Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-25-2018, 07:48 AM - 2 Likes   #16
Pentaxian
dsmithhfx's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,888
The "smartphone" form factor succeeds best at being a completely self-contained pocket computer no one in their right mind would want to use as such for more than 5 or 10-minutes at a stretch, if they have an alternative to hand (if not, I guess they're sort of stuck).


It is inferior, both as a phone and as a camera compared to dedicated devices.

No amount of code can overcome this inherent, physical deficit.


Last edited by BigMackCam; 10-25-2018 at 10:32 AM.
10-25-2018, 08:46 AM   #17
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 946
QuoteOriginally posted by brofkand Quote
DSLRs do not have any of those deficits. I do not see a need to apply "computational photography" to DSLRs.
I think it's inevitable, and it will open up all kinds of possibilities. For example, the new Pixel phone has a running buffer of 15 images that it uses to do things like exposure stacking that gives their relatively poor, small aperture lens the equivalent light gathering of a much larger lens, and does it transparently just at the touch of the shutter button. All of the computational magic happens in the background.

Do that with a DSLR sensor and lens and you could have the equivalent of a physically unobtainable lens/camera combination. Your 50mm f/1.4 could have the light gathering capablity of a f/0.2 lens but with usable depth-of-field, which can't exist. Sure, you could do a rough approximation of this with your DSRL and stacking multiple exposures, but it would take a lot of post-processing. Phones today already do this with zero work in post.
10-25-2018, 08:51 AM   #18
Banned




Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 9,674
QuoteOriginally posted by ThorSanchez Quote
Do that with a DSLR sensor and lens and you could have the equivalent of a physically unobtainable lens/camera combination. Your 50mm f/1.4 could have the light gathering capablity of a f/0.2 lens but with usable depth-of-field, which can't exist. Sure, you could do a rough approximation of this with your DSRL and stacking multiple exposures, but it would take a lot of post-processing. Phones today already do this with zero work in post.
This is already done by some people. There is name for such image stacking, but I don't know anymore. With that technique you could use an aps-c sensor camera and have much better images then a fullframe (back in the days Pentax didn't have a fullframe).
10-25-2018, 09:01 AM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 638
QuoteOriginally posted by ThorSanchez Quote
I think it's inevitable, and it will open up all kinds of possibilities. For example, the new Pixel phone has a running buffer of 15 images that it uses to do things like exposure stacking that gives their relatively poor, small aperture lens the equivalent light gathering of a much larger lens, and does it transparently just at the touch of the shutter button. All of the computational magic happens in the background.

Do that with a DSLR sensor and lens and you could have the equivalent of a physically unobtainable lens/camera combination. Your 50mm f/1.4 could have the light gathering capablity of a f/0.2 lens but with usable depth-of-field, which can't exist. Sure, you could do a rough approximation of this with your DSRL and stacking multiple exposures, but it would take a lot of post-processing. Phones today already do this with zero work in post.
Phones do this because the tiny sensors they use become a noisy blur after say ISO 200. A relatively recent DSLR can go to ISO 6400 with far better image integrity than a phone at ISO 200.

Again, these levels of computational photography are not necessary with DSLRs because they do not have these deficits. They are no compromise machines purpose built for photography.

The Motorola phone with a Hasselblad zoom attachment was interesting, I thought it was a great idea - attach a "real" camera to your phone when you need it (like when you're going to a concert or vacation), otherwise make due with the built-in job - but it doesn't appear to have taken off.

10-25-2018, 09:30 AM   #20
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 946
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
This is already done by some people. There is name for such image stacking, but I don't know anymore. With that technique you could use an aps-c sensor camera and have much better images then a fullframe (back in the days Pentax didn't have a fullframe).
Yep. But the phone does it in the background, with none of the import into Photoshop, align, stack, export... it just happens when you push the shutter.

---------- Post added 10-25-18 at 12:34 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by brofkand Quote
Phones do this because the tiny sensors they use become a noisy blur after say ISO 200. A relatively recent DSLR can go to ISO 6400 with far better image integrity than a phone at ISO 200.

Again, these levels of computational photography are not necessary with DSLRs because they do not have these deficits. They are no compromise machines purpose built for photography.

The Motorola phone with a Hasselblad zoom attachment was interesting, I thought it was a great idea - attach a "real" camera to your phone when you need it (like when you're going to a concert or vacation), otherwise make due with the built-in job - but it doesn't appear to have taken off.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a DSLR that could pull off a really good ISO 256,000 picture using computational methods? Or have a processor in-camera that's powerful enought that you can take really sharp images with a f/4.5-6.3 55-300 zoom at a outdoor night sporting event with crappy lighting?
10-25-2018, 09:42 AM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 638
QuoteOriginally posted by ThorSanchez Quote
Wouldn't it be nice to have a DSLR that could pull off a really good ISO 256,000 picture using computational methods? Or have a processor in-camera that's powerful enought that you can take really sharp images with a f/4.5-6.3 55-300 zoom at a outdoor night sporting event with crappy lighting?
I suppose so, I guess I've never considered it. I'm not crapping my pants over the possibilities I guess, it doesn't seem like a transformational shift like the linked article is suggesting.
10-25-2018, 10:10 AM   #22
Lens Hoarder
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: St. Louis, MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,651
Today’s pocket slab camera is yesterday’s Instamatic. I had and often used a 126 film camera. I have a smart device and use it for casual image capture - checks for deposit, documentary images to email, etc. I also had, contemporaneous with the 126, still have and still use 135 interchangeable lens film cameras, and contemporaneous with the phonecam, digital ILC’s. Each to its purpose, I can’t imagine the impractical ergonomics of a phonecam ever being overcome by code.

