What is Digg?Sponsored by Norton 2010
Cybercrime makes more money than illegal drugs. view!
everyclickmatters.com - See the top masterminds behind the biggest cyberscams ever—and what they cost us all.
82 Comments
- GrahamStw, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24Nice!
Not because it is 10 megapixel (which is seems largely pointless), but because it looks like it has a normal compact camera lens on it, rather than the usual tiny crappy plastic lens used on most camera phones. So you might actually be able to take decent pics with it. - manfesto, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Megapixels are meaningless unless the optics taking the shot are decent (this is true of all digital cameras, not just camera phones) - and traditionally, camera phones are less than great (from the pics, this does look like quite the step up from most camera phone lenses, though). I mean, such a large resolution for what is likely a subpar camera will only serve to show in great detail how bad the pictures being taken are - digital noise is never more obvious than when you take a 5 MP shot with a cheap digital camera (I know - my cheap "take everywhere, and don't care if it gets banged up" camera is a 5 MP camera I got at Target for $120 - horrendous picture quality, blown up to a full 5 megapixels for everybody to see every little flaw. I see a 10 MP camera phone having similar problems).
Practicality is another issue - camera phones are meant to take quick 1.3 MP shots of quick funny moments you can't afford to miss - nothing serious, nothing you'd need 10 megapixels for. A 10 MP shot is meant to be taken with a DSLR that can actually fill 10 MP with plenty of detail, IMHO. - tw0bit, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Thats sweet. "Ohh let me get my phone" *pulls our camera and starts talking*. That thing is a camera, and they decided to add a phone to it lol. DUGG
- Rosewood, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Yea my first thought when I saw the link was "So?"
When I saw the lens mechanism my thought was "FAP FAP FAP" - ProAm500, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I'll put a billion dollars, my right foot, and left testicle that this will not see the light of day in the US.....
- stokestack, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Like you'll ever see this in the U.S. We still don't even have the V3i or V3x. Why even read the gadget sites, which are full of products that for some reason are available to the rest of the world but not the U.S.? And the few outdated products we get are only available through one of three providers.
- detrate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I think of mitch hedberg when I see this...
"I don't have a microwave oven but I do have a clock that occassionally cooks *****!" - Flankk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"Okay everyone, sqeeze together to fit in the frame. Okay, smi- *ring* Oh, *****, hold on my work is calling."
"No, don't answer the phone. It's syncing photos."
"Hey buddy, let me take a picture with that." /Makes a long-distance call.
"Okay, give me your phone number and I'll write it down on this paper."
"Why don't you store it on your phone?"
"It's full of 10 MP pictures right now." - whiteguysamurai, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5i agree, 3-5 megapixels is perfectly acceptable.
IMHO, if this thing grows boobs that shoot ice cold beer, then i might just have to put a mortgage down on the old honestead. - jabelar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+510 megapixel is pointless for computer viewing, but for large prints it is still useful. But as mentioned elsewhere, higher resolution does not necessarily imply better quality.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4uber. too bad we probably wont see something like this in the states for a looong time
- Phyrefly, on 10/12/2007, -0/+310MP with an itty bitty sensor, what the hell is that supposed to do? Stretch noise patterns and increase the blur?
I guess some people don't care about image quality... but why not stick with the current 2MPs and buy a decent stand-alone camera with the rest of the money. - osbjmg, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Exactly, just like in real estate - lenses, lenses, lenses.
- abstraxion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2More megapixels + same size sensor = higher pixel density = more digital noise. Fitting 10MP onto an APS-C sized dSLR is something we're finally doing now, and this sensor is probably around half the size, if not smaller. Plus a small lens with a low MTF. Stupid product.
- illu45, on 10/12/2007, -0/+210 MPs is pointless... You'd need a really good lens to capture all of those megapixels, and on a phone... I doubt you'd get it. Even if you did get a really good lens, it would probably be quite fragile or bulky, depending on how well they decided to secure it. Either way, it goes against the moblity of a mobile phone. Why don't they take the technology and make a nice, small 10-mpixel camera instead?
- esaba.com, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Personally, I'd call that a 10 Mega pixel camera with a built in phone rather than a camera phone.
Impressive none the less. - chuckfoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2its a really just a camera with a phone on it.
- dasch, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Let's all just remember that more pixels doesn't necessarily mean better pictures. As I see it, the weakest link in cameraphones on the market today is their lenses. Size does matter, which makes it difficult, but for the prices they charge, phone producers should be able to use at least half-decent lenses.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Holy crap! Even non digital SLR point and shoot cameras (the ones that cost under $200) haven't averaged to 10MP yet...
- chicken101, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Snip snip.
- cmykdesigns, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5True that! Mmmm non-pixelated goodness! lol
- foxhoundadmin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2yup. let's just hope it shoots a decent pic. i don't care if it is 10 megapixels if it takes a crappy photo. who wants a 37xx x 27xx (or so) res image if it looks like... *****?
- Bassguy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3That is impressive. My very first digital camera (Panasonic PV-SD4090) back in 2001 (If I recall correctly) was only 1.3 megapixels.
