Samsung EK-GC100 Pro Reviews

There are a couple ways to look at the Samsung Galaxy GC110 digital camera. It's either an all-in-one device, or for some, it may be all-in-none. Its unique capabilities--blending a capable zoom-lens compact with the brains and display of a smartphone - could make it the only device you need to pack. Or, it could be just too bulky to serve as a compact camera, and its lack of cellular connectivity hamstring it as a tablet or phone replacement. Either way, it's worth a closer look. See also: Samsung Galaxy S4 Zoom review.

The Samsung Galaxy Camera combines the functions of a Android device and a dedicated camera quite well, letting you whisk your photos and videos to the Web instantly. But this first-gen design also shows room for improvement.

ReviewSamsung's attempt at a merger between a smartphone and a digital camera -- the Galaxy Camera -- is an interesting model. It's a sharp-looking camera that's a fun gadget. The 4.8-inch touchscreen LCD is very sharp and bright, and by running the Android operating system, the Galaxy Camera is easy to use. Samsung gave this camera some nice features, including Wi-Fi or 4G connectivity and a 21x optical zoom lens. The primary drawback with the Galaxy Camera is that its image quality is similar to a basic point-n-shoot camera, which makes it tough to justify the $450-plus price tag. You'll have to spend a significant premium for the large screen, wireless connectivity, and Android OS versus other models with similar photographic quality and camera features.

They've long been predicted, and the first round of Android cameras are finally here. Two companies -- Nikon and Samsung -- got the ball rolling, and we were fortunate to be able to compare both cameras side-by-side. Unfortunately, but not entirely surprisingly for first-generation designs, both show signs of compromise at work. As we noted in our review of Nikon's camera, it has a conflicted design that almost seems to pit Android and camera against each other, and suffered from significant stability, performance, and battery life issues. In the form of the Galaxy Camera and its Wi-Fi only variant, Samsung's entry feels much more coherent. The camera features play nicely with third-party applications, and there's not such a strong divide between camera and Android modes as in Nikon's camera. It's unfortunate that Samsung hasn't mirrored the Nikon's ability to take photos without first waiting for Android to boot up after a battery change, but if you pay attention to your charge level it's not too tough to work around this, especially given that the Galaxy Camera has significantly better battery life in camera terms than does its rival. Certainly it won't challenge the best dedicated cameras out there, but given that it's running a full-blown operating system, it's hardly fair to expect that it could.

Overall, we had a great time using the Galaxy Camera and see a lot of fun scenarios where we would enjoy having a connected camera that also has the ability to take great photos. We appreciate that Samsung didn’t skimp on the features in the Galaxy Camera—it has a 21x optical zoom that works very well along with many automatic picture taking modes and full manual controls. All in all, the Galaxy Camera is a really fun and cool gadget, but we expect the price and monthly contract will deter many users who would otherwise love to own a connected camera.

For $500 to $600 you can currently get higher quality (in the photographic sense) cameras with interchangeable lenses, but you do not get any connectivity, a great OS and the ability to access hundred of thousand of applications. Across the board, the Samsung Galaxy Camera delivers good image quality and, as a connected device running Android, it offers a ton of benefits that a traditional digital camera will never provide, including seamless photo-sharing on multiple channels from anywhere. The Samsung Galaxy Camera lived up to our high expectations and we were pleased to see that it felt almost like using a high end Smartphone while delivering high-quality images and manual controls. The manual mode interface should be slightly re-worked to make it perfectly functional. Samsung just invented the Smart Camera category. I hope that this review gave you a good feel for how it is to use the Samsung Galaxy Camera in the real world. If there’s something else that you want to know, please leave a comment, and I will try to address your question while I still have the camera on hand. Thank you for stopping by! Let us know what you think.

When we started this article we thought that the Samsung Galaxy Camera and the Nokia 808 PureView might have a lot in common - a great camera package with a smartphone OS to extend their functionality. It turns out that they are pretty different and will get different people interested. The Galaxy Camera is great for the social networking photographers. With built-in 3G or LTE you can upload photos straight to Instagram or Facebook or Twitter or Google+ or anything really - we can't think of a popular web service that lacks Android support. Then there are things like instant upload, image editors, IM clients and everything else in the Google Play Store. When it comes to actual camera features, the Galaxy Camera offers impressively long zoom, manual controls, as well as 60fps and 120fps slow-motion videos that are nothing short of impressive and unmatched by phones (too bad YouTube doesn't support them). It also has the best screen in the camera world - by far. It's not all good though - the Camera is bigger than most micro four thirds and costs as much. Most disappointingly, it is miles behind them in terms of actual quality.

In the end, the Samsung Galaxy Camera is let down by the quality of the photos it produces - very few (if any) people will need the advanced on-board functionality offered by Android and be okay with a camera that can't beat a cellphone camera. But we'd love to see a sequel - especially if Samsung takes its usual approach to covering the entire range. Now that they have made a point with the versatile zoom, something more compact and with a larger sensor would be most welcome.

