iphone camera
I'm not holding out much hope for this thing. It's two megapixels sure, but just from how tiny that hole is up top I can only guess the quality is going to be as good as your typcial cell phone, in other words, grainy, blurry, horrible color and so on. Higher megapixels does not automatically equal higher quality.
Seeing what Sony Ericsson and Samsung are doing with their higher end camera phones in terms of real flashes, zoom lenses and better quality imaging chips, I'm sad Apple did seem to take a more serious approach with the camera on the iphone.
I was really hoping to replace both my ipod and my digital camera with one device. So I didn't have to carry three things around with me. But the iphone seems to fail as a full size ipod replacement with it's limited storage and as a camera (so it would appear) with it's poor quality camera componants.
Seeing what Sony Ericsson and Samsung are doing with their higher end camera phones in terms of real flashes, zoom lenses and better quality imaging chips, I'm sad Apple did seem to take a more serious approach with the camera on the iphone.
I was really hoping to replace both my ipod and my digital camera with one device. So I didn't have to carry three things around with me. But the iphone seems to fail as a full size ipod replacement with it's limited storage and as a camera (so it would appear) with it's poor quality camera componants.
Comments
Anyways, there is no one device to rule them all and there never will be, because the single function device will always push the standard that we judge the multi-function device by.
Anyways, there is no one device to rule them all and there never will be, because the single function device will always push the standard that we judge the multi-function device by.
amen.
The thing is Nokia and Sony Ericsson and Samsung can do it with their models.
Just look at this unit:
http://mb.softbank.jp/mb/en/product/3g/705nk/index.html
3.2 megapixel with a carl zeiss lens and real flash
Even if it's not as good as a dedicated camera it's still has to be better then what most of these camera phones can do.
I would have hoped Apple could have matched this. Maybe next time
I guess the real point is the iphone (for as much hype as it's getting) isn't for everyone. It's really more for people who want a smartphone for internet browsing, not for people who want a music player or a camera phone.
I totally agree that a single device will always beat a multifunction device in terms or overall quality and use. No doubt. But over time as things get more advanced the standard always gets raised. So a camera phone tomorrow may take better pictures then a dedicated camera does today.
The thing is Nokia and Sony Ericsson and Samsung can do it with their models.
Just look at this unit:
http://mb.softbank.jp/mb/en/product/3g/705nk/index.html
3.2 megapixel with a carl zeiss lens and real flash
Even if it's not as good as a dedicated camera it's still has to be better then what most of these camera phones can do.
I would have hoped Apple could have matched this. Maybe next time
I guess the real point is the iphone (for as much hype as it's getting) isn't for everyone. It's really more for people who want a smartphone for internet browsing, not for people who want a music player or a camera phone.
The thing is, the Camera isn't even the main selling point. It doesn't have to be better in every possible way to still be the best option when it comes to phones, or a very good option when it comes to selecting your next iPod.
Sebastian
Don't expect too much from the camera until technology on these things improve by about 10x. For some reason camera phones just suck. I have an old 1.5 megapixel camera that totally outdoes anything shot with my phone.
I never use it anymore, and my next phone wont even have one if I can help it. Although my iPhone will obviously.
you cant replace a dedicated camera with a 3-in-1 (4?-in-1) convergence device. convergence is all about compromise, whether apple likes it or not. Its the 3 point triangle where you have to choose between Features, Size, and Battery Life. You cant have all 3. sensor size doesnt mean crap with regards to quality, i took many detailed pictures with my old 2MP camera, its all about the lens. just look at any disposable film camera! film has a higher resolution than digital and they still look like sh1t in the best of conditions. Add a usable built in flash and all of sudden that 5 hour talk-time battery life is significantly shorter.
Anyways, there is no one device to rule them all and there never will be, because the single function device will always push the standard that we judge the multi-function device by.
This is true of physical devices, but not of software devices.
The iPhone is already a better cellphone than my RAZR. It's also a better iPod than my iPod. Most of what makes a good cell phone and a good iPod are the same physical parts, so it's easy to make one device that's better than the individual pieces.
