Samsung Galaxy M31 has 64MP, 6,000mAh, AMOLED for £245

[3dcandy]

Phil on the ball as usual...

[philehidiot]

Phil on the ball as usual...

It has been a tough day. Finally completed Portal 2. Bought it as soon as it came out.

SPAAAAAACE.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

It's all very well Samsung pushing up the camera sensor pixel count up and up but, there's no chance the lens will be capable of resolving enough detail. on a tiny sensor, to come anywhere near fully utilising the sensor's potential resolution.

You know (like all newer sensors) they use pixel binning don't you?

The point still stands though....

Pixel binning is another way to get past poor sensor/lens resolution....

...

Cat - the pixel binning is done on the sensor....
It's a quick and dirty and fairly cheap way to get round various issues as you said and as it's done on the sensor you have less to worry about reading all that data as you have said. Read up about ISOCELL from Samsung for example. Apple and Google have shied away from having larger mp sensors for many reasons a big one not touched upon is that they don't have expandable storage unlike Samsung and the others. You also have a marketing way of saying more megapixels is better
What you have said is true - but all these people are costing the sensors and lenses down. Apple for example are well known for screwing the price of components including lens' and sensors way way down...
I have generalised A LOT. DSLR sensors are also not going for much higher mp as the images size starts to become an issue (filesize). Sony have also said that demand for larger size sensors has dramatically fallen in recent years and that 80% of their business is cheap small sensors paired with cheap lenses. The phones that emphasis on cameras have nearly all failed dramatically. DSLR sales are down huge amounts. Mirrorless appears the only way it is going...
Photographers tend to stick with things longer and longer. I make music and that and photography are the strangest things where opinions are concerned with all musicians and photographers I've come across have pretty polarising opinions on kit. DSLR's are falling out of favour for many as a mirrorless is just lighter and easier to carry around with the results being "good enough"

Dude,it's still reading out from each photodetector. You are literally going into a moan about dSLRs,etc.

The fact is someone made a correct statement about the lenses,and you started adding stuff about pixel binning...the original point still stands.

My phone takes pictures.

Phil on the ball as usual...

It has been a tough day. Finally completed Portal 2. Bought it as soon as it came out.

SPAAAAAACE.

[philehidiot]

To contribute to the actual (off topic) thread...

(D)SLRs used to be a serious enthusiast / professional only jobbie. All those sales of (relatively) cheapo DSLRs weren't to this market, they were to casual hobbyists and to people who loved the full auto mode but wanted decent image quality. It was inevitable that this market would collapse when something smaller / more practical came out. I loved my DSLR but it cost a grand for the body alone and a half decent lens was £450. I didn't get enough use out of it for a few reasons, so I'm not going to replace it now it has passed on.

I will not be buying a phone to try and do what I used to do with my DSLR. It's not just a pixel count or optics issue. You can not replicate the beauty of the dynamic range offered by a decent large sensor on a phone, which always tries to get punchy images, often with saturation cranked up so people go "oooh". Many of these people who want a punchy photo for little effort and the chance to see it on a decent, punchy display immediately and flatter themselves with "look what I can do with a phone" will be satisfied with these expensive phones. The convenience and number of point and click options with high end phones is going to attract those casual photographers who really never needed (or wanted) the flexibility of a DSLR. They just want a good picture they can go "ooh" at.

I expect DSLRs will go back to being silly expensive with expensive lenses as these cheapo kit things are dropped in favour of expensive phones with a million lenses and these smaller form factor things.

That's my off-topic ramble over with.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

If people look at actual SLR sales during the film days,they were actually much lower than current sales,and it used to be as long as a decade between Nikon(for example) launching their new,high end bodies.

DSLR sales skyrocketed when digital became affordable,and even now,dSLR and mirrorless sales are still higher than film SLR sales during the 1990s. But the fact is a 6 year old dSLR is still good enough to make a decent image,as the limiting factor is always the optics. Even film is starting to see a resurgence as people want a more hands-on experience.Most people using kit lenses won't get the most out of many SLRs in the first place,and unlike phones they don't break so easily. But even then a lot of casual photographers who used film compacts,used dreadful film and bad processing,so why moving to a digital compact was such a revolution in image quality for many.

But what compacts did wrong,was bump up MP,etc so image quality actually started to get worse and worse in many metrics,ie,excessive noise,poor DR,soft images,etc. This drove more casuals to dSLRs as these were better,but they were bulky. Now phones have along with free cameras,and share on social media,so one has to ask what many of these high end phones offer the end user.

But what I have an issue is with the expensive high end phones,which are holding back on technology on purpose to drip out the next update. In the past top end phones had the best technology you could get away with.

