The cameras inside the iPhone Xs and Xs Max are estimated to cost $51.10

Huh people were telling me that small sensors and lenses are uber cheap.
Per unit of area, this costs much more than Sony A9 (which is the only FF stacked BSI sensor, for now).

These costings are fascinating - Mainly because I think they use the same gross/net cost calculations that they use in the film industry (hence why actors always negotiate a percentage of the gross - Because net the film Always loses money lol). That $390 BOM, yeah wouldn't surprise me if the cost of R&D, cost of shipping, cost of marketing, value of stock space, value of retail space, cost of sales staff, cost of support, cost of cost of cost of etc etc and etc was all factored in to the per unit cost. Their screens (big cost) are bought in, but their chip (another big cost) is home-grown. The most premium of mobile brands doesn't also become the firm sitting on that Huge cash reserve by marking up a lowly 300% from factory to retail. Considering in the luxury trade, mark-ups can run into the four figures based on the strength of the brand is a clue. And for everybody who's asked "How do they do that??" when handling a flagship that Retails at $400-500, now you know.

It is to be hoped EVERY camera reviewed here be subject in future to the same costing exercise as this phone has been.

There are, however many better cameraphones with greater sensor resolution, less noise and often, much bigger sensors, that cost far less-IF mobile phone photography is important to you.

FodgeandDurn's apologist answer to a VERY greedy industry misses the point that you are getting very little for a great deal of money, and I needs must remind the stupid that you can buy a dozen secondhand Nokia 1020s or a Nikon D800 for even less money now than this bad Apple, - and I am typing this and working on a Mac, but gave up my iPhone once I saw results from the 1020 and from the Lumia 950 machines, because as a photographer my mobile matters to me.

An interesting point here is that the camera makes up 13% of Apple's fixed hardware costs when manufacturing a phone noted for it's photographic prowess.

Given that a $20 increase in hardware costs = $100 at retail (once additional costs have impacted), and the fact that Apple could conceivably have got away with a $30 camera unit (I'm just imagining here), it shows:

a) Apple's prioritisation of photography as a part of the package relative to other hardware costs
b) How much Apple think consumers will prioritise photography as a part of the package, relative to cost increases incurred by that focus.

Guys, that's the story. Stop grousing that there wasn't an essay about all the other costs that go into making a phone. If you want that info, you can find it elsewhere.

Not click-bait. You guys can be so grumpy.

A post in DPReview's defence:

1. I found the article and data point interesting. In 2018 a device noted for it's photographic prowess contains a camera with a fixed hardware cost of $51.10. What a world we live in.
2. The article never claims that fixed hardware costs are the entire story behind product pricing and markup. It was not a call to arms to protest the retail-end expense of phones. I don't know where some of you got that idea.
3. We are all smart enough to realise that hardware costs are but one part of a product's pricing, especially for a company like Apple who develop software in-house.
4. They even note that retail price increases scale disproportionately to hardware costs - clearly implying that there is more to the story, not covered by the narrow stated focus of this article.
5. If you're smart enough to know all the information an article should have included, stop moaning that the article didn't include that information (this applies to so many DPReview comments.)

I don't get all the comments here ...
The article is about the BOM (bill of materials). No more, no less. Nobody ever claimed that this is related to the sales price; except of course it can't be lower than the BOM.

Why stop there, go further – the iPhone Xs consists of a few ounces of silicon, oxygen, carbon, aluminum and lithium – which cost $5 max! (Some assembly required.)

I seriously doubt Foxconn aka Apple pay that much for parts. Lens, angular mirror and cmos assemblies in the 8-12mp range on a pc board cost around 5$ as 1000 item batch. Its a commodity.

Just bought the Xs Max. This is my first iPhone

Apple is the first $1 trillion company in history. ............the secret is out............

And yet, despite the preposterous profit built into every phone, the people who work at the Apple stores will still make starvation wages. Apple used to be the coolest company on the planet, now it's the worst.

Break down anything to component form and it's cheap, would you have the knowledge toput it all together, that's what you pay for. How much does each part of Photoshop cost to put together,i'd guess at 0.

It's hard to put this into perspective. Let me explain.

It could be "only" $51 because they produce so many of them that regardless of their quality they are cheap, based on bulk. Or....they are just cheap.

Also what is the price of other cameras in other phones? Are those $20? If so, this would make this one, in theory, better. Only in theory though :)

But yes, it does put everything in perspective.

I have a smartphone but never use it , if my phone rings i know for a fact it's the wrong number.

It's for emergency use only , no emergencies so far so not getting my $ worth .

Yes i know i'm an odd one , most are the opposite of me and love their phones to death .

People love phones and gaming , i gamed once as a kid then moved on.

