Sony's Dual Camera to See Inclusion in Devices From 'Major Smartphone Players'

[JesterJJZ]

There shouldn't be any differences between the regular iPhone and the Plus other than size. Some of us don't want a larger phone. We also don't want a gimped one.

 

[Max(IT)]

This news made me think the dual lens iPhone could be the iPhone 7S in 2017, not the iPhone 7...
[doublepost=1454576516][/doublepost]

I hope this rumour is true, I love the camera on my iPhone and getting DSLR quality photos would be worth the price alone!

You won't get DSLR quality anyway...

Limiting it to the plus is kind of discriminatory against women. My wife takes lots of beautiful photos and would greatly benefit from something like this, but her hands will never work with such a large phone.

What ?!? Actually phablets are quite popular among women...

 

[SgtPepper12]

Modern sensors are already pretty good at eliminating pattern noise (in particular Sony sensors which is what the iPhone is currently using), there isn't a lot that can be gained there.

The sensors can't and don't eliminate "pattern noise" (it's not pattern noise, btw, it's just good old poisson noise, which has no pattern). The noise is just reduced by using pixels that are as big as possible and by using noise reduction algorithms, which in my opinion should be optional in every camera, as they usually suck. What the algorithms do is that they average neighbouring pixels by assuming they are the same colour (or not), therefore improving the statistics for that area. It's a trade-in, the covariance of the pixels is reduced, but the correlation between the pixels is blown up, or in less statistical terms, the image gets blurry and muddy. So in any case, there is always a LOT to be gained there.

And you cannot have both noise reduction and resolution increase at the same time.

In opposite: You always have the same thing in the same time. You can't pick one of the two. Although, thinking about it, you can have reduced noise and no detail enhancement. Anyway, here's an example what the combination of two slightly shifted images can do under best circumstances:

As you can see, the resolution is greatly enhanced and the noise is reduced as well. Note, this has no other processing in it, it's really just aligning and averaging the images. Usually some more post-processing is involved, i.e. a noise reduction filter as mentioned above would probably get rid of the noise in the light area mostly. Also some sharpening/deconvolution to bring out the details more. There are some pretty clever algorithms that make the best use of the available information.

 

[diipii]

This multiple lens malarky is interesting in that it points to an image produced simultaneously from multiple sources therefore :
Is the image a fusion of two images and therefore an impression rather than a rendition of actuality ?
Could the spacing between the lenses create a sense of dimensionality coded into a single image that can be decoded ?
Does this still image technology have implications for video ?
Will the claimed advantages be a revolution in digital imagery so that all digital cameras both moving and still will be made this way ?
Was that last strong coffee a touch too much ?

 

[Lemon Mac]

Why? What's the benefit?

Having hardware redundency for lenses is a great idea, I cant beleive nobody has thought of this before. Truly innovative.

 

[Tycho24]

You shouldn't need to buy a phone the size of your face just to get decent specs.

Soooooo... if you don't have dual cameras, your phone doesn't even have "decent specs"?
That's a silly thing to say.

 

[uhaas]

What ?!? Actually phablets are quite popular among women...

I have a 6S Plus, she has a 6. She can't get her fingers around mine comfortably.

While I don't doubt they are popular among some women, I suspect they either have larger hands or don't care and work through it. I also expect hand size is part of the reason around the revival of the smaller phone revival, especially [for parts of the world] where people's hands aren't as large as ours.

 

[Max(IT)]

I have a 6S Plus, she has a 6. She can't get her fingers around mine comfortably.

While I don't doubt they are popular among some women, I suspect they either have larger hands or don't care and work through it. I also expect hand size is part of the reason around the revival of the smaller phone revival, especially [for parts of the world] where people's hands aren't as large as ours.

It's not hand size the reason phablet are so popular among women. It's purse size !

 

[Aston441]

Took longer than I thought for one of these posts to pop up......Thought there'd be a lot more in here whining about this. You folks like to bring this point up every time they have room to put things in a bigger phone and not the smaller "most popular" phone as you say. I'd love to be able to seat my entire family in a Porsche 911 but it's not going to happen....

