Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 33 of 33
  1. #21  
    Hi, 2 me the purpose of the camera is as follows. U go 2 a store to get a plumbing part armed with a photo of the piece u need. For example in recently installing a garbage disposal a part was missing during the istallation. I would have been able to either take the phone with me on my phone or had it sent to my phone by someone else with a treo or other phone with similar capibilieties. It will never replace my SLR, nor does HS claim it will, that I have dragged w/me from europe, asia, and the americas. It is just for a quick convience. I certainly am not going 2 photograph the ruines at Copan in Honduras with it!

    But it would be fun 2 send a pic of me @ the ruins in Copan 2 my g/f via the internet, while she is stateside and i am not.

    Cool it guys, it is just for an added convience, nothing else.

    Lets just keep it persective, it is like getting an extra cup holder in a car, we r not going 2 become Ansel Adams, or Rhicard Aedeon with it, (But I would love 2 have that talent), LOL, take care, Jay
  2. #22  
    Originally posted by silverado
    Any real VGA-size pictures (640x480)? Maybe these would look better?
    it looks like those are thumbnails of the 640, that smaller res option (it takes in two diff modes, right?)
    I dont think I need the 640 to know that picture sucks
    wonder what the treo screen was seeing at that moment? doubt it looked better. Someone bring a flashlight next time
  3. #23  
    Originally posted by nmotion

    wonder what the treo screen was seeing at that moment? doubt it looked better. Someone bring a flashlight next time
    screen looked the same as the end result for me..
    I also noticed that the refresh rate was notablicy slower than on the NR70V... I kinda expected that to be the other way around..
    Once again I hope this was all because it wasnt the final product yet...
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  4. #24  
    Attached is a pic I took with a 600 while outside the NYC Mission:Possible event. A few observations, bearing in mind that it is a low-res camera with no focus, zoom or flash -- accept it and move on. With the limitations in mind:
    1. There seems to be an optimal focal length, a little experimentation and you should be able to find the best way to take a clearer picture. You can tell by the central area being so much clearer.
    2. Any camera will not take decent pictures without enough light, this one is no exception.
    Just my two bits.

    http://www.kaufmanarchitecture.com/i...600-sample.jpg
    Last edited by MikeK; 09/26/2003 at 08:36 AM.
  5. #25  
    Originally posted by MikeK
    Attached is a pic I took with a 600 while outside the NYC Mission:Possible event. A few observations, bearing in mind that it is a low-res camera with no focus, zoom or flash -- accept it and move on. With the limitations in mind:
    1. There seems to be an optimal focal length, a little experimentation and you should be able to find the best way to take a clearer picture. You can tell by the central area being so much clearer.
    2. Any camera will not take decent pictures without enough light, this one is no exception.
    Just my two bits.
    Attached? Where is the picture?
    --Inspector Gadget

    "Go Go Gadget Pre!!"
    Palm Pre on Sprint

    Palm V--> Palm IIIc--> Visor Prism--> Visor Phone--> Treo 270--> Treo 600--> Treo 650-->
    Treo 700wx--> HTC Touch Diamond--> Palm Pre & HTC EVO 4G.
  6.    #26  
    Originally posted by MikeK
    Attached is a pic I took with a 600 while outside the NYC Mission:Possible event.
    How were you able to take such a clear picture of that man with the knife for a hand? Weren't you scared?

    Scott
    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.
  7.    #27  
    Originally posted by mwylde
    I think that everyone is missing the point. This camera is not to take high quality pictures that you could put in a magazine or something. This camera is just to take a quick snapshot here or there when the opritunity presents itself.
    Sigh. I knew someone would say this, because someone always says this. Yes, the camera is not to take pictures of high enough quality to be printed in a magazine. As I've said numerous times, I have no problem with the resolution being "low" at 640x480. What I do want is to have halfway decent (hopefully better) 640x480 pictures. I want to be able to take pictures when I'm at the store of something and send it to my wife to get her approval (e.g. - shopping at the grocery store or whatever). Based on the sample pictures I'm seeing, I imagine myself taking a picture of a milk carton and her telling me "I wanted milk, not a turkey."

    Scott
    Last edited by Scott R; 09/26/2003 at 08:29 AM.
    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.
  8.    #28  
    I think what's missing in this conversation is a sense of perspective. There are some here who still see a built-in camera as "the latest thing" and are willing to accept poor quality just because it's so "new." There are others of us who realize that that built-in cameras really aren't new anymore and while poor quality may have been acceptable a year ago, it's time for the manufacturers to step up to the plate and build in cameras that are as good or better than the best built-in cameras out there (with the exception of something like the CLIE NZ90's camera which is in a class by itself and was priced accordingly).

    I wish I could compile a photo gallery comparing the identical scene as taken by several different cameras, as that would better demonstrate just how awful this camera seems to be. Again, I'm not claiming that the Treo is alone here. In fact, the majority of built-in cameras are awful. But there are a few that have been out for a while now (e.g. - Nokia 3650) that are not awful (though still could be improved a lot), and I merely ask that the various manufacturers match or beat that now. Just to reiterate...I am NOT asking for higher resolution than 640x480 (though others may be). I am merely asking that I get decent quality 640x480 images.

    Scott
    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.
  9. #29  
    Originally posted by Insp_Gadget


    Attached? Where is the picture?
    my bad.. pic now linked to previous post!
  10.    #30  
    Originally posted by MikeK


    my bad.. pic now linked to previous post!
    Thanks! That's the best one so far. Being my usual critical self, I have to say that it isn't the best choice for subject matter. Weren't there any flowers or other non-monochromatic scenes available? OTOH, it's actually a good choice for demonstrating the camera's ability (or lack thereof) to pull out shadow detail.

    Scott
    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.
  11. barjohn's Avatar
    Posts
    62 Posts
    Global Posts
    67 Global Posts
    #31  
    Unfortunately, some manufacturers fail to provide a worthwhile camera. Granted that the resolution is low, but VGA resoultion with a full color spectrum should not look so bad. To me, if you aren't going to do it right, leave it off. For a sample of what a well designed VGA camera phone can produce look at the following links on the Sharp GX-20:

    http://www.mobileburn.com/review.jsp?Page=14&Id=464

    http://www.mobileburn.com/review.jsp?Page=10&Id=464

    http://www.mobileburn.com/review.jsp?Id=464

    I would be embarrased if I were the Treo engineer that designed its camera if I couldn't do as well as the Sharp engineers did. What I have seen in the sample pictures so far, and in many other phone cameras is poor lens quality and lousy choice of CMOS chip. Note that the Sharp GX-20 also takes video with sound!
    John
  12.    #32  
    Originally posted by barjohn
    For a sample of what a well designed VGA camera phone can produce look at the following links on the Sharp GX-20:
    Bravo!

    If that had a decent built-in OS and a better form of text entry, or if it had Bluetooth (so I could hook it up with a Bluetooth PDA), I'd be all over it. Alas it has neither.

    Hopefully this will raise the bar enough such that other manufacturers can at least make a half-hearted attempt at matching it, instead of feeding us the garbage they have been.

    Scott
    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.
  13. #33  
    I've used the Palm Pix attachment for the Palm iii series, and I can say that the 600's camera quality is not as good. Wee Bit did take some pics with the 600, which he emailed to himself from MP. Most of the pics I've seen on this board so far are not as good as what I saw at MP yesterday. Perhaps they just looked better on the actual lo-res Treo screen than they do on a PC monitor.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions