vB Easy Archive - All current camera phones are horrible

Pages: 1

All current camera phones are horrible
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: bugmeman

I had to say it.

I remember reading that the new Sony Ericsson K790a would bring the cybershot moniker, integrating a powerful camera with a cell phone. The N73 did the same, advertising its superior camera.

Then I saw the sample images of both, and I had to question why people are saying they are such great cameras? They're great relative to the first cameras, but their images clearly would not pass any sort of photography test. Cheap "throw away" digital cameras costing $100 produce much better images than what companies are throwing into phones.

Posted by: newtype2011

somebody else want to take this one...I'm kind of tired at the moment -

Posted by: PurpleMonkey910

Well i can't be arsed carrying around a Phone, Camera, Phone book, Calendar, MP3 Player, radio & a whole lot more, so its nice to have them all in one small device.

I agree the camera on my n73 isnt as good as it could be but considering the size of the phone & all else it does its great. You dont like it go buy a decent camera, maybe you want a good zoom for looking at naked ladies in there bedrooms

& yes the zooms on phones is that crapp digital zoom which i hate, but ITS A PHONE the camera is a bonus to me.

Posted by: Rcadden

coming from the 6620 to the 6682, then on to the N80 and now the N73, I 'll take it over any other camera phone currently on the market for 2 reasons:

1. Symbian

2. Convergence and convenience - I have my N73, I can snap a pic and it's uploaded to Flickr right then and there. There's none of this take a load of pics, fill up my memory card, freak out cause I don't have a spare, get back to my computer, put the memory card in, transfer the pics to my computer, then upload them to Flickr. It's a no-step process as opposed to a 7-step process.

That's it for me. Plus I think it depends on what you're going to do with these pics. If you're going to be doing alot of printing or jacking with them, you might want something better. However, for me, I have them all in folders on my pc, on Flickr, some on Facebook, and that's about it.

Posted by: friedbrains

or the OP can just wait till canon or nikon joins the cellphone market...

or wait for canonokia...

Posted by: bugmeman

Don't get me wrong.... These are fantastic devices which converge all the features needed for a typical day.... web, phone, camera, music, etc. I'm just saying that the cameras are highly overrated for their quality. My old 3.2mp Minolta has greater image quality than the 5mp N95 samples I've seen.

Most phones also use digital zooms, which are utterly useless. You might as well take the picture from distance and crop yourself in image editing software.

Posted by: DevilsRejection

Because people really fill up their gigabye memory card?

Posted by: Rcadden

Quote:

Originally Posted by bugmeman

Don't get me wrong.... These are fantastic devices which converge all the features needed for a typical day.... web, phone, camera, music, etc. I'm just saying that the cameras are highly overrated for their quality. My old 3.2mp Minolta has greater image quality than the 5mp N95 samples I've seen.

Most phones also use digital zooms, which are utterly useless. You might as well take the picture from distance and crop yourself in image editing software.

again, I (along with most) am willing to sacrifice slightly in image quality for the convenience of one device and constant connectivity.

Posted by: JayFReaZy

Quote:

Originally Posted by PurpleMonkey910

Well i can't be arsed carrying around a Phone, Camera, Phone book, Calendar, MP3 Player, radio & a whole lot more, so its nice to have them all in one small device.

I agree the camera on my n73 isnt as good as it could be but considering the size of the phone & all else it does its great. You dont like it go buy a decent camera, maybe you want a good zoom for looking at naked ladies in there bedrooms

& yes the zooms on phones is that crapp digital zoom which i hate, but ITS A PHONE the camera is a bonus to me.

I agree, we have a phone first and foremost. The camera is just an extra bonus. Its not like any of these 2MP + cameras with autofocus are bad, they're actually quite good in well lit areas. Its definetly a huge upgrade from the old 640x480 with no AF. Even now, I still believe the pics I take with my w8 come out fantastic, being that it does so many other things compared to a digi cam. We all know that pics are just going to get better and better as our phones do.

Posted by: drewyehboi

What is the likelyhood that you are going to be carrying your camera around at all times and have it when you need it as apposed to the likelyhood that you will have your phone at all times and have IT when you need it. Convenience over quality is what drives todays economy.

Posted by: lamplighter

Nobody said the camera was good, it's a phone not a camera.

