Rumor: Samsung Galaxy S6 And Galaxy S6 Edge To Feature A 20MP Camera Sensor

[Guest]

Sources say that the new Galaxy S6 and Galaxy S6 Edge smartphones will feature 20MP cameras.

Rumor: Samsung Galaxy S6 And Galaxy S6 Edge To Feature A 20MP Camera Sensor : Read more

 

[djc831]

Just keep cramming more mega pixels in there, Samsung. That way dum dums will think you have a good camera. It's not just about mega pixels, fools.

 

[MasterMace]

Still waiting to see important specs - Resolution, Processor, RAM, Battery, Size.

 

[InvalidError]

Instead of increasing camera resolution like crazy, they should work on reducing pixel noise, improving sensitivity and increasing dynamic range so people can take sharper, cleaner pictures without having to filter and edit their pictures to hell and back to make them look good.

There is not much point in having a 20MP raw image if you need to reduce it to 4MP to average noise, blur and other imperfections between pixels down to a reasonable level.

 

[captaincharisma]

i just hope they get rid of that band-aid looking leather back

 

[soldier44]

Samsung haters make me lol. Get a life. Stick with your outdated Apple tech and 8mp camera that you seem to love so much. My Note 4 takes awesome pics with a 16mp camera.

 

[dstarr3]

Even professional photographers rarely need 20mp. Your average Instagrammer certainly has no use for that kind of resolution, either. Just pointless, pointless, pointless, just so the spec sheet has bigger numbers.

 

[InvalidError]

Samsung haters make me lol. Get a life. Stick with your outdated Apple tech and 8mp camera that you seem to love so much. My Note 4 takes awesome pics with a 16mp camera.

If that was intended for me, I do not own any Apple or Samsung products. When I said "they," I meant all camera sensor manufacturers and integrators thereof.

The majority of cameras out there are horrible at highlights or shadows depending on exposure settings, often both at the same time for cheaper cameras.

I would like to see a 10-16MP camera that can do low-noise HDR in a single exposure without the need for extensive computational photography or editing to produce good image quality - images that still look good when you zoom into the raw image down to 1:1 on a 24" display instead of a 5" phone or 3" stand-alone camera's review display.

 

[alextheblue]

Instead of increasing camera resolution like crazy, they should work on reducing pixel noise, improving sensitivity and increasing dynamic range so people can take sharper, cleaner pictures

Assuming the rumor is true, it is possible they're doing more than just increasing the resolution. The rumor also says they're adding OIS which is well overdue. More pixels can be good if done correctly with other upgrades. You can't determine the outcome and condemn them just because they're increasing the resolution. The final result may well be a decent improvement over the S5. We won't know for certain until we see it tested.

 

[SnakeV943]

Instead of increasing camera resolution like crazy, they should work on reducing pixel noise, improving sensitivity and increasing dynamic range so people can take sharper, cleaner pictures without having to filter and edit their pictures to hell and back to make them look good.

There is not much point in having a 20MP raw image if you need to reduce it to 4MP to average noise, blur and other imperfections between pixels down to a reasonable level.

This is why iPhone's have always had the best picture quality of any phone camera and they do it with lower megapixels....why? CCD sensor...

It's ALL BS marketing.... just like Samsung touting it's 8 core processor...lol Too bad Apple's OPTIMIZED dual core runs circles around. Apple is posting record profits while Samsung's are down 40%.... Samsung will never learn.

 

[aldaia]

Megapixels have nothing to do with picture quality

Yes and no. My largely outdated DSLR has half the pixels of my phone, yet it takes way better pictures (than my phone and any other existing phone). Reason: the optics. Newer DSLRs with more megapixels take better pictures using the same optics, so number of pixels plays a role, provided that the optics are up to the task.

it's the CCD sensor.

BS! There must be a reason why professional full frame DSLRs from both Cannon and Nikon use CMOS sensors instead of CCD.

Hence why the iPhone 6+ 8MP takes better pictures than your 16MP Note 4's.

More BS! I quote from Toms Hardware review "while the iPhone camera is still quite good, it’s no longer the best. Image quality suffers primarily from a lack of resolution for both the front and rear cameras, resulting in pictures that can’t match the sharpness and detail shown by competitors like the Note 4"

Watch the language. - G

 

[gggplaya]

Adding RAW support basically trumps anything apple can do.

 

[gggplaya]

Megapixels have nothing to do with picture quality

Yes and no. My largely outdated DSLR has half the pixels of my phone, yet it takes way better pictures (than my phone and any other existing phone). Reason: the optics. Newer DSLRs with more megapixels take better pictures using the same optics, so number of pixels plays a role, provided that the optics are up to the task.

it's the CCD sensor.

BS! There must be a reason why professional full frame DSLRs from both Cannon and Nikon use CMOS sensors instead of CCD.

Hence why the iPhone 6+ 8MP takes better pictures than your 16MP Note 4's.

More BS! I quote from Toms Hardware review "while the iPhone camera is still quite good, it’s no longer the best. Image quality suffers primarily from a lack of resolution for both the front and rear cameras, resulting in pictures that can’t match the sharpness and detail shown by competitors like the Note 4"

CCD sensors consume too much power, newer CMOS sensor consume less power and are now more efficient at absorbing light. In the world of professional photography, power consumption takes a back seat to image quality. So if CCD was truly better, they would still be using CCD sensors. But they don't, it's all CMOS now, and in particular shifting to backside illuminated CMOS.

