Theoretically, you're correct. More megapixels doesn't mean better pictures. However, the general trend is that the more pixels a cameraphone has, the better pictures it takes.
Take a look at this comparison for a rival platform. Guess what? The 3.2MP cameraphone came last and the 8MP cameraphone came top.
Nice article but are we not discussing iPhone?? The market for iPod/Zune is already stagnating, Apple know this hence the iPhone/Touch. So typical of Microsoft to be catching up when it's already too late.
I know the megapixels aren't the only thing that determines picture quality (I like photography as something to do on trips...but not the reason I have a Mac)...but having more pixels makes for more dots per inch...which makes for a larger picture or a better picture when viewing at the same size. Six-10 megapixels doesn't make much of a difference (unless you turn your pics into large posters)...but 2-3 does (you are assuming RIM doesn't improve the sensor).
Given the quality of the lenses of the microcameras, you can just make more dots through interpolation and get as good of a result, if not better. Putting more sensor dots on an already too-small sensor will just make each dot less sensitive and noisier. To make the iPhone camera competitive to some of Nokia's better cameras, the iPhone pretty much needs to be thicker.
Theoretically, you're correct. More megapixels doesn't mean better pictures. However, the general trend is that the more pixels a cameraphone has, the better pictures it takes.
Take a look at this comparison for a rival platform. Guess what? The 3.2MP cameraphone came last and the 8MP cameraphone came top.
You are drawing a coincident correlation. There are certain limits to the trend you speak of making it more than just one number that has to get bigger in order to get better photos. It looks to me that the real trend on that comparison is the physical size of the camera itself, not the number of dots on the sensor. That 8MP phone is 60% thicker than the iPhone.
It looks to me that the real trend on that comparison is the physical size of the camera itself, not the number of dots on the sensor. That 8MP phone is 60% thicker than the iPhone.
But the thickest phone in the comparison came last. It's hard to draw conclusions from such a small sample group but I know that plenty of thin cameraphones that take good photos.
As I said, there's a general trend that cameraphones with more megapixels take better quality photos. I don't think it's coincidence that the 8MP phone came first, the 5MP phones ranked second to forth and the 3.2MP phone came last.
But the thickest phone in the comparison came last. It's hard to draw conclusions from such a small sample group but I know that plenty of thin cameraphones that take good photos.
As I said, there's a general trend that cameraphones with more megapixels take better quality photos. I don't think it's coincidence that the 8MP phone came first, the 5MP phones ranked second to forth and the 3.2MP phone came last.
As many of my posts have said ? want a nice digital camera, then buy one, want a nice cell phone then buy one. Who wants both? I mean, there isn't much you can do with the pictures you take with a phone, so why waste your time.
Well I'm (not) wrong, but many would disagree.
I'm here at Disney with our Grandson, and EVERYONE is taking picture with their damn phone ? why, I don't know, but they are? And many of these folks DO NOT have a regular camera of any type. Boy are they going to be pissed off, when they realize, they haven't got any good photo's for a scrap book, and to print out for friends and family.
I guess I point is, if folks want a camera phone, then maybe Apple should give them what they want. A nice 4-6 mega pixels camera phone, that after a few dozen pictures or so, the battery goes dead, and they have to charge it, before they can make a phone call ?
By the way, if anyone is interested - I sell Solar powered cell phone chargers
But the thickest phone in the comparison came last. It's hard to draw conclusions from such a small sample group but I know that plenty of thin cameraphones that take good photos.
As I said, there's a general trend that cameraphones with more megapixels take better quality photos. I don't think it's coincidence that the 8MP phone came first, the 5MP phones ranked second to forth and the 3.2MP phone came last.
Are there any phones as thin as iPhone that takes better photos? The mechanical module to extend the lens for focus or zoom, not to mention being a larger lens, takes space.
Nice article but are we not discussing iPhone?? The market for iPod/Zune is already stagnating, Apple know this hence the iPhone/Touch. So typical of Microsoft to be catching up when it's already too late.