LL-

Posted by: THETRUTH#34

Quote:

Originally Posted by bugmeman

last i checked your minolta couldnt play music, or call someone or browse the net, again the n73 is a great camera phone, compared to whats out there, and in daylight it takes some pretty good pics, excellent for veiwing on a comp, or flickr or mms or to even print 4x6 photos, hell i even printed pics taken with my s710 and people said wow thats from a phone. We all can agree its not gonna top a a digital camera because thats what a camera is its a camera, this is all in one and i for one am very pleased, bottom line is only time i would carry my camera around is if im going to a special event, and even then i have trouble taking pics, but with the n73 i whip it out all the time and snap a photo because its with me all the time.

Posted by: tkao2025

Quote:

Originally Posted by newtype2011

somebody else want to take this one...I'm kind of tired at the moment -

LOL....

Yes that's how I always feel when someone brings up these topics on a forum, like "the N73ME is not as good as my IPOD". I've owned both the N73 and K800i and I can say that I've printed out 4x6 photo's and they look really nice. No they aren't as good as a dedicated cameras, but IMHO they are quite good for a phone with a Camera. The key word being "phone"

Posted by: houman

Quote:

Originally Posted by drewyehboi

What is the likelyhood that you are going to be carrying your camera around at all times and have it when you need it as apposed to the likelyhood that you will have your phone at all times and have IT when you need it. Convenience over quality is what drives todays economy.

For me, 90+%

But it varies for people. I only use my Cell phone camera when I have forgotten to take my digicam with me, like in a restaurant and such... and the 3mp does fine. I miss auto-focus of my w810i at time, but I have learned how to take pics with n80... I have owned digicams since days #1, and iirc, original digicams did not have auto-focus either, but we used to take pictures just fine.

The unfortunate thing about digicams packed in cell phones are that you have to spend lot of money to get an avg digicam in a cell phone, while you can dish out $200-$300 these days for a much nicer and compact camera, while getting a phone that does decent for you.

N95 is the only device that I think will be offering both, but trust me, optical zoom is very nice on a digicam, especially if you get it at > 10x.

-H

p.s what is the optical zoom on N95 ? N93 is about 3x ?

Posted by: bugmeman

I don't mean to attack people who love their multifunction devices. On the contrary, I love the ability to do so much with one thing. But I also think people are deluded into thinking that the cameras in their phone are better than they really are. The drop in quality is more than "slight". I think that for most of the time the images in the phone aren't worth printing since they really are so horrible in quality.

But I guess I have a completely different perspective than people here. I don't take pictures every chance I get, so I don't put much effort into camera capabilities. With the advent of blogs, people seem to take pictures of everything they see, so for those purposes, there's no need to have optically great looking pictures when it's just a picture of the food they ate at a restaurant that looked good.

The same applies to music. I don't really see the point in listening to music in public, since people really should focus on things like their environment like when crossing a street.

And though I think it's extremely cool to browse the internet on a phone, the phone is extremely limited in its capabilities, not only through it's processing power and ability to handle the multitude of sites out there, but also by the fact screens are small and the ability to navigate is compromised. Why spend 5 minutes trying to get on and navigate a site on a phone when I could do the same in 30 seconds on a computer? I can see the point when there's no computer around, but otherwise it seems odd and somewhat pointless.

And even if a camera were to have optical zoom, which would be great in its own right, the sensor has to be capable of rendering the captured images better.

For your information, I bought my phone to talk and for its long battery life. I have a separate camera for times that require one. I also have a portable music player that I may use on a flight or long trips, but I would never use one while commuting. But I suppose we all have different priorities.

Posted by: joninator

THis just gives me a great new product that I will bring out. It's called the iCamera Phone. Starting at just $999 on a 3 year contract. You get an all in one device that can make and receive phone calls, browse the internet, organiser, 60GB MP3/Divx player, dual format camera (35mm film or 8.5MP digital) with 10x Optical zoom auto focus and lens attatchments.

Glue and duck tape sold seperately.

Posted by: houman

Quote:

Originally Posted by bugmeman

I don't mean to attack people who love their multifunction devices. [...]

I agree with everything you say, the first day I took my w810i to the gym, the phone kept ringing and the mp3 was being stopped, then I switched to the airplane mode, and everytime I ran a bit harder on the treadmill the phone 3.5mm adapter would get loose and I was a running boombox ...

so I did myself a favour, got myself a 4Gb Sandisk Sansa, and I was happy. The all in one devices are nice for "convenience" only, they're in no way replacing the devices that are supposed to do the mp3 or camera job.

