Apple should make a full-sized camera with built-in phone and browsing capabilities. And it should be brown; browner than the brownest brown times infinity.
I just want a camera that can take landscape photos while the phone is held vertical. Give us a button to select portrait or landscape. Users almost never intend to shoot portrait video but holding the phone vertically is more natural and comfortable so the internet is full of portrait videos that everyone hates watching.
YES. I've been thinking for a while now that Apple is the one company that can kill vertical video by doing exactly this.
I just want a camera that can take landscape photos while the phone is held vertical. Give us a button to select portrait or landscape. Users almost never intend to shoot portrait video but holding the phone vertically is more natural and comfortable so the internet is full of portrait videos that everyone hates watching.
This is not practical. Shooting in portrait mode while holding the phone vertical, you will see the image occupying less than half of the screen. It becomes difficult to make adjustments.
He meant the opposite to what you interpretted. Holding the phone in a more comfortable vertical (portrait) orientation but having the result captured in landscape orientation.
On the other point, yes the Huawei P20 (but the Pro version) and the Mate RS already have triple rear cameras.
Someone else mentioned that it wasn't necessary to have a triple camera array.
Almost everyone that has used the P20 Pro would seem to disagree.
You understand me wrong. If you want the image captured in landscape orientation, how could the screen display the full image on the whole screen when you are holding the phone vertically?
Why is this hard to imagine? Yes, the video preview wouldn't take up the full screen vertically, but it doesn't have to. Make the default video setting landscape regardless of phone orientation and we'd reduce the use of vertical video by a huge factor. The end result is worth it.
I just want a camera that can take landscape photos while the phone is held vertical. Give us a button to select portrait or landscape. Users almost never intend to shoot portrait video but holding the phone vertically is more natural and comfortable so the internet is full of portrait videos that everyone hates watching.
This is not practical. Shooting in portrait mode while holding the phone vertical, you will see the image occupying less than half of the screen. It becomes difficult to make adjustments.
He meant the opposite to what you interpretted. Holding the phone in a more comfortable vertical (portrait) orientation but having the result captured in landscape orientation.
On the other point, yes the Huawei P20 (but the Pro version) and the Mate RS already have triple rear cameras.
Someone else mentioned that it wasn't necessary to have a triple camera array.
Almost everyone that has used the P20 Pro would seem to disagree.
You understand me wrong. If you want the image captured in landscape orientation, how could the screen display the full image on the whole screen when you are holding the phone vertically?
Why is this hard to imagine? Yes, the video preview wouldn't take up the full screen vertically, but it doesn't have to. Make the default video setting landscape regardless of phone orientation and we'd reduce the use of vertical video by a huge factor. The end result is worth it.
I'd guess Apple is using 4:3, 4K x 3K, 12MP imager in landscape mode. so vertical use would give you 3K x 2.25K tall (cropped.at 4/3), You wouldn't get true 4k video with the iPhone in vertical mode.
I just want a camera that can take landscape photos while the phone is held vertical. Give us a button to select portrait or landscape. Users almost never intend to shoot portrait video but holding the phone vertically is more natural and comfortable so the internet is full of portrait videos that everyone hates watching.
This is not practical. Shooting in portrait mode while holding the phone vertical, you will see the image occupying less than half of the screen. It becomes difficult to make adjustments.
He meant the opposite to what you interpretted. Holding the phone in a more comfortable vertical (portrait) orientation but having the result captured in landscape orientation.
On the other point, yes the Huawei P20 (but the Pro version) and the Mate RS already have triple rear cameras.
Someone else mentioned that it wasn't necessary to have a triple camera array.
Almost everyone that has used the P20 Pro would seem to disagree.
You understand me wrong. If you want the image captured in landscape orientation, how could the screen display the full image on the whole screen when you are holding the phone vertically?
Why is this hard to imagine? Yes, the video preview wouldn't take up the full screen vertically, but it doesn't have to. Make the default video setting landscape regardless of phone orientation and we'd reduce the use of vertical video by a huge factor. The end result is worth it.
I'd guess Apple is using 4:3, 4K x 3K, 12MP imager in landscape mode. so vertical use would give you 3K x 2.25K tall (cropped.at 4/3), You wouldn't get true 4k video with the iPhone in vertical mode.
I'm guessing that wouldn't be desirable.
99% of iPhone users have no idea what 4K video is.
I just want a camera that can take landscape photos while the phone is held vertical. Give us a button to select portrait or landscape. Users almost never intend to shoot portrait video but holding the phone vertically is more natural and comfortable so the internet is full of portrait videos that everyone hates watching.
This is not practical. Shooting in portrait mode while holding the phone vertical, you will see the image occupying less than half of the screen. It becomes difficult to make adjustments.
He meant the opposite to what you interpretted. Holding the phone in a more comfortable vertical (portrait) orientation but having the result captured in landscape orientation.