If you had read what preceded my response, I was merely responding to someone who brought up the Zune market or lack of it.
Are there any phones as thin as iPhone that takes better photos? The mechanical module to extend the lens for focus or zoom, not to mention being a larger lens, takes space.
A lot of people have started to use their mobiles as their primary snapshot camera. They may live to regret it but it is a big pain to carry two pieces of equipment when one will do (sort of). The high end Nokia's take excellent photos and for a lot of things they will do an adequate job. There are plenty occasions that arise out of the blue that are picture taking worthy. Everybody always carry their cell phones. I am not sure if it is even possible to improve the camera on the iPhone, but if it is Apple should do it.
Thanks for a thoughtful, intelligent response. Seems the twatter crowd has invaded AppleInsider.
The network the phone is on makes all the difference and AT&T is terrible! This phone, when released in the US, will be available on Verizon Wireless which has much better digital network and mobile broadband coverage. Not to mention cheaper voice and data plans.
I would love to have the iPhone on Verizon, but seeing as this is not the case, the Storm is now the next best option. I look forward to checking it out when it becomes available, as I'll be due for an upgrade.
Personally, I'm more excited about the possibilities of WiMax. Once Sprint has built out their new WiMax network for Xohm, that is going to be a real game changer. My bet is on Google to take advantage of it first.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHeneen
Wow is this thread loaded with fanboys!! Anyways, I would just like to bring up a few points:
-there ARE things the iPhone lacks
--for those that travel, you can't swap the SIM card to use a local carrier
--the camera isn't great...while I don't use it very often, better quality (3MP) would be great
--I found myself mistyping a lot the couple of times I played with it at the Apple store...a stylus is annoying, a full keyboard has too small keys, but a QWERTY keyboard w/2 letters to a button is great (for me) and I like it
--sure the iPhone is only $199...but by the time you figure in the service plan into the equation, my family plan is great ($120 for 1500 minutes on two phones on T-Mobile, including data plans on both and unlimited calls to the top 5 numbers for both...why we only need 1500 min). Compare that to $150 for 1400 minutes (but we'd need more since we wouldn't get unlimited calls to 5 numbers)! Saving over 2 yr contract...$720 (plus international roaming charge$). See the point.
While the iPhone does have a few great features that make up for these shortcomings, not everyone needs the music, the better web browsing, nor the App Store. The point I'm trying to make to all of you is this: THE iPHONE IS NOT A "ONE SIZE FITS ALL"...please keep that in mind when b----ing about this phone. Some of us enjoy the ability to use other carriers to...gasp...save money and some of us don't exactly care for the better browser. While I love my Macs and love to share that love with others and spend time on sites like AI and TUAW to learn all the latest...I don't think that everything Apple touches is great for everyone...iPhone included. Sorry for the rant...but many of you needed this!!!
On a positive note, I am very happy for the new syncing software for Mac...the current software is for PPC and is very slow and always crashes 2/3 of the way through a "sync". This has driven me crazy to the point of syncing calendars manually whenever I have free time and am bored (or procrastinating). Way to go RIM for finally realizing there are Mac users in this world (now if only AutoDesk realized this)!!!
To anyone who responds...don't just post "but the iPhone has..." I care about practicality not aesthetics and touchscreen technologies yada yada.
I am not sure if it is even possible to improve the camera on the iPhone, but if it is Apple should do it.
If they keep going for thinness they will probably keep exceeding any new camera tech. Putting the camera on the top or side may be the only way Apple can offer a better camera, but that would be ackward to hold and use.
If they keep going for thinness they will probably keep exceeding any new camera tech. Putting the camera on the top or side may be the only way Apple can offer a better camera, but that would be ackward to hold and use.
It would be easy to spot the iPhone users. They would be the ones taking photos of their kids while looking the other direction, or bending over forwards or backwards at 90 degrees trying to fame their shots.
