|
|
|
|
|
by ACCount37
6 days ago
|
|
You wouldn't! You'd buy instead an "industrial/automation/automotive" sensor - one that has a fraction of the raw resolution, but maybe spots some other perks. Like a global shutter with no rolling shutter distortions, a "no RGGB Bayer" option that lets you set up your own filters and pick what wavelengths you care about, a package that's amenable to low volume manufacturing, longevity guarantees, availability in quantities of tens instead of tens of thousands, or actual documentation that you can get without 3-6 months of salesman and lawyer negotiations. Or you'd buy a ready-made "scientific instrument" camera from someone else. Which probably has another "industrial" sensor - maybe worse, maybe better than one you could get directly, depending on how up to date the catalog is and how good of a working relationship does the instrument company have with the sensor vendors. And a price tag in 4-5 digits range. Then you would integrate that thing as a subsystem into whatever science hardware you wanted to make. But if you truly want the "flagship smartphone" mix of small sensor size, low cost and high resolution? There are no good options! Clearly, the tech just hasn't advanced far enough for that! |
|
For example this one:
https://mm.digikey.com/Volume0/opasdata/d220001/medias/docus...