On the other point, yes the Huawei P20 (but the Pro version) and the Mate RS already have triple rear cameras.
Someone else mentioned that it wasn't necessary to have a triple camera array.
Almost everyone that has used the P20 Pro would seem to disagree.
It isn't necessary to have a triple camera array for quality images. Most users don't care about that level of IQ, and are more than happy with single or dual cameras.
Show me some sales numbers that demonstrate that there is a wide market for triple rear cameras. Otherwise, it's just a halo feature for a small niche.
As I have mentioned on many occasions, smartphones reached 'good enough' levels a couple of years ago. I am very happy with mine in spite of it being a low end phone.
I have no need to upgrade but my next phone will have a dual camera array. That is almost a given even if I am not explicitly looking for a dual camera and would be fine with just one.
Currently though, if you are going to pay premium prices, you want the phone to have the necessary extras. So, while most users might not care about tri camera setups, the people that are considering premium phones probably will care.
Currently, the P20 Pro can do things no other phone can do in photography. It is as simple as that and I have yet to see any review that disputes this.
I don't know the sales numbers because the phone has only been on the market for a few weeks. That said, Huawei has stated that the P20 Pro got off to a flying start:
No numbers, no confidence that they are the "top" sellers other than for Huawei in comparison to previous model sales, which means what exactly?
You diss all data that actually provides iPhone sales numbers. Why would I not believe that those "smash" numbers are bullshit?
Oh, BTW.
I looked up sales of the P9, and the only article that I could find was that from April 2016 to March 2017, all P9 models combined sold about 12 million units worldwide; that's about a million a month.
Good for Huawei, I suppose, but not really in Apple's league for premium phone sales. Maybe combine all of the current Mate Models, plus the Honor models, might push Huawei to 30 million in sales for this year.
The Pixel 2 was apparently only sold in very few countries.
This thread is about triple cameras, not sales.
You brought sales into the picture, not me. I only included those links to give you an idea of how things might be going (after making it clear that real numbers don't even officially exist yet) and provide you with an attempt at an answer.
I don't 'diss' any real sales information. I might put it into perspective when people start trying to interpret quarterly numbers out of context or make claims on estimates but not 'diss'.
Huawei is very much in Apple's league. Last year it shipped 153 million handsets. For two quarters it consistently outsold Apple to become the world's second largest handset manufacturer:
The quarter that Apple pulled back, it topped Huawei by just 8 million units. Apple went back into number two spot annually on the back of the Christmas quarter (Apple's peak quarter).
The Mate 10 series stepped ahead of Apple in some aspects. The P20 Pro simply widens the gap in still more areas (at a far lower price point) with no reply on the horizon from Apple until the end of the year and when it comes, it might include dual SIM (long standard on many Huawei phones) and not include a triple camera array (for 2019 according to this latest rumour). By then, the P20 Pro will be the least of Apple's worries. The Note 10 will be just around the corner and the Mate 20 will be about to drop (possibly along with a Porsche Edition). And to top things off, rumours claim that the tri-camera setup will quickly move down Huawei's product line.
Take a look at the image of the P20 Pro in this article and give me your opinion on the exterior design:
We really need to step back and see things from an industry perspective. There has never been so much competition for Apple at the high end. Nor for that matter in the lower tiers, where Apple now has a far wider spread.
This is great news for consumers except for US consumers that have restricted choice.
I just want a camera that can take landscape photos while the phone is held vertical. Give us a button to select portrait or landscape. Users almost never intend to shoot portrait video but holding the phone vertically is more natural and comfortable so the internet is full of portrait videos that everyone hates watching.
This is not practical. Shooting in portrait mode while holding the phone vertical, you will see the image occupying less than half of the screen. It becomes difficult to make adjustments.
He meant the opposite to what you interpretted. Holding the phone in a more comfortable vertical (portrait) orientation but having the result captured in landscape orientation.
On the other point, yes the Huawei P20 (but the Pro version) and the Mate RS already have triple rear cameras.
Someone else mentioned that it wasn't necessary to have a triple camera array.
Almost everyone that has used the P20 Pro would seem to disagree.
It isn't necessary to have a triple camera array for quality images. Most users don't care about that level of IQ, and are more than happy with single or dual cameras.
Show me some sales numbers that demonstrate that there is a wide market for triple rear cameras. Otherwise, it's just a halo feature for a small niche.
As I have mentioned on many occasions, smartphones reached 'good enough' levels a couple of years ago. I am very happy with mine in spite of it being a low end phone.
I have no need to upgrade but my next phone will have a dual camera array. That is almost a given even if I am not explicitly looking for a dual camera and would be fine with just one.
Currently though, if you are going to pay premium prices, you want the phone to have the necessary extras. So, while most users might not care about tri camera setups, the people that are considering premium phones probably will care.
Currently, the P20 Pro can do things no other phone can do in photography. It is as simple as that and I have yet to see any review that disputes this.
