aironeous | # 21 | 2010-04-22, 07:04 | Report

This is why.
http://www.invisageinc.com/

Rauha | # 22 | 2010-04-22, 07:08 | Report

That's only a new sensor technology. You would stil need large lenses for gathering the photons into the sensor.

It would replace the current digital sensors the same way digital sensors replaced silvernitrate based film. It wouldn't affect the bending-light part, a.k.a optics, at all.

---

Last edited by Rauha; 2010-04-22 at 07:14.

ossipena | # 23 | 2010-04-22, 07:20 | Report

that technology will decrease significantly the amount of photons needed.

but everything is about the details. if you aren't willing to sacrifice any, buy something like this with digital back:


if you are willing to sacrifice some, buy something like this:


and some more:


and more:


and more:


and more:


and more:


please note how pocketability changes.

Switch_ | # 24 | 2010-04-22, 07:21 | Report

Hm. Interesting theory. Agree woleheartedly with the point reference the laws of physics - the larger the CMOS sensor, the better the picture ultimately. Look at the size of the lens in a camera phone. How large do you really think the CMOS is behind that tiny little 2.8mm lens?

Granted, phones are getting *better* at photos - my lady has a Sony Satio (12.1Mp) camera phone - the camera is great, using Xenon flash as well instead of poxy dual LED's, which makes impulsive shooting in low light conditions soooo much better than my N900, but the video recording on it sucks. The 900 is sooo much better at recording video, and I put that down to the processing speed of the ARM-8 and potentially also the write speed of the memory.

Rant:

To say that phones will have DSLR quaity in, say, 5 years, wouldn't be too much to ask, but by 2011....? Somehow, I don't think so. And for it to be Nokia that is the benchmark? What about Sony Ericsson and their Cybershot series? Much better image quality already and obviously the trailblazers so far as camera phones go. Nokia still don't have Xenon flashes. Nuff sed.

/Rant

james174 | # 25 | 2010-04-22, 07:36 | Report

You make no sense at all. For starters my article was copied from a source here in that article it gives a link to an interview by reuters here is the shortened version of that link http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKLDE63J15F20100420 the guy who done the interview is this guy

How can you possibly say its from a false source? What, the whole things made up is it?

jakiman | # 26 | 2010-04-22, 07:42 | Report

i bought the very first DSLR Canon made when it came out. Canon D30. About 10 years ago. Whopping 3MP sensor. Took absolutely gorgeous pics. No 10+MP tiny digicams and mobile phone will ever come close to it. Never. Unless lenses become bigger than the phone itself that can provide nice dreamy bokeh, shallow dof, tele compression etc. It's about the feel for me. Not the detail.

lattenwald | # 27 | 2010-04-22, 07:44 | Report

I got n900 with excellent photo capabilities - rather good lense, 5mp sensor.
I got Canon 400D, DSLR, 10mp sensor.

When I look at images taken with 400D at 100% zoom level, I see that every single pixel works. There are details at pixel level.
When I look at images taken with N900 at 100% zoom level, I barely see that pixel clusters of diameter 5 and more pixels work.

I know why it happens. It's all about noise reduction. Larger pixels of sensor lead to smaller amount of noise.

To be better than DSLR, phone has to:
1. have sensor as good as DSLR (20mm size is current standard for amateur-level DSLR)
2. have lense as good as lenses for SLR and small enough to fit phone. This is impossible at current technologies level. Later there might be a breakthrough - like liquid lenses, or something like that.

Either Nokia talks about integrating phone capabilities into existing DSLR, or they lie.

abill_uk | # 28 | 2010-04-22, 07:45 | Report

All you guys doubting new electronic concepts should be very carefull before you talk because remember not so many years ago man did the impossible and flew to the moon AND landed on it AND flew back ha.
The first computer was the size of a house and now we have the N900 ooooer lol.
So now we have guys who can predict whats NOT going to happen in the future hmmmmm interesting lol.

xav | # 29 | 2010-04-22, 07:58 | Report

I don't think physics get in the way of having a good lens fitting in a phone. I mean, the eye has a pretty good lens, and it's not that big.

jakiman | # 30 | 2010-04-22, 08:32 | Report

Eye has fixed focal length, cannot focus super close. No optical zoom either. Aperture is also fairly slow. So it cannot provide shallow dof on objects further than about 2-3m away. Sensor however is pretty darn good. Not perfect either by any means though. (cannot see when too bright or too dark while electronic sensors can)

It's all about the physics. Photography = capturing light.
Sensor will get better over time. Lense? Not really.
Unless you use Diamond lenses or something.