Sticker shock on new phones

[mrschwarz]

I just picked up a couple of Moto G5 Plus phones at Costco for $169 each. They are replacing Galaxy S5s. I haven't set up my wife's, yet, but mine is a huge improvement. I have only had it for a few days, so the jury is still out, but unless it does something stupid, I don't think I'll be spending that kind of money for a phone. I switched from Verizon to Straight Talk (Verizon) at the same time. I may switch to another prepaid Verizon carrier before I'm done.

If I amortize the cost of the phone over the next year, I am saving money, have more data, and have new phones.

 

[docj]

It's 14 megapixel at the rear and 5 MP front, so the resolution is darn good as well.

I don't want to be a spoil sport, but as someone who once earned a Ph.D. in physics with a specialty in optics, I can assure you that the cameras in virtually all phones already have more pixels than matter.  It's a complicated topic, but suffice it to say that if all you are doing is posting photos on Facebook you're never going to use the capabilities of all the pixels you have.  In fact, a ~6MP camera is all that is necessary for that task.

There are several factors that come into play when calculating the resolution of a digital camera and pixel count is definitely one of them.  But, not to be overlooked, is the size of the lens itself. The tiny lenses on phone cameras cannot fully utilize all those extra pixels because they are "diffraction limited" which, simply, means that the light can't be focused accurately enough through the small lens to focus effectively on each of the tiny pixels.  A larger lens, such as what you would find in a DSLR, focusing on a larger pixel array can do a better job.

None of this is all that important if you don't ever print or crop your photos.  But if you do trying cropping them you will find that the ones from a phone camera become fuzzy when the cropped image is very small compared to the full photo.  With a larger lens a much smaller piece of the photo can be cropped out and still be usable. 

This is probably more than most of you wanted to know about image resolution, but I thought there might be a few folks who wondered why anyone would still buy a "big, old camera" when phone cameras are so good.

Obviously, I have far too much time on my hands on Christmas morning!  ;D Merry Christmas to all!

 

[Larry N.]

both of us have our phone in OtterBox cases

I have a Trident case, which has protected my Ascend Mate 2 from a couple of shirt-pocket height drops, as well as a few other bumps and bangs. It's rather rugged, but the cover material is kind of hard rubber-looking, and gives a bit with impact (cuts the g-load a lot).

 

[Tom]

I have a similar case by Aduro for my S4. Not quite as rubbery as my prior case, but works/protects OK.

 

[UTTransplant]

I don't want to be a spoil sport, but as someone who once earned a Ph.D. in physics with a specialty in optics, I can assure you that the cameras in virtually all phones already have more pixels than matter.  It's a complicated topic, but suffice it to say that if all you are doing is posting photos on Facebook you're never going to use the capabilities of all the pixels you have.  In fact, a ~6MP camera is all that is necessary for that task.

There are several factors that come into play when calculating the resolution of a digital camera and pixel count is definitely one of them.  But, not to be overlooked, is the size of the lens itself. The tiny lenses on phone cameras cannot fully utilize all those extra pixels because they are "diffraction limited" which, simply, means that the light can't be focused accurately enough through the small lens to focus effectively on each of the tiny pixels.  A larger lens, such as what you would find in a DSLR, focusing on a larger pixel array can do a better job.

None of this is all that important if you don't ever print or crop your photos.  But if you do trying cropping them you will find that the ones from a phone camera become fuzzy when the cropped image is very small compared to the full photo.  With a larger lens a much smaller piece of the photo can be cropped out and still be usable. 

This is probably more than most of you wanted to know about image resolution, but I thought there might be a few folks who wondered why anyone would still buy a "big, old camera" when phone cameras are so good.

Obviously, I have far too much time on my hands on Christmas morning!  ;D Merry Christmas to all!

It all comes down to optics, doesn?t it? This is the reason I take snapshots with my phone and photographs with my camera.

 

[Howard R]

I'm not quite that bad, but I have trouble holding them steady, they don't have a viewfinder, and the zoom leaves a lot to be desired

or it takes 36 pictures for you ... can't see much to frame a picture in bright daylight.  I couldn't begin to get airshow shots like attached with a phone camera ... might work for you, but not me.

Howard 

 

[NY_Dutch]

It all comes down to optics, doesn?t it? This is the reason I take snapshots with my phone and photographs with my camera.

X2! )

 

[docj]

or it takes 36 pictures for you ... can't see much to frame a picture in bright daylight.  I couldn't begin to get airshow shots like attached with a phone camera ... might work for you, but not me.

Stunning photos!

 

[Larry N.]

Gorgeous shots, Howard! That defines part of the reason that cameras in a pocket computer (erroneously known as a phone) are inadequate for so much that I shoot -- closeups are only a little part of the (excuse me) picture.

 

[Gary RV_Wizard]

Understand that more megapixels is not inherently better, but more pixels are useful when using the digital zoom function.  I also view photos later (sometimes years later!) on a big screen and the extra pixels have value there as well. Still, I find 6MP-8MP fine for most things and my phone is normally set at 8MP.

I take snapshots with my phone and photographs with my camera.

Best summary advice I've heard yet!  However, I find I no longer need the pocket digital camera I used to carry around for casual snapshots and I only use my DSLR for serious stuff.  A relatively rare event these days.

 

[Howard R]

Stunning photos!

Thanks !

Howard

 

[Peteyboy]

Getting back to the original intent,,, maybe we will see some downward movement in the price of phones with the sluggish sales of the new iPhone X.  My rich brother bought one a month ago, and he has close to $1500 in the whole deal,,,,YIKES !!!!!

 

[NY_Dutch]

I have yet to see a good description of what those high dollar phones do that's worth the selling price.