.:
10-25-2018, 10:45 AM - 1 Like   #23
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 345
Computational photography isn't really about smartphones, even though the technology right now is only in smartphones.

It's actually about computational photography in general and how it will change even ILCs. Future mirrorless cameras with advanced software for example will be able to take ultra clean, sharp shots in low light with budget lenses. I wouldn't be surprised if Sony integrates a direct HDR raw feature in the next few years that will give more like 16-17 stops of dynamic range. Sony is already working on smarter autofocus technologies like Eye-AF for animals. Traditional IBIS systems by moving the sensor will be augmented with machine-learning software solutions. I think noise-removing algorithms will achieve a big boost by selective smoothing.

Camera companies are slow to do this because most of them have a long history of hardware expertise but little software expertise. However, such software would make formats like micro 4/3rds more competitive with larger sensors, while still being cheaper. It's also true that for many applications larger sensor cameras don't really need software enhancements for most type of photography.

10-25-2018, 11:07 AM - 1 Like   #24
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 8,185
I'm waiting for computational auto composition to be employed.
10-25-2018, 11:13 AM   #25
Pentaxian
dsmithhfx's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,888
QuoteOriginally posted by tuco Quote
I'm waiting for computational auto composition to be employed.
We don't need no steenking photographer!
10-25-2018, 11:38 AM   #26
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 946
QuoteOriginally posted by automorphism Quote
It's also true that for many applications larger sensor cameras don't really need software enhancements for most type of photography.
I can take pretty darned good photos of relatively static subjects in good lighting with my circa 2004 Canon Elph. Printed at 4x6 or viewed on Facebook you might not be able to tell if it was taken with that or a K-1.

But technology is often driven by what are now edge cases. Once the edge case becomes more mainstream because of that technology you'll often see possibilities that were not even thought of previously.
10-25-2018, 03:15 PM   #27
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nelson B.C.
Posts: 3,700
QuoteOriginally posted by ThorSanchez Quote
Yep. But the phone does it in the background, with none of the import into Photoshop, align, stack, export... it just happens when you push the shutter.

---------- Post added 10-25-18 at 12:34 PM ----------



Wouldn't it be nice to have a DSLR that could pull off a really good ISO 256,000 picture using computational methods? Or have a processor in-camera that's powerful enought that you can take really sharp images with a f/4.5-6.3 55-300 zoom at a outdoor night sporting event with crappy lighting?
I'm getting 32000 shots with quite good IQ, at shutter speeds to stop motion with my dslr. If I have the luxury, I can pixelshift my K1 II in light where I can barely see what I'm shooting and get remarkably good results. At 200 yards with nice detail.

The phone is limited by the lens and sensor size.

I have the Pixel XL, and the camera is remarkably good, but it is wide angle. That isn't what I want to shoot. I want long, at dusk or dawn, and I have that.
10-25-2018, 03:20 PM   #28
PDL
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Woodinville, WA USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,578
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Today’s pocket slab camera is yesterday’s Instamatic. I had and often used a 126 film camera. I have a smart device and use it for casual image capture - checks for deposit, documentary images to email, etc. I also had, contemporaneous with the 126, still have and still use 135 interchangeable lens film cameras, and contemporaneous with the phonecam, digital ILC’s. Each to its purpose, I can’t imagine the impractical ergonomics of a phonecam ever being overcome by code.

.:
126 film was 26.5x26 .5 => 702.25 square mm i.e. larger in area than APS-C 23.5x15.6 => 366.6 square mm. Therefore is the resolution of 126 film better than our APS-C cameras? Be careful what you wish for.
10-25-2018, 03:55 PM   #29
Lens Hoarder
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: St. Louis, MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,651
QuoteOriginally posted by PDL Quote
126 film was 26.5x26 .5 => 702.25 square mm i.e. larger in area than APS-C 23.5x15.6 => 366.6 square mm. Therefore is the resolution of 126 film better than our APS-C cameras? Be careful what you wish for.
Uhm, Huh?
10-25-2018, 04:00 PM   #30
PDL
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Woodinville, WA USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,578
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Uhm, Huh?
Are you conflating the image quality of 126, APS-C and cell phones?
If you were using 126 for "casual" photography, are you implying APS-C is not good for "real" photography?
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, code, dslr, fullframe, future, future of photography, image, images, iso, phone, photography, photography is code, post
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
12% of Pentax Australia Lenses using ''KMOUNT'' code'. 3 Days only! BruceBanner Pentax Price Watch 7 04-27-2018 12:38 AM
Adobe Creative Cloud Photography Plan On Sale 25% OFF With Code CCPHOTOPLAN @ B&H interested_observer Pentax Price Watch 4 08-29-2016 09:52 AM
People "The future's bright – the future's Orange" Kerrowdown Post Your Photos! 22 04-03-2014 01:01 PM
"Future? What future?" frodemin Monthly Photo Contests 0 01-04-2014 11:16 AM
CODE GIVEN AWAY. {I have a KEH code for 7% off, who wants it?} PBandJ Pentax Price Watch 10 09-11-2013 08:22 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:36 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top