Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-05-2011, 10:38 AM   #1
Forum Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Eugene, Oregon, US
Posts: 97
New State of the Art in sensors/lenses

Just thought you might be interested in some astounding photos taken by the iPhone 4S that Apple announced yesterday. There's a good selection at AppleInsider | Apple showcases iPhone 4S camera with high-resolution sample photos
... and you can click any of the reduced-size photos to get 100% crops.

You really need to pixel-peep the full-size to appreciate them -- the 100% crops I've attached are just very small portions of 3264 x 2448 originals. Here's one full-size squirrel: http://photos.appleinsider.com/4scamera-111005-1-full.jpg
Here's some flowers, back-lighted by the setting sun: http://photos.appleinsider.com/iphone4scamera-111004-2-full.JPG

According to Apple's announcement, the iPhone 4S camera has "8-megapixels, 1080p HD video, a custom f2.4 lens, and an advanced hybrid IR filter... The video camera function now features real-time video image stabilization and temporal noise reduction." They say the [JPG] photos are "unretouched", but don't mention what sort of processing is going on in the iPhone software, nor how much control the user had over the results.

But look at the macro-like minimum focus distance, extraordinary depth of field, superb bokeh, and lack of chromatic aberration in the squirrel picture! Check out the wonderful dynamic range and perfect white balance in the beach sunset!

The camera module is not manufactured by Apple, of course. According to the article, it's multi-sourced: 90% of them for the 4S are produced by OmniVision, 10% of them by Sony. So clearly, the development and manufacture of the camera sensor and lens did not require a gigantic capital investment. This bodes well for future sensors in Pentaxes, and all DSLRs for that matter. We're not in Kansas anymore, Dorothy.

PLEASE NOTE: I'm NOT suggesting that the iPhone 4S will replace the Pentax K5 any time soon -- these photos were taken under fairly good conditions, plenty of light at least.

What's obvious, though, is that extremely small and very cheap sensors now have the ability to produce fantastic high-resolution photos. A corollary is that the software to support the sensor is entirely feasible.

I'm guessing:
1) The entire market of point-and-shoot cameras costing over $100 may well die in the next year or two.
2) The development and production cost of full frame sensors will soon be impossible to justify.
3) There will be a huge market for photo-specific software for smartphones, to cater to the semi-pros.
4) There will be an entirely new market in extremely small telephoto lenses for smartphone cameras.

Attached Images
   
10-05-2011, 12:03 PM   #2
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,574
QuoteOriginally posted by infosyn Quote
I'm guessing:
1) The entire market of point-and-shoot cameras costing over $100 may well die in the next year or two.
The good cameras are mostly in smart-phones that require data plans. I recently upgraded my cellphone contract and I intentionally looked for the best in-phone camera I could find. However, since I didn't want a data plan for my cellphone, my choices were very limited. So I think it's going to be a bit longer than you're guessing before the cellphone kills off p&s cameras. I also think the more expensive p&s cameras will survive. It's the cheapies that will go away.

QuoteQuote:
2) The development and production cost of full frame sensors will soon be impossible to justify.
I agree. Most of the research seems to be going into improving smaller sensors...not larger ones. We're getting into a range of diminishing returns on large sensors.

QuoteQuote:
3) There will be a huge market for photo-specific software for smartphones, to cater to the semi-pros.
I agree that there will be a huge market for smartphone software. I'm just not sure how many semi-pros will actually use cellphones for their work.

QuoteQuote:
4) There will be an entirely new market in extremely small telephoto lenses for smartphone cameras.
I hope you're right on this one. I'm already carrying a small ND filter around for use with my cellphone. What I'd really like is a small, square filter that's divided into 4 different levels of ND so that I'd have more options. As small as the lenses are on smartphones, a person could have a tiny little accessory case that carried a telephoto attachment, fisheye attachment, and several filters.
10-05-2011, 12:22 PM   #3
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NewYork
Posts: 899
I doubt all that will happen. There was similar talk about a recent Nokia that supposedly had the best camera phone on the market. This seems like apples response as to not be outdone. Not everyone will want to pay 600-800$ for a smart phone and that is what they cost. With a 2 year contract the base model is supposed to cost 200$. The major carriers require a data plan with smart phones so you are looking at least 70-80$ a month or 1680$ plus 200$ for the phone. The camera module on that recent top of the line nokia cost 29$ (that's what nokia paid for the part). You could easily put similar new technology in a cheap camera. The phone is crippled by space limitations (it has so many other components that there is not a lot of room for the camera). A camera can use similar technology without limitations on space for the components or the glass.

