Samsung Galaxy Camera 2 officially unveiled

[TopWargamer]

http://www.technobuffalo.com/2014/01/02/samsung-galaxy-camera-2-unveiled/

 

Pictures

 

Specs

-16.3MP sensor

-21X optical zoom

-4.8 inch Super Clear Touch HD display

-Android 4.3

-1.6GHz quad-core processor (unspecified)

-2GB of RAM

-8GB of storage

-2000mAh battery

-Expandable microSD card slot

-Weights 9.9 ounces (281 grams)

 

I'm still not impressed. Samsung, please stop wasting your money on this product. Very few people bought the original Galaxy Camera, and doubt those numbers will rise at all, and if they do, only by a little. Obviously this is a camera first and foremost instead of a phone with a good camera on it (*cough* Lumia 1020 *cough*), so I'd like to see what the image quality is like. But in reality, this is just going to be a pricey point and shoot camera, in which case, why bother even buying one? Just buy a cheap point shoot camera (under $100) or just use your smartphone.

[cjeffcoatjr]

Great! More bullsh*t that no one is going to use, and just more less for Samsung!

[Jeroen1322]

It is just a smartphone build in a camera.. 

[coen113]

the camera with a build in phone with a 3 hour battery life

[Emperor_Piehead]

I much rather have one of the sony's cameras that you can attach to your phone

[xrex64]

All them megapixels.. It's only good for zooming in and not loosing the quality. People think that more megapixels makes the image look better but our screen can't even display it...

 

Edit: I worded this poorly. I meant to say that people think the image quality will look better on than 1080p screens with a 10 MP camera rather than an 8. And it wont. However, if you zoom in on that image, the picture wont loose it's quality until a certain point. I'm not actually saying the camera is bad because of this, but it's bad that people think it's all about the megapixels and not how well it does with low lighting and other stuff.

[DyGr00339]

All them megapixels.. It's only good for zooming in and not loosing the quality. People think that more megapixels makes the image look better but our screen can't even display it...

Just by reading this I can tell you are not qualified in this subject..

[HaZardousLP]

...I guess it's better than last attempt?

[dizmo]

I'm still not impressed. Samsung, please stop wasting your money on this product. Very few people bought the original Galaxy Camera, and doubt those numbers will rise at all, and if they do, only by a little. Obviously this is a camera first and foremost instead of a phone with a good camera on it (*cough* Lumia 1020 *cough*), so I'd like to see what the image quality is like. But in reality, this is just going to be a pricey point and shoot camera, in which case, why bother even buying one? Just buy a cheap point shoot camera (under $100) or just use your smartphone.

 

 

It is just a smartphone build in a camera.. 

 

 

the camera with a build in phone with a 3 hour battery life

 

...this isn't a phone at all. Just because something runs the Android operating system, doesn't make it one.

This is just a camera that runs Android. You can't make calls on it.

[neon]

I don't see the problem with it, it is a point and shoot camera with a good zoom, I disagree that you should just buy a cheap <£/$100 point and shoot or just use your phone, obviously because then why do point and shoots with big zooms exist at over £/$100 price points.

 

The real question is does the image quality stand up to point and shoots at the same price point, and then do the features stand up, some manual control, ect. the advantage of something like this is the built GPS for geolocation and WiFi and that it runs Android compared to a proprietary OS, so as long as the image quality stands up it's a no brainer.

[coen113]

...this isn't a phone at all. Just because something runs the Android operating system, doesn't make it one.

This is just a camera that runs Android. You can't make calls on it.

You can make calls. But its mainly a camera

[dizmo]

You can make calls. But its mainly a camera

 

Incorrect. Unless they changed that feature from the original. You can make voip and skype calls, however you cannot use it as you would a cell phone.

The person also can't see you when you're on skype. No rear facing camera.

[qwertywarrior]

2000 mah

rofl

[coen113]

Incorrect. Unless they changed that feature from the original. You can make voip and skype calls, however you cannot use it as you would a cell phone.

The person also can't see you when you're on skype. No rear facing camera.

if you say so...

 

i wonder why people would get this, instead of an DSLR.

[dizmo]

if you say so...

 

i wonder why people would get this, instead of an DSLR.

For “phone calls” and texting 

As I mentioned, there’s no real way to make phone calls with the Galaxy Camera. You can make Skype calls (or other chat apps), but it’s a poor substitute and there’s one big, glaring, horrible reason for that: The person using the Galaxy Camera can’t see the video. Unlike most smartphones, there isn’t a second camera on the Galaxy Cam. You have to hold and point the camera at yourself for the duration of the call. You could set it on some surface and play the “am I still in the frame?” game with the person on the other end, of course. Basically, your options are limited and the experience isn’t great.

It’s simply impossible to use this device as a phone. You can use workarounds all day long but the fact remains that people use phones,  not chat apps, to talk.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/is-the-galaxy-camera-a-true-all-in-one-device/

 

That's from DigitalTrends review of the Galaxy Camera. I don't know how to quote websites without copy/paste.

 

Well...a DSLR is generally at least twice the price and many, many times the size.

I got rid of my Samsung NX11, which is similar in size to a compact DSLR for a Sony RX100 M2. Still takes amazing pictures, and it's way, way smaller.

It's also much better at macro shots, without me having to spend $700 on a new lens.

[neon]

if you say so...

 

i wonder why people would get this, instead of an DSLR.

