See, Samsung? This is how you make a proper high-MP sensor. Global shutter, decent area (still small but not too small), and features that ensure quality (as opposed to software compensating for quality loss).

schmidtbag:

See, Samsung? This is how you make a proper high-MP sensor. Global shutter, decent area (still small but not too small), and features that ensure quality (as opposed to software compensating for quality loss).

not defending samsung in anyway but really, comparing smartphone high-MP sensor with image sensor for industrial equipment make sense ?

slyphnier:

not defending samsung in anyway but really, comparing smartphone high-MP sensor with image sensor for industrial equipment make sense ?

It does, because Samsung's is just a marketing gimmick. What Sony made is a legit product. Not all phone cameras are gimmicks, including others made by Samsung. It doesn't matter what the market is when the product is misleading.

schmidtbag:

It does, because Samsung's is just a marketing gimmick. What Sony made is a legit product. Not all phone cameras are gimmicks, including others made by Samsung. It doesn't matter what the market is when the product is misleading.

sony did release new smartphone sensor IMX789, go ahead google it, if u havent read it is it better? based what i read so far not much different than what samsung one [youtube=n51BBcjZFso] now this IMX661 prolly not even going to high-end mirrorless camera like mentioned in article intended for industrial uses https://av.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/1310903.html -> expected to improve inspection accuracy and shorten inspection time in the inspection process of displays and electronic boards that require high productivity. now IMX789 as legit as IMX661 ? thats is different class on its own ... so comparing those is just not make sense imo

slyphnier:

sony did release new smartphone sensor IMX789, go ahead google it, if u havent read it is it better? based what i read so far not much different than what samsung one

I wasn't able to find much, but I do know it's 48MP (generally, smaller is better for phone cameras) and has a better autofocus system. Couldn't find anything about sensor size or whether it's a rolling or global shutter. These would really separate it from Samsung.

now IMX789 as legit as IMX661 ? thats is different class on its own ... so comparing those is just not make sense imo

Given the lack of info, it's too hard to say. But, it probably is just as legit. The 789 is obviously inferior but that doesn't mean it's not a good and sensible sensor. To put it another way, compare it to something like a Mazda Miata vs a Dodge Challenger Demon: The Miata is a slower and cheaper car, but it does what it's meant to do very well: handle tight windy roads. The Demon, meanwhile, has so much power that it's impractical. You can't realistically use the power it has to offer, and it's mostly just good in a straight line. It's a gimmick. But... the amount of power it has isn't a gimmick, when put into something like industrial equipment, or public transportation (like a bus). So in this analogy, the Miata is the IMX789, Samsung's 108MP sensor is the Demon, and a camera like the HDC-100c is like the bus. The Miata is the only one that's slow and "weak", but it's a legit product.

Meanwhile, the Hubble telescope which has peered into the farthest reaches of the universe has been doing it with an 8mp sensor.

alanm:

Meanwhile, the Hubble telescope which has peered into the farthest reaches of the universe has been doing it with an 8mp sensor.

Quality lenses (even repaired ones) designed for a purpose >> pixel count

Meh! we needed that on the Perseverance Mars Rover. You know, for Alien life porn, when they find it. And thats not if but when. Ooh Baby Baby, Ooh Baby Baby.

I wonder why phones had rolling shutter instead of global to begin with. Small area and plenty of processing power.. did they just want to screw with us. Now all of a suddent some heavyass 127mp sensor can do global shutter out of nowhere? If you can snap all pixels at once on a 127mp sensor whats the damn problem of doing it on the mainstream 12mp ones..

Correct me if i'm wrong as maybe i'm reading this wrong. But isn't this sensor....huge? Like it's meant for industrial equipment, and would be extremely impractical, if not impossible to put it in a phone and have the phone still be wieldable as a phone from what i'm seeing. So....why is everyone comparing it to a phones sensor? Even if it didn't specifically state it was for industrial equipment, the size itself would make it completely irrelevant for phones, so why are we talking as though it is?

schmidtbag:

