[ronniebar]

I see this a lot. Please define this.

Really? The time has come to stop being in denial. The iPhone 4 is a great phone and a great piece of hardware. Why are all the other phones ALWAYS being compared to the iPhone 4? Because it's the king of smart phones right now.


I am a huuge blackberry supporter. I started off with an 8310, and worked my way up to a the monster bold 9000 (the BEST blackberry hands down so far) even when compared to my 9700. When the 9000 came out, it was already outdated. It had a measly 2.0 megapixel camera (instead of a 3.2 w/ autofocus) and a mini-usb port (not that big of a difference) but still.

Right now I have a Bold 9700, and a 16 gig Playbook. Now I love my Bold 9700, but I really wish it would take better pictures.

Why?

Because I'm a student. I pay for my school's tuition, books, cell phone plan, internet connection, food, computers etc etc. I wouldn't take money from my parents even if they threw it at me. I don't want to go out and purchase a digital camera. I would love to have a DSLR, but I cannot justify the pricetag that comes with it, and where the heck would I carry it with me all day? I work as a camp director during the summer, and carrying the DSLR with me all day is not an option. BUT if the camera on my phone would be better, it could ACT as my digital camera, hence removing the need for a stand-alone camera.

Recently, a friend of mine had asked me to update his Torch 9800 with the latest software, and so I took it home to do it (overnight job). I was very curious as I had never played with a Torch extensively yet, and so play I did.

After getting to keep the phone for 2-3 days (he was busy :P), I came to the conclusion that the experience was pretty half-baked imo. But that's not what I came here to rant about. I came here to rant about the FANTASTIC 5.0 mp camera w/ autofocus. Hooolyyy smokes, does this phone take amazing pictures.





Now that I know that the bold 9900 won't have the same great camera, I'll look elsewhere.

PS the playbook takes AWFUL photos if you don't have a decent light source. HD video is amazing on it though.

[austriker]

I see this a lot. Please define this.

I recently had an android. And it was great and fun. But then when I got my blackberry I understood exactly what you are asking.. RIM does email, phone calling, and texting so much better and efficiently than other phones. Like it does not really freeze, the OS is super stable. It is quick when you want to use it for communications features but does not really offer tons of apps or what not..

Also I cant tell if you were being sarcastic or not..

[_StephenBB81]

Now that I know that the bold 9900 won't have the same great camera, I'll look elsewhere.

PS the playbook takes AWFUL photos if you don't have a decent light source. HD video is amazing on it though.

The lack of a Flash on the PlayBook was certainly a mistake, the 9900 corrects that

some have posted pics taken with 9900's and they have been very nice quality at full 5MP

I think depending on what your photo usage is depends on which you'll like more, I take a lot of single item pictures so I'm going to miss AF, if I took landscape or group pictures I'd appreciate the All focus

[Kontakt7]

I keep seeing different sources; some say it has autofocus, others say it does not. It would be a good value for prospective 9900/30 buyers if it did come with AF.

I know for me, the 9780's autofocus camera has been invaluable. Part of my job is taking pictures of electronic circuits and traces looking for corrosion, cold solder joints or other physical damage. I was using a DSLR to take the pictures but it was hassling having to run back and forth to a PC to connect the CF card and offload pictures. I was pleasantly surprised on how well the Macro mode on the 9780's camera works. It really does a good job zooming in for detail. And I can email the pictures right off the phone instantaneously.

I don't know if I buy the story that there is no autofocus in the phone because RIM is trying to keep the unit thin. My brother has a Nokia N8 on which we recently did a casing change as his was pretty beaten up. That phone is pretty thin IMO. It has a 12MP Zeiss lens assembly and that assembly was at the most 3 or 4mm thick. I'm pretty sure RIM could have squeezed in the 5MP assembly...or for that matter, an 8MP sensor or something.

I do know this, RIM's got great AF camera lenses as far as phones go. Right now of course, Nokia's N8 is the boss phone right now, that camera's better then most of those $200-$400 point and shoot cameras selling today. The SE Xperia Arc has an 8MP sensor so it should be second place...but in my experience, it does not hold up against the 9700/80/Torch camera.

Those who say that it doesn't matter if the camera is AF or FF, perhaps you have a point. It is in the end up to the end user; they will decide if the phone has sufficient features for their liking. However, smartphones today are EXPECTED to be integrated devices. Meaning, they should have excellent communications/PIM functions in addition to excellent multimedia functions, of which the camera would be part of.

Also RIM has precedent using AF cameras in their phones, so it puzzling why with their latest "flagship" device they would want to remove a useful feature like AF.