So while the Samsung Galaxy Camera doesn't take the best photos in the world, it is a versatile device that is surprisingly easy to use given its almost total reliance on a touchscreen interface, with its real strength lying in the ability to edit and share your photos online with very little fuss. For those users, the so-so image quality won't be such a big factor, so if the main way that you share your photos is uploading them to your favourite socaial network, then we can heartily recommend the new Samsung Galaxy Camera.

More of a camera than a smartphone -- that much you can say about the Samsung Galaxy Camera in the end. With the Galaxy Camera, Samsung brought an interesting and versatile product to the market and simultaneously created a new product class. As we have experienced with other Samsung devices, the camera case gleams with solid manufacturing quality and a good choice of material. The camera feels substantial, and the fusion of the touchscreen with the camera is well done. Input through the touchscreen works very well both in tablet-mode and for photography, and it glistens with its excellent responsiveness and high level of accuracy. The value of the touchscreen itself is also convincing, even if the colors are a little distorted at certain angles of vision. The hardware's performance is also as satisfactory as it could be, though it always lags a little behind the Samsung Galaxy S3.

A sure sign of things to come, but this first effort doesn't feel like the finished article

This is a tricky thing to evaluate. On the one hand, if we had $500 to spend on a camera of this size, we'd be more likely to spend it on a sophisticated mirrorless model that delivers better image quality. Alternatively, if we needed a cheap compact, we might opt for the Samsung WB850F, which has WiFi connectivity and the same lens and sensor as the Galaxy Camera, but costs half the price. The fact that we're paying so much money to dupe expensive components already used in smartphones, and that we'd have to spend at least $10 per month extra to get a basic data plan and make use of that SIM slot, all weighs heavily against the Galaxy Camera as a practical purchase. If the device were smaller and lighter, perhaps with a 4.3-inch panel and a shorter zoom, and if it was priced only slightly higher than a regular non-Android compact (perhaps at $300 or $350), we could imagine it being more mainstream. But alas, that's not what we're looking at right now.

The Samsung Galaxy Camera has some standout features to justify its price. It is an extremely ideal travel camera, when in use the zoom allows you to take wide landscape shots, or zoom in for close-ups. When you're not shooting you can use Android apps to edit and share your photos, play games, check your email, browse the web and much more. The HD screen makes the camera look extremely cool and will be a wow with your friends. Generally, image quality is good, but we found the panorama shots weren't stitched together well and with a minimum focusing distance of 10cm it's difficult to shoot close-up macros. There are full manual controls so you can set your own aperture and shutter speed, with auto mode if you'd like the camera to adjust the settings automatically, making picture shooting easy. Although a little expensive if you're looking for a travel zoom, there is plenty to love about the Samsung Galaxy Camera and is therefore recommended.

The best parts of a camera and tablet combined – a compelling choice for connected travellers and social network addicts

As a proof of concept, the Galaxy Camera is one of the most effective I’ve ever seen. Almost every idea that Samsung has tried here is not only good but works exactly as you’d expect it to. The only issue with the software is there’s too much of it. I can’t imagine a situation where I’d ever want to read a book on my camera — can you? And that's just one of many useless diversions left in Samsung’s first Android camera attempt. That said, going back to using a NEX-F3 was a truly painful experience — the tiny non-touchscreen, the convoluted menus, the endless plugging and unplugging of SD cards; it all seems so unnecessary now. I’m persisting with Sony’s old-fashioned camera because the difference in image quality is so large it’s insurmountable, and no amount of apps and trickery will ever be able to fix that. Other manufacturers need to take note, though: Samsung has just taught you how to make a smart camera. These sort of devices have to provide automatic cloud storage options, they have to let you plug into any social network you want, and they have to allow you to install additional apps so you can switch to whatever new image sharing, editing, or viewing platform you want. That’s the standard that Samsung has set here. Is Google’s Android the only way to achieve that feature-set? Perhaps not. I can’t help but feel Samsung would have been better off forgoing the full Google experience in exchange for a more focused, tweaked version of Android that has access to a curated, camera-focused store. At the very least some of the applications should’ve been suppressed, as there’s way too much going on when you first take the Galaxy Camera out of the box. It’d be a far better experience for the end user, that’s for sure. If not Samsung itself, then another manufacturer needs to take what Samsung has started and finish it. While there’s no substitute for the dedicated dials of a DSLR, the addition of a touchscreen and cloud backup would be a killer feature, and the more consumer-friendly interchangeable-lens systems and high-end point-and-shoots would benefit from the whole suite of smart camera features. As for the Galaxy Camera, it’s a $200 point-and-shoot with some fantastic sharing and editing features — is that worth the $300 premium? Probably not, especially if you have a smartphone with a capable camera.

The Samsung Galaxy Camera offers a great deal of connectivity allowing users to transfer photos from the device to a tablet or phone along with one of the best implementations of connectivity seen to date. The quality of image is good as photos taken in good lighting conditions and at low ISO are relatively sharp and noise free. The camera employs a user interface that is second to none among cameras. The components far exceed any smartphone camera available. Although the market for this camera might be low, the overall appeal is great. Can you find a less expensive compact camera that takes images that are of equal of greater quality? Yes. But can you find one that is as fun and easy to use? We think not!

The Samsung Galaxy Camera is an impressive combination of technology. As far as features go it's as well specified as any on the market, with the only real missing feature being Raw capture for advanced shooters. It's also well designed, with the main focus of operation rightly devoted to the stunning touchscreen on the model's rear. However, it's not a camera without its faults - the burden that the ample touchscreen places on the battery means that you'll need to be packing one or two spares for a full day's shooting and usage. There's also the fact that image quality, though much better and more versatile than your average smartphone, stumbles in a host of areas. Putting these faults aside, Samsung must be applauded for leading the way in the digital camera market and launching a device that generally impresses. If the Galaxy Camera is anything to go by, it certainly won't be the last 3G-enabled digital camera.

Creating something like the Samsung Galaxy Camera is a risk: Because it’s a hybrid device, there’s the chance it’s both a crappy Android device and a crappy camera. This isn’t a perfect camera; it could have a bigger sensor and a better lens. And, of course, while you can use video or voice chat apps for calls, this isn’t actually a phone and using it as such is awkward, at best. But none of that denies how compelling it is. There is, simply put, so much you can do with this device, and it certainly stands on its own two legs as a point and shoot. However, the concession you have to make is the fact that the virtually same camera, the WB850 F, is currently selling for almost half the Samsung Galaxy Camera’s price: It’ll cost you around $270 on Amazon, and the Galaxy Cam costs a whopping $500 (and don’t forget about paying for data). For that price, you could get an impressive Micro Four Thirds or bridge camera. Then again, most high-end smartphones will run you $500 without a wireless contract as well, so the price isn’t uncalled for, considering the hardware.

The Samsung Galaxy Camera delights yet confounds. In many respects it's a breath of fresh air that succeeds in camera connectivity to a degree way, way beyond anything else out there. The £400 price point may sound a lot - and it is - but it's about £100 less than the Samsung Galaxy S III smartphone for a device that's, well, better specified depending on which way you look at it. It also buries the Nikon Coolpix S800c's chances of any Android dominance by outperforming it at almost every level. And we love all the Samsung's power and multimedia playback possibilities too. But this is meant to be a camera at its core. And as a camera it can't produce images worthy of its £400 price tag because the lens has sharpness issues and image processing doesn't help either. There's too much going on for successful cohesion. It's like Samsung's taken all its best possible devices and thrown them in a pot with the belief that it would make for the greatest camera ever. It could have, but it hasn't. We'd like to see a smaller-bodied and optically improved device, possibly with a yet larger sensor at the expense of some zoom. There's a huge amount of potential here and we don't doubt that a future Galaxy Camera will hit the nail on the head. But as it stands the first of its kind hits both nail and the thumb.

The Samsung Galaxy Camera combines the functions of a Android device and a dedicated camera quite well, letting you whisk your photos and videos to the Web instantly. But this first-gen design also shows room for improvement.

The best way for me to sum up the Samsung Galaxy Camera is that it's an OK camera, but a very good gadget. The lens and image sensor are nothing special and if you just want a compact megazoom with some wireless features, I recommend the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX30V or the Samsung WB850F, or just buy another camera and use an Eye-Fi SD card. With those, you can shoot whatever you want, and then wirelessly send the images to a mobile device and use that to upload. The Galaxy's advantage is that it's all in one; you shoot and you share, just like you would with a smartphone or tablet with a mobile data plan. The price for the privilege of doing that, though, is too much.

Is the Galaxy Camera a game-changer? Yes, and no. In itself, it’s the best of the Android-based cameras, though that’s hardly a well-stocked category. Judged purely on its photography abilities it struggles, falling short of what similarly-priced rivals can produce while costing significantly more than the point-and-shoots it’s quality is on a par with. Taken into context as an all-in-one photography, editing, and social sharing studio, however, and it’s a different matter, occupying a niche sweet spot between the flexibility (but underwhelming photos) of a smartphone, and the quality (but cumbersome sharing options) of a camera. Then there’s price. AT&T offers the Galaxy Camera for $499.99 with a month-to-month plan, not the usual two-year agreement, and if you’re an existing smartphone customer you can add the Samsung to Mobile Share data plan for an extra $10 per month. Alternatively, you can get it a data plan of its own, starting at $14.99 for 250MB per month, or $30 for 3GB, or finally $50 for 5GB. Given the increasing number of users with mobile hotspot functionality on their phones, or willing to simply take advantage of WiFi hotspots, we can see plenty opting out of a cellular data connection altogether, which does somewhat undermine the Galaxy Camera’s abilities.