Comments on: Samsung Galaxy Camera Review

By: Utkarsh Bhatt

Utkarsh Bhatt — Thu, 03 Jan 2013 18:24:00 +0000

The lag was there because you didn’t turn off the Power Saving mode, which is enabled by default by Samsung. Once disabled, the performance will be very good.

By: David Bavin

David Bavin — Sat, 08 Dec 2012 08:27:00 +0000

Point and shoots are a thing of the past. Why have them when you can just take the photo on your smartphone, the quality is good enough! But when you need real image quality, that is what DSLR’s are for. I use my DSLR when I can but since it’s a bulky item, I just use my phone’s camera.

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 07 Dec 2012 20:38:00 +0000

But this isn’t a good camera for the price and you can play Angry Birds on your phone. And it’s not like someone is going to leave their phone behind because their camera has android.

By: JKBane

JKBane — Fri, 07 Dec 2012 20:09:00 +0000

This is a step in a really cool direction. However, I want a top notch quality camera. The blurry photos and the toggle switch are the two red flags thrown up for me. When I took pictures with my GS3, I would get more blurry pics than good ones. The lowlight settings concerned me on my GS3 and wondered if the same problem would carry over to the Galaxy Camera.

By: mustbepbs

mustbepbs — Fri, 07 Dec 2012 19:03:00 +0000

Soccer is for pansies. Hockey is not.

By: Goose306

Goose306 — Fri, 07 Dec 2012 11:44:00 +0000

As someone who graduated in Journalism (although now has nothing to do with it, lol) I can see how in many areas a device like this could be extremely clutch. The cost won’t matter to those people. (Relatively) tiny factor that can take way better photos than cell cameras and instant upload? They’ll all be asking where they can sign up.

Now, if Samsung can pair up with a manufacturer of decent spec DSLRs (Canon/Nikon) and get one of theirs out the door for ~$800-$1000 every single professional photographer I can think of would be on that. Problem here is Samsung is trying to hit the consumer market, and the cost is too great. If you’re going to aim high, aim for the top, otherwise if you’re aiming for consumer knee-cap that thing ~$100-$150 less and consumers will start considering it. Most consumers consider their cell phones decent enough for a point and shoot currently IMO.

By: digitalicecream

digitalicecream — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 20:10:00 +0000

I think my concerns are this: the camera itself is not superb, it’s merely good. At this price for a camera I want something at least on par with a Sony NEX-F3. As for an Android phone, I have one. I don’t need another one, and when I do get another one this camera will still be running good old Jellybean, one two or three years from now. So, If you want a phone that takes subpar pictures with an OS that will inevitably become obsolete on a platform that you will not take with you everywhere and you want to pay too much for it. This is it for you.

By: digitalicecream

digitalicecream — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 18:56:00 +0000

I guess they compete at the same price point. But even Sony is catching on to the idea of sharing everything everywhere. They dropped the price of the camera by $100 to stay competitive at this entry point, and then came out with the new 5 series to take the reigns back and stomp all over the Galaxy camera. don’t get me wrong, I’m running two Galaxy Notes in this household, one is running Black Star 10, and the other is running AOCP’s Jelly Bean rom, both are awesome. But if you’re going to spend this much on a camera, don’t sell yourself short.

By: YogurtBites

YogurtBites — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 18:25:00 +0000

Is that the Maxtrix showing through on the panorama shot in the bowling alley?

By: Aaa

Aaa — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 17:08:00 +0000

Related to my post, DL should do a review of the HTC 8X.

By: Aaa

Aaa — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 17:07:00 +0000

BETTER picture***

By: Aaa

Aaa — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 17:05:00 +0000

The take home for me is that the RAZR HD has a terrible camera… Unless there was some bias in subconsciously trying to get a picture with the Galaxy Camera or trying to get a worse shot with the RAZR HD… (Still deciding on Note 2 vs DNA vs RAZR HDs)

By: Eric James Salcido

Eric James Salcido — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 15:38:00 +0000

Why not? just because of the form factor? I get that it has a huge lens covering the back, but that won’t stop you from having any fun with it. It can still play Angry Birds. If someone wants to have fun on this thing, I’m more than certain that they can.

By: Ben Myton

Ben Myton — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 15:21:00 +0000

This strikes me as a combination between a 4th generation iPod touch ($199) and a fairly middle of the road point-n-shoot ($199). The convenience of having the devices built together is worth something I guess.

Honestly I could see my grandparents getting use out of this. They don’t carry a smart-phone, but would love an easier way to share and navigate facebook to stay in touch. It’s tough to get them over the hurdle of pulling pictures out of a camera onto a desktop, uploading, etc. The all-in-one system would work great, especially since they spend most of their time in WIFI zones.

By: chad

chad — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 14:57:00 +0000

that doesnt go in your pocket..lol