So yes you can spend $900 for an N95, and get everything, and you can also get an N73 for $400, a solid mp3 player for $150 and a decent digicam for $300. The convinience factor is gone, but then you have decent items that follow you around.

my $0.02 worth
-H

Posted by: voytech

Not to beat it with a stick here...

To me jumping from a VGA res Nokia 6230 to the SE K790i was like night and day. I can for sure say that the quality and options available at least match those of my old *** Olympus 2MP point and shoot camera. Here's my point:

First photo is from the Olympus D-380 (2MP) and latter from K790i (taken at 2MP). You choose the better one. Here's a 100% res crop for reference:

I'll stick to my phone. Granted, this camera is ancient. But I still think the phone's camera is years ahead.

Posted by: yangj08

That's why I got a 902SH at first (pity I lost it)- I wanted to see if the "multifunction device" concept worked well. It was great for me- I could print 4x6 prints with ease (optical zoom is great to have in a phone) and the music function worked well too. I'd say that his concept is something that should definitely be refined before it will be useful, but as it is it's pretty good.

Posted by: NOUSEFORANAME

actually, the N73 and N80 and the K790 have really good cameras

and with the release of the N95 w/ 5 mp, that's sure to be a hit as a multifunction device/smartphone

Posted by: barfoneuser

yes the camera isn't perfect, but for 4x6 prints, its perfect!

this picture was taken with my 2MP camera phone and I think the quality is great. Your choice I guess.

Posted by: Heavy Fluid

I think that the 2 megapixel camera on my W810i is more than enough, after all, it is a phone, not a camera. Just like the mp3 player is not iTunes, and the games are not like the Sony Playstation 3. All of the functions that come on phones these days have been shortened down, to make them all fit. I couldn't imagine how big the phone would be if we had full mp3 players, 7 megapixel cameras, full gaming systems, etc. on them.

Taken with my W810i on St. Patrick's Day, Chicago, IL, on Michigan Avenue.

Posted by: houman

Nice Pic of the Windy City

I loved my w810i, best phone I ever had (well until I got my N80)

Posted by: Heavy Fluid

houman, did you get a chance to see the Chicago river this year on St. Patty's day? Wow, it was really green. This pic was taken a few hours after they dyed it, and the dye was starting to disappear. I cannot believe how green it was.

Posted by: houman

no I wasn't downtown, but I think they had dyed the river in Naperville as well.

Posted by: ace587

current camera phones are ok for point and shoot i only use 4X6 prints anyway

903sh shots

Posted by: riel

Camera phones are PHONES first, and CAMERAS second.

That is all.

Posted by: marktang

yes but if u know how to use the camera on the phones properly then u can see get greats pics from it.

Posted by: P5010

Quote:

Originally Posted by riel

Camera phones are PHONES first, and CAMERAS second.

That is all.

ya definitely...
ppl shouldn't expect some crazy samsung 10MP/w-cdma quality...
unless they are willing to move to korea..

903sh shots are unparalleled for something that came out almost 2yrs ago...
i'll admit functions and battery life could be better on this.. but its tolerable
the ability to print 4x6 out of a device i use mainly for calls is impressive...
btw: i do not own a dedicated digital camera.. and need the 903sh for spontaneous shots..

shots were taken at full res then scaled down for posting... absolutely NO editing or adjustments

Posted by: spaceman

is there any other alternative for low light shots other than the k790 k800?

i mean is there any other cameras with a good flash?

Posted by: riel

Quote:

Originally Posted by spaceman

is there any other alternative for low light shots other than the k790 k800?

i mean is there any other cameras with a good flash?

You mean camera phones? Coz like every camera has flash

Sony Ericsson's xenon flash is one of the best.. Some other camera phones only got a continuous light that turns brighter as you take the picture. N73, N93, and N93i all have flash, and are competitors against K790/K800 if you want something different. N93/i are almost double the price though.

Posted by: P5010

W900's low light shots are ok.

