Is there any room for improvement there given the space there is for optics on a phone, and the desire that the lens not move? I'm wondering if we've basically already hit the wall with phone photography quality.
Obligatory iPhone 4 Thread...
- Thread starter Grall
- Start date
Of course there is room for improvement - even if you assume that the current lenses have no room for improvement (but they do), there are still improvements to look forward to in noise levels and dynamic range for sensor+electronics, as well as (huge) improvements in image processing.
As far as optics go, while size is certainly a constraint, particularly if you are thinking of zoom lenses, the cost constraints are brutal. On the bright side there are already cell phones that have a pronounced photo profile where the modules are allowed to cost a bit more, Nokia in particular comes to mind, but S-E and Samsung have some offerings as well. Lens materials, coatings, design complexity are factors that come into play both in terms of performance and cost, as well as focusing speed and accuracy et cetera. Add completely new technologies that may or may not come into play and the future looks fairly bright for camera phones - at least if you're the patient type.
But aaronspink raises a valid point, for sure - just about all aspects of photographic quality other than resolution typically get roughly as much attention and budget as their exposure in marketing justify....
IMHO consumer awareness, as usual, is key.
PS. wishiknew - you are correct. Pixel size (at the sensor level) is constant, and the number of pixels increased. I suspect which sensor we are dealing with but don't have enough information to say for sure - as I said, Sony Components offer pdfs for their offerings.
Last edited by a moderator:
They typically don't put cameras on the iPod Touch either. Or digital compass, GPS.
You figure A4 SOC and the display will be on the iPod Touch they will release in September or so.
Anything else is a bonus.
He did say during the FaceTime demo I think, that there would be tens of millions of devices capable of FT by the end of the year. So they will either sell a lot of iPhone 4s this year or maybe they will put it on iPod Touch for the first time.
Front-facing camera can't do 720p BTW, only 640 x 480. But probably FT can't transmit 720p video anyways, although you can switch to the rear camera to stream video from it.
They want to make it an open standard so it would reasonable to expect someone to create a desktop client for various OSs.
Skype is proprietary and this is going to be open.
aaronspink
Veteran
aaronspink
Veteran
that's what I meant but left out the right word. ment to say diode and wrote sensor instead.
Well there's no NAT reconfiguration and there may be some way to discover the IP via the phone number? Because the UI is through the phone-calling window, it appeared.
One thing though is that Skype may be encrypted since it's P2P? Or at least its voice chat and audio are. Maybe video can't be encrypted?
Is FT encrypted is the question.
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
How good the iPhone4 might become, why would you want one if you can have the HTC Legend? if you hold a Legend, you want to lick it.
This is the description from the Apple site:
"FaceTime works right out of the box — no need to set up a special account or screen name. And using FaceTime is as easy as it gets. Let’s say you want to start a video call with your best friend. Just find her entry in your Contacts and tap the FaceTime button. Or maybe you’re already on a voice call with her and you want to switch to video. Just tap the FaceTime button on the Phone screen. Either way, an invitation pops up on her iPhone 4 screen asking if she wants to join you. When she accepts, the video call begins. It’s all perfectly seamless. And it works in both portrait and landscape modes."
I'm not really sure how cellphone protocols work, so I'm not sure if there is a room during a cell call to share information like an IP address that could be used to prep a video chat. Since the FaceTime app is always on, maybe your phone reports its phone number and IP address to a server, and when you launch a FaceTime session it looks up the connecting IP based on the current connected phone number. Not sure how you'd be able to do it in a P2P manner, switching from a voice call to an IP connection.
I'm almost 100% certain that it would all be encrypted. At least I hope it would be.
Another question I have: Does the FaceTime connection maintain the open cellular connection for audio, and use IP protocols only for video? If I walked out of a WiFi spot, would it fall back to a standard cellular call, or would I have to call back? Obviously this impacts minutes and the ability to make long distance calls.
I must say... I'm anti-iPhone, in-love-with-my-Blackberry boy... But i'm kinda ashamed to say that i'm sort of digging the iPhone4... It's just sooooo pretty!!
NO! I can't! I must resist!!
NO! I can't! I must resist!!
Hmm, I wonder if the iTouch range are effectively binned iPhone chips to lower costs? Since the iPhone has to run much more power intensive 3G modules etc etc, the iTouch would be a higher voltage less suitable bin to lower fabbing costs overall?
Same here. I'm the anything-but-Apple-kinda-guy and a big fan of both Android and WP7. I have to say though, I'm digging the iPhone 4.I must say... I'm anti-iPhone, in-love-with-my-Blackberry boy... But i'm kinda ashamed to say that i'm sort of digging the iPhone4... It's just sooooo pretty!!
NO! I can't! I must resist!!
....Must......resist.....
Hm. "Often" would vary from title to title, would it not?