Theoretically, you're correct. More megapixels doesn't mean better pictures. However, the general trend is that the more pixels a cameraphone has, the better pictures it takes.
Take a look at this comparison for a rival platform. Guess what? The 3.2MP cameraphone came last and the 8MP cameraphone came top.
The Samsung i8510 does take better pictures because it seems to have bigger lens and probably bigger sensor than the other cameras. In both NYT article, David Pogue used the same camera and the same picture which is more representative for the difference in MP regardless of other specs. I have experienced this myself, I have a 2.4MP Fuji Finepix 4900 that I bought 9 years ago. The pictures used to take are much better quality than most 4 and 5 MP point and shoot camera they are even much better that my iPhone pictures now (even though the difference is just 0.4MP). It is simply because the camera have a bigger lens and sensor.
Take a loot at David Pogue review of this camera by Sigma that have the size of point and shoot camera but the sensor of SLR camera. The pictures are beautiful. However, the camera is thicker than most point and shoot cameras and have limited capabilities.
Regardless of the iPhone. People tend to over rate phone cameras MP and forget that it doesn't really matter. What matter is the lens and sensor size (why do you think they don't tell you what the phone camera lens size is?!). Even with flash and 5MP the pictures will never reach the quality of 5MP or even 2MP real cameras.
It would be easy to spot the iPhone users. They would be the ones taking photos of their kids while looking the other direction, or bending over forwards or backwards at 90 degrees trying to fame their shots.
If it was on the top edge, you could simply look down at the image. This would result in a lot of images that are taken much lower than other cameras. But is that a bad thing? How about angling the lens in the camera so you could hold it in front of you at 45° angle? But if they can do that, why can't they do an enclosed, 90° angled mirror in the back of the phone so you can keep the camera where it is?
Note: I don't know enough about camera tech to know if any of these are feasible, but I do know Apple loves to make their devices thinner at the cost of adding faster/better components so I'm trying to find a middle ground. If the above ideas aren't possible, save your 'schooling' as I really don't care enough cellphone cameras to care about them. I much prefer to use a dedicated camera for taking pics.
If it was on the top edge, you could simply look down at the image. This would result in a lot of images that are taken much lower than other cameras. But is that a bad thing? How about angling the lens in the camera so you could hold it in front of you at 45° angle? But if they can do that, why can't they do an enclosed, 90° angled mirror in the back of the phone so you can keep the camera where it is?
Note: I don't know enough about camera tech to know if any of these are feasible, but I do know Apple loves to make their devices thinner at the cost of adding faster/better components so I'm trying to find a middle ground. If the above ideas aren't possible, save your 'schooling' as I really don't care enough cellphone cameras to care about them. I much prefer to use a dedicated camera for taking pics.
Yeah, I thought about the mirror thing, too. I guess space would be a limiting factor. But I'm with you re- cameras, I use my Canon or Panasonic for my exquisite photography!
The Storm has a multi-touch capacitive touchscreen with the whole screen riding on top of a click mechanism. It is very inventive as it solves some UI difficulties (selection versus cursor movement). Pushing on the screen is like pushing on a key. RIM needs to set it at exactly the right force, and they should be able to easily enough. Once that bit is done, tapping on the screen will feel like typing with keyboard buttons. This is a thousand times better than haptic feedback.
Make no mistake about it. Apple's much more immediate battle is with RIM which is on home turf, Apple's bread basket, and in the background the long term and coming war with Nokia.
I have to say I didn't know what the storm had and was speaking in general about all these other "iPhone Killers" out there. It will be interesting to see what RIM comes up with. One thing I can say as I've kind of been an apple hater most of my life for no apparent reason. I've also never really wanted a smartphone (with the only real choice being a BB at the time) until the iPhone came out. So that goes to tell you something about the iPhone. I feel that a good BB will keep BB users on BB instead of switching to iPhone, but the potential for new clients I would put in favor of apple at this point in time.
