[belfastdispatcher]

I've had much better luck than 1 in 10, but I'm not posting pictures of my daughter here, even with her face pixelated. Yet since you have no such qualms, why not post a close up of your daughter's face taken from a foot away, and then with a straight face tell everyone again how the 9900 camera is an "improvement"?

Don't worry, you won't have to pixelate her face -- the 9900 will blur it just fine.

Close enough for you? My picture was taken in a completely dark room using flash.

Edit- remember the photos upload here at 1/3 of the full size and quality.

[Robert22]

You try to excuse an inxescusable camera failure of RIM on the Bold 9900. I will never buy this phone because of this. I need to take pictures of dociments, forget to make it with the crapy camera of the 9900.

[blackmoe]

Close enough for you? My picture was taken in a completely dark room using flash.

Edit- remember the photos upload here at 1/3 of the full size and quality.

Why are you removing the EXIF info from the pictures? The only way to know what camera and settings took the picture is to leave it in.

[drfever]

Wow ... I didn't think I would get this much controversy out of one article and my own observations and thoughts.

There are two school of thoughts here....both with easy solutions.

You either like the camera and all if fine.

You don't like the camera and for this you make a decision not to purchase the phone. Fair enough. Solution = don't buy the phone.

Easy!

Picture samples will follow when I get a chance to upload them to my photo hosting site.

[belfastdispatcher]

Why are you removing the EXIF info from the pictures? The only way to know what camera and settings took the picture is to leave it in.

I'm not removing anything, I just follow the upload steps in the forum. The maximum upload size is 500kb, the photo size is 1.64mbnso more then 1mb is missing from the picture you see in my post.

[mud314]

For those that think the 9900 camera is not an improvement, please show me how you can take photos like these with an Autofocus Camera

Wow...you took those pics w/the 9900's camera? I have to say those are very impressive pictures for being a "downgrade".

For me a camera that I don't have to sit there and focus is the way to go, I am impatient and not that great of a photographer. I tried my photography phase a few years back....I bought a nice expensive camera that was used maybe three times for taking actual photographs.

Thanks for sharing !!!

[mud314]

Wow ... I didn't think I would get this much controversy out of one article and my own observations and thoughts.

There are two school of thoughts here....both with easy solutions.

You either like the camera and all if fine.

You don't like the camera and for this you make a decision not to purchase the phone. Fair enough. Solution = don't buy the phone.

Easy!

Picture samples will follow when I get a chance to upload them to my photo hosting site.

Personally I liked your review bro. I have to admit I tried reading about that lens and until I read your review I was still going &*^$#%!!!! No I am not slow I just like reading things that are new to me in layman's terms, which you covered! So thanks and F those who are whining I think there is cheese elsewhere....I hear the moon is made out of it

[belfastdispatcher]

Wow...you took those pics w/the 9900's camera? I have to say those are very impressive pictures for being a "downgrade".

For me a camera that I don't have to sit there and focus is the way to go, I am impatient and not that great of a photographer. I tried my photography phase a few years back....I bought a nice expensive camera that was used maybe three times for taking actual photographs.

Thanks for sharing !!!

It's very important to use the scene settings with the 9900 camera, put it in sports mode and it will be so fast you end up taking the photo before you meant to take it where with the 9700 you had to think a second or two ahead.

Again, i want to stress that over 1mb is missing from the pictures as the upload limit is 500kb.

[siopow]

For those that think the 9900 camera is not an improvement, please show me how you can take photos like these with an Autofocus Camera

As mentioned before, autofocus is needed to take macro/close up shots.

Let me see some macro pictures.

[belfastdispatcher]

As mentioned before, autofocus is needed to take macro/close up shots.

Let me see some macro pictures.

There, not as good as the autofocus but good enough for me.

[Drayk]

Nice job OP....You had to stir up controversy....JK.

I messed with the 9930, and the camera @ a VZW store before purchasing the 9810.
I was totally satisfied, and actually quit impressed w/the pix. Even the ones I took of the display verbiage tag.
I, too, rely on "close up" text pix from time to time and the 9930 took great pix, I thought.
The only reasons I have the 9810 and didn't wait for the 9900 on ATT is:
-I like the bigger screen
-9900 is nowhere in sight
-the 9810 was $50
I'm actually glad I didn't have an option for both. I'd probably still be deciding.

Conclusion: If there is something about a device you just can't live without.....get another device.

My wish for device: A 9900 slider. AND, the EDoF camera would be an excellent component for this "ultimate" BB

[Drayk]

There, not as good as the autofocus but good enough for me.

