Why? You might rather have more sensitivity, but the wafers cost a lot and the smaller the sensor the cheaper and that means sensitivity is dependant on coincidental breakthroughs, where meanwhile the manufacturers have to make do and compete in phones with silly megapixel counts, and who cares if they do or not if in the end it doesn't change anything except that it sells the unknowing consumers new phones/cameras which then finance research that hopefully will lead to results that are more useful like increased sensitivity and deeper colorspace.
The Triumph proved to be one of the better looking and performing pre-paid handsets we'd had the pleasure of holding in our sweaty mitts, but we had one major hangup: the name.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Nail in the coffin of the megapixel race? Please?
Why? You might rather have more sensitivity, but the wafers cost a lot and the smaller the sensor the cheaper and that means sensitivity is dependant on coincidental breakthroughs, where meanwhile the manufacturers have to make do and compete in phones with silly megapixel counts, and who cares if they do or not if in the end it doesn't change anything except that it sells the unknowing consumers new phones/cameras which then finance research that hopefully will lead to results that are more useful like increased sensitivity and deeper colorspace.
They'll more than likely put most of their funding into research for more megapixels rather than camera aspects that are actually useful.