03-17-13 02:24 AM
70 123
tools
  1. chiefbroski's Avatar
    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.
    Last edited by chiefbroski; 09-08-11 at 02:40 PM.
    09-08-11 02:28 PM
  2. jad123's Avatar
    Wow you might actually be super right !
    like yeah if other mobile products had flash what would stop them from putting flash on 9900
    09-08-11 02:53 PM
  3. billyg072's Avatar
    yawn..., another cam story, tired of it. so i'll just say : i agree.
    Jake2826 likes this.
    09-08-11 02:55 PM
  4. zephryn's Avatar
    This....actually makes sense. Personally I could've dealt with a 5mm taller phone for the sake of a better lens
    chiefbroski and Bonnie Bonzai like this.
    09-08-11 03:09 PM
  5. Ben1232's Avatar
    RIM Would have known well ahead of time the dimensions / room inside these phones. I guess they designed them on computers months before they saw a tangible Bold. I doubt they scribbled the design up on the corner of a news paper.

    I suppose just cos they had non focus camera's laying around (in the back) they just used them.

    As you said the Bold is a premium phone. RIM are trying to claw back market share so they would'nt have cut corners.

    Theres my two cents
    chiefbroski likes this.
    09-08-11 03:17 PM
  6. bbboyjr's Avatar
    The OP makes it sound like RIM didn't realize that the autofocus camera wouldn't work until relatively late in the design process. I seriously doubt that.

    I think the main reason they used a non-autofocus camera is that they put a premium on having an ultra-thin (at least by RIM's standards) device, and the autofocus camera they use in other models wouldn't fit. (The OP may be right about RIM using what it had in stock vs. special ordering a smaller auto-focus camera - I don't know about that but it makes sense.)

    Why RIM decided to place thin-ness ahead of having a better camera, I don't know. Seems to me that more people are griping about the camera than would be complaining if the 9900 were half a milimeter (or whatever) thicker.
    09-08-11 04:20 PM
  7. ahpsi's Avatar
    I'd go so far as to say it may be preferable to have quick shutter response over slightly better image quality. When I use my cellphone camera it's more about getting the quick shot with an easily available device than it is to get the quality picture that requires proper lighting and a little set-up. I can't count the number of sub-optimal shots I've gotten while waiting for the camera to focus on my 9630.

    To this end perhaps quicker response is RIM's idea of 'premium'?
    09-08-11 04:43 PM
  8. smithrep's Avatar
    I'd go so far as to say it may be preferable to have quick shutter response over slightly better image quality. When I use my cellphone camera it's more about getting the quick shot with an easily available device than it is to get the quality picture that requires proper lighting and a little set-up. I can't count the number of sub-optimal shots I've gotten while waiting for the camera to focus on my 9630.

    To this end perhaps quicker response is RIM's idea of 'premium'?
    The iPhones shutter could be very quick at times too. Sometimes faster than the Bold's. I'm just sayin.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    09-08-11 05:22 PM
  9. chiefbroski's Avatar
    I was thinking that maybe the autofocus camera was even able to fit in the device, it just was too tight of a fit such that it could cause shorting or wires, manufacturing issues or damage to the LCD when they were testing it out. It was maybe safer to go with no autofocus. This is all speculation of course.

    Also, in response to ahpsi, RIM could have made the default camera mode at fixed focus for quick shots and added an option to adjust the focus in the options menu for the fancier shots. That would be premium.

    Just saying that if RIM moved the camera position, and had the same camera component as the iphone, they should be fine. I just don't buy the "the phone was too thin" reason if Apple could do it. I can't imagine an autofocus camera component costing too much, but I don't know...I'm no expert.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    09-08-11 05:23 PM
  10. otacon#AC's Avatar
    If you want a great digital camera with amazing auto focus capabilities.......buy a Canon.
    jerry12, fragment137 and Elite1 like this.
    09-08-11 05:58 PM
  11. dalton4L's Avatar
    I don't know why they chose EDoF, but it was certainly the wrong move in my opinion. I was debating on having a 9900 as a secondary phone, but when I heard there was no AF, it sealed the deal.

    I doubt you're right though, giant corporation probably rarely make such careless mistakes like 'ordering too many EDoF cameras.'
    09-08-11 06:12 PM
  12. schlemer's Avatar
    Aside from it not having autofocus, thus hindering the 99xx's camera where close ups are concerned. Overall, the camera has better color saturation. Shutter speed is faster which helps with shots where the subject moves. The AF camera found on the 9810 can take fantastic close up shots. Great for those who need to take photos of text, barcodes or serial numbers for there work. Color saturation was a tad bit on the washed out (or more pale) side of the grid.

    I undrestand why some feel it is a big issue. You want to capture a moment. Nine out of ten time you will have your Smartphone over a camera. You may need to facebook, BBM, MMS, etc an image on the fly. Camera may be a main reason why you bought your BB.

    I seriously advise anyone wanting to by one of the newer RIM devices. Before you leave the store, take photos of the shop, including the info right next to the phone. If that is a make or break deal at least you'll know right then and there.

    It's actually good that many have posted on the camera issue, but it should not scare off anyone wanting to buy an amazing communication device.
    chiefbroski likes this.
    09-08-11 06:33 PM
  13. lomed7724's Avatar
    Not sure why it is a problem. I owned the BB torch for two weeks cause the person at the store didn't realize the bold was touch screen. It has auto focus. The camera took a few seconds to focus before taking the picture. I missed a few moments because of it. With the few pics I took with my bold so far I have not had a problem with it yet!

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    09-08-11 06:42 PM
  14. bbboyjr's Avatar
    If you want a great digital camera with amazing auto focus capabilities.......buy a Canon.
    How's Canon's cell reception?
    09-08-11 06:44 PM
  15. djnick's Avatar
    If you want a great digital camera with amazing auto focus capabilities.......buy a Canon.
    iphone is the most popular device used on flickr...doesn't that tell you anything?
    mssca likes this.
    09-08-11 06:49 PM
  16. TheScionicMan's Avatar
    You make it sound like its just some guys in a shop with some loose parts to bolt together and see how it works.

    "Dang, the case won't close with that camera, hand me that "inferior" one..."
    09-08-11 07:12 PM
  17. Wookie316's Avatar
    My beef is the flash. I am finding photos blown out. I have tried face recognition & all the other settings with no better results. I never had that issue with my 9800 or 9700. Without flash, I am happy with the photos, but somtimes you need flash. That is when I have the problem. Anyone got a suggestion?

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    09-08-11 07:21 PM
  18. jhamilton3#CB's Avatar
    Quite an interesting thought.. could be right.. could be wrong
    09-08-11 07:22 PM
  19. ignites's Avatar
    i am of the camp which thinks that no one would get really angry if they had the camera part stick out (kinda like the htc/samsung) phones a bit but retaining the rest of the shape of the phone. it would give the phone a nice raise off the desk when placed flat on its back as well
    09-08-11 07:36 PM
  20. olblueyez's Avatar
    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
    fragment137 likes this.
    09-08-11 07:57 PM
  21. snowindec9's Avatar
    im kinda upset that rim decided to put an evof camera on this one.i could have used the autofocus a lot.but i have a digital camera which i love so much so i really don't count on my phone as a camera.if i choose the iphone 5 over the bold,i would have an 8 megapixel camera to work with on a daily basis.but that has yet to be determined.i like to take pictures of nature scenery.i still have to play with each device before making up my mind.im not going to opt for the torch 9810 or 9860 just for the autofocus feature.for me,its down between the bold and i5.
    MetalxAssassinx likes this.
    09-08-11 08:13 PM
  22. jammisunil's Avatar
    Polished steel? NFC? Wifi? Every other friggin thing?

    As far as I know, NFC is becoming a standard. Wifi is pretty much standard on all smart phones. Polished steel is negligible when it comes to cost.

    Android fan boys get more, far more, for less. Apple seems to have stuck in an autofocus, with polished steel and NFC and the 8 GB model costs lesser than the Bold 9900.

    RIM ships BB without autofocus in a phone thicker than the iPhone and yet people say it's because they wanted to keep it thin. Battery life is poor on the 9900 when compared to 9700. The Playbook didn't ship with native email.

    I think RIM floats devices just to keep busy on the market. As much as I love my BB (been a BB user for 4 years and will be into the future), I hate the way RIM operates. I am sure they could have found a way to fit an autofocus camera into an 800$+ phone if they thought about it.

    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
    fragment137 and blackguy07 like this.
    10-26-11 12:53 PM
  23. olblueyez's Avatar
    Polished steel? NFC? Wifi? Every other friggin thing
    Right

    As far as I know, NFC is becoming a standard.
    Let me know when it is a standard. Let me know when the other Blackberries have it. Also let me know what that has to do with what I wrote. NFC adds to the cost of the phone.

    Wifi is pretty much standard on all smart phones.
    The WiFi adapter on the 9900 is better than the adapters on the other Blackberry's. This adds to the cost of the phone.

    Polished steel is negligible when it comes to cost.
    So you know what the cost of the bezel is and how it relates to the total cost of the phone? Whatever the cost of the bezel is it adds to the cost of the phone.