I don't know the sales numbers because the phone has only been on the market for a few weeks. That said, Huawei has stated that the P20 Pro got off to a flying start:
All that work by Huawei and it adds up to nothing. The thing still runs Android. Fatal flaw. Might as well compare a $999 DSLR versus iPhone X for camera capability. The DSLR beats the X too, but it will never be used by discerning consumers as a smartphone. Same as Huawei. It’s just out of consideration.
I just want a camera that can take landscape photos while the phone is held vertical. Give us a button to select portrait or landscape. Users almost never intend to shoot portrait video but holding the phone vertically is more natural and comfortable so the internet is full of portrait videos that everyone hates watching.
This is not practical. Shooting in portrait mode while holding the phone vertical, you will see the image occupying less than half of the screen. It becomes difficult to make adjustments.
He meant the opposite to what you interpretted. Holding the phone in a more comfortable vertical (portrait) orientation but having the result captured in landscape orientation.
On the other point, yes the Huawei P20 (but the Pro version) and the Mate RS already have triple rear cameras.
Someone else mentioned that it wasn't necessary to have a triple camera array.
Almost everyone that has used the P20 Pro would seem to disagree.
It isn't necessary to have a triple camera array for quality images. Most users don't care about that level of IQ, and are more than happy with single or dual cameras.
Show me some sales numbers that demonstrate that there is a wide market for triple rear cameras. Otherwise, it's just a halo feature for a small niche.
As I have mentioned on many occasions, smartphones reached 'good enough' levels a couple of years ago. I am very happy with mine in spite of it being a low end phone.
I have no need to upgrade but my next phone will have a dual camera array. That is almost a given even if I am not explicitly looking for a dual camera and would be fine with just one.
Currently though, if you are going to pay premium prices, you want the phone to have the necessary extras. So, while most users might not care about tri camera setups, the people that are considering premium phones probably will care.
Currently, the P20 Pro can do things no other phone can do in photography. It is as simple as that and I have yet to see any review that disputes this.
I don't know the sales numbers because the phone has only been on the market for a few weeks. That said, Huawei has stated that the P20 Pro got off to a flying start:
I just want a camera that can take landscape photos while the phone is held vertical. Give us a button to select portrait or landscape. Users almost never intend to shoot portrait video but holding the phone vertically is more natural and comfortable so the internet is full of portrait videos that everyone hates watching.
This is not practical. Shooting in portrait mode while holding the phone vertical, you will see the image occupying less than half of the screen. It becomes difficult to make adjustments.
He meant the opposite to what you interpretted. Holding the phone in a more comfortable vertical (portrait) orientation but having the result captured in landscape orientation.
On the other point, yes the Huawei P20 (but the Pro version) and the Mate RS already have triple rear cameras.
Someone else mentioned that it wasn't necessary to have a triple camera array.
Almost everyone that has used the P20 Pro would seem to disagree.
It isn't necessary to have a triple camera array for quality images. Most users don't care about that level of IQ, and are more than happy with single or dual cameras.
Show me some sales numbers that demonstrate that there is a wide market for triple rear cameras. Otherwise, it's just a halo feature for a small niche.
As I have mentioned on many occasions, smartphones reached 'good enough' levels a couple of years ago. I am very happy with mine in spite of it being a low end phone.
I have no need to upgrade but my next phone will have a dual camera array. That is almost a given even if I am not explicitly looking for a dual camera and would be fine with just one.
Currently though, if you are going to pay premium prices, you want the phone to have the necessary extras. So, while most users might not care about tri camera setups, the people that are considering premium phones probably will care.
Currently, the P20 Pro can do things no other phone can do in photography. It is as simple as that and I have yet to see any review that disputes this.
I don't know the sales numbers because the phone has only been on the market for a few weeks. That said, Huawei has stated that the P20 Pro got off to a flying start:
All that work by Huawei and it adds up to nothing. The thing still runs Android. Fatal flaw. Might as well compare a $999 DSLR versus iPhone X for camera capability. The DSLR beats the X too, but it will never be used by discerning consumers as a smartphone. Same as Huawei. It’s just out of consideration.
I think it's preference for most people. iOS or Android (and all the different varieties on top of whatever Android release you have).
I definitely wouldn't call mine a fatal flaw. Ironically the Huawei EMUI interface is largely given the thumbs down by people who have used other versions of the OS. I like it though. It's pretty decent IMO but there you go, it's only my opinion. Personally, I feel cramped by iOS and its limitations.
I'm not sure how important the user facing aspects of a mobile OS are nowadays, though. I've never tried to calculate how much of my daily phone use is actually used on the system as opposed to in the apps. It must be quite short. I mean the user facing aspects.
Under the hood, system use is out of my hands but no one has stolen my identity, I haven't seen any increase in spam etc. All my apps get regular updates.
