[cenloe]

Geez.... what's the problem here? You use a phone to primarily take pictures or make/receive telephone calls??? If you're into photography, there are great pocket-sized digital cameras on the market these days that have DSLR features (aperture settings, exposure control, etc). A phone isn't meant to replace those.

How come people that buy digital cameras don't complain that the camera's phone signal is weak, or that they can't play games or use flash??

I, for one, much prefer having a phone with strong signal, good battery life and above average call quality than worrying about autofocus on a phone with a camera.

Good grief.

Good grief, what a complete post of B.S. We aren't talking about a DSLR buddy, everyone knows a high end DSLR cannot be replaced by a cell phone camera, but it is widely known that the best camera is the one that you have with you. My brother is a professional photographer and he wold tell you that it isn't always practical or legal (NFL Games) to have your DSLR with you.

This is 2011 and RIM should have added auto focus to its newest devices, it's ridiculous that they didn't. You couldn't even use the camera to deposit checks into your checking account like some banks allow you to do (USAA)

Your opinion is in the minority, most users want auto focus as opposed to those who don't mind it not having it. RIM has already lost costumers (Me and the wife) by not having auto focus in the 9930 and they sure aren't adding customers by leaving it out.

[pythons]

So in the YouTube vid the camera has "scene" type settings. One of them is for "Close Up". So wouldn't that make for a sharper focus on close up shots?

You would think it would yet for all the urination on this issue NOT ONE example has been produced from either a Bold Touch OR a Playbook that shows either can take a "business related picture".

And, the article posted in favor of EDoF type cameras comes right out and says that the system is worthless for business users after saying AF is excellent for taking business related pictures.

Is the blackberry bold no longer a phone for the business user?

[katiepea]

The bottom line, for the people trying to rationalize or justify the lack of AF by saying things like "get a camera" are truly missing the point. There is no reason for it not to exist, its in every high end phone I can think of for at least the last 2 years, and it was idiotic of rim not to include it. Saying you don't need it doesn't change thy fact. I remember people saying they didn't want threaded texting just because it wasn't available to them, even people here saying they don't want APPS...lol, just admit something is bogus when it is so you don't sound delusional.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[southlander]

You would think it would yet for all the urination on this issue NOT ONE example has been produced from either a Bold Touch OR a Playbook that shows either can take a "business related picture".

And, the article posted in favor of EDoF type cameras comes right out and says that the system is worthless for business users after saying AF is excellent for taking business related pictures.

Is the blackberry bold no longer a phone for the business user?

When I get home to my PlayBook I will take some close ups and post for you all.

[pythons]

The bottom line, for the people trying to rationalize or justify the lack of AF by saying things like "get a camera" are truly missing the point. There is no reason for it not to exist, its in every high end phone I can think of for at least the last 2 years, and it was idiotic of rim not to include it. Saying you don't need it doesn't change thy fact. I remember people saying they didn't want threaded texting just because it wasn't available to them, even people here saying they don't want APPS...lol, just admit something is bogus when it is so you don't sound delusional.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Perhaps what we are seeing can be attributed to the adoption of the "Cuckold lifestyle" RIM has placed itself in...
...It would be logical for some of RIM's loyal customers to follow their leader into the this lifstyle.

RIM was previously the only one in bed with the business community and this in and of itself ADVERTISED the RIM product better than ANY t.v. spot. ever could. The business community started to need their phones to come with certain abilities and RIM's answer to those requests was.

A) Go buy a digital camera

B) Go buy a video camera

C) Go buy a notebook

D) etc, etc, etc.

The business community interpreted those answers from RIM as saying go buy a Droid or iphone.....
...And that's exactly what they did.

Now, RIM sits in a stool by the side of the bed it once shared with the business community ( it's wife )...
...While it watches Apple and Droid pleaure it's wife over and over and over again.
...RIM has been reduced to providing the hot water and towels.

I'm still on a blackberry and want to see them take back what was initially theirs but if these types of examples keep coming out of Canada we can only shake our heads and watch Darwin's theory become reality.

Shame on RIM for not making it's new FLAGSHIP "business phone" with AF!

[jc_halifax]

To put another spin on it, a lot of businesses (financial institutions, military, likely many others) disable the camera so in those cases it doesn't matter how good the camera is or isn't.

