Cameraphones

theo2008

Hello, I'm quite a div when it comes to things like this.
I want to buy a decent but averagely priced camera phone. Alot of the camera phones seems to have Megapixel of about 3 whereas alot of regular cameras seems to have a Megapixel of about 12. Is the difference between 3 and 12 a big deal? I will want to use the cameraphone as much for the camera as the phone.

PCPhoto

try to get a phone with a 5MP camera - if needed (and sharp) you should be able to print it up to 10x8 no problem.

Abelloid

12mp is completely pointless, as above ^^, 3 is fine for most applications, 5 for larger prints.

The lens is more important than the resolution, but phone manufacturers have copped that buyers often confuse big numbers with better spec.

MagicMarker

The only difference between 3mp & 12mp is the actual size of the image.

Personally, cameras on phones are way over rated. If you want to take a lot of pictures, you'd be better to buy an actual camera imo.

partyatmygaff

Don't be fooled by Megapixel count. I can get a very cheap 12 megapixel standalone camera and it will perform terribly compared to a 5 megapixel camera with a high quality lense and image processor.

Anyway, phones-wise the two best camera phones out at the moment is the Sony Ericsson Satio with a 12MP sensor and a narrow angle lens(Standard) and a xenon flash for photos and a led flash for video.

The Nokia N86 has an 8MP sensor and a wide angle Carl Zeiss lens and has a dual led flash for both photo and video.

Now i've seen photos taken by both of these phones and they both perform brilliantly. The Satio works brilliantly outdoors with a lot of natural sunlight and captures more detail thanks to the 12MP sensor. But it has a slight noise problem meaning it looks a tiny bit grainy if you zoom in and the problem gets a lot worse in dark photos. The N86 captures less detail but not enough for it to be a problem. It handles low light photos a lot better and (Somehow) has a more powerful flash compared to the Satio's xenon flash. It doesn't suffer from digital noise at all thanks to the image processing. The wide angle lense means it can capture a wider field of vision which is great for taking landscape photos.

When it comes to Video the Satio doesn't perform that well. It's fixed focus and runs at VGA and does not maintain that resolution if you zoom in during a video meaning that video's become pixelated if you zoom in. The N86 manages to maintain it's resolution even if you zoom in meaning you don't get the same pixelation issue and it also has a pre-focus meaning it can auto focus before a video.


I know I went a bit overboard there :pac: but anyway if I had to choose between the two I would choose the N86 because it's better overall than the Satio.

BopNiblets

I'd look around gsmarena, they review most new phones and always have a camera review part and have sample shots/videos: http://www.gsmarena.com
Some of the latest top of the range ones also have HD video recording which is cool.
I have a Samsung Jet which has a great camera, compared to something like the iPhones which haven't got cameras that are as good.

Also their phone finder page is handy:
http://www.gsmarena.com/search.php3

bongi69

If you have the cash, a high end Nokia N series will do you well.

Had an N95 8GB, 5MP with a Carl Zeiss lens, and quite good video quality.

Photos generally came out quite well. Flash could have been a little better. I used as my 2nd camera for nights out etc. as my main camera is an SLR which is cumbersome to lug around, especially in a pub.

Now I haven't used an N97, but if its anything like the N95, it should be grand for most general pics

pearljamfan

i have a sony ericsson c902, it takes great photos, i took this with it..

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=1947613&l=76988104d4&id=509337254

its not as expensive as the satio, but ive had it a year and its lasted well .

pawrick

I'd also recommend sony ericsson for camera phones .

My last phone was a Samsung which I upgraded to (ages ago) because I though it would have a better camera but it was actually a bit poorer although it was 5mp compared to my sony which had 3.2 (K800i).

I now have an Xperia X10 and it seems ok but haven't really tested it out yet.

try this site - reviews are a bit on the too good to be true side but it will point out some differences between models

www.mobile-phones-uk.org.uk

Rsaeire

A couple of vital points to remember, when discussing the merits of a low megapixel cameraphone over a high megapixel cameraphone, are the camera optics and technical capabilities of the lenses. While it's possible to acquire very good results from a 5 MP cameraphone, the breakthroughs and technological advances in cameraphone lenses are being done in the 8 MP+ area; not in the 5 MP.

You can see evidence of this in the reviews of the Samsung W880, with its 12 MP camera, 3x optical zoom, Xenon and LED flash and 720p video recording, the Samsung Pixon12, with its 12 MP camera, wide-angle variable aperture lens and Xenon and LED flash and the Nokia N86, with its 8 MP camera, wide-angle variable aperture lens and dual-LED flash.

In addition, the latest rumoured high-end handsets, from the likes of Nokia and Samsung, all appear to be offering a 12 MP camera with advanced camera capabilities, so it would seem if you're looking for a handset with a decent camera, then a 12 MP camera is in your future.