8MP camera module with physical shutter peeped at MWC
By Laura June 
posted February 21st 2009 2:03AM
posted February 21st 2009 2:03AM
Hanging around on show quietly amongst the glitz and glamor of MWC was this little guy -- an 8MP prototype by camera manufacturer Jabil for mobile phones which boasts a physical shutter. The module is 10 x 10 x 8mm in size, and also boasts an autofocus feature. The company is currently shopping around for manufacturers that might want to pack the module into their phones. We'll keep our eyes on this one -- because we'd definitely like to see it on some devices.
First, hope this'll appear in Q4 or 2010.
Look no further, the Nokia N86 has it:
http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/16/nokia-busts-out-its-own-8-megapixel-slider-the-n86/
wonder what happens when you drop your phone?
It'd probably break.
As a side note, the Nokia N95 has a mechanical shutter. This feature is also shared by a couple other N-Series phones.
@Devin: The N95 has a mechanical shutter *cover*, but, unless I've very much mistaken, has no camera shutter in the traditional sense.
However, the new N86 *does* have a mechanical shutter, and variable aperture. I wonder what the difference is between the Sypro one and the one in the N86.
I distinctly remember the mechanical shutter being one of the selling points of the camera, NOT the lens cover.
The N95 was the first Nokia phone to feature a mechanical shutter
No, Davidxwaterman is correct. And believe me, I have owned an N95.
The mechanical shutter referred to the lens cover, unfortunately, the description of that particular part was always wrong. The main selling point of the N95's camera was a) The Carl Ziess optics, and b) it was one of (if not THE) first 5 Megapixel camera Phone on the market (in Europe, at least).
The N86 is the first Nokia phone with a mechanical shutter.
Direct from the Nokia USA website:
Camera Specifications
* Sensor: CMOS, 5 megapixel (2592 x 1944)
* Carl Zeiss Optics: Tessar lens
* Focal length 5.6 mm
* Focus range 10 cm ~ infinity
* Macro focus distance 10-50 cm
* Shutter speed: Mechanical shutter: 1/1000~1/3 s
I've owned both the N95 and the N95 8gb btw....
@Devin: re N95
Sounds convincing. Thanks for correcting me.
I have my 5mp cellphone since 2006... I live in japan of course. Also that cellphone is an ugly fat bitch.
Actually, the N73 had a mechanical shutter before the N95
that will be just very delicate
Wait, having a shutter is a new feature? Welcome to the mid-19th century!
Having a physical shutter is new for camera phones. I think the only announced phone that has one so far is the Nokia N86, I think.
What's the big benefit? I don't want the sales pitch, or what it's "supposed" to do, I mean what benefit will a user truly see in real-world use?
"The Nokia N86 8MP has a mechanical shutter, operating at 1,000th of a second. It has 'Wide angle Carl Zeiss optics', with f2.4-4.8 'large variable aperture' (F2.4/3.2/4.8) meaning better photos in all light conditions - the first camera phone to seriously challenge standalone cameras?"
I wonder what the Sypro has over the Nokia N86? It seems to have all the features listed. Here's the bit from forum nokia ...
Camera Resolution 3280 x 2464
Digital Zoom 20 x
Optical Zoom
Sensor CMOS 8.0 Megapixel
Focal length 4.61 mm
F-Stop/Aperture f/2.41
Focus range 102 cm to infinity
Image Format JPEG/Exif
Camera Features Auto Exposure, Auto Focus, Carl Zeiss Optics3, Flash4, Full Screen Viewfinder, Image Stabilization, Red-Eye Reduction, Self Timer
Maybe the Sypro one is smaller or something?
...oh, I missed some of the details on the shutter :
1Large and variable aperture: F2.4, F3.2, F4.8
2Macro focus: 10-50 cm
3Wide angle optics: 28mm. High speed shutter, max shutter speed: 1/1000 sec
...here's a quote from AllAboutSymbian to fill that gap :
"The N86 8MP has a mechanical shutter, operating at 1,000th of a second. It has 'Wide angle Carl Zeiss optics', with f2.4-4.8 'large variable aperture' (F2.4/3.2/4.8) meaning better photos in all light conditions - the first camera phone to seriously challenge standalone cameras?"
@Devin : I still think you're mistaken. I've owned a couple of them (original and 8GB), and I see no evidence on forum nokia's n95 page about a shutter. I'd be interested in any evidence you have to show what you say is true.
Is there any benefit using physical shutter? It would be best if they try to develop small and cost effective optical zoom... or better yet, make a small sensor that have low noise and high sensitivity. Since DSLR already reach 20mp+, can't we just cut it to a size of 3mpix and put it on cellphone (I would bite for DSLR quality sensor for as low as 2mpix)?
Well, having a Physical shutter will improve the picture quality already.
The problem is, if you have a big sensor and a big lens, you're gonna end up with a BIG phone. And given the public's current obsession with having the thinnest phones possible, manufacturers and designers are having to compromise to meet the approval of everyone.
Look at something like the Innov8 or N95; It's good tech, and the cameras are second to none, but it's so THICK! Blah blah blah.]]
So what phone companies are doing is ignoring the camera completely (a la iPhone), or using every possible trick to make the picture better (better optics, better software, mechanical shutters, etc.) without actually making the camera module bigger.
Why does this automatically improve the image quality? Also, without a viewfinder, the shutter being closed wouldn't let you see what you're taking a picture of. If it was open at rest, then that sort of defeats the purpose, doesn't it?
@chrisk1590 :
That's an interesting point - how would that work? Even in regular (compact) cameras...they'd have to have two sensors - one to take the shot and one for the viewfinder. If they somehow use the same sensor for the viewfinder then what's the point in having a shutter? With just one sensor, it'd have to close the shutter, then open it again...
Perhaps they do have two sensors. Same applies to compact cameras too, I suppose. I see your point and I don't know how they work.
It's obvious how cameras with *optical* view finders work...not problem there...but how do the ones with LCD view finders work. Perhaps I'm wrong that they have mechanical shutters - I've had an SLR for too long...the most recent compact camera I've had was the Olympus C3040...quite a while ago now.
I don't completely understand the physics, but basically the process of clearing a sensor works best in darkness. Which a physical shutter can provide.
Those 20+ sensors are also full frame 135 film equivalent. 24x36mm. Even if you scaled that down to 2MP, the sensor would be larger than what is typically found in a digital compact. (which in turn tend to have larger sensors than cameraphones)
@David
There is just one sensor. The shutter closes when you hit the button (clearing the sensor from the live view), opens to expose, closes again, and finally reopens. At least that is how it works on a G1.
So more megapixels automatically increase the image quality the same way mechanical shutter does?
I'm not believing it does any good till I see it with my own eyes.
@davidmaxwaterman: Do you have any links to some of these 2-sensor cameras? Because all the compact digital cameras I've encountered have only had the one sensor -- EVF or optical. Even with the DSLRs I know of, the 2nd sensor isn't capable of producing an image -- it's a different kind of sensor.
As for an EVF with a mechanical shutter, I have no idea if they exist, but I see no reason why it couldn't be possible -- The shutter would close, the EVF would go blank, the sensor would clear, the shutter would open again for the exposure, then close again, the image is taken from the sensor, and then it would open again to allow the EVF to function.
@Justin Bell: re links...no, I don't. I didn't claim that I knew of any...it was just my only explanation for how it could work...call it thinking out loud..."They'd have to have..."...or else..."it'd have to close the shutter, then open it again..". Someone later says that they actually do the latter...
Why would you even want a mechanical shutter? No compact camera I know of has one, and I don't really see any advantage of one in any camera at all, other than maybe to protect it from stray bright light or dust.
...Are you serious?
... I think he is...
I am serious. What is the real advantage of one? Electronic "shutters" can start and stop reading the sensor in a fraction of the time that a shutter can open and close, and it doesn't make any noise. Plus there's no eventual wear.
Eh? You're kidding. I've never seen a camera, compact or otherwise, that doesn't have one, analog or digital - apart from phone camera. Even the old 'pin-hole' ones had a shutter, albeit a mechanical one (remove the lens-cap for a while).
Having said that, I don't know what the advantages are over just electronic 'virtual' shutters. It is clear that the mechanical shutter must be better, at least with the current state of virtual ones, otherwise they wouldn't all use them.
Are you thinking of the mechanical lens cover? ...that's not what we're talking about here.
Huh? I mean the blade shutters that are in SLRs. They're the only ones that have physical mechanical shutters that open and close. I think all digital compact cameras just start storing data for a fraction of a second that the "shutter" speed is set to. There's no actual mechanism that opens and closes all the way.
Umm, No.
A good P&S still has a shutter. Not the focal plane type used in dSLRs, but the much quieter leaf shutters. Which is often "merged" with the aperture IIRC.
Let's see here...They allow for better (more accurate) exposure, faster shutter speeds, etc.
Dibs on the first one!
That's why I said that can't they take 20mp+ DSLR sensor tech and make one that only have 3 or 2mp. I believe the sensor size if I take 5DmkII sensor and make a 2mp sensor, the size would be 11.4mm x 7.6mm (0.45in x 0.3in). I don't know if it's still to big, but certainly doable to cram that into cellphone (at least in terms of surface size... I don't really know if the thickness would hinder the implementation).
Basically I would take 2mp DSLR class sensor over 8mp cellphone class sensor anytime. Since a lot of cellphone camera used to take candid photo and probably in low light situation, it would really benefit using this kind of sensor.
The issue is not the bigness of the sensor but that the lenses would have to accommodate and become huge.
Here's an idea, why not build a small cellphone module in a DSLR, with bluetooth, and voila there's your large sensor cameraphone, and I'm only half joking too.
Doesn't the smaller sensor should translate to smaller lens too?
That measure would be close to a 2/3" sensor. This sensors size isn't even used in most digicams anymore. I think Fuji might still have a model, but that's it. 1/1.8" (7.18x5.32mm) or smaller is the norm.
Cameraphones are often in the 1/4" range.
I remembered some company came up with a liquid (or something to that effect) lens for mobile phone cameras. It was supposed to be adding optical zooming capability to our personal devices..... With that and this, the camera phone would be an extremely competent camera device, no?
No. Liquid lens only allowed focusing without changing the distance between lenses. Same thing with optical zooming.
But, since they aren't in the phones yet, I guess it didn't do much good after all.
I wonder if mechanical shutter will do any good...
I belive Sharp's 8 MP CCD module has a mechanical shutter.. before the n86...
The Casio W53CA and W63CA have had 28mm lenses
Ever since Sharp made a 5MP Camera phone they have had 29mm lenses
Now to be honest, the best cameraphone of all time is the Sharp 903SH.. the beast matches low-end point and shoots... quite an accomplishment. 3.2MP CCD (1/2.5")!!! with 2x Optical zoom. I need to see something like that come out again. The only bad thing about the phone was its size.. 2.2cm thick.. but one of the best equipped phones for its time.
I don't get this argument about quality...
Carl Zeiss only approves of another companies design, and most of the camera modules come from the same place.. AKA - Sony or Samsung for the mass produce 3.2 or 2.0 MP sensors shoved into every phone... y
ou know Carl Zeiss doesn't waste time on these pointless plastic lenses when they are really working on their Ikons, and Bessas and their manual lenses for EF, K, F mounts
Having a physical shutter makes sense for high-end cameras, especially DSLRs. But is there that much of an advantage in a small, low quality camera like this? Are they planning to allow 1/1000th shutter speeds? Is the extra quality really going to be noticeable on such a tiny, noisy sensor with a small lens?
I think the point is that we will keep seeing advances. How do you know the sensor is tiny and noisy?
Everything is relative. There are people with $1500 digital slr who will snear at $500 point and shoot cameras, people with $3000 slr who sneer at the $1500 guys, and full format people who laugh at the $3000 slr guys for even taking off the dust cap.
I was a shooter for a living some years back and that $1500 slr and the $3000 one with good glass, don't have the ability to GPS tag my phot -- and put int on my facebook or email it five seconds later -- like my phones camera can!
every advance is good news. most images shot by individuals that are SEEN by others nowadays are shot on cell phones. All those pictures sitting on your (and my) unconnected cameras 32gb card by be noiseless, but they also by their nature obscure.
I think all the developments in connected smartphone cameras are very good news
Would a tiny noisy sensor benefit more from DSLR lens? Try to attach it and see if it does ;)