Likewise, larger sensors are getting this new technology too (in fact I would be willing to bet that the technology is trickling down from more professional cameras to cheaper cameras and phones). Even if it is not the technology will make it there even if not first. Sure they are going to go for more compact and smaller sensor cameras like the q because of the performance that a current small sensor can achieve but a larger sensor with similar new technology will still smoke the little one. Pros use stuff like this
Canon EF 500mm f/4.0L IS USM Lens
and they use full frame or larger cameras like this
Amazon.com: Canon EOS 1D Mark III 10.1MP Digital SLR Camera (Body Only): Camera & Photo
and they pay the big bucks that make larger sensor development cost effective (what makes more money, a 29$ phone camera module or a 5000-10,000$ professional camera body).

For those that get an expensive smart phone its a great selling point and there is no doubt it can take some decent pictures with many limitations. I would think it would compliment a decent compact camera (you may always carry your phone but not your camera) but I'm thinking that even something a simple and common as low light will kill this cameras performance. How do you think it would compare in a dim lit room to a high iso dslr or even some of the larger sensor compact cameras? There is no doubt that they will continue to develop for these phones and come up with accessories and such as it makes money, but it's not going to replace larger cameras.

Lastly, Putting a lens in front of it does not give as good of quality as a dedicated lens. It can be very good but a properly designed dedicated lens will always out perform. This comes from someone that has probably 1500$ worth of front mount lenses of various types (from my prosumer days before I had a dslr). They don't get a lot of use anymore and the dslr outperforms in almost every way (yes there are a few instances where a compact and or a compact with an add on lens work out better but not many, and that is with a prosumer camera that originally cost 800$).
10-05-2011, 12:39 PM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,237
QuoteOriginally posted by infosyn Quote
I'm guessing:
1) The entire market of point-and-shoot cameras costing over $100 may well die in the next year or two.
That's probably too soon for 'death', but that market will continue to shrink, probably at a fairly rapid rate.

QuoteQuote:
2) The development and production cost of full frame sensors will soon be impossible to justify.
Interesting that you admit that camera phones won't replace the K-5, yet you think they'll replace FF cameras

Actually, the FF market is going to be least affected by camera phones (aside from MFD.) The camera phone is going to come close to wiping out the low-end P&S, and mirrorless/EVIL will put a big dent in low end aps-c OVF/DSLR, but high-end aps-c DSLR and especially FF will be least affected by them.

Also, FF sensor costs are going down, not up, wafer yields are increasing, etc. It may come to pass that the only OVF/DSLR you can buy say 10 years from now will be a FF body.

QuoteQuote:
3) There will be a huge market for photo-specific software for smartphones, to cater to the semi-pros.
Semi pros? Doubt it. Right now, LIghtroom and photoshop can be used on smartphone output - not sure why 'semi pros' would need some special apps geared toward them. There will be a small explosion of consumer-targeted apps for smartphones, however, but a lot of it will start to look the same and do the same type of stuff - eventually it wil be pared down to the best apps from folks like Adobe, NIK, Google, some upstarts.

QuoteQuote:
4) There will be an entirely new market in extremely small telephoto lenses for smartphone cameras.
Sure - but probably a pretty small market. Start carrying stuff around to stick on your smartphone and you might as well start carrying a small interchangeable lens camera around.


.

