LG V30 smartphone will boast "largest aperture, clearest lens"

[HEXUS]

It sports the world's first f/1.6 dual lens camera in a smartphone. Launches 31st August.

Read more.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

So still a tiny sensor then??

[3dcandy]

Well obviously. Always will be a tiny sensor, all the phones with big sensors have bombed

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Seems to have a tiny 1/3.06 sensor which is smaller than what is found in a £100 compact and smaller than average than even the one in budget phones like a Moto G.

What another overpriced pile of crap.

A "glass lens" - BAHAHAHA! My webcam has a glass lens and probably a similar sized sensor. A webcam and that was released years ago.

Plastic is also badddddddddd and not professional since SLR lenses don't use moulded plastic elements at all. LMAO.

My 24 year old Nikon 28-70mm which I still use was the first mass produced lens to use plastic aspherical elements. Before that they had to be ground manually so were only found in custom lenses like the Noct Nikkor.

So basically they found a way to cost cut on the sensor by using a slightly larger aperture,which is all relative since it's still probably smaller than the competing phones.

Then to cover up their sins try to use PR to advertise it had a feature.

These companies are making a mockery of their customers.

Spend enough on PR and people will buy into anything nowadays.

Also LG diagram - wow!

So LG has not talked about the singularity they plonked after the lens??

[3dcandy]

Nope the aperture is the largest on a major phone. For example the S8 is f1.7. Smaller numbers are larger apertures remember. It's all about balancing aperture v size and cost. For most people a decent smartphone camera is one of the things they "require" but they don't care much about how it gets there. They then also want a thin light phone which impacts battery life and the size of the sensor and lens...

[peterb]

Don't knock it, this will be perfect for posting slightly out of focus kitten pictures on Facebook.

[3dcandy]

oh and the glass lens... it does make a difference, but yes it's a lot of pr to say they have the best camera

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Nope the aperture is the largest on a major phone. For example the S8 is f1.7. Smaller numbers are larger apertures remember. It's all about balancing aperture v size and cost. For most people a decent smartphone camera is one of the things they "require" but they don't care much about how it gets there. They then also want a thin light phone which impacts battery life and the size of the sensor and lens...

Nope - do you even understand what you are posting here?

They have dropped the sensor size over competing phones so a slightly larger aperture is not going to help.

Stop excuse making for those companies,as they are trying a fast one which will only hurt you as a consumer.

They are companies only worried about their bottom line.

A lot of these modules can be as cheap as £10 to £20.

It's cheaper for then to drop sensor size and put a slightly larger aperture lens in.

This is a cost reduction marketed as a feature.

Edit!!

See how their PR lies hides the fact they dropped the sensor size over the V20.

The V20 had a 1/2.6" sensor and this has a smaller 1/3.06" one.

The V20 selfie camera is 1/3.2" by comparison.

These are moving to what you find in webcams.

If they want to compete with competitors unless they have dropped MP count,the photo detector area will be smaller,hence they will be less sensitive.

To compensate for that you can try to get more light onto the sensor. Now understand why they are bigging up the lens.

[3dcandy]

But it's not that simple. They want low light performance easiest way to get that is to up the aperture as it will simply let more light in. Sensor size isn't always the issue, you can make the actual pixels larger and have less of them to compensate. Have a better lens as you have already said and the phone has to correct less distortion. Again I'll say that it's a balancing act. You may think it's cost reduction but I bet it's not as extreme as you seem to believe. They have also implemented both optical and electronic image stabilisation and laser focusing into the camera setup which is aimed at helping lowlight photos. I have no love for LG per se but don't hate them either

[snedger]

Nice if it improves low light snapping on a phone - will wait for the reviews.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

But it's not that simple. They want low light performance easiest way to get that is to up the aperture as it will simply let more light in. Sensor size isn't always the issue, you can make the actual pixels larger and have less of them to compensate. Have a better lens as you have already said and the phone has to correct less distortion. Again I'll say that it's a balancing act. You may think it's cost reduction but I bet it's not as extreme as you seem to believe. They have also implemented both optical and electronic image stabilisation and laser focusing into the camera setup which is aimed at helping lowlight photos. I have no love for LG per se but don't hate them either

Dude,its a cost reduction,and that is why you use smaller sensors and remember aperture is relative to sensor size and focal length. If you take an extreme example a F2.0 lens on a 35MM lens for my 35mm frame camera is simply a much bigger physical aperture than say F2.0 on my old Canon S95 compact. Also regarding distortion,many modern dSLR/mirrorless lenses are built with distortion in the design which is electronically adjusted for,as they can make them more compact.

