News & Analysis
Comment
DrQuine
This is very clever - and especially helpful for smartphones which use very ...
RodgerDavies
I love image stabilisation – I haven’t bought a camera without it since my Canon ...
Firm claims anti-shake camera breakthrough
Peter Clarke
5/4/2011 6:07 AM EDT
LONDON – Cambridge Mechatronics Ltd. (CML), a developer of actuator technology used in consumer electronics, has demonstrated the application of its technology to optical image stabilization in a smartphone miniature camera.
CML (Cambridge, England) has created an actuator based on wires of nickel-titanium shape memory alloy (SMA) and an associated control and heating ASIC. The alloy has the property that it contracts and expands in a precise and reliable manner under heating and cooling.
The system uses a set of SMA wires to control the pitch and yaw of the lens in its housing and this must be done at frequencies of 1 to 30-Hz in response to gyroscope measurements of handshake, said CML CEO Simon Calder. The same technology is also used to control the z-position of the lens for focus.
CML has already succeeded in getting SMA-based control designed into cameras for autofocus. Mobile phones using AF technology are on sale in Japan, Calder said. But increasingly smartphone developers want to offer similar capabilities to digital still cameras, including OIS, but in a smaller and slimmer device.
Prototype smart-phone camera modules built to take advantage of CML's OIS actuation provide more than 24-dBs (more than 4 optical stops) of hand shake suppression, Calder said. This enables as much as a 20-fold increase in exposure times without hand-shake induced blur. This will help eradicate two weaknesses of smart-phone cameras, poor (or no) low-light performance and shaky video recordings. It also improves the quality of photographs taken in other conditions.
The SMA based system is smaller stronger and simpler and consumes less power than conventional system which is a voice-coil motor, Calder added.
|
|
|
|
|
Navigate to related information
yalanand
5/4/2011 10:38 AM EDT
Wow pretty soon we will have Image stabiliser inbuilt in smartphones. Moreover 20-fold increase in exposure time will definitely help users to take clear pictures in low light.
Sign in to Reply
selinz
5/4/2011 6:05 PM EDT
Well, I have an image stablizer in my Samung Galaxy S phone but I presume it is all electronic. It seems to me that image sampling and smart reconstruction is the way to go as we move forward...
Sign in to Reply
chanj
5/4/2011 7:47 PM EDT
Sony digital camera has image stabilizer for a couple years already. It takes a couple of shot and use image processing to match pattern and increase contrast. It works pretty well in dim environment and shot with zoom in the evening. The new mechanical stabilizer will definitely help to allow better shot with zoom. I wonder the zoom capability of a smartphone camera.
Sign in to Reply
Jlhughes
5/5/2011 7:59 AM EDT
Selinz, your first point is spot on - at the moment, all cell phone solutions are software-based Electronic Image Stabilization (EIS).
However in reality they don’t provide a substantial improvement to image quality.
Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) is the best solution for great photos and is found on higher-end digital stills cameras.
It actually involves moving camera optical components in reaction to real-time measured handshake.
Amazing that this can now be packaged and priced to be found inside a handset!!
Sign in to Reply
RodgerDavies
5/5/2011 8:58 AM EDT
I love image stabilisation – I haven’t bought a camera without it since my Canon IXUS 800 5 years ago, and like you say, it’s really good for zoom and low-light. I suppose the difference is that all the wide-angle shots look really good from my DSC, even in low-light, but shots from my cellphone look terrible (under-exposed and grainy).
I can’t wait for a product like this to be on the market – hopefully it will sort out those poor low-light shots.
Sign in to Reply
DrQuine
5/6/2011 7:38 PM EDT
This is very clever - and especially helpful for smartphones which use very small apertures so that light is limited which drives long exposures and accentuates the effects of any camera motion. It would be interesting to know which blurs are easiest to remove by image processing and which are easiest to prevent with image stabilization. Are they the same or do both methods have their place?
Sign in to Reply