Notebookcheck
, , , , , ,
search relation.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 

Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

Verification:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: S.Yu
« on: April 22, 2020, 19:01:12 »

Then again I believe the crux of the matter is Samsung Mobile's inability to utilize the sensor to the maximum potential, instead of Samsung S.LSI inability to deliver sensor performance matching Sony's.
And adding more pixels won't solve that problem. Processing all that data to spit out a pretty image is going to require a lot of resources. I can imagine such a sensor making sense for computer vision. Where it's not about pretty pictures. For taking pictures, I prefer something that doesn't have to draw its interpretation of the scene, but rather captures it and leaves any enhancement to my judgement.

When you realize that "4k" video is about 8 Mpx, it shows the scale of ridiculousness. If they were planning a 600 Mpx medium format camera, I would be interested. It's still a big challenge. But a phone camera? How much space is single picture going to take?
Yeah, seems that they choose to pile up the pixel number before making each pixel read from a binned setup actually count, IMO a 150MP with twice the physical pixel pitch, then 4-1 binned(still 37.5MP output) is already more than enough to bring stacking like HDR+ to the next level, possibly bringing FF quality to phones, then again it may not be the same people calling the shots regarding software and hardware.
Posted by: _MT_
« on: April 22, 2020, 10:17:26 »

Then again I believe the crux of the matter is Samsung Mobile's inability to utilize the sensor to the maximum potential, instead of Samsung S.LSI inability to deliver sensor performance matching Sony's.
And adding more pixels won't solve that problem. Processing all that data to spit out a pretty image is going to require a lot of resources. I can imagine such a sensor making sense for computer vision. Where it's not about pretty pictures. For taking pictures, I prefer something that doesn't have to draw its interpretation of the scene, but rather captures it and leaves any enhancement to my judgement.

When you realize that "4k" video is about 8 Mpx, it shows the scale of ridiculousness. If they were planning a 600 Mpx medium format camera, I would be interested. It's still a big challenge. But a phone camera? How much space is single picture going to take?
Posted by: S.Yu
« on: April 21, 2020, 21:44:28 »

Small is only better if it could match larger photosites in quality, so does 0.7μm have at least matching read noise and well depth compared to previous 0.8 μm?
Then again I believe the crux of the matter is Samsung Mobile's inability to utilize the sensor to the maximum potential, instead of Samsung S.LSI inability to deliver sensor performance matching Sony's.
Posted by: Redaktion
« on: April 21, 2020, 17:47:24 »

A Samsung executive has written a piece on where this OEM's image sensor technology is headed. It includes claims that it is working on new components with qualities that beat those of the human eye. This includes estimated resolutions of about 500MP, whereas the Korean giant is aiming for 600MP.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/600MP-for-the-masses-Samsung-outlines-its-plans-for-the-image-sensors-of-the-future.462182.0.html

 
» Impressum     Sprachen: Deutsch | English | Español | Français | Italiano | Nederlands | Polski | Português | Русский | Türkçe | Svenska