However,the problem is phone companies are making exactly the same mistakes,that the big companies made with compacts 10 to 15 years ago. They bumped up MP,used lenses which were not the best,added bells and whistles,and tried the route of overprocessing the images. All this was done to save money,but if you listened to all the marketing they were reinventing the wheel. I told many of you years ago,periscope lenses would make sense for telephoto lenses,because it wasn't such a big deal. They were in compacts I used even in 2002~2004. Pixel binning is an ancient technique too which was used on cheap cameras. These are things they artificially held back on to ripoff smartphone customers.

I am amazed when people think any of these things are a big deal on a £1200 phone,when it should be doable on phones 1/3 the price of that. The technology is not new. The use of different colour filters over standard Bayer types - again not new.
These are still black and white sensors.

Who has pushed many of these innovations?? Chinese companies with lower margins and less R and D budgets - I told you this would happen years ago. Samsung and Apple have overinflated their margins and dripping technology in small bits,so other companies have caught up or exceeded them in many ways,as I thought they would a few years ago.

I also said people will keep phones longer and longer,as companies didn't bother to innovate in image quality,features,etc - it's happening right now. If Huawei wasn't unfairly targetted Samsung would be in deeper crap right now. I know so many people saying how great the phones were for the price,and how great the photos were against similarly priced Samsung and Apple phones which cost more.

What I also have a big issue is with the frankly crap hardware which too many of these £1200 phones use. I can literally spend £200 on a phone,and I can get all the acceptable snapshot quality I need for social media,and postcard sized prints,and also have a proper dSLR/mirrorless setup,which will last me years.

If they want to charge £1200 for phones,they better get off their arse and innovate,as soon people will realise that cheap phone will probably be good enough,and high end phone sales will also collapse.

Yet the biggest adverts for the new phones is how great their cameras are!

These companies are just conning everyone with cheap tat,dressed up in more marketing.

Even the Samsung M31 is more a response to the intense fight Samsung is having in Asia with Chinese companies. It was launched in India before the UK.

Its only when you see how much competition they have worldwide in cheaper markets,why they have kicked dragging and kicking into actually trying to improve. I still remember the shock seeing the specifications of some of the cheaper phones abroad a few years ago and they were far better than the UK. I told you they would have a massive impact over time.

Edit!!

Also more of the marketing crap - I saw one company boast it had a single glass element in it's smartphone lens with a slightly larger F number,and boasted it let more light through,etc. It was like they wanted a pat on the back for the "innovation" when there were webcams with glass elenents in their lenses.Everyone was repeating the marketing saying how revolutionary it was.

They used a crapper sensor,and I told people it would not make it better,and the reviews just confirmed what I said,as image quality got worse.

Same things they did with compacts,10 to 15 years ago. The same deja vue. Marketing over substance.

[philehidiot]

I HATE THE WORLD

You're right about the compacts, it reminded me of the power phase race on mobos many years ago. It was a number that got traction and was easy to convey in marketing. My £1K DSLR was 6MP when cameras were at least 8MP and many >10MP. There are so many more important things than just the number and when you get into the smaller sensors the high MP count can become a problem. I was astonished at how poor images from casual compacts were compared to a modern mobile phone and there is no excuse for that. All the money was put into this one metric which was supposedly an indicator of quality. I remember also the HTC M7 which was using way larger pixel sizes in the sensors but the MP count of the photos was only 4MP. In order to compete on marketing they didn't mention the MP count but had some silly branding for it. The camera quality wasn't bad but you couldn't do much zooming.

I really like where Apple have gone with their SE model this year. One decent camera, fast phone, no silly frills. Problem is it's Apple and I have a passionate loathing for them due to how they've treated me in the past as a customer.

I will be keeping a close eye on this model for reviews. It has nearly everything I want and the only thing I will miss is OIS (used to be essential for my steroid induced shakey shakes but I'm now medicated even more so I can actually hold the phone straight). I look at reviews of these phone cameras and they go on about chromatic abberation from cheap lenses and lack of depth here and there.... I can never spot ANY of it from the previews (aside from white balance, etc) and have to go to the full size photos to see this stuff. I have to ask, how many people use a mobile phone to make A4/A3 prints or view the image at full size? And if you are wanting to do this, hows about not spending £1200 on a phone camera system and doing it properly?

