Previous news story    Next news story

Samsung doesn't deny Android-based camera

By dpreview staff on Mar 15, 2012 at 02:14 GMT

Samsung has refused to confirm reports that it is working on an Android-based camera, only to say it is looking at the idea. The non-denial, which says 'it is something we are monitoring,' comes in response to reports from tech website Engadget that it is considering an 'open' camera operating system. However, while the site goes on to speculate that Android makes sense, based on its parent company's use of the OS on its smartphones, we think there are other reasons for Samsung to use Android.

Samsung's statement:

'Samsung has not confirmed anything regarding potential use of Android or any other platform on future generations of Samsung Smart Cameras. Like any technology, it is something we are monitoring. Our present platform is more than capable of delivering a robust Smart Camera experience to consumers and we will continue to evolve that platform.'

Comments

Total comments: 108
Donie
By Donie (Jul 25, 2012)

I want to play with a digital camera + Camera 360 effect.
Or MagicHours and CameraZoom application.

0 upvotes
ARB1
By ARB1 (Mar 16, 2012)

Samsung can't even get my freekin' Android Nexus cell phone signal to work properly so I'm not holding my breath for anything else they're working on.

0 upvotes
migus
By migus (Mar 16, 2012)

Samsung is an unique position to merge their smartphone/tablet leadership (likely #2 after Apple) w/ their still fledgling photo division. Sony would be the other, though they aren't an Android shop.

As per battery life, indeed Apple's iOS outshines the rest. But that's mostly owing to the poor implementations of most android devices, failing to enter into the deep sleep cycles and turn off the chips and parts not currently in use, e.g., LTE or WiFi radios, GPS, sensors etc. Sloppy jobs we sometimes bestow upon our markets ;-)

1 upvote
N13L5
By N13L5 (Mar 24, 2012)

Sony isn't an Android shop? Unlike Samsung, who also makes Windphones and Bada phones, all of Sony's smartphones are based on Android.

Certainly, programmability would help the Nex-5N's cludgy menu. It would take less than a month and someone would have fixed that interface to perfectly interact with the camera's hardware controls.

Of course, you can assume Samsung is "investigating" this for the purpose of instant upload from camera to online foto portals and print shops.

Other apps might be considered incidental, but you can't underestimate how much value 3rd party developers can add to a manufacturer's product.

1 upvote
CAcreeks
By CAcreeks (Mar 15, 2012)

As wklee pointed out on the News forum, Polaroid has already got one, albeit still in vapo(u)rware form.

http://www.polaroid.com/en/sc1630

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Mar 15, 2012)

As also covered in the article this news story links to.

1 upvote
dylanbarnhart
By dylanbarnhart (Mar 15, 2012)

The new generation of kids today, growing up owning a smartphone since elementary school, does not know how to use a camera/DSLR. These kids only know how to use smart phones. When it's time to buy a real camera, they will more likely buy an Android/iPhone based camera.

A typical camera today is so cryptic and intimidating for such kids. If you give them a conventional camera, they will be asking:

. Why swiping/pinch/zoom don't work [use the buttons outside of the screen]
. Why so many buttons? [each button does one thing, sometimes 2 or 3]
. How do I save my photos to the cloud? [uh, nope you can't]
. How do I share it with my friends on facebook? [uh, nope you can't]
. How do I see my friend's comments on the picture [uh, nope you can't]
. What is that hole on the top of the camera for? [for seeing through the lens]
. How do I get an XYZ effect app? [uh, apps don't work] Seriously?
. Why call shutter Tv and aperture Av? [because the full name is too long for the button size]

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
dokisays
By dokisays (Mar 15, 2012)

I agree with you on the lack of knowledge of using a DSLR with these generations, but I see plenty of High Schoolers that find it a cool fashion statement to walk around with a DSLR hanging around their neck. That and the fact that they "take good pictures".

3 upvotes
Tape5
By Tape5 (Mar 15, 2012)

The new generation of elementary schoolers are growing up owning playdough. They don't know about the Italian Renaissance. They only know how to play with their dough. When they come to see some of the classic sculptures they will be asking:

.Why isn't it soft?
.Why doesn't it droop after a while?
.Why isn't it in neon green and pink?
.How do I stick my spoon into it?
.Why cannot I push a bit of it up my nostril?

3 upvotes
shaocaholica
By shaocaholica (Mar 15, 2012)

You can say the same for any generation. At its base its nothing new.

Also, sending data to the 'cloud' should not be a 'kiddy' feature. I would love to have all my digital cameras wirelessly send photos to some base station or even the cloud.

Imagine the implications for the press. The photog is on the ground shooting and someone on the other side of the world is processing and publishing within seconds.

