Samsung Introduces ISOCELL HM3 with massive 108Mp Image Sensor for Smartphones
Click here to post a comment for Samsung Introduces ISOCELL HM3 with massive 108Mp Image Sensor for Smartphones on our message forum
Kaarme
When I checked Canon and Nikon DSLRs, I see that unlike in smartphones, the megapixel race seems abandoned. My ancient Canon DSLR is over 10 years old, but the new Canon ones in the same class have only raised the MP amount from 18 to 24. If you pay over 1000 euros, you'd get 32.5MP. If you pay thousands of euros, you'd get 50MP. I suppose you can tell that the manufacturers consider DSLR to have totally lost the competition against smartphones in the more casual market. Thus people who really want to use DSLR are willing to pay a lot or alternatively don't really care about fancy specs. Nevertheless, as long as my current one works, I'm not going to pay 600-700 euros to upgrade from 18 to 24MP, plus some miscellaneous stuff like a touch screen. If the hobbyist cameras had at least 50MP, I might actually consider it.
xg-ei8ht
Truthfully it depends on what you want to do with a camera.
For taking photo's it's best to have a large sensor, you could want faster burst speeds, but lenses play a big part as well.
No matter the size of a sensor on a smartphone, you still don't have enough quality zoom, then it goes to digital and gets worse.
SmootyPoody
Silva
Smartphone sensors have come a long way, and some of them take truly amazing pictures in daylight.
Sadly most of the software offers little to no settings control and even with all the development you can't just beat a full or medium format camera: larger sensor area = more photons captured = less noise
Plus, the fake blur is horrible. The natural blur can't be beaten by software. But for low quality Instagram pictures, good enough!
Kaarme
scoter man1
Denial
scoter man1
Kaarme
scoter man1
Kaarme
Venix
Oh ! More megapixels of noise ! While for extreme zoom it will help a phone is impossible to get a lens big enough to not get tons of noise in such resolutions.
slyphnier
slight oot
this probably marketing-"bs" things, but apple release this yesterday:
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/01/shot-on-iphone-12-portraits-cityscapes-the-night-sky-and-more/
iphone12 is only 12mp, right?
for whatever reason, aside for production use or maybe big-printing, i think in many people eyes, those pictures already good enough
the things with smartphone camera is that, its a feature that considered main
so it still keep getting improvement for each new release, its quite interesting how they will keep pushing image quality that showing what look nice in our eyes
back to topic, as far as high MP, while its not bringing whole different quality instantly, but there some improvement with high MP sensor, so for me personally as long there improvement why not
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/images/product/iphone/lifestyle/Apple_ShotoniPhone_NIKCHU_hero_011221_big.jpg.large.jpg
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/images/product/iphone/lifestyle/Apple_ShotoniPhone_abdullah_shaijie_011221_inline.jpg.large.jpg
Clawedge
i had a canon mx10 and i compared it with a motorola one power phone (Gcam) app.
The phone decimated the canon MX10 so bad, i ended up selling it.
SmootyPoody
https://www.izotope.com/en/learn/digital-audio-basics-sample-rate-and-bit-depth/_jcr_content/root/sectioncontainer_main/flexcontainer/flexcontainer_center/flexcontainer_center_top/image.coreimg.82.1280.png/1590799216325/increasing-bit-depth-resolution.png
The higher sample rate the finer detail. However. Just because you sample at a higher rate, it does not mean the final product is better as it is not always noticeable for a human or maybe the image/audio is of a low quality and therefor it is wasted sampling at a higher rate.
I am a professional photographer and use a 42mp sony camera on a daily basis. That thing is amazing - if the lighting is right. It has terrible ISO performance because the photosites are so small. My 12mp sony camera however is also fantastic. You think 12mp is not enough these days, but it is. If its made with modern tech. The problem is that we compare 10 old tech with brand new future tech and say "look at the difference! WOW!".
Also. Lower megapixel counts lets you read out data from the sensor much faster and can capture more images with the same space. Those images can then be put together and you can then superresolution them. There is a reason that Apple is still using 12mp cameras. Its because they can manipulate them much faster, take more images and compare difference and then normalise the end result. You dont even notice it just took 20 images and compared them, rotated some, superresolutioned, some in low exposure, some in high all put together to one image.. In the end its the physical size of the sensor and the current tech that says what the quality will be. Megapixels count is just one quantitative factor of a whole pipeline and largely a marketing term. You dont hear all the other numbers of the stuff that is in the tech - only the megapixel count.
Sure, but that are two different price segments. The 18mp camera is not competing against the 50mp one. The 18mp one is using a lot older tech and lower-end tech. That is why you can have it so cheap. The 18mp is an entry level camera. The 50mp is a professional. But the megapixel count has nothing to do with the entry vs professional.
A Megapixel count is just a sampling rate. Just like audio sample rate -> Kaarme
SmootyPoody