I wasn't able to find much, but I do know it's 48MP (generally, smaller is better for phone cameras) and has a better autofocus system. Couldn't find anything about sensor size or whether it's a rolling or global shutter. These would really separate it from Samsung. Given the lack of info, it's too hard to say. But, it probably is just as legit. The 789 is obviously inferior but that doesn't mean it's not a good and sensible sensor. To put it another way, compare it to something like a Mazda Miata vs a Dodge Challenger Demon: The Miata is a slower and cheaper car, but it does what it's meant to do very well: handle tight windy roads. The Demon, meanwhile, has so much power that it's impractical. You can't realistically use the power it has to offer, and it's mostly just good in a straight line. It's a gimmick. But... the amount of power it has isn't a gimmick, when put into something like industrial equipment, or public transportation (like a bus). So in this analogy, the Miata is the IMX789, Samsung's 108MP sensor is the Demon, and a camera like the HDC-100c is like the bus. The Miata is the only one that's slow and "weak", but it's a legit product.

talking about good sense, you comparing $2000 sensor vs around $10 sensor LMAO https://www.sony-semicon.co.jp/e/products/IS/industry/technology.html https://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/201910/19-098E/ -> IMX530 24MP sample price 210,000 JPY bet IMX661 wouldnt cheaper than that https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Technology/iPhone-12-teardown-showcases-South-Korean-parts-makers "Sony is the key supplier for the CMOS image sensors used in iPhone 12 Pro's three camera lenses, including its wide-angle and telephoto lenses, the findings showed. The sensors are priced at around $5.40 to $7.40 each." https://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_note20_ultra_5g_bom_is_550_calculate_analysts-news-45209.php those camera module (ultrawide+108mp wide+tele+AFlaser+flash)in note20 is priced at $60 well no point discussing more than this... now just answer it yourself since beginning we all know sony making great camera + sensor (they are at top sensor market share afterall) so why they havent make/release vastly superior camera sensor for smartphone then? even say they possible make such sensor for smartphone with the price of course so its make sense to u if smartphone price goes up 4x-5x times than now ? which people now already think its way to high that before considering the size, and various factor to add i agree samsung using "big-numbers" in marketing but thats common things nowdays, and considering their market-share is much smaller (less than20% ? compared to sony 50%+), they doing more aggressive marketing trying to get more appeal, which is practical enough and what important is that although its true, their "big-numbers" sensor didnt gain much improvement equally to the big-number, but still the fact is that it got some improvement and also not much worse compared to competitor latest best sensor

Aura89:

Correct me if i'm wrong as maybe i'm reading this wrong. But isn't this sensor....huge? Like it's meant for industrial equipment, and would be extremely impractical, if not impossible to put it in a phone and have the phone still be wieldable as a phone from what i'm seeing. So....why is everyone comparing it to a phones sensor? Even if it didn't specifically state it was for industrial equipment, the size itself would make it completely irrelevant for phones, so why are we talking as though it is?

It's big, it's expensive, it probably uses far more power than one designed for a smartphone, etc. I'm also not entirely convinced the high MP of Samsung cameras is purely marketing. I went from a Pixel 4XL to a S21 Ultra. The S21's camera even in the 3x3 binned mode has higher detail than the 4XL, at full 108MP it's significantly better as long as the shot is well lit. The sacrifice is low light shooting and it shows vs a 4XL which performs better but it's hard to say if that's due to the sensor or Google's superior camera processing and decision making. The S21 just tries to make low light shots look like day, where as the 4XL looks so much more natural.. but on the flipside if I stack a few S21 raw shots in photoshop and merge them, I can get similar results to the Pixel. Not quite as good but very similar. So idk.

slyphnier:

talking about good sense, you comparing $2000 sensor vs around $10 sensor LMAO

Clearly, you're not understanding my point if you think price has anything to do with this. My point is simple: Samsung's sensor is a gimmick, Sony's isn't. It doesn't matter what the market is. It doesn't matter what the cost is. I don't know how to spell it out for you any clearer than that.

"Sony is the key supplier for the CMOS image sensors used in iPhone 12 Pro's three camera lenses, including its wide-angle and telephoto lenses, the findings showed. The sensors are priced at around $5.40 to $7.40 each." those camera module (ultrawide+108mp wide+tele+AFlaser+flash)in note20 is priced at $60

What's your point and how does this info refute mine?

so why they havent make/release vastly superior camera sensor for smartphone then?

