When the
megapixel race unofficially started in the point-and-shoot world, it didn't take long before every last camera manufacturer out there was cramming 14-megapixel sensors into any ole pocket cam. Now, it seems the same race is headed to the mobile realm. Of late, we've seen a new
batch of
8-megapixel handsets and a
9-megapixel sensor, and a recent interview with LG's sales and marketing director John Barton points to even more of those in the near future. According to him, "the megapixel race that we saw amongst camera makers is now being battled out between mobile manufacturers," hinting that
10+ megapixel phones (not to mention handsets with
HD video capability) are closer than we may have imagined. Mmm, the possibilities.
[Via
Cell Phone Feeds]
posted Sep 28th 2008 8:27AM
Now I wonder how long we will have to wait until we see a 10 MP camera with HD video on the iPhone.
Considering that iPhone has by far the worst camera in smartphone market (only 2 megapixel camera and absolutely no video shooting capability). Hmmm maybe in 2015?
The iPhone will never be a phone bought for its camera.
Apple never had expertise in making cameras.
Nice save Taylor, good to see you got Apple's back.
And Nokia has tons of expertise in making cameras now, doesn't it ?
would rather a good lense and sensor race
i think in 2015 , iphone will have bluetooth file sharing. or who knows apple also will be in chapter 11 by that time if they continue fooling people continuously hehe :)
@Taylor:
Say what?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_QuickTake
Although, seriously:
Apple will come up with a high megapixel iphone sooner rather than later.
I mean ... They are a lifestyle brand! Not microsoft!
They definitely know lg and samsung will release android phones with 8 megapixel cameras next year.
The current 2 mp iphone will probably stay as the entry level model and they will probably introduce a higher end iphone.. the iphone photo! that will do video and have a better camera.
Then they could reduce costs by using the same module for a high end ipod touch. The ipod touch photo!!!
Well, Nokia ARE the number one camera manufacturer in the world. Yes, they sell more cameras than Sony, Nikon, Canon and others.
@Taylor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/quicktake/
Early digital camera. Didn't sell because it was all film at the time.
@Rauha: to be fair to the camera, it's Apple's lack of software that prevents it from doing video. And the quality of the photos actually isn't that bad if you're okay with 2 megapixel resolution.
The iPhone's camera is plenty high-res for the sensor size.
What we need is a lens race (for those who actually care about the camera in their phone). Seriously, 1600x1200 is pretty damn high resolution, it'll meet most needs short of trying to enlarge sections. It's being held back by the sensor, as is the case on most cameraphones.
If picture quality is a priority, you're going to have to get a camera phone with a more unweildy body, not just look for the highest MP sensor in the specs.
Seriously, why megapixels? You can get a good picture with like 2 megapixels with good optics.
i wish my treo's camera was as good as an iphone's
with a lens like that, getting a girl's phone number could most definitely open the door to an 'is that your cameraphone or are you happy to see me?' moment.
Who cares for a godamn 14 MP camera, just make the sensors better for more realistic resolutions.
Indeed. Sensors and lenses. Light and clarity.
One would think that camera phones will eventually catch up to the point and shoot camera. This would make my life easier instead of carrying both every day.
To all of the comments about it replacing a DSLR, I suggest you purchase a DSLR in the first place and take it off of the 'Auto' mode. Get yourself a few lenses and definitely, take a class, or two.
Camera phones will always be just that. A convenience.
(Mine embeds the GPS lat/long in the EXIF information)
there should be a way to measure how good a sensor is cause too many people think higher megapixel value means the phone takes better photos
I am only interested about the megapixels when the photos don't look all crappy and disorted even on the 320x240 screen of the phone.
A sensor can be great john and then a plastic 0.01" lens will not make great pictures with it, there's a lot involved with a good digital camera, lens, sensor, and also good processing, there are many cameras that use the same sensor and even equal lens quality but still have huge differences in output due to the chip and firmware used to process the sensordata.
I think it would be damn hard to make a universal quality indicator, you'll just have to go by reviews or hearsay I fear.
The First True Camera-Phone is nigh.
No, not if manufacturers are only cramming in more pixels.
A camera is more than just the number of pixels.
It's like saying that a P'n'S camera can become a D-SLR just from shoving a 20MP sensor into it, it's a ridiculous statement.
disagree, I would consider the Sony Ericcson Cybershot, and high end Nokia N series good camera phones
and out in Asia samsung got phones will crazy cameras
You know what, instead of megapixels .. we need to push makers to one of the standards for image quality. So they can advertise the camera performance taking a standard scene that has movement (so that a long exposure would blur that part of the scene), colors, and lighting variation. Basically a picture that is taken of a standard lit colorful scene (that has with various fine grid patterns that are lit up/shadowed differently).. and then a rating of how close to reality the captured picture is.
So if you capture it at 10 megapixels .. but with lots of noise you may get say .. 60 points.
But a 2 megapixel capture of the same scene with the correct range and without noise may get say 75 points.
Then .. camera makers can compete and sell their cameras on how well their cameras .. sort of like how cpu's compete with each other based on spec bench or 3D mark.
Ok, why wont the guys at DPreview take a lead on this one? ..They have the equipment and expertise.
I'm not disagreeing here (I back your above statement), but how would you define the standard for a picture? Won't peoples opinions always be slightly different regarding what looks best compared to real life etc? Or are there already systems which cover this issue?
@Samboini
The scene capture analysis and assigning of points won't be up to a human .. there is no subjectivity involved. For example if the scene has certain colors and luminance these can be measured accurately with a photometer or even a spectrophotometer. And image analysis can be used in a non subjective manner for stuff like determining if the resolving power can separate out lines on a grid pattern.
The only part that is subjective is what weightings to give (is the color reproduction more importation that resolving power?) .. That will have to be determined way in advance by a group of experts (that's how spec and 3D Mark work anyway).
Someone may want to wake up Apple!
cant there be a phone story without bringing up the iPhone
please- just for this once
It's possible...
before Engadget born.
Awesome. Now my grainy, atonal, blurry cam shots can take up even more room on my hard drive. Maybe I can get RAW too while we're at it.
How about upping the lens and sensor quality first?
Samsung i8510 has better image quality than Nokia N82, 8mp vs 5mp. So they do increase image quality with pixel count. At least sometimes.
nokia n82 take best shots at night, no blurred pics 99,99% times, its xenon flasher makes it even to a normal digital cam
@Shinigami:
Yeah, sometimes they increase picture quality together, while increasing the pixel count, but that's not the most common.
Actually, many updates within a single line, increasing pixel count, increase also the number of pixels per centimeter, what makes the sensor receive even less light and creates more and more noise in higher resolutions.
None of my colleagues in the office who I've discussed this with could care less about megapixels at this point. An A4 sheet of paper is the largest they'd ever print it on at home and for presentation on a digital photo frame the size of the displayed image is likely to be even smaller.
What we want now is optical (real) zoom, and Xenon (real) flashes to be standard on devices that tout themselves as 'camera phones'. A lot of us even avoid mobile phones with setups that don't feature Xenon flashes. Which culls an extraordinary amount of the market.
I'm certainly one of those. The Nokia N82 has the best Xenon flash at the moment, followed by the Sony Ericsson K850. It doesn't leave many others...
Then what about me? My 30-inch 2560x1600 digital photo frame (I call my monitor that way) shows great images with great detail. Under one condition, though - it has to be a 10-megapixel image (my digital point-and-shoot has 10mp and it really looks far superior compared to older 4mp point-and-shoot). 5mp doesn't look half as good. Interpolation gives more detail.
But I have to agree - we have to stick to 10-mp and increase quality, add optical zoom ect. I hope phone makers will follow this way in 2009.
I think they didnt put xenon flash on the N85 so it wont compete with the N82. I am little disappointed. I just hope they didn't remove the VOIP like on the n96.
I say about 5 years until mobile phones replace music players and cameras altogether.
and gps navigators?
Music players maybe, but i don't think that digital cameras will be fully replaced with camera-phones, point n' shoot can be a posibility but you can't stick a DSLR lens on a phone, also if they want to do that, they must improve the quality of the sensors & the quality of the pictures (without offending your comment [not very good with english])
Until they create better desktop sync utilities, I don't think there is even the slightest chance of that happening. The iPhone and Blackberry are the only ones that have it completely right thus far. Cameras on phones also have to get better. The iPhone camera, despite being only 2 MP and lacking flash and zoom, has by far the highest quality image sensor I have ever seen on a phone, and it still has a ways to go.
