by
Matt Hickey
on
December 21, 2006
Comments 
Leave Comment
Commenting Options
Enter your personal information to the left, or sign in with your Facebook account by clicking the button below.
Alternatively, you can create an avatar that will appear whenever you leave a comment on a Gravatar-enabled blog.
- Actively Discussed Posts
- The 5 Rules of Black Friday
65 comments - Amazon announces better battery life and native PDF support for the Kindle
29 comments - Gift Guide 2009: Gifts for the Technologically Impaired
22 comments - Chevy Volt's UFO noise to be driver-controllable
13 comments - Windows 7 install base overtaking OS X
11 comments
- There are no posts to display.
So with these tests, the age-old question with consumers comes to mind: Are you really getting what you’re paying for? I skimmed through the article (it’s 5:37am and I haven’t slept yet) but for the most part, I was enlightened to the fact that the quality stated is/can be far from the quality produced. Since I don’t own a camera phone, I can’t conduct my own tests, but it is something to keep in mind when I eventually purchase one.
Something I have thought about concerning camera phones – if you’re buying a camera phone for the *camera* feature(s) and dissatisfied with the quality, are the manufacturers are fault for not standing to their results, or are you (the consumer) at fault for over-expecting and not buying an actual camera instead?
(All the more reason to want to win the Nikon and use a *real* camera. :D)
I’ve got a Nokia 6236i and I’ve been happy with the pictures it has produced. Like Isaiah says though, buying a picture phone or a multi-purpose anything and expecting it to perfrom any one of those single functions as well as a single use device is pushing your luck. That is unless you’re spending mega bucks. And truth in advertising is also a bit much to expect I’d say. After all mega-pixels and megabytes are really little more than marketing gimmicks. Hard drive manufacturers inflate the number of gigs they actually have. And as I’ve read a number of places lens quality is more important than the pixel count. If you want something you need to put in the research to make sure you get quality. Caveat emptor and all that.
Hey Scott, are you from North Carolina?
That aside, Scott and Isaiah hit the nail on the head. If you want a good camera on your phone, stop asking for really small and less expensive phones that will fit in your pocket and look trendy. The engineers and designers that build these phones are already hard pressed to include all the features you want into the phone, so an underused camera feature is going to be a last minute add on.
In addition, a lot of these phones don’t feature any sort of optical zoom, so users whose phones have “zoom” on them is a computer program to use the current pixels and enlarge them for a “closer view.”
Add that to the fact that your lens sits in your pocket, gets gunk accumulated on it, and has the lens cover get scratched up, how do you expect a good picture? In addition, how many of us actually export the pictures taken off our wee little 1.3 or less megapixel phones and onto our computers? These minicameras were designed to take pictures to be displayed on your phone, not on your 24″ LCD monitor or on you HDTV. Cap this with mass-manufacturing standards and low quality control on such intense features, you have crappy pictures.
I’m not a photographer (amateur or otherwise), but I’ve actually been much more impressed with 1MP+ camera phones then I thought I would be. It could be the changing times, but my 3MP digital camera used to take far worse photos then many of the new camera phones. It’s a shame that I lost it – it would have been interesting to take a test and see if I got ripped off :P
I’ve also got to say I can’t wait until 2MP+ cameras become standard on all size phones. I don’t want to get into specifics about what I’m working on, but let’s just say there’s more then one use for that camera :)
I can’t really say I am surprised, you can only fit so much quality in such a small technological footprint… this is why I said previously, we have all these gadgets that do one thing great and about 5 other things half-assed. Lets all start a revolution like the Chinese… instead of going after AC Adaptors for cell phones, lets go for the jugular, cell phones with cameras! ;-)
Isaiah, you can draw… why the heck do you need a technological wonder to replicate your abilities? Some questions I fear will never have proper answers… don’t worry, I will send you pictures via e-mail that you can recreate with your drawing ability!
Jon
I am indeed Jon.
Mmmm… sorry Jon if you say it a 2 megapixel cameraphone, what the mayority of the consumers expect is the image quality of a 2 megapixel camera. So if the producers can´t recreate a cameraphone with the image quality of 2 megapixels just announce that the camera is 2 megapixels, because you are just cheating consumers to buy them, and don´t talk about gadgets and all that about “because it is a multifunction” and all that nonsense. If consumers want a 2 megapixel camera give them what they want , if you can´t, just don´t sell false hopes please