When 2 megapixels is better than 5

[joe]

Originally Posted by boxta

just wanna share my 2cents as i am quite a serious photography hobbyist.

Thanks for sharing! I really appreciate the info!

[Spin This!]

Frankly, I don't think the size of the glass matters as much.. (quality of glass and sensor size matters more). For example, a 70-200 L glass from canon is 67mm while a shorter L glass is 77mm.

True. Again it really depends on what you're sticking behind that glass, too. Smaller sensors mean the glass can be made smaller because you don't have to focus on as large an area. (For example on my Nikon D200, my 18-200 DX format lens would be much much bigger if it was to be made for 35mm).

I don't think you can go wrong by buying any of the "L" glass either.

You'll will usually find the better glass is "faster" which consequently makes the glass physically bigger though.

[jpmihalk]

I would also think that storage space is a somewhat limiting factor... since most people will use their iPhones for music and some for video, pictures will add up pretty quickly too at 2MB per photo. If people want higher quality photos to view, they can always load them. It's a balancing act.

[Napoleon Dynamite]

Originally Posted by jpmihalk

I would also think that storage space is a somewhat limiting factor... since most people will use their iPhones for music and some for video, pictures will add up pretty quickly too at 2MB per photo. If people want higher quality photos to view, they can always load them. It's a balancing act.

4 and 8 GB are a marketing choise: iPhone has the same storage of the Nano, which is the most popular one

[archer6]

Originally Posted by Spin This!

That said, those alleged photos floating around look pretty good to me

That's because they were taken with the soon to be released iCamera.

[archer6]

Originally Posted by jpmihalk

If people want higher quality photos to view, they can always load them. It's a balancing act.

Now that makes sense, however I'm sad... you've popped my bubble...

I thought the balancing act was Steve on the stage hyping his latest toy........

[dblaron]

You all are about 65% right. only because 65% of a digital cameras relation to other built in hardware is 35% of the device. you have to take in to consideration the AD interface. (analog to digital) this is very important. put it this way most phones today only put in the bare minimum of memory. this causes them to skimp on their software for the camera. because really there are only a few companies that make AD chip sets. in that size sensor. So with that they have to rely on how well their software processes them. that is why digital cameras are still superior to phones. because that is the only function they have to do. but once the memory is upped they will get better. So with that you are 100% right on your topic. yet there are more things to factor in than just the sensor. And apple has taken this in as a factor and will be better than any other camera phone because of the memory. Its kind of like cannon vs. sony. its all in how they process the information. That is why there are so many cameras on the market. and each pattent is slightly different. you will find that most electronics have a lot of the same components in them. that is why it costs around $13000 to get a electronics pattent.

[Cantwait4iPhone]

Exactly. I am fine with 2 MP, because it's not like I am going to take serious pictures with the iPhone. The camera is a nice feature, but it's certainly not a make- or- break thing, at least not for me.

[ColsTiger]

Shoot! I'm looking forward to taking 2MP shots with the iphone instead of that big, giant Sony Mavica FD200. That thing's a monster!

[robhon]

Originally Posted by Cantwait4iPhone

Exactly. I am fine with 2 MP, because it's not like I am going to take serious pictures with the iPhone. The camera is a nice feature, but it's certainly not a make- or- break thing, at least not for me.

WHAT? The iPhone has a camera too!!

(joking)