Hello And Welcome. I'd like to ask everyone that. What is your opinion on this? Or what do you guys think? Is this true? Can Any type of Smartphone replace normal cameras in astrophotography or photography? Since I was planning to buy a camera, I heard that not everyone uses cameras. Only professional people do. Who is using a smartphone or a normal camera?
Do Smartphones Can Take Over Cameras In Astrophotography? Who what using?
Short answer, no.
Slightly less short answer:
No, because Smartphone sensors are too small and the IR filter blocks most of the Halpha and SII signal.
Slightly less short answer:
No, because Smartphone sensors are too small and the IR filter blocks most of the Halpha and SII signal.
Well Written Concise
LoL, No. Can smartphones take over MRI and CT?
Even the consumer "astrophoto" toys like the Seestar, are very limited. Obviously one could fake ANY "data" using AI nowadays, but you don't even need clear skies and a camera of any kind for that.
What phones might take over are the controllers, like asiair/miniPC's today.
Even the consumer "astrophoto" toys like the Seestar, are very limited. Obviously one could fake ANY "data" using AI nowadays, but you don't even need clear skies and a camera of any kind for that.
What phones might take over are the controllers, like asiair/miniPC's today.
Let's not be too dismissive of phones. Demand for better sensors for them has surely benefit astro cameras.
No, while a smart phone might be useful for general photography it's is next to useless for astrophotography. Yes, you can put one in a holder that lines it up with the eyepiece and take pictures of bright objects like the moon and planets and even some bright deep sky objects of the telescope is big enough. It may even look fine on the tiny cell phone screen but as soon as you look at it on a large screen it won't hold up. There are a number of reasons for this, small sensor, IR cut filters and so on. The biggest problem is you are forced to shoot afocal. Meaning you have to have an eyepiece and the camera's lenses between the sensor and the incoming light from the telescope, that's a lot of glass and aberrations. Not to mention that none of it will be precisely centered. The truth is, even a pricey digital SLR with removable lenses and solid mounts won't be as good as a dedicated astronomy camera. Lastly, a useful astronomy camera doesn't need to be that expensive. Something like a ZWOASI585MC which costs $400.00 US can do it all at a very high quality level and will work with all of the astronomy software out there. For $200.00 US more you can get the cooled version.
Helpful
Nah they are all rounder cameras super tiny sensors and small lens boosted by algorithms- good for social media though
TiffsAndAstro:
Let's not be too dismissive of phones. Demand for better sensors for them has surely benefit astro cameras.
I would never be dismissive of smart phones as testbeds for new technology but the question was, can they replace astronomy cameras in astrophotography. The answer is a resounding no for all the reasons posted above.
Well Written
I agree with you, but I doubt we'd have modern CMOS tech without the demand created by smartphones.
Well Written
No doubt, it's a huge market that drives everything else.
I'm not the right guy to get deep in the weeds about the science of how lenses work etc, but regardless of sensor capability, there is no way you can make a 2mm plastic lens do the work of a proper lens that is 1 or more orders of magnitude larger. Its kind of ridiculous to even suggest that it could be done. Physics simply doesn't allow it.
Unless you're going to have phones with a 50mm aperture, no, they can't catch up. As someone above mentioned, sure you could use AI to fake it, but why bother with that? If you're going to do that you may as well just download someone elses photo and say you took it with your smartphone, because either way you're faking it.
The real limitation on resolution is not the sensor in this type of system, it is the aperture. And the limit on quality is the material and construction of the lens.. Maybe plastics can eventually beat heavier coated lenses someday, but we're not there yet as far as I know. And even if we were there, that still doesn't get you over the aperture size limitations, there is no shortcut for that piece.
Unless you're going to have phones with a 50mm aperture, no, they can't catch up. As someone above mentioned, sure you could use AI to fake it, but why bother with that? If you're going to do that you may as well just download someone elses photo and say you took it with your smartphone, because either way you're faking it.
The real limitation on resolution is not the sensor in this type of system, it is the aperture. And the limit on quality is the material and construction of the lens.. Maybe plastics can eventually beat heavier coated lenses someday, but we're not there yet as far as I know. And even if we were there, that still doesn't get you over the aperture size limitations, there is no shortcut for that piece.
Helpful Insightful
TiffsAndAstro:
Let's not be too dismissive of phones. Demand for better sensors for them has surely benefit astro cameras.
Better sensor tech developments from phones does not equate with using phones in place of astro cameras or even using phone sensors in astro cameras.
Phones and astro cameras have totally different uses and requirements so require totally different sensors.
So the tech developed for phone sensors will be useful for astronomical sensors (at least some of it), but the actual phones or phone sensors, not a chance.
The biggest effect has been (and probably will be) to make sensors and cameras cheaper.