I'm not planning to change phones again until my 9780 dies out. But for those of you who are planning to make the purchase, your 9900/30 SHOULD come with that AF camera. At the price point most WSPs are selling the phone at, you DESERVE that AF camera.

[Spika]

This is from Dubai's Etisalat carrier, no mention of AutoFocus!

Be the first to feel the Ultimate Touch Blackberry� Bold 9900 smart phone experience.
Features

It is a Smartphone with 2.8 inch capacitive touch screen, wide QWERTY keypad and optical track pad.
5.0 megapixel camera with flash.
CPU Processor1.2 GHz
It comes with 768 MB RAM, 8 GB internal memory and support expandable memory 32 GB via SD slot.
It supports High Definition video recording support with quality 720p.
It works on BlackBerry� 7 Operating System.
Dimensions (L�W�H): 115 � 66 � 10.5 mm - the thinnest BlackBerry Bold
Weight: 130 grams.
Screen Resolution: 640 � 480 pixels.
It supports connectivity Bluetooth, 3G, WLAN, USB, Tri Band WiFi and Built in GPS.
Battery Support: 1230 mAh removable, rechargeable battery.
It supports wireless network, Near Field Communication (NFC) technology.
It supports easier and faster internet browsing.

[the.ak.hermit]

I have been debating on which of the new phones to get. I like everything about the Bold except the camera. Unfortunately, I don't have the option to have a camera without auto focus, because a lot of the pictures I take for work are data tags, and details of parts, etc. on equipment. Currently I use my Storm 2 for this purpose, and it works pretty good.

My Playbook does not do well up close, but I mainly take long shots with it, so it is fine.

Will the torches have auto focus?

Of course, I could get the Bold, and just carry my digital camera with me, but then I lose the convenience of emailing the pictures back to the shop on the spot like I do now.

[Rexcee]

I'm disappointed. The reason why I'd give this a negative is not about the fact that it has no AF, but the fact that they removed AF just to make this smartphone thinner.

Disappointing indeed.

[UrbanGlowCam]

After getting to keep the phone for 2-3 days (he was busy :P), I came to the conclusion that the experience was pretty half-baked imo. But that's not what I came here to rant about. I came here to rant about the FANTASTIC 5.0 mp camera w/ autofocus. Hooolyyy smokes, does this phone take amazing pictures.





Now that I know that the bold 9900 won't have the same great camera, I'll look elsewhere.

PS the playbook takes AWFUL photos if you don't have a decent light source. HD video is amazing on it though.

Those photos came out great. But to be fair, try taking pictures that aren't in such good lighting conditions for a comparison. I have a feeling the 9900 can take pictures similar to that in that lighting. Now put it in the dark and it's a whole different story.

[boydude]

i was looking forward to release of this device, just found this thread am dissapointed it will not have AF, i more inclined not to go for it now, i'll check a demo out at the store when it's released and make a desicision.

[market58]

I just returned from a week at the beach. I used my PB all week to take pictures and video. The pictures look awesome.....but using the PB to takes pics is a pain. The shutter lag is forever, and if you have children to photograph getting them to sit still can be an adventure in itself. The videos are as good or better than the Flip I used to take on vacation. Albeit the light outside was phenomenal so it made taking great pics easier. As far as a camera on a phone, my Storms (1 and 2) both sucked and the Bold 9650 I have is terrible as well. They are not very intuitive and do not have the same snap as the iPhone. I have friends that have the iPhone and have used the camera on it many times and that is about the best camera experience I have had on a phone.......BUT that is not why I purchase a phone. I don't feel the need to have a great camera experience on a smartphone, that is not it's primary purpose. Knowing that going in I am a little more tolerant than those that expect more. So auto focus is not a big deal IMO.

[johndoe086]

Picture:
9900/9930 < [9810/9850/9860 (because of auto focus)]

Video:
9810/9850/9860 < [9900/9930 (because of all focus)]

So, that is the trade off, video vs. picture

[barrist]

Those photos came out great. But to be fair, try taking pictures that aren't in such good lighting conditions for a comparison. I have a feeling the 9900 can take pictures similar to that in that lighting. Now put it in the dark and it's a whole different story.

Exactly. Most cameras do fine in great lighting. The 9900 would do just as well with those types of photos (great lighting, subject a fair distance away) that were posted from the Torch.

[BB9900Lover]

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

[Drayk]

[

Those photos came out great. But to be fair, try taking pictures that aren't in such good lighting conditions for a comparison. I have a feeling the 9900 can take pictures similar to that in that lighting. Now put it in the dark and it's a whole different story.

