The World's Smallest Video Camera 78
fergus07 writes "Medigus has developed what it claims is the world's smallest video camera at just 0.039-inches (0.99 mm) in diameter. The Israeli company's second-gen model (a 0.047-inch diameter camera was unveiled in 2009) has a dedicated 0.66x0.66 mm CMOS sensor that captures images at 45K resolution and no, it's not destined for use in tiny mobile phones or covert surveillance devices; instead the camera is designed for medical endoscopic procedures in hard-to-reach regions of the human anatomy."
Smallest camera you say? (Score:5, Funny)
Well, they know where they can stick that...
Re: (Score:2)
In a very small person?
Re: (Score:1)
One of the nice things about really small cameras is that you can stick them in your mouth, and then they do the work while passing through the neighborhood.
Re: (Score:2)
They can obviously see Uranus with it.
Which changed it's name to Urectum because they we're tired of the jokes.
Actually they got tired of that joke too, so they changed the name again. Something with goats, I think.
Re:Smallest camera you say? (Score:4, Funny)
They can obviously see Uranus with it.
Which changed it's name to Urectum because they we're tired of the jokes.
Actually they got tired of that joke too, so they changed the name again. Something with goats, I think.
Urkidding?
Translation (Score:4, Insightful)
instead the camera is designed for medical endoscopic procedures in hard to reach regions of the human anatomy.
By that they really just mean "up-skirt" shots.
Hard to reach (Score:2)
Ah yes, the perpetual struggle of Slashdudes everywhere.... Meeting those that posses such "regions" is a prerequisite to reaching said regions....
Re: (Score:2)
Not with teledildonics.
Re: (Score:3)
Not with teledildonics.
I can't tell if that's the next version of the Vibraphone, or a previously unknown book by L. Ron Hubbard.
Re: (Score:2)
You use that word, but I don't think you know what it means. A vibraphone [wikipedia.org] is a musical instrument. They've been around for 80 years. Think "NBC Chimes" sound.
Re: (Score:2)
"Even words, like 'tits', 'winkle', and 'vibraphone'..."
Which is only funny if one already knows what a vibraphone is.
45k in lines (Score:3)
I always wondered why we don't use fibre for endoscopes etc... Having the CCD fed by fibre to each "pixel" and a few around the perimeter emitting light, then running the lot through a sheath, would surely be smaller than mounting the whole thing on the end of a cable?
Re: (Score:2)
Fiber endoscopes? Isn't that what we have for a decade if not a few...
It's about 1cm....next time when you do a cystoscopy you will know what I mean.
Re: (Score:2)
Weak.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I had to look that up.
Weak.
In Soviet Russia, cystoscopy looks up...actually, that's how it works everywhere.
Re:45k in lines (Score:4, Interesting)
Thats what they are doing right now. Guess what. 45k individual fibres, even bundled, need a lot more space than a 1mm^3 camera...
Re: (Score:2)
Soon they will give you a one shot robotic tablet to swallow and a mobile phone app to relay data from the robot to the doctor via bluetooth and 3G.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
For long term monitoring the problem is the power supply: batteries are way to big. Now people are solving that by developing blood powered fuel cells [wired.co.uk], but I have a clue some people may not like the ideas of teaching machines to use our blood for their fuel.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Has been doen for years.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080124161613.htm [sciencedaily.com]
But does not work as nice, as there is no way to stear it (and its one-way street down).
Re:45k in lines (Score:5, Informative)
They do use fibre bundles for endoscopes ; they're very expensive ($10,000 kind of expensive).
CMOS sensors are actually a significant step up in terms of
* durability - whack a fibre endoscope on the edge of a surgical trolley and you just broke half the fibres in the bundle. Not so with a wire bundle.
* price - a CMOS sensor, even a medically certified one, is much cheaper than a carefully aligned bundle of photographic class optical fibres
And I reckon you can probably make sensors of a usable size and resolution, with lenses, much smaller than an equivalent fibre assembly.
Thow away (Score:2)
They do use fibre bundles for endoscopes ; they're very expensive ($10,000 kind of expensive). {...} price - a CMOS sensor, even a medically certified one, is much cheaper than a carefully aligned bundle of photographic class optical fibres
Price is indeed important. Down to the point where the precious /. article on sub-1m cameras mentioned that such sensors are so cheap, that they could be used in single-use scenario, and still be cheaper that the fiber.
