Source: Tom's Guide US | Keywords: iPhone, 3GS, Test | Themes: Smartphones
4. Camera and Video
While the iPhone 3GS features a 3 megapixel camera and the iPhone 3G’s camera is only 2 megapixels, we didn’t notice a huge improvement. What’s more, the focusing capabilities of the iPhone 3GS camera (squares emerge over different items appearing in the camera’s depth of field; you tap a square to focus on that object and put the other objects out of focus) didn’t result in shaper pictures in our limited tests. Keep in mind that our photos were taken indoors in fluorescent light—these lights aren’t particularly constant or adapted to fine photography. In our offices, flickering lights are part of life.
Oddly, the iPhone 3G’s photo looks the sharpest and brightest here.
Here’s the image we took where we focused the iPhone 3GS camera on the plum in the foreground. This image is hardly sharp, and seems overexposed.
In this image, the iPhone 3GS camera was focused on the phone in the background. While the image is sharp, it appears dark.
But in these photos, of a single image (half-eaten plum), the iPhone 3GS camera took a substantially better picture (on the right).
The video and video editing features of the iPhone 3GS are a real boon to the new phone. The image quality is consistent, and uploading to a site like YouTube is a snap. The trimming function is easy: simply grab the handles on either end of the flip-book style stills bar at the top of the screen with two fingers, and pinch inward. Alternatively, you can slide either end of the footage inward to shave off portions of the video.
- Previous page Compass & Maps Integration
- Next page Display
I assume then that to use the navigation features, say while driving, that you need connectivity to the internet. That doesn't sound like a good solution in terms of reliability, ie. always there when you need it, or from the perspective of cost as a lot of data will be downloaded to keep the google map updated. My aging PDA has Tom Tom Navigator installed and it works a treat with no need for internet access just to guide me somewhere. Anyway, it's just an observation as I dont have an iPhone so I'm not up on what apps are available. I'm afraid the whole Apple monopoly gets up my nose.
I assume then that to use the navigation features, say while driving, that you need connectivity to the internet. That doesn't sound like a good solution in terms of reliability, ie. always there when you need it, or from the perspective of cost as a lot of data will be downloaded to keep the google map updated. My aging PDA has Tom Tom Navigator installed and it works a treat with no need for internet access just to guide me somewhere. Anyway, it's just an observation as I dont have an iPhone so I'm not up on what apps are available. I'm afraid the whole Apple monopoly gets up my nose.
Driving while staring at an iPhone screen isn't safe. But to answer your questions: 1) iPhone uses the cell network (in this case AT&T 3G) to load its maps, not wireless Internet access. 2) All AT&T iPhones have unlimited data phones, so you don't incur fees no matter how many times you load the maps.
A conclusion would have been nice.
A conclusion would have been nice.
Okay, Curnel_D. Here's your personalized conclusion:
"After about four hours use, nothing about the iPhone 3GS convinced this iPhone 3G user that she simply must have it. The speed--both in Web browsing and in switching between applications built into the phone--is a genuine perk to the 3GS, but using the phone is akin to using a laptop with a better processor than the one yours has. It certainly doesn't mean its time to ditch your one-year-old laptop in favor of a brand new one. For iPhone Classic owners, the upgrade option might be far more compelling.
Most iPhone 3G owners will be satisfied with the shiny, new feeling they got when they installed iPhone OS 3.0 on their phones earlier this week. For now, that's enough to carry most of them through until something even better (iPhone or not) comes along."
Okay, Curnel_D. Here's your personalized conclusion:"After about four hours use, nothing about the iPhone 3GS convinced this iPhone 3G user that she simply must have it. The speed--both in Web browsing and in switching between applications built into the phone--is a genuine perk to the 3GS, but using the phone is akin to using a laptop with a better processor than the one yours has. It certainly doesn't mean its time to ditch your one-year-old laptop in favor of a brand new one. For iPhone Classic owners, the upgrade option might be far more compelling.Most iPhone 3G owners will be satisfied with the shiny, new feeling they got when they installed iPhone OS 3.0 on their phones earlier this week. For now, that's enough to carry most of them through until something even better (iPhone or not) comes along."
Now put that in the article!
I see the camera section of this article with interest.
It's interesting how so many of the major media agencies tolerate subpar (read: crappy) picture quality from the iPhones, but demand ultra-sharp pictures from other handsets like LG, Samsung and SE, and then still criticize for lacking focus, flash, etc, etc. It seems very, very hypocritical to me.
Especially the AutoFocus is a complete failure for the iPhone if it actually does not lock into the particular item. Of course, you were quick to make excuses, calling fluorescent light the problem.
The truth is, my SH906i with 5.2MP autofocus takes pictures fine under fluorescent light. It's not overexposed, not underexposed, image is sharp and best of all, it's actually watchable.
Just a little rant from someone who owns a Japanese phone and had experienced so much better.
I see the camera section of this article with interest.It's interesting how so many of the major media agencies tolerate subpar (read: crappy) picture quality from the iPhones, but demand ultra-sharp pictures from other handsets like LG, Samsung and SE, and then still criticize for lacking focus, flash, etc, etc. It seems very, very hypocritical to me.Especially the AutoFocus is a complete failure for the iPhone if it actually does not lock into the particular item. Of course, you were quick to make excuses, calling fluorescent light the problem. The truth is, my SH906i with 5.2MP autofocus takes pictures fine under fluorescent light. It's not overexposed, not underexposed, image is sharp and best of all, it's actually watchable. Just a little rant from someone who owns a Japanese phone and had experienced so much better.
Couldn't agree more: many phones out there--especially those that aren't "smartphones"--have much better cameras than the iPhone 3GS (and the other iPhones too). The truth is, other camera phones would've performed much better in our testing environment. Next time I will try to include comparison shots from other camera phones, so that you can see the difference.
Thanks for reading,
Rachel Rosmarin
Editor, Tom's Guide
Couldn't agree more: many phones out there--especially those that aren't "smartphones"--have much better cameras than the iPhone 3GS (and the other iPhones too). The truth is, other camera phones would've performed much better in our testing environment. Next time I will try to include comparison shots from other camera phones, so that you can see the difference.
Thanks for reading,Rachel RosmarinEditor, Tom's Guide
Thanks for the consideration!