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

The 9900 has a camera flash.
All I know about EDoF is what I've researched after reading through this thread.
I'm going to reserve judgment until I can see for myself. Seeing an entire pic come out crystal clear from 2"+ is appealing.Being able to take rapid fire pix is also appealing.
One 9900 "tester" said the NFC function works well on his device.
So......I'm wondering (as I always do re: all the bs before a bb is released) whats the big deal.
As I've always said, I use, and love, my bb's for how it helps me in my daily routine.
I think I'll just wait for my own "hands on" experiance to pass judgment. It's abundantly clear to me you can't get a "good read" on a new bb based on what you read on CB.

[Skeevecr]

I agree totally. But it does make one wonder why RIM would have to go to a full focus camera instead of keeping the auto focus camera, to help get the device as thin as possible. When the iPhone 4 for example has a camera that has auto focus and is still thinner than the 99xx. Makes no sense, but it does make cents....

Anyhow, the 9900/30 takes good enough pictures. I would say they're no worse than previous BlackBerry models. And the video capture is better than with previous version with or without HD recording.

If you look at the link somebody posted, a fixed focus camera only fails compared with an autofocus one on some close-up work, for most other uses it matches or is actually superior and video is definitely better.

So in the real world you have a camera that is easier to fit in a phone, is a little bit cheaper and produces equal or better results in most usecases, sounds to me like they made a sensible decision really.

Found that link again:

EDoF versus Auto-focus: Understanding the compromises involved

[Skeevecr]

Unfortunately Kevin, this is not the case. Otherwise the 9810, 9850 & 9860 would have the same all focus camera. But they don't. You must understand that anything under 11mm is rather thin. In order to accomplish this, something different was needed.

Actually, the 9810 having a different camera is probably as simple as them reusing as much of the 9800 design as possible to simplify production.

[TheStoof]

i was looking forward to release of this device, just found this thread am dissapointed it will not have AF, i more inclined not to go for it now, i'll check a demo out at the store when it's released and make a desicision.

While AF may be a good feature, I did well with my shoddy 9000 camera. The 9800 was slow, so AF was a pain in the ***. My unlocked T-Mobile 9700 even had a slow AF camera.

The speed of the camera makes it a moot point. You can re-take photos within seconds.

Granted, AF should have been there...We will live.

No one should be printing photos from camera phones as it is.

[melb_me]

Which device took which picture? Playbook or Iphone4.
They both have tiny little pinhole 5MP cameras is my point.
Sorry no EXIF data.

[dcburke789]

Picture:
9900/9930 < [9810/9850/9860 (because of auto focus)]

Video:
9810/9850/9860 < [9900/9930 (because of all focus)]

So, that is the trade off, video vs. picture

If the camera stinks at taking pics but, takes great vids.....
Why not just take a video and then snap a screen shot of what you want?

[lax42]

If the camera stinks at taking pics but, takes great vids.....
Why not just take a video and then snap a screen shot of what you want?

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)

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[the_sleuth]

This AF debate is a red herring. What we should gripe about, RIM not kicking it up a notch and delivering a phone with 1080p recording capability.

Anyhow here is the camera in action:

Here's an informative article that UGC posted: EDoF versus Auto-focus: Understanding the compromises involved

[Kobol]

FFS RIM, why is it so hard for them to get something right, no nfc no autofocus, maybe no customers.

the share holders really missed a chance to kick those stupid CEOs out at the last meeting

[katiepea]

Its as if they intentionally hold every product back, although apple sped this too, I don't think rim does it as strategically

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[pythons]

This AF debate is a red herring. What we should gripe about, RIM not kicking it up a notch and delivering a phone with 1080p recording capability.

Anyhow here is the camera in action:

From a business perspective the 9900's camera is directly next to worthless....
...Simply because the majority of the types of pictures one would take in the capacity of doing their job.
...Is beyond the ability of the 9900 due to the lack of an AF.

I read the article about the difference between AF and EDOF and it comes right out and states EDOF is next to worthless for business applications.

Did RIM design this phone with the understanding that 1% of the people who would buy it would use it for "business"? If you add up everything the article says about the difference between AF and EDOF this is exactly the premise one is left with.

[southlander]

From a business perspective the 9900's camera is directly next to worthless....
...Simply because the majority of the types of pictures one would take in the capacity of doing their job.
...Is beyond the ability of the 9900 due to the lack of an AF.

I read the article about the difference between AF and EDOF and it comes right out and states EDOF is next to worthless for business applications.

Did RIM design this phone with the understanding that 1% of the people who would buy it would use it for "business"? If you add up everything the article says about the difference between AF and EDOF this is exactly the premise one is left with.

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?