2 ms·
As someone with mild knowledge of semiconductor fabrication and optics, I honestly think these technology are not that meaningful to justify their cost of devel
by picture 2y ago
As someone with mild knowledge of semiconductor fabrication and optics, I honestly think these technology are not that meaningful to justify their cost of development and implementation, compared to the winning solution of arbitrarily complex plastic lens assemblies.
Chromatic aberration can be good enough with doublet lens design and Petzval is largely solved by the final field flattener usually with multiple concave and convex sections, and you can still easily fit a large number of lenses in a small formfactor.
Additionally being able to adjust the power of a lens is not a huge gamechanger, as a lot of the complexity with modern optic design is to counter various defects and distortion like aforementioned Petzval.
Rather, the fundamental limit is the sensor size. It's just not practical to achieve much better image quality with a physically small system
- gruturo 2y agoThanks for the information! But my understanding was exactly in the direction of the issue you point out - the fundamental limit being the sensor size. A curved sensor would, by allowing a relatively thinner (due to fewer elements) lens assembly, could have a larger area, and still remain within the allowed overall "thickness budget" of the smartphone. Hence my surprise that they seem to have gone nowhere.