Oh, how the times are changing. - jakeadams, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1can someone explain to me why this technology is not available in the states?
- skologinczak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1camera witha phone on it...ill stick with my 1.3 mega pixel, if there is anything i wanna capture with better quality, ill wip out my trusty kodak cam....
- MakinBacon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You know, there are some gadgets where convergence just works. I like the idea of a high calibre camera and phone hybrid. I would even add MP3 to the mix. Despite what some cheapos out there may say - there IS a market for a $700-$800 cell phone/camera/MP3 player.
- SEMW, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The sad thing is you're almost certainly right -- and they will continue to capture barely a megapixel's worth of data.
- SEMW, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1 - An 8MP Canon Digital Rebel with an L-series or that nice f/1.4 50mm will capture a full 8MP worth of detail.
- This 10MP phone camera, with a not-that-bad lens for a point&shoot, will capture maybe 2 or 3 MP worth of detail.
- A normal 2MP cameraphone with its tiny plastic lens will capture under half a megapixel of detail, possibly a lot less. - aThing, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Hooray for gigantic (as in digital space) files!
- av4rice, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2A better lens won't help and higher resolution can only hurt. Unless you have a bigger CCD, cramming more pixels in DECREASES the quality. This is why DSLR makers like Canon have stayed in the 6mp/8mp range until they could get bigger, full-frame CCDs (like that new one they announced).
It's a stupid tradeoff to make. 6mp-8mp is already more than enough for good sized prints; upping the resolution doesn't exactly give you more output options. As if you'd even want to make prints from a cameraphone. And due to what I described in the first paragraph, it probably looks worse than lower-res models anyway. - Stuart.n, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Impressive. I like that you could actually use it like a camera. Sure, 10 megapixels is a bit excessive for it's purpose, but that makes it more fun! Right? I want to see what a picture from the phone looks like, more than anything else. The phone itself sure does look nice though.
- diskopo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Same reason you have a computer that does multiple tasks, instead of a typewriter, a calculator, a DVD player, a console, you have 1 WinXP machine. Convergence makes it so you don't have to buy/carry around lots of stuff.
- John184, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1THIS IS TECHNOLOGY ABUSE!!! People just because we can build these things dosn't mean we should.
- Lionhart, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3just in case you wanted to take a picture the size of a car with your phone.
- 12340987, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1stick a headphone jack and microdrive in it and it will sell.
- Ruckus21, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Lost me at "never going to come close to America or Europe"
- sogo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The thing looks like it has a growth on the back of it
- fourfive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That's a camera, with a phone on it.
- Zipp425, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2samsung means to come
http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/samsung.php - rhinocirrus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I have to say, I have been waiting for this day for some time. I don't care that the 10mp is overkill, or that 10mp with a bad lens doesn't matter. It still beats the pants off every camera phone I have seen to date. I would have loved owning this little gem, when George Clinton made a surprise concert appearance at the closing awards ceremony of Slamdance Film Festival Last year. I was 10 feet from him at a party of 200 people max. The pics I got on my little Samsung camera phone, still barely convince anyone I was there. Also, The best value I see in this thing is two decent looking devices combined. I hate carrying a bag of devices everywhere I go. It is getting better. I see the day where I finally carry 1 device with me for everything. Do you think they could work this phone into the Origami?!
- diskopo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Did you read the article?
- Xiol, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I guess they could add it to that UMPC you were so uppity about defending before, eh?
- mikev, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I like the 10mp camera [my k750i has only 2]
However, that is pretty bulky compared to a closed v3 razr...and the front is ugly...the colours of it kinda suck too.
Almost there Samusung... - buttonmasher, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Nice use of apostrophe's.
(It was a JOKE, humorless modders). - Maajid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"I can guarantee you that there'll be 20MP compacts out within the next 3 yrs"
Fair enough, but what is the need I ask of you? How about they spend their time in developing something like mind controled functions, if you want to talk about "progression."
On a slightly different note, unless it has a very fast processor (unlikely), it would take absolute years to shoot a picture and load it in your screen for you to see...? - shness, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Don't you think if you needed a camera all the time, you would take one with you. They make small ones for this purpose. At the moment, the camera phone is junk in terms of quality. At least with the new junk 10Mpx camera phone you can blow your on the spot uneeded photo to at least 14x16!
- golddigga, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1yeah, this was at ces and was on the australian tv show beyond tomorrow. But wouldn't you rather have a razr phone then a thick block that has exactly the same features as your camera in your bag
- OropheR, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't know what's the point of putting a simple camera in a mobile phone....This is becoming ridiculous. If you want to take picture, buy a proper camera.
The only great advancement would be to have a video camera in your mobile, so that your interlocutor would be able to see your live video on his mobile phone screen/computer, and vice versa. Its in all science fiction movie after all! - hiro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Why is it insane? It's just natural progression, anyone think they were going to stop at 2MP? Of course not.
I can guarantee you that there'll be 20MP compacts out within the next 3 yrs - thewhitefedora, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Dugg because rediculous technology is the greatest thing ever
-
Show 51 - 82 of 82 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is