F1.6 on a 1/3.06" sensor vs F1.7 on a 1/2.5" sensor in the S7 does not mean the former is getting more light - the glass aspects of the lens might help,but again its not a big deal at all. Like I said dSLR/mirrorless lenses use plastic elements - aspeherical elements used to be ground down manually in glass,but 20+ years ago companies like Nikon started using hybrid elements using moulded plastic parts,and do you know that the first time OIS was implemented for a consumer camera was not an SLR lens?? It was the Nikon 700VR compact in 1994!!

Electronic is is just a fancy name for bumping up the ISO and doing lots of noise reduction afterwards.

My webcam uses glass elements in its lens and that was yonks ago.

Its why it annoys me so much these companies advertise things which are not innovations.

Edit!!

A comparison of sensor sizes.



Second Edit!!

I managed to find charts applicable to smart phones.



Its appreciably smaller than competing sensors from competitors. LG says the new lens will transmit 25% light(well their PR bumpf says that),so unless they really have dropped MP count,it looks more like a compensation for the smaller sensor size.

OFC,they could have always use a normal 1/2.3" sensor and this "new" lens,but that would cost more money wouldn't it??

Lets hope they have better OIS,that should win the day for them!

[3dcandy]

I'm not expecting too much to be fair but we shall see. As said a smaller sensor size will increase chromatic noise for starters. Samsung et al have kinda standardised on a 12 mp sensor because that can do 4k video nicely with large bright light receptors. The advances are now in processing, lenses and autofocus mechanisms and then the optical stabilisation systems that many are going for.

[3dcandy]

I bet my bottom dollar it's not cost reduction. More likely to be because they can either get more battery in or something else and reduce bezel size as that is the current fashion. It's like cutting 3.5mm headphone sockets to reduce the bezels by like .1 mm. Cut the sensor size and you can make the phone smaller. They have reduced the size of the whole optical assembly and that is never a good thing really

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I simply don't understand why they couldn't move to even a 1/1.7" sensor or even a 1/2.3" one,and I don't think it is rocket science for them to engineer lenses either with the advances in high refractive index plastics and optical glass in the last few decades - these companies make billions and they could easily do this is if they wanted to. These sensors are shipped in massive volume - more than for traditional cameras,so they must be getting fantastic discounts.

It annoys me when they advertise "glass" as a big innovation in a lens. Its all about cutting BOM,so they can eke out a few more USD in profits - this like what PC companies do by advertising uber leet performance and then plonking in the cheapest RAM,etc they can get away with. Smartphones are not cheap £100 thingies - they can be as high as £600 to £700 with a very limited lifespan for most people,and when you see the margins companies are making you can kind of tell they are really not trying.

It wouldn't be so bad if they cameras where just one part of a smartphone - they are often advertised as the defining feature of them,and yet if you look at the BOM,they are often not even the most expensive part.

Its almost like they are using the same common parts bins from suppliers!

[3dcandy]

I simply don't understand why they couldn't move to even a 1/1.7" sensor or even a 1/2.3" one,and I don't think it is rocket science for them to engineer lenses either with the advances in high refractive index plastics and optical glass in the last few decades - these companies make billions and they could easily do this is if they wanted to. These sensors are shipped in massive volume - more than for traditional cameras,so they must be getting fantastic discounts.

It annoys me when they advertise "glass" as a big innovation in a lens. Its all about cutting BOM,so they can eke out a few more USD in profits - this like what PC companies do by advertising uber leet performance and then plonking in the cheapest RAM,etc they can get away with. Smartphones are not cheap £100 thingies - they can be as high as £600 to £700 with a very limited lifespan for most people,and when you see the margins companies are making you can kind of tell they are really not trying.

It wouldn't be so bad if they cameras where just one part of a smartphone - they are often advertised as the defining feature of them,and yet if you look at the BOM,they are often not even the most expensive part.

Its almost like they are using the same common parts bins from suppliers!

Size. End of. If they put a sensor that size in a smartphone something else would have to make room, usually battery or have a big hump which people hate as it won't sit on a table or anything. Plus with the on going fascination with slim phones with tiny bezels (which is STILL what people want) it's not going to happen. Most sensors are made by Sony, they also choose the sizes. Yes from a parts bin but they have made a big push in the LG parts bin to reduce the optical assembly size so it must be for something else to fit in with the room they have in the design

[3dcandy]

Oh and just to add - can you remember when people tried to make "proper" camera phones? They never sold and were all reduced massively in price to shift them. People want a good camera but usually only to stick the videos/pics on facebook where it kills any quality they had to begin with