How would a camera phone compare against a camera?

[daveatcake]

I'm working with Motorola who have just launched the new ZN5, the first handset to feature Kodak Image Technology. Motorola then commission 8 top photographers from around the world to photograph their home city within 24 hours. The results can be seen on their flickr (http://flickr.com/photos/29770539@N07/) channel.

But do the pictures compare well against a more traditional stills camera?

[Village_Idiot]

And how exactly did they determine, top 8?

And the skateboarding shot has lots of noise and is soft at the full size. I guess it's a lot better than other phones out there, but it in no way compares to even a 300D.

[bacchanal]

Even a modest compact point and shoot from Canon/Nikon/Sony etc. will outperform those images for noise and resolution. That said, they look pretty good for a phone and look fine for daytime shooting and posting on the web and small prints.

V_I - "8 top" and "top 8" are two different statements.

[Colorblinded]

Even a modest compact point and shoot from Canon/Nikon/Sony etc. will outperform those images for noise and resolution. That said, they look pretty good for a phone and look fine for daytime shooting and posting on the web and small prints.
Agreed. They certainly look better than anything my phone or past phones could manage. They certainly look worse than even my old Canon Powershot G3 but considering that's a camera in a phone, and it's giving results that would make a reasonable 4x6 print or look acceptable online then I'd say it's not too shabby.

The low light performance suffers though. Didn't look at all of them but it does seem the photogs converted a bunch to B&W which makes them less objectionable probably.

[clarkent1]

Limitations are a bitc*

My Lg Viewty is a 5MP camera phone. Very nice quality images for what it really is ( a PHONE!)

[Village_Idiot]

The guy's just a spammer. He posted the same exact post on another forum.

[Village_Idiot]

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=145430

[Ballen Photo]

The guy's just a spammer. He posted the same exact post on another forum.
Actually, This is a legitimate question, as well as an interesting topic.
We have certain guidelines that determine whether or not a post is spam, and posting the same question in another forum isn't included in them. ;)
-Bruce

[Village_Idiot]

Actually, This is a legitimate question, as well as an interesting topic.
We have certain guidelines that determine whether or not a post is spam, and posting the same question in another forum isn't included in them. ;)
-Bruce

True, but it does look an aweful lot like some one that's trying to generate hits for their site/business when they only post one post on a forum with a link to a product they're promoting, especially when it's one post on several. I'm sure there's probably several other photo forums this guy has hit up.

It might not look as suspicious if he actually participated in the threads rather than just starting one and dropping a link in it.

[PMN]

But do the pictures compare well against a more traditional stills camera?

I'm not really sure what you'd deem to be "a more traditional stills camera", but even by compact standards these don't really match up. They're good for a phone but they still have that tell tale 'phone camera noise'. The average small, modern compact camera would have no problem outperforming this.

Here's a wacky idea... You make a phone that actually functions well as a phone without loads of crap I don't want or need, and I'll use my digital and film SLR's, or even my Canon Powershot P&S if I want to take photos. While you're at it, please give me a ring tone that actually sounds like a damned phone ringing, instead of the polyphonic audio nonsense that comes as standard on a lot of phones!

Cynical? Me? Naaaah! :lol:

Paul

[therealmr]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3149/2807691175_f1499ae3fc.jpg?v=0

Pretty neat for a camera phone. Obviously not a replacement for a 'real' camera... but it is always fun to take a look at technology progression and such.

[52k]

I do chuckle to myself when I hear people raving about their 8Mp phones... What's the point I ask myself when the lens is like 1 or 2mm diameter?

For the masses they are great and for the mobile operators they generate a huge amount of revenue via MMS etc. For snaps of people/places and general fun... perfect but I won't refer to them as cameras until I can bolt up one of my L series lenses :-)

Try having a long converation on a phone with a 70-200 f2.8L IS attached LOL

[jasonleehl]

I do chuckle to myself when I hear people raving about their 8Mp phones... What's the point I ask myself when the lens is like 1 or 2mm diameter?

For the masses they are great and for the mobile operators they generate a huge amount of revenue via MMS etc. For snaps of people/places and general fun... perfect but I won't refer to them as cameras until I can bolt up one of my L series lenses :-)

Try having a long converation on a phone with a 70-200 f2.8L IS attached LOL

Agreed. It's amazing how people rave about the latest 8MP on their phone, how sharp it is, that it could replace their P&S and do magnificent night shots handheld with the built-in flash. And they probably judge that from the phone's LCD screen instead of the monitor screen.

Don't get me wrong, I'm always snapping photos out of my phone when I need them especially for work purposes. It's the convenience that you get. But I just can't understand this craze people have.

[Ballen Photo]

But I just can't understand this craze people have.
That works both ways Jason, Those people can't understand the craze we have either. Suits me though.
Next time you have one of those conversations with the camera phone person, ask them if they've ever shot a wedding with their phone. :lol: ;)
-Bruce