[emirozmen]

I dont understand why!
Every brand is releasing phones which are at least 8mp's. There are some that are even 12mp!!! Of course you might stay megapixels dont actually determine the image quality, its the sensors or sth else. But i have seen a ton of android and nokia devices, and i ve also seen iPhones. They take better pictures. I take quite a lot of pictures on the go and actually use my phone as a digital camera and i'd be so glad if they chose to go with a high end camera on their flagship(!) device, at least a camera that has autofocus!

Are you also dissapointed with the camera? What would you wanted?

[Wangta]

I agree. I'd take the camera from my old 8900, which was a 3.2 megapixel with AF. It takes better pics than my 9900!

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

[adicktuz]

Camera isn't everything about the 9900. The 9780 had 5MP with AF but I gave it up for the 9900.

Yes, although it would've have been better if the 9900 had at least 8MP with AF, but yea, what the heck! It's gots lots of other good stuff on it.

[Maseroche]

Wish they kept the AF though.

[xDAKx]

I do as well wish the 9900 had AF, it's my only complaint about the 9900, EDoF is just not what I'm looking for, I'm often taking close up shots (sometimes even macro) of various things, and so being able to have auto focus is really important.

Like most everyone else, I understand why they did it, I just wish they hadn't.

[emirozmen]

This has been discussed several times by now.
If i'm correct they took out the auto-focus out because they want to keep the slimness of the phone.
I don't know if that's an sort of a excuse of them, nor even i dunno if it's true.
But yeah don't know what to say else, you have it live with it now haha.
Ofcourse it could be better..

There are slimmer phones than the 9900 which have 8mp cameras and autfocus , if I am not mistaken

[xDAKx]

There are slimmer phones than the 9900 which have 8mp cameras and autfocus , if I am not mistaken

True. There are many phones slimmer than the 9900, but what your forgetting about is the component density. Meaning, How many other things are in the area of the component we're talking about.

In the case of the 9900, there are a lot of things right in that area, the screen, the ear piece, proximity sensor, LED notification light, and the flash, plus from what I understand that area houses a secondary microphone used for noise cancellation and video recording, so then count in all the ribbon cables for those things, and the thickness of the actual connectors, and then look at the "depth" of the camera in the device, compared to what's required for an AF camera, and you quick begin to realize how little room they had to work with.

Other devices have camera with AF, but when you actually fully tear those devices apart, you can see that while it may be as little as .5-1.0mm difference, they have more room for the AF camera, room that the 9900 just doesn't have.

[ubizmo]

I do as well wish the 9900 had AF, it's my only complaint about the 9900, EDoF is just not what I'm looking for, I'm often taking close up shots (sometimes even macro) of various things, and so being able to have auto focus is really important.

Like most everyone else, I understand why they did it, I just wish they hadn't.

Did you check out some of the close-up pictures people have taken with the 9900 in the "Real World" pictures thread? Such as this and this? It seems to me that with a little practice, they are getting good quality close-up images.

I can certainly see that if most of the pictures you take are of this sort, an AF camera would be essential, but I think it's important for people to understand that the claim that you can't take decent close-up pictures with the 9900 is false. I realize that you didn't claim this. But before I ordered the 9900 I was concerned about this, with so many people claiming on CB that the 9900 camera is "no good". That thread convinced me otherwise.

[guerllamo7]

I like the 9930 camera because it takes faster pictures and I have three fast little boys. For me it works better than AF. Notice that all three (or whatever your multi-object number is) of the kids are in focus and Cooper is pumping his arms as he shoots at Ben.

For me the pictures look great. 12Mega Pixels are a gimmick in my view. 3.2MP was just fine, 5MP is just bonus. The one thing the Bolds struggle with is tiny print or barcodes. I don't take pictures of this so to me it does not matter.

I have at least five hundred pictures of my family with the new Bold and it works great for us. Fast for multiple objects is better for me than barcodes and tiny print. It just makes sense for real life. However, if you need to take tiny print or barcode pics for work then it is a problem. I don't so it isn't for me.

Take a look at the attached picture of two boys running full speed in a low light environment. With my former phone (HTC Evo 4G and 8MP camera) I would have a picture of two blurs running around a caretaker but the camera took much longer to launch so I would probably not even get a picture at all. With three boys fast always in focus trumps barcodes and tiny prints.

This is a picture of moving kids in low light. There is another post with still pictures from the bold with good light and they look awesome.

I also like the upgrade to HD video recording.

[xDAKx]

Did you check out some of the close-up pictures people have taken with the 9900 in the "Real World" pictures thread? Such as this and this? It seems to me that with a little practice, they are getting good quality close-up images.

I can certainly see that if most of the pictures you take are of this sort, an AF camera would be essential, but I think it's important for people to understand that the claim that you can't take decent close-up pictures with the 9900 is false. I realize that you didn't claim this. But before I ordered the 9900 I was concerned about this, with so many people claiming on CB that the 9900 camera is "no good". That thread convinced me otherwise.

What I really meant to say in that post wasn't that you can't take a good close-up/macro with an EDoF camera, but really that you can achieve a good result, it's just not nearly as simple or quick as using a device with an AF system built in, This is what I've been telling to friends and colleagues when I explain what EDoF is to them, EDoF is fine, you just have to be willing to experiment a bit in order to harness the full potential of it.

What I'm doing is more along the lines of taking photos of proofs (for print designs that I'm doing) which usually involve getting in somewhat close to try and capture detail in a photograph or printed text in page layouts, however on occasion, I do find myself using the camera with QRcodes as well.

