>>4323790>normies don’t care about any of those “quality” things you talk about,They do not care about the details, as in which element is responsible for what.
But they do care about about quality of photo, which is why newest iPhone has 1/1.7" sensor? and 12 element aspheric lens in there. To get the best picture possible from such small camera.
>You’re never convincing them they need more than their phone againIf you can convince them that you need 48 MPX iPhone camera, you can convince them they need telezoom camera as an accessory for their iPhone, to take more better pictures. And accessory can't cost more than iPhone.
> there isn’t enough market demand for corpos to revive these types of cameras.There is enough demand for somebody in Shenzhen to manufacture horrible phone sensor cameras.
>You say they should make them cheaper, sure maybe, but then they wouldn’t be very good.Well, let's thing, what did change since 2012 (back when 200-500 dollars could get you an good camera) and 2024.
Glass/Lenses? Maybe. Plastic lenses got more refined (to allow phones to take good pictures). But not by that much. Price difference is negligible.
CCD/CMOS? Absolutely. Modern phones can see in absolute darkness, while 2012 digishit can't see with indoor lighting for shit. But again, it's like comparing Core 2 Duo and newest Core i5. Prices are more less the same, if not cheaper.
Processing? Cheap as fuck too, because same phenomenon as CMOS sensors.
So I would say that if you take 2012 digishit, remove awful CCD and install phone sensor in there, you'd get one pretty decent camera. And price of a phone CMOS is probably cheaper than that of a CCD in 2012.
Furthermore Kodak/Asia optical makes new digishits for $100. They are a bit underwhelming.
Alternative route is to make a fucking phone with 1 (one) good camera. Not 4 cameras out of which only 1 is useable and 2.5 other are gimmicks. Which would sell. I think.
>>4323793More like Taiwan numba one!