I just want a camera that can take landscape photos while the phone is held vertical. Give us a button to select portrait or landscape. Users almost never intend to shoot portrait video but holding the phone vertically is more natural and comfortable so the internet is full of portrait videos that everyone hates watching.
This is not practical. Shooting in portrait mode while holding the phone vertical, you will see the image occupying less than half of the screen. It becomes difficult to make adjustments.
He meant the opposite to what you interpretted. Holding the phone in a more comfortable vertical (portrait) orientation but having the result captured in landscape orientation.
On the other point, yes the Huawei P20 (but the Pro version) and the Mate RS already have triple rear cameras.
Someone else mentioned that it wasn't necessary to have a triple camera array.
Almost everyone that has used the P20 Pro would seem to disagree.
It isn't necessary to have a triple camera array for quality images. Most users don't care about that level of IQ, and are more than happy with single or dual cameras.
Show me some sales numbers that demonstrate that there is a wide market for triple rear cameras. Otherwise, it's just a halo feature for a small niche.
As I have mentioned on many occasions, smartphones reached 'good enough' levels a couple of years ago. I am very happy with mine in spite of it being a low end phone.
I have no need to upgrade but my next phone will have a dual camera array. That is almost a given even if I am not explicitly looking for a dual camera and would be fine with just one.
Currently though, if you are going to pay premium prices, you want the phone to have the necessary extras. So, while most users might not care about tri camera setups, the people that are considering premium phones probably will care.
Currently, the P20 Pro can do things no other phone can do in photography. It is as simple as that and I have yet to see any review that disputes this.
I don't know the sales numbers because the phone has only been on the market for a few weeks. That said, Huawei has stated that the P20 Pro got off to a flying start:
"There’s a direct link between the Facebook scandal and Google’s failings on the privacy front. As people started poring over what data Facebook held about them, it was quickly discovered that Facebook collected the call records and SMS data of its Android users but not of its iPhone users. Why the disparity? Facebook’s app could ask for permission to access that info on Android, whereas Apple’s iOS refuses to entertain the idea,"
Yeah, the fatal flaw is that Android OS isn't iOS.
So, on a Apple website, it's pretty easy to surmise that "fatal flaw" is wrt Android OS being unsuitable for an iOS user.
I just want a camera that can take landscape photos while the phone is held vertical. Give us a button to select portrait or landscape. Users almost never intend to shoot portrait video but holding the phone vertically is more natural and comfortable so the internet is full of portrait videos that everyone hates watching.
This is not practical. Shooting in portrait mode while holding the phone vertical, you will see the image occupying less than half of the screen. It becomes difficult to make adjustments.
He meant the opposite to what you interpretted. Holding the phone in a more comfortable vertical (portrait) orientation but having the result captured in landscape orientation.
On the other point, yes the Huawei P20 (but the Pro version) and the Mate RS already have triple rear cameras.
Someone else mentioned that it wasn't necessary to have a triple camera array.
Almost everyone that has used the P20 Pro would seem to disagree.
It isn't necessary to have a triple camera array for quality images. Most users don't care about that level of IQ, and are more than happy with single or dual cameras.
Show me some sales numbers that demonstrate that there is a wide market for triple rear cameras. Otherwise, it's just a halo feature for a small niche.
As I have mentioned on many occasions, smartphones reached 'good enough' levels a couple of years ago. I am very happy with mine in spite of it being a low end phone.
I have no need to upgrade but my next phone will have a dual camera array. That is almost a given even if I am not explicitly looking for a dual camera and would be fine with just one.
Currently though, if you are going to pay premium prices, you want the phone to have the necessary extras. So, while most users might not care about tri camera setups, the people that are considering premium phones probably will care.
Currently, the P20 Pro can do things no other phone can do in photography. It is as simple as that and I have yet to see any review that disputes this.
I don't know the sales numbers because the phone has only been on the market for a few weeks. That said, Huawei has stated that the P20 Pro got off to a flying start:
It isn't necessary to have a triple camera array for quality images. Most users don't care about that level of IQ, and are more than happy with single or dual cameras.
Show me some sales numbers that demonstrate that there is a wide market for triple rear cameras. Otherwise, it's just a halo feature for a small niche.
Adding a B&W sensor to the mix has the potential to dramatically improve low light image quality. You know, shots at night, in bars, and other dimly lit situations.
Throwing on a 3rd camera doesn't make the cameras better!!! This is typical Android thing. Take something and just over do it. More is better, type of thing. Yet Google Pixel phone with 1 camera seems to be the overall Winner. So maybe this is a more Software side issue that could improve overall picture quality, not throwing on a 3rd camera.
You're right about software - that can make a big difference on the DSLR side too.
I disagree with your "Throwing on a 3rd camera doesn't make the cameras better" statement though. I use the 2x zoom on my X regularly. I can get a full 12MP photo with tighter framing to my subject without having to get closer (often isn't practical when I'm on my bike).
