Samsung's next trick in fighting large sensors - Motorola phone with 200MP camera leak

[williamcll]

It was planned a year ago and originally teased back in November that Samsung was working on a 200MP camera for mobiles. The first candidate to utilize this may be motorola, and it certainly look the part. Also interesting to see a 125 Watt charger.

Quotes

Quote

Last month we heard about an upcoming Motorola flagship set to debut Samsung’s 200MP ISOCELL HP1 camera sensor and Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 Plus chipset and we finally have our first look at the device. The folks over at WinFuture have obtained an official looking image of the Motorola Frontier 22 alongside more confirmation of its key specs.

 

My thoughts

125W? looks like if I were to get this phone I'm going to waste even more of my drawers to put in another high power charger since this is certainly not USB-PD but some proprietary charging standard. No idea how well the camera actually performs since moto was never really known for good image qualities.

 

Sources

https://winfuture.de/news,127697.html

https://www.gsmarena.com/motorola_frontier_design_and_specs_leak-news-52850.php

[WhitetailAni]

How big will these photos be?

12MP on my 6S/7 are already about 1.5MB, assuming linear scaling (which is dumb) that's ~520MB per picture - WELL over the Discord picture upload limit.

Why??
Who needs this?!

[williamcll]

6 minutes ago, FakeKGB said:

How big will these photos be?

12MP on my 6S/7 are already about 1.5MB, assuming linear scaling (which is dumb) that's ~520MB per picture - WELL over the Discord picture upload limit.

Why??
Who needs this?!

Zooming in pictures would be terrific.

[WhitetailAni]

Just now, williamcll said:

Zooming in pictures would be terrific.

Ok, that's fair. Hopefully there's an option to not take pictures at 18K or whatever this ends up being.

[wanderingfool2]

55 minutes ago, FakeKGB said:

How big will these photos be?

12MP on my 6S/7 are already about 1.5MB, assuming linear scaling (which is dumb) that's ~520MB per picture - WELL over the Discord picture upload limit.

Why??
Who needs this?!

Well in practice it's more similar to a logarithmic scale (sort of) with compression...Also, if a 12MP was 1.5MB and you assume a linear scale that's actually only 25MB (200/12 * 1.5).  In practice though, the movements and lens quality will mean you can't capture perfect detail so pixels next to each other will be even more similar than in the 12MP variant...so the jpg compression algo will work a lot better on it than on 12MP.

 

With all that said, I really wish instead of a camera bump they just widened the entire phone by that amount and used that extra space for a bigger battery.  Also, the quality of the photos really seems more due to the lens and the size of the sensor anyways which aren't listed.

[Dracarris]

200MP on a phone? Sure, bro, I guess we can all throw away our DLSRs now. That will be as useless as that 100.000x zoom joke. Another flagship halo feature to show off without any real usage benefit.

[RejZoR]

Chinese brands are obsessed with big numbers and for good reason, there is tons of gullible people who buy into that BIG NUMBERS ARE BETTER crap. I see it on daily basis how these same basic people whine over iPhones because they only have 12Mpix cameras, how they only have 4GB of RAM, how they only have X mAh batteries, how they only have 6 cores etc and they entirely disregard the actual experience. They usually get oddly quiet when I mention why are iPhones then always a benchmark for entire industry despite those "small" numbers? iPhones, despite having "small" numbers always have one of highest chipset performance, one of best photos, one of smoothest experiences of use and they achieve all that with "small" numbers in spec sheets.

 

Looking just the specs tells absolutely nothing. On paper Galaxy A52 looks better than iPhone 13, but when you actually look at the results, it's anything but. It has more cores, more memory, more megapixels for camera, more mAh in battery yet it doesn't come anywhere near iPhone in any of those. You can only argue it has a 120Hz display. But with iOS's smoothness, I frankly don't give a damn if I'm still "stuck" at 60Hz. I don't jerk the settings menu up and down and orgasm while doing it. I also don't read webpages while they are scrolling, so it only really means anything if you're mobile gamer.

 

Just like with dumb graphic cards from bottom segment having 16GB of VRAM doesn't make them better than RTX 3080 with "only" 10GB, the same is with phones. Most big specs on cheaper phones mean absolutely nothing as their actual results are very luckluster in real world.

 

Who wants to bet these 200Mpix photos from Motorola will just take fuck ton of space on the phone and have mediocre quality at best?

[Blademaster91]

I wonder how well this 200MP camera works, but I'd rather just have a larger battery and a single good camera with a nice lens, cameras on phones are more than good enough these days for taking casual photos, otherwise get a dedicated mirrorless camera.

 

Also not surprised another Android topic gets turned into an iphone circlejerk.

[LAwLz]

3 hours ago, FakeKGB said:

How big will these photos be?

12MP on my 6S/7 are already about 1.5MB, assuming linear scaling (which is dumb) that's ~520MB per picture - WELL over the Discord picture upload limit.

Why??
Who needs this?!

Pictures from the 108 megapixel Galaxy S21 Ultra are around 20MB. 

I doubt these will be more than "just" 30MB or something around there. Still massive, but not that impractical.

[Blademaster91]

2 hours ago, Dracarris said:

200MP on a phone? Sure, bro, I guess we can all throw away our DLSRs now. That will be as useless as that 100.000x zoom joke. Another flagship halo feature to show off without any real usage benefit.

At least some phone makers are innovating, a 100X zoom is also impressive to have in a phone, idk why people were expecting to have the performance of a telephoto DSLR lens, but people are quick to make assumptions on this too, i'll see how it is before making judgement, though I don't really get excited for phones anymore, even cheap phones are good nowadays.

1 hour ago, RejZoR said:

Chinese brands are obsessed with big numbers and for good reason, there is tons of gullible people who buy into that BIG NUMBERS ARE BETTER crap. I see it on daily basis how these same basic people whine over iPhones because they only have 12Mpix cameras, how they only have 4GB of RAM, how they only have X mAh batteries, how they only have 6 cores etc and they entirely disregard the actual experience. They usually get oddly quiet when I mention why are iPhones then always a benchmark for entire industry despite those "small" numbers? iPhones, despite having "small" numbers always have one of highest chipset performance, one of best photos, one of smoothest experiences of use and they achieve all that with "small" numbers in spec sheets.

Well if I can get a cheap Chinese brand phone for half of what an iphone costs, yeah I care about the specs because I want the most I can get for the price.

1 hour ago, RejZoR said:

Looking just the specs tells absolutely nothing. On paper Galaxy A52 looks better than iPhone 13, but when you actually look at the results, it's anything but. It has more cores, more memory, more megapixels for camera, more mAh in battery yet it doesn't come anywhere near iPhone in any of those. You can only argue it has a 120Hz display. But with iOS's smoothness, I frankly don't give a damn if I'm still "stuck" at 60Hz. I don't jerk the settings menu up and down and orgasm while doing it. I also don't read webpages while they are scrolling, so it only really means anything if you're mobile gamer.

I take you've never used a display with a 120Hz refresh rate, the smoothness just feels so much nicer. And photo performance is really subjective, depends on what review you're looking at and how biased they are for a brand.

1 hour ago, RejZoR said:

Just like with dumb graphic cards from bottom segment having 16GB of VRAM doesn't make them better than RTX 3080 with "only" 10GB, the same is with phones. Most big specs on cheaper phones mean absolutely nothing as their actual results are very luckluster in real world.

Interesting you use Nvidia as an analogy, you shouldn't be paying more to get less, and them only putting 10GB of VRAM on the 3080 is planned obsolescence to sell you the 3080Ti or 3080 12GB later, just as getting limited specs in a phone for $1000, as games or software gets more demanding, the less VRAM becomes a limitation.

1 hour ago, RejZoR said:

Who wants to bet these 200Mpix photos from Motorola will just take fuck ton of space on the phone and have mediocre quality at best?

The image size probably won't be that large if Motorola is using the same pxiel binning as Samsung does with their phones, but sensor size, megapixels, or processing doesn't mean much unless we can have larger phones with larger lenses.

[williamcll]

2 hours ago, RejZoR said:

"small" numbers always have one of highest chipset performance

Not entirely true anymore. A15 throttles even harder than the 8G1 on games. 

[Arika]

Phones in 2027 will either be

 

 

or

 

[Mihle]

Eh, I have seen photos from my mum's 108 MP camera on her Samsung, lot of the extra pixels is a waste in 108 no mode, it doesn't look very good, if you zoom in it looks very artificial. Probably because size of sensor and the quality of the lens isn't good enough and they use lots og algorithms.

[Zodiark1593]

Soo, does diffraction just not exist anymore?

[Gamer Schnitzel]

11 hours ago, Dracarris said:

200MP on a phone? Sure, bro, I guess we can all throw away our DLSRs now. That will be as useless as that 100.000x zoom joke. Another flagship halo feature to show off without any real usage benefit.

People don't buy DSLRs for zooming or MP. They buy them because the pictures look better and photographers will continue taking pictures with them and not phones. MP literally does nothing for photo quality at this point which is why it is actually turned off by default when you use the camera. The default lense is probably going to be 16 MP and you have to press an extra button to use the high MP lens.

[Distinctly Average]

1 hour ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Soo, does diffraction just not exist anymore?

Obviously not. Nor does the fact that at 200mp the photo sites will be so small that light gathering will be blooming awful. Who needs quality when you can just have big numbers.

[RejZoR]

11 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

At least some phone makers are innovating, a 100X zoom is also impressive to have in a phone, idk why people were expecting to have the performance of a telephoto DSLR lens, but people are quick to make assumptions on this too, i'll see how it is before making judgement, though I don't really get excited for phones anymore, even cheap phones are good nowadays.

Well if I can get a cheap Chinese brand phone for half of what an iphone costs, yeah I care about the specs because I want the most I can get for the price.

I take you've never used a display with a 120Hz refresh rate, the smoothness just feels so much nicer. And photo performance is really subjective, depends on what review you're looking at and how biased they are for a brand.