Comments
As said many times before. Without bigger lens and sensor 3MP is not better than 2MP as [URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/08/technology/08pogue.html"] MegaPixel thing is more as myth.
Theoretically, you're correct. More megapixels doesn't mean better pictures. However, the general trend is that the more pixels a cameraphone has, the better pictures it takes.
Take a look at this comparison for a rival platform. Guess what? The 3.2MP cameraphone came last and the 8MP cameraphone came top.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/ptech/1...ref=newssearch
Nice article but are we not discussing iPhone?? The market for iPod/Zune is already stagnating, Apple know this hence the iPhone/Touch. So typical of Microsoft to be catching up when it's already too late.
I know the megapixels aren't the only thing that determines picture quality (I like photography as something to do on trips...but not the reason I have a Mac)...but having more pixels makes for more dots per inch...which makes for a larger picture or a better picture when viewing at the same size. Six-10 megapixels doesn't make much of a difference (unless you turn your pics into large posters)...but 2-3 does (you are assuming RIM doesn't improve the sensor).
Given the quality of the lenses of the microcameras, you can just make more dots through interpolation and get as good of a result, if not better. Putting more sensor dots on an already too-small sensor will just make each dot less sensitive and noisier. To make the iPhone camera competitive to some of Nokia's better cameras, the iPhone pretty much needs to be thicker.
Theoretically, you're correct. More megapixels doesn't mean better pictures. However, the general trend is that the more pixels a cameraphone has, the better pictures it takes.
Take a look at this comparison for a rival platform. Guess what? The 3.2MP cameraphone came last and the 8MP cameraphone came top.
You are drawing a coincident correlation. There are certain limits to the trend you speak of making it more than just one number that has to get bigger in order to get better photos. It looks to me that the real trend on that comparison is the physical size of the camera itself, not the number of dots on the sensor. That 8MP phone is 60% thicker than the iPhone.
It looks to me that the real trend on that comparison is the physical size of the camera itself, not the number of dots on the sensor. That 8MP phone is 60% thicker than the iPhone.
But the thickest phone in the comparison came last. It's hard to draw conclusions from such a small sample group but I know that plenty of thin cameraphones that take good photos.
As I said, there's a general trend that cameraphones with more megapixels take better quality photos. I don't think it's coincidence that the 8MP phone came first, the 5MP phones ranked second to forth and the 3.2MP phone came last.
But the thickest phone in the comparison came last. It's hard to draw conclusions from such a small sample group but I know that plenty of thin cameraphones that take good photos.
As I said, there's a general trend that cameraphones with more megapixels take better quality photos. I don't think it's coincidence that the 8MP phone came first, the 5MP phones ranked second to forth and the 3.2MP phone came last.
As many of my posts have said ? want a nice digital camera, then buy one, want a nice cell phone then buy one. Who wants both? I mean, there isn't much you can do with the pictures you take with a phone, so why waste your time.
Well I'm (not) wrong, but many would disagree.
I'm here at Disney with our Grandson, and EVERYONE is taking picture with their damn phone ? why, I don't know, but they are? And many of these folks DO NOT have a regular camera of any type. Boy are they going to be pissed off, when they realize, they haven't got any good photo's for a scrap book, and to print out for friends and family.
I guess I point is, if folks want a camera phone, then maybe Apple should give them what they want. A nice 4-6 mega pixels camera phone, that after a few dozen pictures or so, the battery goes dead, and they have to charge it, before they can make a phone call ?
By the way, if anyone is interested - I sell Solar powered cell phone chargers
Skip
But the thickest phone in the comparison came last. It's hard to draw conclusions from such a small sample group but I know that plenty of thin cameraphones that take good photos.
As I said, there's a general trend that cameraphones with more megapixels take better quality photos. I don't think it's coincidence that the 8MP phone came first, the 5MP phones ranked second to forth and the 3.2MP phone came last.
Are there any phones as thin as iPhone that takes better photos? The mechanical module to extend the lens for focus or zoom, not to mention being a larger lens, takes space.
AI - why did you even post this story?
Huh!? No one required that you read it.
Some of us enjoy reading (and responding to) stories such as these, as surely evidenced by the thread.
Nice article but are we not discussing iPhone?? The market for iPod/Zune is already stagnating, Apple know this hence the iPhone/Touch. So typical of Microsoft to be catching up when it's already too late.
If you had read what preceded my response, I was merely responding to someone who brought up the Zune market or lack of it.
Are there any phones as thin as iPhone that takes better photos? The mechanical module to extend the lens for focus or zoom, not to mention being a larger lens, takes space.
A lot of people have started to use their mobiles as their primary snapshot camera. They may live to regret it but it is a big pain to carry two pieces of equipment when one will do (sort of). The high end Nokia's take excellent photos and for a lot of things they will do an adequate job. There are plenty occasions that arise out of the blue that are picture taking worthy. Everybody always carry their cell phones. I am not sure if it is even possible to improve the camera on the iPhone, but if it is Apple should do it.
The network the phone is on makes all the difference and AT&T is terrible! This phone, when released in the US, will be available on Verizon Wireless which has much better digital network and mobile broadband coverage. Not to mention cheaper voice and data plans.
I would love to have the iPhone on Verizon, but seeing as this is not the case, the Storm is now the next best option. I look forward to checking it out when it becomes available, as I'll be due for an upgrade.
Personally, I'm more excited about the possibilities of WiMax. Once Sprint has built out their new WiMax network for Xohm, that is going to be a real game changer. My bet is on Google to take advantage of it first.
Wow is this thread loaded with fanboys!! Anyways, I would just like to bring up a few points:
-there ARE things the iPhone lacks
--for those that travel, you can't swap the SIM card to use a local carrier
--the camera isn't great...while I don't use it very often, better quality (3MP) would be great
--I found myself mistyping a lot the couple of times I played with it at the Apple store...a stylus is annoying, a full keyboard has too small keys, but a QWERTY keyboard w/2 letters to a button is great (for me) and I like it
--sure the iPhone is only $199...but by the time you figure in the service plan into the equation, my family plan is great ($120 for 1500 minutes on two phones on T-Mobile, including data plans on both and unlimited calls to the top 5 numbers for both...why we only need 1500 min). Compare that to $150 for 1400 minutes (but we'd need more since we wouldn't get unlimited calls to 5 numbers)! Saving over 2 yr contract...$720 (plus international roaming charge$).
While the iPhone does have a few great features that make up for these shortcomings, not everyone needs the music, the better web browsing, nor the App Store. The point I'm trying to make to all of you is this: THE iPHONE IS NOT A "ONE SIZE FITS ALL"...please keep that in mind when b----ing about this phone. Some of us enjoy the ability to use other carriers to...gasp...save money and some of us don't exactly care for the better browser. While I love my Macs and love to share that love with others and spend time on sites like AI and TUAW to learn all the latest...I don't think that everything Apple touches is great for everyone...iPhone included. Sorry for the rant...but many of you needed this!!!
On a positive note, I am very happy for the new syncing software for Mac...the current software is for PPC and is very slow and always crashes 2/3 of the way through a "sync". This has driven me crazy to the point of syncing calendars manually whenever I have free time and am bored (or procrastinating). Way to go RIM for finally realizing there are Mac users in this world (now if only AutoDesk realized this)!!!
To anyone who responds...don't just post "but the iPhone has..." I care about practicality not aesthetics and touchscreen technologies yada yada.
I am not sure if it is even possible to improve the camera on the iPhone, but if it is Apple should do it.
If they keep going for thinness they will probably keep exceeding any new camera tech. Putting the camera on the top or side may be the only way Apple can offer a better camera, but that would be ackward to hold and use.
