[just_luc]

The picture quality on my 9900 is decent,if I really want good photo's I use my Nikon DSLR.. but where I do miss the auto focus is trying to scan QR codes or Microsoft tags.. and forget about those business card reader apps..

[mud314]

I like the camera just fine. The pics are not bad always in focus and easy to use for me not having to wait for that auto focus is perfect. If I wanted a better camera I'd buy an SLR or something more professional grade; but I don't want something like that. I'm not even at amateur level when it comes to photos and most that are amateur level would no the using their precious for a really good shot.

[10-Dee-Q]

the idea is not that it has to have the best camera in smartphone market
but RIM is going backward instead of forward
previous Bold devices have better camera than this.

i know that if i want a superb quality pictures i won't rely on a smartphone
but for moderate use, i found that my previous 9700 / 9780 is satisfactory

but not on this 9900

i think thats why people are complaining.

[rcheung135]

If you want a great digital camera with amazing auto focus capabilities.......buy a Canon.

No, get a Nikon

[olblueyez]

the idea is not that it has to have the best camera in smartphone market
but RIM is going backward instead of forward
previous Bold devices have better camera than this.

^^^WOW, that was a real rollercoaster ride!!!^^^

i know that if i want a superb quality pictures i won't rely on a smartphone
but for moderate use, i found that my previous 9700 / 9780 is satisfactory

but not on this 9900

i think thats why people are complaining.

NFC
1.2Ghz Processor
More Memory
5.8Ghz WiFi that the other BB's dont have
Full Qwerty & Touch Screen
Blah, Blah, Blah

And you are saying they went backwards?

Maybe some people just like to invent reasons to complain because they dont have anything better to do.

[10-Dee-Q]

Aren't we talking about the camera here ?
Helooo ????

Well if u want to start it, there's a lot of "subjects" on these!
-worse camera
-worse build quality
-worse trackpad that moves by itself
-worse battery life
-worse cell receptions
-worse wifi range

Just search the forums, there's tons of complain bout his 9900/9930

We are talking about the camera alone here,

Eg:
You buy 2010 Ferrari it has 5 litre engine, bla bla bla and it comes with Bi xenon headlight
Then u upgrade to more expensive top of the line 2011 ferrari, it have 6 litre engine and more ammenities (which is normall because its their latest top of the line model) but now it comes with Halogen headlight no more Bi Xenon headlight.

Get it ???

Why don't we 9900/9930 just admit that our camera is worse then previous  ?
I'm not ashamend about it at all
RIM should be ashamed of it
And I'm indeed really dissapointed by it .

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[olblueyez]

Aren't we talking about the camera here ?
Helooo ????

Well if u want to start it, there's a lot of "subjects" on these!
-worse camera
-worse build quality
-worse trackpad that moves by itself
-worse battery life
-worse cell receptions
-worse wifi range

Just search the forums, there's tons of complain bout his 9900/9930

We are talking about the camera alone here,

Eg:
You buy 2010 Ferrari it has 5 litre engine, bla bla bla and it comes with Bi xenon headlight
Then u upgrade to more expensive top of the line 2011 ferrari, it have 6 litre engine and more ammenities (which is normall because its their latest top of the line model) but now it comes with Halogen headlight no more Bi Xenon headlight.

Get it ???

Why don't we 9900/9930 just admit that our camera is worse then previous ? ?
I'm not ashamend about it at all
RIM should be ashamed of it
And I'm indeed really dissapointed by it .

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Did someone mention the EDOF camera in the 99XX is better than the AF unit in the other Blackberry's?

The 9900 has features the other Blackberry's don't have and the manufacturing cost is not unlimited as many people seem it completely forget when they make the same point over and over.

If your going to ignore the facts and present nonsense as fact then don't expect everyone to accept what you are saying. Maybe next time you might wanna do some more fact finding before you attempt to make a point.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[10-Dee-Q]

That's not true
If "eDof" is better than "auto focus"
Then all DSLR will have eDof, not auto focus.

EDof can take decent picture , bo doubt about it
But auto focus take better pictures.

Full stop.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[10-Dee-Q]

TThe Fact is that I've compared the picture that I took using 9700,9780, and 9900
And there's no way that 9900 produce a better pictures than previous Bold, or even Curve 8900 for that matter.

And another Fact is that a 5MP Auto Focus camera module only Cost $15 (go and check the web for 9700 camera module replacement)
I think majority of us wouldn't mind or infact happier to pay a $15 more expensive version of 9900 if it does have Auto Focus camera.

Anyway that's my guess, I'm not the owner of RIM so I don't know what really happen, but in "camera" department I think most of us here will tend to agree that eDof is a step "BACKWARD" compared to Auto Focus found on previous Blackberries.