Because physics and modern technology doesn't permit it. Sony isn't pretending to have something better than what they've actually got.

even say they possible make such sensor for smartphone with the price of course so its make sense to u if smartphone price goes up 4x-5x times than now ? which people now already think its way to high that before considering the size, and various factor to add

If they can pull it off and someone wants a phone specifically because of the camera, I don't see the problem. Nobody is forcing you to buy a flagship phone... There are niche phones out there, like ones that are extra durable, ones that have great battery life, ones that use e-ink, ones with built-in gaming features, etc. Is it really that unreasonable to have a more-expensive-than-average phone with a genuinely good camera? I don't think so.

and what important is that although its true, their "big-numbers" sensor didnt gain much improvement equally to the big-number, but still the fact is that it got some improvement and also not much worse compared to competitor latest best sensor

That's the thing - they made something great but they chose to cripple it. If Samsung chopped the MP count down to 1/3 and made the pixels 3x bigger but kept everything else the same, it would have been a very good camera: faster processing, lower battery consumption, better image quality, better low-light detail, less disk usage, lesser rolling-shutter effect, and so on. They willfully made their camera worse and more expensive to manufacture for the sake of marketing. It doesn't matter what you compare it to, deliberately making your product worse is objectively stupid.

I bet these are designed to be used in high-resolution cameras used for surveillance so they can use AI facial recognition on a huge crowd all at once. Right now its not easy because the resolution is not enough for hundreds of faces in crowd at once. Won't be cheap, but certain oppressive governments will pay big to watch their citizens on every street in their cities.

schmidtbag:

That's the thing - they made something great but they chose to cripple it. If Samsung chopped the MP count down to 1/3 and made the pixels 3x bigger but kept everything else the same, it would have been a very good camera: faster processing, lower battery consumption, better image quality, better low-light detail, less disk usage, lesser rolling-shutter effect, and so on. They willfully made their camera worse and more expensive to manufacture for the sake of marketing. It doesn't matter what you compare it to, deliberately making your product worse is objectively stupid.

if like u said, then why sony also keep bumping MP with latest sensor ? IMX689 48mp, IMX686/IMX682 64mp, now IMX766/IMX789 50mp

Samsung uses pixel binning to essentially get the same results of a much higher pixel size but be able to switch to higher detail as well. In order to say "Samsung is just marketing" you'd have to actually show why the 3x3 pixel binning Samsung does is inferior to a sensor with bigger pixels + contrast that with the obvious detail trade off of having 108mp in shots that can be well lit. Seems like Samsung is simply making a different design choice, there are advantages and disadvantages to their approach and sure one of them probably includes being able to market higher MP numbers but that's not the only benefit.

slyphnier:

if like u said, then why sony also keep bumping MP with latest sensor ? IMX689 48mp, IMX686/IMX682 64mp, now IMX766/IMX789 50mp

Can't say I'm happy about that either, but if like Samsung they improved the overall sensor then maybe it's fine. Hard to say for sure since we don't have results yet.

Denial:

Samsung uses pixel binning to essentially get the same results of a much higher pixel size but be able to switch to higher detail as well. In order to say "Samsung is just marketing" you'd have to actually show why the 3x3 pixel binning Samsung does is inferior to a sensor with bigger pixels + contrast that with the obvious detail trade off of having 108mp in shots that can be well lit.

If there were less complexity in the sensor then binning wouldn't be a necessity. It's been proven by photographers for a while that more pixels in the same area reduces light sensitivity. This makes sense, because the receptors are triggered by fewer photons, and, there is a blind spot between each receptor. So even if you're merging 3x3 pixels, you're still losing light.

Seems like Samsung is simply making a different design choice, there are advantages and disadvantages to their approach and sure one of them probably includes being able to market higher MP numbers but that's not the only benefit.