 

[SeilerBird]

I have yet to see a good description of what those high dollar phones do that's worth the selling price.

The camera alone makes them worth the price. Free online unlimited photo storage is worth a lot of money.

 

[docj]

The camera alone makes them worth the price. Free online unlimited photo storage is worth a lot of money.

No offense intended but, if you haven't noticed, online storage has become a lot less expensive lately.  For example, for $10/mo I get 5 subscriptions to Microsoft Office 365 and each subscription comes with its own 1TB of cloud storage. I have many hundreds of photos in my cloud and don't have anywhere near a TB. I'm sure there are other similar deals, this is just one I'm familiar with.

 

[Larry N.]

The camera alone makes them worth the price. Free online unlimited photo storage is worth a lot of money.

To some people it does. But you can buy a decent camera plus a lower end "phone" for less. And some of us rarely use the camera in our "phone."  And are you saying that you get all the online storage you can use included with the cost of the "phone?" That doesn't much matter to someone such as me -- I don't use (or trust) online storage.

 

[Jan C Wright]

I'm several generations behind with my cell phone. Wandering through Costco a few days ago, I looked in at the cellular booth where we normally buy our phones. $800+ to buy a new Samsung S8 phone    Cheaper than iPhone updates, but too  rich for me. I do little beyond phone calls and text on my S4, so my current phone will be fine for some years to come. Hopefully, Samsung doesn't go through the same "iPhone slowdown on old phones" that Apple users have recently experienced.

Chris hasn't (yet) complained of a slowdown on her iPhone.

Hi - there have been recent postings that the Apple slowdown on older phones is really due to worn out batteries.  A relatively inexpensive battery replacement solves that problem.  The gist of is that batteries eventually wear out and need to be replaced.

 

[SeilerBird]

And are you saying that you get all the online storage you can use included with the cost of the "phone?"

https://www.cnet.com/news/google-pixel-phones-offer-free-unlimited-photo-and-video-cloud-storage/

 

[Gizmo]

I agree, these new offerings are quite expensive and for my use, way over blown.  My wife an I are still using our Iphone 6Plus's and while working, are also victims of this ridiculous Iphone older generation slow down.  I agree with Lou, Apple's reasoning is baloney, quite simply as with so many products these days it is planned obsolescence to fuel un-abandoned consumerism.  When I finally do replace my phone, I am done with Apple, instead will likely be a mid range phone, brand undetermined right now.  I only use a phone for calls, occasional text messages, a few helpful apps and an occasional photo to record for memory recall or to send quickly off to someone.  As a professional photographer with access to high quality gear, I have little use for smart phone cameras other than the use I previously mentioned.

 

[mrschwarz]

Hi - there have been recent postings that the Apple slowdown on older phones is really due to worn out batteries.  A relatively inexpensive battery replacement solves that problem.  The gist of is that batteries eventually wear out and need to be replaced.

Isn't it curious that a simple battery replacement solves the speed problem, but a simple battery replacement is complicated by the 'feature' of not making batteries user replaceable?

Here's the thing. Remember when a decent laptop cost thousands of dollars? Have you looked at the price of laptops lately? I would have trouble spending the same money I spent 5 years ago unless I wanted some super whiz bang technology that wasn't mainstream. Not so with smart phones. In 2007, the original iPhone retailed for $499 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone_(1st_generation)). The latest, the iPhone X is $999. So...while inflation may have affected the price ($499 in 2007 translates to about $597 in today's dollars(https://www.saving.org/inflation/inflation.php?amount=499&year=2007)), the iPhone has actually experienced a price increase of more than 67%. My opinion is that this is the result of a single-source of a product. Why compete when there is no competition? Is it possible this is why the sales of iPhones is not as high as Apple forecasted https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2017/12/26/downbeat-iphone-x-sales-projections-hobble-apple-shares/981351001/?

Samsung is trying the same thing with their Galaxy S line of flagship phones. I haven't been able to find out what the original Galaxy S cost, but the new one lists for about $720. I bought a Galaxy Note II in 2012 for $645. The new Note 8 lists for $1,000, which is around a 45% increase in cost when calculating it using today's dollars. I will assume that the regular Galaxy S price difference is somewhere in the neighborhood. For someone who wants the latest from Samsung, this is the price they are going to pay. But again, here's the thing. Everyone and their brother is making phones with the Android OS. There's a lot more competition and there's a lot of innovation from all places.

My previous phone, until last week, was a Galaxy S5 that originally cost about $600. It was a great phone and I used it for more than 3 years and 3 batteries, which were pretty inexpensive to replace. It was great, but slow, until the screen started to fail. I seriously thought about replacing it with an S8 when Best Buy was selling them for about $375, but I couldn't see being locked into a single carrier for the next couple of years. When wandering around Costco last week, I saw the Moto G5 Plus for $169. It still has a headphone jack and an SD card slot, but the battery is no longer user replaceable. The new phones we got are far superior to our Galaxy S5s, but they are rated as 'economy' or 'budget' phones. 

Among the other changes I made, I switched from a Verizon plan for 2 phones and 4 GB of data (pooled) for about $90 (plus all the gimmes and gotchas) to a prepaid phone plan that uses Verizon towers for two phones and 15GB of data (pooled) for about $60 (without any gimmes or gotchas). If I amortize the cost of 2 new phones over a year, the cost is about $28 per month. Added to the cost of the phone plan, I am still saving a few bucks a month, got new phones, and got more data with the same dependable service I had. Next year, we can either get new phones or save money.

The point of this post is that as most technologies mature, their costs drop. Up until recently, this hadn't happened with mobile phone service, but we're beginning to see this change. Smart phones are not following this path, at the moment, but I think we're beginning to see it happen. I know it is for me!

YMMV