Your iPhone X only has 2 camera's, NOT 3. You missed the point. Why not throw on 10 cameras? What you're talking about is Optical Zoom. Which phones don't normally have. You can kind of get this having 2 camera's with different lens on the phone. So it's one or the other. It's not variable like on a DSLR. You just don't have space on a Smartphone to do that. Samesung made a phone doing that but it was bulky. Their ZOOM phones. The S4 Zoom and the K ZOOM. These have real Optical Zoom on them.
The point I was making is Apple does 2 Camera's and everyone else then has to start doing that. They someone else on Android goes, well if they have 2, why not throw on a 3rd. If 2 is better, 3 must be better yet. No one cared about screen resolution. Apple comes out with the Retina screen which made a huge difference, then on Android they go, well if Apple did that, people like it, we should do it to. But they went overboard with the ppi so much, that no human can possibly see a pixel and on such a tiny screen. It does more harm than anything, making the CPU/GPU work much harder to throw around a bunch of pixels you can't see.
The solution is not to throw more Camera's on the phone. The solution is better software to get more out of what you have. A Smartphone camera is never going to be a DSLR. Not without a larger sensor and a larger lens. It's going to have limitations.
The solution is not to throw more Camera's on the phone. The solution is better software to get more out of what you have. A Smartphone camera is never going to be a DSLR. Not without a larger sensor and a larger lens. It's going to have limitations.
Are you saying that the dual cameras on iPhones were a bad idea?
I’m all about better camera HW and better SW, but I can see how additional cameras that have different capabilities are a good thing. For example, could a far-range IR camera on the back of an iPhone help make better quality photos because that data could be used to determine foreground and background data? How about for determining low-light images? Is one camera that allows the best image within a given size really feasible?
It isn't necessary to have a triple camera array for quality images. Most users don't care about that level of IQ, and are more than happy with single or dual cameras.
Show me some sales numbers that demonstrate that there is a wide market for triple rear cameras. Otherwise, it's just a halo feature for a small niche.
Adding a B&W sensor to the mix has the potential to dramatically improve low light image quality. You know, shots at night, in bars, and other dimly lit situations.
And that, I think, people DO care about.
People may care about it, but will they pay for it? Some will, most are satisfied with the current level of IQ that they have. Adding a color sensor that works up to ISO 12800, as Sony has, would be even better. The truth is that for most people, IQ has long been good enough. gatorguy said:
I just want a camera that can take landscape photos while the phone is held vertical. Give us a button to select portrait or landscape. Users almost never intend to shoot portrait video but holding the phone vertically is more natural and comfortable so the internet is full of portrait videos that everyone hates watching.
This is not practical. Shooting in portrait mode while holding the phone vertical, you will see the image occupying less than half of the screen. It becomes difficult to make adjustments.
He meant the opposite to what you interpretted. Holding the phone in a more comfortable vertical (portrait) orientation but having the result captured in landscape orientation.
On the other point, yes the Huawei P20 (but the Pro version) and the Mate RS already have triple rear cameras.
Someone else mentioned that it wasn't necessary to have a triple camera array.
Almost everyone that has used the P20 Pro would seem to disagree.
It isn't necessary to have a triple camera array for quality images. Most users don't care about that level of IQ, and are more than happy with single or dual cameras.
Show me some sales numbers that demonstrate that there is a wide market for triple rear cameras. Otherwise, it's just a halo feature for a small niche.
As I have mentioned on many occasions, smartphones reached 'good enough' levels a couple of years ago. I am very happy with mine in spite of it being a low end phone.
I have no need to upgrade but my next phone will have a dual camera array. That is almost a given even if I am not explicitly looking for a dual camera and would be fine with just one.
Currently though, if you are going to pay premium prices, you want the phone to have the necessary extras. So, while most users might not care about tri camera setups, the people that are considering premium phones probably will care.
Currently, the P20 Pro can do things no other phone can do in photography. It is as simple as that and I have yet to see any review that disputes this.
I don't know the sales numbers because the phone has only been on the market for a few weeks. That said, Huawei has stated that the P20 Pro got off to a flying start:
People may care about it, but will they pay for it? Some will, most are satisfied with the current level of IQ that they have. Adding a color sensor that works up to ISO 12800, as Sony has, would be even better. The truth is that for most people, IQ has long been good enough.
There are one or two minor issues with physics that involve pixel size, depth, and whatnot that make just "Adding a color sensor that works up to ISO 12800" somewhat problematic. A B&W sensor has no Bayer color filter to block 30% of the incoming light. Such a sensor could be lower resolution (say, 8MP), increasing pixel size and dramatically improving the S/N ratio. All major wins.
And I think you're projecting "for most people" based on your own viewpoint. I personally think "most people" would prefer to have low-light images that didn't look like a blurry, grainy mess.
Truth be told, improvements in camera and video technology are one of the main things that drive people to upgrade their phones. Apple knows this, which is why the "camera" portion of each iPhone announcement is so prominent and given so much time.
