MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

"Multiple resources indicate a new generation of Micro-Four-Thirds sensors that is ready to arrive in the market and be implemented on smartphones. The range starts from 44 to 100 megapixels. One of the resources is Weibo which specifies the sensors per smartphone as follows:

4/3-inch 108Mp 1.4μm Nonacell Full-pixel DPAF (new ISOCELL, optimized quantum efficiency)
4/3-inch 80Mp 1.65μm QuadBayer Full-pixel 2×2 OCL AF ( IMX472 changes Mipi interface to reduce digital layer power consumption)
4/3 inch 50Mp 2.1μm 4-Cell Full-pixel 2×2 OCL AF WDR (LOFIC TheiaCel)
4/3-inch 44Mp 2.25μm Mask-PD AF VDGS (Pregius S II)"

Seems like a logical progression... BUT, I am just passing on general news ( valid or not ). Don't kill the messenger.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Of no consequence for me.
I replace phones only when they quit working.
I have no idea what's in my current phone,
and don't really care.
It has a sensor.........

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

I hear you, but a lot of folks do as the technology moves forward and folks who are on the fence over a phone cam vs. a " REAL CAMERA " but are worried about IQ, is where it makes a difference. Just here on the Hog, there are a lot of converts who are recognizing that phone cams are not really that bad and are going to get better. A little Olympus or Lumix copycat in your possession at ALL TIMES ? What is that saying about the BEST camera being the one that is with you at all times ?

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

I'll be curious, once a real phone comes out with one of these in it.

I just bought a new iPhone 15 Pro Max. It is more than sufficient for my casual imaging needs.

I do plan to replace my Micro 4/3 Lumix GH4 with a Lumix G9 Mark II, however. It has a more realistic 25 MP Micro 4/3 sensor in it. Remember, with about 1/4 the physical area, that's almost like a 100MP full frame sensor when it comes to photo receptor site (sensel) size. That is not an issue for what I need to do, but it would hamper some folks' games.

The sensors you listed seem more appropriate for spy work, industrial applications, and yes, smartphones that have megapixel bragging rights.

More is not necessarily better!

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

Like I said Bill, I am just a messenger of dubious news... But, just as a layman observing the increase in IQ and cropping ability etc... as the sensor size increases, the general IQ should get even better. Be interesting of the lens size, configuration etc... MAYBE clip ons ?

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

I have no qualms about using my phone at all.
And it's usually with me when I'm out and about.
(My DSLR or bridge are not glued to my body.)

dwrcymru Loc: North Wales, UK

Once a 12mm lens is attached it won't fit in the pocket, unless of course they keep their 4mm lenses and have a super duper wide angle with hardly any definition but recognisable imaging. It's all fake, the phone would have to be at least as thick as a compact M43 camera.

MJPerini

Are you sure they are not speaking about the fractional size sensors currently being used in Phones?
Micro 4/3 is 13x 17 mm with a diagonal of about 21mm
The lenses needed to cover a 21mm diagonal would have to be fairly large compared to current smart phone lenses.

It might bee more like a Camera with a phone in it, than a Phone with a camera in it.

I love my iPhone, and love the camera, but wouldn't want one that had to be twice the size.
They have engineered current phones to get around tiny pixels with multiple exposures and great processing.
I'm to saying it can't happen, but it seems counter intuitive from a convenience point of view

BebuLamar

The 100 plus MP is easy but to fit the 4/3 sensor in the smartphone is not easy. The normal lens is about 20-25mm which is too long for the smart phone.

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

Yes. will be interesting the work arounds...

Hip Coyote

In the January 2024 PSA Magazine there are two articles dedicated to smart phones. One of the articles is entitled, "The Freedom, Versatility, and Capability of Today's iPhone Photography." The other is a documentary about a photographer's journey towards using an iPhone as a primary camera. Both articles display exceptional photographs. One author points out differences between his dlsr and iPhone 13 ProMax. There is not a lot of difference, but he does point out some situations where the little iPhone simply would not work.

While some may not care or want to ignore the advancements of the mobile phone as a camera, the fact is that it is here and quite capable. While people on UHH can argue, ad nauseam, about FF vs. this or that, IQ of each system, 31 pages and counting on the latest drivel on RAW vs. JPG, the fact is that that the phone is a very capable system. The photographs in the articles far surpass all but a few photos in the Gallery of the UHH. One author notes that the use of modern processing capabilities, including AI and algorithms to reduce or eliminate noise also benefit the iPhone camera. He also notes that the versatility of the phone is amazing...during a course he was teaching people did panoramas, macro photography, underwater photography and light painting...all with the little ol' camera. Of course, the phones cannot do birds in flight well or sports (except video is quite good), but as a general shooter or for travel, it may be all that is needed by the rational open minded person.

In my case, I do not care to use the iPhone as a camera replacement. The ergonomics and the rapidity at which I can deploy the phone camera are a problem. But, that could well be my problem rather than the device. What I do know, and will be teaching to my camera club, is that the iPhone can be a very capable mini-computer when I use a regular camera, edit the pics in LR Mobile on my phone, sync with the cloud and later polish up editing on my home computer. Now I come home from a vacation with nearly fully edited pics, all avail on the cloud with my raw and side car files for incorporation into my beloved LR Classic. Its downright voodoo.

What is clear is that the money behind phones is far greater than the money behind cameras. The computational capabilities, meshing with the cloud and so many other capabilities far eclipse our traditional cameras.

What is a universal truth is that using a camera as an artistic implement is the key to success. To paraphrase the adage that, "amateurs talk tactics while soldiers talk logistics," I believe amateurs talk gear while photographers talk art.

JohnR Loc: The Gates of Hell

They'll have to have M4/3 lenses few of which fit in pockets of any kind! Very unlikely methinks.

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

WOW.... One of the best posts I have read on the Hog EVER... Kudos....

one_eyed_pete Loc: Colonie NY

Curious news. The MFT camera sensor is 17.3mm by 13mm making the diagonal about 0.85 in. There are already several cell phones already on the market with sensor diagonals greater than the MFT sensor, up to 1" diagonal (i.e. Sony Experia Pro). I think the limiting difference is in the optics. The sensor to lens flange distance on a MFT camera is 19.25 mm. For a cell phone to duplicate the capability of a MFT camera even with a pancake lens the cell phone would need to be about 2" thick. I'm still amazed that 3/8" diameter lens on my cell phone can project any decent image onto the sensor in my phone 3/8" away.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

Exactly my thoughts. The big restriction in putting larger sensors in phones is that larger sensors require larger lenses. The optics are the issue.