I've been able to get decent results with a bit of experimentation when it comes to photographic detail, and RIM has done a good job addressing the EDoF camera when scanning QRcodes, via implementing on-screen guides and suggestions for the optimal distance to hold the camera away from whatever it is your scanning, my only remaining issue has been text, and it's the complaint I've found most common from other people using devices with EDoF cameras.

The best solution I've found so far, is to just carry an ultra-slim point and shoot when I know I'm going to be doing those types of shots where getting focus on text will be needed, so far it's worked pretty well, and has the added bonus of not mixing in photos I'm taking for work with the photos I'm taking in my personal life, since the 9900 is my personal device, not a work device.

[guzprom]

I like iphone's camera, but minus the 9900's keyboard and smoothness, I choose my 9900. But i agree it is better if its got an 8 mega pixel cam that shoot hd. Maybe someone should tell rim which factory in china sell that camera part.
Slimness is definitely not an issue. Seen the Samsung note? It's slimmer... Anyway, bold still rocks!

[ubizmo]

What I really meant to say in that post wasn't that you can't take a good close-up/macro with an EDoF camera, but really that you can achieve a good result, it's just not nearly as simple or quick as using a device with an AF system built in, This is what I've been telling to friends and colleagues when I explain what EDoF is to them, EDoF is fine, you just have to be willing to experiment a bit in order to harness the full potential of it.

I think that if I had to do a lot of that sort of thing, auto-focus would be a non-negotiable requirement for me.

[TheScionicMan]

It's good to see that others understand that its a trade-off, not a low-end camera used to save a buck. What the EDoF lacks in closeup shots, it more than makes up for it with the quickness and quality of most of your other shots. I really miss the 9930 camera. I've missed many shots due to the A/F on this 9800, waiting for it to focus when the 9930 would have been done.

[Wangta]

This has been discussed several times by now.
If i'm correct they took out the auto-focus out because they want to keep the slimness of the phone.
I don't know if that's an sort of a excuse of them, nor even i dunno if it's true.
But yeah don't know what to say else, you have it live with it now haha.
Ofcourse it could be better..

I don't buy it. Greatest example - THE iPHONE. It is practically the same width!!!

[ThePoisonBerry]

It's foolish to buy the "limited" space argument. Look at RIM's history with incremental option upgrades-- Tour with no wifi, curve with no 3G... at the time, all other phones were coming out with similar features in same sized and form factor. RIM simply wanted to make it so there is something to look forward to on the next phone.

I bet the next Bold will have AF, 8MP at same thickness.
It's all a business strategy.

[pynkfloydd]

I read a great write up on one of Lenovo's blogs discussing their design/engineering choices which seems pretty applicable here.

I believe the write up specifically addressed screen choice and why Lenovo wasn't using "the best" screens in their Thinkpad line. The short answer was that the majority of sales were going to bulk purchases made by corporate customers. For those customers, the difference between paying a few dollars extra per item and improved user experience wasn't worth it. (He stated that a lot of times, it even came down to cost saving of a few pennies per item.)

Anyways, I suspect it's probably similar here as this might be more aimed at the corporate consumer. You'd really have to see sales numbers to know the exact story. ...but, because they sell the Bold line without a camera, there's probably not a huge demand for spending the extra money on a better camera.

[waukeshaberry]

What would be nice is a front facing camera, maybe around 2.0 mp for self portraits and a higher mp camera maybe 8 mp in the rear both with AF. I think it is an excuse about the thickness influencing the AF not being part their camera, since the iPhone and some Android phones are about the same thickness or thinner. So if your going to have this your "flagship" device then make it so. Other than that it's perfect....for me.

[nubgen]

5mp without AF. it's like RIM is stuck in 2009 lol

[BlackBerry Guy]

I'm beginning to wonder if the 9900 and PlayBook share the same 5mp camera module. Both are similar in thickness. Probably cheaper for RIM to re-use the module than to go out and source out new AF units.

[belfastdispatcher]

The problem with more camera MP is the resulted bigger file size and the harder to share they become, the 9900 already takes photos in 1.6mb size, what file size results from a 8-12mp camera?

Don't get me started on HD video, 10 seconds becomes virtually impossible to share unless you upload it somewhere first, too big for email or I M clients

[MikeFromCanada]

The problem with more camera MP is the resulted bigger file size and the harder to share they become, the 9900 already takes photos in 1.6mb size, what file size results from a 8-12mp camera?

Don't get me started on HD video, 10 seconds becomes virtually impossible to share unless you upload it somewhere first, too big for email or I M clients

Bingo! Even the size of the mid-range video quality (one up on MMS setting) is huge. Every second of recording is almost 1MB stored. Sharing a quick 10-20 second clip is near impossible.

Megapixels are not the be all end all. If you think they are then you should really look more into technology in cameras. A 5MP camera is more than enough to produce great looking pictures while maintaining some kind of reasonable file size.

[belfastdispatcher]

Happy Place

[jamesbondOO7]

I think the camera of the Bold 9900 is amazing. It is now the only camera I use now for my real estate activities. Clients and colleagues ask me which camera I use....

[anon(73368)]

I think the camera of the Bold 9900 is amazing. It is now the only camera I use now for my real estate activities. Clients and colleagues ask me which camera I use....

Agreed!!! The 9900 is very good and takes quality pics. Very pleased with it. Dont get the negative talk about the cam?

[jamesbondOO7]

Some examples











QED