1 upvote
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (Mar 15, 2012)

I've already bought several real cameras, and you know what:

pinch-to-zoom would be useful
saving the files to the cloud would be useful
being able to run apps would be useful
touch navigation of the on-screen menus would be useful

Manufacturers of real cameras could stand to learn a thing or two from manufacturers of, what would you like me to call them, "fake" cameras?

1 upvote
PentaxNick
By PentaxNick (Mar 16, 2012)

Quite often when I'm out with the camera taking pictures, I then take another picture with my phone to share with friends and family. It would be great if the main camera could do this. It would have to downsize the image automatically though.

0 upvotes
N13L5
By N13L5 (Mar 24, 2012)

I think smart phones / cameras will eventually merge into a sort of "tricorder" device, that can record / detect anything, depending on what modules you pick, process the resulting data, and send it wherever you wish.

A ubiquitous operating system is the enabler for everything else in this merging.

Samsung might as well start now.

0 upvotes
Tape5
By Tape5 (Mar 15, 2012)

Now someone has to play the matchmaker and get Sony to ask iOS out for a date. We could all Call their firt baby Appleony.

0 upvotes
N13L5
By N13L5 (Mar 24, 2012)

eww disgusting... iOS, locked down and limited functionality to enable the intellectually challenged.

Sony would be interested! They LOVE locked down...

Seriously, I don't mind manufacturers offering a 'limited functionality' mode for the simple minded, but don't make it the ONLY mode. Otherwise, I will prefer Android with its greater capability.

Someone can always design a top level interface with reduced function and complexity, but that should never be all there is.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
AngryCorgi
By AngryCorgi (Mar 15, 2012)

Oh wow...Samsung Camera meets Android OS...that's like Worthless^2!

1 upvote
Desertbilly
By Desertbilly (Mar 15, 2012)

I like the idea. More options/functionality is always better (for me, at least) than less. And I could see using the file system and networking extensions to link cameras to devices networked at home. The initial utility would relate to being better able to manage image files. Subsequent utility might be giving the photographer access to more cloud services from a camera. Sign me up.

0 upvotes
D200_4me
By D200_4me (Mar 15, 2012)

Honestly, for making photos, I simply want a way to control the aperture, shutter speed, ISO, exposure compensation and maybe have a few extra features like bracketing. Oh and some external controls to access the previously mentioned functions. I would rather not have the ability to superimpose an image of Tweety Bird over my photos or surf the web on my camera or whatever else. I'm pretty sure the cameras I have now do support actual photo-making functions. I'm not sure why I would need Android or some other OS that allows me to do lots of other things (but others may want the extra functions).

3 upvotes
unotisto
By unotisto (Mar 15, 2012)

I'm interested in the battery life of something like this. You'd need a very capable processor for something like this. The 800mhz ARM comes to mind, but then we'll begin to measure the battery life in hours again, not clicks.

0 upvotes
duartix
By duartix (Mar 15, 2012)

Best news of the decade!
PERIOD.

0 upvotes
Tape5
By Tape5 (Mar 15, 2012)

This could be saying something about the quality of the news, or the decade we live in, or both.

0 upvotes
duartix
By duartix (Mar 15, 2012)

Let me rephrase it:
Best camera news of the decade!

0 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (Mar 15, 2012)

Camera "operating systems" are way behind the curve and in dire need of an overall. It doesn't have to be Android, and it doesn't need to have Angry Birds, but something that doesn't feel 15 years out of date would most welcome.

Oh, and a retina display would be nice, thank you.

0 upvotes
thielges
By thielges (Mar 15, 2012)

I can think of two advantages to using a standard OS on a camera. The most obvious is that it can become an open platform. That will open the floodgates for custom aps. And I'm thinking of aps to use during image capture, not postprocessing or aps unrelated to photography. Stuff like custom exposure programs and intervalometers will be easy to find and cheap. Third parties might even be able to patch around the annoying firmware bugs which Samsung seems to release. Lets just hope that Samsung makes it truly open.

The second and less obvious advantage is that by adopting a standard OS Samsung can now take better advantage of standard hardware processor platforms. The Android developers take all of the grief of porting to new processor platforms. Aps makers like Samsung only need focus on their ap. Think faster, more powerful devices that are developed quicker.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Mar 15, 2012)

Because standard processor platforms record raw data better than what?

0 upvotes
ksgant
By ksgant (Mar 15, 2012)

Would love something like a base camera system. Has a great sensor (at least APS-C sized), good lenses and then have a connection to plug in your smart-phone to control everything. Give us a great API to program to, and just unleash developers on it to give us all kinds of things.