10-05-2011, 12:57 PM - 2 Likes   #5
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 702
10-05-2011, 12:59 PM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 6,617
Apple is using a BSI sensor like the Q and the new Nikons. Eventually BSI technology will make it to larger sensors and we will see a big boost in performance. BSI sensors have heat issues and bigger sensors = more heat = more noise. 4/3 will probably be the first to get BSI and it could put it into the K-5 performance class.
10-05-2011, 01:51 PM   #7
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 7,001
Would have been almost unnoticed if it wasn't written Apple on it. I'm not anti-Apple, I have an iPhone and a Macbook.
But sometimes guys really take to marketing pill very seriously.

10-05-2011, 03:17 PM   #8
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,913
QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
sometimes guys really take to marketing pill very seriously.
Amen.

And now that the Steve Jobs reality distortion field is no longer in force, I seriously hope the evil Apple Empire begins to topple.
10-05-2011, 03:40 PM - 1 Like   #9
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NewYork
Posts: 899
From what I gather they have not rushed to get bsi into larger sensor cameras as the larger sensor already has the same effect in magnitude. I can not find the sensor size of the new iphone so I'll use the hotshot nokia camera phones as an example. The nokia n8 uses a 1/1.8 sensor. That is about 38sq. mm area. A Pentax aps-c sensor area is about 370sq mm. In comparison, the nokia n9 is supposed to have a sensor that is 70% the size (so they could make the phone thinner). I wonder if they switched to bsi with the n9?

A regular cmos sensor has the printed circuits in front of the sensor. On smaller sensors, only about 60% of the light gets to the sensor. On smaller bsi sensors where the printed circuits are moved behind the sensor, they are supposed to have 90% of the light make it to the sensor. Still, 90% of 38sq mm is 34sq mm and 60% of 370sq mm is 222sq mm. The aps-c sensor still has about 6.5 times the usable sensor area. The only flaw with my logic is that the aps-c sensor is 10 times larger, but that doesn't mean the printed circuits have to be 10 times larger (the actual individual circuits themselves that are blocking the light). I couldn't find figures for aps-c sensors so I was just playing devils advocate using 60% with the aps-c sensor, as my guess is the loss is much less. Larger sensors also have less wasted space percentage wise in between pixels than smaller sensors do further improving the equation for the bigger sensor. The camera phone (assuming decent technology in both the phone and the camera) has no chance of competing with a dslr.

Long story short, they are putting large, high performance 1/2.5 and or 1/1.8 sensors in camera phones like you would find in good compact cameras so its no doubt they will give them some competition. A compact camera has sacrifices in quality and abilities over a full size prosumer camera, and a camera phone takes those sacrifices even further. Sure it will effect the compact camera market, but some are not going to want to spend the cost for the phone and the contract, and some are not going to want the sacrafices and may wish to go with a larger prosumer camera, even if they have a good camera phone. Some may even wish to own a compact camera even if they have a camera phone as 12x optical zoom for instance, is sure better than digital zoom (what I assume the iphone has). There are plenty more tradeoffs that come with the small size too.
10-05-2011, 05:45 PM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,237
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
Amen.

And now that the Steve Jobs reality distortion field is no longer in force, I seriously hope the evil Apple Empire begins to topple.
Not me. If other companies cannot innovate, it's their own fault, not Apple's.

Build a better mousetrap, etc.

.
10-05-2011, 05:53 PM   #11
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,913
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
If other companies cannot innovate
What innovation? Mobile phones? PC's? Tablets? Walkmans? GUI? Mouse? Online stores? None of that was Apple.
10-05-2011, 06:15 PM   #12
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Buffalo/Rochester, NY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,133
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
What innovation?
The true innovation Jobs and Apple brought to market was the popularization and "sexification" of a lifestyle. Simply put, they took their brand and accompanying technology to heights no other tech manufacturer could take tech to. Sony tried decades ago, but they didn't learn anything from the Betamax debacle, so they went through it again with ATRAC and MD discs. They could have had it, but forgot the customers can make or break the success of any tech.

Even this late in the tech game, Apple is still leaps and bounds ahead of all others when it comes to the adoption factor. Only Google, with Android OS, has truly come close to delving into Apple's territory.
10-05-2011, 06:51 PM   #13
Veteran Member
bobmaxja's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Laval, Quebec Canada
Posts: 2,171
Please take out your Pentax lense and put yourself in the user of these IPhone. Now you will understand why the camera phone are not really replacing P&S , they are simply multiply the use of photo in everyday real application. 99% of these peoples are happy with the resolution of them. Dont try to make any comparaison with APS-C or FF. Many of these user dont have a clue what they are
10-05-2011, 07:42 PM   #14
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,263
QuoteOriginally posted by bobmaxja Quote
99% of these peoples are happy with the resolution of them.
That's been true since the first Kodak P&S hit the streets ca. 1892. Most camera-like devices were and are used for small snapshots, which don't need huge resolution. It's even better now than when 6x9cm contact prints were the P&S state-of-the-art. The vast majority of all photos now taken (with many immediately deleted) will never be seen on anything larger than the (phone)cam's wee tiny LCD screen. Some fewer will make it onto computer or netbook screens. Almost none will be printed. We ARE in a world of mostly paperless photography. We mostly don't see photos in the world, just tepid magazine-quality copies churned out like the Sunday funnies.

And that seems to be good enough for many. Personal audio has gone from home Hi-Fi to MP3s and earbuds. Casual secular photography has gone from tangible prints to wisps of bits and bytes beaming at eyeballs. It's all so McLuhan, these hot and cool media with their modes of personal involvement. And it's all so economics-driven: the cheapest possible experience that is still tolerable. What are the ultimate efficiencies for producing and delivering media?
10-05-2011, 08:08 PM   #15
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,237
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
What innovation?
Mobile phones?
Yes. They frankly remade the device. All other 'smart phone' makers have been trying to catch up, trying to copy, sometimes to the point of patent infringement, desperately trying to put a device in peoples hands that is both as powerful (very possible) and as seamless, easy to use, and beautifully designed (not easy) as the iphone. Google might come close - but that's saying something, that a company as large, powerful and fresh as Google is challenged in matching Apple.

QuoteQuote:
PC's? GUI? Mouse?
Xerox PARC basically invented the modern mouse-driven GUI we use today. When I discovered this fact decades ago, I was very anti-Apple about the whole thing, felt that Steve Jobs 'stole' the idea from Xerox.

Since then I've spent some time in the business world on the technology side of things. I realized that if someone on that Xerox team had even half of Job's ability to truly see what's going to hit, to realize what people will go crazy for before they themselves even know - then Xerox PARC would have made the Mac, would have brought the GUI to mainstream.

And really, Microsoft took the ball from Apple on that one. If you want to talk about a true lack of innovation, talk about Windows circa late 80's.

Since the early 2000's we've had OS X - basically Unix-based OS, stable, slick, beautiful GUI, less susceptible to malware, wed to the hardware. I'm a Unix guy, I just really like that OS on the surface and under the covers.... especially when I compare it to Windows.

QuoteQuote:
Tablets?
Tablets before ipad sucked. Oddly, most tablets after ipad still suck - have you tried these Android tablets?

QuoteQuote:
Walkmans?
Sony did well with the Walkman back in the early 80's. Good on them. Why has no mp3 player matched the ipod in sales or design? Why did itunes become what it did, and not something else in its place?

Do you see a pattern here? What do you attribute it to, blind luck, again and again?

.
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!
apple, camera, iphone, market, photos, sensor, sensors, software, video
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Thematic I Object-Art Objects,Folk Art,Classical,Modern bbluesman Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories 152 02-11-2016 08:16 AM
Can sensors go bad? J Merrill Pentax DSLR Discussion 23 06-08-2010 10:40 PM
Pentax Sensors scottax1 Pentax DSLR Discussion 2 04-07-2010 01:01 AM
Machinery State of the Art shiner Post Your Photos! 0 02-01-2010 09:22 AM
Blanton Museum of Art - Modern Art Matthew Roberts Post Your Photos! 8 03-26-2007 04:48 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:54 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