Interesting you use Nvidia as an analogy, you shouldn't be paying more to get less, and them only putting 10GB of VRAM on the 3080 is planned obsolescence to sell you the 3080Ti or 3080 12GB later, just as getting limited specs in a phone for $1000, as games or software gets more demanding, the less VRAM becomes a limitation.

The image size probably won't be that large if Motorola is using the same pxiel binning as Samsung does with their phones, but sensor size, megapixels, or processing doesn't mean much unless we can have larger phones with larger lenses.

And you're already caught into "big numbers" thing from what you're saying. It costs less and has big numbers on papers, but there is no way any of the mid range phones that have bigger numbers on paper are ever better than even vanilla iPhone 13.

 

It's interesting you're brushing against NVIDIA. I just gave it as recent example. I had GTX 1080Ti with 11GB. Went to RTX 3080 with "only" 10GB and it's multitudes faster. And I've been gaming with it for a whole year. RTX 1080Ti with just mere 2GB extra was released a year later basically. And also good luck actually buying one for price I paid for mine (which was already inflated, but not much). When VRAM becomes limitation I'll probably not be using this card anymore. Also I'm not dumb, I have well balanced hardware and focus on high framerate, not big resolution on cheap 4K monitor. I'm gaming at 1440p on RTX 3080 and for that 10GB is plenty for anything I'll ever throw at it.

[RejZoR]

9 hours ago, williamcll said:

Not entirely true anymore. A15 throttles even harder than the 8G1 on games. 

Yeah, whatever, most people care about general performance more than just gaming alone. And for that Bionic chipsets stand against time way better.

[xAcid9]

Meh, "108mp mode" on my phone just look barely better compare to the default 12mp. 

[Kisai]

15 hours ago, FakeKGB said:

How big will these photos be?

12MP on my 6S/7 are already about 1.5MB, assuming linear scaling (which is dumb) that's ~520MB per picture - WELL over the Discord picture upload limit.

Why??
Who needs this?!

200mpixel = 14142px x 14142px or something like that

So I'll just start by saying first of all, you ain't getting 200mpixel photos. At the minimum that needs 1GB of RAM to take the photo with only 8-bit channels, and smartphones rarely come with 3GB.

 

But more to the point, that's ONLY a 8-bit per channel image. HEIF(h265)/AVIF(AV1), and jpeg2000/xr can be stored in HEIF which can result in 10 or 14 bit per channel HDR images. Canon EOS DSLR's are 214MB per image at 14bit per channel  for 20mbit. So multiply that by 10. so 2140MB for a raw image. or 800MB for a RGBA image.

https://snapshot.canon-asia.com/article/en/hdr-pq-heif-breaking-through-the-limits-of-jpeg

 

Using the same math, HEIF HDR PQ would result in 76MB files.

 

Now, the better question is, "who asked for this", because unfortunately CMOS sensors are not this good, and never will be this good without matching lenses, which smartphones simply do not have. a $32000 DSLR with a real 100Mpixel sensor that is physically 53.4 x 40.0mm. That would consume half of the back of most smartphones.

 

 

 

[Doobeedoo]

To actually brag about it, it better actually deliver amazing pictures in all conditions. Be it zoom, low light, binning.

[LAwLz]

Before commenting "this is too much" because you once heard "megapixels aren't everything", please note that the HP1 sensor can do 2x2 and 4x4 pixel binning. It will very rarely actually capture 200MP pictures.

 

If you are in a low light situation then it will do a 12.5MP capture by merging 16 subpixels together into one massive 2.56µm pixel. For comparison, the iPhone 13's camera pixel size is 1.7µm and the Pro has 1.9µm pixels.

Although there is some area loss when doing pixel merging, so it's not as effective as a true 2.56µm pixel would be, it still should be able to outperform the iPhone 13's camera easily, even in low light scenarios (assuming equally well tuned software and ISP).

 

 

The benefits of a high megapixel count (other than higher resolution of course) are that you can do things such as better denoise filters, better detection of sharp edges and single-exposure HDR at higher resolutions.

Here is a post I made explaining how it works in more details back when people were making the same kind of comments regarding Samsung's 108MP sensor:

 

 

I don't think 200 megapixels in a phone camera is necessary and that we have probably gone too far, but I also see a lot of misdirected hate towards high megapixel sensors that is simply founded on old and outdated ideas about photography. If this was 10 years ago then yes, 108MP cameras in phones would be useless, but we have found several uses for it since then.

[That Franc]

18 hours ago, FakeKGB said:

How big will these photos be?

12MP on my 6S/7 are already about 1.5MB, assuming linear scaling (which is dumb) that's ~520MB per picture - WELL over the Discord picture upload limit.

Why??
Who needs this?!

Supersampling. Also, smaller pixels and more pixels per picture mean much smaller, less noticeable noise grain - which should allow to iron it out without losing too much detail before downsizing the image.

[Imbadatnames]

Samsungs image quality is already suffering badly at 108

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

Before commenting "this is too much" because you once heard "megapixels aren't everything",

 

 

I think it is a law of humanity,  humans have been saying new developments are pointless or not possible since the dawn of time.    One day we will actually learn form the past.

 

I'll probably be dead by then though.