I also don't agree with you in your statements that resolution plays a role in picture quality. Yes, when you're blowing things up to large sizes, but most people don't do that. Pictures stay on facebook, or on 5x7 paper. Pixel peeping will always show an advantage to higher resolution pictures, but when compresses to normal size, those extra pixels and detail get averaged down to the same as a lower resolution photo. Optics plays a large part in percieved megapixels. Lenses on phones don't have the optical quality to resolve such high resolution images, so even if you put a 20mp sensor on it, it's still going to look like 8mp. The newly announced canon 50MP 5Ds/r have impressive spec. But people already know that unless you have $2000 glass in front of it, you will only be able to resolve up to about 25-40mp of it.

My 8MP Canon Rebel XT from like 10 years ago takes way better pictures than any smartphone, images look sharper, and colors look more vibrant, and noise is significantly more well controlled. Of course, i also have newer DLSR's as well including my newest Canon 6D. All of which look worlds apart better than any smartphone.

 

[InvalidError]

InvalidError: I completely agree with you. However, more MP gives us more headroom for post processing.

At the expense of having noisier and less sensitive pixels than you would have by sticking with the larger cell size. You may have more pixels but they are of lesser quality than they could have been, so you may end up with worse overall picture quality.

For example, Canon's 330HS (which I own) is a 12MP point-and-click camera that was one of the best-in-class cameras of its year. The 340HS that followed (which I considered buying) is a 16MP camera but failed to get much praise from anyone who reviewed it because its pictures are noticeably noisier than the 330HS.

More MPs is not always better.

With phones and tablets, there is also the additional challenge of cramming a whole optics stack of almost pinhole lens in less than 5mm.

 

[InvalidError]

Also, with mirrorless DSLR cameras available and modern smart phones, point and shoot cameras are pretty much a moot point in 2015 going forward.

What is the cheapest smartphone that can compete with a decent $100-120 point-and-shoot camera like the 330HS? Probably over $500. My 330HS goes from off to ready to shoot in less than three seconds - practically ready to go between the time I pick it up (and turn it on) and the time I am in position to shoot. Unlocking my phone or tablet so I can start the photo app and take a picture takes over ten seconds and I still need to point it at whatever I want to shoot, assuming I still have something to shoot.

There might be "no point" to P&S cameras for people with high-end phones or tablets who mostly use it for convenience (that's kind of the main reason these things have cameras - a relatively inexpensive extra to help inflate prices since all the back-end processing, review and storage of a camera is already there) but for people who do not care about high-end tablets and phones (like me) or may sit down for hours of detail photography (also like me), having separate cameras is much cheaper and more convenient. For half of the photography I do, I would not dare use a $500+ device due to how close the lens may get to sharp or hard stuff in the process of getting the picture I want. A DSLR lens would not even fit in many of those spots, such as between heatsinks to get part numbers I cannot read by eye.

The popularity of point-and-shoot cameras might be fading but they can still be incredibly useful and valuable to some people.

 

[gggplaya]

InvalidError: I completely agree with you. However, more MP gives us more headroom for post processing.

At the expense of having noisier and less sensitive pixels than you would have by sticking with the larger cell size. You may have more pixels but they are of lesser quality than they could have been, so you may end up with worse overall picture quality.

For example, Canon's 330HS (which I own) is a 12MP point-and-click camera that was one of the best-in-class cameras of its year. The 340HS that followed (which I considered buying) is a 16MP camera but failed to get much praise from anyone who reviewed it because its pictures are noticeably noisier than the 330HS.

More MPs is not always better.

With phones and tablets, there is also the additional challenge of cramming a whole optics stack of almost pinhole lens in less than 5mm.

I understand the plight that more MP isn't always better. But, this hasn't typically been the case for flapship smartphones from one generation to the next. Also, with mirrorless DSLR cameras available and modern smart phones, point and shoot cameras are pretty much a moot point in 2015 going forward.

The only difference between a mirrorless DSLR and a point and shoot is just the fact that you can attach different lenses. They can make point and shoots with larger sensors, but generally at those prices, people want the option of switching lenses, and cameras go up in size. It's also technically incorrect to call a mirrorless DSLR a DSLR, because there is no mirror to relect up to an optical viewfinder.

But i disagree, when the android phones were jumping up to 8-13mp, even the flagship devices, the iphone 4 was announced with a 5 megapixel camera. Apple took alot of crap for it until it was released and people compared photos. The iphone 4 simply took much better photos than anything else on the market.

 

[Draculav2]

Im definitely looking forward towards this Galaxy S6

 

[InvalidError]

The only difference between a mirrorless DSLR and a point and shoot is just the fact that you can attach different lenses.

And usually a crapload of manual settings. overrides, physical controls over many parameters, etc.

The two most frustrating things on my 330HS for the sort of photography I do are the lack of manual focus and manual exposure settings. The limited dynamic range can also be annoying but in most cases, I can get away with sacrificing either highlights or shadows as long as it makes the point of the picture stand out.

 

[alextheblue]

My 330HS goes from off to ready to shoot in less than three seconds - practically ready to go between the time I pick it up (and turn it on) and the time I am in position to shoot. Unlocking my phone or tablet so I can start the photo app and take a picture takes over ten seconds and I still need to point it at whatever I want to shoot, assuming I still have something to shoot.

I can unlock my Lumia and have it ready to shoot a bit faster than your 330HS can power on and start snapping. A hard press of the dedicated two-step shutter button unlocks the phone and loads the default camera app (Lumia Camera) so it's ready to shoot in a flash. I can bring the phone up and start pointing it while pressing the shutter button all in one go. I don't need to touch the display or look at the phone at all. 10 seconds? Yeah if my phone took that long, I might see a use for a P&S too.

 

[fabienio1]

it will probably not be camera as good as those of Sony because Sony has more experience in the field,samsung should equip the galaxy s6 with a sony camera as she did with the samsung galaxy note 4 until she master better the technology