Dude.....good job. I was sooooooo hoping someone would post a snap shot of something like this.
As I mentioned in a prior post, I took pix like this from a 9930 in the 1st try using close up or macro mode....(can't remember exactly)
I can't wait to read other comments to this post.
Thanks belfast!!!!

[lase532]

There, not as good as the autofocus but good enough for me.

the phone I tried would not come close to this. maybe there are defective phones out there.

[Taxi2base]

Nice..................

[belfastdispatcher]

the phone I tried would not come close to this. maybe there are defective phones out there.

You need to know how to do it, pull the camera back 20-30 cm and zoom in to get close, for text put it in text mode, not close up mode and force the flash on, that's all it takes.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[graystuff]

EDoF is not a down grade in quality at all. Its better in some situations and worse in others. It goes progressively more out of focus as you get closer to the subject from approx 1 metre. But if you have 3/4 people at differnt distances, ie group shot, then all will be in focus with EDoF, but auto focus would try to focus on the one in the middle of the picture and the rest would be slightly out of focus. Simply knowing the limitations of both EDoF and AutoFOcus will enable you to minimise the unwanted effects and maximise the positive ones.

If you take lots of close ups then maybe it's not for you, but lots of action shots of the kids running around then brilliant. For most people it will be fine.

[123berryaddicted]

the phone I tried would not come close to this. maybe there are defective phones out there.

Defective phones, no. Defective users, yes.

I'm not pointing a finger at you but I bet if you follow some of the close-up tips provided in the forums and gave it another try you'd come up with equally impressive photos.

We all know for close-ups the phone does not compare to a 5mp AF. Buuuuuuuuuut, if used properly its also not so terrible, and can still be used to 'scan' and 'forward' text documents... I know because I have a 9900, and I do use it from time to time for this purpose - its not as good as my 9700 was, but its certainly not terrible.

I will say this though, my 9900 takes beautiful photos of faster moving objects (things on side of road, buildings, animals, sports, etc.) So the edof has its advantages over the AF as well.

Truth be told, if the 97xx had edof and we were all used to its great motion, always in focus abilities, and then the 99xx had AF, we'd all be complaining about lag and blurry birthday photos - lol... Just sayin. Both types of cameras have their advantages.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[porkchopian]

Dude this is the best post ever! I have the Bold 9900 and out of all the BlackBerry phones i have had this one kills them all. I have taken many pictures with the Bold and have no complaints what so ever! It takes great pictures (for a phone of course)!! If i want amazing pictures I'll use my Sony 10mp camera cause you know thats what it was made for but infortunately no BBM, phone calls or emails on it! Once again thank you for the great post explaining the differences. I think this should be a CrackBerry blog post!!!

[[email protected]]

I am quickly learning that AF only matters up close.....I saw a video of Steve Litchfield comparing the EDoF camera on the Nokia E7 and the AF camera on the Nokia N8 and in video mode, the EDoF DESTROYED (and I mean *destroyed on every level*) the video from the AF model.

So everyone, if video is important, EDoF is far superior. I recall with my 9700's, Nexus One and Torch 9800 when taking videos, it would mess things up...but EDoF is fantastic for that.

For you sharpshooters out there, look, I am 100% not going to carry a camera with me, too many things to carry, but if my JOB required me taking pictures of something, then by all means, I probably should, or I suck at my job.

The EDoF camera does a fantastic job. There is enough proof in here to provide me comfort in the abilities of the camera. Now I/we simply need to learn how to use it better.

End of story.

[deejayburnout]

Great post

I actually prefer this camera to my 9520 as it takes pictures so much faster and smoother.

The auto focus was great but as you said in your initial post, if the object in focus movesn the picture is useless.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[mnemanov]

(sorry i did not read all 7 pages so maybe this is already written).

the OP gives a very interesting beleivable explanation.


unfortunately it's plain NOT TRUE.

'Continuous Focus' means that the camera is mechanically able to adjust focus, and the software is directing the camera to contiusly focus so as soon as you press the shutter button it can take the picture right away without additional lag.

this feature is available on many cameras.

what the 9900/9930 have is a 'fixed focus' lens, it cannot focus. it's just designed in a way to be focused on almost any distance, so there is no need to focus.

that is great for anything over a few feet, but from close up, it will not focus, no matter what you do.

many posters commented that you can move a few feet a way and then zoom in, that makes sense (though I did not try it myself). but the OP is still untrue.

m

[anon3396357]

There has been talk about the camera on the new device. I recently replied in another post but I felt the subject and my response deserved its own little thread.

I've read some concern about how the removal of the autofocus feature on the new devices is somehow a downgrade in the camera. I made the analogy that people don't and shouldn't only by phones for the camera eluding to the fact pocket cameras don't have telephone call capabilities.

