You're over-assuming the iPhones abilities or intended purpose. it's not meant to compete with a professional DSLR, it's a phone ffs.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Sony Introduces Next-Generation Image Sensor to Advance Mobile Device Cameras
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You're over-assuming the iPhones abilities or intended purpose. it's not meant to compete with a professional DSLR, it's a phone ffs.
Error in thinking here is that the actual gain of this sensor is more sensor real estate on the top layer giving what you want: a bigger sensor which would then be combined with a bigger lens since the focal point is bigger... but that is not even the point in cell phones (or other mobile devices). It's all about snap shots. With screen resolutions going up, it is just nice to have a native resolution big enough that I can just crop the picture to my desktop. 13MP should do it
This is true only if the sensor is otherwise the same. If there are other differences, such as optical glass, sensor size, signal to noise ratio, etc... then this may not be true at all. Software is hugely important in a digital camera, and can break a camera, but it's dependent on the hardware for its ultimate capability.
Seems like manufacturers are always trying to make things smaller... or at least, thinner. I certainly don't think the iPhone needs to get smaller (if you ask me it should be a bit bigger), but it's definitely the trend.
I like this too, but it's by no means a template for the future. We can't count on apple to ignore "more is better" in favor of "better is better" indefinitely. They already use "more is better" as advertisement for many of their products.
Not saying it's a given, it's just a troubling possibility that makes too much economic sense to ignore.
Obviously it's a phone, not a DSLR. For many, it's also their primary camera. For me, it's my ONLY digital camera (I typically shoot film on a Nikon F100). Nobody has suggested it should compete with DSLRs. I simply don't want to see image quality decrease in favor of "newer, smaller, & more MP".
Error in thinking here is that the actual gain of this sensor is more sensor real estate on the top layer giving what you want: a bigger sensor which would then be combined with a bigger lens since the focal point is bigger... but that is not even the point in cell phones (or other mobile devices). It's all about snap shots. With screen resolutions going up, it is just nice to have a native resolution big enough that I can just crop the picture to my desktop. 13MP should do it
I realize the real-estate gain, and potential for sensor-size increases or constancy, but manufacturers could easily use this to just make sensors take up less room in devices with more megapixels. That was my point - just that this is a possibility, and it's not one I relish.
Because a flash on the ipod touch isn't likely to sway a purchase decision over a competing media player. The iPod touch is meant to be a gateway device to the iphone. If you don't believe me, why didn't the latest touch get the A5?
It's also thinner, has a worse camera, and apple wants a lower BOM cost. Same reason it has a retina, but non IPS, display.
Last edited:
I get what you're saying, and it'll be my only camera aswell as soon as I get one :0 anyway, I doubt Apple would be idiotic like that, with other companies you have to dig into manuals to see if they're lying about quality, but with Apple you can trust them to not **** you over.
----------
Thats exactly what's happened to me, got an iPod to check iOS out, and the hardware quality, and boom, I'm getting an iPhone 4S and a Macbook as soona s I can afford them
I'd like to know
how this technology compares to the Foveon sensors, which stack the RGB sensors rather the putting them side by side and interpolating the missing pixels. The result is that the Foveon sensors can produce better images at the same raw resolution as standard sensors.
Anyone have the expertise to answer?
how this technology compares to the Foveon sensors, which stack the RGB sensors rather the putting them side by side and interpolating the missing pixels. The result is that the Foveon sensors can produce better images at the same raw resolution as standard sensors.
Anyone have the expertise to answer?
8MP works just fine for me. Like many I want improved low light, which CMOS usually resolves.
Last edited:
Aren't most mobile devices now-a-days really disposable items, since technology renders them obsolete in matter of a several months, or 2 years tops!? Heck, you can almost make a case for most electronics are disposable, based on their "technological shelf life". My MacBook Pro from 1.5 years ago is starting to show some grey whiskers on its processor....
Why do we ALWAYS get guys asking who needs an improvement? jesus man.
a better camera is a better camera.
Well said. It's simple physics. Shrinking sensor (and pixel) size leads to less light exposure for each pixel, which decreases picture quality, especially in lower light situations. The only way to compensate is to increase ISO, which in turn increases noise. I'm pretty sure the iphone compensates for this by smoothing, which is why many of the pictures they take are so soft. Of course, if you take all your pictures in beautiful natural sunlight, you can get some great photos, because the extra light compensates for the small sensor. But that's not most real-world situations.
Tell me they've found a way to get a bigger sensor within the design limitations of a thin phone, and THEN I'll get excited.
Let's not forget iPhone 4S has a much better lens than the 4. I wonder if Apple used the same sensor in 4 for 4S, the photo quality will actually become better than the current 4S camera.
CMOS sensors used to have worse noise than CCDs. Here software has come to improve noise recently. This is why CCDs are losing out to CISs.