OR, build in a device that can be programmed extensively. I don't care...and don't care if it's Android or iOS or whatever. But look at all the neat things that can be done on a small little camera phone on the iPhone 4. Now just imagine that control...and even more...on a big-sensor camera system.

0 upvotes
Atlasman
By Atlasman (Mar 15, 2012)

I agree provide an extensible system via an API and let the development community dream up new possibilities!

And it shouldn't be Android or iOS or any other smartphone operating system.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Mar 15, 2012)

ksgant:

Because it iphone shoots so well in low light and has great DR and can shoot sports, not.

0 upvotes
ksgant
By ksgant (Mar 16, 2012)

HowaboutRAW:

Yes, I know. Which is why I said use camera equipment with a large sensor and give us a port and API to program to, and CONTROL it from an iPhone or Android phone. That way, use the strengths of having a camera with interchangeable lenses, a big sensor that's good in low-light, and the ability to write your own apps to it and control it any way you want.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Mar 15, 2012)

Where is tha Samsung Tegra 3 tablet? Several Android tablet makers promised 4-core tablets to compete with the new iPad 3, but why are none for sale? There is only the Asus Transformer Prime, with its bad speaker and hobbled GPS. Why does Samsung have 4G trouble with FFC while Apple does not? Wither Acer, Toshiba, or Lenovo? Why the postponements until July or later? Delays until October, just for the sake of Windows 8? Troubles with ICS and Jelly Bean? If no other contestants show up at the race, Apple will win by default.

0 upvotes
dccdp
By dccdp (Mar 15, 2012)

Although offtopic, imo there is little reason to build tablets with 4-core processors. Applications are not optimized for multithreading, and, in a tablet context, having 4 cores it's only a waste of resources and battery.

Keep in mind that "the new iPad" DOES NOT run a 4-core CPU, despite the (intentional?) misleading announcement by Apple. Only the graphics processing unit has 4 cores, which is *way* different. Even some cheap, under $200, tablets have 4-core Mali 400-based graphics, therefore that particular feature is not that a big deal.

1 upvote
ksgant
By ksgant (Mar 15, 2012)

Apple never misled anyone. They state right up front that it's a "4-core GRAPHICS processor". It's the tech-press that keeps spouting "4-core" all over the place.

And seriously, Apple is on it's 3rd generation already and Android is still floundering around...still thinking that a nice spec-sheet for a device is what sells it. Obviously that's not the case.

0 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Mar 15, 2012)

Multi-thread apps will appear if there are 4-core processors that can exploit them. Games are an obvious case. iMovie or the Avid app would also be cases where multi-threading could raise performance. Windows 8 certainly has to have a provision for 4-core processors. Any graphics-intensive software should benefit from 4-core optimization, and may be obligatory if engineers, architects, or video editors want a tablet to be a field tool for analysis or presentation.

0 upvotes
audijam
By audijam (Mar 15, 2012)

it's just another way to overcharge consumers. do we realllllly need 61-point AF system? do we realllllllly need ISO over 100,000 (only paparazzi and law enforcement need it)

0 upvotes
KEG
By KEG (Mar 15, 2012)

I wouldn't use the flounder to describe android, 700 thousand activations per day is not something to worry about.

Of course this will all change when Windows 8 arrives and takes 96% of the marketshare.

0 upvotes
unotisto
By unotisto (Mar 15, 2012)

Agree with first poster, but @audijam: Still haven't gotten over the 1DX, eh? Does everyone reallllllllllllllllllllllllllllly have to b*tch about things that they don't like?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
dccdp
By dccdp (Mar 15, 2012)

@ksgant: Yes, Apple clearly states on their technical specs page that the CPU is dual core, with 4-core graphics.

However, when their launch event presentation puts "A5x quad core graphics" on a single line on a slide, it is easy to confuse the non-professional user, who will only understand that "there is something 4-core about this new processor". A5 was the previous processor (marketed as dual core) and A5X is the new, better CPU. This, correlated with the unfounded (i.e. not proven) claim of A5X being four times faster than Tegra, does nothing to make things clear. Honestly, how many users understand the difference about the main CPU and the graphics cores (and that there's no big deal in having 4 graphics cores even in tablets), how many really care, and how many actually read the specs?

I only replied to the OP as I felt the post was related to this "4-core confusion". After all, it states the lack of 4-core Android tablets is the very fact that will let "Apple win by default".

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Mar 15, 2012)

Cy Cheze:

Irony: Samsung just released a really cool Windows 7 tablet, a much more interesting tool than the ipad or android tablets. Intel i5 CPU, 4 gigs of ram, actual right click functions.

