I don't see why sensors need to get bigger and bigger MP count, specially on phones. I'd rather have larger pixels and awesome low light performance (that will always be bad compared to a real camera). The phones using this sensor better record 8k (7680x4320) at 33.2MP, I think with 43.7MP it can surely do it.

Silva:

I don't see why sensors need to get bigger and bigger MP count, specially on phones. I'd rather have larger pixels and awesome low light performance (that will always be bad compared to a real camera). The phones using this sensor better record 8k (7680x4320) at 33.2MP, I think with 43.7MP it can surely do it.

Issue is in lenses. Bigger, low resolution sensor with good optics will produce better image than smaller with higher resolution with tinier lenses. Bigger sensor needs bigger lenses. And that's not very good for phones. I would like to have better optics too ...

Fox2232:

Issue is in lenses. Bigger, low resolution sensor with good optics will produce better image than smaller with higher resolution with tinier lenses. Bigger sensor needs bigger lenses. And that's not very good for phones. I would like to have better optics too ...

To clarify, the sensor probably isn't getting bigger, the MegaPixel count is. Physical space on a phone is limited. But you're right: more megapixels need good and expensive glass to see benefit off. We did see improvements in optics, they're putting out bigger aperture lenses on phones that let in more light and, in turn, offer better image quality in all light conditions.

Well, at least this isn't anywhere near as stupid as the phone cameras exceeding 100MP. Still stupid though. Give me a solid 12MP camera capable of progressive scan and then you've piqued my interest.

not sure why people skeptical about new-sensor, while we are seeing some real-improvement in smartphone-camera, do you guys have some prove/base that new sensor more or less useless ? smartphone camera wont reach real-camera, mostly simply because the lens, those lens for specific-purpose... there rest i am thinking smartphone catching up really good in each generation but other than photography-pro or people that into photography (for people that just want good picture) taking camera-kit everywhere is just unpractical, if ur phone can capture great quality [youtube=h34SFKUoXV8] [youtube=kgbz5KbIatI] well for me personally, if there no real improvement (aka gimmick), then i agree to be skeptical, but so far i see its gets better

Silva:

I don't see why sensors need to get bigger and bigger MP count, specially on phones. I'd rather have larger pixels and awesome low light performance (that will always be bad compared to a real camera). The phones using this sensor better record 8k (7680x4320) at 33.2MP, I think with 43.7MP it can surely do it.

for low-light that the reason with multi-camera (flood illuminator, telephoto) setup in latest phone, no ?

slyphnier:

not sure why people skeptical about new-sensor, while we are seeing some real-improvement in smartphone-camera, do you guys have some prove/base that new sensor more or less useless ?

Adding more MP doesn't make a camera better. For a phone, sacrifices have to be made.

smartphone camera wont reach real-camera, mostly simply because the lens, those lens for specific-purpose... there rest i am thinking smartphone catching up really good in each generation

It doesn't have to match a "real camera", but cranking up the pixel density isn't the right answer either. It doesn't fix any of the existing issues and it adds more problems.

but other than photography-pro or people that into photography (for people that just want good picture) taking camera-kit everywhere is just unpractical, if ur phone can capture great quality

With that argument, what's so bad about current phone cameras? There are several issues with phone cameras, such as: 1. Limited to no zoom 2. Poor quality and visibility in low-light 3. Crappy lenses 4. Rolling shutter 5. Lossy image quality, regardless of sufficient light 6. Crappy auto-focus Of all these problems, only the first one (and arguably 6th) can be resolved with more MP. But... optical zoom attachments exist for phones if that's so important to you. The rest of the stuff I mentioned will either be made worse, or, are completely unrelated to MP count. These are all REAL problems that can and should be fixed to yield better photos and videos. Note how I didn't mention anything about what a professional would be looking for, because that kind of stuff isn't the point of using a phone camera. I don't think anyone expects perfection or professional quality from a phone camera, nor should they. We can get something so much better than what we have, but adding all these MP on a tiny sensor isn't helping anyone.

for low-light that the reason with multi-camera (flood illuminator, telephoto) setup in latest phone, no ?

Or y'know... just cut down on the MP, since higher pixel density causes a darker and noisier image.

schmidtbag:

Adding more MP doesn't make a camera better. For a phone, sacrifices have to be made. It doesn't have to match a "real camera", but cranking up the pixel density isn't the right answer either. It doesn't fix any of the existing issues and it adds more problems. With that argument, what's so bad about current phone cameras? There are several issues with phone cameras, such as: 1. Limited to no zoom 2. Poor quality and visibility in low-light 3. Crappy lenses 4. Rolling shutter 5. Lossy image quality, regardless of sufficient light 6. Crappy auto-focus Of all these problems, only the first one (and arguably 6th) can be resolved with more MP. But... optical zoom attachments exist for phones if that's so important to you. The rest of the stuff I mentioned will either be made worse, or, are completely unrelated to MP count. These are all REAL problems that can and should be fixed to yield better photos and videos. Note how I didn't mention anything about what a professional would be looking for, because that kind of stuff isn't the point of using a phone camera. I don't think anyone expects perfection or professional quality from a phone camera, nor should they. We can get something so much better than what we have, but adding all these MP on a tiny sensor isn't helping anyone. Or y'know... just cut down on the MP, since higher pixel density causes a darker and noisier image.

