AnonD-80094, 17 Jan 2013The galaxy camera seems to be a collection of components Samsung needed to get rid of somehow,... moresorry bud, camera phones have been around for a while. 808 isn't an innovation at all.
I'd probably buy an 808 for my next birthday. Merely used my phones for capturing moments and Android camera's just won't do. Still saving up. Or wait till the 808's camera makes it to the Lumia.
AnonD-44227, 17 Jan 2013the 808 has more smart features than any LumiaAgree. But Lumias have the apps. I own an Xperia btw.
AnonD-85611, 17 Jan 2013All i can say for you is that you are just a Nokia fanboy, don't know anything about lens and ... moreLens for Samsung devices are made by schnieder electric
Do you even have any idea what you're talking about
You don't have an opinion, you don't have any information
All you have is an internet connection
This is one Nokia that I want
Not choosing Android as their OS looks like more loss to android than Nokia.
What Nokia did with 808 is really impressive, they showed when they're up to something, they leave the competition miles behind.
AnonD-101930, 17 Jan 2013And it should be noted that 808 used in the review is still based on Belle FP1 which is out-of... morePerhaps because the new Nokia Symbian team tends to break things that worked fine before in newer updates. One step forward, two steps back. Personally I have my N8's and E7's stuck on Anna, due to functionality that's no longer there in Belle.
And it should be noted that 808 used in the review is still based on Belle FP1 which is out-of-date. Though the latest version, Belle FP2, doesn't directly offer improvements concerning output image quality, it does provide more features on gallery, for example, ability to view details and use gallery in horizontal mode.
I wonder why GSMArena doesn't update 808 to the latest version prior to taking it to the review process. Even Belle FP2 is more than three months old already.
Anonymous, 17 Jan 2013you obviously dont own one, the image quality is actually not bad, its only bad when geeks and... moreThe Galaxy camera is a 1st generation Connected camera and things will obviously improve in d near future and many manufacturers will be offering such products, fostering competition and thereby quality n features! As Samsung's own tag line reads "Connected camera begins"! Good luck to the pioneers who're pouncing on the prototype now, methinks it's wiser to wait 4 things 2 improve n they surely will and of course then everybody will have to offer these at much cheaper rates!
AnonD-71308, 17 Jan 2013PV is better no doubt about that. Galaxy camera seems better on papers but reality is a differ... moreSymbian (Simian) was a still born OS from the start! The only good thing it ever did was help in the genesis of Android and iOS!
@gsmarena. Try galaxy camera vs. Nokia n8. I bet nokia wins again.
Anonymous, 17 Jan 2013When compared to other cameras and the 808, the image quality on the galaxy camera is worst. B... moreOK I recommend you try the PV if you like to shoot and post to facebook as PV808 can do this quite well and its a phone. There are a few more hidden gems in it as well but you really have to try it to believe
another one bites the dust.........
Don't forget play via radio, play any music file, great mic recording capabilities and hard as nails, you can actually use it as phone ....... so please haters the 808 pureview is just another amazing piece of engineering by the finns....... ohhhhh I can hear the trolls a comin they goin round the bend and I aint seen no stop sign since I don't know when.......NOKIA 808 PUREVIEW FTW
IMHO the Galaxy Camera is too expensive.
it's just a Point-and-Shot camera with Android OS and price similar to entry-level DSLR / mirrorless camera.
i'm sure most camera enthusiast won't pick Galaxy Camera cause you can get better camera (some of them are wifi-enable) with the same amount of money.
not even as their secondary camera since it's to big to be caried around on daily basis.
Samsung should lower the price (and the size!) if they really want to sell Galaxy Camera.
In page 2 hardware features/specs, 808 doesn't feature optical image stabilization.
By the way, please bear in mind that 808 has a full telephony functionality while GC doesn't. Though both compete in an overlapping landscape.
AnonD-3928, 17 Jan 2013At the price lower than galaxy camera u can get canon s100 best point and shoot out there with... moreyou obviously dont own one, the image quality is actually not bad, its only bad when geeks and tech nerds get into details when comparing it to better quality cameras. When you actually take pictures with this, upload it to your computer or TV it still looks pretty good. The only people that would consider saying the quality is bad are professional photographers, or geeks who wants to get technical. For the average users, who just wants to take decent pictures its good enough.
At the price lower than galaxy camera u can get canon s100 best point and shoot out there with full manuql controls....I dnt get the concept of galaxy camera whats d point in making this device if they cant fit better sensor in this.....its image quality is worse than some 100 $ point and shoot....a camera is known for its image quality not for its extra features......I agree it has android but whats d point if image quality is bad......
The galaxy camera seems to be a collection of components Samsung needed to get rid of somehow, so they decided to market this as something new... when in reality there is nothing new about it. Its the same old stuff in a different package..
The 808.. well there we have real innovation.. and it shows.
AnonD-5950, 17 Jan 2013Samsung Lens is crap! No matter what. Carl Zeiss is still the best lens manufacturer for cam... moreAll i can say for you is that you are just a Nokia fanboy, don't know anything about lens and all you are saying is bullshit (not to mention that carl zeiss doesn't even make lens for most SRLs anymore).