Mobile camera quality isn’t great – discuss…
By Ben Robinson on Friday, May 23rd, 2008 at 7:21 AM PST In Camera Phone, Hardware
Warning: I am about to go on a mini-rant, so those of you looking for news should probably scoot onwards to the next post ….
Some time back, I wrote a post about the quality of the images produced by Mobile camera modules – not specifically any model or manufacturer, but generally. As an Editor on intoMobile, I get through my fair share of devices, and during that process, often take pictures. Some of those pictures I need temporarily, and some I’d like to keep – but often using a Mobile that claims to be a “convergence” device, I expect that the quality from the device will at least be serviceable – well, I have to say I’ve reached the point where I just don’t think that is the case….
Case in point: I took a series of pictures for the Vuzix headphones review (see here), using my current Mobile device – it’s 5MP, it has supposedly reasonable optics, and there are lots of image editing options in the UI – all of which suggests to me that it should take a good picture. Well, on uploading the pix to my PC, I find that really they are lacking a level of detail that I usually get with my digital camera.
Yes, yes, yes, of course the digital camera is a singular device, and the Mobile does other things too – but isn’t the point of these convergence devices to at least be able to do an “average” job of each of tasks they claim to be able to do? Certainly if the positioning of the product is such that it can handle decent digital imaging, then I don’t have an unreasonable expectation.
Perhaps it’s actually the case that Mobile devices at the moment are more suitable for “casual imaging” – that is, where you are not concerned necessarily by the final quality of the result, but just want something that makes a reasonable representation of the moment, there and then. If you have aspirations for proper “hi-res” imaging, perhaps you should still be packing your digital camera too?
To be fair and balance up the discussion somewhat, I’ve not had the opportunity to play with an N82 yet (the supposed “top dog” of Mobile digital imaging) – so if any web stores want to provide one (or indeed Nokia (NYSE: NOK)), for a side-by-side “shoot out” (pardon the pun) with a digital camera, please do feel free!
In the meantime, for those of you who have buried your digital camera in the “legacy devices” drawer, you might want to get it out and charge it – that is if you have any pix to take that are going to be valuable, and that you’ll want to keep….
IntoMobile readers: what are your thoughts? Are you happy with your Mobile camera, or do you carry a separate digital camera too? And if so, what brand / megapixel rating?
Ben
Before buying my N82, I used to carry a Cybershot T300 camera but now my mobile camera does almost everything I need. I only use my digital camera for special occasions. Btw this is my first comment on IM.
the problem with camera phones is that you need really good lighting and a very steady hand. i have the n82 and it does take very good pics, but they are noticeably better when the lighting is good. other phones that i have had are not as forgiving when taking pics indoors with only decent lighting (n95-4, P1i, n95-3)
good pics are attainable, but not by pointing and clicking. you need to mess with the settings to get the best results.
I think for most people it’s subjective. I’m happy with most of the pictures my N73 and N93 take (except night shots of course) and I have a 5 mp Sony Cybershot as my “real” camera. My brother on the otherhand has a Nikon D80 SLR ( I think it’s 10 mp) as his “real” camera. His shots come out amazing, but it’s not gonna be just for point and shoot. If I need an impromptu shot, I find the quality of my cell phone to be acceptable. If I’m on vacation or taking pictures I may want to print, I’ll bring my Cybershot along. I’d probaby use a dedicated digital cam also if I’m reviewing products and posting pictures of them.
I don’t think we’ll see any big jump in camera phone quality until a manufacturer puts in a CCD Sensor instead of a CMOS sensor. I’m pretty sure they exist, but not in widely available numbers or from a respectable manufacturer.
I hope cross linking is ok…
There is a quick comparison between an N82, N93, K850i and a Samsung S850 on the mobiles blog here that came about after the N82 won the TIPA award recently. You should be able to compare the images from the Samsung and the N82 easy enough.
Until recently imaging wasn’t too important to me, but the N82 makes it possible for quality pics whenever I want them, which is a nice option to have when out and about
I have not yet used N82 (hv used Samsung F700, Nokia N73, N95) but overall i agree with Ben. This post is really fantastic.
I would have to agree. Ofcourse my current phone is only 1.3 megapixels but I have played with my friends N73 and it’s nice but with his moms 10 megapixel Nikon, it’s nothing when it comes to upclose and background details. I think the 5 megapixels is nice for all around camera use, but I wouldn’t get into a photography career with it…
i actually take pictures for a living. I use a Canon 30D, it’s an 8.2 mp DSLR.
I find i’m happy 97% of the time with the images from my N82. It’s definitely the best camera phone i’ve used or seen in all settings. It’s noticable let down is low lighting, but it still dominates over other phones.
It’s never going to be as good as a digital camera, even a 5mp point and shoot. But it is still a very good camera phone. very good.
just my thoughts.
cs.
oh,i can’t agree with u more ,i hv used more than 20 cellphones ,but never a satisfied found on camera~
I think the point is what you shoot for: if you want to have some decent pictures of your trips, maybe print out some of them, and get an A4 size of some of them, maybe in decent light conditions, a nokia n95 or n82 will do the job at best. Something not very different from a point-and-shoot 4/5 mp camera.
If you want to do art photos or great photo compositions, you definetely need a DSLR camera, lenses, and so on.
But for an average-over average user, top-line cameraphones are, i think, enough.
You are 100% right. Actually this is totally misleading as well as unethical practice that mobile companies have been doing so far. The claims what they makes in there marketing campaigns, they are not even near to that. Most of the people don’t see this differences as they do not upload this pictures but instead they prefer mms or will store it in mobile memory only. And the other reason is they do not have the camera copy of same images= so they are not able to compare to identify the quality difference. It’s not the question of quality of mobile mobile camera or technology but its about claims that companies are making while markeitng a new product.
I use a nokia n95 8Gb as my cameraphone and a sony H50 (superzoom camera with 9.1mp sensor)as my real camera. Of course there is no point in discussing the quality differences on the photos. What we should discuss is that in our digital world we like to create memories of everything due to the fact that we actually can! So maybe with my H50 I can shoot and print the sparkling green eyes of my girlfriend but with my mobile phone I can take pictures of her anywhere and anytime. I have many good photos taken from my phone. O.k maybe they’re not good enough for a poster but they are great for our digital memory world(laptop,msn,ipod etc etc).
Finally and I’ve written this to your previous post on the subject, before my H50 I used to have a samsung V5. It is a 4 year old 5 mp camera. What I noticed one day when trying to photo an exam paper from close distance was that the nokia n95 had a far superior macro mode than the samsung (The H50 is of course superior to the n95 on the macro mode)
Agreed. But that’s not to say that some of the better camera phones (N82 and N95 come to mind) are not ‘good enough’…
http://tinyurl.com/69c6qd
I’ve seen some stunning examples, yes even at full screen resolution.
I tested this camera for a client. I didn’t have the light running for more than 15 minutes. The battery lasted approximately 6 hours before recharging. The LCD, however, had a few dead pixels – never saw this before. Tried returning for exchange and had to put up quite a fight. Anyone else seen this?