Hmm, seems I wasn't as clear as I meant to be. My bad, I'll try to be clearer...
@map002. You may improve quality with that hack, but is that doable on the 32, or even most cameras? I highly doubt it.
I don't know what the cases on Gen 8 will be like or whether the cases will be shaped like or what they will be made out of or where the lenses will be placed. That's why I said...
...depending on lens placement, angles and case material type...
I was careful to qualify my statement.
Even if you can, it will only help the quality so much. The low light videos will still be horrible because of the sesame seed sized sensor.
Again, I qualified my original statement...
All else being equal, given the same CCD...
...CCD being the sensor.
I have no idea about what size or quality the CCD on all of the different Gen 8 tablets. Some of them might be big/good enough to produce acceptable quality for YouTube style videos shot indoors, or they may not.
My post was not directed at you as you had a valid post with no misinformation.
New 720p mobile phone cameras such as the ones in Droid X, iPhone 4, HTC EVO and Samsung Galaxy S all have decent low light quality.
That's because they're comparing to other phones's cameras, not to dedicated camcorders.
Low light is not only a sensor size issue, there is aperture and resolution. 720p video which is still arguably optimal resolution for web distribution is less than 1 megapixel so it can do pretty fine in low light, even on mobile phone sized cameras with cheap sensors. If you try take 12 megapixel pictures with a mobile phone, sure low light will be terrible. But for 720p video and with a really fast and high quality encoder, it can be just great even with a small low cost sensor.
I won't even bother to argue anymore until you read up and get your facts straight. Read up If we use a car analogy, you're trying to get sedan performance from a kart's engine. It's not possible. A kart's engine does not have anywhere the near the displacement needed for such performance. A engine's displacement is *directly* related to its performance, the same as a camera's sensor size's relation is directly related to its image quality.
A good modern HD mobile phone camera is more like $12 in component cost. I'd film with a 720p camera at the least, so Archos 43 or 48 at the least.
While that might be true, they're certainly not used on phones, or the $150 32. It sounds more like the cost for the Flip HD or other pocket 720p camcorders's imaging system cost.
Image processing is getting amazing with OMAP3630 and will be absolutely incredible with OMAP4430 coming out for next year. And prices are coming down so all cheap cameras will have absolutely fantastic compression quality built-in. Look forward to it. With ARM Cortex A9 and the new DSPs that go with it, all camcorders even cheap ones will encode H264 in real-time at about 98% the same quality that you can get from encoding multiple passes using a quad-core intel processor desktop. Yup you heard it right. Near full high profile quality done by the camera itself in real-time, no re-encoding needed.
Again, get your facts straight.
Dedicated, standalone hardware converters used for TV broadcast that costs tens to hundreds of thousands dollars cannot hope to reach the quality you get from a high quality, slow encode from x264 on a computer. Desktop GPUs that cost $100+ alone produces horrifyingly bad video conversion quality. The portable OMAPs will just be even worse.
Again, I am not criticizing the new OMAP chipsets, because it is fundamentally impossible (due to the way video is compressed) to have a hardware based encoder to reach CPU encoded video quality. I will have to ask you not to post things that you have *no clue* about. Misinformation is bad.