As nearly every smartphone is expected to have a camera these days, there is an important lesson that people must heed. Cameras are more complex than a simple megapixel rating. It’s a common belief that when it comes to megapixels, bigger is better. But I’m here to tell you that you need to look deeper if you are basing your smartphone decision on which has the best camera. Megapixels have their use. A pixel dense picture is great if you want to crop it down and still retain good quality, but beyond that there is more to be considered.

Case-in-point, the Droid 2 [portal page] and the iPhone 4 [portal page]. Both phones have 5MP sensors. This means that they capture 5 million pixels in a given image. Both phones might capture the same number of pixels, but the quality and size of the sensor dictates how accurately each pixel is sampled and how much light it can capture. Another important factor is focus. Without a good focus algorithm (and no ability to manually focus), you’ll end up with a blurry shot no matter how many megapixels your camera can capture.

To demonstrate this, have a quick look at the two photos below. One is taken with the iPhone 4 and the other with the Droid 2. Both were taken under the same lighting conditions and were focused as accurately as possible (click for full size):

You may have to click for the full-sized images to see, but the image taken with the Droid 2 is blurry and has inaccurate colors.

This is a result of the Droid 2’s camera not being able to capture as much light as the iPhone 4, as well as the inability to focus as accurately. This is all despite the fact that both phones have the same megapixel rating.

But what can you do if you don’t have the phones to try before you buy? A bit of research may go a long way if a camera is important to you. I’d recommend checking Flickr’s camera page. Find your desired smartphone and then browse the photos to get an idea of the photos that the phone is capable of taking. And of course we’ll always do our best to give you camera comparisons and tips right here at Carrypad.

As Chippy pointed at his personal blog, it’s possible to search Flickr for pictures taken by particular cameras. By analyzing EXIF data, flickr is able to keep detailed data for all the cameras that are used for snapping photos that end up on the site. Flickr has a neat page that has stats for all of their photos and the cameras that they were taken with.

Looking at the stats for iPhones shows some interesting trends:

*For clarity’s sake, I’ll refer to the iPhone 3GS as the iPhone 3G[S] so that it won’t be confused with the plural of the iPhone 3G (iPhone 3Gs)

This isn’t the most detailed graph, but I think we can make some educated guesses about what’s going on here.

You can see that the iPhone 3G is the most used camera out of these three, and in fact, you may find it interesting to note that it’s the most popular of all cameras used on flickr (see: http://www.flickr.com/cameras/, this is probably due to a combination of the iPhone 3G’s popularity and the fact that there is a Flickr app in the app store. Traditional cameras naturally can’t upload without going through a computer).

You might also wonder why the iPhone 3G appears to be so much more popular than the more recently released iPhone 3G[S]. I think this has a lot to do with the AT&T contract. Lots of people went out to buy the iPhone 3G because it was much more affordable than the original iPhone and had improved features. Many of these people signed up for new, or re-upped, a two-year contract. When the iPhone 3G[S] was released about a year later, most people weren’t eligible for upgrade pricing.

Now you’ll see the correlation between the dip at the end of the iPhone 3G line and the peak at the end of the iPhone 4 line. iPhone 3G users who purchased the iPhone 3G when it was released are now eligible for upgrade pricing on the iPhone 4. And if we’re looking at this correctly, it looks like people are upgrading from the iPhone 3G to the iPhone 4 at a very regular rate. The iPhone 4 line also shows us something about the availability of the device. You’ll notice that there is only a slight upward trend as the iPhone 4 line lifts off the x-axis, then it suddenly starts to jump upward. This could represent the initial release of pre-order devices, then the availability of new stock.

So what about the iPhone 3G[S]? What’s with that lazy curve it’s got going on? It’s hard to say exactly as the graph doesn’t have a proper timeline, but the dropping end of the line may be cause by Gizmodo’s early iPhone 4 reveal. They got their hands on the iPhone 4 hardware far before the phone was released, and the ensuing drama was covered by major news outlets across the US and even further. People knew in advance that the iPhone 4 was coming and this likely hurt the sales of the iPhone 3G[S].

I’ll be interested to continue watching these charts. If the iPhone 4 and iPhone 3G lines ever cross, I think it’ll be pretty conclusive that lots of people are upgrading.

Agree with me? Have a better analysis? Feel free to let us know in the comments!

