Samsung made a new 50-megapixel image sensor with the smallest pixels yet

nanoguy

Posts: 794   +12
Staff member
In brief: Samsung's newest 50-megapixel image sensor affords the company bragging rights for the smallest pixel size in a mobile image sensor, and the company says its 1/2.76-inch optical format and the use of ISOCELL 2.0 technology makes it the ideal choice for phones with multi-camera setups.

The megapixel race is far from over in the smartphone world, which is why Samsung just announced a new image sensor for phones that supposedly has the smallest pixel size achieved to date for a mobile image sensor.

What this means is that manufacturers are going back to making higher resolution cameras for the sake of a better spec sheet in mid-range and high-end phones. The new Samsung ISOCELL JN1 sensor has 50 million pixels crammed into a tiny 1/2.76-inch optical format, with each pixel measuring no more than 0.64μm in size. The company holds the previous record with the ISOCELL Slim GH1 from 2019, a 43.7-megapixel sensor with pixels measuring 0.7μm.

That's not to say that having smaller pixels is necessarily the goal, as professional photographers have good reasons for going with larger sensors, among them better performance low-light scenarios. Samsung says it built the new sensor to be easily integrated in camera modules on a variety of phone designs, where space is at a premium and manufacturers aim for ever slimmer profiles with little to no protrusions.

With the ISOCELL JN1, the company employs its new ISOCELL 2.0 tech to reduce crosstalk, boost color fidelity, and allows pixels to absorb 16 percent more light thanks to a new reflective material used in the lower part of the color filter barriers. The new sensor also makes use of Samsung's Tetrapixel technology that does four-to-one pixel binning to increase picture quality in low-light with the compromise of dropping the resolution to 12.5-megapixels.

Other notable aspects of the new sensor include support for 4K video capture at 60 frames per second, or 1080p at 240 frames per second, and the integration of Samsung's "Double Super PD" autofocus. The ISOCELL JN1 is now in mass production, so it won't be long before we see it in actual products.

Permalink to story.

 

Dimitriid

Posts: 696   +1,233
You know I have a novel idea that means that we could use eve better lenses and sensors AND extend the battery size of devices as well as their peak performance by improving their cooling by fairly large margins!

Here it is: MAKE THE DAMN PHONE THICKER.
 

duckofdeath

Posts: 422   +560
You know I have a novel idea that means that we could use eve better lenses and sensors AND extend the battery size of devices as well as their peak performance by improving their cooling by fairly large margins!

Here it is: MAKE THE DAMN PHONE THICKER.
Is Samsung only making one phone or do they have an alternative that actually fits your pseudo requirement?

(Yeah, I know, I know. You'll elaborate that your don't want THAT one.)
 

yRaz

Posts: 3,719   +3,728
Is Samsung only making one phone or do they have an alternative that actually fits your pseudo requirement?

(Yeah, I know, I know. You'll elaborate that your don't want THAT one.)
With a proper case phones get pretty thick. Also, battery life hasn't been an issue for a number of years now. I get a solid day and a half on my S21 plus and my google pixel 3a before that would last around 3 days depending how I used it.

Only reason I see to make a phone thin is so that it can fit in a stronger case and I take full advantage of that with the best cases OtterBox can make
 

Wereweeb

Posts: 45   +98
MAKE THE DAMN PHONE THICKER.

Phones are already getting thick. And now they're too damn heavy and big. I'd rather have a slightly smaller and lighter, but thicker phone. 6", 180 grams, SD 780G, basically a slightly bigger Zenphone 8 Lite with a bigger battery.

With a proper case phones get pretty thick. Also, battery life hasn't been an issue for a number of years now. I get a solid day and a half on my S21 plus and my google pixel 3a before that would last around 3 days depending how I used it.

The issue isn't battery life, but battery durability. I want a bigger battery so I can avoid ever going under 20% charge / over 80% charge. Plus, the bigger it is, the less it will be affected by degradation.

That way it lasts longer and I don't need to replace it in two years (At which point the manufacturer probably stopped making it - because of course they did - and there are only low quality copies around)
 

yRaz

Posts: 3,719   +3,728
The issue isn't battery life, but battery durability. I want a bigger battery so I can avoid ever going under 20% charge / over 80% charge. Plus, the bigger it is, the less it will be affected by degradation.

That way it lasts longer and I don't need to replace it in two years (At which point the manufacturer probably stopped making it - because of course they did - and there are only low quality copies around)
That's not as big if an issue anymore as you'd think. You can get a solid 2 years out if a phone without noticeable battery degradation. And 20-80% is only a 60% total charge. After 700 cycles(~2 years) you aren't going to lose 40% capacity in your phone battery if you charge to 100%. I also rarely come home with less than a 50% charge on phone. I usually upgrade after 2 years and I've never had a phone more than 3 so the battery issue isn't much of a problem for me.

And if battery degradation is an issue for you it doesn't cost more than $100 to have it replaced. If you have a flagship phone it's worth it to get another year or two out of it.
 
Last edited:

Vulcanproject

Posts: 1,367   +2,410
I wish phones were smaller but not thinner. Thickness or mild rounded protrusions is not the problem. Height of the screens is the problem. Two millimetres is here nor there in terms of thickness. A half inch on the screen is a big deal though.

I never wanted a phone I needed two hands to reach all areas of the screen and still don't now. Compact screen phones are a dying if not dead breed for Android, and that's a tragedy to me.
 

Wereweeb

Posts: 45   +98
That's not as big if an issue anymore as you'd think. You can get a solid 2 years out if a phone without noticeable battery degradation. And 20-80% is only a 60% total charge. After 700 cycles(~2 years) you aren't going to lose 40% capacity in your phone battery if you charge to 100%. I also rarely come home with less than a 50% charge on phone. I usually upgrade after 2 years and I've never had a phone more than 3 so the battery issue isn't much of a problem for me.

And if battery degradation is an issue for you it doesn't cost more than $100 to have it replaced. If you have a flagship phone it's worth it to get another year or two out of it.
I get the "60% charge" to protect the battery.

And I don't buy flagship phones lmfao.
 

Danny101

Posts: 1,741   +756
Many professional photographers cite bigger apertures for getting enough light into the lens for better photos. While Google has it's negatives, they got it right with photos and greater megapixels isn't that much of an improvement. How about the manufacturers start focusing on improving the software?