Oppo Introduces 10x Optical Zoom Triple-Camera Smartphone

[ksec]

Have you looked at MIUI and ColorOS? They sure look like trying to create an Android version of iOS even in the newest versions.

Yes I did. As a matter of fact nearly every Chinese Android has an UI that takes lots of inspiration, or even copy Apple's iOS design style.

But the gist is in the operation. There are many little features that make lots of sense even from an Apple's iPhone is an appliance perspective rather than Android is like a PC. As Compared to in the old days where they were copying for the sake of copying, using it you could literally tell they haven't put *any* thoughts into it.

And many of these innovation I talked about are in Hardware. From Material to manufacturing process. Ok they are not as good as Apple in absolute terms, but from the use of ceramics while trying to improves its structure, to designing their SoC. None of these are state of the art technology, but innovation isn't always about state of the art.

 

[cmaier]

Why isn't anyone talking about the patent infringement or the possibility ?

https://petapixel.com/2016/04/21/apple-patent-shows-apple-may-add-optical-zoom-iphone-7/

Because there is no evidence the oppo does this:

1. A camera, comprising:

a photosensor configured to capture light projected onto a surface of the photosensor; and
a folded telephoto lens system comprising a plurality of optical elements arranged along a first optical axis and a second optical axis of the camera and configured to: refract light from an object field located in front of the camera along the first optical axis; redirect the light on to the second optical axis; and refract the light on the second optical axis to form an image of a scene at an image plane at or near the surface of the photosensor;
wherein the plurality of optical elements includes, in order along the first and second optical axes from an object side of the camera to an image side of the camera: one or more lens elements on the first optical axis; a light path folding element configured to redirect the light from the first optical axis on to the second optical axis; and one or more lens elements on the second optical axis;
wherein the telephoto lens system further includes an aperture stop located between a first lens element on the first optical axis and a reflecting surface of the light path folding element.
[doublepost=1551074531][/doublepost]

But Timmy will only deliver the best and doesn’t care about numbers (his words)

Did you call Steve Jobs “Stevie?” Or do you reserve this sort of emasculating disrespect only for gay CEOs?

 

[iMEric984]

Everybody's innovating while Apple only knows how to raise the price.

Yawn
[doublepost=1551075781][/doublepost]

It's only innovation if Apple does it, come on get with the program!! I'm not sure people actually understand how hard it is to get that amount of optical zoom in such a small form factor. Also just like the pixel the use of software brings it all together to give impressive results in a smartphone.

Pixel just does software aided digital zoom.

And Oppo didn’t make a true 10X zoom. If you look at how optics and cameras work, it’s enhanced digital zoom.

 

[sidewinder3000]

Those type of shots don't work well with moving objects in the desired field of view.

And yet, they still made the right call.

 

[johnmed]

Everybody's innovating while Apple only knows how to raise the price.

Apple has COURAGE.

 

[bladerunner2000]

Apple has COURAGE.

They should price their phones with a base price of $3,000. I can only see myself buying one of their phone then. I have courage too.

 

[Wanted797]

I know that some iOS users applaud new additions or vehemently defend some controversial changes Apple makes, but I am curious on your take on the changes from the 5S until now? I just wanted to know your perspective overall, not trying to label you in a camp for or against Apple product lines.

Where should Apple be right now, especially if their product line is "painfully embarrassing?"

There is good and bad w/ Apple. I'll give credit, FaceID is pretty nifty. The processors are the best on the market. But then again, they don't do enough with the tech to maximize it. If they had a chance to reduce the notch early, then why not reduce it? If the processors are strong enough to be in a possible laptop, then why not give the iPhone the iPad's multi-tasking features with the larger displays (5.5" or higher)?
[doublepost=1550961274][/doublepost]

Whether if it's an S or a full # change, we shouldn't have to vehemently defend incremental changes that phone manufacturers make in general. The smartphone pricing is getting stupid expensive now. The X to the XS was such a minor upgrade that the X to the XS change isn't worth it.

I would argue no year on year iPhone upgrade has ever been worth it.

 

[Freida]

How long have you owned your HomePod?

Having had mine for about a year now, and listening to it 3-5 hours a day, I can say it is far from useless.

Sound quality is superb. I have an oddly shaped room with multiple reflective surfaces and a high ceiling. With other speakers it's tough to get decent sound. Not so with HomePod. HomePod uses a speaker array and and advanced adaptive beamform signal processing techniques to acoustically equalize the listening environment it's placed in. It sounds great no matter where I place it in my room due to the above equalization techniques.

Verbal commands to Siri can be spoken in a normal voice no matter how loud the music is, or if there are other sounds in the room. I can give HomePod a verbal command from 20 feet away no problem, in a normal voice. How can that be? Apple uses a microphone array and similar dynamic adaptive beamform signal processing techniques to spatially locate my command and reject all interferers, including music that is playing and other sound sources in the room.

The above is an example of outstanding Apple innovation, being the first to use both types (emitting and receiving) adaptive beamforming techniques in a relatively low-cost compact desktop speaker.

Siri... It works great for its intended HomePod use as a user interface to play music. Is it 100% perfect? Of course not. But it does get my music commands correct 9+ times out of 10.

So... How long have you been using your HomePod to reach the conclusion it's worthless?