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

You're right about the compacts, it reminded me of the power phase race on mobos many years ago. It was a number that got traction and was easy to convey in marketing. My £1K DSLR was 6MP when cameras were at least 8MP and many >10MP. There are so many more important things than just the number and when you get into the smaller sensors the high MP count can become a problem. I was astonished at how poor images from casual compacts were compared to a modern mobile phone and there is no excuse for that. All the money was put into this one metric which was supposedly an indicator of quality. I remember also the HTC M7 which was using way larger pixel sizes in the sensors but the MP count of the photos was only 4MP. In order to compete on marketing they didn't mention the MP count but had some silly branding for it. The camera quality wasn't bad but you couldn't do much zooming.

I really like where Apple have gone with their SE model this year. One decent camera, fast phone, no silly frills. Problem is it's Apple and I have a passionate loathing for them due to how they've treated me in the past as a customer.

I will be keeping a close eye on this model for reviews. It has nearly everything I want and the only thing I will miss is OIS (used to be essential for my steroid induced shakey shakes but I'm now medicated even more so I can actually hold the phone straight). I look at reviews of these phone cameras and they go on about chromatic abberation from cheap lenses and lack of depth here and there.... I can never spot ANY of it from the previews (aside from white balance, etc) and have to go to the full size photos to see this stuff. I have to ask, how many people use a mobile phone to make A4/A3 prints or view the image at full size? And if you are wanting to do this, hows about not spending £1200 on a phone camera system and doing it properly?

Because its driven by marketing and accountants. Its also why I think the dedicated camera companies got walloped by smartphones. They just prodded and rebadged the mainstream cameras,but didn't improve image quality. Then the smartphone companies got close enough,and then they were screwed - the biggest decline in their sales was compacts. If they had bothered to push better technology earlier,they might have retained sales for longer.

A lot of these smartphones for years,used to push photography as the biggest feature,then you looked at the cost difference between a mainstream model and a highend model camera ,and it was literally £20~£30 for a doubling or tripling of price. It took Huawei to really push things for them to start spending more as the P10 and P20 took risks - the ironic thing is Huawei used companies like Leica,etc to help them. But even now a $1000 to $1200 phone has $70 to $100 of cameras,so each camera is still very cheap. So if there is a cheaper smartphone with less cameras,the cost difference again might not be high either. It wouldn't surprise me if they artificially gimp processing on cheaper models,to differentiate from the expensive ones.

Also as I mentioned the M31 was launched in India first,so I would go on GSMArena and look at some of the Chinese rivals - Xiaomi,Redmi and Oppo are available in Europe for example. A number of these can be flashed with your own Android distro if you want to go that way. Many use standard Qualcomm chipsets.

If you don't mind a refurbished phone,and don't need expandable storage:
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/362777968480

Edit!!

The M31 has been reviewed:
https://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_gal...eview-2070.php

The iPhone was reviewed,but AT had some lens issues,so I don't know if the lense is a poor design,or they got a bad example,but its a solid phone.

[DanceswithUnix]

My phone takes pictures.

Of cats I hope.

I do wonder how may MP you need for a cat photo. Specially when 20MP is taken up with a big blurry thumb.

What I really want is a sensor activated alert in the camera software so when people are taking portrait photos it tells them they are doing it wrong.

[Dec]

Actually seems pretty decent for the price might look into getting one.

[philehidiot]

Of cats I hope.

I do wonder how may MP you need for a cat photo. Specially when 20MP is taken up with a big blurry thumb.

What I really want is a sensor activated alert in the camera software so when people are taking portrait photos it tells them they are doing it wrong.

Dogs.

One of my first photos with my S8 was of a dog close up and the bokeh was beautiful and the shot mindblowing for a phone. Then I realised they'd taken the stuff that makes a "punchy" photo and just turned the sliders up in post processing. What I took was pure luck as I was just firing away at the dog but that's one of the beautiful things about smartphone photography for the masses - it's click and go.

I was watching a presentation from an infosec conference where someone was upset about the demise of real "hackers" who understood things on a low level and found exploits at that level and the rise of those who just run the scripts and go "yay, look how skillful I am!". We've always had script kiddies in the computing community but it's society in general being represented. Everyone wants to press the button and for things to happen in their favour. They don't want to learn how things work and put the real effort into doing it. There's no doubt that'll get you places as assessment of your skills is based on the average and if the average is point and click, why bother? Very often standing out with your understanding of something actually makes life harder.

It's like any other skill. You can buy a DSLR and put it on auto and get some decent shots but you'll never get close to the capability of the kit. I pick locks for fun and it's so easy to rake open locks (randomly attack the pins with shaped picks). But, when you get to harder ones you simply can not rake them. It won't work. Which is why I got so excited when I single pin picked a eurocylinder that I've been working on since last October, opening it twice in an evening. If you want to be good at something, you have got to be willing to take it to the lowest level you can and hit a solid learning curve.

