Why Nokia Used Dual-LEDs On The N96
This has been the subject of much debate since Monday: Why didn’t Nokia put a Xenon flash on the N96? Why did they choose the dual-LED setup? I think the answer is two-fold, and many thanks to Mark Guim over at The Nokia Blog who captured one in video:
Dual-LEDs are super bright, and don’t require ‘charging’. Check out this video, taken by Mark at the 2008 Mobile World Congress, where he got the chance to sit down with the Product Manager for the N96 and get some questions answered. After turning out the lights, it’s really easy to see just how bright these dual-LEDs are, and how, when taking a picture, they’re able to ‘flash’ slightly staggered, so that there are basically two flashes. This will help prevent red-eye in photographs, and will also help the color to be slightly more true.
The biggest reason that dual-LEDs were chosen as opposed to Xenon flash is because LEDs, as opposed to Xenon, are able to function as a video light, which is a feature that many Nseries fans have wanted for a long while. With a bright light shining during video capture, the noisy ‘night mode’ videos should be a thing of the past, and will open up new opportunities in video recording with the N96. I believe that LED flashes will also consume less battery per flash, as opposed to Xenon, which is somewhat power hungry. Since Nokia somehow decided 950mAh was ‘enough’ for such a mobile powerhouse as the N96, it makes sense that they would try to optimize that battery in any way possible.
What do you think? Are you overly disappointed in the lack of Xenon flash on the N96, or do you think the dual-LEDs will, in the end, offer a superior solution for both imaging and video?
Very disappointed with the lack of xenon flash. There are other phones out there that have both a xenon flash as well as led lights.
They should have made it a millimeter or two thicker to incorporate both types of lights as well as a bigger battery. Maybe even a camera lens cover as well.
The lack of a lens cover and xenon flash make it really hard to get excited about the N96
A few thoughts on this issue…
From a marketing perspective it sure seems odd to me that they just got done proclaiming how great Xenon flashes are with the N82 now they go ahead and take their new “flagship” phone and omit Xenon. Is this another case of separate product development teams not communicating and then the marketing team is left to try and smooth out the obvious contradiction? Why not Xenon AND a bright LED, or xenon and two LED’s? Sure cost is a factor, but two LED’s are cheap, even the super fancy ones aren’t bad when you buy in bulk. LEDs for video, maybe one LED and then Xenon for still shots…
I am curious to see some background on how the staggered flashing of the two LEDs is supposed to help the color be more “true”.
As far as being disappointed, how can I be? So far I haven’t had anything to be disappointed with. What the light comes from doesn’t matter much to me, the images produced however, are what its all about. I’ll be waiting to see some side by side shots like we saw comparing the N95’s performance in the dark to that of the N82. I’ll withhold my final judgement until I am able to see these from end users, not from marketing teams. For instance, the LEDs in that video sure were blinding but the camera which was filming the video didn’t behave the same way the human eye does. I was impressed when the N96 was facing away from the camera and we got to see it light up the gentlemen standing there. All in all, my preliminary view is that its a compromise and somewhat of a negative one. Personally I would prefer higher quality still shots, at least until video from the phone really becomes impressive (as the still shots are finally approaching). If Nokia wanted to make another video powerhouse where is the optical zoom? (And this sure could help the still shots as well)
Time will tell if they made the best choice. Either way its surely an impressive piece of technology that takes things forward, they set yet another benchmark for the entire industry to follow.
From my understanding, the staggered light flashes offer better color because a flash is basically sending off light to a dark object, and then the camera snaps the resulting light reflection. Different colors and surfaces reflect light differently, etc.
With the two, the first light is reflected the most harshly, while the second softens things up a bit for the camera to capture.
I could be entirely wrong, but I’m pretty sure that’s how it’s been explained to me. Similar to how it reduces red-eye by ‘preparing’ the human eye for the sudden amount of light and allowing the pupil to resize itself.
One would think they could have one LED for video and one xenon for photo rather than having dual LED. I’ve read elsewhere that the N96 chassis couldn’t physically house a Xenon flash, which would make more sense to me if true. Of course, as you mention, the tiny battery in the N96 probably also played a role in the decision as well.