like i already saying and what important, is the image quality improved with new sensor so-far? what happen is it is or u have some prove that more MP on tiny-sensor dont do anything ? i would like to see some photo comparison dont tell me what u gonna showing is low-light+zoom photo ? to pointing simply because "real"camera have big sensor+good-lens? also at this point, why u can be so sure higher-pixel-density = more darker+noiser image, if so why newer smartphone with more MP = better quality opposite to what u saying ? so far what the progress in smartphone camera been always better in everyway maybe easiest way show some prove what u saying? so far even pro-photographer agree that smartphone-camera really proggressing fast and catching up "real" camera [youtube=lUPGljku_kE]

@slyphnier Look here: https://praxistipps.chip.de/megapixel-wie-viel-braucht-man_16804 Probably you have to translate it by Google first. TL;DR: The amount of MP needed is roughly based on how big the photo will be printed out / viewed. Better images are done by better sensors with more or better effects like noise reduction, OIS or others. So based on this a 100MP cam would give you nice 20 x 10 meter posters, but the same image quality on your 1080p screen like a photo taken with 8MP. Only when you zoom in there is a difference, or you may crop the image without visible loss of quality.

slyphnier:

like i already saying and what important, is the image quality improved with new sensor so-far? what happen is it is or u have some prove that more MP on tiny-sensor dont do anything ? i would like to see some photo comparison

Again... more MP doesn't equal better image quality. Remember, phones have limited processing power and limited storage. At 43MP, you're either going to run out of space very quickly or you're going to have quality so lossy that you'd get better detail at half the resolution. To put it in another perspective: I think most people would agree that a Blu Ray at 1080p looks better than a highly compressed Youtube video at 4K.

dont tell me what u gonna showing is low-light+zoom photo ? to pointing simply because "real"camera have big sensor+good-lens?

Why would I need to show an example of a worst-case scenario when phone cameras at half the resolution and no zoom at all are already suffering badly from low-light conditions? Like I said, higher pixel density makes low-light shots even worse.

also at this point, why u can be so sure higher-pixel-density = more darker+noiser image, if so why newer smartphone with more MP = better quality opposite to what u saying ?

Because of science? This is an old article but it's still relevant: https://www.cnet.com/news/camera-megapixels-why-more-isnt-always-better-smartphones-unlocked/ There's a reason why pros opt for the lowest pixel density possible while having a sufficient resolution to get the job done.

so far what the progress in smartphone camera been always better in everyway

Most of those improvements were done via software or refined sensors, not because of more MP.

so far even pro-photographer agree that smartphone-camera really proggressing fast and catching up "real" camera

I'm aware of that... I'm not disagreeing. You're missing the point here - it's not that phone cameras aren't good or can't get better, the point is more MP doesn't make a camera better. There are other real problems phone cameras have that NEED to be fixed and have nothing to do with MP count.

Silva:

I don't see why sensors need to get bigger and bigger MP count, specially on phones. I'd rather have larger pixels and awesome low light performance (that will always be bad compared to a real camera). The phones using this sensor better record 8k (7680x4320) at 33.2MP, I think with 43.7MP it can surely do it.

I'd guess they're going to combine several pixels into a larger one, in effect, with the software. So no guarantee that it'll record or even take pictures at 8K. It's better to have a clear-ish 4K image than an 8K one that looks like a pile of crap even if you resize it down to 4K.

Shot with a cheap € 130 Smartphone! Xiaomi Mi A2 with Sony IMX 20MP Pixel binning in Portrait Mode. Stock Camera! No Gcam!!! https://i.imgur.com/JMIpHT6.jpg

KayserKay:

Shot with a cheap € 130 Smartphone! Xiaomi Mi A2 with Sony IMX 20MP Pixel binning in Portrait Mode. Stock Camera! No Gcam!!! [spoiler] https://i.imgur.com/JMIpHT6.jpg[/spoiler]

For the price, offers good quality to print on small sizes. But if you know what to look for, you'll spot the hideous fake bokeh and all the noise. Plus, your finger is in the shot on the bottom left corner. Problems you wouldn't have with a real camera. Everyday I try to take a good picture of my cat with my phone. Just forget it, he either moves by the time I'm ready or the photo comes out unfocused or blurred. A real camera with articulated screen would make the job trivial. Smartphones are great, and cameras have been improving, but they are just for the everyday family use. PS: learn how to hide big photos, just put "spoiler" and "/spoiler" in [] not in "".

Please take this picture with a phone: (It's flying at the usual 10000-12000 meters or 30000 feet+) https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48775324566_0ef4f852e2_o_d.jpg Good luck with that !