Just because most people don't buy phones while taking its camera into consideration does not mean nobody buy phones for the camera.

The confusion lies with peoples' misunderstanding of cameras and the focussing systems used by cameras. Just because RIM removed the autofocus feature doesn't mean you aren't getting any autofocus in your images.

Misleading information. Fixed Focus is not Autofocus.

We are all familiar with the 9780 or 9700 camera right? (I hope so). You've all encountered the pressing of the trackpad, the camera stalls as it is focussing and then snaps the picture. That delay is what is commonly referred to as shutter lag.

Inaccurate.

Total Lag = Autofocus Lag + Shutter Lag
AF lag is not Shutter lag

Here are a couple of links for you to learn the difference between AF lag and shutter lag:

ImpulseAdventure - Shutter Lag & Startup Time Comparison
AF Lag and Shutter Lag

It is unwise to suggest that the 9900 has an inferior camera because that feature is gone.

Depending on what kind of shots (landscape, still life, macro) and the lighting conditions, EDoF cameras can be either superior or inferior to AF cameras.

Quite contrary in my view. Autofocus has not been lost. The camera is still focussing but in continuous mode.

Wrong, just plain wrong.

First of all, to say that EDoF cameras "focus continuously" it would imply that the focal length can be changed which is NOT the case. EDoF cameras employ a fixed focus system = the focal length cannot be changed. Therefore, no "continuous focusing" and hence no AF.

For the most part people don't yet realize the difference between autofocus and continuous focus. This leads to the confusion.

You mean your own confusion. Continuous focus means continuous AF.

Given that my hobby next to guitar is photography I will try to help in this regard.

How may times in autofocus have you tried to snap a photo only for the subject to move as you were about to snap the picture?...the end result is an unusable image.

Many times on the one in my 9780, because the continuous AF mode is too slow to keep up with the movement of my subject. Anyway, let's move on for now:

Autofocus is the most widely supported camera focus mode, In essence it is one-shot focusing,

WRONG. Autofocus is not one-shot focus in essence, simply because there are both one-shot AF and continuous AF systems.

which is best for still subjects. The autofocus mode as I just provided an example for is susceptible to focus errors for fast moving subjects or subjects that move before the shutter is fully pressed. Autofocus cannot anticipate subject motion. Auto focus is great when you have a perfectly still subject. The focusing requires a focus lock before the photograph can be taken. This is what people on their 9870 or os 6 devices notice when taking pictures. That slight freeze ....then "click" when the image is taken.

There are so many errors in this paragraph I don't know where to begin, but
there are many, many kinds of AF systems. Just want to point out that AF is used for shooting fast moving objects as well.

I'm not picking bones here. I know that the 9780 is not capable of shooting fast moving objects because although it has a AF camera, it is poor in performance due to size and budget constraints. But it is a FALLACY to say that AF cannot shoot fast moving objects just because the 9780 AF camera fails to do so.

Check your 9780 ... in camera options go to "Autofocus" tou will see there is continuous listed first then "single shot".

The single shot is what has been removed.

I'll bet you a dollar that most people didn't even realize they have been shooting continuous focus all this time with their 9780 but are now making an issue out of a feature that they never used not being available...ie the "single shot" focus. Continuous focus was always an option on the 9780 .

Most people though barely used it and I'll bet never knew it was there.

Continuous AF on the 9780 is just as it says, it readjusts the focus automatically depending on light conditions and focal point. If I want to shoot a macro of say, a cup, I can do it both in continuous AF mode OR single-shot AF.

The difference is this: In continuous AF mode, the focus is constantly readjusting depending on light conditions and focal points as I pan the 9780 camera around me without me pressing a single button. In single-shot AF mode, the camera will not focus on any thing as you move it around. It will autofocus only at the point you click the trackpad for a snapshot.

So, back to the cup. In continuous AF mode, I'll just point the camera at it, wait for it to focus automatically, then take a snapshot. In single-shot mode, I'll also point the camera at it, except this time the cup does not come into focus until I press my trackpad for a shot.

Most people don't even use the scene modes by the way ... believe me ... they help ... I can't tell you the number of times I've been a rock concerts and see people snapping images of the stage with a flash when they are 60 feet away from the stage! That's what night or party scene modes are for. Flash at that distance is going to illuminate the head of the guy standing in front of you...not the image. Get to know your scene modes for better images and don't blame the camera. I am veering off topic so my apologies.

Bank on point.....

Continuous focus, supports an autofocus mode which continually adjusts the focus distance for moving subjects.

