Low-light photography gets a boost

Author: Brett Thomas
Published: 23rd May 2007
Comments (12) Stumble
Low-light photography gets a boost

"Light it up" - a new sensor for cameras will take nice pictures in as low as 1 lux of light.

We all know the scenario - you're in a bar, or at a wedding, and someone wants a picture. And right before that happens, a light so bright that you see spots for ten minutes strobes repeatedly in your eyes. We all hate it, don't we? Fortunately, it may just be time to say goodbye to the flash - for good.

Developers at the South Korea Electronic Technology Institute (KETI) have announced an amazing breakthrough - a new sensor that can take a bright, clear picture in just one lux of light. If you don't remember tables of physics metrics, one lux is equal to the light output of one candle from one meter away - that's not a whole lot of light. The sensor is purported to be over 2,000 times more light sensitive than current technologies allow.

The new sensor, dubbed the single carrier modulation photo detector (SMPD), is designed to replace current CCDs in modern digital cameras. But before it makes the rounds into a Canon or Nikon near you, it will find itself in CCTV cameras, reverse/rearview cameras in vehicles, and mobile phones. Each of these technologies requires a significantly lower resolution, allowing the technology to be perfected before hitting the 10.1 Megapixel photo buffs among us.

Exactly when we'll start finding the chip in our cameras hasn't been disclosed, though it certainly sounds like it will be soon. KETI has invested a mere $10.5 million USD over four years into designing the new sensor, which is expected to net about $2.2 billion USD in returns each year. How's that for return on investment?

Do you have a thought on the breakthrough? Looking forward to throwing those flashes away? Tell us about it in our forums.
Quote yodasarmpit 23rd May 2007, 17:13
Wouldn't it be great if this could come out with minimal noise increase, would save a fortune on big wide open lenses.
Quote Bauul 23rd May 2007, 18:12
Excellent breakthrough, flashes are such a hit and miss affair as it is, and decent ones are not only bulky but weigh alot as well. Can't wait to see this in action.
Quote Tyinsar 23rd May 2007, 18:24
Shweeet. A lot of times a direct flash is the only reasonable option for a spur of the moment picture (that or a really grainy picture) and I dislike the way a direct flash photo looks.
Quote scq 23rd May 2007, 19:09
Quote:
Originally Posted by yodasarmpit
Wouldn't it be great if this could come out with minimal noise increase, would save a fortune on big wide open lenses.

I wonder what lense-makers will think of this? While it certainly helps to push cameras, it's going to destroy glass makers who demand that 4-digit price for that F/2.8 over F/4, since people who buy these lenses probably wouldn't pay such a premium for the extra bulk and the bit of extra bokeh.
Quote pendragon 23rd May 2007, 20:15
this is really neat.. however, it sucks that i just bought a nice 5 megapixel camera a year ago :-/ ...that's technology for ya
Quote supermonkey 23rd May 2007, 21:39
Quote:
Originally Posted by pendragon
this is really neat.. however, it sucks that i just bought a nice 5 megapixel camera a year ago :-/ ...that's technology for ya
No, it doesn't suck for you at all. There is nothing in the original article other than a lot of funky claims.

IF this technology is real, it will be several years before any of us see it in a digital camera. It seems more suited to surveillance than casual digital photography.

Also, I don't think it will destroy prime lenses at all. One of the greatest things a wide aperture gives us is narrow depth of field. Shooting at ISO 3543^5 at a dark wedding might be fun, but you'll still want to open up the aperture to isolate grandma from the busy background.

Even taking all that into consideration, this will not put an end to flashes. Any professional photographer worth his salt is still going to light the scene artificially. Unless ambient light plays a role in the image, there is almost always a flash.

I'll believe it when I see it.

-monkey
Quote scq 23rd May 2007, 23:41
Quote:
Originally Posted by supermonkey
No, it doesn't suck for you at all. There is nothing in the original article other than a lot of funky claims.

IF this technology is real, it will be several years before any of us see it in a digital camera. It seems more suited to surveillance than casual digital photography.

