07-11-10 09:53 AM
59 123
tools
  1. detze001's Avatar
    Does anyone have any inside info on when/if Blackberrys will have a high megapixel camera? It is a real setback
    07-02-10 08:33 PM
  2. amazinglygraceless's Avatar
    A setback? Really?

    High megapixels on a cell phone are about as pointless as a trailer hitch on a Ferrari.
    07-02-10 08:37 PM
  3. grahamf's Avatar
    I don't know. I avoid the upcoming devices section of this forum like the plague.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    07-02-10 08:38 PM
  4. SirGodLess's Avatar
    Better to ask when will it get a better sensor and multimedia functions, the answer is never
    07-02-10 08:38 PM
  5. tandaina's Avatar
    There is little need for that many pixels on a camera with zero optical quality. You want a camera, get a camera with a real lens, real optics. More MP just means your pictures take up more room on your memory card, but at a certain point your glass (can we really call it that on a cell phone) just can't TAKE better pictures, no matter how many pixels you cram behind it.
    07-02-10 08:41 PM
  6. andyahs's Avatar
    Does anyone have any inside info on when/if Blackberrys will have a high megapixel camera? It is a real setback
    The same time your camera can make phone calls............
    07-02-10 08:48 PM
  7. Artemis68's Avatar
    It will come in the future soon. MP in camera cells keep going up. I'm sure years ago, there would be threads like "I'm sick of my 1.3MP BB camera!! When will it go up?"



    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    07-02-10 09:13 PM
  8. blazed12's Avatar
    Does the BB 9670 Clamshell counts? It has the 5.0 MP camera
    07-02-10 09:22 PM
  9. chuckh0308's Avatar
    I have to be honest. I get so sick of the camera megpixel race and the marketing behind it that it makes me want to puke! As already mentioned, the optics are the failure point and getting better optics will add size, weight, and cost. More MP's actually create worse pictures when the optics aren't good.

    BTW, my Storm2 actually takes pictures that are quite good. In some cased even better than my 8 MP Canon camera.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    07-02-10 09:29 PM
  10. Radius's Avatar
    I bought a 13MP camera with a good lens, it cost $200. I would be hard pressed to come up with a reason to use a 5MP camera. That is just so old.
    07-02-10 09:36 PM
  11. grahamf's Avatar
    It will come in the future soon. MP in camera cells keep going up. I'm sure years ago, there would be threads like "I'm sick of my 1.3MP BB camera!! When will it go up?"



    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    only the pearl 8100 (NOT the 8110, 8120, or 8130) had a 1.3mp camera...
    07-02-10 09:49 PM
  12. amazinglygraceless's Avatar
    Does no one understand that a camera, no matter the format, is only as good
    as the optics it employs. NO CAMERA PHONE will ever, regardless of MPs, be up to
    the task of a decent camera.
    07-02-10 10:07 PM
  13. adamtaylor's Avatar
    Wall Street Journal is claiming that the BlackBerry Bold 9800 will be launching with a 5 megapixel camera. This also doesn’t take a huge leap of faith, considering the BlackBerry 9670 clamshell, currently the only other known device to be running OS 6, also has a 5 megapixel camera.
    07-02-10 10:16 PM
  14. Jared DiPane's Avatar
    I would rather they worry about the lens and sensor that are used then the number of MP that the camera boasts about.
    07-02-10 10:19 PM
  15. OdinStormer's Avatar
    To me blackberry will always be a business device even if I use one and its not for business. Some businesses don't even allow blackberry's with cameras so its RIMs least worry.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    07-04-10 02:26 AM
  16. Pete6's Avatar
    There is little need for that many pixels on a camera with zero optical quality. You want a camera, get a camera with a real lens, real optics. More MP just means your pictures take up more room on your memory card, but at a certain point your glass (can we really call it that on a cell phone) just can't TAKE better pictures, no matter how many pixels you cram behind it.
    I agree completely. There is no substitute fo a large piece of glass up front. If the lens is good then it can make the most of whatever sensor behind it.

    Higher megapixels is not the answer. All this does is to produce larger files which are difficult to handle and email. I would much rather see a modest resolution camera having square pixels and a bigger and better lens through which to photograph the world.

    RIM have done a good job with Zeiss on their 3.5 megapixel cameras and I expect this trend to continue when the 9800 is released later this year with a 5Mp camera http://forums.crackberry.com/f209/bl...-facts-488160/

    I have a Nikon D50 6Mp SLR camera that has superbe low light abilities and a 10Mp Canon PowerShot G11. Both cameras have good lenses and I can print excellent full page pictures from both devices.
    07-04-10 03:03 AM
  17. beamolite's Avatar
    My 3.2 megapixel 9700 takes better pics than my 5.0 MP Olympus digital camera.
    07-04-10 03:06 AM
  18. devGOD's Avatar
    where is the BB Grandpa's with the "its a business device, and not a toy" replies... they must be on vacation. I'm sure you will see them posting and the "stop your whining, its just a phone"
    07-05-10 11:32 AM
  19. Radius's Avatar
    where is the BB Grandpa's with the "its a business device, and not a toy" replies... they must be on vacation. I'm sure you will see them posting and the "stop your whining, its just a phone"
    Exactly, it's just a phone. When I take pics with my phone it's just for something quick where I really don't care about the quality. That's all they'll ever be good for.
    07-05-10 12:12 PM
  20. grahamf's Avatar
    I wanted to see how decent my storm's camera is.
    3.2 mp autofocus with flash (Storm 9530), about 3" from subject with standard indoor lighting; no image manipulation

    (click to embiggen)

    We don't need no stinkin' 5mp
    07-05-10 12:47 PM
  21. Denise in Los Angeles's Avatar

    We don't need no stinkin' 5mp
    I certainly would not select a phone based on the camera specs. I carry
    my Olympus camera in my purse.. so I'm ready if I want to take pictures
    with a decent camera. LOL
    07-05-10 01:14 PM
  22. Denise in Los Angeles's Avatar
    Here's a picture taken with my Pearl 9100 3.2 mp camera.

    07-05-10 01:16 PM
  23. devGOD's Avatar
    Samsung phones take WOW! pics then again they're like 8mp and higher. but that's like samsung niche okay phone features but badass camera with lens
    07-05-10 01:47 PM
  24. trooperdjb's Avatar
    I'd be much more interested in a camera without so much shutter lag. My old 8310 curve was ok, my new 8700 is almost useless for anything that might even be considering moving or that you want to catch in the act.

    So when will RIM get rid of the horrble shutter lag?
    07-05-10 02:15 PM
  25. chuckh0308's Avatar
    I wanted to see how decent my storm's camera is.
    3.2 mp autofocus with flash (Storm 9530), about 3" from subject with standard indoor lighting; no image manipulation

    We don't need no stinkin' 5mp
    The Storm takes better macro shots than any camera I've ever used. Seriously. Whenever I run across something with tiny print that I can't read I use the Storm to take a picture of it and I read the picture...lol.
    07-05-10 02:30 PM
59 123
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD