Is Android the way to go for mainstream digital cameras?

[Ian]

I am going to be bold enough to suggest that the majority of us reading this will already be using a smartphone of some description and a very large proportion of those who do will be using the Android system on one form or another. Most smartphones have cameras plus a whole host of other goodies including GPS, wifi, Bluetooth, motion sensors, orientation sensors and more. One thing you won't find on a smartphone is a zoom lens. These are simply too big and bulky to accommodate.

However, Nikon and Samsung have produced compact cameras with zoom lenses that are Android-based. When I discuss the future development of cameras with other photography and camera journalists, the subject of Android never seems to be far away. Why Android? It's not an expensive or restricted technology - Google basically gives it away to hardware manufacturers, unlike, say - Apple's iOS, which is Android's main rival.

The attraction of a smartphone-like operating system for a camera is the ability to download apps and also to use your camera for a lot more than a typical mainstream could let you. We're all increasingly familiar with smartphone user interfaces and so familiarity with core controls on a camera with an Android interface would be good.

So what do you think? Should camera user interfaces remain proprietary or should more camera manufacturers embrace the the smartphone way of doing things and implement Android on their cameras?

Ian

[Bob Ross]

Re: Is Android the way to go for mainstream digital cameras?

Hi Ian,
"user interfaces" are a design element in the present field of camera choices .... buttons? ....menu options? ....flexible? ....adaptible?
In other words, a place to say "ours is better than...." and when you get used to ours, the others" will seem like alien territory.
This will prevail until "youth" turns its back on it, deciding that everything taking pictures should behave like a phone. After that "youth's choice" will perculate upward to all imaging devices, about the time that present day designers head into retirement
Bob

[Ian]

Re: Is Android the way to go for mainstream digital cameras?

Sounds like 'fashion'

Ian

[Patrick]

Re: Is Android the way to go for mainstream digital cameras?

Sounds like 'fashion'

Ian

My first question would be what's the benefit of a OS system on a camera? Mine does more than I want or need now.
Do we really need a camera that works like a smartphone, do we need half the things on our smartphones for that matter. I use the camera very infrequently on mine, I do use the Internet from time to time, but its mostly the personal hotspot to use Internet on my iPad, I bought one without 3G as I wouldn't pay for a second contract.
Manufacturers have for some time now been creating things and convincing us we need them, half the things on cameras now go unused as it is.
It's not just cameras either, Apple are rumoured to be working on a smart watch using their OS system. I'm very much a fan of Apple products but I am struggling with that one.

Patrick

[JSR]

Re: Is Android the way to go for mainstream digital cameras?

What is the difference between an Android smartphone with better camera hardware, and a camera that has an Android OS? Aren't they the same thing?

[Bob Ross]

Re: Is Android the way to go for mainstream digital cameras?

Sounds like 'fashion'

Ian

Mixing camera and dress designers doesn't seem to compute in my mind, but then as Patrick said, it is a game of being convinced.
My 13 year old granddaughter seems to have arrived convinced and just flows into and out of her phone. She will be the marketing target....a moving target at that
Bob

[Ian]

Re: Is Android the way to go for mainstream digital cameras?

A smartphone is a veritable swiss army knife - it possesses a multitude of abilities and it's doubtful that you will find all of them useful the first time you encounter them and many you will never ever use, but others you may find useful one day. I don't see any major harm in including things you are not sure you will use as long as it doesn't affect the usability of things that you definitely want to use. We are all different so we all appreciate a different mix of functional options.

One thing I think smartphones do offer is a commonality of user interface - at least if you are used to an Android phone then you would be more at home with Android on a camera.

Is there a difference to Android on a phone and Android on a camera? I think there is, at least at the moment. Take the Samsung Galaxy Camera. Its camera section is relatively highly evolved; there is control for the zoom lens, for example, and a number of other camera-related functions you won't find in ordinary Android smartphones. You can't make a phone call on a Samsung Galaxy Camera, even though it can take a SIM card - which is for mobile data connection only. But apart from that the user interface is pretty much the same as the latest Samsung Galaxy S-series and Note-series smartphones.

Personally, I like the way Android's user interface works and it is the result of a fair bit of evolution concerning the use of the touch screen. Most conventional cameras I have used that have touch screens are comparatively primitive in this respect.

Sony now has a system whereby some of its cameras can be enhanced via the installation of 'apps' but this is proprietary and the app system on Android has much more potential I think.

Why am I not including Apple iOS in this discussion; it's unlikely that Apple would permit the use of iOS on third party hardware and I'm not sure that the camera market is for them.

Ian

[Ian]

Re: Is Android the way to go for mainstream digital cameras?

My first question would be what's the benefit of a OS system on a camera? Mine does more than I want or need now.
Do we really need a camera that works like a smartphone, do we need half the things on our smartphones for that matter. I use the camera very infrequently on mine, I do use the Internet from time to time, but its mostly the personal hotspot to use Internet on my iPad, I bought one without 3G as I wouldn't pay for a second contract.
Manufacturers have for some time now been creating things and convincing us we need them, half the things on cameras now go unused as it is.
It's not just cameras either, Apple are rumoured to be working on a smart watch using their OS system. I'm very much a fan of Apple products but I am struggling with that one.

Patrick

All cameras have an OS (operating system), but conventional cameras have a very narrow functionality and most if the OS is hidden from view. I'm pretty sure that some cameras have OSs based on Linux, which is a relative of Android and Mac OS 10. The Panasonic Lumix GH2 camera is well known for having been 'hacked' - which means the camera's OS has been modified by third parties.

Patrick, I think when you refer to 'OS' you probably mean Apple iOS, which is the operating system that is used in Apple smartphones and tablets.

Ian

[Graham_of_Rainham]

Re: Is Android the way to go for mainstream digital cameras?

Compact, Connected, Customisable, Coloured, Commercial, Cheap...

COMPROMISED:

Verb - Settled by mutual concession. Weakened by accepting standards lower than desirable.

Anything that degrades Image Quality, must be resisted. Consider the quality of sound that people now accept from "smart" technology, compared to the real thing. Each time we allow another "Processing" step between the original and the end product, degredation is introduced.

Did we not learn anything from the Swiss Army Knife...

[Ian]

Re: Is Android the way to go for mainstream digital cameras?

Would (does?) an Android UI compromise image quality? Well, not the UI. The Samsung Galaxy Camera has a zoom lens of average compact camera image quality so it's not outstanding but it is pretty good compared to most smartphone camera lenses.

Ian

[Graham_of_Rainham]

Re: Is Android the way to go for mainstream digital cameras?

All the connectivity and commonality of the UI is of real worth and I can see the appeal. However when I look through the specs and features of these things, I get the feeling that there is a lot of in camera processing aimed at "connected" devices and the social media as the end product.

The vast majority of the images taken with these type of cameras will end up viewed with resolutions many times less than the full capability (4608 x 3456) and with this, there will be many processes of those original 16.3 Mega pixel data sets.

I didn't see any reference to the Image Processing engine or even what format the image data is available in. It's all listed for the AV output, which again suggests the consumer to which these cameras are aimed at.

http://www.samsung.com/uk/consumer/mobile-devices/galaxy-camera/galaxy-camera/EK-GC100ZWABTU-spec

http://www.samsung.com/uk/consumer/mobile-devices/galaxy-camera/galaxy-camera/EK-GC100ZWABTU-features#

Hopefully we will see some of the features, particularly customisable UI, cross over into the more conventional cameras.

[Patrick]

Re: Is Android the way to go for mainstream digital cameras?

[QUOTE=Ian;

Patrick, I think when you refer to 'OS' you probably mean Apple iOS, which is the operating system that is used in Apple smartphones and tablets.

Ian[/QUOTE]

I meant OS to mean a none specified operating system, not wishing to get into a android versus apple comparison argument.

I simply want to know how an android or any operating system for that matter will improve my photo taking. I take your piont an operating system in cameras already exists.

Microsoft will be watching and move in the same direction if they believe market share could be improved, particularly as they are the bit player at this time in mobile operating systems.

As you say apple have their own agenda, and I agree and doubt their willingness to let anyone use their software technology in none apple products. Although there are signs Tim Cook may not be as protective as Steve Jobs was
That's not to say with their cash mountain if its deamed necessary to protect market share if threatened would not buy a manufacturer to stay in the game. Much of their technology was through buying out the original innovators.

Patrick

[John Perriment]

[JSR]

Re: Is Android the way to go for mainstream digital cameras?

Is there a difference to Android on a phone and Android on a camera? I think there is, at least at the moment. Take the Samsung Galaxy Camera. Its camera section is relatively highly evolved; there is control for the zoom lens, for example, and a number of other camera-related functions you won't find in ordinary Android smartphones. You can't make a phone call on a Samsung Galaxy Camera, even though it can take a SIM card - which is for mobile data connection only. But apart from that the user interface is pretty much the same as the latest Samsung Galaxy S-series and Note-series smartphones.

That may all be true at the moment, but does it need to be true? Is the difference there just for the sake of making them different?

What I mean by that is that - couldn't the smartphone have a beefed up camera to match the Samsung Galaxy Camera? Couldn't the Samsung Galaxy Camera have phone capabilities? If they both run Android, then it's just a case of tweaking the hardware - and, if that's the case, we're back to the question I posed in that there is no need for a difference between the two devices, so why do we still have two devices?

At present, I have a compact camera purely because it takes better photos and videos than my Android smartphone but the phone does okay for happy snapping. When I'm out and about, I take my smartphone as a "must carry" device but everything else is optional. I see no logical reason why the smartphone couldn't have the same hardware capabilities of the camera.

Putting Android on the camera effectively makes it equivalent to a smartphone, especially if there's a SIM card slot. Why does the Samsung Galaxy Camera have a SIM card slot that's only for data but not for calls? Is that some kind of "crippling" of the device so that this camera doesn't hurt their smartphone sales?

Samsung in particular have a vested interest in maintaining both a smartphone range and a camera range. They want us to continue buying two different devices. But it's not going to be long before the two markets merge, and Samsung had better be wily about it if they don't want to be seen as the ones holding back progress.

It's not likely that smartphones will ever be in danger of being a suitable alternative to high-end cameras but, for the majority of people, the day that a smartphone replaces a regular camera can't be too far away. Will people still be using high-end cameras given the new Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act that'll allow people to nick your images without worrying about copyright? Who's going to risk putting their photo on a website or out for public perusal now?

[Ian]

Re: Is Android the way to go for mainstream digital cameras?

There may be more possibility of an Android camera behaving more like a phone than an Android phone delivering the total camera experience. But I believe both will remain apart. For a camera, there is little impetus to make it into a device for making phone calls (and it will look ridiculous!) - you have a phone already and that is much more compact (read: slim and light). The whole point of a reasonable compact camera is to have a zoom lens that is of better quality and versatility than a smartphone camera and there is just no way this can be achieved on a smartphone without seriously compromising its size.

In fact the trend is to combine the talents of a camera and smartphone using wifi: your main camera hooks up to the smartphone wirelessly and transfers photos to the smartphone for use on social media sites as required. The camera can also get geo-tag info from the smartphone and the smartphone can be used to remote control the camera, complete with a live view of what the camera is viewing through its lens. Samsung already has a smartphone/tablet app that can even zoom the lens (if it is powered) on the target camera). Panasonic recently announced NFC capability so you just 'touch' your camera to the (NFC-enabled) smartphone or tablet to set up the wifi connection automatically.

But I see the attraction of using Android in a camera in several ways; commonality/familiarity of the user interface, plus its flexibility, the evolution of camera apps, direct cloud connectivity, etc.

Ian