But an iPhone will never be a better camera because the parts needed for a good one camera are huge, expensive, and impossible to kludge together with a phone.
Don't expect too much from the camera until technology on these things improve by about 10x. For some reason camera phones just suck. I have an old 1.5 megapixel camera that totally outdoes anything shot with my phone.
It's the lens, the lens is most important thing, It's impossible for this tiny cheapy lenses to compare to a regular digicam. It's all about the glass before megapixels.
I was really hoping to replace both my ipod and my digital camera with one device. So I didn't have to carry three things around with me.
Sorry man but unless your digicam is like 5+ years old there's no way a camera phone will be better. The 3mm diameter polycarbonate camera phone lenses can never compare to real glass and the size difference alone of the sensor and lens is immense.
Unlike superman return's claim you cannot get decent full sized 8x10 photos from a camera phone.
The ipod-phone combination is way more important than ipod-camera.
It's also more than just megapixels and lenses. Today's cameras are getting ever more sophisticated, what with digital image stabilization, faster ISO ratings and smarter electronics that can figure out how to change exposure within a picture so details in shadows don't get blacked out in bright scenes. Sorry, but no way the iPhone can match a mid-range digicam that has all those features. Personally, I'm just hoping that it means Apple can offer a phone-less model with the same widescreen LCD, WiFi features, user interface, and battery life for $100-150 less. The true video iPod, for those of us who 1) don't mind carrying separate, dedicated devices and 2) can't stomach the thought of ever doing business with Cingular/AT&T again.
Not likely. Truth be told I have no idea where the 6G is going to go from here, but WiFi probably isn't on the feature list for it because it doesn't make any kind of logical sense.
Nobody needs to send Music over WiFi for any reason, Syncing would be far to slow, and in order to buy "Wireless iTS Content" it would have to become both the iPod and iTunes in one, which it's not. The iPod is essentially a dumb companion to iTunes, iTunes handles all the Media Management features and sorts out into 2+2 so the iPod can provide the answer.
You don't need the power of OS X in an iPod, and you don't need any of the other features if you are going to drop the phone part of it, that goes for all of it's Internet Capabilities as well.
Sebastian
Yep. 5 mega pixels.
Rushing through a mega store last night, I noticed a new cell phone for sale here in Japan with a 5 megapixel camera and a half decent-looking lens. Will try to find out more.
Yep. 5 mega pixels.
Not surprised, you get all the cool Phones first.... until iPhone
Sebastian
Next year I will actually be able to use both my phone and my computer and smile because they both will be Apples!
3G
5.0 mega pixel
http://www.handcellphone.com/archive...or-credit-card
May not be as new as I thought... but at least it is new in my area (the boonies).
The 911SH has a gorgeous TV screen (I had the bigger brother in my living room for a couple of years and it was awesome).
http://digital-lifestyles.info/sharp...-and-playback/
You can record from TV, too.
That just totally blew my mind hole.
Some manufacturers are using higher quality cameras as a selling point. To get that higher quality camera, something else has to give-- price, battery life, feature set, weight.
Apple put some kind of camera in there, but it looks like it wasn't a priority as a selling point. I would guess there's a pretty steep delta between "average cell phone meh camera" and "5 megapixel Carl Zeiss lens camera", so Apple chose meh because the tradeoffs to get to the next worthwhile plateau just weren't worth it, to them. I think the things that were high priority more than make up for that.
Eventually, someone will put a 24 bit stereo recorder with decent mic preamps on a cell phone, and for the people who want or need that the trade-offs will be worth it. That doesn't mean Apple will have done something wrong if they don't follow suit.
I think fondly of my Sony Clie PEG 50; it has a camera (not too great,) a mic (not too great), a wide screen (not too great), animated interface (not too great), an easy to use keyboard (once you got used to it)... you get the picture: it is (though no longer built) a very well-rounded device that did everything I needed but was not over-done. I have done a lot of work with this device and had a wonderful experience with it. Fortunately, I had bbought two just before they were discontinued, so when the battery on mine finally conked out I had a spare to cover me until a replacement comes out. It also has BlueTooth, so I just link wirelessly at home.