[TD-Linux]

This is not a "mirrorless camera sensor", at least how it's meant to be interpreted. While technically mirrorless like all webcams, the sensor is under a quarter of the area of the smallest Sony mirrorless intechangeable-lens cameras.

[rfwhyte]

Came to say basically the same thing. Not to mention they also refer to their F1.8 "Glass" when their own technical specs list the lens elements as plastic.

It's basically a $10 sensor, a $5 mic, $5 of miscellaneous plastic and circuitry, and yet they want $175 for what?

I might have given all their typical startup BS and hyperbole a pass if it was like $79 or something reasonable, but at $175 it just seems like a scam.

[j45]

I’d love to learn how to build one of my own from you since it’s that easy?

The form factor here is ideal. Also unclear if it’s 4K (can help with brightness in less than ideal lighting.

My understanding is the same components still have to be driven well to work together by custom software for high quality?

[jfim]

It's 1080p. From the specs

> Resolution 48MP binned to 1080P

[LoganDark]

That's ridiculous. 48MP should be capable of at least 4K video. Are their yields still not high enough at 4K even if they're charging an order of magnitude more than what the components actually cost?

[tw04]

They don’t have any yields. This is an off the shelf Sony sensor and they chose the cheaper binned part.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exmor

[LoganDark]

(Non-mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exmor)

Ah, so they only care about money. Perfect.

Also hilarious that they say it's "binned" to 1080p when they're actually only getting the rejects that weren't good enough for 4K! Way to be technically correct, Opal.

[j45]

I wonder if it could be swapped :)

[j45]

Agreed. I’m running a Logitech Brio (4K) and while it’s not perfect it’s pretty decent to auto adjust for the lighting in most rooms.

[deafpolygon]

They want some of that sweet Apple tax. Er, I mean, marketing faff and charging extra for it. Just look at their website.

Some people will pay, just for the illusion.

[Chilko]

Agreed, the line "WITH AN F1.8 LENS LETTING IN AS MUCH LIGHT AS A PROFESSIONAL CAMERA" is also quite misleading when using a much smaller sensor size.

[rubatuga]

What a scam.

[wmf]

They call their other webcam "DSLR quality" so at least they're consistent in their exaggeration.

[hypercube33]

Technically Sonys current smallest decent mirrorless is apsc and I guess the 1" family (25mm) rx100 cameras could count as mirrorless if you bend things...and this webcam rocks a sensor half that size.

[beAbU]

By their definition my phone camera also qualifies as mirrorless.

[seanp2k2]

it's like yeah there's no mirror that flips up to expose the sensor because there's no optical through-the-lens viewfinder either...which is what the mirror was for in the first place...

Seems like a cool idea though, but it seems like it could be done even better: get an iPhone 15 Pro Max sensor and put it behind an actual quality glass lens, then add in the beam-forming mic array stuff and MAKE IT A NORMAL CLASS-COMPLIANT WEBCAM, which unlike the C1, the Tadpole is from what I understand.