    Android fan boys get more, far more, for less.
    Samsung, HTC, etc. don't develop mobile phone software. Google does that for them. The phones end up costing less, having more features, and less to distinguish them from each other because of it too. They also use their own manufacturing plants that make RIM's manufacturing facilities look like weekend cabins.

    Apple seems to have stuck in an autofocus, with polished steel and NFC and the 8 GB model costs lesser than the Bold 9900.
    Apple phones cost more to own so Apple makes more money even though they don't provide services like BIS that do cost money. Apple cheats every single person who ever bought an Apple accessory because they force anyone who produces or sells an Apple related product to pay a licensing fee. That fee is then passed onto the customer. This is why they have things like the stupid dock connector. They have their hands in AT&T's pockets above and beyond the other brands. They have their hands in the customers pockets above and beyond any other brand. They have their hands in the pockets of every accessory maker above and beyond every other brand. They have their hands in the pockets of the hardware manufactures above and beyond any other brand. Then multiply that by the number of products they sell since they sell iPods and Computers as well. They make more friggin money and they should be putting more into their friggin phones.

    RIM ships BB without autofocus in a phone thicker than the iPhone and yet people say it's because they wanted to keep it thin. Battery life is poor on the 9900 when compared to 9700. The Playbook didn't ship with native email.
    RIM is not Apple. It's quite simple really. If manufacturing cost for the 9900 is equal to or greater than an iPhone, it could even be less, and RIM has to develop the software to run that phone, and provide BIS services for everyone who has a 9900 and allow lesser profit on standardized accessories and apps,,,... Then that 9900 cost more,,,... AF or no AF,,,... Than the iPhone. OK?

    I think RIM floats devices just to keep busy on the market. As much as I love my BB (been a BB user for 4 years and will be into the future), I hate the way RIM operates. I am sure they could have found a way to fit an autofocus camera into an 800$+ phone if they thought about it.
    Fitting the camera in was never the issue, one look at the Samsung Nexus will tell you that. Its about margin.

    I absolutly despise the way those to Chimpanzees run RIM. It's my beleif that RIM has some very talented people and some fantastic ideas because of those people, but the leadership always takes the cheap way out and chops their noses off to spite their face. Had they advertized the PB and used the increased income to get 2.0 and all the OS7 devices out sooner then they would have taken a nice bite out of Apple's Buttocks.

    They decided not spending money on advertizing, and aquiring companies that they cannot support with product was the way to go. They could have been No.2 in the tablet market and they blew it. Now they are talking about an OS update IN 2012 for furious customers on a product that has been rendered unsellable by top end management debacles,,,????????????????????????

    So anyway, its really about money and mismanagement, but yeah, they could be offering the customers more, RIM just needs to realize that giving us more requires that more of us exist.


    Don't go takin all this personal, I am 100% with you on loving the Blackberry's, and because of that, I too share your frustration when I see missed opportunities on RIM's part.
    Last edited by olblueyez; 10-26-11 at 02:34 PM.
    10-26-11 01:53 PM
  24. 10-Dee-Q's Avatar
    I think RIM is following the "old" Nokia way
    Remember Nokia ? One times they was the biggest phone company in the world
    Almost everyone uses them, then they become more "arrogant"
    And taking us , their loyal supporter for granted.
    They began producing and selling phones that are actually the same "inside" but different "outside"
    And they never sell us the "perfect" phone
    You want qwerty, choose E series, but E series camera and speakers are bad
    You want camera and speakers, get the N series but the N series has no qwerty
    And so on...
    In the end us, their used to be loyal customer , starting to looked elswhere to get a phone that has good camera and qwerty and etc.

    I really think that RIM is following their path right now.
    You want good keyboard get the 9900
    You want good camera get the torch
    You want good battery live get the future 9790
    And so on

    In the end I relly think that will make us become tired of it
    And choose other vendors

    Look at apple
    They only produce 1 phone in 1 year
    And it has the latest technology that they can offer at that time of point.
    That's why they phone is less "problematic" then BBs

    I've been bb user for a long time, but I'm starting to get fed up with them
    Cause my 9900 camera can't take decent picture of reciept or atm transfer reciept
    Which I really rely upon everyday
    And the battery life suck big time
    The only thing that keep me holding on is the super nice keyboard and big screen
    Otherwise Ill already went back to my 9780.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    10-26-11 06:10 PM
  25. TheScionicMan's Avatar
    I've missed more shots with this 9800 waiting for autofocus to work than I had trouble with closeup shots when I was using a 9930.
    homer1475 likes this.
    10-26-11 07:54 PM
70 123
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD