Over the past ten years, photographic cameras have almost completely transitioned from silver halide film to electronic sensors. But the other key component — the lens — has remained largely unchanged... Until now. The mobile phone industry, with its huge demand for embedded cameras, is driving a broad set of new requirements for miniaturized, rugged, low-cost, low-power, high-performance lens and actuator combinations. As they come to market, the superior value proposition of those optical assemblies will threaten to displace traditional optics in cameras of all types. As a result, the business of designing and making lenses is undergoing its most fundamental upheaval since the Renaissance.

CMOS sensor developers have responded to consumer preferences for slimmer and slimmer handsets by shrinking their chips so that more pixels can be squeezed into an ever-smaller footprint. As pixel sizes shrink, standard fixed-focus lenses found on must camera-phones cannot pass the test of focusing light onto these tiny pixels. This presents a growing challenge — and an opportunity — to optical assembly designers and component suppliers to supply lens and actuator combinations that can provide both focus and zoom in smaller and smaller footprints.

“Reinventing the Lens: Next-Gen Focus & Zoom Technology,” a research study just published by Future Image, the leading independent center of expertise on the convergence of imaging, technology, and business, and host of the 6Sight® Future of Imaging conference, investigates the next generation of technologies being deployed to provide focus and zoom to the tiny cameras found in mobile phones and a wide variety of other applications such as medical research and robotics. “At our 6Sight conference last October, industry players were nearly unanimous in forecasting that top tier camera-phones would need auto-focus and optical zoom to meet consumer expectations. To deliver that DSC-like functionality, systems that can move or reshape lenses are required. The companies we analyze in this report are at the forefront of the drive to provide those capabilities.”

The 53-page report with 32 illustrations looks first at the changing requirements for mobile camera modules brought about by changing consumer preferences, including the latest developments in CMOS image sensors and explains why these changes require a new approach to the ‘traditional’ focus and zoom technology found in DSCs. Future Image conducted a survey and follow-up interviews with four of the leading vendors of next-generation focus and zoom technology: Artificial Muscle, Inc. (AMI), Nanomotion/Johnson Electric, New Scale Technologies, Inc. and Varioptic SA. All four vendors and their solutions are profiled. The study concludes with our analysis of the competing solutions and the outlook for their success.

Among the more than two-dozen topics covered by our vendor survey were the following:
2. Technology Description
3. Advantages
3.1 Compared to traditional actuators
3.2 Compared to competing technologies
3.3 Compared to competing products that employ similar technology
4. Disadvantages
4.1 Compared to traditional actuators
4.2 Compared to competing technologies
4.3 Compared to competing products that employ similar technology
5. Product Information
5.6 Speed — responsiveness, time in seconds to achieve focus (if applicable)
5.7 User experience — what, if any, differences will the end-user notice when using a camera-phone or camera that has your actuator vs. a standard, traditional actuator?
5.11 Manufacturing supply (can you meet the quantity and quality requirements of the CMA?)
5.12 Track record (evidence of reputation, reliability, financial stability, etc.0)
 

Copyright Notice

Table of Figures
About the Author / Future Image
Definitions & Methodology
I. Introduction
1. Reinventing the lens
1.1 Challenges
1.2 A Setback
1.3 Industry Response
1.4 The Incredible Shrinking Sensor
1.5 Innovation Required
2. Next-Gen Focus & Zoom Technologies
2.1 Why are they necessary?
Sidebar: Active vs. passive auto-focus 9
2.2 What about "Digital Auto-Fous (DAF)" lenses?
2.3 Current motion technology
2.3.1 DC motors
2.3.2 Stepper motors
2.3.3 Voice-coil motors
2.3.4 Ultra-sonic motors
2.4 Challenging requirements
2.4.1 Size
2.4.2 Cost
2.4.3 Ruggedness
2.5 Responses
2.5.1 Piezoelectric motors
Sidebar: Shape Memory Alloy (SMA): Promising, but not ready for primetime
2.5.2 Electroactive Polymers (EAPs)
2.5.3 Electrowetting
II. Vendor Profiles
3. Artificial Muscle Inc.
3.1 Company Profile
3.1.1 Primary Contact
3.2 Technology
3.3 Advantages
3.3.1 Compared to traditional actuators?
3.3.2 Compared to competing technologies?
3.3.3 Compared to competing products that use similar technology?
3.4 Disadvantages
3.4.1 Compared to traditional actuators?
3.4.2 Compared to competing technologies?
3.4.3 Compared to competing products that use similar technology?
3.5 Product Information
3.5.1 Product names / models
3.5.2 Release dates
3.5.3 Target customer and market segment
3.5.4 Product size
3.5.5 Unit price
3.5.6 Speed
3.5.7 User experience
3.5.8 Power requirements
3.5.9 Other requirements
3.5.10 Ruggedness
3.5.11 Manufacturing supply
3.5.12 Track record
4. Johnson Electric / Nanomotion
4.1 Company Profile
4.1.1 Primary Contact
4.2 Technology
4.3 Advantages
4.3.1 Compared to traditional actuators?
4.3.2 Compared to competing technologies?
4.3.3 Compared to competing products that use similar technology?
4.4 Disadvantages
4.4.1 Compared to traditional actuators?
4.4.2 Compared to competing technologies?
4.4.3 Compared to competing products that use similar technology?
4.5 Product Information
4.5.1 Product names / models
4.5.2 Release dates
4.5.3 Target customer and market segment
4.5.4 Product size
4.5.5 Unit price
4.5.6 Speed
4.5.7 User experience
4.5.8 Power requirements
4.5.9 Other requirements
4.5.10 Ruggedness
4.5.11 Manufacturing supply
4.5.12 Track record
5. New Scale Technologies, Inc.
5.1 Company Profile
5.1.1 Primary Contact
5.2 Technology
5.3 Advantages
5.3.1 Compared to traditional actuators?
5.3.2 Compared to competing technologies?
5.3.3 Compared to competing products that use similar technology?