Yes: A better camera equals a better phone
However, more megapixels DOES NOT (Always) = better camera
Increasing the resolution does not necessarily result in ability to crop, since the sharpness goes down on high-resolution tiny sensors. You used to see this with the interpolated megapixels, where cameras would create larger images that didn't actually contain any more information. The problem on cell phones is that they're generally not even good for snap shots, at least in real-world, low-light situations. Sure, outdoors, on a tripod, in bright sunlight, your iPhone can take a great picture of a mountain vista. But at a birthday party, sporting event, etc, it just doesn't gather enough light to be useful.Error in thinking here is that the actual gain of this sensor is more sensor real estate on the top layer giving what you want: a bigger sensor which would then be combined with a bigger lens since the focal point is bigger... but that is not even the point in cell phones (or other mobile devices). It's all about snap shots. With screen resolutions going up, it is just nice to have a native resolution big enough that I can just crop the picture to my desktop. 13MP should do it
Some misconceptions here.
I'd like to address a couple of things here that are in error.
In any event there is lots of upside potential in cell phone camera sensor technology. Very soon we should be seeing sensors built around quantipum dot technologies or other advancements that could easily double low light performance. Other technologies are also being developed to improve cell phone cameras. I suspect that your bigger is better bias isn't based on sound evaluation of the current state of the hardware nor where tech is going.
Think about this, if bigger was indeed better then how is that Apple has improved the camera in every iPhone release?
I'd like to address a couple of things here that are in error.
More megapixels don't help if the rest of the camera system aren't up to it. However more pixels can be extremely useful if you maintain image quality. Note that this implies that pixels don't directly impact image quality, however in the long run you are far better off having the extra pixels to work with.
Actually this is just wrong, the ability of a camera to resolve detail is very important. This is as much an issue of optics as it is sensor technology. However the more quality information you have to work with the better your pictures and the greater your flexibility with post processing.
Nope! Larger cameras and there for larger optics do not assure you of higher quality. The fact of the matter is the larger the optics the harder it is to control aberrations and other issues that impact rendered images.
Bigger sensors can capture more light but that is only part of the equation. You still need a lens system that can resolve properly to take advantage of the sensors resolution.
The lack of depth of field is a problem at the extreme short focal lengths of common digital cameras.
Baloney, some of the best eyes out there are on birds.
What is notable is that Apple has been able to avoid that marketing nonsense as they have dramatically improved the iPhones camera. Pixel count is a factor in those improvements, Apple just puts equal weight on other factors when integrating a camera. Call it balanced engineering if you will. As long as they continue to improve over all performance increasing pixels counts is a win.
Actually manufactures are continual linty improving what a small sensor can do. You angst is mis placed as Apple has improved the camera with every iPhone release, and likely will continue to do so. Also contrary to your statement Apple is directly selling the image quality of the iPhone as it has been highlighted many times in marketing materials.
In any event there is lots of upside potential in cell phone camera sensor technology. Very soon we should be seeing sensors built around quantipum dot technologies or other advancements that could easily double low light performance. Other technologies are also being developed to improve cell phone cameras. I suspect that your bigger is better bias isn't based on sound evaluation of the current state of the hardware nor where tech is going.
Think about this, if bigger was indeed better then how is that Apple has improved the camera in every iPhone release?
I fully expect this to be on a Motorola phone immediately upon release, all the while cannibalizing the rest of their products.
It is a mistake to equate low level light performance with image quality.
The problem with your point of view is that you forget about all of the other physics involved in imagining. Low light performance is only significant if you are looking for a camera that performs well in low light situations. That is not the norm and frankly things like flash and artificial lightening can address the short comings of the sensors light gathering ability.
The light gathering ability of small sensors is steadily increasing. The fact that cameras like the iPhone do as well as they do should highlight that. In this regard there is much technolofpgy in the labs that will eventually come out to give you even better low light capability. The attitude you expressed here seems to indicate a willfully disregard for how far these sensors have come. The iPhone in its current form is extremely impressive when compared to even a point and shoot of a few years ago. It is actually pretty impressive compared to things like the old 110 and disc cameras of the past.
This doesn't turn the iPhone into a digital SLR class camera and frankly I don't think anybody at Apple intends to compete with that class of camera. However it out classes many other platforms out there, including almost all cell phones, more than a few point and shoots and many of the film cameras of the past. It is doing this with an extremely small sensor so I'm not sure their is any value in all this emotion over larger sensors.
The problem with your point of view is that you forget about all of the other physics involved in imagining. Low light performance is only significant if you are looking for a camera that performs well in low light situations. That is not the norm and frankly things like flash and artificial lightening can address the short comings of the sensors light gathering ability.
The light gathering ability of small sensors is steadily increasing. The fact that cameras like the iPhone do as well as they do should highlight that. In this regard there is much technolofpgy in the labs that will eventually come out to give you even better low light capability. The attitude you expressed here seems to indicate a willfully disregard for how far these sensors have come. The iPhone in its current form is extremely impressive when compared to even a point and shoot of a few years ago. It is actually pretty impressive compared to things like the old 110 and disc cameras of the past.
This doesn't turn the iPhone into a digital SLR class camera and frankly I don't think anybody at Apple intends to compete with that class of camera. However it out classes many other platforms out there, including almost all cell phones, more than a few point and shoots and many of the film cameras of the past. It is doing this with an extremely small sensor so I'm not sure their is any value in all this emotion over larger sensors.