(Price is so low, because everything in that sub-1m camera could be assembled on a wafer. And given the size, you can get a bazillion of cameras from a single wafer, which brings the price down nicely).
Re: (Score:2)
Is this what is called .. (Score:3)
.. a bottom up approach?
Funny that it immediately is mentioned that it's not intended for spy use. Exactly how many seconds do they expect that situation to last? :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There is a catch. Smaller lens means less light. There are very real limits. How far we are from them, i can't be bothered to calculate.
But... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Tweezers and a very small light proof bag.
Re: (Score:2)
Tweezers and a very small light proof bag.
Wow, you just gave me a flashback to my youth. I hadn't thought of light-proof film changing bags for 25 years or more. Now I'm wondering where my old 8mm cameras are.
I (my doctor) could've used that recently (Score:1)
I had an endoscopic "procedure" done recently and I wish my doctor had had this available!
By the way, outside of the U.S., if you have procedures done that provide electronic data, oftentimes the hospital will, for a nominal fee give you a copy on CD-ROM.
In Thailand I've had endoscopy, laproscopic knee surgery, CAT scans, retinal scans, X-Rays and ultrasound pictures and videos all given to me as well as EEGs from a sleep study and EKGs from a heart stress test. Fun, if a little gross to look at on my iPad
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
In this sentence "company's" clearly means "company is". So maybe the first company went bankrupt, so they tried another business model. :-)
UrethraTube... (Score:1)
...the video sharing site for up and coming urologists.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
+1
Who would say such cameras are not to be used in Covert Ops or any other surveillance must be very naive person. And I bet such person would believe that no one ever surveillance other than bad people like thiefs and terrorists...
Re:"...all you want..." Perhaps not... (Score:1)
...home security applications, given that you can wire that up all you want since it's your house.
No, you can't. In some states it's a crime to surveil someone without their knowledge and consent, even more so if the person can prove a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't have to be the military. Even regular SWAT units around the world would love to get their hands on tech like this.
Dupe ? (Score:3)
I thought it was a dupe but actually it is not, this camera being 0.01 mm smaller than the previous one from last month [slashdot.org].
However, at 220x220 pixels, the resolution is also smaller compared to 250x250.
Re:Dupe ? (Score:4)
Re: (Score:1)
Automated aggregater has a very short memory, and besides, it picks up advertiser info in place of content, so it probably doesn't even know what's in the article.
Re: (Score:1)
Video Camera? (Score:2)
45K != 45K (Score:2)
Normally 2K means 2048 x 1080 pixels.
However, the article assumes that 45K means 45000 pixels, which should be written as 0.045 MP (megapixel).
That depends... (Score:1)
Depending on the part of the anatomy, some people migh actually want doctors to use larger cameras.
Too early in the morning (Score:3)
Off topic (Score:5, Funny)
Not Destined? (Score:2)
... and no, it's not destined for use in tiny mobile phones or covert surveillance devices, instead the camera is designed for medical endoscopic procedures in hard to reach regions of the human anatomy."
Are you kidding me?
Agent 1:"Sir, I have this cool new camera we can use to watch the Smith house with."
Agent 2:"Alright, where is it?"
Agent 1:"Here." holds up his hand
Agent 2:"I don't see it."
Agent 1:Hands him a magnifying class. "Try again"
Agent 2:"That's just a spec of sand."
Agent 1:"No, seriously sir, it's a camera"
Agent 2:"You're full of it!"
Agent 1:"Just imagine where we can put these things, and no one would ever know."
Agent 2:"Why would we need something that small? No, we're going to
Re: (Score:2)
... and no, it's not destined for use in tiny mobile phones or covert surveillance devices, instead the camera is designed for medical endoscopic procedures in hard to reach regions of the human anatomy."
Are you kidding me?
Not kidding. First, if you plant this camera in someone's home, you're basically littering dust. The 1mm camera does not contain any film, no hard drives, no way to transmit images. By the time you add the supporting hardware to run the camera, you're in the neighborhood of the 5x3cm brick.
Second, being designed for endoscopic purposes and being very small, I'm guessing this camera has a very short focal length. Another guess here, but I'd wager most surveillance involves a space more than a few millime
Diffraction? (Score:2)
This thing is 1mm in diameter. For a 'normal' angle of view, that would give it a focal length of 1mm. At f/
Re: (Score:3)
'0.039-inches'? (Score:1)