Author |
Megapixels on mobile phones. Marketing scam? |
AbuBasim Joined: Nov 04, 2005 Posts: > 500 PM |
On 2007-07-05 00:34:38, dumbrella wrote:
and longer exposure, higher ISO must be used in order to provide you with fully-exposed pictures.
Actually lower ISO values! Higher ISO = higher amplification of the sensor output = more noise. To get less noise use lower ISO values which in turn require longer exposure times.
On 2007-07-05 00:34:38, dumbrella wrote:
An example of this, compare a D-SLR to a standard digital compact. Less noisy better pictures, even with lower MP sensors.
The Canon 300D has whopper of a sensor (22.7x15.1mm) and with a firmware hack it can take ISO values up to 3200 and still give less noise than a camera phone at ISO 200!
Read this and this article for more.
_________________
The Tree of Life is Self-Pruning. -- DarwinAwards.com
[ This Message was edited by: AbuBasim on 2007-07-05 13:54 ] |
|
massgeorge Joined: Mar 15, 2007 Posts: 25 PM |
You can also look at the DPI (dots per inch) of the pictures, my w810 @ 2mp has 72dpi and my old canon digicam has 180dpi.
I'd be curious about the different dpi between phone cam models
Rogers network black w810i |
ch33sehead Joined: Sep 13, 2006 Posts: 34 PM |
On 2007-07-13 06:21:08, massgeorge wrote:
You can also look at the DPI (dots per inch) of the pictures, my w810 @ 2mp has 72dpi and my old canon digicam has 180dpi.
I'd be curious about the different dpi between phone cam models
Umm what? DPI is a PRINTER attribute, not a picture attribute! It stands for Dots Per Inch. Any picture can be printed at any DPI as long as the printer supports it! Your 2MP picture for the w810 can be printed at 100,000 DPI if you have a 100,000 DPI printer. |
*Jojo* Joined: Oct 15, 2003 Posts: > 500 PM |
Yes, I guess it's NOT a scam . . . if so, professional-people who are into photography would have SUED them by now !
[addsig] |
REO Joined: Nov 21, 2004 Posts: > 500 From: U.S.A. PM |
I've said it once and I'll say it again..... anything above 3.0 MP in a cam phone makes no sense, as it will not be that much different than the current 2.0MP.
At least for now. We'll see what the near future brings. until then...... the difference is not substantial at all.
iphone rocks... |
*Jojo* Joined: Oct 15, 2003 Posts: > 500 PM |
On 2007-07-31 04:36:15, REO wrote:
I've said it once and I'll say it again..... anything above 3.0 MP in a cam phone makes no sense, as it will not be that much different than the current 2.0MP.
At least for now. We'll see what the near future brings. until then...... the difference is not substantial at all.
@reo - Let's be a bit futuristic here mate . . . what if it's a: 7 or 8 MP camfone
[addsig] |
Supa_Fly Joined: Apr 16, 2002 Posts: > 500 From: Toronto, Ontario PM, WWW
|
I think perceptions of quality of CAM phones & whether or not artifacts & if they're "SCAMS" will VASTLY change as a consensus when ...
Liquid variable diameter/focal lenses appear (Oil or water based liquid lenses).
This technology is currently being refined to appear by late 2008 when announced in mid 2006 but they may be another year or 2 off by then.
Passing Electricity to thicken or CURVE the lense or widen or shorten the diameter. All affecting focal length, zoom, aparature, clearness etc.
|AppleTV2|iPhone 12Mini 256GB|iPad Pro 256GB| Previously ...  K750|Z500|Z520|K700|K790i|K850i, :Ericsson: T18z|T28World|T36m x3|T68m (Ericsson, not the rebranded  T68i). |
ch33sehead Joined: Sep 13, 2006 Posts: 34 PM |
Okay, here's a test. The first one is a 2MP picture, second one is 3MP picture. Here are the originals (Esato automatically resizes them. Oh well.)
2MP
3MP
The Test
Then, I used Photoshop to increase the 2MP picture to 3MP using interpolation and a slight "Smart Sharpen" filter. Here are the results:
2MP interpolated to 3MP + "Smart Sharpen"
3MP (original)
Is there a quality difference? I'd say yes. If you look at the street sign, you can see that "Harbor" is a tad bit clearer in the native 3MP picture, but it is so small that it would not justify taking pictures in 3MP. It is also probably the result of processing before resizing vs. resizing before processing. If this camera gave me the RAW files (and if I had more time), I could probably do a better job.
