Smartphone Camera Evolution: Beyond Megapixels, What Really Counts?

I think any camera, regardless of whether it is in a phone/tablet or standalone, should take pictures accurate to the scene being photographed. Historically optics has played a huge role in this. Nikon always was one of the best SLRs primarily because of their Nikor lenses so I would have to say optics. I also think that in a digital camera the sensors also play a big role but without good optics, great sensors can't shine. It seems to me like manufacturers have tried to combine cameras and Photoshop like functions into phone cameras to try and make cameras more idiot proof but then you are tweakting photos to some arbitrary standard that you think is better (color saturation, sharpness, contrast, ect.) that may or may not be universally accepted as a good image.

Frankly, 13 megapixel cameras were, and still are, the sweet spot. Most people will be fine with that, and sure enough, that is now the new entry-level standard, it would seem. Now, I am not opposed to any of the methods for making the same 13 megapixels even better... whether that is through pixel-binning on a 50+ megapixel physical sensor, or through AI enhancement, or through larger pixels and low-light performance, or software tricks, or whatever... but I think that the 13 megapixel camera set the standard that does not need much improvement.

The technology isn't the problem, it's the idiot crowd (that's as polite as I can get) and their obsession with thin phones with no bezels that the rest of us can't have a proper camera on our smartphones. Some 10 or 11 years ago I was fortunate enough to have a phone with the best camera ever, the Nokia 808 PureView. Sony made a huge deal last year (?) with its 1" sensor yet my Symbian-powered relic had a 1/1.2 sensor and of course the Zeiss optics.

I miss the old Nokia... the partnership with Ziess was the stuff of legends... I almost got a Nokia N95 once upon a time, and that 5 megapixel camera with Ziess was the real deal back in the day! I wish I had not missed out on the last days of Symbian, and phones like the 808 PureView, but the world keeps turnin', and life keeps on moving forward...

Apparently, nothing but the logo on the phone according to PA's new camera rating system! 😂

Just kidding... kinda...

Yeah, remember the Galaxy S4 Zoom? It had 10x optical and a 16MP sensor inside 10 years ago. Yep, it was a small sensor, but the optics were kinda cool! Personally, I'd be perfectly fine with a thicker device with a real 1" sensor and real optics... Sadly, companies prefer to keep the vanity factor and compensate with algorithms.

Some call it vanity, others call it comfort. I think the main reason Samsung is growing on flagship devices in a time when everybody else are failing might have to do with Samsung being the only manufacturer left with common sense?

So, to get around the limiting factor of trying to engineer a good camera into a compact phone, other solutions has to be found. Pixel binning has proven to be the most logical way forward. Half a decade ago the haters berated Samsung for using high pixel counts. Today everybody use it, because it works. Use maths to solve issues you get with miniaturising lenses. With current processors being fairly overpowered for what most people use a phone for, this makes even more sense. I mean, you can even get pixel binning devices on ultra-high end astrophotography cameras these days. Maths really does work to solve accuracy issues if it is done right.

It's funny how history always repeats itself. Samsung does unique things for years before the other brands gets the point.

Whoever is writing him in this stop he's in the 🏥

You can't omit pixel count. It does matter. But there is a point where the return will be minor.

The Galaxy having a 100MP sensor is nice, but it isn't all that great. You can do better with a DSLR and a nice lense to attach.

The pixel rush was at 1st a benefit to be ahead of the competition who also had ever-changing hardware.

Now that cams aren't being upgraded that often, the pixel count isn't a matter of importance per say.

But if are a person who wants the best pasture possible. Then most should know to take at a higher resolutions and you can resize and get a very awesome looking capture.

The larger the sensor for more light the better. But that is only a true benefit for nighttime shots. S=Daytime shots on most cameras now look the same. Its just variations in color.

What funny, Samsung was always flagged for having saturated pics. But Apple did too for awhile and all of a sudden everyone is loving iPhone pics and Samsung getting picked at for having more natural looking pics.

People realize, especiially with oems that can offer cheaper devices, that you can get a device for about $400 and have a camera that can take amazing pictures where daytime pics are not that much different than flagship models.

After all, the OnePlus is not a flagship device. But it has some specs that can rival expensive offerings by Apple and Samsung.

Only pros care about the specs of a camera. The rest of us point and click and if we don't like the pic, we just take it again if we can and move on.

The A series packs a very good camera for its price and its been selling very well. The iPhone plus models are good enough where you just don't need the pro models at all.

The specs don't matter. If you pay $700+ for a phone, you're gonna get a very capable camera that no one will be mad about. Period.