Anonymous, 07 Apr 2020You don't understand Quad Bayer sensors. Your knowledge is limited to traditional sensors.
Co... moreIdea of quadbayer is to use pixels of different exposures. But none is doing this.
If none is using , it is being wasted.
Sensor is not going to do it by itself, software has its role.
Looks like you are the rookie here.
LG Superfan, 07 Apr 2020Can the binning be optional? Like the user selects how much binning they want 4-in-1, 9-in-1, ... moreNo because quadbayer/nonacell is hardware level.
Not software like OP6T or LGG7 bright mode.
Clearly this high megapixel count competition doesn't really produce relatively sharper results than standard bayer lower resolution sensors.
Well, Quad Bayer or any multi-Bayer sensors don't even resolve as much detail as what their resolution indicate, nor do they even provide better low light performance or wider dynamic range.
See, wider dynamic range can be achieved by using larger native pixels with some software enhancements, which is shown by the Galaxy Note 10+ by having better shadow details than the S20 Ultra. I'd say the best implementation would be the main sensor of the S20/S20+ and Xperia 1 Mk II. At 12MP single bayer 1/1.7" sensor, their 1.8um native pixel size should theoretically offer supreme low light performance, and the S20/S20+ somehow prove their superiority to the S20 Ultra, especially in low light video.
As for resolved detail, it is a matter of having a lens that could resolve a large amount of detail. A highly-detailed 12MP image can be oversampled and upscaled to, say 48MP, and its details would convincingly look like a true 48MP image from a true 48MP sensor due to the detail resolving power of the lens, and in the case of flagships, they should be able to do this for their asking price tag.
It's about darn time we actually do something more sensible with camera technologies, instead of making new things that are actually worse than existing ones.
Anonymous, 07 Apr 2020Waste of time using quadbayer sensors.
None is applying HDR on pixel level, just same frame ... moreYou don't understand Quad Bayer sensors. Your knowledge is limited to traditional sensors.
Computational photography and Pixel binning Algorithms are alien subjects to you.
Anonymous, 07 Apr 2020Yes, the aspect ratio changed things, screens are now narrower, but much taller, making one-ha... moreSamsung One Ui is specifically designed for one handed usage without having to reach top of the screen.
Shanti Dope, 07 Apr 2020Yeah, but I don't think it's the absolute best camera in the world today, unless I'm really mi... moreAre there any APSC sensors in a compact body of smartphones? Nope.
End of story.
Best camera is the one you can carry anywhere.
Anonymous, 07 Apr 2020Phase One XF IQ4 = 150MP
Medium Format (more than 2x size of FF sensor ).
Costs 50.000 dol... moreYeah, but I don't think it's the absolute best camera in the world today, unless I'm really missing out something.
Either way, we don't have to go that far away. Even an APS-C sensor is more than enough to slaughter all of the best smartphone camera systems to ever exist.
Whackcar, 07 Apr 2020It's not a fair comparison though. The 6 inch phones of the 16:9 era are about as big as the m... moreYes, the aspect ratio changed things, screens are now narrower, but much taller, making one-handed use a struggle, to say the least.
Taking your example, Nexus 6 was 160 mm tall, but considering how big the bezels were, the top of the screen was 10 mm lower. So your touch area was basically 150 mm tall. That was a giant phone in its time, Galaxy S5 got released the same year, with 5.1" screen.
These days, bezel-less phones that reach 150 mm height are close to 6" (6.1" for Galaxy S20, 151 mm tall) and that's the smallest option. You can easily get phones that will reach 165 mm tall with no bezels.
The stretched aspect ratio makes phones narrower, thus easier to hold. But definitely not easier to use. You can stretch out the screen, but not your fingers.
Can the binning be optional? Like the user selects how much binning they want 4-in-1, 9-in-1, 16-in-1
Whackcar, 07 Apr 2020It's not a fair comparison though. The 6 inch phones of the 16:9 era are about as big as the m... moreExactly the screen to body Ratio has jumped from 70-75% to around 90%.
These haters have nothing better to do than complain.
Study_shows, 07 Apr 202019.5/9 - 6.4 is the same width as 16/9-5.5.
That being said it's obvious that tall phones are... morehttps://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?&idPhone2=9788&idPhone1=7863
Here's a comparison of two popular phones from few years back to current flagships.
I don't see anything taller or wider.
sadh, 07 Apr 2020Crazy how these numbers are fake compared to native 41MP camera on 808 and 1020. Nokia even sa... moreWaste of time using quadbayer sensors.
None is applying HDR on pixel level, just same frame level.
In the end, it is just high MP being used as marketing purposes ....
Better having a 1" with 20MP like Panasonic CM1
Great.. More s*hitty midrangers. This segment should be w*iped from the s*urface of the earth.
Anonymous, 07 Apr 2020The 6 inch screens from few years back had a way larger footprint than today's smartphones.
M... more19.5/9 - 6.4 is the same width as 16/9-5.5.
That being said it's obvious that tall phones are for aliens/piano players with 90mm-100mm fingers.
True marketing. Another bining pixel phone rom Xiaomi.
Poor people and not very smart people - this kind of marketing uses them as target.
sirozan, 07 Apr 2020Crazy how not too long ago we all thought the Megapixel race ended at 41MP with the Nokia 808/... moreCrazy how these numbers are fake compared to native 41MP camera on 808 and 1020. Nokia even said the truth about 34MP effective in 16:9 and 38MP in 4:3.
I wonder tho if Nokia can combine two techs with tons of pixels binned resulting 41mp natively with huge pixel size and from there, their PureView's downsampling take over.
Anonymous, 07 Apr 2020Well, also a few years ago 6" screen was considered too big, yet this year the smallest flagsh... moreIt's not a fair comparison though. The 6 inch phones of the 16:9 era are about as big as the modern ~6.5" ultrawide screen phones (19.5:9, 19:9, 20:9, 21:9, etc).
If you compare the Nexus 6 (6.0") to iPhone 11 Pro Max (6.5"). You'll notice that the physical dimensions of the iPhone are actually smaller than the Nexus.
Thee point being, that phones haven't really gotten larger than old-school phablets. Just their aspect ratios have changed, and their bezels have been trimmed.
Anonymous, 07 Apr 2020Well, also a few years ago 6" screen was considered too big, yet this year the smallest flagsh... moreThe 6 inch screens from few years back had a way larger footprint than today's smartphones.
Most 6.5 inch smartphones from 2020 have smaller footprint than 5.5 inch devices from few years back. The screen size has increased, not the dimensions.
Unfortunately, Some users still throw a hissy fit over increased screen size without taking into consideration the dimensions of the phone