Helpful Insightful Respectful
Phones could certainly take over astrophotography world
As long as they come with cooling down to -10c or so, up to 8" flat field lenses (not very portable or easy to carry IMO)
So yes, it is possible, just very unlikely
As long as they come with cooling down to -10c or so, up to 8" flat field lenses (not very portable or easy to carry IMO)
So yes, it is possible, just very unlikely
Why would I used something that wasn't designed for something vs something that was?
My phone belongs in my pocket, pulled out when I need to answer a call or a text, not sitting on my telescope for 8 hours a night.
Astronomy cameras are specifically designed to attach to telescopes at precise distances with the option to use accessories such as filters or guiders and to be cooled to sub zero temperatures.
I see no reason why anyone in their right mind would use a phone for astrophotography unless they're playing around taking pictures through a visual eyepiece.
I wouldn't even read a book on my phone, I have a really nice kindle that does it better.
My phone belongs in my pocket, pulled out when I need to answer a call or a text, not sitting on my telescope for 8 hours a night.
Astronomy cameras are specifically designed to attach to telescopes at precise distances with the option to use accessories such as filters or guiders and to be cooled to sub zero temperatures.
I see no reason why anyone in their right mind would use a phone for astrophotography unless they're playing around taking pictures through a visual eyepiece.
I wouldn't even read a book on my phone, I have a really nice kindle that does it better.
Helpful
In my eyes, the cameras in smartphones can already do a lot. But they can't replace a fully-fledged camera, especially in our hobby. But if we're talking about normal photography, then definitely! In my eyes, the smartphone is also the best camera because you always have it with you ;-)
As you can see here, for example... I only had my smartphone with me and simply exposed the Milky Way for 17x30s.
So you can see what is now possible with these things. Of course, nothing earth-shattering and no incredibly great resolution, but a few years ago I would never have believed that a smartphone could take a picture like this.
As you can see here, for example... I only had my smartphone with me and simply exposed the Milky Way for 17x30s.
So you can see what is now possible with these things. Of course, nothing earth-shattering and no incredibly great resolution, but a few years ago I would never have believed that a smartphone could take a picture like this.
Helpful Engaging
Lars Bartels:
In my eyes, the cameras in smartphones can already do a lot.
Jumping on this topic, I think it depends on what you call astrophotography.
For deep space, phones are mostly garbage.
It's mostly the same for planetary, although eyepiece projection can get some results.
But for very wide shots, as Lars showed, why not?
You probably won't win an APOD, but you can still achieve great images.
Sure, if you're serious about this hobby, you'll probably want to use something other than a phone's camera.
But in the end, trying to take pictures of the sky with a phone is better than not trying.
Phones taking over dedicated cameras or even DSLRs is very unlikely.
As others mentioned, there are too many technical limitations with sensor sizes, aperture, IR sensitivity, etc.
But it can still be a decent entry point for people interested in the subject who don't want to spend too much in the beginning.
Whatever makes you happy, as long as you enjoy what you're doing!
Clear skies!
Helpful Respectful Engaging Supportive
The quick answer is not a chance, but that doesn't mean they can't have a place. I'm reminded of the aurora back in May. My cell phone captured terrific images of colours and patterns I could hardly see. Smartphones have decimated most of the "serious" camera market, at least from the perspective of DSLR and point-and-shoot sales in the hands of less serious users. I'm hoping Apple or someone else will make a point-and-shoot with the software magic of the smartphone but with a bigger sensor.
Well Written Insightful Respectful Concise Engaging
This is called Astrophotography...:
https://www.astrobin.com/jgfcv2/
Milky way stacks are great, but that's about it. Just like for daylight photography, the fixed wide angle lens defines your frame. Physics dictates what you can pack in a phone with regards to focal length, meaningful lens aperture and properly illuminated sensor size. Show a single example on Andromeda, where ANY smartphone can match the tiniest Redcat with an Astrocam? And that's a pocket scope, suitable for trackers.
https://www.astrobin.com/jgfcv2/
Milky way stacks are great, but that's about it. Just like for daylight photography, the fixed wide angle lens defines your frame. Physics dictates what you can pack in a phone with regards to focal length, meaningful lens aperture and properly illuminated sensor size. Show a single example on Andromeda, where ANY smartphone can match the tiniest Redcat with an Astrocam? And that's a pocket scope, suitable for trackers.
Technically, you could rig a smartphone to a telescope and take an image. Would it be of any useable quality? Probably not and definitely lightyears behind what other astro cameras and equipment can do. The modification to a current smartphone would be significant and too costly to make it practical. Most have color sensors with bayer filters, etc.
Helpful Concise
Nikon Aculon A211 10×50 Vs 10 22×50 which One Better For Astronomy?
Hello And Welcome. I'd like to ask everyone here whoever using binoculars for astronomy. I've been planning to get binoculars called Nikon Aculon a211 10×50 binoculars. Cause they said it's a very top choice and inexpensive but mostly can...