Samsung's 8 megapixel CMOS sensor for phones -- another world's first

You know all those 3 megapixel cameraphones out there? Well, they're about to achieve 8 megapixel ubiquity. Samsung just announced availability of their 8 megapixel CMOS sensor which shares roughly the same 10.5 x 11.5 x 9.4-mm girth of its 3 megapixel cuz. Just make sure you've got plenty of light to frame those shots if you're expecting anything close to a quality image.

[Cunthor @ Nov 15th 2007 3:25AM]

Hate to think how noisy this will be... I can just foresee the smears from noise reduction kicking in, reducing any significant resolution benefits 8mpx can offer over a good 4mpx compact digital, or 2mpx camera phone. Can't phone manufacturers learn from camera companies?

[Jeff @ Nov 15th 2007 3:37AM]

Simply because of the fact that cellphone manufacturers are not cellphone companies. If you want a decent cameraphone, better start angry letters to Canon to get into the phone business.

But knowing how things go...the camera would be awesome but the phone would be shit.

[Geir E @ Nov 15th 2007 8:54AM]

You know that Canons compact cameras have image sensors made by Sony? Which is in the cellphone industry. Not a surprise they (sony) have the best 3 mpixel cameras in cellphones.

8 mpixel is too much in a cellphone based on the sensor and lense though

[Josh Warner @ Nov 15th 2007 9:31AM]

Noise is likely a problem here, you are correct. However, the more serious issue is that of the lens. Crap glass = crap pictures, and these cell phones have some of the worst lenses known to mankind. The distortion on these lenses is obscene.

For comparison: my 10 Mpxl Nikon D200 only reveals its true sharpness when it is in perfect focus and there is no leftover jitter from my hands (or the shutter speed is high enough). Even at shutter speeds of 1/250th of a second, in a multiple-shot series there are clear differences between photos. Now, this is with some of the best glass Nikon has ever produced, on an DX size sensor. Put a sensor close to that resolution into the environment of a cameraphone? With those "lenses," after 2 Mpxl or so there is no resolution left. Pointless. People are paying for a number, not performance.

[vanboy @ Nov 15th 2007 12:23PM]

@Geir E

SE doesn't have the best 3MP camera phones on the market. Sharp does with its CCD camera phones. ex: After almost 3 years, unlocked 903SH still sell for $500US!

While most people know 8MP doesn't mean better quality, phone manufacturers use it as attention.

[USA homes @ Nov 15th 2007 5:41AM]

If quality is wanted it is better to buy a camera)

-------------
Cool houses

[Jonathan @ Nov 15th 2007 3:35AM]

I would much rather have a sensor that could take a decent 2 mpixel image than another grainy, noised filled cmos on.

Honestly, not to mention why would people even need a 8 mpixel or hell even a 3 or 5 mp coms quality image in the first place period is still baffling.

[John @ Nov 15th 2007 3:42AM]

clearly you don't have a decent camera phone...
I use a sony ericsson K800i with a 3.2 megapixel camera (with Xenon flash too!) and I have to say it's a lifesaver... many times have I wanted to take a nice picture (not a crap VGA one) and been happy to have a quality camera on my cell phone (especially as my 5mpx still camera recently broke). Convenience only goes so far when quality still counts - that's why I'll be upgrading to a K850i (5 megapixel) when I get a new phone.

[Jason @ Nov 15th 2007 8:47AM]

John: Well, as long as YOU believe you're getting better pictures out of a 5MP sensor the same size as the 3.2MP one you're using now.

Of course in reality I'm sure the 5MP will do far worse in low light.

[CB @ Nov 15th 2007 3:53AM]

All rather pointless, but pixel count sells phones to the unwashed.
My N95 has 5mp at a Zeiss lens, but it's so tiny you can see the edging problems, it might as well be 2mp, in fact in never take a pic at full resolution, you would just get more detailed lens distortion and slower pic taking, plus less storage and a flatter battery.

[linuxamp @ Nov 15th 2007 5:27AM]

Pixel count is attractive to the masses. Those who understand digital photography know that a good sensor is better than a high pixel count but pixel count really stands out on a specification chart.

[Daryl Herbert @ Nov 15th 2007 5:54AM]

How long before they fit a DSLR into a cell phone?

The 8MP CMOS camera is already obsolete.

[iczer2 @ Nov 15th 2007 8:06AM]

When they figure out how to fit in at least an APS-C sized sensor, powerful image processor (like the DiG!C II or III), and great lenses. Only then would they be able to fit a DSLR out there.

Remember kiddies, a 5 megapixel DSLR with a 5 megapixel sensor will produce better images than this micro-sized sensor. As someone stated before, it sounds great on specs but people who know more about how digital cameras work know this thing will producing noise like crazy past the lowest ISOs (100 or 200 at the max, forget about clear images at ISO 400).

8MP DSLR obsolete? Right...

[L.Rawlins @ Nov 15th 2007 7:05AM]

This is actually pretty good news. You'll be able to take a native 8MP picture, and then scale it to say a perfectly useable 4-5MP size and end up with a pretty crisp image.

It's the only workaround I've found so far for camera phone grain. I dial back pictures on my K800i in post-production to remove such artifacts. It's not ideal but it works.

I'd much rather see some optical zoom advancements than pixel progression. Until this happens I don't think the conventional compact cameras have an awful lot to worry about. However, once optical zoom takes a foothold in the phone industry I believe that the big players such as Kodak and Canon will have to seriously consider supplying the sensors for phones as their consumer market will be squeezed almost entirely by this feature inclusion. Optical zoom would render compact camera purchase pretty much entirely redundant I think.

[Carbonize @ Nov 15th 2007 8:39AM]

Kodak already supply lenses for Motorola phones.

[XenoX101 @ Nov 15th 2007 8:22AM]

L.Rawlins, if you compare the quality of a compact digital to a phone, you'll find that the phones are ALWAYS significantly worse, I'm not sure as to the technical reason for this, but I've yet to see any really competitive photos, don't underestimate the compact digital.

However, I do agree about the scaling down, hence this will make a difference.

[Jason @ Nov 15th 2007 12:38PM]

reason #1 - Lens

reason #2 - Sensor size (not pixel density)

reason #3 - Image processor

[LordAdmiral @ Nov 15th 2007 2:20PM]

It's just a 1/2.5" CMOS sensor, not too much worse than the existing 7-8MP sensors in most PS cameras. Post-processing might not be as good, as it's not sitting on a dedicated image processor. It'd definitely be good to have RAW output.

[TIMMAH! @ Nov 15th 2007 4:23PM]

Could someone stop cramming more megapixels and just make our existing megapixels less crappy?