Have a good day everybody

$51 for the camera module and $1B for the chip and software that actually make it deliver the results that it does. I'm actually surprised it's even $51.

>The total cost of camera components

This is a bit misleading as i'd consider the screen a "camera component" along with the cpu needed to process the image, flash, internal storage and anything needed to get the image off the phone (lightning connector/hardware or wi-fi).

What you are really saying is the total cost of the camera module and sensors. Has dpreview ever provided that information for any other camera? At this point given they are on the 100th regurgitation I imagine it costs canon abut $1 to make their well loved 18mp sensor...... It would be a bit interesting to see sensor cost versus camera cost for all of the major players. Sure figuring that out may be hard but isn't that what tech journalists are for?

$1000 for a phone, fools are easilly parted with their money

Now, try and take a photo or video without the software... Whilst the camera HW may be around $50, the actual cost will be far more. Good for sensationalistic headlines though.

Am kinda surprised that a lot of the commenters are surprised (heck some are defensive) with that price!

Its quite normal for the camera assemblies in smartphones to top out near $40. (Not counting the front elements though)
But that doesn't make it a "$40 camera"; camera assemblies (lens, sensor and connector) doesnt function on its own.
There is a ~$70-80 Display, ~$50-70 processor and another ~ $50 for the memory and bit less than that for the battery and body and etc. So to be able to take a shot (not counting the "phone" wireless communications parts, speakers ...etc) ; in other words to run the camera part in such phones, it's like a $250+ in parts only.

Now add a bit more for the modems, -hand detecting- antennas and SW, cost of R&D, logistics, and $250 for the apple logo and $500 to pay for the brainwashing marketers wrangling all those iSheeps and voila! $1000 ....:p

And TechInsights estimated the cost at $443.00: https://www.gsmarena.com/apple_iphone_xs_max_components_value-news-33454.php

Just shows you how wrong most of these analysis are

216 million I phones were sold in the 2017 fiscal year... I still have the 6+ and running strong.. There worth every penny.. Most of my friends Android devices barely survive 3 years..

Apple ....are we making 300% profit?

Sure, that's what the PHONE ITSELF costs to make, but those suicide nets don't pay for themselves!

And the whole phone costs around $100 to make.
This is why they’re a trillion dollar company people. Nothing but pure greed! 🤨

Yeah, so? $40K of lumber builds a $400k house.

Remember the film NEEDFUL THINGS..?

Gaunt, a creepy older man moves to a small town and sets up shop. Bad things soon follow. Gaunt has the remarkable ability of selling people exactly what they want most. Through Gaunt's manipulation his ideal purchases come at a price that involves more than just money. ,

Seems like $120 goes to samsung for the screen. This makes it the most expensive part of the phone.

i dont see this as click bait at all ... its simply a number connected to the camera assembly ... the monetization...

no one here is so stupid as to disregard the insane amount of research and development necessary to create complex technology or to amortize the salaries and facilities costs and the myriad other costs linked to developing and building a phone.

but its cool and harmless to know that it begins with a bill to the manufacturer for 51 dollars and 10 cents ....lol

I find this sort of article misleading. Sure, the hardware part of the camera is probably fairly cheap. But all the investment Apple made into the software development for the Computational Photography, that's really very expensive.

Edit: I am a software engineer, so I mentioned only software development above, but there is a hardware development cost, too.

Complete clickbait. Is this the new level that DPR is lowering itself to?

With that idiotic mentality, a car is probably about $4,000 in steel, rubber, plastic, and glass.

Your desktop computer is probably about $300 in plastic, metal, gold, fiberglass and copper.

Apparently... you think this components just magically build themselves, and disregard the hundreds of thousands of man-hours, the salaries of the employees that designed them, the machining and technologies employed to manufacture that "$51.10" camera.

Just another reason why I read less and less of your articles.

These types of pointless, click-bait articles are just designed to get people angry and generate comments. They are a single cherry-picked data point with absolutely zero context. This is a shady excuse for journalism.

Shame on you DPReview for sinking to the lowest level for clicks.

A camera... and a phone... are so much more than the financial sum of their parts, and you damn well know it.

Yes, the camera 'only' costs $51.10 because there are a bazillion of them made. Simply economy of scale. The 'camera' is also more than the sum of it's dissected components.

$51.10! I want my money back :-)

If you are in any way mad about the "BOM" of a phone I dare you to check out the "BOM" of a government project. Hint: those roads and bridges don't really cost billions of dollar to build

Non News.
No RD cost. No enormous softwar dev effort esimation
a lot of BlAh

$51.10 camera !!! And it shoots awesome pictures !!! Outstanding videos !!! Excellent microphone !!! Better than GoPro !!!

I wonder who made the camera at such a very very very cheap price.