YUKI93, 07 Nov 2021No need for a native macro camera since it can be integrated inside the ultra-wide camera as a … moreI agree, in theory, but the macro on my Zenfone 8 isn’t that great – it can’t be as close as the Huawei P40 Pro + I had before it. AF on the Z8 just isn’t great.
geek-a-contra, 8 hours agobokeh stuff. except those who are trying to get artistic portraits, how many of you actually want … moreYes, I hate forced bokeh – I want to take photos that clearly show people and the background they are in.
Sorry but the polls are really stupid, all the right options are missing.
There are much better alternatives than putting a 5Mp sensor or using Ultra-Wide for Macro.
For Portrait, we can either have:
* A dedicated camera, 12Mp or more, Portrait, with limited depth of field, potentially with a higher focal length than Wide, in fact 2x magnification would be better.
* Use one of the 12Mp + sensors already present, usually using Ultra-Wide to take a wide portrait, having a corresponding resolution to allow more precision to process details, such as hair and other edges that are often spoiled by the digital bokeh of 2Mp or 5Mp or ToF depth sensors.
* Use a telephoto or zoom (continuously variable focal length) camera that can reduce its depth of field enough to achieve true background blur.
Ditto for the Macro:
* Dedicated, 12Mp or more, same as Portrait but with a minimum near focus distance, and also “greater than Wide” magnification.
And there are solutions to have both at the same time:
* Combine it with the dedicated portrait which is already set for short distances, has a high focal length and shallow depth of field, which is exactly what you want for a macro (Ultra-Wide is literally the worst lens type for a macro), it only needs to be able to focus closer than a single portrait lens.
* Combine it with Telephoto or Zoom, with deep focus control (possibility to focus very close and get shallow depth of field).
Ideally, you would want a phone with:
* Wide + Ultra-Wide + Telephoto which uses UW for Bokeh and Telephoto for Macro, or even better Telephoto for both.
* Wide + Ultra-Large + Telephoto + Dedicated combined macro and portrait sensor.
* Ultra-Wide + Zoom which can do everything else.
* Zoom (from ultra-wide to wide) + Zoom (wide to telephoto) with the latter having macro and portrait capabilities.
But all this 2Mp, 5Mp and Ultra-Wide nonsense for Macro are the worst possibilities.
Depth information can be acquired using 2 cameras, the primary camera and a secondary camera. It doesn’t matter which MP is supported by the second camera.
A dedicated macro camera is sometimes really useful but should at least take clear photos.
I just wish we would go back to normal camera phones, just to keep the cost of phones down, it might make your phone look Premium, but the phone companies really know they don’t offer high quality cameras. first class, so why put different types of camera phones nowadays, Nokia used to offer the best camera phones with Carl Zeiss on their phones, and they never messed up offering different types, so why not just one premium camera, the buyer knows he can trust
bokeh stuff. Except for those who are trying to get artistic portraits, how many of you actually want bokeh-free photos when traveling and taking pictures of your family against an interesting and memorable background? I bet the number is hundreds to 1 for people who don’t choose bokeh.
FarFan, 9 hours agoI still think that in the future only one top sensor will be used for all scenarios, one … moreExactly.
I never understood why the manufacturers chose different sensors for the canera anyway.
Having the same sensor would mean a lot less tuning work as they could use the exact same algorithm and color profile for the main and ultra wide zoom.
And it would look more like a real camera that does an optical zoom.
I still think that in the future a single top sensor will be used for all scenarios, as well as the selfie camera.
Whatever ? If it’s functional, I’ll take it.
The macro camera needs to be over 5MP, however, otherwise you lose that crisp image you get from ridiculous close-ups. Plus, a wide focal range isn’t “better.” A closer focus means you can get really detailed photos of extremely fine detail.
Those ten-cent sensors are just there to trick customers. They don’t really have any use.
- Kg @
Can we also talk about all the obnoxious piercing selfie cameras? As the punch holes in the screen are annoying and people keep pushing for a camera under the screen when an already existing method already exists. Which consists of having a few small glasses on top and putting the camera in there.
why do you need a depth sensor? only one camera with software optimization is enough for portraits.google pixel3 and samsung s9 did this in 2018. for best results a 3d ToF sensor can be added at extra cost.
khellandros66, 16 hours agoGive me a 1 / 1.54 “12mp 2.4um main F1.7, a 1 / 1.7” 12mp 1.8um Ultrawide “gimbaled” … more12MP 2.4 microns is 1 / 1.3 “.
Not 1 / 1.54 “.
Everyone wants to look premium. So, don’t expect this trend to change anytime soon.
Why don’t companies just make “camera phones” and smartphones? I don’t care how many MPs I have, extra wide, narrow, ass or whatever. I just want something that does decent photos. IF I WANTED a smartphone that takes great professional photos, I would have bought a phone with over 99 cameras.
Simple smartphone users don’t care about beautiful photos, just decent with 1 camera is enough.
- Wayne morellini
- 7 tm
Let’s be realistic.
– A 3D sensor that can be used as a microscope / macro.
– 48mp + macros.
Liquid lens technology can achieve very good results. So, one liquid lens array to do it all in one sensor, variable focus, variable aperture, variable zoom (with liquid lenses it may look more like a variation between a primary lens array), macromicroscope configurations, from a single 48mp + sensor. The 4-phase AF could be used as a kind of DOF detector.
It would probably be a smaller lens module than having 4+ sensors.
Have a nice day.
On, 22 hours agoWho the hell even uses macrosMacrophotographers.
just integrate the macro with UWA and AF, is it difficult ???
On, 22 hours agoWho the hell even uses macrosme, I need to take pictures on small electronic parts, most of the time the normal camera could not capture the code of the parts
I prefer three Tele Wide and Ultra Wide cameras no depth, I think Iphone Sam and others have done this, it’s great until 2050 so I don’t know what will happen with the PTZ cameras.
yes if you like this comment. thumbs up.