Judging from the way you talk, you seems to know everything, maybe you are one of RIM owner so maybe you know the best.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[olblueyez]

RIM isn't Samsung or Apple and their margins on hardware are lower. Deal with it, Prove me wrong, or insult me, it makes no difference to me.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[jeffawa]

The camera is the only function that I am disappointed with on the 9900. I use QR codes on my business card and the the 9700 could read it quickly everytime. The 9900's camera cannot read the same QR code. Smartphone apps are utilizing imaging more and more (evernote, etc). The lower quality camera on the flagship product does seem like a mistake on what is otherwise a great smartphone.

[blackmoe]

The 9900 has features the other Blackberry's don't have and the manufacturing cost is not unlimited as many people seem it completely forget when they make the same point over and over.

If your going to ignore the facts and present nonsense as fact then don't expect everyone to accept what you are saying. Maybe next time you might wanna do some more fact finding before you attempt to make a point.

You are are making a baseless assumption that RIM's choice of camera had anything to do with cost. Maybe it did or didn't but don't assume you are making a slam dunk with your arguments.

[olblueyez]

You are are making a baseless assumption that RIM's choice of camera had anything to do with cost. Maybe it did or didn't but don't assume you are making a slam dunk with your arguments.

RIM isn't Samsung or Apple and their margins on hardware are lower. Deal with it, Prove me wrong, or insult me, it makes no difference to me.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[mustangv8]

The Bold 9900/9930 does not have an autofocus camera. 95% of the time, this is no big deal and the camera is actually good.....ANYWAYS....The Bold is a spare-no-expense type of phone. It was designed to be premium.

Here is my reasoning as to why the Bold doesn't have an autofocus camera.

RIM messed up on the internal design of the phone (as a fanboy is pains me to say this). I believe RIM intended to put autofocus in this badboy. The added expense of having an autofocus camera is fairly minor. They have millions of these components anyway. If Apple can buy an autofocus camera to fit into 9.3 mm, then RIM could easily too.
So why not?

The issue lies in the placement of the camera. Apple put it in the top corner of the phone, far away the the LCD. If you look closely at the Bold 9900/9930, the camera is located close to the top edge of the LCD on the other side. I think it was just close enough that it forced RIM to use a non-autofocus camera(which require less space). I don't think they saw this coming and it was going to be way too difficult to try to get those autofocus cameras in there as it would cause other issues.

If you don't own a Bold, spin the image of the Bold around on RIM's site and see if you agree with me:

BlackBerry - BlackBerry Bold Phones - Compare BlackBerry Bold Phones - Bold Smartphones - CA

RIM did not have time or want to spend the money to order more autofocus cameras that were smaller and had the right specifications. I think RIM did the right thing here in the situation. They could not just redo the Bold 9900 housing, that would be ridiculous as it cost them lots of time and money (and plus, it's super sexy). If RIM wanted to save money by removing autofocus, they would have removed it on the Torch.

You can argue that RIM could have put an autofocus camera in the Playbook as they had lots of room and its only 10mm thick. And you're right. But I believe RIM ordered soooo many 5mp edof cameras without autofocus that were for the curve originally that it just made sense to use them as it 1) saved some money, 2) autofocus isn't that necessary on a tablet, 3) they had tons of stock of edof cameras and 4) Device fabrication is easier

If you disagree, awesome! The more opinions the better. What are your thoughts? Thanks.

Haha, spare no expense type of phone? What a joke. You have an ultra premium price above an iphone and most droids. Same price now as a droid bionic, wonder which has better specs
Did you see all the posts of people returning their bad quality bolds? Oh, and lastly, judging by where the phones are made and quality control, this is no where near a no expense spared.

[Spartacus_82]

NFC
1.2Ghz Processor
More Memory
5.8Ghz WiFi that the other BB's dont have
Full Qwerty & Touch Screen
Blah, Blah, Blah

And you are saying they went backwards?

Maybe some people just like to invent reasons to complain because they dont have anything better to do.

Yes...but You cannot roll back on camera's performances and that is a real pain in the arse, especially if you were so used to do docs scans in n a second with it and send it by mail.

As I said before Onix are perfect for everyday hard working usage, 9900 are not yet. Spoilted processor ,more sex appeal won't let me work better during a busy day. look at the battery...

[olblueyez]

Like I said some people just wanna complain. Moan like a dog in heat and maybe RIM will make one special just for you.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[Spartacus_82]

Like I said some people just wanna complain. Moan like a dog in heat and maybe RIM will make one special just for you.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

You're talking about your self while looking at the mirror right?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[donnation]

Its margin guys, you can't have polished steel and NFC and a better WiFi adapter AND every other friggin thing in the world an Android fanboy would want and still be able to keep the product within the allotted budget.