Also, I don't think it will destroy prime lenses at all. One of the greatest things a wide aperture gives us is narrow depth of field. Shooting at ISO 3543^5 at a dark wedding might be fun, but you'll still want to open up the aperture to isolate grandma from the busy background.

Even taking all that into consideration, this will not put an end to flashes. Any professional photographer worth his salt is still going to light the scene artificially. Unless ambient light plays a role in the image, there is almost always a flash.

I'll believe it when I see it.

-monkey

True that large apertures will isolate, but is one stop worth double or triple the price when better noise handling can take care of it? We're not talking about $20 over $10, or even $200 over $1000, an extra stop can be the difference between $5000 and $1500.
Quote Fod 23rd May 2007, 23:53
Quote:
Originally Posted by scq
True that large apertures will isolate, but is one stop worth double or triple the price when better noise handling can take care of it? We're not talking about $20 over $10, or even $200 over $1000, an extra stop can be the difference between $5000 and $1500.

is 50 extra bhp worth the £10k tuning kit?
is 10 extra fps worth the £100 extra for the 8800Ultra?
is £1000 worth it for that 1dB more sensitivity in your speakers?

i could go on, but the point is: the high end is there for those people who simply don't need to ask that question.
Quote Carbon_Arc 24th May 2007, 10:10
But something else to consider..... the big expensive fast lenses are not just for that extra f-stop, they also have better optical properties that the cheaper lenses. They control distortions, aberrations, vignetting, sharpness, etc, better.

That's why i carry a 1.3 kg Nikon 80-200 f2.8 lens around on my D80, it may be twice the price of the newer 80-300 f4.5/5.6 VR lens, but in terms of sharpness and image quality its worth every penny. Plus f2.8 at equivalent of 300mm is perfect for things like motorsport photography, using the depth of field to isolate the subject.

I guess it comes down to personal preference, i'm a glass junkie when it comes to lenses, but i know people who swear by smaller, lighter, 'slower' lenses with Vibration Reduction.

This looks more like an innovation for camera phones and the like, where small sensors and high pixel counts mean noise is a real issue. So an inherently more sensitive sensor and less amplification of the signal should be a real boost to image quality.
Quote scq 24th May 2007, 10:46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fod
is 50 extra bhp worth the £10k tuning kit?
is 10 extra fps worth the £100 extra for the 8800Ultra?
is £1000 worth it for that 1dB more sensitivity in your speakers?

i could go on, but the point is: the high end is there for those people who simply don't need to ask that question.

I'm not arguing this new sensor will kill any demand. There will always be the nuanced bunch who demand the extra stops - but I'm saying that it would reduce the need for faster, larger, and heavier lenses for many.
Quote AndyO 24th May 2007, 14:24
Quote:
Originally Posted by scq
I'm not arguing this new sensor will kill any demand. There will always be the nuanced bunch who demand the extra stops - but I'm saying that it would reduce the need for faster, larger, and heavier lenses for many.

Gotta agree with this...I know better bokeh may tempt a few people to 2.8s but low light performance is just as big a pull, and probably more of a concern for the bulk of users?

If this new tech is scalable to high resolution sensors and combined with more conventional stuff so the highlights are retained I really do think it would make a serious difference to many an indoor photographers kit bag :)

Regardless, one more incentive to leave the tripod at home can only be a good thing:) When I can get that tack-sharp sunset at F22 and 1/2000 thanks to my uber-nightsight sensor with full dynamic range I'll be a happy camper

Just hope noone turns a torch on behind the horizon or it'll look like the space shuttle taking off.
Quote devdevil85 24th May 2007, 18:01
Screw my College Savings Fund....I'm investing in KETI! ;) hehe...I'm rich beeotch!
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.







Mobile Phones

LG Arena ReviewHTC Magic Review

Compare over 250 mobile phones &
52,000 deals!



Broadband

Mobile Broadband

Compare over 100 broadband & mobile broadband deals online!