joncogar Loc: WV

Gizchina.com: Samsung Galaxy S11 will have an incredible 108MP camera.
https://www.gizchina.com/2019/08/17/samsung-galaxy-s11-will-have-an-incredible-108mp-camera/

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

And someone posted a few days ago that Samsung will be supplying that sensor to camera makers.

bleirer

Thats going to have some diffraction!

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

That was my point. But most UHH"ers other than some of the engineers are not well versed in quantum mechanics so they think marketing determines nature.

olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida

1/1.33 size sensor with 108MP, that is a lot of MP packed in a still relatively small area, dense pack. Drops to 27 MP at 2x, quite the crop...... Should sell well what with all the subsidizing the phone provider's do, I'm sure it will not be cheap (especially bought as a stand alone, w/o a "plan"). Reading the info I've seen so far, sounds like more marketing hoopla....but a 27MP 1/1.33" sensor should take a very nice photo.... now, if we could just hang a bunch of big lenses on it...... Folks will surely line up to buy that "monster phone camera".....

"Samsung says the ISOCELL Bright HMX is the fruit of a 'close collaboration' with Xiaomi. The ISOCELL Bright HMX is the first mobile sensor to feature a 1/1.33" size, according to Samsung, which says its Tetracell tech enables the HMX to 'imitate big-pixel sensors' for better quality 27MP images.

Canisdirus

huh? lol....

Sensor smensor..... it's always in the glass.
If you have a lens that can resolve 25mp of detail ... and you have a 100 mp sensor.
You end up with ... 25mp of detail.

elliott937 Loc: St. Louis

Thank you Canisdirus, We keep reading of increased sensors in cell phones, but no comment about the lens...the glass. Without it, a sensor is worth little.

lesdmd Loc: Middleton Wi via N.Y.C. & Cleveland

Thank you Canisdirus and elliot937. Bigger is not always better. I will wait until that super sensor can be coupled with some excellent lenses.

alexol

I think that was me originally, and I believe the sensor is actually from Sony.

The main point was the ever expanding and all-encompassing nature of sensors, their astonishingly small size and capability.

Yes, it is about glass, but small lenses on phones and drones etc are becoming quite extraordinarily capable.

Phones aren't going to replace "serious" cameras yet for quality, but if you lock a latest-gen Pixel, iPhone, or Samsung phone down securely (tripod adapter etc) most people would be utterly shocked by the incredible image quality.

Just think how far small camera technology (especially phones and drones) has come in just the last five years, compared to how long it has taken to get from pinhole cameras to D850 and the like. And let's not forget the relative cheapness of these multifunction devices.

Anyone who looks at the latest gen of DJI drones knows what I mean - for the price of a single decent short telephoto lens, the drone technology is nothing short of amazing, unimaginable just a few short years ago.

In 1981 I had a German friend in Singapore who was mad about radio control helicopters and spent a huge amount of money on his. The very latest tech was a gyroscope small enough to use in his models. It was about the size of two decks of cards, and cost $9,000 (and in 1981 this was VERY serious money) and required a motor upgrade to lift the extra weight.

My drone today was a quarter that cost (in 2019 money) and has gyros (plural), image and IR distance sensors, gps, it communicates with land based systems to control legal flying areas, can fly pre-programmed routes, can map autonomously, has 360° collision avoidance, is video linked to the controller etc etc. Oh, and it has a 20 MP camera. And I could fit two of them in a shoe box.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

That is yet a further factor, but not the one the OTHER fellow brought up that I was commenting on. It seems the lenses that are used on SmartPhones are of a very different construction and simpler than any regular camera lens, yet they are sharp for their intended use with tiny sensors. I have a Note 8 and it takes much nicer images than I might expect @ 12MP. Shot in RAW I can do quite a bit with the files. Sure not 16x20" blow-ups, 6x9" might even be pushing it. So you are telling me this SmartPhone Snapshot is not reasonably sharp or has nice resolution if viewed from the PROPER * viewing distance? Most images do not look great when pixel peeking. No, it is not up to my DSLR's IQ. But are you still using a Flip Phone?

* 12" x 18" Print > 21.5" x 1.5 = 32.25"

This Image Was Actually Shot As A Cell JPG, But I Might Have Shot A RAW.

(Download)

Canisdirus

Well, when they can put the resolution power of the brand new Sony 600mm f/4 into a cellphone lens...call me.
Cause that's what it takes to resolve 100MP of detail.

bleirer

Its kind of non intuitive, but the size of the pixel and the aperture that is really the deciding factor for diffraction, no matter how good the glass is, the light is going to do what the light is going to do, and when the diffraction exceeds 2 pixels it supposedly becomes noticeable. One reason full frame and larger sensors can be better - bigger pixels. Other distortions and aberrations still go to the glass though.

Hey, that almost sounded like I knew what I was talking about! Really just used an online diffraction calculator.

alexol

So, comparing a $13,000 lens to the camera on a celphone makes sense?

The 600/4 is a great lens, but utterly worthless for anything other than taking a photo;)

Of course, comparing the 1-1/2 million dollar camera on a previously mentioned friends twin engined mapping aircraft makes the 600/4 look like the bottom of a coke bottle, but what does that prove?

Here's my contribution for the day taken very quickly at the breakfast table...

(Download)

Canisdirus

It is what it is ... a cellphone camera.
95% of the pics will end up on Instagram, or twitter.... it's all ... marketing.
Nothing wrong with that ... but a huge sensor in a cellphone is just hype.
Hype which will ... work.

alexol

I disagree.

Five years ago - possibly less - my image of the coin which can be blown up quite well, shown below as 1/12 of the "full" smartphone image would have been completely impossible with any smartphone on the market. Now, it is absolutely nothing exciting.

"[B]ut a huge sensor in a cellphone is just hype" - so what size should manufacturers stop at? 1MP? 10? 20? Come to that, why stop? You might be an optical engineer of some kind with inside knowledge of the topic but it seems to me that there are many people of the site who just don't see that progress is possible when recent history says the exact opposite? Smartphone optical technology may indeed plateau, but it won't be this year.

Why not climb on the bus and enjoy the ride? After all, how long has the 600/4 existed? Oh wait, it was announced just a couple of months ago.

I'm glad you weren't advising AMD on their wafers, as a 200mm version now holds 21 BILLION transistors.
In 1985, the company I was working for agreed to buy me a hard drive for my twin-360k floppy computer.
A serious screaming match ensued (my boss was French) because I ridiculously, wilfully, pointlessly squandered company money totally without justification by buying a 6 megabyte drive. How colossally stupid - I mean, who in their right mind would think that a 6 MB drive could ever be filled?

(Download)