I say it's a scam. If you look at the 2MP pictures and blow them up to actual size, you might say they truly are comparable to 2MP pictures from standalone units, but the 3MP ones cannot compare to standalone 3MP pictures.
[ This Message was edited by: ch33sehead on 2007-07-31 05:37 ] |
ch33sehead Joined: Sep 13, 2006 Posts: 34 PM |
On 2007-07-31 04:16:43, *Jojo* wrote:
Yes, I guess it's NOT a scam . . . if so, professional-people who are into photography would have SUED them by now  !
What kind of professional photographer would rely on a camera phone w/ a tiny CCD? I'm sure every professional uses a dSLR of some sort. I don't think that's a very good argument. |
DarKMaGiCiaN Joined: Aug 25, 2006 Posts: > 500 PM |
think about it
more MP = more memory space needed (MB)
more memory space = new memory stick with high capacity
new memory stick with high capacity = more cost
more cost = benefit for the company
because I think 3 MB is enought for mobile phones
if not the 5 is enought and maybe more than enought
[ This Message was edited by: DarKMaGiCiaN on 2007-07-31 07:10 ] |
JK Joined: Feb 24, 2005 Posts: > 500 From: S. Africa - JOZI PM |
Id like to know why they all have the same types of cams eg: first they were all 1.3 Mp, then 2 Mp then 3.2Mp now 5Mp
The 6680, D500 V800 all had 1.3 and that was the best etc etc
Then the N90 K750 D600 all 2Mp
The N80 K800 N73 all 3.2 Mp
Now the N95 K850 are 5Mp
...........
|
Supa_Fly Joined: Apr 16, 2002 Posts: > 500 From: Toronto, Ontario PM, WWW
|
Ok Mods.
Since so far all this talk is related to SE phones can we somehow merge this thread which seems to be in the same line as the other thread ...
http://www.esato.com/board/vi[....]ic=148711&start=45#post2057030
"K800 Not really a 3MP Camera"
Please?
|AppleTV2|iPhone 12Mini 256GB|iPad Pro 256GB| Previously ...  K750|Z500|Z520|K700|K790i|K850i, :Ericsson: T18z|T28World|T36m x3|T68m (Ericsson, not the rebranded  T68i). |
KingBooker5 Joined: May 12, 2007 Posts: > 500 From: London, England PM |
Why should we merge it to that thread?
That is soley about the k800s cam, underperforming.
This thread is talking about megapixels being a scam. Megapixels ruin quality. This thread is talking about all the technical stuff of cameras. There are some nice debates going on.
These 2 threads are totaly diffrent IMO |
Danny_BFC Joined: Jun 18, 2006 Posts: 499 From: Barnsley, Phone, PM |
Get your tongue out of masseurs arse mate
My 2 cents
I think that It is a marketing scam. i think the manufactores are just saying the bigger numbers to make it sound like the best phone. Like the N80's 3mpx cam was no where near as good as say a k750's cam.
Cant you all remember this?
Thats the Samsung SCH-B600 10 megapixel cameraphone. It was just a proto but thats were the markets headed imo, i doubt the optical zoom will do it many favours for its looks
Im not fussed about phones/gadgets no more. If im online im in the Non-Mobile discussion  |
max_wedge Joined: Aug 29, 2004 Posts: > 500 From: Australia PM, WWW
|
Once camera's got to about 2MP they should have slowed down on megapixel increases and concentrate more on cmos quality. That said, I'd still like to see MP keep rising, but only if they do equivalent improvements to the cmos technology. That means smaller low power cmos sensors with quality equivelent to todays CCD sensors.
Already ccd sensors are being replaced by cmos in some DSLR applications, so it's quite possible that high quality small cmos sensors are just around the corner. Once the quality of small cmos sensors is good, then people will clamour for more MP again.
And don't forget, high MP's = detail and clarity; just as important as the other qualities. I mean does it really matter how good "quality" a picture is if it's only VGA?
_________________
File System Tweaks for the K750 K750 Tricks
[ This Message was edited by: max_wedge on 2007-07-31 12:19 ] |
|