What sort of annoys me. Is the S10 although is very good phone. But for the tenth anniversary phone. It was a S9 with slightly better camera. And finger print in screen reader. Now i would expect samsung to do amazing camera thats in the S11 on the S10.
Don't delude yourself that any software can make it even comparable to DSLR... I see many people here belive so. As soon as you think like that, you should know you know nothing about photography.
Software and hardware of an DSLR are entirely deticated to photography. Photos are incomparable by tonal ranges, contrast, clarity, sharpness...
Phone images only look "interesting" on displays.
Anonymous, 20 Dec 2019Furthermore low light performance has nearly nothing to do with bracketing. Different exposure... moreNever said Smartphones are beating Dslr image quality purely based on sensor technology (hardware).
It's a combination of hardware and software that has helped them achieve similar results (in certain low light scenarios, not all)
Anonymous, 20 Dec 2019You don't seem to understand how physics works. Otherwise you wouldn't have posted the nonsens... moreYes that is why Samsung engineers are putting their time and hard work on Bayer sensors. While you are caught up in therotical garbage.
Software on Smartphones allows phones to extract way more out of a Bayer sensor than traditional ones, hence the move towards higher MP Bayer sensors which use pixel binning.
I get that you prefer old school technology and will defend it to death, since you can't grasp the newer improvements in camera technology.
Anonymous, 20 Dec 2019Noise can be there in the final output coz of multiple factors. Quad Bayer HDR is simply bette... moreFurthermore low light performance has nearly nothing to do with bracketing. Different exposures have an advantage in good light conditions because the sensor would overexpose if it wants to capture too much light per unit area. In low dynamic range low light conditions this issue doesn't exist. Therefore different exposures have nearly no advantage in low dynamic range low light conditions. Saying that a smartphone beats the low-light image quality of a modern DSLR due to sensor technology is mostly wrong. A smartphone can beat the low light image quality of a DSLR due to sophisticated image processing, better exposure and multi frame noise reduction
Anonymous, 20 Dec 2019Noise can be there in the final output coz of multiple factors. Quad Bayer HDR is simply bette... moreYou don't seem to understand how physics works. Otherwise you wouldn't have posted the nonsense gsmarena article, which doesn't understand that the fluctuations of photon numbers are part of the reality and can't be changed by a sensor.
Quad Bayer HDR isn't hardware pixel binning, these are two different things. Furthermore no company has ever said whether and when they really use Quad Bayer HDR. Just recently Samsung published an article about their large 70mm² Quad Bayer sensor. HDR wasn't mentioned in this recent article. Furthermore no company has shown that it works better. The advantages of Quad Bayer HDR are nothing else than theoretical.
Furthermore a scientific comparison between different HDR modes from different companies is only possible with HDR raw files.
Anonymous, 20 Dec 2019Wrong! You copied this from a gsmarena article, which is completely wrong!
"If one of the fou... moreNoise can be there in the final output coz of multiple factors. Quad Bayer HDR is simply better than hdr from traditional sensor in certain scenarios.
You don't really understand how Quad Bayer sensor works. Read up a few more articles, and you might understand.
Final output of the s11 should seal your regressive opinions.
There are scenarios where low light performance by K20 pro matched one from Dslr. Another user proved it. I was Shocked to see those results. Improvements in smartphone camera sensors (on the hardware and software side) has been huge. You can still continue to support old traditional sensor technology.
Anonymous, 19 Dec 2019Noise is a random process and if the large pixel of a traditional sensor captures noise instea... moreWrong! You copied this from a gsmarena article, which is completely wrong!
"If one of the four pixels on a Quad Bayer sensor captures noise, however, thatÂ’s only 25% of the information lost i.e a 4x noise reduction that doesnÂ’t diminish the sharpness of the image. " That's complete nonsense. You can't say which pixel has photon noise and which doesn't. Noise is mostly the fluctuation of the number of photons that arrive per time unit. So this noise is part of the reality and isn't produced by the sensor! The reality(!) is noisy because light sources like the sun (or a lamp) don't emit the same number of photons every millisecond. That's why the intensity fluctuates a little bit, which is perceived as noise. So Gsmarena's explanation is total nonsense. Pixel size has no effect on photon noise as long as the sensor area is constant. Only in extreme darkness or dark shadows, where electronic read noise dominates, less pixels are better.
2.4μm. That is even higher than the one in HTC One M8. I do really hope the photo quality would match the spec.
TooFatTooFurious, 19 Dec 2019I am time traveler from the year 2055 where we have 864MP ULTIMA HM1 Sensors.
Each pixel is... moreThats nice to hear,12mp still rocking so far into the future.
Thanks for the insight fellow traveler.
Anonymous, 19 Dec 2019Panasonic cm1 has 2.2 or 2.4um pixelsIt is also very bulky at 21mm thickness.
Plus it was launched in 2014, so pretty much useless by today's standard
AnonD-731363, 19 Dec 2019Its dicta not Nona. Nona = 9
Dicta = 200
I am time traveler from the year 2055 where we have 864MP ULTIMA HM1 Sensors.
Each pixel is 0.01µm large, resulting in 864MP Sensor.
Then we combine 72 pixels into one and shoot 12MP pictures.
Anonymous, 18 Dec 2019Try making one 12mp sensor with 2.4 micron pixel size and fit that into a smartphone That's pretty much what Samsung is going to do.
Anonymous, 18 Dec 2019Pixel size refers to the pixel pitch, which won't change. It would be still 2.4 micrometers. B... moreNoise is a random process and if the large pixel of a traditional sensor captures noise instead of signal, there’s little to be done (other than covering it up by interpolating data from neighboring pixels).
If one of the four pixels on a Quad Bayer sensor captures noise, however, that’s only 25% of the information lost i.e a 4x noise reduction that doesn’t diminish the sharpness of the image. For this hmx1 sensor, only 11.11% of information is lost.
Alternatively, the sensor can be split up into two logical sensors – one that captures a short exposure and one a long exposure. This is used in real-time HDR capture.
You could do noise reduction and HDR with a single non-quad Bayer sensor by taking two (or more) photos one after another and combining them. That’s what the Pixel phones do and they are quite good at it.
But there’s a problem, moving objects change position between sequential exposures. A Quad Bayer filter takes two photos at the same time, so there’s no need to use AI to correct for artifacts caused by moving objects.
So a Quad Bayer HDR is better in these cases compared to traditional sensor, Samsung using Nona Bayer which is even further improvement.
Less noise, sport photography, using the entire 108Mp resolution to aid hybrid zoom. These are not available on traditional 12mp sensors. Name one traditional sensor on the Market with 2.4 micron pixel size?
Anonymous, 18 Dec 2019nona for 9 just like quad for 4, penta for 5 etcIts dicta not Nona.
Anonymous, 18 Dec 2019For this size of sensor , f1.7 is more than enough. People that think bigger aperture is bett... moreExactly. On the contrary having too wide open aperture on bigger sensors will reduce general sharpness
Anonymous, 18 Dec 2019Try making one 12mp sensor with 2.4 micron pixel size and fit that into a smartphone would be the same size as the one theyre gonna use lmao.