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.
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
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
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...
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.
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.
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
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.
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"
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.
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)
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
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?
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.