Anyone buying the Samsung Galaxy Camera?

Forums › Android › Anyone buying the Samsung Galaxy Camera?

1 | 2 | 3

946 posts

Ultimate Geek

#727034 4-Dec-2012 19:19

wow, that is a crazy price! If you could use it as a phone too (you can't!) then it could maybe start to make more sense at that price.

https://www.youtube.com/c/SoundSpeeding

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
67544 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#735663 20-Dec-2012 17:38

Just in time for a road trip over the holiday break:

Fresh out of the box...

These links are referral codes

NZtechfreak

4649 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#735668 20-Dec-2012 17:54

This kind of device makes sense, however Samsung's first stab at it doesn't make sense at that price point. It simply itsn't a good enough camera at the asking price, doesn't even remotely compete with similarly priced (and even cheaper) dedicated cameras for image quality.

Twitter: @nztechfreak
Blogs: HeadphoNZ.org

old3eyes

8387 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#735681 20-Dec-2012 18:57

Elpie: These are now in NZ. Harvey Norman have them for $749 http://www.harveynorman.co.nz/samsung-galaxy-camera-3g-white.html

At that price I won't be getting one but if they were half that it would have been a no-brainer for me. Just the thing to take on a summer beach holiday.

Agreed. In this day and age it's a rather expensive novelty..

Regards,

Old3eyes

plod

266 posts

Ultimate Geek

#735711 20-Dec-2012 20:20

I wonder what the boot time on it is like, or can you by pass the android bit

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
67544 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#735712 20-Dec-2012 20:22

It's pretty fast. Basically it boots and go directly to camera mode. You only go to the Home Screen if you tap the [Home] icon on the top.

Quad-band WCDMA (850/900/1900/2100 MHz).

These links are referral codes

zhuyan

176 posts

Master Geek

#735715 20-Dec-2012 20:44

Would be interested to see more actual feedbacks from users.

Here's another detailed review of this new toy

http://www.theverge.com/2012/12/3/3706206/samsung-galaxy-camera-review

P1n3apqlExpr3ss

830 posts

Ultimate Geek

#735776 20-Dec-2012 22:38

Was playing with it at work, took a good 15-25 secs to boot... hardly the <5 secs of a traditional digital camera

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
67544 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#735847 21-Dec-2012 08:26

Yes, it took about 25 seconds to boot. The idea is to leave it always on though - like a smartphone would be. The problem is the constant need of charge. Let's see how it behaves on holiday.

These links are referral codes

turnin

509 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#740339 5-Jan-2013 01:26

I paid $600 on Boxing day for this camera/tablet.
I figured I could not buy a 4 core 1.4ghz tablet with wifi 3g and gps and for that and it was a zoom camera also, besides. I just couldn't help myself.

Ive played with it quite a bit. The main thing is that never before has a camera run on a 4 core chip. That makes the camera far more capable than one might think. Image stabilisation is faultless, shots in low light are amazing, the 120fps slow motion video is quite cool and samsung have put deep grooves in the surface of innovation when the designed some of its default software.

There must be some fairly nifty alogrhythms working to produce the quality of HDR that I'd have trouble doing in photoshop. The face choosing software allows users tro snap a shot. The camera actually takes multiple shots and then it then seperates all the faces in all the shots and lets you choose the best of "each" persons face, then makes a combined photo of all the best faces. It does it flawlessly, even if people move their heads.

an sdk is soon to be released from samsung that will allow programatic access to all camera functions. Till now camera apps have been about capturing an image from a camera and using image/word/code recognition or image manipulation from perhaps a 2-8mp camera without a zoom. Now its 16mp and 21x zoom. That opens a quite a few doors for apps.

skruwd

12 posts

Geek

#742342 9-Jan-2013 15:53

I haven't actually seen it in action, but I have glanced at what it's capable of doing as far as features is concerned. While it is quite impressive, what the camera can do, I'm still skeptical as to whether or not it's worth $750. A 1/2.3" sensor, while being much larger than a phone camera's sensor, is smaller than even a basic $100 point and shoot (1/2.5").

For $750 dollars you could get a basic micro four thirds lens kit that would take up roughly the same amount of space as the galaxy camera. I'm not gonna go into the benefits of an interchangeable lens system vs a point and shoot, was just throwing it in there as a size & price point comparison.

In saying that, it all comes down to what kind of photography you intend to do. I'm an amateur photographer so the sensor and lens etc matters a whole lot more to me than the convenience offered by the galaxy camera. This wouldn't be the case for most people, but that's still a lot of money to be paying for just convenience, because I'm not convinced it'll take photos any better than a point and shoot that costs a fraction of the price would.

If you already own an android then most of the other functions that set it apart from a normal camera are redundant, it's not like you're going to leave your phone behind since you have your Galaxy Camera on hand.

NZtechfreak

4649 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#742367 9-Jan-2013 16:27

I've not seen very impressive shots from this device at all, and none of the reviews from trusted sources thought that much of the image quality either. For that money you should get far better image quality, and I don't think the convergence factor really detracts from that basic requirement (for example if I say to you here is this car, its not actually very good as a car, and for the car aspects you do you better at 2/3rds the price, but it has such a good sound system, and inbuilt TVs, and a fridge... you're probably not going to buy that for all its other qualities if its primary one isn't good enough are you?).

As I said, I like this idea, and certainly you can see it is where things are going, but this iteration isn't there yet.

Twitter: @nztechfreak
Blogs: HeadphoNZ.org

skruwd

12 posts

Geek

#742374 9-Jan-2013 16:37

I agree, unlike on phones where the camera is still a secondary function, this is a device that's primary function is to take pictures, and take them well. When you pay the same price as you would for a basic DSLR kit, it better take some damn good photos, at the very least, better than a point and shoot retailing for even half the price. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to be the case.

I like the direction they're heading with making electronics smarter, but as you mentioned, it's not ready yet, and not at that price point. $750 is well into enthusiast prices, it has to be able to take enthusiast level photos before it's feasible.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
67544 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#742387 9-Jan-2013 17:07

I had one with us for about two weeks while around the North Island and have been happy with photos and videos taken - even in low light. Not sure it's worth $750 as I'd like it to be closer to a point and shoot, but we didn't take the Nikon DSLR out of the case during the whole time.

These links are referral codes

skruwd

12 posts

Geek

#742397 9-Jan-2013 17:14

Hmm, i might have to have another look at some full res pics. Does it shoot in RAW by any chance?

1 | 2 | 3