Guru3D Thermal Paste Roundup 2019
Back-to-school Microsoft Office 2016 $18 Win 10 Pro $12
TeamGroup T-Force Vulcan 1TB SSD Review
Corsair K57 RGB Wireless keyboard review
AMD Ryzen 7 3800X review
PowerColor 5700 RED DEVIL review
MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT Evoke review
ASUS Radeon RX 5700 XT ROG STRIX review
ViewSonic Elite XG240R Monitor Review
Promo: URCDKey Summer Sale Windows 10 Pro for $11
Samsung introduces 64- and 48-megapixel camera sensors for smartphones
Samsung today announced two new camera sensors for smartphones. The South Korean company will offer a whopping 64-megapixel ISOCELL Bright GW1 sensor and a version with a slightly less impressive number of pixels, the ISOCELL Bright GW2 with a 48-megapixel sensor.
Samsung Electronics, a world leader in advanced semiconductor technology, today introduced two new 0.8-micrometer (μm) pixel image sensors – the 64-megapixel (Mp) Samsung ISOCELL Bright GW1 and 48Mp ISOCELL Bright GM2. With the addition, Samsung expands its 0.8μm image sensor lineup, the smallest pixel size currently available in the market, from existing 20Mp to ultra-high 64Mp resolutions.
“Over the past few years, mobile phone cameras have become the main instrument for recording and sharing our everyday moments,” said Yongin Park, executive vice president of sensor business at Samsung Electronics. “With more pixels and advanced pixel technologies, Samsung ISOCELL Bright GW1 and GM2 will bring a new level of photography to today’s sleekest mobile devices that will enhance and help change the way we record our daily lives.”
ISOCELL Bright GW1 is a 64Mp image sensor that features the highest resolution in Samsung’s 0.8μm-pixel image sensor lineup. With pixel-merging Tetracell technology** and remosaic algorithm***, GW1 can produce bright 16Mp images in low-light environments and highly-detailed 64Mp shots in brighter settings. To take pictures resembling the way the human eye perceives its surroundings in a mixed light environment, GW1 supports real-time high dynamic range (HDR) of up to 100-decibels (dB) that provides richer hues. In comparison, the dynamic range of a conventional image sensor is at around 60dB, while that of the human eye is typically considered to be around 120dB.
GW1 is equipped with a Dual Conversion Gain (DCG) that converts the received light into an electric signal according to the illumination of the environment. This allows the sensor to optimize its full well capacity (FWC), utilizing the collected light more efficiently especially in bright environments. Sharper results can be delivered through Super PD, a high-performance phase detection auto-focus technology, and full HD recording at 480 frames-per-second (fps) is supported for smooth cinematic slow motion videos.
ISOCELL Bright GM2 is a 48Mp image sensor that also adopts Tetracell technology in low-light environments and a remosaic algorithm in well-lit settings, bringing highly-detailed pictures with natural and vivid colors. GM2, like GW1, adopts DCG as well for added performance and Super PD for fast autofocus.
Samsung ISOCELL Bright GW1 and GM2 are currently sampling and are expected to be in mass production in the second half of this year.
Samsung Introduces Exynos i T100 - 05/08/2019 08:53 AM
Samsung announced a new Internet of Things (IoT) solution, the Exynos i T100, which enhances the security and reliability of devices designed for short-range communications. Along with the previous...
Samsung 970 PRO 2048 GB NVMe PCIe SSD Starts Listing at Webshops - 04/26/2019 10:20 AM
When Samsung released their rather excellent 970 Pro M2 SSD series we already mentioned in our review that the documentation is indicating a possible 2TB model as well. Well, indications are now here...
Samsung postpones release of Galaxy Fold after reports of screen defects - 04/23/2019 07:39 AM
After the debacle as reported last week, Samsung has decided to that the Galaxy Fold will not be released on April 26. From a statement that the company has released, it becomes clear that delaying th...
Samsung Completes 5nm EUV Development - 04/16/2019 08:01 AM
Samsung announced that its 5-nanometer (nm) FinFET process technology is complete in its development and is now ready for customers' samples. By adding another cutting-edge node to its extreme ultrav...
Samsung Adds New Q Series HW-Q70R and HW-Q60R Soundbars to its Lineup - 03/27/2019 09:14 AM
Samsung Electronics announced today the release of two new Q Series soundbars that feature Samsung Acoustic Beam technology, as well as the new Adaptive Sound feature. As part of a Samsung Audio Lab a...
Someoldguy
Junior Member
Posts: 1
Joined: 2019-05-09
Junior Member
Posts: 1
Joined: 2019-05-09
#5667419 Posted on: 05/09/2019 08:08 PM
They left the mirrorless ilc market (Samsung NX) awhile ago. Those new sensors are probably quad bayer sensors so 4 pixels are merged together (the photosites are so small the noise levels are probably pretty nuts) e.g 48mp produces 12 and 64 to 16.
They left the mirrorless ilc market (Samsung NX) awhile ago. Those new sensors are probably quad bayer sensors so 4 pixels are merged together (the photosites are so small the noise levels are probably pretty nuts) e.g 48mp produces 12 and 64 to 16.
AcidSnow
Senior Member
Posts: 404
Joined: 2013-08-09
Senior Member
Posts: 404
Joined: 2013-08-09
#5667423 Posted on: 05/09/2019 08:17 PM
"Flagship" phones will ship with 1TB of storage by the end of the year, or beginning of 2020, so storage of large 64/48MP images won't be an issue for high-end phones.
"Flagship" phones will ship with 1TB of storage by the end of the year, or beginning of 2020, so storage of large 64/48MP images won't be an issue for high-end phones.
Neo Cyrus
Senior Member
Posts: 9166
Joined: 2006-02-14
Senior Member
Posts: 9166
Joined: 2006-02-14
#5667435 Posted on: 05/09/2019 08:52 PM
A 48 or 64 MP camera on a phone seems kinda stupid in most cases. In order to really take advantage of that level of quality, the file sizes are going to be absurdly huge. Considering the limited resources on phones and Samsung not typically including SD slots in flagship models (which these cameras are obviously going to be used on), really gets me to wonder what the point of this is. Seems like a good sensor for a standalone camera, but not for a phone.
On the note of standalone cameras, I was thinking "why doesn't Samsung make DSLR or mirrorless full-body cameras?" and to my surprise: they do. Sure gets me to wonder though if their sensors are as good as they claim, seeing as I've never once heard of a professional photographer mention them.
Samsung get a lot wrong, but they do include Micro SD card slots on their phones, flagships included.
And I doubt they'll use the 64 MP sensor to take crappy 64 MP photos. It'll probably combine information from multiple pixels and take a much lower res photo, at higher quality than what's available now.
A 48 or 64 MP camera on a phone seems kinda stupid in most cases. In order to really take advantage of that level of quality, the file sizes are going to be absurdly huge. Considering the limited resources on phones and Samsung not typically including SD slots in flagship models (which these cameras are obviously going to be used on), really gets me to wonder what the point of this is. Seems like a good sensor for a standalone camera, but not for a phone.
On the note of standalone cameras, I was thinking "why doesn't Samsung make DSLR or mirrorless full-body cameras?" and to my surprise: they do. Sure gets me to wonder though if their sensors are as good as they claim, seeing as I've never once heard of a professional photographer mention them.
Samsung get a lot wrong, but they do include Micro SD card slots on their phones, flagships included.
And I doubt they'll use the 64 MP sensor to take crappy 64 MP photos. It'll probably combine information from multiple pixels and take a much lower res photo, at higher quality than what's available now.
labidas
Senior Member
Posts: 223
Joined: 2013-03-06
Senior Member
Posts: 223
Joined: 2013-03-06
#5667486 Posted on: 05/09/2019 11:06 PM
You know what would be awesome: if a 64MP would take 4 16MP(or 16x4MP) images at the same time and stack them(like in photoshop->smart object->stacking). This would result in images that look VERY clean. Right now cameras do it by taking mutiple successive images which introduce artifacts due to movement.
(if each pixel is defined by a number and the number shows the image number it belongs to (out of 4))
12341234...
34123412...
12341234...
34123412...
. . . . . . . . ...
You know what would be awesome: if a 64MP would take 4 16MP(or 16x4MP) images at the same time and stack them(like in photoshop->smart object->stacking). This would result in images that look VERY clean. Right now cameras do it by taking mutiple successive images which introduce artifacts due to movement.
(if each pixel is defined by a number and the number shows the image number it belongs to (out of 4))
12341234...
34123412...
12341234...
34123412...
. . . . . . . . ...
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4264
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4264
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5667495 Posted on: 05/09/2019 11:33 PM
You know what would be awesome: if a 64MP would take 4 16MP(or 16x4MP) images at the same time and stack them(like in photoshop->smart object->stacking). This would result in images that look VERY clean. Right now cameras do it by taking mutiple successive images which introduce artifacts due to movement.
(if each pixel is defined by a number and the number shows the image number it belongs to (out of 4))
12341234...
34123412...
12341234...
34123412...
. . . . . . . . ...
I think they'd be better off just finding a way to do a global shutter, or, to increase the speed at which the shutter sweeps. A global shutter is obviously the preferred option since frankly that's the right way to take photos and videos, but it is a lot more demanding of the hardware so I can see why they wouldn't do this in a phone.