[dreester]

Currently I have a Nokia E72 which has a 5MP AF camera with document scanning capability. In almost 2 years I've never used it for serious document scanning though, so it won't be a deal breaker with the 9900 for me. I found an article about document scanning with the Nokia E7 which is equipped with an EDoF camera.

[southlander]

To put another spin on it, a lot of businesses (financial institutions, military, likely many others) disable the camera so in those cases it doesn't matter how good the camera is or isn't.

True but that is why RIM makes the no camera Bolds.

[the.ak.hermit]

Can someone explain exactly the loss of quality without AF? And can someone post a picture with AF and 1 without AF? thanks

These are taken at 6 inches away. The Storm 2 takes a better picture at this distance than the Playbook. If the Bold has the same camera as the Playbook, then I would expect similar results.

For most people this won't be an issue, because at distances greater than this the picture will be much better.

For me, it will be an issue, as I take photos at this distance many times a day at work, and immediately email them to the shop.

So, if you don't need close up shots on a constant basis, then the Bold camera should be fine.

[the.ak.hermit]

This is the Playbook at 12 inches to give a liitle more of an idea.

[jc_halifax]

True but that is why RIM makes the no camera Bolds.

No camera Bold? Never heard of that. My BB (provided by the military) isn't a Bold, it simply has the camera disabled.

I'm surprized that RIM (or any company) would make two different versions of the same phone when the camera can simply be disabled with software.

[howarmat]

This is the Playbook at 12 inches to give a liitle more of an idea.

see this is the point of the discussion right here. Overall this is a good picture. But if the objective was to take a picture of the bottle and be able to read it then it fails. Just have to see when people get their hands on them

[southlander]

No camera Bold? Never heard of that. My BB (provided by the military) isn't a Bold, it simply has the camera disabled.

I'm surprized that RIM (or any company) would make two different versions of the same phone when the camera can simply be disabled with software.

The no camera Bold.

[jimpilot]

Wow 17 pages on a camera. Who'd of thought that would happend. It is what it is. Do you really need it or just want it because.........

Rim made a call to use the thin lens to get a thin phone. Some folks might find the thin phone of more value than auto focus (me). I suspect RIMs research showed that to be the case so they built it for the majority.

if you need auto focus maybe this isn't the phone for you.

[the_sleuth]

For business, all real estate sales staff are heavy users of smartphone camera, be it 20 ft. pics of house, 5 ft pics of rooms to 12 inch pictures of documents. For these applications, I think the camera will perform admirably.

http://forums.crackberry.com/blackbe...rounds-636008/

If you need more detailed shots or close-up at less than 12", then BB users will have to look elsewhere.

[pythons]

For business, all real estate sales staff are heavy users of smartphone camera, be it 20 ft. pics of house, 5 ft pics of rooms to 12 inch pictures of documents. For these applications, I think the camera will perform admirably.

http://forums.crackberry.com/blackbe...rounds-636008/

If you need more detailed shots or close-up at less than 12", then BB users will have to look elsewhere.

From the "pro" EDoF article itself.

As for close of document shots, there is a solution. It's unfortunate that we have to do it BUT if you take a shot from further away, you can eventually zoom/crop the subject.

Does this 'soultion' sound better for a business user than simply looking elsewhere for a business smartphone?
...The market has already weighed in on such questions and the results are OBVIOUS.
...They have been obvious for two years.

I'm afraid you nailed it when you said if someone needs to take detailed shots they need a droid or iphone.

[TheStoof]

From the "pro" EDoF article itself.



Does this 'soultion' sound better for a business user than simply looking elsewhere for a business smartphone?
...The market has already weighed in on such questions and the results are OBVIOUS.
...They have been obvious for two years.

I'm afraid you nailed it when you said if someone needs to take detailed shots they need a droid or iphone.

Documents should be scanned in regardless. No person should use a camera to send those documents.

[pythons]

Documents should be scanned in regardless. No person should use a camera to send those documents.

Translation: Go buy a smartphone that can take pictures of documents if that's what you need.

RIM is obviously operating off the false premise that business needs the same phone today, that it was happy with in 2007...
..And if someone wants to take a picture of a document so that they can read it.
..That person should go scan that document. LOL!

I'm sorry man but I got to ask - do you work for RIM lol?

[Skeevecr]

Let's just take away thw whole camera feature than. Paying this much money for a phone you usually wouldn't even have to worry about the camera (unless you buying from rim, I think I learned my lesson and stopping after 3 bb)

You don't have to worry about the camera in this phone either unless you use it in low light which is the bane of any camera phone. The only thing to bear in mind is that some types of photos are better than others, which is also true for an AF camera.

[Rain11Man]

The camera does have auto focus. In the videos on CB you see the auto focus in action. However, there is a quick shot mode that does not use auto focus and just snaps the action shot, so it seems to me that there is a setting that you need to use or something. As I do not yet own the device I am not certain how it works, but auto focus is on the device, RIM is not that dumb

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[pythons]

The camera does have auto focus. In the videos on CB you see the auto focus in action. However, there is a quick shot mode that does not use auto focus and just snaps the action shot, so it seems to me that there is a setting that you need to use or something. As I do not yet own the device I am not certain how it works, but auto focus is on the device, RIM is not that dumb

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

It is an EDOF RIM put into the Bold, it's flagship "business" device...
...As such it can't handle taking close up shots of documents, RMA's or I.T. server bank related things.


It appears Apple wasted no time in plugging this hole as the phone they are replacing shortly already has the ability to take a fine detail shot. Guess which picture comes from the soon to be old iphone and which one comes from the new blackberry available later this month.

[elgolfman]

Wow 17 pages on a camera. Who'd of thought that would happend. It is what it is. Do you really need it or just want it because.........

Rim made a call to use the thin lens to get a thin phone. Some folks might find the thin phone of more value than auto focus (me). I suspect RIMs research showed that to be the case so they built it for the majority.

if you need auto focus maybe this isn't the phone for you.

True - well, kinda sorta. The iPhone takes amazing pix - why won't my BB? Legitimate gripe. My 9650 is horid by comparison (fan boys will argue otherwise).

[pythons]

True - well, kinda sorta. The iPhone takes amazing pix - why won't my BB? Legitimate gripe. My 9650 is horid by comparison (fan boys will argue otherwise).

In my case the 9650 I've been using for work took more than acceptable pictures for work related items...
...Every example we have witnessed from the 9930 / 9900 takes shots that are years behind the quality of the 9650.

I don't expect my Bold 9650 to take as good of pictures as an iphone 4....
...I absolutely expect ( and demand ) the Bold 9900 to take AS GOOD of pictures as my 9650.
...And I expect and demand a business phone to be able to take the standard shots one would take in the business world.

[the.ak.hermit]

Wow 17 pages on a camera. Who'd of thought that would happend. It is what it is. Do you really need it or just want it because.........

Rim made a call to use the thin lens to get a thin phone. Some folks might find the thin phone of more value than auto focus (me). I suspect RIMs research showed that to be the case so they built it for the majority.

if you need auto focus maybe this isn't the phone for you.

I believe the point being made is that the Bold is considered the Cadillac of Blackberry smartphones. This being said, not having auto focus is like a downgrade to an otherwise kick a__ smartphone.

Personally, I was leaning toward the Bold for my next phone, but because of the camera, I may end up getting the Torch instead. I use one phone for personal and business, so Blackberry is the logical choice, but which one is the question. If I get the Torch, then I wonder what I will be giving up on it versus the Bold.

I need all of the functions of a smartphone, and I want them also.

I would be curious as to what research was done, if any, and I want to know who told them that they wanted a fuzzy 5 MP camera so they could make it a little thinner. I would have told them that I want it thinner and auto focus, make it happen!

[pythons]

I would be curious as to what research was done, if any, and I want to know who told them that they wanted a fuzzy 5 MP camera so they could make it a little thinner. I would have told them that I want it thinner and auto focus, make it happen!

I would gather that same thing has been said at board-rooms directing other cell mfg's...
...I would also say the comanies on their way up in the world SAID the exact same thing you would have said.
...If you sat on RIM's board.

I'm starting to wonder if RIM isn't targeting an imaginary business customer demographic....
...And they are making devices that appeal to this imaginery customer.
...When they polled this imaginary customer demographic about the need for a camera.

The imaginary customers all said if they wanted to take a good picture they would just go out and buy a good digital camera - this would have been viewed as a win / win by RIM because it could save money by putting EDOF into it's flagship 9900.