5.4 Disadvantages
5.4.1 Compared to traditional actuators?
5.4.2 Compared to competing technologies?
5.4.3 Compared to competing products that use similar technology?
5.5 Product Information
5.5.1 Product names / models
5.5.2 Release dates
5.5.3 Target customer and market segment
5.5.4 Product size
5.5.5 Unit price
5.5.6 Speed
5.5.7 User experience
5.5.8 Power requirements
5.5.9 Other requirements
5.5.10 Ruggedness .
5.5.11 Manufacturing supply
5.5.12 Track record
6. Varioptic SA
6.1 Company Profile
6.1.1 Primary Contact
6.2 Technology
6.3 Advantages
6.3.1 Compared to traditional actuators?
6.3.2 Compared to competing technologies?
6.3.3 Compared to competing products that use similar technology?
6.4 Disadvantages
6.4.1 Compared to traditional actuators?
6.4.2 Compared to competing technologies?
6.4.3 Compared to competing products that use similar technology?
6.5 Product Information
6.5.1 Product names / models
6.5.2 Release dates
6.5.3 Target customer and market segment
6.5.4 Product size
6.5.5 Unit price
6.5.6 Speed
6.5.7 User experience
6.5.8 Power requirements
6.5.9 Other requirements
6.5.10 Ruggedness
6.5.11 Manufacturing supply
6.5.12 Track record
III. Conclusions & Outlook
7. Conclusions & Outlook
7.1. The Need Exists
7.2. Artificial Muscle Inc.
7.3. Johnson Electric / Nanomotion
7.4. New Scale Technologies .
7.5. Varioptic S.A.
7.6 The Proof of the Pudding
 

Table of Figures

Fig. 1 – Sharp 5MP CCD camera module LZ0P3770 with
auto-focus and 3x optical ‘inner’ zoom
Fig. 2 – Toshiba A5504T, Kyocera TK41, Motorola RZR V3
Fig. 3 – Samsung Ultra Edition handsets
Fig. 4 – Grid showing 36 2.2-micron pixels on the cross section
of the average human hair
Fig. 5 – Schematic of a typical mobile camera module
Fig. 6 – First auto-focus camera: Konica C35 AF
Fig. 7 – Afocal zoom lens system
Fig. 8 – Digital vs. optical zoom
Fig. 9 – Phones that incorporate optical zoom
Fig. 10 – A simple DC motor
Fig. 11 – FDK Corporation SM3.7 series: the world’s smallest stepper motors
Fig. 12 – Sharp 5MP, 3x optical zoom module compared to typical camera-phone module
Fig. 13 – MIGA Motors SMA-based Displacement Multiplied Linear Actuator
Fig. 14 – How dialectric elastomers work
Fig. 15 – Electrowetting: a droplet of liquid on a hydrophobic surface
Fig. 16 – A cutaway illustration of AMI’s Universal Muscle Activator (UMA)
Fig. 17 – AMI’s DLP-95 compared to a dime
Fig. 18 – Cross-section of AMI’s DLP-95 camera module
Fig. 19 – A drawing illustrating the linear motion created by the elliptical trajectory of the piezo element
Fig. 20 – A comparison of the macro performance of (top to bottom) stepper, VCM, and NanoZoom
Fig. 21 – NanoLens module
Fig. 22 – NanoZoom module
Fig. 23 – NanoZoom 13-mm Zoom motion unit
Fig. 24 – Illustration of SQIGGLE motor with the parts labeled
Fig. 25 – Illustration of a camera module showing the lens assembly in the up & down positions
Fig. 26 – New Scale SQIGGLE motor SQL-1.55-6 on a fingertip
Fig. 27 – A prototype optical zoom module from New Scale, compared to an Xacto knife
Fig. 28 – A Varioptic lens with the current ON and OFF
Fig. 29 – Centering a liquid droplet .
Fig. 30 – Schematic drawing for a prototype optical zoom lens based on two liquid lenses ..
Fig. 31 – AFCM MI285 2MP auto-focus camera module
Fig. 32 – Varioptic Lenses Artic 320 and Arctic 416, compared to the tip of a pencil