Read more: http://www.techradar.com/news/phone-and ... z0pKkG95fa

See if you can make a post without mentioning a certain Apple product

Cox's Pippins

Oops.

I'm counting that as a fail

If the lens is any good, then it's going to make a decent photograph. So many camera phones are rubbish because the optics are rubbish.

I'm still not entirely convinced with this convergence stuff, but it's an unstoppable tide and most people seem to like it.

The digicam in the iPhone 3GS has an excellent implementation. The macro feature coupled with the spot metering is brilliant. I haven't heard of another camera 'phone that has the spot metering.
This is very much the same situation as proper cameras. Greater megapixels dosen't always equate to better images. If we get some good optics in front of the sensor then yeah, that'd be cool, but until there is there's really no point in massive megapixel numbers in 'phone cams.

Mark

I'm sorry, I kind of consider this waste of time. As Heather points out, the quality of the optics is as big a factor as the resolution of the sensor. if your optics are poor, all you're effectively doing is magnifying the flaws as much as the detail. Plus you're producing massively bigger files to no great end - most camera phones photographs are never going to be printed out at all (so they're never going to be seen on a display that's over say 2MP) and if they are it's on a domestic A4 inkjet printer. So what's the point of a 14MP image when the best output you're going to put it to is at best able to correctly reproduce say a 7MP image? You're using up space storing detail you're just never ever going to use.

From what I've see the optimum for a camera phone seems about 5MP, and for a consumer compact around 7MP. If you're taking pro shots that may appear on billboards or in magazines then knock yourself out. But otherwise, it's just marketing [LIFTED].

Jon