Hacker News Reader

Comment by greg7mdp | Hacker News Reader

The writer obviously does not understand the benefit of curved sensors. They will make the lenses cheaper and smaller - they will not change the way photographs look.

View on HN

Making the sensor smaller and cheaper also enables larger sensors at the equivalent cost and form factor of a current sensor though, which would change photos (if you think higher output resolution is a change to an image). The benefit doesn't have to be taken as making things cheaper.

Full-frame at APS-C prices would be great. It would lose one of the perks of APS-C: crop factor. Getting 450mm out of a 70-300mm lens is nice.

edit: since it's apparently not clear and I'm getting downvoted for sharing how this benefits a harmless personal preference, I will emphasize that I'm speaking to my needs. The 70-300 lens is what I use, not some abstract construct meant to represent all purposes.

The crop factor is generally a perk for people who shoot at the ranges I shoot at even if it comes with compromises for other needs.

Crop factor is only an advantage for APS-C cameras where the pixel density is higher than the comparable FF camera. That's not always true, eg I have a Sony a7Riv, which has 26MP in crop mode (more than APS-C cameras).

The "croppability" of the image is not really a function of the sensor size, it's a function of pixel density. APS-C cameras used to have higher pixel density than FF cameras, but that hasn't been universally true recently.

Or where you are willing to sacrifice pixels to get the longer length.

Isn't this usually thought of as a disadvantage? E.g. You have to buy more glass ($$) to get smaller mm equivalents?

I am only speaking for my use cases. Nikon crop sensors can use DX lenses, and those are always cheaper for more or less the same reach and features.

this is essentially zoom though as you're not using the full output of the lens

That's okay. I usually shoot things that are further away. Other people will have different needs. Only speaking for myself.

Lens size is the limiting factor for smartphone cameras, so the photos will look better.

Very clear the writer hasn't taken a course on optics:

"Rather than follow the curve of our eyes, the sensors in conventional digital cameras are flat. This results in an unnatural curvature in the image, and so the accompanying lenses have to be made in a way that corrects this distortion."

.... The aberration that curved image sensors helps mitigate is spherical aberration. Not distortion ....

Better, cheaper, and/or smaller lenses if the design is made specifically for the curved sensor.

> They will make the lenses cheaper and smaller - they will not change the way photographs look.

This article notes that curved sensors will enable "greater aperture and reduced light fall-off at the edge of the photo", and other articles on curved sensors suggest that they require fewer optical elements (which I assume has associated quality benefits) and will reduce distortion and vignetting when shooting at wide angles. Are these not notable improvements beyond cheaper/smaller?

I mean you're not wrong, but the author here understands that the main application is for compact-sized phone camera modules, which in their case the lens et al. are nearing or already in their physical limits.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com