Camera technology is also one of the main differentiators that separate high-end phones from mid-to-low-end models.
People may care about it, but will they pay for it? Some will, most are satisfied with the current level of IQ that they have. Adding a color sensor that works up to ISO 12800, as Sony has, would be even better. The truth is that for most people, IQ has long been good enough.
There are one or two minor issues with physics that involve pixel size, depth, and whatnot that make just "Adding a color sensor that works up to ISO 12800" somewhat problematic. A B&W sensor has no Bayer color filter to block 30% of the incoming light. Such a sensor could be lower resolution (say, 8MP), increasing pixel size and dramatically improving the S/N ratio. All major wins.
And I think you're projecting "for most people" based on your own viewpoint. I personally think "most people" would prefer to have low-light images that didn't look like a blurry, grainy mess.
Truth be told, improvements in camera and video technology are one of the main things that drive people to upgrade their phones. Apple knows this, which is why the "camera" portion of each iPhone announcement is so prominent and given so much time.
Camera technology is also one of the main differentiators that separate high-end phones from mid-to-low-end models.
People may care about it, but will they pay for it? Some will, most are satisfied with the current level of IQ that they have. Adding a color sensor that works up to ISO 12800, as Sony has, would be even better. The truth is that for most people, IQ has long been good enough.
There are one or two minor issues with physics that involve pixel size, depth, and whatnot that make just "Adding a color sensor that works up to ISO 12800" somewhat problematic. A B&W sensor has no Bayer color filter to block 30% of the incoming light. Such a sensor could be lower resolution (say, 8MP), increasing pixel size and dramatically improving the S/N ratio. All major wins.
And I think you're projecting "for most people" based on your own viewpoint. I personally think "most people" would prefer to have low-light images that didn't look like a blurry, grainy mess.
Truth be told, improvements in camera and video technology are one of the main things that drive people to upgrade their phones. Apple knows this, which is why the "camera" portion of each iPhone announcement is so prominent and given so much time.
Camera technology is also one of the main differentiators that separate high-end phones from mid-to-low-end models.
I just want a camera that can take landscape photos while the phone is held vertical. Give us a button to select portrait or landscape. Users almost never intend to shoot portrait video but holding the phone vertically is more natural and comfortable so the internet is full of portrait videos that everyone hates watching.
This is not practical. Shooting in portrait mode while holding the phone vertical, you will see the image occupying less than half of the screen. It becomes difficult to make adjustments.
He meant the opposite to what you interpretted. Holding the phone in a more comfortable vertical (portrait) orientation but having the result captured in landscape orientation.
On the other point, yes the Huawei P20 (but the Pro version) and the Mate RS already have triple rear cameras.
Someone else mentioned that it wasn't necessary to have a triple camera array.
Almost everyone that has used the P20 Pro would seem to disagree.
It isn't necessary to have a triple camera array for quality images. Most users don't care about that level of IQ, and are more than happy with single or dual cameras.
Show me some sales numbers that demonstrate that there is a wide market for triple rear cameras. Otherwise, it's just a halo feature for a small niche.
As I have mentioned on many occasions, smartphones reached 'good enough' levels a couple of years ago. I am very happy with mine in spite of it being a low end phone.
I have no need to upgrade but my next phone will have a dual camera array. That is almost a given even if I am not explicitly looking for a dual camera and would be fine with just one.
Currently though, if you are going to pay premium prices, you want the phone to have the necessary extras. So, while most users might not care about tri camera setups, the people that are considering premium phones probably will care.
Currently, the P20 Pro can do things no other phone can do in photography. It is as simple as that and I have yet to see any review that disputes this.
I don't know the sales numbers because the phone has only been on the market for a few weeks. That said, Huawei has stated that the P20 Pro got off to a flying start:
"There’s a direct link between the Facebook scandal and Google’s failings on the privacy front. As people started poring over what data Facebook held about them, it was quickly discovered that Facebook collected the call records and SMS data of its Android users but not of its iPhone users. Why the disparity? Facebook’s app could ask for permission to access that info on Android, whereas Apple’s iOS refuses to entertain the idea,"
Yeah, the fatal flaw is that Android OS isn't iOS.
So, on a Apple website, it's pretty easy to surmise that "fatal flaw" is wrt Android OS being unsuitable for an iOS user.
This an Apple centric site.
However, Appleinsider has a fair amount of Android news and Android handset news when it's relevant (mainly Samsung). No doubt there will be an article or two on news coming out of Google's developer conference soon.
The author of the piece you linked to made it explicitly clear that in spite of the content of the article, he still uses an Android phone.
What does that tell you?
This is not a fatal flaw except in the opinion of the holder. It all boils down to preference.
I wasn't affected by the CA scandal because I didn't use the app and rarely use FB. When I do, it is via the web client and all the information on my profile is false.