Comment edited 27 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
ksgant
By ksgant (Mar 16, 2012)

KEG:

I was referring to Android in the tablet space. There they have floundered, and floundered hard. In the phone arena, that's where they shine.

0 upvotes
Kirppu
By Kirppu (Mar 15, 2012)

I doubt it will be 'open' even if it uses android. But community enchanged user experience would be nice.

0 upvotes
Bilgy_no1
By Bilgy_no1 (Mar 15, 2012)

Let's not forget, by the way, that Panasonic already has the Android based Lumix phone 101P:

http://techcrunch.com/2011/09/29/android-phone-lumix-camera-panasonics-lumix-phone-101p-for-japan/

0 upvotes
AndrewG NY
By AndrewG NY (Mar 15, 2012)

I don't see how this is a Lumix other than in name -- it has a single-focal-length lens with a super-tiny sensor, and an LED flash, just like most other camera-equipped smartphones.

To be a 'smart camera' in addition to the 'smart capabilities' like apps you need camera features beyond the typical smart phone -- to me this means more creative control or improved image quality, whether it's a zoom lens, or a larger sensor, an actual flash with more substantial range, etc.

0 upvotes
AdventureRob
By AdventureRob (Mar 15, 2012)

I thought of this idea a while ago too.

Samsung although having a nice camera in the NX series they seem to be behind the market place. They'd be wise to make this move as it would get a lot of attention for them.

Anyone who denies app's are incredibly useful at times probably doesn't have a smart phone either. Even just the simple idea of adding effects / filters makes the camera more fun to use, and isn't that half the point of them?

Apps are rated in categories when they are submitted, so why not just allow all photography apps to work with a camera.

I don't expect camera manufacturers to put a SIM card inside them (although Sony and Samsung would be in the best position to do this). But uploading photos to the cloud rather than relying on memory cards makes a nice backup too, not to mention sharing options for facebook (this is what casual photographers want).

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Mar 15, 2012)

Before they were called "apps", the name was applications.

I still don't need to send emails from my camera, don't need to edit raws on my camera either, nor do 3D CAD work.

I need, and anyone who treats photos at all seriously needs, to navigate camera functions and settings, smoothly and quickly, unlike some of the recent Sony Nex cameras for example.

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Mar 15, 2012)

Ah, the old, "anyone who wants to approach photography differently is not a 'real' photographer" schtick.

3 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Mar 15, 2012)

nt

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
bewing77
By bewing77 (Mar 15, 2012)

Great, now I know what I need! I mean, i've always wondered but no one up until now have actually been adept enough in their knowledge of my work and had the psychic skills to divine up my actual needs, but now everything i clear. Thank you HowaboutRAW!

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Mar 15, 2012)

tkbslc:

It's not about real photography, it's about cluttering up a camera's system with features that can readily be accessed on a handheld device external to the camera.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Mar 15, 2012)

bewing77:

I assume you're being ironic, so in fact you do want to run Solidworks on your digital camera.

0 upvotes
AdventureRob
By AdventureRob (Mar 16, 2012)

HowaboutRAW - you don't need to use any of this stuff. An application (if the word app is so offensive) is basically a feature. Some people are moaning micro-4/3 cameras don't have focus peaking like the NEX range - easily sorted with an app.

How about an app to expand bracketing range? Or do give us a different (custom) resolution? Or custom timer (rather than 2 or 10 seconds) or different grid rather than rule of thirds? Or create panoramic /360 degree shots? Or to calibrate your printer? Or to download that amazing photo you took from the cloud of that wedding you did a job for to show new clients? The limits are your imagination here.

Of course we're not going to send emails from the cameras primarily (although that function would come in useful - imagine a photojournalist with a tight deadline quicker to email from camera rather than transfer the photo to another device and then send).

The point is apps are useful, but the basics will still be there.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Mar 15, 2012)

I don't have any particular problem with the OS on the NX100 I use.

And I don't need to read emails on my camera, I'm sure Sony can screw up that feature if they like on a a future version of the Nex cameras.

1 upvote
Alphoid
By Alphoid (Mar 15, 2012)

I'd buy a camera with an open OS. I'd really like to be able to customize my shooting settings. I want to be able to tell my camera: "Limit ISO to 400-1600. Try to shoot f/2.8 if you can, but I'll tolerate f/1.8 if otherwise I'd get too much motion blur. Shutter speed should be at most 1/30s, but I'll do 1/8s with a warning, if the light doesn't allow." I'd also like to have all those composition tricks (flip image upside down, show color by zones as in Understanding Exposure, etc.). I'd also like to have modes where I rapidly take three photos: no flash, flash, no flash, and later combine. Heck, I'd even be pretty happy if I could remap the buttons. I can keep going for a while, but at the end of the day, I'd kill for an open cam.

4 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Mar 15, 2012)

The NX cameras already have a bit of the ISO limitation feature you seek.

Why would you want to combine 3 photos within a camera, that can be done out side easily enough?

0 upvotes
Tonio Loewald
By Tonio Loewald (Mar 15, 2012)

Are you kidding?

An android-based camera, if done right, could be great. Personally I think Apple should buy Olympus with pocket change and build a m43-based iPhone or accessory, or simply license M43 and do it, or, failing that, Olympus should do it itself.

Why?

iPhoto on iOS is awesome. Every iphone has GPS. You can shoot, process, and share in a few taps. You can rate your images on the device and discard lousy shots before they get tied up in your storage/backup chain. You can wirelessly view you shots on your HDTV.

Anyway, I think it's a good idea to build an android camera, and I wish Samsung luck, but based on past experience Samsung will screw it up. Eventually, iPhone/cellphone sensors will get so good — oe way or another — that the entire small sensor camera market is gone anyway.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Mar 15, 2012)

Tonio Loewald:

Samsung has particularly screwed up still digital cameras, when?

Also the Galaxy II really good andriod tablet--still better than the ipad in some ways.

Just not sure Samsung needs to combine the two.

0 upvotes
MilesMcEver
By MilesMcEver (Mar 15, 2012)

Actually I thing Samsung might do pretty good at this as I have to say my current phone the Galaxy Nexus is a great device and yes a year ago I would agree with you but they have stepped up their game. I have been an Olympus fan for years but I do have to say if Apple buys them I would no longer be an Olympus owner sorry just not a fan.

0 upvotes
dccdp
By dccdp (Mar 15, 2012)

@Tonio Loewald: Sorry, but if Apple bought Olympus, the result would be a consumer-only camera with a single, round button and a dedicated proprietary software for transferring pictures through some exotic, Apple-only cable. Do you really need this? ;)

4 upvotes
Atlasman
By Atlasman (Mar 15, 2012)

Gee, let me think here: let's take an OS than was designed from the ground up for mobile devices and graft it on to a camera.

" 'Our present platform is more than capable of delivering a robust Smart Camera experience to consumers and we will continue to evolve that platform.' "

0 upvotes
Camp Freddy
By Camp Freddy (Mar 15, 2012)

Kind of agree: I haven't bothered with anything more than the rather sad "photoshop express", surprised then they put their name to it. Perhaps some android apps will get made for bigger files but I doubt the OS can handle it without falling over.

0 upvotes
MilesMcEver
By MilesMcEver (Mar 15, 2012)

Is a Camera not a mobile device? Size limit you will have to explain that one I know the app had problems opening pics from SD card or if your talking about the APP size the max is 4GB. If its bigger than that it needs to fall over. I do say I will have to see it to believe in it though but I do think its all headed that way give it 2 years.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
D1N0
By D1N0 (Mar 15, 2012)

They alteady have crappy camera's with android. They're called Galaxy. You can even call with them.

1 upvote
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (Mar 15, 2012)

...let's not get things wrong, please: call quality is actually very good.
...on the other hand, "crappy" is quite euphemistic... ;-)

0 upvotes
unotisto
By unotisto (Mar 15, 2012)

Do you mind listing the model you make claims on?

0 upvotes
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (Mar 18, 2012)

Of course not (and sorry for the delay):
Samsung Galaxy S I9000, stock Froyo.
It was out 3 years and 3 month after the Nokia N95 and yet the camera can't stand a direct comparison.
They just tried to stuff a camera with an abysmal focal length in too thin a body (it is stylish, I have to admit it) and the result is that it is painfully slow. I have made side-to-side tests, and I could tell the one from the other without looking at the captions: much less luminous, less crispy detail, in a nutshell.

0 upvotes
whtchocla7e
By whtchocla7e (Mar 15, 2012)

Instead of messing around with Android they should concentrate on making a high-end NX body with an EVF to put those lovely pancakes on.

2 upvotes
altendky
By altendky (Mar 15, 2012)

Wow, no comment about how Sony is already using Linux in their DSLTs? Technically, their OS is open, it's just their software that's closed. I'm sure a slimmed down version of Android could be used to avoid the unneeded overhead. On the other hand, those 'useless' alarms are basically a tool for time lapse, yes?

Personally, I have little to no interest in processing my photos on my camera. I want openness for the features that you can get from the likes of CHDK and MagicLantern. You can always process your images elsewhere but CHDK allows you to capture images that you otherwise can't (or have to pay hundreds of dollars or more for extra external control hardware).