I don't think MP3 players will be replaced by phones until DRM goes away completely or Apple liscences FairPlay to the phone companies. GPS will simply require better hardware for phones and software from Garmin.
I hope you are working on a supremely advanced battery then! An all in one device will rape power.
@Ashwin: lol, I hope your being sarcastic. There are few camera phones that are worse than the iPhone.
And to those who think camera phones can't be serious... just look at that beast on the picture for this post. It's quite old already, but the image quality is on par with regular point and shoot cameras, probably because it has the lens and the sensor of a regular point and shoot. You can even add tele- and wide angle converters as well as filters (probably). But it was horribly expensive and isn't exactly compact. But imagine one of those Sony T series cameras, with phone functionality (and touchscreen?).
No matter how good phone cameras get, ordinary cameras will always be one step ahead.
Fact is, if you want to take proper photos you'll need a proper ordinary camera, and it will remain that why for a while.
That's like saying the pics taken with a quality cam now are not proper. Granted, the bar is always being raised, but if you can take a pic today and be pleased and satisfied with the quality, then this same quality should be acceptable from a camera phone. So, even if it is achieved, but remains a step behind what is being done with dedicated cameras, why would it not be good enough?
So, now we will have 10 million blurry pixels to waste processing time and storage space. Yay!
HD video capture would be nice, BUT the manufacturers actually have to include more than 256MB of storage space in order to actually record for some decent amount of time. Don't rely on external flash memory, INCLUDE IT!
You're even crazier than you think. 2gb card costs around $10 here. Just get 8gb and your battery will die long before you can fill up half of that space with HD video.
Why do you think digital cameras don't have built in memory? Because if they did, people like you would always say it isn't enough. Besides, if they did it, they could break the memory card market.
Phone memory is supposed to hold programs, not media. If you want to store media you go and buy a memory card, which is soooo expensive, like the $30 I paid for a 8 gb MicroSD.
So based on your suggestions, the iPhone is a failure because it does not even have the ability to expand its memory.
Included memory is always welcome... And next time you reply, lay off the personal attacks.
dcoaster, if you're going to put a stupid comment expect less than a positive reply. Also, if that is your idea of a personal attack, you need to get out of your bubble more. You tool.
Hell, I would pay good money for a decent digital camera which could send text messages and make phone calls!
Imagine a Nikon D60 mobile phone?!
What if you want to answer a call in the rain?
I can't see what all the fuss is about. Camera phones aren't, I don't think, meant to take serious pictures. Who in their right mind would attach their phone to a tripod?
one of my requirements for the "ideal" cell phone I want is a camera, but I noticed many of them have two problems still, flash(aka lighting) and video recording, many of them do QVGA at 30fps but not VGA, also many flashes on cameras don't really cut it as well as camera flashes (the xenon's).
Another issue but not as much of a problem is optical zoom, I know one of samsung's G series has it (i think) but a standard 3x would be great, but we probably aren't there yet in this so called "MP Race".
Now if manufactures could only put a bit of focus on media playback.....or just throw VLC on a phone.... :P
I think Engadget and other tech websites need to make a stand against the megapixels scam - stop giving press to this crap, and instead give it to *real* improvements like new lenses and flashes!
Agreed.
If you ripped these companies in every single article regarding mobile phones + more pixels, or regular point and shoot cameras + more pixels, more consumers would be aware of the general stupidity of asking for more megapixels. Judging by some of the responses here, there are lots of geeks out there who still don't realize this, let alone the average person who doesn't really know technology.
With the sensor sizes used in these cameras (what is it.....1/3.2"? 1/3.5"???), there really shouldn't be more than 2 or 3 MP. With a regular point and shoot, 6 MP gets you great images. Beyond 6 MP, the camera with fewer pixels should get you better images (if you compare 2 sensors using the same generation of sensor technology, and designed by the same company).
Agreed.
If you ripped these companies in every single article regarding mobile phones + more pixels, or regular point and shoot cameras + more pixels, more consumers would be aware of the general stupidity of asking for more megapixels. Judging by some of the responses here, there are lots of geeks out there who still don't realize this, let alone the average person who doesn't really know technology.