There are video cameras everywhere I go. I am reminded of the fact by signs that tell me it is for my own safety but those same signs tell me I can 'exercise my rights' by contacting a postal address. We live in a digital age. Shops know what you buy, banks know where you shop. Your phone company knows the numbers you call, where you are, the pages you visit etc. You have little real privacy as you are just a hack or error away from having your 'private' information revealed. Apple is not immune in any way either. The same applies and Apple has made it clear that it will comply with the laws in different jurisdictions when it comes to managing our information.
We are all given privacy terms to read for the services we use that detail how our data will be used. We can agree or disagree to how our activities/data is managed. It is doubtful we have seen the end of CA style abuse (and at the end of the day it is abuse). Data protection laws are slowly catching up with technology and if you happen to live somewhere with solid privacy and data protection legislation, the basic protections should be in place. From there it's your call on Android or iOS, weighing up the pros and contras of each side.
People may care about it, but will they pay for it? Some will, most are satisfied with the current level of IQ that they have. Adding a color sensor that works up to ISO 12800, as Sony has, would be even better. The truth is that for most people, IQ has long been good enough.
There are one or two minor issues with physics that involve pixel size, depth, and whatnot that make just "Adding a color sensor that works up to ISO 12800" somewhat problematic. A B&W sensor has no Bayer color filter to block 30% of the incoming light. Such a sensor could be lower resolution (say, 8MP), increasing pixel size and dramatically improving the S/N ratio. All major wins.
And I think you're projecting "for most people" based on your own viewpoint. I personally think "most people" would prefer to have low-light images that didn't look like a blurry, grainy mess.
Truth be told, improvements in camera and video technology are one of the main things that drive people to upgrade their phones. Apple knows this, which is why the "camera" portion of each iPhone announcement is so prominent and given so much time.
Camera technology is also one of the main differentiators that separate high-end phones from mid-to-low-end models.
You prefer improved low light capability, but most people aren't going to pay a premium for that.
I think everyone would like to get better photos in low light and photography is definitely one of the reasons to pay a premium. Obviously it's not the only reason.
An 800€ phone isn't within everyone's reach but for those who can afford them, photography has always been very much a tent pole feature. Apple has run (and in fact still runs) advertising campaigns promoting solely the iPhone's photographic prowess.
The P20 Pro can actually reach an ISO of 102,400 although it will rarely (if ever) go there.
What really counts is the photo and currently it is taking photos that other handsets simply can't take.
To achieve what it is capable of, other factors come into play in a combination of hardware and software, so for example, it can reach a 3x lossless zoom but go still higher with little loss in quality.
If Apple follows suit with a triple camera, I'm sure low light performance will be an important part of it.
Comments
I'm guessing that wouldn't be desirable.
This thread is about triple cameras, not sales.
You brought sales into the picture, not me. I only included those links to give you an idea of how things might be going (after making it clear that real numbers don't even officially exist yet) and provide you with an attempt at an answer.
I don't 'diss' any real sales information. I might put it into perspective when people start trying to interpret quarterly numbers out of context or make claims on estimates but not 'diss'.
Huawei is very much in Apple's league. Last year it shipped 153 million handsets. For two quarters it consistently outsold Apple to become the world's second largest handset manufacturer:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-iphone-toppled-huawei-takes-second-spot-in-global-sales-for-first-time/
The quarter that Apple pulled back, it topped Huawei by just 8 million units. Apple went back into number two spot annually on the back of the Christmas quarter (Apple's peak quarter).
The Mate 10 series stepped ahead of Apple in some aspects. The P20 Pro simply widens the gap in still more areas (at a far lower price point) with no reply on the horizon from Apple until the end of the year and when it comes, it might include dual SIM (long standard on many Huawei phones) and not include a triple camera array (for 2019 according to this latest rumour). By then, the P20 Pro will be the least of Apple's worries. The Note 10 will be just around the corner and the Mate 20 will be about to drop (possibly along with a Porsche Edition). And to top things off, rumours claim that the tri-camera setup will quickly move down Huawei's product line.
Take a look at the image of the P20 Pro in this article and give me your opinion on the exterior design:
https://www.androidcentral.com/top-5-things-i-learned-traveling-huawei-p20-pro
I have seen the entire P Series line in person and some of the options are simply gorgeous.
Huawei has stated a goal of 20 million P Series phones this year but that includes the 'lite' version too:
https://www.phonearena.com/news/Huawei-P20-sales-20-million-2018_id104118
We really need to step back and see things from an industry perspective. There has never been so much competition for Apple at the high end. Nor for that matter in the lower tiers, where Apple now has a far wider spread.
This is great news for consumers except for US consumers that have restricted choice.
I definitely wouldn't call mine a fatal flaw. Ironically the Huawei EMUI interface is largely given the thumbs down by people who have used other versions of the OS. I like it though. It's pretty decent IMO but there you go, it's only my opinion. Personally, I feel cramped by iOS and its limitations.