The whole point of increasing MP is to add more detail per-pixel (or for digital zoom, in some cases). If a sensor with 1/3 the pixel density looks just as good, what do you gain from a sensor that costs more and requires so much sacrifice to function?

schmidtbag:

Can't say I'm happy about that either, but if like Samsung they improved the overall sensor then maybe it's fine. Hard to say for sure since we don't have results yet. If there were less complexity in the sensor then binning wouldn't be a necessity. It's been proven by photographers for a while that more pixels in the same area reduces light sensitivity. This makes sense, because the receptors are triggered by fewer photons, and, there is a blind spot between each receptor. So even if you're merging 3x3 pixels, you're still losing light. The whole point of increasing MP is to add more detail per-pixel (or for digital zoom, in some cases). If a sensor with 1/3 the pixel density looks just as good, what do you gain from a sensor that costs more and requires so much sacrifice to function?

the only one that have yet to see the result is only IMX789, rest already released https://www.kimovil.com/en/list-smartphones-by-lens-model/sony-imx689 https://www.kimovil.com/en/list-smartphones-by-lens-model/sony-imx686-exmor-rs https://www.kimovil.com/en/list-smartphones-by-lens-model/sony-imx682-exmor-rs https://www.kimovil.com/en/list-smartphones-by-lens-model/sony-imx766 so there already bunch of result you can find, such oneplus8, asus ROG 5 and really u said we dont have result from like 1year old phone ? lol for samsung 108mp sensor itself, they been improving like 3 times since first release ISOCELL HMX > HM1 > HM2 > HM3 well if u care and not just want to bashing the "108mp", u should already know about it if u look at current smartphone cmos sensor , either samsung, sony or omnivision they all doing similar things, what sony quad-bayer ? do you really think u know everything about sensor more than all those sensor engineers ? based what u saying, i doubt u read enough about pixel bining, and why most smartphone sensor now using it (also mirrorless Sony A7S III) and i wonder do u using phone with those sensor and know its bad based your usage ? OR u just basically saying what in ur thought without even testing it? anyway while u still critizing 108mp... samsung already marketing other else [youtube=8KILAVjM8lY] [youtube=TYdEHoPo6jA] they cant stop marketing it [youtube=PtzRsTzAijw] so you can continue "talk" whatever you like lol

slyphnier:

if u look at current smartphone cmos sensor , either samsung, sony or omnivision they all doing similar things, what sony quad-bayer ? do you really think u know everything about sensor more than all those sensor engineers ? based what u saying, i doubt u read enough about pixel bining, and why most smartphone sensor now using it (also mirrorless Sony A7S III) and i wonder do u using phone with those sensor and know its bad based your usage ? OR u just basically saying what in ur thought without even testing it?

The engineers are doing what they're told to do regardless of whether it's sensible or not. This is typical among all kinds of major corporations. I don't blame them for making a crippled product. But you have to pause and think for a moment why companies that take photography/videography seriously aren't following the same path. It's not a coincidence. It's also not a coincidence that Samsung sensors are rarely used in professional equipment.

they cant stop marketing it

Dude... have you not been paying attention to what I've been saying? I've been calling it a marketing gimmick. The fact you said yourself "they can't stop marketing it" just proves how much they're trying to gaslight you into thinking it's actually a good idea, and you're falling for it.

schmidtbag:

The engineers are doing what they're told to do regardless of whether it's sensible or not. This is typical among all kinds of major corporations. I don't blame them for making a crippled product. But you have to pause and think for a moment why companies that take photography/videography seriously aren't following the same path. It's not a coincidence. It's also not a coincidence that Samsung sensors are rarely used in professional equipment. Dude... have you not been paying attention to what I've been saying? I've been calling it a marketing gimmick. The fact you said yourself "they can't stop marketing it" just proves how much they're trying to gaslight you into thinking it's actually a good idea, and you're falling for it.

its marketing yes, but not everything pure-gimmick as like what u been said and what we talking here is samsung smartphone sensor which is what samsung developed for their smartphone (we already know they didnt make wide array of sensor like sony) but then why companies such sony that seriously in photography/videography, offering similar things like samsung ? not creating vastly superior sensor that comparable to mirrorless that blow samsung 108mp sensor out of water? so if u trying to say samsung pixel-bining is just gimmick, then its mean all similar sensor is no different u should start debunking back from nokia 808 then Nokia 808 PureView proved that oversampling improve picture quality https://www.slideshare.net/antonioedasilvacampos/nokia808-pureview-whitepaper https://www.imagesensors.org/Past%20Workshops/2013%20Workshop/2013%20Papers/13-1_071-Alakarhu.pdf sony also showcasing similar things https://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/201807/18-060E/ https://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/technology/stories/IMX586/