You know what would be awesome: if a 64MP would take 4 16MP(or 16x4MP) images at the same time and stack them(like in photoshop->smart object->stacking). This would result in images that look VERY clean. Right now cameras do it by taking mutiple successive images which introduce artifacts due to movement.
(if each pixel is defined by a number and the number shows the image number it belongs to (out of 4))
12341234...
34123412...
12341234...
34123412...
. . . . . . . . ...
I think they'd be better off just finding a way to do a global shutter, or, to increase the speed at which the shutter sweeps. A global shutter is obviously the preferred option since frankly that's the right way to take photos and videos, but it is a lot more demanding of the hardware so I can see why they wouldn't do this in a phone.
Silva
Senior Member
Posts: 895
Joined: 2013-06-04
Senior Member
Posts: 895
Joined: 2013-06-04
#5667688 Posted on: 05/10/2019 11:54 AM
I'm sure diminishing returns will affect this really badly.
For image quality you want large pixels, to collect lots of light. Some professional cameras already boost over 40MP but either lenses can't take full advantage, or its hard to do so.
Very few cases were more than 24MP are really needed. Thats why most video cameras are "low resolution", they use all the sensor and its enough.
To record 4k you need 8.3MP, most cameras have 12 or 16. Oh, I know: next phone will record 8K, you need 33.2MP for that...
Very useful, not. Rather have low light performance tbh.
I'm sure diminishing returns will affect this really badly.
For image quality you want large pixels, to collect lots of light. Some professional cameras already boost over 40MP but either lenses can't take full advantage, or its hard to do so.
Very few cases were more than 24MP are really needed. Thats why most video cameras are "low resolution", they use all the sensor and its enough.
To record 4k you need 8.3MP, most cameras have 12 or 16. Oh, I know: next phone will record 8K, you need 33.2MP for that...
Very useful, not. Rather have low light performance tbh.
Venix
Senior Member
Posts: 884
Joined: 2016-08-01
Senior Member
Posts: 884
Joined: 2016-08-01
#5667693 Posted on: 05/10/2019 12:19 PM
I'm sure diminishing returns will affect this really badly.
For image quality you want large pixels, to collect lots of light. Some professional cameras already boost over 40MP but either lenses can't take full advantage, or its hard to do so.
Very few cases were more than 24MP are really needed. Thats why most video cameras are "low resolution", they use all the sensor and its enough.
To record 4k you need 8.3MP, most cameras have 12 or 16. Oh, I know: next phone will record 8K, you need 33.2MP for that...
Very useful, not. Rather have low light performance tbh.
yep except if they start putting lenses about the size of the one the humble telescope has .... so many megapixels are just so they can advertise a bigger number than the last one ! ((obviously not the same lenses as telescopes and obviously i am over-blowing the size i am aware
))
I'm sure diminishing returns will affect this really badly.
For image quality you want large pixels, to collect lots of light. Some professional cameras already boost over 40MP but either lenses can't take full advantage, or its hard to do so.
Very few cases were more than 24MP are really needed. Thats why most video cameras are "low resolution", they use all the sensor and its enough.
To record 4k you need 8.3MP, most cameras have 12 or 16. Oh, I know: next phone will record 8K, you need 33.2MP for that...
Very useful, not. Rather have low light performance tbh.
yep except if they start putting lenses about the size of the one the humble telescope has .... so many megapixels are just so they can advertise a bigger number than the last one ! ((obviously not the same lenses as telescopes and obviously i am over-blowing the size i am aware
))
fantaskarsef
Senior Member
Posts: 10588
Joined: 2014-07-21
Senior Member
Posts: 10588
Joined: 2014-07-21
#5667711 Posted on: 05/10/2019 01:39 PM
So... nobody wondering if such a sensor even makes sense on a smartphone camera, when the real trouble with a smartphone probably is blurry images due to not using a tripod?
So... nobody wondering if such a sensor even makes sense on a smartphone camera, when the real trouble with a smartphone probably is blurry images due to not using a tripod?
moab600
Senior Member
Posts: 6087
Joined: 2004-09-30
Senior Member
Posts: 6087
Joined: 2004-09-30
#5667714 Posted on: 05/10/2019 01:51 PM
Sensors are too small to take really advantage.
I love the Mate 20 X camera as well as P30 Pro, but it's still a phone, especially compared to my trusty D850.
Sensors are too small to take really advantage.