They do have monetary limitations when they design the units, OP, you do realize that don't you?

You sure figured them out,,...LOL

They didn't realize it wouldn't fit until the last minute,,...LOL

That's funny stuff.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

That argument might make sense if there weren't other phones in the same price range (or less) than the 9900. To me it seems like they just said "let's see if we can squeak by without it and hopefully it won't be that big of a deal. Oh yeah, price it the same as other top of the line phones with better specs and cameras while you're at it."

[lax42]

That argument might make sense if there weren't other phones in the same price range (or less) than the 9900. To me it seems like they just said "let's see if we can squeak by without it and hopefully it won't be that big of a deal. Oh yeah, price it the same as other top of the line phones with better specs and cameras while you're at it."

Yea think that's exactly what they did lol because they "forgot" to mention it at the conference where they introduced the 9900/9930 and when crackberry got those hands on videos no one ever mention the crappy camera

[10-Dee-Q]

RIM isn't Samsung or Apple and their margins on hardware are lower. Deal with it, Prove me wrong, or insult me, it makes no difference to me.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

We don't need to prove that you are wrong, because you are.
And we don't need to insult you, because u just did it yourself.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[TZUNAM1]

I am extremely disappointed in the fact they ignored this key element. Many new business applications deal with taking a picture of my receipts and logging them into the system. Unless I hold the phone more than a foot away, the image is very blury, I see my company kicking these expenses back. What a bummer!! RIM will not be around in five years with this continued strategy of delivering subpar products. The business world DEMANDS the best, the only thing keeping RIM alive is the keyboard, which I can't seem to part with. (I've had an Droid and Droid X for personal line but still sticking with the keyboards)

Shawn

[OniBerry]

The Bold 9900/9930 does not have an autofocus camera. 95% of the time, this is no big deal and the camera is actually good.....ANYWAYS....The Bold is a spare-no-expense type of phone. It was designed to be premium.

Here is my reasoning as to why the Bold doesn't have an autofocus camera.

RIM messed up on the internal design of the phone (as a fanboy is pains me to say this). I believe RIM intended to put autofocus in this badboy. The added expense of having an autofocus camera is fairly minor. They have millions of these components anyway. If Apple can buy an autofocus camera to fit into 9.3 mm, then RIM could easily too.
So why not?

The issue lies in the placement of the camera. Apple put it in the top corner of the phone, far away the the LCD. If you look closely at the Bold 9900/9930, the camera is located close to the top edge of the LCD on the other side. I think it was just close enough that it forced RIM to use a non-autofocus camera(which require less space). I don't think they saw this coming and it was going to be way too difficult to try to get those autofocus cameras in there as it would cause other issues.

If you don't own a Bold, spin the image of the Bold around on RIM's site and see if you agree with me:

BlackBerry - BlackBerry Bold Phones - Compare BlackBerry Bold Phones - Bold Smartphones - CA

RIM did not have time or want to spend the money to order more autofocus cameras that were smaller and had the right specifications. I think RIM did the right thing here in the situation. They could not just redo the Bold 9900 housing, that would be ridiculous as it cost them lots of time and money (and plus, it's super sexy). If RIM wanted to save money by removing autofocus, they would have removed it on the Torch.

You can argue that RIM could have put an autofocus camera in the Playbook as they had lots of room and its only 10mm thick. And you're right. But I believe RIM ordered soooo many 5mp edof cameras without autofocus that were for the curve originally that it just made sense to use them as it 1) saved some money, 2) autofocus isn't that necessary on a tablet, 3) they had tons of stock of edof cameras and 4) Device fabrication is easier

If you disagree, awesome! The more opinions the better. What are your thoughts? Thanks.

Pretty sure the reason the 9900 doesn't have auto focus, is because RIM didn't manufacture the phone with one. I don't really see another answer that fits.

[adam917]

I haven't taken a whole lot of pictures with my 9900 yet so I'm still seeing if this will ever be an issue, at least for my important photos like trips. If it is, it may justify a possible purchase of a 9810 in 2012. I don't want an all-touch phone and I bet that the 1st BBX phone will not have a keyboard at all.

[zkyevolved]

Why is everyone talking about getting a camera? That's NO Excuse. I don't carry my camera with me everywhere! I carry my PHONE. I don't think it's unreasonable to want decent pictures from your phone, especially nowadays when the standard is 8mpx in mobile phones.

So yes, I do have a camera. But when I am out doing daily things I don't carry it with me. I have my phone. I don't think it's too much to ask that the subject in question be in focus, or for me to be able to take a picture of a document then send it. I shouldn't HAVE to carry a camera, plug it into my computer when I get home and email it.

[TrespassersW]

iphone is the most popular device used on flickr...doesn't that tell you anything?

It tells you there are a lot of sheep out there.