I'm not sure how important the user facing aspects of a mobile OS are nowadays, though. I've never tried to calculate how much of my daily phone use is actually used on the system as opposed to in the apps. It must be quite short. I mean the user facing aspects.
Under the hood, system use is out of my hands but no one has stolen my identity, I haven't seen any increase in spam etc. All my apps get regular updates.
Everything works as I expect it to.
"There’s a direct link between the Facebook scandal and Google’s failings on the privacy front. As people started poring over what data Facebook held about them, it was quickly discovered that Facebook collected the call records and SMS data of its Android users but not of its iPhone users. Why the disparity? Facebook’s app could ask for permission to access that info on Android, whereas Apple’s iOS refuses to entertain the idea,"
Yeah, the fatal flaw is that Android OS isn't iOS.
So, on a Apple website, it's pretty easy to surmise that "fatal flaw" is wrt Android OS being unsuitable for an iOS user.
And that, I think, people DO care about.
The point I was making is Apple does 2 Camera's and everyone else then has to start doing that. They someone else on Android goes, well if they have 2, why not throw on a 3rd. If 2 is better, 3 must be better yet. No one cared about screen resolution. Apple comes out with the Retina screen which made a huge difference, then on Android they go, well if Apple did that, people like it, we should do it to. But they went overboard with the ppi so much, that no human can possibly see a pixel and on such a tiny screen. It does more harm than anything, making the CPU/GPU work much harder to throw around a bunch of pixels you can't see.
The solution is not to throw more Camera's on the phone. The solution is better software to get more out of what you have. A Smartphone camera is never going to be a DSLR. Not without a larger sensor and a larger lens. It's going to have limitations.
I’m all about better camera HW and better SW, but I can see how additional cameras that have different capabilities are a good thing. For example, could a far-range IR camera on the back of an iPhone help make better quality photos because that data could be used to determine foreground and background data? How about for determining low-light images? Is one camera that allows the best image within a given size really feasible?
gatorguy said: Probably not news, but the reverse is true as well. Many Android OS users think that Apple is the fatal flaw of the iPhone.
Funny how tribal people are, even those going through the motions to appear free of bias.
And I think you're projecting "for most people" based on your own viewpoint. I personally think "most people" would prefer to have low-light images that didn't look like a blurry, grainy mess.
Truth be told, improvements in camera and video technology are one of the main things that drive people to upgrade their phones. Apple knows this, which is why the "camera" portion of each iPhone announcement is so prominent and given so much time.
Camera technology is also one of the main differentiators that separate high-end phones from mid-to-low-end models.
https://www.pocket-lint.com/phones/news/sony-mobile/143767-sony-xperia-dual-camera-system
You prefer improved low light capability, but most people aren't going to pay a premium for that.
However, Appleinsider has a fair amount of Android news and Android handset news when it's relevant (mainly Samsung). No doubt there will be an article or two on news coming out of Google's developer conference soon.
The author of the piece you linked to made it explicitly clear that in spite of the content of the article, he still uses an Android phone.
What does that tell you?
This is not a fatal flaw except in the opinion of the holder. It all boils down to preference.
I wasn't affected by the CA scandal because I didn't use the app and rarely use FB. When I do, it is via the web client and all the information on my profile is false.
There are video cameras everywhere I go. I am reminded of the fact by signs that tell me it is for my own safety but those same signs tell me I can 'exercise my rights' by contacting a postal address. We live in a digital age. Shops know what you buy, banks know where you shop. Your phone company knows the numbers you call, where you are, the pages you visit etc. You have little real privacy as you are just a hack or error away from having your 'private' information revealed. Apple is not immune in any way either. The same applies and Apple has made it clear that it will comply with the laws in different jurisdictions when it comes to managing our information.
We are all given privacy terms to read for the services we use that detail how our data will be used. We can agree or disagree to how our activities/data is managed. It is doubtful we have seen the end of CA style abuse (and at the end of the day it is abuse). Data protection laws are slowly catching up with technology and if you happen to live somewhere with solid privacy and data protection legislation, the basic protections should be in place. From there it's your call on Android or iOS, weighing up the pros and contras of each side.
An 800€ phone isn't within everyone's reach but for those who can afford them, photography has always been very much a tent pole feature. Apple has run (and in fact still runs) advertising campaigns promoting solely the iPhone's photographic prowess.
The P20 Pro can actually reach an ISO of 102,400 although it will rarely (if ever) go there.
https://www.pocket-lint.com/phones/news/huawei/143983-huawei-p20-pro-triple-camera-good-review-details-explored
What really counts is the photo and currently it is taking photos that other handsets simply can't take.
To achieve what it is capable of, other factors come into play in a combination of hardware and software, so for example, it can reach a 3x lossless zoom but go still higher with little loss in quality.
If Apple follows suit with a triple camera, I'm sure low light performance will be an important part of it.