Samsung Unveils Windows Phone 8 Device and Android-Based Camera 179
MrSeb writes "Today Samsung joined Nikon in announcing an Android-powered camera. The Samsung Galaxy Camera weighs 305g, features a 16-megapixel CMOS sensor, 21x super zoom lens, a quad-core 1.4GHz SoC (probably Exynos 4), 8GB of internal storage, and runs Android 4.1 Jelly Bean. This compares with the Nikon S800c which also has a 16MP CMOS sensor, along with a 7x zoom f/2 lens and runs Android 2.3 Gingerbread. Since neither unit has shipped, we don't know anything yet about how good they are as cameras, but we do know that the companies are trying to regain some of the ground they've lost to smartphones by integrating sharing right into their cameras. For photographers, there are a couple of critical questions about these new models: First is whether these cameras will have enough additional functionality to justify the added cost and weight when most people already have a serviceable camera in their phone. Second, and more importantly, there is still a big question mark hanging over Nikon and Samsung's long-term intentions for Android. If Android cameras are just standard point-and-shoots with a smartphone OS bolted on for sharing, that'll be a wasted opportunity. It would have been easier to create a camera that instantly tethered to a smartphone instead, and let the phone do all the work. There is an exciting possibility, if Nikon and Samsung do this correctly and allow low-level access to the camera functions via Android, to really unleash the power of Android to enable new photographic solutions."
Samsung has also taken the wraps off the ATIV S, the first smartphone running Windows Phone 8. It has a 4.8" screen, NFC support, and a microSD card slot. Samsung plans to start shipping them in Q4.
Plan B (Score:0, Insightful)
Goes to prove that successful companies always have a Plan B, or C, or D....
The loss to Apple and the $1 billion fine were damaging, as will the product ban be, but it’s good to see Samsung had Windows Phone and a non-phone Android device in their back-pocket. Plus let’s not forget their TV and home appliance businesses.
There's Serviceable and then .... (Score:4, Insightful)
...whether these cameras will have enough additional functionality to justify the added cost and weight when most people already have a serviceable camera in their phone...
Yeah, if you only want to take quick snapshots and you don't care about the quality, any phone camera will do. But even among phones, camera quality varies.
For a long time, I carried a Motorola Droid X with an 8 MP camera. I didn't buy it for the camera, but having the camera made me fall into the habit of taking pictures whenever I saw something interesting. (I'm a serious pedestrian living in a town with a lot of interesting architecture and views.) The results were pretty cool [bit.ly].
Then I had to replace the phone with a Motorola Triumph with a 5 MP camera. Picture quality suffered. Wouldn't have mattered so much to me if the previous camera hadn't introduced me to the joys of casual photography. When I have the time and money, I will certainly buy a more serious camera and take some classes.
Will that camera be Android-powered? The way the article goes at it (is there enough added functionality?) is exactly backwards. It assumes you live in an Android-powered world and are looking for the best way to integrate your picture-taking into it. For my part, I'll look at all low-end cameras, Android or not, and see which has the physical and electronic features that will work for me.
I suspect that Android is overkill for a dedicated camera and that one of those special purpose, nameless OSs that most cameras come with will suit me better. But I'm withholding judgment until the time comes.
Re:DSLR (Score:5, Insightful)
One big reason is the software (Score:5, Insightful)
They're losing ground to camera phones - so they apparently came to the conclusion the reason for that is the OS that's on some of those phones?
A different take is that they realized people like to take photos with smartphones because of the large choice ot applications you have to take the photos. Some apps do filters, some do panoramics, some do selective coloring, etc.
When you can do all that right as you are taking an image, who wants a boring old camera where you do that later?
I think it's about as good idea as can be had to revive the concept of a separate compact camera, which otherwise will be totally subsumed by smartphones in short order.
What would be really interesting, is a DSLR that you could program in this way... You could even have the normal camera control software just as one app, but allow people to write others. As long as other apps could take input from all controls on the camera you could get some great alternate takes on control software for a DSLR.
Re:DSLR (Score:2, Insightful)
Photographers are like guitarists. They are stuck with 60 year old technology because that's what they are used to, and because the kinks and failures on that old tech (vacuum tube distortion, lens flares, etc.) are so ingrained in our culture that new tech has to imitate them in order to satisfy the artist.
Re:Plan B (Score:5, Insightful)
i'm guessing that Microsoft is paying some very serious money to hardware manufacturers to build Windows phones. I can't see them doing it out of any vision of the platform succeeding.
Re:DSLR (Score:3, Insightful)
The point of the physical controls that they all have is that you don't want to be looking away from the subject for any reason other than moving around. And even that you wouldn't want to do if you could do so safely. Touchscreens are crap for anybody that needs to get things done without looking at the screen.
Not to mention the fact that now you have a screen that's taken up with widgets rather than with the actual image. Or worse that burns through your battery life much quicker than a traditional interface would.
After using the same body for years, I just know where to put my fingers to control everything that I want to control. The other things come up via a menu and at no point do I need to remove either hand from the camera, except to replace memory card, add or remove the tripod, battery or put the lens cap on.
Not to be elitist, but I take it you've never been a serious photographer either professionally or as a hobby, because what you're proposing would be a huge headache for anybody that's taking a lot of photos.