Wait. You want a 911 and the only thing standing between you and your Porsche is family? Simple solution. Ditch the family. vroom vroom

 

[macduke]

Having different focal lengths pretty much excludes most the other benefits because both cameras won't cover the same frame. Modern sensors are already pretty good at eliminating pattern noise (in particular Sony sensors which is what the iPhone is currently using), there isn't a lot that can be gained there. The iPhone 6s already can record full resolution images during video with the limitation that they are cropped to the 16:9 aspect ratio, it doesn't take a big step to go to the capture of the full sensor.

Close but not quite. While 4K video gets you a lot closer than 1080p frames used to, the iPhone 6s outputs a 4032x3024 resolution image. The still frame is only 3840x2160. It crops in some on the video on width as well as height. Right now it's not significant, but 4K video is likely going to be the max for some time, while 12mp sensors may not be. But yeah, right now it's not a significant difference. And yes, I recognize that all of those features can't come true as some preclude others.

Increased resolution is an interesting application but I think of limited use since the iPhone camera is already noise-limited in resolution when viewed at 100%, even at base ISO. And you cannot have both noise reduction and resolution increase at the same time. This might get useful if it is combined with taking multiple images in quick succession and merge them. Changing the focus in post will by definition be limited to choosing between two focus positions. This can occasionally be useful but overall will be of limited use. Ditto for 3D applications, I don't think that is something that people will use much. I also think the PD AF in the current 6s is already fast enough for most people, same for face detection. Sure, an improvement in both can be useful in some cases but again, overall of rather limited additional use.

I'm pretty sure you can. This isn't the same as having a more pixel dense sensor which would increase noise without significant technological advancements for photo receptor interference dampening. With this technology, it seems like you can have your cake and eat it too. It merges exposures from both cameras, slightly offset (perhaps even by a few mm) to do a sort of interpolation but without making up image information—if that makes sense? I'm not sure how else to explain it, but the two sensors capture simultaneously and fill in each other's resolution gaps with additional information using advanced algorithms. I'm pretty sure there are some cameras from companies like Olympus that do something similar—although I think you have to be a lot more careful about moving subjects as well as being very careful with handholding the camera. This wouldn't be an issue with two cameras snapping simultaneously, and is the huge benefit of these crazy fast A-series processors that are approaching laptop speeds (or even surpassing some on the iPad Pro).

Overall, these improvements are the logical next steps and together they might amount to the most significant camera improvements (though other things like gaining AF were pretty significant as well). But nothing what I would consider revolutionary. Gaining three stops of low light shooting capabilities (a wild guess for the effectiveness of the IS in the 6(s) Plus) is something I would consider as a much more noticeable improvements (in the situations where it applies, ie, low enough light levels that shooting at base ISO would result in blur by camera shake and a reasonably still subject).

I'm not sure if they were logical as no other phone maker seems to be doing it. The key is utilizing these crazy fast new chips to enable advanced photographic applications we haven't thought of before. It's an exciting time for photography (isn't it always?) but even more so when we're talking about the camera we always have on us. Which brings me to my next point…

The ability to blur the background in a manner that approaches what fast lenses on DSLRs can do might be the most visible feature if it works well.

And you know full well that this 'DSLR like image quality' is a marketing slogan that is physically impossible to achieve by a dual, 1/3" camera setup.

Sorry, I moved one of your quotes down a paragraph to juxtaposition it against your last quote. This is what I'm talking about—and I think what most of the rumors have alluded to—it being able to blur the background much like a narrow depth of field using a higher-end, large aperture prime on a dSLR. Will the image be as clean? No. But they're getting closer every year and the biggest drawback to phone photography in 2016 is the crappy lens (well and low-light, as you mentioned). But at this point it's hard to tell what kind of quality you could get out of multiple camera setups using advanced software, so I'm cautiously optimistic!

I was just reminded in that last paragraph about another potential benefit, although it sort of precludes other benefits: Lower resolutions on each sensor? If you could go with a lower pixel pitch, you could get better high-ISO/low light performance, and make up for it on the high-res photo merge. I'm just not sure exactly what that would do to 4K as I doubt you could merge two 6mp sensor streams into a unified 4K stream on the fly—at least not for several more years of processor upgrades. As it stands now, my 6s can sometimes get a little choppy with 4K video playback. Or perhaps only one camera could be lower resolution, but it could still help boost the resolution vs a single sensor alone. Or just keep them separate. Such as a 6mp+12mp combo? One is a low-light boss, the other is for regular photos. IDK, seems like that could get kinda crazy, but it's just another possibility I thought of.

 

[igorsky]

I known a LOT of people who are going to be super pissed if the only iPhone with the top-end camera is the Plus. You shouldn't need to buy a phone the size of your face just to get decent specs. Who cares if the phone is thin if you can't even hold it? I mean some people can, but I measured my hands. They're a little above average and I tried to deal with the Plus for a whole year. I mean, we'll see what happens but I'm slowly getting concerned about Apple. If I were to define my interests:

1. Designer and lover of design and all things UI/UX
2. Artist, specifically photography and painting
   
3. I like building things with my hands
   
4. Apple and tech enthusiast
   
5. Science, specifically meteorology and astronomy

Apple makes the top five. And even I'm worried. I follow everything closely and have scoffed for years at the naysayers. And yet here I find myself, a little worried. I hope I'm wrong. But when I hear things about the iPad Air 3's big feature being four speakers it makes me think twice. I get the sense that they are beginning to grasp at straws. The sales curve for the iPad is finally getting pretty scary. They're forecasting iPhone sales drops for the first time ever. They come out with poor designs like that battery case, or a mouse that can only be charged from the bottom? It's getting weird and I don't like it. Even the Macs are getting flimsier. Every store unit I've tried of the new MacBook seems flimsy where the top of the trackpad meets the keyboard area. It flexes a ton and doesn't seem durable at all. The Apple Watch shipped with a metric crapload of bugs and is only now finally starting to feel like a usable device, even though the taptic engine has gotten mushy.

TL;DR: It would be a shame for Apple, especially in their current negative forecast climate, to release such a breakthrough new camera system on only their more niche, phablet-sized device. Makes me worried, but I'll wait and see what really pans out.

So the point of this rant is what? That Apple should design products that piss off the least amount of people?

 

[macduke]

So the point of this rant is what? That Apple should design products that piss off the least amount of people?

…ummm…not sure if trolling but……yeah? That's kind of the general minimum goal a company would set with product design. Hopefully they aim to set the bar higher than "Does this offend our customer that only larger, predominantly male users can get a fancy new camera upgrade in a massive phone?" With a device this personal and handheld, you have to consider the majority at a minimum. And yeah—hopefully do better than that!

 

[h2323]

"SLR-ish quality" according to rumours.

In reality it will be compact camera performance. DSLR quality is largely reflected by the optics. Crystal, Size, Lens diaphragm and element arrangement. The smartphone will not be able to duplicate the optical advantage. This trickery may be able to get some image quality closer to a 300 dollar compact camera.

 

[igorsky]

…ummm…not sure if trolling but……yeah? That's kind of the general minimum goal a company would set with product design. Hopefully they aim to set the bar higher than "Does this offend our customer that only larger, predominantly male users can get a fancy new camera upgrade in a massive phone?" With a device this personal and handheld, you have to consider the majority at a minimum. And yeah—hopefully do better than that!

Disagreeing with you doesn't automatically equate to trolling, but thanks. And my point is Apple doesn't design to not offend. They set the trends...this has been the case for many years.

 

[TroyThrust]

I can see this feature getting pushed back to the iPhone 7S
[doublepost=1454530574][/doublepost]

Steve Jobs would have a dim view of the direction of the iPhone IMO; he despised fragmentation

Wah, Wah, Steve Jobs Would'a not liked this or that, get a new argument. The guy is dead, he can't respond, He's DEAD.

Move along, nothing to see here, Move along.

 

[tbrinkma]

In low light situations, as the light level drops, a camera has to extend the exposure time to maintain image quality (at a certain level). This why you'll get more images with motion blur in such situations. For example, instead of 1/60 s if the light is better, the camera might choose 1/30 s to capture more light by keeping the shutter open twice as long. Technically, you could see this as two 1/60 s exposures taken back to back with no gap in between. But as they extend over a 1/30 s time period, any camera or subject movement over that period will result in a blur proportional to the length of that period.

What the dual-lens systems do is to take two 1/60 s exposures (in this example) not one after the other but at the same time and add the recorded signals/data. Thus you only get the amount of blur that movement during this 1/60 s time period causes but get the amount of light a 1/30 s exposure would normally result in.

Another way to describe this that you get a sensor area that is effectively twice as large compared to a single camera module (without requiring a bigger lens that a single lens camera module with twice the sensor area would require, where bigger means also thicker in phone geometry terms). However, since the sensor of a typical DSLR is about 20x larger than that of an iPhone camera, an increase by a factor of two still leaves a big gap in effective sensor difference.

At the same time, having two images for the same time span, but offset slightly, gives comparative data which can be used to correct for image noise, and actually produce an image better than just doubling the sensor size. Not enough to completely make up for the total difference in sensor size between the paired camera and the DSLR, of course.
[doublepost=1454625409][/doublepost]

3D pictures as well?

On very close subjects, maybe, but probably not to a degree useful in practice (at least based on the concept rendering in the article). The cameras are too close together for that.

 

[macduke]

Disagreeing with you doesn't automatically equate to trolling, but thanks. And my point is Apple doesn't design to not offend. They set the trends...this has been the case for many years.

The way your response reads is very trolly, referring to my well thought out response as a rant, and then asking a really vague, obvious, open-ended question. I disagree with LOTS of people on here who are not trolls.

 

[Yelmurc]

I knew it! the bastard!

You know, I have some inside sources, and it turns out Tim Cook actually does have a personal vendetta against you. He's frequently heard wandering the halls at Apple muttering your name under his breath.

 

[countryside]

I don't see why the regular 4.7" model can't have the duel lens also.

 

[Four oF NINE]

Wah, Wah, Steve Jobs Would'a not liked this or that, get a new argument. The guy is dead, he can't respond, He's DEAD.

Move along, nothing to see here, Move along.

oh.. great.. your robotic knee jerk reaction was SO much more insightful and informative than mine where at least I offered some sort of observation and commentary about the product and direction of the company. Have you nothing better to do than denigrate honest opinions?

What are YOUR opinions about this issue? Do you have any?.. Or do you simply come here to troll the comments of others?

 

[scottsjack]

"Dual-lens technology has previously been used in smartphones such as the HTC M8, but it may soon become a more popular option following rumors that Apple plans to incorporate a dual-lens system into its iPhone 7 Plus." Wouldn't a more honest, less fanboi sentence read "...popular option INCLUDING rumors that Apple..." Not everything in the industry is Apple-driven, especially cameras.

That said a better camera would be much appreciated. My iPhone 6 shoots pretty good ones but there is a lot of room for improvement in both resolutions and detail.

 

[AFDoc]

Not enough room?
Here is an idea. Make the phone a little thicker. Increase the thickness of the battery. Decrease the width of the battery. Volume = surface area x thickness. So it gets the same battery life. Simple math. Now the phone has more x-y space for the camera module and so it can have OIS and dual sensors. And frankly more z space as well. So the camera won't have to stick out.
Anyone with me?

Now that's a COMPLETELY different argument that I also support. I'm tired of this race to thin..... It's all the sissies that can't hold their phone up for any amount of time crying about phone size/weight.

 

[CarlJ]

I'm tired of this race to thin..... It's all the sissies that can't hold their phone up for any amount of time crying about phone size/weight.

Really? You're disturbed by the crowds of sissies protesting with signs about how their phones are too thick and heavy?
Because I can't recall any such protests. I can't recall any such group. It seems to me like Apple themselves seem to be the only ones preoccupied with making the iPhone thinner.