Nikon cameras refer to this mode as continuous focus which is what we see in the new Bold 9900.

Continuous focus is not what we see in the Bold 9900. The EDoF camera is fixed-focus. You can't change the focus.

(Not Nikon�s focussing system though but they just called it the same). Those with Canon cameras notice this referred to as AI Servo focusing.

Continuous focussing works by predicting where the subject will be slightly in the future based on an estimation of the subject velocity using focus distance and movement. The camera then focuses at this predicted distance in advance to account for the shutter lag (which is the delay between pressing the shutter button and the start of the exposure as we see in autofocus shots in the 9780). This greatly increases the probability of correct focus for moving subjects.

Correct, that's how AF in Nikon cameras work, NOT in 9900s. For more information, I'll just point you to this link which explains the various AF modes Nikon cameras have.

There is no "downgrade" going on with regards to no autofocus in the 9900 device. The camera in the bold 9900 is still auto-focussing but doing so on in a continuous mode...continually tracking the subject.

The 9900 camera is NOT autofocusing! It has a fixed-focus camera. It means the focus cannot be changed. It means the 9900 CANNOT autofocus. It does not track the subject at all.

Try putting your own hand 2-3 inches away from your 9900 camera. Does it focus? No. So is it in continuous focusing mode? No.

How many times have you tried taking a picture of someone blowing out a birthday candle with your 9780 only to get it blurry because the camera was trying to lock focus? During that lag, your subject blew out the candles and you missed the shot!

That's because the camera on the 9780 is not comparable to modern P&S or DSLRs. If I use AF on a high-end DSLR to shoot in that scenario you just described, I wouldn't miss the shot and neither would it be "blurry".

Now do that in continuous focus and chances are you have a clear shot. Now, drop the preview picture setting down to as low as possible (I believe you can turn it right off on the 9900) and then you can snap away even quicker!

I shoot photography as an advanced hobby. I can tell you that even when shooting still subjects I utilize continuous focus (this is a $2,000 camera body) just in case I get some movement.

So to answer your question...you are not getting an inferior camera. With all due respect, people just need to know how to use the camera. As the old saying goes, the cost of the gear doesn't make you a better photographer...it is what you do with the equipment you have that does.

By the way, my $2,000 camera still doesn't make telephone calls or accept incoming email or BBM messages.

The excuse has been used many times before yes ... that other devices offer better cameras. Oh well ... the buyer needs to realize what he/she is buying the device for. Will they be buying it for the RIM reliability, security and fastest push services in the industry or are they buying it for entertainment purposes?

I hope this clears the air.

I have taken great shots with my 9900 .. clear and crisp ... arguably better than the 9780 on which I too used continuous focus extensively.

Learn when to use the proper scene modes and don't sweat the absence of "autofocus" or single shot focus as was known on the 9780. The camera is still focussing!! It is just focussing differently.

I'll just summarize this whole chunk into one sentence: You are confused about autofocus, fixed-focus and other stuff.

-

Now, the 9900 camera can be argued to be either superior or inferior to the 9780's.

If I need to take macro shots, the 9900 is inferior to the 9780.
If I need to take fast moving shots, the 9900 is superior to the 9780.
And the list goes on.

End.

[Rdeleon05]

Many Thanks! I actually posted a Q about this issue on a Thread I created yesterday.

But stilllll, Y try to snap a Picture with Text and the "Text" or "Close Up" modes still give me blurry images, have played with the Light and still NoGo.

Back with my 9650 it worked like a charm because text would come out so crisp.

Anyhow, I guess I can live with not being able to take pictures of Documents or close up paragraphs... I mean, you can still read some of it.

Many thanks for the Explanation it really helped me understand what was going on.

Brgds!

[bustermin]

But shouldn't the Bold,being RIM's flagship device, have a better camera than the Curve 93xx's? Why should a Bold 99xx buyer have to compromise features in comparison to an entry-level device from the same manufacturer?

+1, what's the point if you can't even use QR Codes.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9650 using Tapatalk

[belfastdispatcher]

Many Thanks! I actually posted a Q about this issue on a Thread I created yesterday.

But stilllll, Y try to snap a Picture with Text and the "Text" or "Close Up" modes still give me blurry images, have played with the Light and still NoGo.

Back with my 9650 it worked like a charm because text would come out so crisp.

Anyhow, I guess I can live with not being able to take pictures of Documents or close up paragraphs... I mean, you can still read some of it.

Many thanks for the Explanation it really helped me understand what was going on.

Brgds!

With the right technique you can get really close, to a few words not paragraph.

Just took these now in the car, not at a desk with a steady hand.