 

DSLR = massive, requires you to carry a bag and it's not something you could conceivably carry around daily;

point and shoot = fits in a pocket but still has much better image quality than a phone camera along with having a zoom, you can conceivably carry it with you everyday, and requires little to no knowledge to use, just point and shoot.

 

Also this has not been announced with any cellular connectivity unlike the first Galaxy Camera, until they announce otherwise this is WiFi only.

[coen113]

For “phone calls” and texting 

As I mentioned, there’s no real way to make phone calls with the Galaxy Camera. You can make Skype calls (or other chat apps), but it’s a poor substitute and there’s one big, glaring, horrible reason for that: The person using the Galaxy Camera can’t see the video. Unlike most smartphones, there isn’t a second camera on the Galaxy Cam. You have to hold and point the camera at yourself for the duration of the call. You could set it on some surface and play the “am I still in the frame?” game with the person on the other end, of course. Basically, your options are limited and the experience isn’t great.

It’s simply impossible to use this device as a phone. You can use workarounds all day long but the fact remains that people use phones,  not chat apps, to talk.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/is-the-galaxy-camera-a-true-all-in-one-device/

 

That's from DigitalTrends review of the Galaxy Camera. I don't know how to quote websites without copy/paste.

 

Well...a DSLR is generally at least twice the price and many, many times the size.

I got rid of my Samsung NX11, which is similar in size to a compact DSLR for a Sony RX100 M2. Still takes amazing pictures, and it's way, way smaller.

It's also much better at macro shots, without me having to spend $700 on a new lens.

 

but a generic digital camera is cheaper than an galaxy camera, so why one would go for the galaxy

[dizmo]

but a generic digital camera is cheaper than an galaxy camera, so why one would go for the galaxy

 

Choice and marketing. People will buy it for any combination of the following reasons.

A) It's a Galaxy device

B) It has Android

C) It's a Samsung

 

It also does have a very nice look to it, and a very respectable zoom.

If it has 3g/4g connectivity like the last one, you can instantly upload to Facebook, Instagram, your blog, etc. You can't do that with a cheap point and shoot.

Before you say it; Yes, you can do that with your phone. This is not that.

 

They're trying something different. If companies didn't do this we wouldn't have 90% of the things we do now.

[coen113]

Choice and marketing. People will buy it for any combination of the following reasons.

A) It's a Galaxy device

B) It has Android

C) It's a Samsung

 

It also does have a very nice look to it, and a very respectable zoom.

If it has 3g/4g connectivity like the last one, you can instantly upload to Facebook, Instagram, your blog, etc. You can't do that with a cheap point and shoot.

Before you say it; Yes, you can do that with your phone. This is not that.

 

They're trying something different. If companies didn't do this we wouldn't have 90% of the things we do now.

i would still get the lumia 1020 over this. and i like how the B ) turned into a smiley

[LAwLz]

Is hating on Samsung the new thing all the cool kids do?

Before bashing something you might actually want to do some research, otherwise you will just embarrass yourself.

 

Anyway I can see the appeal of the Galaxy Camera. It is definitely a step in the right direction for point-and-shoot cameras (and DSLRs as well). Point-and-Shoot cameras are dying though, but we will most likely see more and more DSLRs get this kind of functionality in the future as well.

[xrex64]

Just by reading this I can tell you are not qualified in this subject..

Having a larger amount of Megapixels doesn't improve the quality of an image because our current screens can not support that many pixels (after a certain point). However, if you zoom in you wont start to see pixel until a certain point. Many people think that wow more megapixels, that means by pixel is going to look that much better, but it wont.

[DyGr00339]

Having a larger amount of Megapixels doesn't improve the quality of an image because our current screens can not support that many pixels (after a certain point). However, if you zoom in you wont start to see pixel until a certain point. Many people think that wow more megapixels, that means by pixel is going to look that much better, but it wont.

True, But for many people (that don't just take selfies) They cannot always get into an optimal position so if there is more mega pixels there, they can crop and zoom it later.

 

If you are getting prints made you also need more mega pixels for it gets enlarged by quite a bit

[xrex64]

True, But for many people (that don't just take selfies) They cannot always get into an optimal position so if there is more mega pixels there, they can crop and zoom it later.

 

If you are getting prints made you also need more mega pixels for it gets enlarged by quite a bit

Yeah exactly. So what i'm saying is, the average camera person usually assumes that image quality is based entirely on megapixels. (like some people with GHz)

[LAwLz]

Having a larger amount of Megapixels doesn't improve the quality of an image because our current screens can not support that many pixels (after a certain point). However, if you zoom in you wont start to see pixel until a certain point. Many people think that wow more megapixels, that means by pixel is going to look that much better, but it wont.

1) The Galaxy Camera has more than just a high megapixel count. It also has much better optics than you will find in any smartphone camera. Didn't find any info about the sensor but my guess is that it is larger than what you will find it pretty much any smartphone as well. It also shoots RAW, has proper camera controls (shutter speed, ISO and aperture to name a few), has optical zoom and lots of other great benefits.

2) A high megapixel count is useful for certain things. Of course it is not the only factor when it comes to taking high quality pictures, but it is a factor nonetheless.

You're the only one in this thread talking about the megapixel count.

[pit5000]

*yawn*

 

can;t they make a cheaper version of the Galaxy NX? that's what i really want