[rave_alan]

The price is good, it looks better than costs, imho. 64 megapixels - more than midrange dslr - what else can a simple user wish? It will be a hit despite the low quality of images

[3dcandy]

The price is good, it looks better than costs, imho. 64 megapixels - more than midrange dslr - what else can a simple user wish? It will be a hit despite the low quality of images

It's not a 64 mp sensor - you can't get a 64 mp picture the sensor only outputs 16 mp

Lol I looked back at my reply somewhere up there. I'm blinkin all over the place.
Few things though
1 Sensors are never going to increase in a mobile, it's not what people want (Hexus doesn't count we aren't normal)
2 Lens' are never going to improve - same as sensors the size/cost/willingness isn't there
3 OIS is how they make this phone cheap. It's a £245 compared to an iphone SE 2020 at £419 or more as I wouldn't get the base model if possible because 64 gig is a bit stingy when you can't easily expand the memory. Night shot is gone too which is probably the main reason to get an iphone for me
4 - It's obviously much cheaper to have 4 sensors with different lens aperture and zoom levels than 1 decent lens with OIS
5 - the iphone SE has a pretty rubbish sensor and lens configuration. Apple has been pretty generous with the facts here. The camera is back to pretty rubbish low light pics
6 - Battery life, battery life battery life... the only person I know who has splashed out on an SE called it dire. If they take pics it's half a day before needing a charge.
7 However the iphone SE is very fast. With big bezels though. And looks quite old fashioned

[jim]

I like the fact that this camera has a phone built into it. That's a cool idea.

[philehidiot]

The iPhone SE is one I'm keeping an eye on. Anandtech did a comprehensive (although for them a short) review and I'm waiting for the camera bit to be re-run. There was some blurring and weirdness. As for the low light performance and old sensor.... I don't really care. I wouldn't buy a phone for photography. I buy a phone for a communications device and a competent camera is a secondary consideration. If the Anandtech review shows that it was a dodgy lens / AF calibration (I'm expecting the latter) that caused their poor images, then the rest will be what you'd expect for something one third to half the price of the flagships - competent but not mind blowing. I don't expect at ~£400 that it will compete with phones costing £1200. It's not necessary that it compete with them and it's not necessary that it is perfect. If you want no compromise, a mid range phone is not the place to look.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The iPhone SE is one I'm keeping an eye on. Anandtech did a comprehensive (although for them a short) review and I'm waiting for the camera bit to be re-run. There was some blurring and weirdness. As for the low light performance and old sensor.... I don't really care. I wouldn't buy a phone for photography. I buy a phone for a communications device and a competent camera is a secondary consideration. If the Anandtech review shows that it was a dodgy lens / AF calibration (I'm expecting the latter) that caused their poor images, then the rest will be what you'd expect for something one third to half the price of the flagships - competent but not mind blowing. I don't expect at ~£400 that it will compete with phones costing £1200. It's not necessary that it compete with them and it's not necessary that it is perfect. If you want no compromise, a mid range phone is not the place to look.

They did the updated review:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/15759...mples-retested

Camera is much better now. GSMArena is also in the process of doing their review:
https://www.gsmarena.com/apple_iphon...news-42935.php

It might be worth waiting a few weeks,to see if the problem is a one off,or a sign of QC issues,it has happened before with other companies.

However,you can also get the Google Pixel 3 brand new for just over £300:
https://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/goo...-black-3453420

Probably not as good as the sub £200 Pixel 3A deal which sold out,which was just for overstock from what I gathered.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Interestingly enough Sony has also stuck to a lower MP sensor for their new flagship phone:
https://www.dpreview.com/news/855080...ii-camera-tech

They go into a lot of detail regarding this.

However, Sony is deploying a different strategy to most of its direct rivals. Both rival phones mentioned above use much higher resolution sensors and pixel-binning technology to reduce noise levels and capture images with a wide dynamic range.

Sony bets on 'traditional' large 1.8µm pixels, which, according to the company, make the new sensor 50 percent more light sensitive than its predecessor and results in improved low light performance.

Sony says the conventional design of the sensor offers faster read-out speeds than the pixel-binning Quad-Bayer technology deployed in most current high-end phones. The entire sensor can be read out in 10ms versus 32ms for a 12MP image from a Quad-Bayer sensor. This allows for lower rolling shutter artifacts (if any) and lowers the risk of banding under artificial light.The sensor features 247 phase detection points.

Sony does also make a 48MP Quad Bayer sensor,but it appears for its own cameras,its prioritising usability. I was talking about readout speeds earlier,and it is 3.2X quicker. It means not only quicker AF,but quick multishot bracketing and less rolling shutter artifacts when shooting video.