The problem here is the attitude: "oh, people die of hunger every day? Poor things!" <- this doesn't help getting into somebody else's shoes.
Wait, you are accepting the statistics coming from China? Covering up is their nature. Especially when their local government can't afford losing Foxconn, they would practically do everything to keep it running (and they did). Despite the high salary, the living expenses are also higher, in the cities where Foxconn's factories are located.
So I skipped from first page to last and wtf we're talking about sweatshops? essential thread artist: www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsLOTYJ-9WQ
I have an uncle who works in a Chinese refrigerator factory. We took a (unscheduled) tour when we were visiting one year. It was a pretty normal factory.
LOL WUT? Im not even going to give this a proper reply right now. Instead I'll be nice and give you a chance to justify how thats even remotely right. (Your not terribly far off the mark but what you said definitely isnt right.)
I don't get how Apple are the first. Both Nokia and HTC did this over a year ago with the Lumia 920 and the HTC One.
The funny thing is 3-years ago almost every smartphone had a bigger pixel size than the iPhone 5s & Co now have. E.g. the iPhone 4 had 1.75µ pixels. The Galaxy S4 has 1.1µ pixel and yet is still the best smartphone camera, so there isn't a clear correlation of image quality and pixel size. Too many other factors play into image quality. Also, i succumbed to the devil and got myself an iPhone 5 of eBay. :D:D:D
Whaaaa? I'm not sure if you're trolling or a little dim, but... First off, I said "one of the first." I'd be stupider than a fuckwit to say that the iPhone 5S has the first large-pixel sensor and then put a link in the same fucking sentence to my own thread that clearly says that the One did it months before the iPhone 5S. As far as I know, the iPhone 5S is the second high end phone to clearly ignore the sensor pixel size trend. Even if I'm wrong about them being second, they'll still be "one of the first." That's why I used that wording. Secondly, the 920's sensor's pixels measure 1.4 microns. That's in line with every other 8MP sensor of that generation. The 920 isn't bucking any trends like the One or the iPhone 5S. The One went balls to the walls with 2.0 micron pixels. It's pretty obvious that they are done with the megapixel race. The iPhone 5S is also an attempt at that with their 1.5 micron sensor, but their efforts don't look as impressive because they are still packing eight million of those 1.5 micron pixels instead of the One's four million 2.0 micron pixels. Don't get me wrong, when Nokia updated the 920 with the 925, they held the line with their sensor size while everyone else continued the march down to 1.1 micron pixels. Granted, that could also be lazy engineering, lol. I manage financial models for a living and I get paid to communicate their results to people no smarter than Trickster. If I was an engineer in grad school, then I would be poised at rigorously communicating to other engineers. Instead, I'm trained to bring Trickster's IQ above room temperature. So I invite you to educate a humble Spartacus as to exactly why it's generally a good idea to have ginormous sensors.
And yet, you're almost entirely incapable of making concise and informative posts, instead resorting to large text walls that you are fully aware no-one will read. You spend a lot of time waffling. So either you're not very good at translating your job skills to the internet, they're lacking in the first place, or you frequently just regurgitate information you've read without having any real understanding of what you're saying - which leads to waffling.
It doesn't take much to be wrong. Wealthy pointed out just a few words that I dumbed down too much. It took you only a few words to be doubly wrong. But it can take a bit of work to be right.
I was going to keep this short since I was eating crisps...Unfortunately for you guys I finished them before I posted :D Note: This is pretty complex and quite hard to explain in a short space as there is a quite a lot of background knowledge needed to understand everything I talk about here. To keep it simple / TLDR: The aperture of the lens affects the brightness of the image. Larger pixels / Larger sensors only allow an image to be produced with less image noise (grain/speckles) for a given setting. Long version. This may confuse people so read at your own risk. (especially a bit about pixel size sicne I seemingly contradict myself, this isnt the case however) Bigger sensors = bigger pixels as you say. Neither a bigger pixel, or the inclusion of more pixels on a sensor will allow it to gather more light though. The amount of light that can be captured in an image is defined by the aperture of the lens. Lens Aperture IIRC the 5s changed from a f2.5 to f2.2 aperture (25% more light gathering). Ofcourse you dont get something for nothing so there are trade offs. The increase in aperture could either be done by reducing the focal length of the lens (i.e. giving it a wider field of view), or by actually increasing the entry diameter of the lens. If they did it by increasing the diameter of the lens then they have another trade off, reduced depth of field (i.e. the area thats sharply in focus). Thats a problem because the lens is fixed at F2.2 so even fi you want more depth of field you simply cant have it. (I can't see it making a HUGE difference since its only 1/4 of a stop though) Sensors and pixel sizes. The size of the pixel has an effect on the image quality. The smaller the pixels the more noise they produce (seen in photos as speckles, which get worse when there is more noise). This is most commonly noticed when taking photos in low light e.g. a dark or dimly lit room. Also affected by the size of the pixels is the light gathering capacity of each individual pixel, (whats that you say, bigger pixels allow you to get more light..not quite) by this I mean that less gain typically has to be applied in low light as the larger pixels are more sensitive due to their slightly increased size. (It doesnt mean that a larger sensor gathers more light, the brightness of an image is defined by 1. Aperture, 2. Shutter Speed and 3. ISO (Film Speed/ sensor gain to provide a direct equivalence to these film speeds) i.e. ISO 100, 200, 400 etc, the size of the sensor has NO effect on this, it simply means that each of these ISO values can be achieved by applying slightly less gain and therefore making slightly less noise) To summarise the new iPhone camera vs the old (based only on the facts that we know, I'm sure there will be software tweaks etc that will improve the image further: Advantages: 1. Better images in lowlight (25% larger aperture +~9% larger pixels...maybe a 25-30% increase in high iso performance. Potentially more depending on software changes). 2. Possibly slightly sharper daytime photos (side effect of the larger pixels) Disadvantages: 1. Slightly shallower depth of field that cant be easily controlled 2. I had something else in mind but cant remember
