Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Ben Wells post RE Samsung 108 MPX Phone sensor  (Read 626 times)

IanKnight

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
Ben Wells post RE Samsung 108 MPX Phone sensor
« on: August 17, 2019, 04:16:44 pm »

Hi,

I have just read the post by Ben Wells regarding the new msung 108 MP sensor.
There doesn't appear to be any mention that this is a Quad Bayer sensor that uses pixel binning to achieve better dynamic range and image quality. It is effectively a 27 MP sensor in practice I believe.

Cheers Ian.
Logged

MMitchell

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12
Re: Ben Wells post RE Samsung 108 MPX Phone sensor
« Reply #1 on: August 17, 2019, 05:41:44 pm »

It does mention the binning and 20+ mp result. Maybe it was updated after you read it?
Logged

Dan Wells

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 980
Re: Ben Wells post RE Samsung 108 MPX Phone sensor
« Reply #2 on: August 18, 2019, 11:37:37 pm »

I think the 27 MP capability is one of the most important capabilities of the new sensor (and, realistically, how it's most likely to be used outside of a few marketing stunts).

It will still end up needing a lens that generates a large camera bump (several times the base thickness of the phone). Even though it doesn't need to be an f1.4 lens with contrast at 500 lp/mm (a beast that probably doesn't exist at all - and, if it does, would be huge and expensive), even an f2.8 lens with contrast at 250 lp/mm that covers that sensor size, which is needed at 27 MP, is no picnic (and is certainly going to add significant size, weight and cost to the phone).

My best estimate of the overall image quality at 27 MP is something in the range of a recent RX100 class camera (assuming that it's a relatively conventional sensor, as the press release implies that it is). If it were something exotic like an organic sensor, Samsung would have trumpeted that fact loudly.

Is it worth putting up with a huge camera bump - an inch/25mm thick or so - to have a RX100 type phone camera with a fixed slightly wide prime? How about if it's as expensive as a top-end iPhone, but with a non-upgradeable version of Android (the camera software will make upgrades tough)?  It'll also have reduced battery life (camera uses extra power and takes up space where battery would otherwise be). Unless they make it even larger, it'll be a touchscreen-only, viewfinderless camera.

Those drawbacks strike me as pretty significant for a nice, but not world-beating camera. Putting an RX100 in a second pocket buys a viewfinder, a zoom lens and removable storage/battery, as well as a nice interface with a shutter button and a dial or two for changing settings.

Dan
Logged

adri

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
Re: Ben Wells post RE Samsung 108 MPX Phone sensor
« Reply #3 on: August 22, 2019, 03:59:06 pm »

I have printed images shot at close range of door knockers in St. Tropez, France, with an iPhone 7+, on 13x19 inch paper (images itself at about 12 x18) and that's about the maximum you can print I feel; with proper viewing distance all prints like very good, and hang above double french doors, but up close (pixel peeping style), you would want to make some comments, if you know what I mean. Like: "very acceptable, but could be slightly better, etc., but from a distance, they look very good." Of course the images needed Photoshop hanzaplast (bandaging).

I have the Sony RX100-VI as my travel camera, and the images can easily print on 13x19 inch paper (at 11.5x17.25 inches) with very sharp results (that Zeiss lens is truly no slouch), but I wouldn't want to push it beyond 17x22 paper prints, no matter what others may boast. Colors could be slightly better, even after much tweaking effort. You made that point well.

A 100MP mobile phone is a joke to me; your point about the issue of a proper lens for it is well taken. Marketing gimmick indeed. Pixel race in the extreme.

For more serious work, I shoot with Sigma cameras, but am on the lookout for something additional and haven't decided yet. Money is there, but decision is not there yet. :-)  Xiaomi's new 100MP mobile phone: Haha, not a chance..... Fuji GFX 50R: possibly. Nikon Z7: maybe. Sony A7R-III (or II?): maybe (the iii may come down in price now?). The new Sony 61MP? Not sure. Seems like too many pixels in the same physical space. Panasonic S1R: too heavy. Same problem with Nikon D850. Hasselblad 50 MP model II? Lenses cost a fortune. But has reportedly best colors. Next year's Sigma L mount camera? (not talking about the recently announced fortepiano model). Who knows....could be a surprise camera with Sigma thinking outside the box again. That's what nice about this company; you have to admit that. Right now, we have  heat wave, so I'm not in a rush. Who knows who else is coming out with surprises soon.

Good article. Thanks.
« Last Edit: August 23, 2019, 04:16:11 am by adri »
Logged

Alan Goldhammer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3678
    • A Goldhammer Photography
Re: Ben Wells post RE Samsung 108 MPX Phone sensor
« Reply #4 on: August 23, 2019, 02:37:21 pm »

I have printed images shot at close range of door knockers in St. Tropez, France, with an iPhone 7+, on 13x19 inch paper (images itself at about 12 x18) and that's about the maximum you can print I feel; with proper viewing distance all prints like very good, and hang above double french doors, but up close (pixel peeping style), you would want to make some comments, if you know what I mean. Like: "very acceptable, but could be slightly better, etc., but from a distance, they look very good." Of course the images needed Photoshop hanzaplast (bandaging).
My wife took a beautiful image in New Zealand with her Pixel phone (12MP).  I printed it out on 13x19 (11x17 image size) and it is very difficult to tell apart from those I've taken with my Z 6 that are hanging right next to it.  This is the major reason why young people see no need to buy even standard cameras these days, the phones are so good.  My daughter and two of her friends did the Camino de Santiago pilgrim walk this spring and the phone pics they were sending out were excellent.  You could not get these kinds of images 10 years ago on a phone.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up