Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Next-Generation iPhone Set to Carry 5-Megapixel Camera?

MacRumors said:
All three claims turned out to be incorrect, however, as Apple apparently scrapped plans for including a camera in the iPod touch after the thinness of the device caused difficulties with its inclusion, the iPod nano received only a 0.3-megapixel camera, and the iPod classic failed to receive a camera at all.
Click to expand...

That may or may not true. We don't know why the touch doesn't have a camera.
 
sushi said:
Is this your opinion, or have you data to confirm this?

Curious. TIA?
Click to expand...

Try the following experiment. Get a small flashlight. The weaker the better, to match what a phone could provide. Go into a dark room. Point your flashlight at something and take a picture with your iPhone.
 
The camera is one of my most used options on my old original iPhone. I hope to finally ditch this thing when the new iPhones come out.

5 mega pixels would rock.
 
Megapixels don't mean squat without a lens that can handle them. I would trade a 5 MP Sensor for a 3.2 MP Sensor with a decent glass lens anyday.
 
cmaier said:
Try the following experiment. Get a small flashlight. The weaker the better, to match what a phone could provide. Go into a dark room. Point your flashlight at something and take a picture with your iPhone.
Click to expand...

How does a pulsed LED compare to a "weaker the better flashlight" for a flash?

My phone camera has a flash, and it's useful for small group photos (2-4 people). It won't light up the Mall, but it's definitely an asset for those close-up situations.

(...and I have a guide 20 (ft) compact flash and guide 138 (ft) big flash for my bridge digicam - so I do understand flash. The phone camera flash is not even close to the builtin flash on the digicam, but the camera flash is an asset, not a detriment.)


BeamWalker said:
Megapixels don't mean squat without a lens that can handle them. I would trade a 5 MP Sensor for a 3.2 MP Sensor with a decent glass lens anyday.
Click to expand...

Yes, definitely. And don't forget aperture - my digicam's f1.8 7 element glass lens is a huge advantage in low light situations. Pixels, aperture, quality - 3 things that show up in the photos but not in the edited datasheets. And pixels are the least important....
 
ChrisA said:
What is the point? Simple - giving an ignorant consumer what he thinks he wants. Ask almost anyone not knowledgeable about the technical aspects of cameras the they will tell you "more MPs are better"
Click to expand...

Exactly! Like adding that stupid voice function to the latest shuffle!
 
cmaier said:
Try the following experiment. Get a small flashlight. The weaker the better, to match what a phone could provide. Go into a dark room. Point your flashlight at something and take a picture with your iPhone.
Click to expand...

Interesting that you would use this as a comparison.

This post pretty much captures my thoughts:

AidenShaw said:
How does a pulsed LED compare to a "weaker the better flashlight" for a flash?

My camera has a flash, and it's useful for small group photos (2-4 people). It won't light up the Mall, but it's definitely an asset for those close-up situations.

(...and I have a guide 20 (ft) compact flash and guide 138 (ft) big flash for my bridge digicam - so I do under stand flash. The camera flash is not even close to the builtin flash on the digicam, but the camera flash is an asset, not a detriment.)
Click to expand...

cmaier, a small flash would be useful on the iPhone. I can think of numerous uses where using a small flash would definitely help take a better picture.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back