If they keep going for thinness they will probably keep exceeding any new camera tech. Putting the camera on the top or side may be the only way Apple can offer a better camera, but that would be ackward to hold and use.
Theoretically, you're correct. More megapixels doesn't mean better pictures. However, the general trend is that the more pixels a cameraphone has, the better pictures it takes.
Take a look at this comparison for a rival platform. Guess what? The 3.2MP cameraphone came last and the 8MP cameraphone came top.
The Samsung i8510 does take better pictures because it seems to have bigger lens and probably bigger sensor than the other cameras. In both NYT article, David Pogue used the same camera and the same picture which is more representative for the difference in MP regardless of other specs. I have experienced this myself, I have a 2.4MP Fuji Finepix 4900 that I bought 9 years ago. The pictures used to take are much better quality than most 4 and 5 MP point and shoot camera they are even much better that my iPhone pictures now (even though the difference is just 0.4MP). It is simply because the camera have a bigger lens and sensor.
Take a loot at David Pogue review of this camera by Sigma that have the size of point and shoot camera but the sensor of SLR camera. The pictures are beautiful. However, the camera is thicker than most point and shoot cameras and have limited capabilities.
Regardless of the iPhone. People tend to over rate phone cameras MP and forget that it doesn't really matter. What matter is the lens and sensor size (why do you think they don't tell you what the phone camera lens size is?!). Even with flash and 5MP the pictures will never reach the quality of 5MP or even 2MP real cameras.
If it was on the top edge, you could simply look down at the image. This would result in a lot of images that are taken much lower than other cameras. But is that a bad thing? How about angling the lens in the camera so you could hold it in front of you at 45° angle? But if they can do that, why can't they do an enclosed, 90° angled mirror in the back of the phone so you can keep the camera where it is?
Note: I don't know enough about camera tech to know if any of these are feasible, but I do know Apple loves to make their devices thinner at the cost of adding faster/better components so I'm trying to find a middle ground. If the above ideas aren't possible, save your 'schooling' as I really don't care enough cellphone cameras to care about them. I much prefer to use a dedicated camera for taking pics.
57 comments and can't believe I did not see one remark about putting lipstick on a Blackberry.....
If it was on the top edge, you could simply look down at the image. This would result in a lot of images that are taken much lower than other cameras. But is that a bad thing? How about angling the lens in the camera so you could hold it in front of you at 45° angle? But if they can do that, why can't they do an enclosed, 90° angled mirror in the back of the phone so you can keep the camera where it is?
Note: I don't know enough about camera tech to know if any of these are feasible, but I do know Apple loves to make their devices thinner at the cost of adding faster/better components so I'm trying to find a middle ground. If the above ideas aren't possible, save your 'schooling' as I really don't care enough cellphone cameras to care about them. I much prefer to use a dedicated camera for taking pics.
Yeah, I thought about the mirror thing, too. I guess space would be a limiting factor. But I'm with you re- cameras, I use my Canon or Panasonic for my exquisite photography!
The Storm has a multi-touch capacitive touchscreen with the whole screen riding on top of a click mechanism. It is very inventive as it solves some UI difficulties (selection versus cursor movement). Pushing on the screen is like pushing on a key. RIM needs to set it at exactly the right force, and they should be able to easily enough. Once that bit is done, tapping on the screen will feel like typing with keyboard buttons. This is a thousand times better than haptic feedback.
Make no mistake about it. Apple's much more immediate battle is with RIM which is on home turf, Apple's bread basket, and in the background the long term and coming war with Nokia.
I have to say I didn't know what the storm had and was speaking in general about all these other "iPhone Killers" out there. It will be interesting to see what RIM comes up with. One thing I can say as I've kind of been an apple hater most of my life for no apparent reason. I've also never really wanted a smartphone (with the only real choice being a BB at the time) until the iPhone came out. So that goes to tell you something about the iPhone. I feel that a good BB will keep BB users on BB instead of switching to iPhone, but the potential for new clients I would put in favor of apple at this point in time.