I'm glad to see that you are happy with it. Its all good, for me its not a great overall product. Its a nice speaker but my point is that its meant to be more and its not. For that reason I said what I said.
[doublepost=1551105896][/doublepost]

Well it’s meant to be a great speaker, a HomeKit hub, and an Apple Music player. The hardware and Siri are all excellent at that. Better than Amazon and Google’s versrions in some ways. If you just don’t like smart speakers, then that’s totally fine (I don’t either), but to claim that the HomePod is trash or useless is pretty dumb to say.

I know

 

[typographer]

I’m not sure I understand your question but are you looking for this?

https://www.macrumors.com/2019/02/20/samsung-galaxy-fold-smartphone/

There are also articles about the four Galaxy S10 phones and the Galaxy buds, you should be able to find them easily.

Oh thank you, I missed it.

 

[deckard666]

Everybody's innovating while Apple only knows how to raise the price.

Obviously said before the mega price rise of the "innovating" folding phones" !

 

[UnusedLoginID]

Fake Marketing at work… back in the days, this would have been called a 3x optical camera. Because as far as I know, 160mm is about 3 times the 55mm lens that we humans see the world through.
I think Apple should put a 180° camera on their next phone and call the current telephoto (ahem?) 2x optical lens a 1000x optical zoom or whatever! Jeez!
What bugs me the most is that there are a lot of people out there who are fooled by these prosperous claims… you know, like “get a free iPhone XR on us” (I’m looking at you, ATT!)

 

[0947347]

I don't think op said $20 earphones sounded good

He said that he had many <$20
better sounding earphones. He didn’t say “not as bad sounding”

There is always space for improvement, but they are fairly good. I use Sennheiser cans for full experience but on a go AirPods are priceless

 

[Gilligan's last elephant]

He said that he had many <$20
better sounding earphones. He didn’t say “not as bad sounding”

There is always space for improvement, but they are fairly good. I use Sennheiser cans for full experience but on a go AirPods are priceless

<$20 headphones can sound better than AirPods. That doesn't mean they sound good. Just a better level of bad sound

 

[DeepIn2U]

Whatever about folding phones, which I personally believe will remain a gimmick for the next decade, until they become good—at which point I still won’t want one because I’m trying to be diet digital for mental health reasons, the idea of adding more cameras to phones. Something that sounds odd at first, has genuine practical use for all users. Imagine the chambers of a gun for a moment, and each one is a camera of differing focal length and the center bearing is the flash. With elegant software this product could be an amazing camera in a phone body, able to zoom in on many more things and provide awesome clarity with awesome after the fact focus correction.

Sorry but a better camera or 2 front and rear is all that’s necessary. The industry is lying by saying Optical Zoom when the lenses do NOT move. That’s digital.

Millipedes have a LOt of legs yet they’re NOT more efficient in travelling than any other creature it’s size (ants other insects). More of something does NOT make the use better. It’s in HOW it’s used that makes it better.

 

[AZREOSpecialist]

Say what??!!! 16-160mm is EXACTLY 10x zoom. Just because it’s starts at ultra wide has nothing to do with that fact. We don’t call a 100mm lens a 2x lens simply because it’s double a standard 50mm.

It is not 10x magnification. You just defied your own logic. If you don't call a 100mm lens a 2x lens because it's twice the focal length of a 50mm, then why do you call a 160mm lens a 10x 16mm lens? You contradicted yourself in one sentence.
[doublepost=1551804343][/doublepost]

No. I'm in my mid-40s and never even use the selfie camera but I observe other users' behavior and do not judge them based on their age.

It's far more fun to judge people based on their age.

 

[Gilligan's last elephant]

It is not 10x magnification. You just defied your own logic. If you don't call a 100mm lens a 2x lens because it's twice the focal length of a 50mm, then why do you call a 160mm lens a 10x 16mm lens? You contradicted yourself in one sentence.

The standard lens in a phone is not 50mm however. I understand it is around 30mm, so the telephoto in this instance will be x5 approx.

The max zoom for a zoom lens is the difference between the fully in and out.

 

[GoodWheaties]

It is not 10x magnification. You just defied your own logic. If you don't call a 100mm lens a 2x lens because it's twice the focal length of a 50mm, then why do you call a 160mm lens a 10x 16mm lens? You contradicted yourself in one sentence

Outside of macro lenses, magnification has nothing to do with natural viewpoint. With a zoom, it has only to do with starting and ending focal lengths. Like I said before, a 24-240, a 30-300, and a 50-500 are all 10x. With macro, say 5x is 5 times life size on the sensor.

 

[AZREOSpecialist]

Outside of macro lenses, magnification has nothing to do with natural viewpoint. With a zoom, it has only to do with starting and ending focal lengths. Like I said before, a 24-240, a 30-300, and a 50-500 are all 10x. With macro, say 5x is 5 times life size on the sensor.

When someone says "10x zoom" most consumers, I believe, would think that means 10x magnification not 10x focal length. It's misleading and just another way tech companies are getting away with making misleading claims.

 

[Gilligan's last elephant]

When someone says "10x zoom" most consumers, I believe, would think that means 10x magnification not 10x focal length. It's misleading and just another way tech companies are getting away with making misleading claims.

10x magnification of what though?

 

[spacemnspiff]

the phone interpolates between fixed zoom settings

So stitched by software and then interpolate where the telephoto camera field of view is too narrow. That is almost like artificial blur (resolution of wide angle camera) with the center of the frame being in focus. Since resolution or pixel data doesn't exist for field of view outside of the telephoto, zooming in the off-center part of the telephoto frame will show funny interpolation results.