Posted by: spaceman

yea even the n73 is more expensive, and has a worse camera/flash

that is insane that noone else puts good flashes on their camera

Posted by: vw_ev

My w810i has a pretty good camera. The big problem is metering.... this camera sucks at balancing light. Pictures are either too dark or too bright. I like to take pics of dramatic clouds against the terrain up here, but often what happens is the clouds come in great, but you cant see the ground because the camera darkens it out too much. The opposite is true with ground shots. Wth the horizon anywhere above half the picture and you cant even see any clouds in the sky and the pic becomes washed out.

Otherwise, camera is okay. Definitely better than my other camera phones... by far, but still not as good as my dedicated digital camera.

Posted by: DecoyGSX

I think I took a picture with my K1m once. Never gonna make the mistake again. =]

Then again, I couldn't care less about it so its not a make or break point for me.

Posted by: spaceman

i think the k790 is a bit to big for my purposes

Posted by: mobileobsession

Quote:

Originally Posted by bugmeman

Although I'm not a professional photographer by any means, the camera quality on my K800i pretty much blows away anything else I've ever owned, both cameraphone and standalone digital, including my far-outdated 2.0 Megapixel standalone Cybershot.

The Xenon flash is a huge plus, though it handles moderately lit shots rather well. About the only thing I do miss is the optical zoom. Even a 2x zoom would be nice.

Posted by: mobileobsession

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heavy Fluid

I think that the 2 megapixel camera on my W810i is more than enough, after all, it is a phone, not a camera. Just like the mp3 player is not iTunes, and the games are not like the Sony Playstation 3. All of the functions that come on phones these days have been shortened down, to make them all fit. I couldn't imagine how big the phone would be if we had full mp3 players, 7 megapixel cameras, full gaming systems, etc. on them.

Taken with my W810i on St. Patrick's Day, Chicago, IL, on Michigan Avenue.

Nice shot. I see they dyed the river "greener than usual" for St. Patty's Day.

Posted by: devilash1

I am really blown over by these beautiful pics and that too at 2Mp resolution. I agree that phones mainly meant for talking and then only they are entertainment devices!
The only point is when they are marketed as cybershots or boast of carl zeiss lenses we do expect something more from them! I purchased the K790i only for the camera after having read gr8 reviews about it. Being an avid photographer I was slightly down by the quality of the images but then again it was a giant leap from the 2mp camera of the 6270 I had disowned!!!!!
All in all phones have come of age and the kind of flexibility and mobility they offer is unparalleled. They should not be compared with stand alone cameras, home theatres or computers!!!

This is the picture of Charminar in Hyderabad in India. It had been taken at 8 PM.

Posted by: vinvam

wow, that's a small photo devilash1...
100x133...

Posted by: batteryman

[QUOTE=bugmeman]I had to say it.

I remember reading that the new Sony Ericsson K790a would bring the cybershot moniker, integrating a powerful camera with a cell phone. The N73 did the same, advertising its superior camera.

Then I saw the sample images of both, and I had to question why people are saying they are such great cameras? They're great relative to the first cameras, but their images clearly would not pass any sort of photography test. Cheap "throw away" digital cameras costing $100 produce much better images than what companies are throwing into phones.[/Amen to that!
]

Posted by: batteryman

You are SOOO right!

Posted by: leof

i agree that cell-camera's suck in comparison to a stand alone digicam, but let's be realistic here, if you shoved a 1/2.5" ccd and a 3x optical lens (let's make it folded optics to be fair), and a xenon flash on a cellphone, you'd have a beast on your hands. look at the n93, that design is probably THE most efficient method of shoving a zoom lens into the body, and that thing is massive. also, you can kiss battery life goodbye if you intend on using as a regular digi cam on a night out.
unlike the addition of an mp3 player(which is mostly a software thing), full fledged camera functions take a considerable amount of hardware addition.
digi-cams on cellphones (at least with today's technologies) SHOULD stay as a supplementary feature, until we can find a way to rid ourselves of glass optics.

Posted by: experiment626

In all fairness,when the first digital cameras came out they were way inferior to what we have,even at entry-level point & shoot,today.It's amazing what you can buy under,say $250, today as opposed to even a few years ago. Cameraphones have improved on the same curve.Give it 5 more years and you will have multi-pixel camerphones which will be the equal of any point & shoot digital camera in everything except optical zoom.Of course how many digital cameras can play mp3s,surf the web,and make phonecalls.Technology-wise,time is on the side of the camerphone.