While I dropped some test images and videos comparing the iPhone 4 and Droid X myself, I wanted to highlight and article over at tnkgrl Mobile which has more comparison info and a detailed write-up of the strengths and weaknesses in the cameras of each phone. If you are looking for a phone with a good camera, you are definitely looking in the right direction with the Droid X and iPhone 4, but between those two, finding which one fits you might just depend on which type of user you are.

It doesn’t matter if you love Apple or if you hate them, they are setting the quality bar for consumer MIDs.

The iPod Touch has been a well built device since the first generation, and with the fourth and latest generation, they’re upping the ante once more.

The new iPod Touch is incredibly slim at just 0.28 inch (7.1mm), and yet the battery life has actually been increased. Apple claims that the new iPod Touch will play audio for 40 hours and video for 7.

While we’re on the subject of video… the iPod Touch is now equipped with the iPhone 4’s “Retina display inch Apple’s fancy marketing terminology for “really high pixel density inch this is a four fold increase over the previous generation’s 320×480 screens, pushing the resolution all the way up to 960×640. The difference is quite impressive if you’ve been using an older generation iPod Touch for years. In addition to the screen, the insides have been updated to Apple’s A4 chip (the same one found in the iPad and iPhone 4.

Apple has included a front and rear camera on the iPod Touch which is going to make FaceTime chatting very prevalent in the US. This is the first implementation of video conferencing that will be easy enough non-techies to just pick up and use, and if Android doesn’t do something similar, they’ll soon be left in the dust in this area (of consumer friendly mobile video conferencing). Expect kids to be sent off to college with a sparkling new iPod Touch so it will be easy for them to stay in contact with their iPod Touch wielding parents back home.

The rear camera is somewhat of a mixed bag. It can do 1280×720 HD recording at 30 FPS which is great (you can expect to see the number of amateur HD videos on YouTube spike in the coming year), however, photos can only be snapped at a rather pathetic 960×720 which is only about 0.6MP. I was hoping that the iPod Touch would include the same quality camera that is found on the iPhone 4, but it seems that this is not the case. Still, the camera will likely take better photos than non-smartphone camera-phones (which iPod Touch users are likely to be using).

Without question, millions of these devices will be sold. Yes, Apple is a marketing maestro, but regardless of what convinces people to purchase the iPod Touch, they are buying a great companion for a great price. Intuitive and useful calendars, email, web browsing, gaming, music, and apps are now joined with effortless FaceTime video chatting, an incredible display, and HD video recording in a pocketable package that has enough juice to last you through the day, all for $229, $299, or $399 for 8/32/64GB and available next week.

I have to preface this review with an apology. It’s taken me a long time to get this review up on the site and I’m sorry for that. You knew not to expect a day-one review from us because that’s just not how we roll; we like to get a serious feel for the items we’re testing before passing judgment. I was waiting for apps to be updated with iOS 4 features, and for Apple to tell their side of the antenna story before writing the review (not to mention getting distracted with the Droid X). With that said, I hope you’ll still join me for our iPhone 4 review.

Hardware

The iPhone 4 introduces an all new design. Here’s a quick spec rundown, and as always, you can get detailed information from our iPhone 4 Portal page.

• CPU: Apple’s A4 chip (1GHz)
• RAM: 512MB
• GPU: PowerVR SGX 535
• Screen: 3.5 inch IPS display @ 960×640 (326 ppi)
• Rear camera: 5 MP with single-LED flash (HD video record capable)
• Front camera: 0.3 MP (video up to 640×480)

Design

You’d have to really despise Apple to say that they have no design talent. The iPhone 4 once again makes its predecessor feel like a toy, despite the fact that it once felt like a quality built device. The iPhone 4 is 24% thinner than the iPhone 3GS, making it the thinnest smartphone in the world (according to Apple), though despite it’s decreased thinness, it doesn’t feel thinner than the iPhone 3GS because of its square back. The iPhone 3G and 3GS had rounded backs which made them feel thinner than they really were. The result of this lack of rounded back makes the iPhone 4 feel just as thick as the iPhone 3GS.

The front and back of the device is made from glass which Apple lauds as being much stronger than plastic. I’ve somehow managed to already get more scratches on the front of the my iPhone 4 than I did over the entire course of my iPhone 3GS’s lifespan. They aren’t significant scratches, but hold the phone under the light and you’ll find quite a few. This is a striking contrast to my iPhone 3GS which never got a single scratch on it.

This could have something to do with the fact that the glass back of the iPhone 4 is somewhat slippery compared to the plastic back of the iPhone 3GS. The iPhone 4 isn’t slippery in the hand, but it frequently slides off of places where I once rested the 3GS, such as on top of my wallet, or on the arm of a couch. Some people have attributed this to the oleophobic coating which is designed to reduce fingerprint smudges (this was only present on the front of the iPhone 3GS, but it’s on the front and back of the iPhone 4).

The front and back of the iPhone 4 is glass, but there is a tiny plastic bezel that surrounds each pane. This is likely to prevent any dangerously sharp edges, as well as reducing the chance of chipping the edge of the glass.

As for the look of the device itself, it’ll definitely come down to personal preference. I, for one, think it’s a beautiful looking device, and I’m happy to see Apple working on a somewhat retro look, rather than continuing to evolve their previous design the natural conclusion of which would have eventually been the iBall — if Apple continued to simplify shapes and smooth lines.

The device feels undeniably well built, and the metal buttons are impressively solid and have no play to them. The volume buttons have been changed from a rocker bar (as they were previously on the 3GS) and separated into individual buttons. The plus and minus markings are cut directly into the metal button which gives them a sharp look that won’t be worn away over time. Both volume buttons, the silent switch, and the hold/lock button have highly satisfying clicks. Additionally, the home button on the front of the device is much more clicky than the one on the iPhone 3GS which was occasionally on the squishy end of the spectrum. If you’ve ever used an iPod Touch, then you’ll know the feeling of the iPhone 4’s home button.

Screen

Apple specifically designed the screen to have a pixel-per-inch rating that surpasses the eye’s ability to tell each pixel apart. Apple claimed that this threshold was about 300 ppi at a given distance (10 inches or so) so they made the screen 326 ppi with a 960×640 display which is 4x the resolution of previous iPhone. Just to clarify, the increase in resolution doesn’t mean more space on the screen. Instead, Apple scaled up graphics of the entire OS to 4x their original size to fit the new resolution. The result is an extraordinarily crisp screen that makes you wonder how you ever lived with the low res 480×320 screens on the old iDevices.

When I look back at an iPod Touch or previous iPhone, the screen looks quite pathetic. The iPhone 4’s 960×640 screen is the highest resolution in a smartphone, but next to an 800×480 device like the Droid X [portal page], the difference won’t be perceptible for most people. So while the iPhone 4’s display blows the previous iPhone out of the water, it isn’t wildly superior to other devices out there.

The IPS screen is reasonably readable in bright sunlight and has an impressive full 179 degree viewing angle with virtually no loss of color or contrast at even the most extreme angle.

This might seem obvious but we think that many of our readers are looking for a similar product –  a consumer handheld internet device, which kinda makes sense because that’s all we cover here at Carrypad!

We wanted to simplify the decision process and short-cut some of the fuss and hype that goes on around the tablet space so we’ve come up with a checklist for you. It’s focused at the consumer tablet but much of this applies to slider and clamshell designs too.

Bookmark this article and when you see a product you like, take a quick look at this list to see if it fits the mould for an enjoyable, usable, flexible, quality handheld internet product.

Read the full story

Sunspider Javascript Benchmark

I ran the Sunspider javascript benchmark on both devices. While the benchmark is quite dependent on browser performance, it is also an indicator of CPU ability, as well as a cross-platform benchmark, allowing us to compare both the iPhone 4 and Droid X from a more objective perspective. I used the default browser on each phone for the test.

On average, the iPhone 4 was 1.3x as fast the Droid X (click to view detailed test results):

(smaller ms is better)
Droid X – Total: 13,511.2 ms +/- 1.2%
iPhone 4 – Total: 10,401.4 ms +/- 1%

I also gave the Sunspider benchmark a try using a different browser than Android’s default. I used Dolphin Browser HD to run the test and actually resulted in a slower score (around 16,000 ms).

Sunspider Javascript Benchmark

I ran the Sunspider javascript benchmark on both devices. While the benchmark is quite dependent on browser performance, it is also an indicator of CPU ability, as well as a cross-platform benchmark, allowing us to compare both the iPhone 4 and Droid X from a more objective perspective. I used the default browser on each phone for the test.

On average, the iPhone 4 was 1.3x as fast the Droid X (click to view detailed test results):

(smaller ms is better)
Droid X Total: 13,511.2 ms +/- 1.2%
iPhone 4 Total: 10,401.4 ms +/- 1%

I also gave the Sunspider benchmark a try using a different browser than Android’s default. I used Dolphin Browser HD to run the test and actually resulted in a slower score (around 16,000 ms).