Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Mirrorless Cameras => Topic started by: Phil Indeblanc on November 18, 2015, 01:08:11 am
-
Anyone see this?
https://light.co/
-
17? $1 plastic phone lenses and 17? $3 phone sensors. It seems a clever & original design but I'm not sure who is going to pay $1,500 for a camera based on phone camera technology.
That should certainly ONLY depend on the quality and usability the gadget delivers.
Great many expensive consumer/hobbyist electronics etc are put together from penny parts, still people happily pay thousands and more. It is not no business of consumers to really know what the ex-works price of the gadget is. It is called supply and demand, desirability, usability etc.
Besides Zeiss has informed us, in connection with the high-Megapixel Nokia smart phone camera, that it is actually possible to make extremely high quality and cheap small plastic lenses, but not larger ones, and we all know how much large high quality lenses cost. So the lens might cost $1, but equals optically an Otus...
-
[...]
Great many expensive consumer/hobbyist electronics etc are put together from penny parts [...]
Besides Zeiss has informed us, in connection with the high-Megapixel Nokia smart phone camera, that it is actually possible to make extremely high quality and cheap small plastic lenses [...]
Some high-end microphones are actually made from $2.50 Panasonic small-diaphragm condenser mics, the same as are used in answering machines. Earthworks makes beautiful-sounding mics by putting those capsules into a housing precision-machined to optimally tune the acoustic response. They take huge sound pressure levels without distorting and can turn in a response up to 40kHz!
-
There is a thread on it here: http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=104464.0;topicseen and my post:
I think very groundbreaking in it’s concept and I’m sure cameras will eventually start to go this way with multiple lens/sensor sites. Perhaps in the future these sorts of cameras will have a low light option (fusing similar frames for lower noise), high resolution mode (like pixel shift) and ‘focus later’ mode.
More and more I have started to see digital cameras as just data capture devices rather than picture making devices and commonly use stitching, focus bracketing for dof stacking and exposure blending as part of my normal photography. My concern is getting the highest quality data captured at the time because I can put the picture together later (which arguably even shooting RAW is doing). Olympus and Ricoh brought the idea of using multiple exposures into a mainstream camera with sensor/pixel shift technology and in-camera HDR has been tentatively added but a camera like this takes this to a new level. Why have one lens and sensor (often fixing you to a tripod and manually processing the frames in software) when you can have many simultaneous ones?
As for the assumed cost of the lenses and sensors, with come technologies making things smaller dramatically reduces the cost, sensors and lenses are one of those things. The output is all that matters.
-
What if you told some kids in silicon valley to "go disrupt the camera industry" and gave them kickstarter funding? Add a slick video and overly-designed webpage and you get...
sorry, I'm not buying it.
-
https://vimeo.com/143690545
More technical information on this video.
17? $1 plastic phone lenses and 17? $3 phone sensors. It seems a clever & original design but I'm not sure who is going to pay $1,500 for a camera based on phone camera technology.
Maybe we should judge on the images ...
Edmund
-
IMO the performance is what matters. If this gizmo delivers no-one will really care whether the underlying technology is smartphone derived, created by leprechaun magic or whatever. So let's wait & see how it performs…
-Dave-