With the sensor sizes used in these cameras (what is it.....1/3.2"? 1/3.5"???), there really shouldn't be more than 2 or 3 MP. With a regular point and shoot, 6 MP gets you great images. Beyond 6 MP, the camera with fewer pixels should get you better images (if you compare 2 sensors using the same generation of sensor technology, and designed by the same company).
Go and compare picture quality taken with high-end smartphones that are equipped with 5 mgapixel units. They are much much better than anything taken with basic 2/3 megapixel phones. Then check out the comparison done with the new Samsung 8 megapixel phone (which clearly has better quality than N82).
Who says manufacturers only add more megapixels. They have clearly improved optics as well. The megapixel myth has been blown out of proportion mainly because Apple included the crappiest camera ever on it's phone, and the zillion brainless mac-heads need some sort of quasi-believable excuse for defending their jesus-phone.
@Rauha
You twit, what most people are saying here that there isn't any point putting more megapixels on camera phones without improving the optics first. And comparing two different phones using different optics isn't smart either. Think.
Oh, and learn to insult properly. You sound like a 12 year old kid who is just using the same bloody terminology as every other hater out there just to look cool.
For one, stop using cell phone camera sensors and start using real camera sensors.
Actually, that is what Samsung did (see the picture). A few years ago they made 5, 7 and 10 MP camera phones which were basically a point and shoot camera with a phone glued to its back. Same sensor and lens as in real cameras. Sadly they were afaik never released outside South Korea, and there they were ridiculously expensive.
My old Sony 2MP that used freakin 3.5" floppies for storage takes better pictures than my 3MP Tilt. Let's work on some image quality people.
@Rauha: Yes, but with all other things being equal (i.e. lens, JPEG processing, sensor technology, etc), a 3 MP version of the sensor will beat the 5 MP version of the same phone camera.
Too bad that the number megapixels really has nothing to do with image quailty.
Get proper lenses and work with image quality instead of letting the marketing dept run the show.
And as someone said above, the camera in a phone won't be anything but a conviniece for at least the next 8-10 years.
O.K. smile and say cheese. Wait, I need to change the sim card..............................................................................................5 minutes and a dropped battery later. O.K., say cheese. Alright, I am going to MMS this to the family. You guys go ahead I will catch up to you later. I do not want to lose my signal. The pic should be there in a ...., crap to large to send, Line up, lets take another let me change the res to MMS settings.....Options and choices are great for some, but for the majority, they just get in the way of life.
Do you even have a mobile phone?
Willyboy,
You failed... hard
Sony phones have the best camera's (see http://www.sonybrands.com), even their 2mp cams are better than other makes of phone with higher mp. You simply dont need 10 mp on a poor quality camera is my point.
It's more Ericsson than Sony at the mobile phone section.
I just wish that screen and printer resolutions would increase at the same rate as those sensor resolutions...
There are no winners in the megapixel race.
Actually there is one: The camera makers themselves! By introducing a new model with more MP every year, that encourages the ignorant masses to "upgrade" their cameras more frequently.
Am I the only who finds it ironic that the post quotes an LG exec but posts a pic of a Samsung phone?
In Korea:
Anycall = Samsung
Cyon = LG
The more you know.
Wow. 14mbs on a little point in shoot? thats nice. Good for photographs that need one for a back up or just in case.
A 2MP camera phone would make a better backup than this. Shoving all those pixels on an already cramped sensor is just a recipe for disaster.
Ok, to everyone bringing up the iPhone... so you want an iPhone with a huge lens on it? The simple fact is that you start going into the 5MP or higher territory, you need a lens with better resolving power, which usually means a bigger bulkier lens unless you just want a very soft 8 MP image.
Totally stupid. My ancient 2megapixel canon takes vastly better pictures than a 9mp camera phone.
We've long since passed the point where increasing resolution at these sensor sizes is not only failing to improve quality, it's obviously harming it with increased noise and consequent massive smeary denoising. It's the same thing with point and shoots - 14mp in a 1/2.5" sensor. Idiotic (most good DSLRs have less megapixels in a sensor 6x the size, and mobile phones use even smaller than that).