What’s perplexing to me is that the N95 was the imaging king when it was released, but the N96 will not be (that title will still belong to the N82). The N82 also has a larger battery - despite the N96’s massive display, huge storage, and FP2, I still find the N82 a preferable all-around device.
Of course, as I already have an N95-3, and none of these support NAM 3G, I figure I should just wait it out for the next generation anyway.
@Gore, I agree with nearly everything you just said. Specifically the N95-3/N82/N96 thing. If and when the US 3G N82 comes out, in black, i’ll sell my N95-3 and get it, but other than that, I’ve not seen anything worthy of replacing my N95-3.
@Malaeum:
I think there is plenty to be disappointed about. In the N95 era, Nokia is now doing just enough to scrape by. Even though we all realize that the N96 has been under development for quite some time, surely Nokia must realize that they should incorporate improvements made in other handsets to this one. Every device announcement that Nokia makes gets me a little angrier and a far more jaded…they are simply making minor tweaks to old devices instead of doing something new.
They are doing EXACTLY what SE was doing for the better part of 2007: They take old handests, give them an “updated” look, tweak a few minor components, and put a new name on it. I think Nokia peaked with the N95, and everyone who espects something totally fresh and new from them is going to be sorely disappointed.
Instead of innovation they are simply churning out handsets to take up shelf space (digital camera makers are most guilty of this practice). I mean, what are you truly gaining by getting the N96 if you already have an N95? (if you have an N95-3, I can see why someone would want the FW improvements though)
The only benchmark they have set is one that shows a company can be lazy and still get people to buy their devices.
@Gore/Guru
I too agree that nothing can really replace my N95-3 at this point. I am hurting for a FW update, but the phone is still great without it.
I am not necesssarily waiting for the next generation because, well, this is the next generation (ie, mediocrity from Nokia). They really can’t give us an all in one device, can they. I would never want another phone again if they made the N95-3 without 3.5mm hiss and put a lens cover on the camera. And Nokia knows that -
The reasoning that the product manager gave us during the Q&A session was that it is easier to place a xenon flash in a candy bar phone, compared to a slider. To put xenon flash in a slider he said, the phone needs to be thicker, and something that they weren’t ready to do. If this is the case, then most likely it would be sorted out to fit one in a slider soon. You can watch the video that I took on my blog for additional info.
Well I wrote about this on my blog a few days ago. I really don’t mind the dual LED flash. But I have to agree that the best of solutions would have been to put both a xenon flash for still photos and Led for video recording.
@newtype2011
While I do, in a way, agree to Nokia not innovating enough, I certainly hope they don’t go the way SE did last year. That’s just plain confusing to consumers, imho.
On the other hand, look at the competition. What major innovation do they have on the market that trumps what Nokia handsets have? (please please let’s exclude the iPhone as an example, as it isn’t a smartphone…yet)
Feature-wise, Nokia is still at the N95 point. But then again, the competition is slowly getting there. After almost a year.
wait the N96 is not US HSDPA?
Hey Ricky, how are things?
I’m really very disappointed by the lack of Xenon flash. At this rate the N82 will be my next phone when the black version is available, and then my next phone after that will either be a Samsung or a 2009 Nokia (IF Nokia actually pulls finger and really advances the feature set).
The lack of a lens-cover is also very disappointing. From the discussion with the N82 product manager at Nokiaworld I really thought that Nokia had heard the markets feedback on the issue (the lens-cover mechanism for the N82 is really very elegant), but it seems they haven’t.
From the outside looking in it seems that the N-Series product managers just do their own thing designing a handset without much of a cohesive understanding of the ‘bigger picture’ in terms of the N-Series. Just seems that something isn’t right within the N-Series portfolio management. You’re closer to it than me Ricky, what do you think?
Do you think xenon-headlights are the next step to increase safety?
All is about the marketing scheme. They sure know about the xenon flash issue. After some time they will launch n96-2 or whatever. Then all people go crazy about it and they make another sales.
Feb 15th, 2008 at 8:11 am
[...] first reason, so Ricky thinks, is that the dual-LEDs are super-bright and also take up less battery power, something precious in the N96 given its glut of features. More [...]