I love the Mate 20 X camera as well as P30 Pro, but it's still a phone, especially compared to my trusty D850.
fry178
Senior Member
Posts: 1063
Joined: 2012-04-30
Senior Member
Posts: 1063
Joined: 2012-04-30
#5667749 Posted on: 05/10/2019 03:02 PM
it wont be too bad for low light, if they switch pixel size, e. g. drop to 16MP which increases amount of light per pixel.
and even if the phone has lots of storage, i doubt this will offer raw.
processing that much data is already getting hard for dedicated cams.
not even talking about the lens being the biggest limitation.
one reason we saw an uptick in l
sales for mirror less and compact cameras, even that all customers had a relatively new phone with +12MP.
they do see the difference...
it wont be too bad for low light, if they switch pixel size, e. g. drop to 16MP which increases amount of light per pixel.
and even if the phone has lots of storage, i doubt this will offer raw.
processing that much data is already getting hard for dedicated cams.
not even talking about the lens being the biggest limitation.
one reason we saw an uptick in l
sales for mirror less and compact cameras, even that all customers had a relatively new phone with +12MP.
they do see the difference...
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4264
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4264
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5667766 Posted on: 05/10/2019 03:45 PM
it wont be too bad for low light, if they switch pixel size, e. g. drop to 16MP which increases amount of light per pixel.
and even if the phone has lots of storage, i doubt this will offer raw.
processing that much data is already getting hard for dedicated cams.
So, why offer the sensor in the first place (I'm not literally asking you for an answer to this)? If you have to drop to 1/4 the pixel density just to get sufficient light, that sounds like a major flaw to me. If the images have to be compressed so the storage and processors can keep up with the large influx of data, that sounds like a flaw to me. It really just sounds like they want this camera that looks beefy on paper but is otherwise impractical and not really capable of delivering. After all, this is why so many phone cameras claim some BS spec boasting of a high MP count when really the effective pixel count is 3/4 that amount and they just use interpolation or whatever to upscale. It's just shady marketing as far as I'm concerned. As you alluded to later in your post, the people who actually care about image quality know there's much more to a camera than pixel count.
Personally, I think Samsung would have more success if they focused on reducing/eliminating rolling shutter and offered better performance in dark areas. That would give them a real edge.
not even talking about the lens being the biggest limitation.
Yup, the lens situation is the primary reason I got a DSLR.
it wont be too bad for low light, if they switch pixel size, e. g. drop to 16MP which increases amount of light per pixel.
and even if the phone has lots of storage, i doubt this will offer raw.
processing that much data is already getting hard for dedicated cams.
So, why offer the sensor in the first place (I'm not literally asking you for an answer to this)? If you have to drop to 1/4 the pixel density just to get sufficient light, that sounds like a major flaw to me. If the images have to be compressed so the storage and processors can keep up with the large influx of data, that sounds like a flaw to me. It really just sounds like they want this camera that looks beefy on paper but is otherwise impractical and not really capable of delivering. After all, this is why so many phone cameras claim some BS spec boasting of a high MP count when really the effective pixel count is 3/4 that amount and they just use interpolation or whatever to upscale. It's just shady marketing as far as I'm concerned. As you alluded to later in your post, the people who actually care about image quality know there's much more to a camera than pixel count.
Personally, I think Samsung would have more success if they focused on reducing/eliminating rolling shutter and offered better performance in dark areas. That would give them a real edge.
not even talking about the lens being the biggest limitation.
Yup, the lens situation is the primary reason I got a DSLR.
slyphnier
Senior Member
Posts: 614
Joined: 2009-11-30
Senior Member
Posts: 614
Joined: 2009-11-30
#5667772 Posted on: 05/10/2019 03:55 PM
as long it have some improvement over previous sensor (less MP) even slightest, it sells
samsung not looking for world-changing-tech but rather just to create "improvement"
which they use in their smartphone
in daily use, except u are pro-photographer, smartphone camera is good enough for taking picture
it dont have dlsr flexibility, but most people wont need those, as long they get clear picture everything is good
as long it have some improvement over previous sensor (less MP) even slightest, it sells
samsung not looking for world-changing-tech but rather just to create "improvement"
which they use in their smartphone
in daily use, except u are pro-photographer, smartphone camera is good enough for taking picture
it dont have dlsr flexibility, but most people wont need those, as long they get clear picture everything is good
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 4264
Joined: 2012-11-10
A 48 or 64 MP camera on a phone seems kinda stupid in most cases. In order to really take advantage of that level of quality, the file sizes are going to be absurdly huge. Considering the limited resources on phones, really gets me to wonder what the point of this is. Seems like a good sensor for a standalone camera, but not for a phone.
On the note of standalone cameras, I was thinking "why doesn't Samsung make DSLR or mirrorless full-body cameras?" and to my surprise: they do. Sure gets me to wonder though if their sensors are as good as they claim, seeing as I've never once heard of a professional photographer mention them.