2 upvotes
ProfHankD
By ProfHankD (Mar 15, 2012)

I've been calling for Sony to support "camera apps" for a couple of years now. I've been developing things with DOS-based CHDK for a lot longer than that. Incidentally, at the IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging conference in January, a guy from Canon told me Canon is now officially "ok" with CHDK despite it originating as a camera hack.

Android would be a viable way to get the functionality, although I think Sony has been missing a huge opportunity to set a better standard for the industry. I'm also getting slightly nervous about how much stuff is tied to Google... although my Chrome browser did let me type that comment. ;)

2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Mar 15, 2012)

ProfHankD:

Ah yes Chrome, the browser that turns everything you type into the address bar into a Google search.

0 upvotes
PentaxNick
By PentaxNick (Mar 15, 2012)

Sony and setting industry standards has never been a good combination - Betamax or MemoryStick anyone?

0 upvotes
antares103
By antares103 (Mar 15, 2012)

Ah, the old Beta Max and MS quip. I fail to see how that proves a point. Beta Max was industry standard for 25-30yrs in PRO equipment. MS was before SD cards. I use CF, SD and MS in my alphas. I get the most grief from SD cards.

BTW, Sony did win Blu-Ray vs HDDVD (or whatever it was called)

1 upvote
altendky
By altendky (Mar 15, 2012)

ProfHankD:
"I'm also getting slightly nervous about how much stuff is tied to Google... "

Wow, someone that actually understands 'too big to fail'. For all my use of Google and it's products, I do avoid some of them so as to avoid becoming wholly dependent on them.

As to CHDK being 'ok'? That's awesome! I recently purchased an SX40. CHDK was the reason I didn't even look at the Panasonic (my last camera brand) or Sony alternatives and one of the reasons I didn't bother spending an extra $1k to get into a decent DSLR. Supposed to have a thunderstorm tonight so I'll have to try to setup the motion trigger. :]

0 upvotes
PentaxNick
By PentaxNick (Mar 16, 2012)

MS may have worked but was to be avoided as it wasn't interoperable with other non-Sony devices (with a few exceptions that didn't last long). Betamax may have been used in industry but was pretty irrelevant for the consumer wanting to watch a film.
What I didn't like about Sony was that they always seemed to want to impose their "standard" as a rival to pre-existing standards.

0 upvotes
Reg Natarajan
By Reg Natarajan (Mar 15, 2012)

Despite all the naysayers, I think this is great. I've wanted a good single device to carry for ages. That means Android. Yes, I need to surf the net, and get my email, and make calls on this device. I would also like to take and share photos online with that single device. If you're willing to carry a dedicated camera everywhere, that's fine for you, but there are millions and millions of us who are not. Samsung has a huge and untapped market for this if they do it. If they don't, I hope Sony will. Both make good cameras and good Android phones.

2 upvotes
Bilgy_no1
By Bilgy_no1 (Mar 15, 2012)

The idea of an open and smart camera system is great, but I doubt that Android is the right platform for it. There are many more interesting new mobile OS developments at the moment (HTML5 based), and it might be better to first look at the specific needs for openness in a camera first.

Personally, I'd like to see an open camera system in terms of the Art Filters that Olympus has. If you make that open, you could enable community based development and sharing of filters.

Next, it would be great to be able to integrate the photo processing software of your choice. Do you want Photoshop, Aperture, or PaintShopPro on your camera? With all the added options of plug-ins etc.

Third, I think the camera should become directly connected to the net for sharing. A tool like this would be great for photojournalists. Take a picture, develop it, send it to the news desk within minutes and without having to start up a computer.

0 upvotes
D R C
By D R C (Mar 15, 2012)

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: rather than turning a phone into a camera it is more logical to turn a camera into a phone!
Then at least the camera side of things will be much better than the current range of camera phones.

Comment edited 32 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Jarda_Houdek
By Jarda_Houdek (Mar 15, 2012)

Android? There are only 2 possible outcomes. Either a slow camera, or a camera that only lasts for 50 shots because it needs dual core 1,3GHz CPU.
Neither is something you woud buy.

8 upvotes
panoviews
By panoviews (Mar 15, 2012)

Kick the butt of Canon & Nikon. It's time to have an open OS firmware for cameras. They cripple feature to get more money from us poor photographers. Just take Magic Latern as an example for hacked camera firmware: http://magiclantern.wikia.com/wiki/Magic_Lantern_Firmware_Wiki

5 upvotes
tkpenalty
By tkpenalty (Mar 15, 2012)

itd be great if they could make a android NX camera. It'd be the first interchangeable lens smartphone with a flippy screen :P

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Mar 15, 2012)

NX cameras will be phones in the future? I sure hope not. Not real sure fixed OLEDs need to be replaced by flippy screens either.

0 upvotes
kff
By kff (Mar 15, 2012)

What a idea !!!
I am thinking and dreaming about a few Years ....

A cheap modular system (like Ricoh GXR) consist of:
- tablet unit with high resolution display 7-12'
and with all processor units and with tripod mounts, etc.
- unit with interchangeable sensor
- interchageable mount for lens
- interchageable lens

and more better would be a simillar solution like Asus Padfone :)

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
mezzoforte
By mezzoforte (Mar 15, 2012)

Why not just make a smart phone with a better lens and sensor like what Nokia did ?

6 upvotes
Digital Suicide
By Digital Suicide (Mar 15, 2012)

exactly :)

0 upvotes
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Mar 15, 2012)

Indeed. I just can't figure out how to make use of an Android based camera since it will require a pretty big touch screen to make sense of Android. I would like a 5MP camera with the sensor and lens of the Nokia,zooming through interpolation is fine by me. I just demand better DR and low light.

1 upvote
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Mar 15, 2012)

Additionally, as one poster above suggested, I also would like a large screen.....I'm thinking of a Galaxy Note with the goods of a large sensor and lens.

0 upvotes
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (Mar 15, 2012)

Well, for starters one shouldn't confuse an OS with its GUI. It is perfectly reasonable to imagine an android-based camera with a traditional camera gui, even without touch screen.

1 upvote
Peiasdf
By Peiasdf (Mar 15, 2012)

What is the advantage of using such a bloated OS for camera? Are you going change the wallpaper? Use the text, calculator, alarm, navi, dictionary, weather, calendar and radio function on the camera? A smartphone takes 10~15 seconds to boot and runs on very powerful hardware that's very costly by P&S standard. Are you going to pay $600 for a smartP&S or $150 for a dumb camera?

3 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Mar 15, 2012)

It's not for the calendering, its for the photo apps and photo sharing apps.

2 upvotes
snake_b
By snake_b (Mar 15, 2012)

Meanwhile, Samsung hasn't been known for blazing fast processors, even in its high end. The cams can barely run their standard OS as it is and it doesn't look like there's a huge priority on changing that.

However, we can add this to the list of gizmoization of Samsung cams before they fix fundamentals, like slow operation, IQ, ridiculously large RAW files, and so on.

1 upvote
Reg Natarajan
By Reg Natarajan (Mar 15, 2012)

Yes, actually, I'm going to do all those things, and more. Why is it so hard for people to understand that many of us want to carry one device around in general, not several? Yes, I'll probably always have a dedicated camera for when I want maximum IQ, but I'm not willing to carry that around all the time. Give me one device that does everything: something that I can make phone calls on, and check my email with, and surf the web with when I'm waiting at places, and take decent shots when opportunity presents, and share those shots online via 4g without any fuss. If that doesn't appeal to you, fine, but all you have to do is take a look at the 41mp Nokia comments to see that I'm not alone.

1 upvote
Peiasdf
By Peiasdf (Mar 16, 2012)

@Reg Natarajan
Because bring Android to camera is just Samsung Imaging PR talk. Samsung is failing badly in camera so they are trying to borrow some smartphone glory to help the camera division.

Instead of saying such idiotic thing as running Android on a camera, they should simply attach a better lens + sensor on their phone a la Nokia 808 and Samsung SCH-W880.

This non-denial of non-rumor is just a stupid stun. I use my iPhone to take non-critical pictures all the time and I wish future iPhones will have better camera but I don't want my D90 & E-PL2 to start running iOS.

1 upvote
limlh
By limlh (Mar 15, 2012)

WebOS looks like a better alternative.

0 upvotes
snake_b
By snake_b (Mar 15, 2012)

Samsung will mess this up. Take a look at the shambles the imaging division is in. Lots of talent and apparently, lots of beancounters that ruin every good idea and implementation.

However, Samsung has mastered releasing products as rumors better than anyone else. They announce cams and if they even actually make it to market, they are literally replaced with the next rumored cam, which subsequently might never get released, either before it's replaced.

I also can't wait for all the problems they'll have with this because of their complete incompetence with regard to firmware releases. For that, there should be a Samsung Firmware F-up forum because it's inevitable.

2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Mar 15, 2012)

Well Samsung has been better with NX lenses than Sony has been with the Nex lenses.

And the Samsung NX200 certainly shipped just a month or so after it was announced.

Who cares about the NX11, it's simply a tweak to the NX10.

Now the rumours of the NX20 are more interesting, but Samsung would realize they have to put an EVF in any NX20 that equals that on the Sony Nex 7, so that feature will take some time and money--and can't add $400 to the retail price.

So the Samsung is mostly short one lens--the F/1.4 85mm. And Samsung needs to work out the buffer slowness on the NX200--I can attest that a U1 card helps.

0 upvotes
AmaturFotografer
By AmaturFotografer (Mar 15, 2012)

Opensource OS is way to go. But it will not gonna happen until we liberalized camera industry from near monopoly Canikon, or Japanese companies in general.

0 upvotes
TN Args
By TN Args (Mar 15, 2012)

New headline: "DPreview doesn't deny that reporting a non-denial is substandard reporting".

!!

6 upvotes
Aaron MC
By Aaron MC (Mar 15, 2012)

FINALLY! I have been saying for some time that whichever camera company does this first owns the future. Because this IS the future. I knew that it wouldn't be Canon or Nikon, but Samsung is a bit of a surprise.

0 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (Mar 15, 2012)

why is this under camera "news" when its no such thing.. just leave this stuff to SamsungRumors.com or the other "rumor" sites

3 upvotes
jj74e
By jj74e (Mar 15, 2012)

yes, usually when people criticize dpreview for doing such news articles, they can defend saying that's it's legitimate news.

but this article is first of all fairly obvious, and second of all borderline rumor site garble.

1 upvote
dkyl
By dkyl (Mar 15, 2012)

Agree with jj74e.
Whether open camera OS or Android, about time this happened.

0 upvotes
vlad0
By vlad0 (Mar 15, 2012)

why don't just make a smartphone, with that same camera ? Oh ya.. they have their P&S biz to think about. Got it.

0 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Mar 15, 2012)

Samsung has the technology... They need the innovations via leading edge partners to smash it through.

.

0 upvotes
jj74e
By jj74e (Mar 15, 2012)

I'm not sure they should rely on Android to do this (because the Android OS is not camera oriented, and Google would have to begin creating a camera oriented OS while also keeping Samsung tied to possible limitations via Google). But an open camera OS is what the camera industry needs. Customized menus, installable/uninstallable apps instead of built in features that just take up menu space that you never use, custom noise reduction settings, more control over UI/button functions, personalized menus, etc.

Samsung would be the most sensible choice as far as which company would lead such a thing, seeing as they are arguably the most powerful company with resources and money beyond its competitors; however they have to do it like a photographic company and not an electronics one if they want any appeal from enthusiast to pro level photogs, and that might be a stumbling block if they get caught up on lesser functions like silly, pointless apps and Facebook uploading.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
ET2
By ET2 (Mar 15, 2012)

Samsung is not a "powerful company" in the camera word. If Samsung creates "open camera OS," they would be the only one who would be using it. No one else would bother with it. It will fail miserably.

Android is a far better choice, because, as the article said, of the already available photo related apps.

2 upvotes
snake_b
By snake_b (Mar 15, 2012)

Samsung already tried their own OS in some non-droid phones and predictably, they failed, badly.

2 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (Mar 15, 2012)

Like Bada OS? I don't think you can really call that a failure. While I love the idea of an open camera OS, Adnroid is definitely NOT the way to go, way too many overheads for a camera and seriously - having to reboot a camera because it won't sync with the camera, HW acceleration has gone down, it is missing the right plug-in etc is all a terrible, terrible idea. Make a camera OS that is open for DEVELOPERS with proper developer tools and Devs will be all over it - it doesn't have to be Android to do that. It should be very very light weight because it will be something users never really see and interacts on a HW level. Then the camera manufacturer makes it's own UI and it has the ability to be tweaked by developers. Android could be ok, but not particularly useful on a P&S - If only to say it has Android and you can play Angry Birds. A camera doesn't need that BS, it needs to be expandable in a simple and intelligent way that suits a camera - not a communicator.

1 upvote
jj74e
By jj74e (Mar 15, 2012)

to ET2- I'm saying they're powerful in the sense that they have the money, resources and technology to do such a thing more than any other camera company.

Android would be a terrible choice- sorry, but I don't need all those systems running in the background of my camera, eating up battery life and slowing performance, not to mention elongating the all important start up time by about 15 seconds.

It doesn't even need to be an "OS" per se, just a revision of their already good NX UI so that it enables installation/uninstallation of certain things. And that's very doable.

2 upvotes
kff
By kff (Mar 15, 2012)

Never say never ...

0 upvotes
kff
By kff (Mar 15, 2012)

And who tell that tablet/camera (T-cam) must have only one OS ?
The best solution is propably a sharing of data (RAW and JPG pics) between camera's and tablet's processors ...

0 upvotes
Total comments: 108