixel 7 Pro, but the problem with those extra large phones they are very hard to hold and type one handed :/
AutoModerator t1_jeamxi2 wrote
Check out our giveaway! Plugable Thunderbolt 4 Quad Dock & Thunderbolt 4 Hub – Intel Thunderbolt 4!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
sidetablecharger t1_jeczntz wrote
They can’t periscope that last mm or whatever to avoid the camera bump?
[deleted] t1_jeb0v3e wrote
[deleted]
Major-Cardiologist-3 t1_jeb61s0 wrote
It costs 464 dollars in materials to build the iPhone 14 pro max 128 Gb, and sells for 1099. The remaining 635 dollars after tax is about 400-300, and they still have to pay for the research & development, shipping, customer acquisition, sales, legal, and overhead. This leaves them with a 25% net profit margin of sales.
Then, because they are a publicly traded company, their profit is split between the shareholders (the U.S. public where anyone can invest and profit) or reinvested in the company, providing growth and jobs.
BeautifulAwareness54 t1_jecr5tp wrote
Oh no, won’t anyone think of the poor multi-trillion dollar company??
Ren-The-Protogen t1_jecrwat wrote
Trillion*
BeautifulAwareness54 t1_jecs695 wrote
Lol even better
Material-Ad1949 t1_jebvt3c wrote
Bro do you understand how much technology and amazing shit is in your pocket for $1000? The fact that these things aren’t $2000+ is amazing, considering how expensive technology has historically been. Also, you don’t have to buy a new one every year. I usually go 3 or so years before upgrading, which really negates the cost.
Winjin t1_jec2awv wrote
I'm still at XR I got as a present. Only thing I did was paid some hacksmiths to install way more memory in it.
The camera really lags behind in comparison to newer models, but other than that it's still really good.
lkn240 t1_jec9rpv wrote
I mean buy a pixel then - they are pretty easily the best bang for the buck out there, esp on sale. My wife is a photographer and gets the pro version - the camera is seriously amazing.
paltset t1_jed4th8 wrote
The periscope zoom is cool but shot for shot, as a camera professional, I prefer what comes out of the iPhone.
Upper_Decision_5959 t1_jecneua wrote
You don't have to always buy the latest and greatest. Just wait a year or 2 and you won't be charged 1000+ dollars.
pgriss t1_jec6dlq wrote
Was this article written by AI?
What does this mean:
> if the company still changes the naming principle.
How does this make sense:
> Kuo claims that the Largan periscope unit costs only $4. In addition, at such a price, the company allegedly cannot make a profit from this direction.
Why is the low cost of the unit an impediment on making profit? Are they trying to say that Apple is only willing to pay $4 for the unit?