Related
I tried every possible situation to get the camera to act like a 5MP one but not even close.
I am happy with my HD actually but the fact that it has the 5MP camera made me buy it a week ago rather than getting the TOUCH PRO 2.
Looking at the pictures with 5MP set on, they are 2592x1552 with superfine quality which even does not make 5MP (4 maybe). Pictures with N95 were way better. Is it that hard to implement a good 5Mp camera with such a great device? Was the aim for all the stories about that 5MP camera only commercial ? I feel bad now as deciding which device to buy based on specs became really hard.
I'm a bit disappointent with the camera as well, but:
- Set 'widescreen' to off. Then you get actual 5MP pictures.
- The camera quality in the new custom roms (I use Dutty's 2.1) is slightly better.
Hope it helps
Have a look here Best Camera Settings
Well, most of us are happy to have a great phone with a 5MP camera and not vice versa!
heliosdev said:
Have a look here Best Camera Settings
Well, most of us are happy to have a great phone with a 5MP camera and not vice versa!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the link. I have been reading also that the camera quality is almost as good as other 3.2MP HTCs devices which is really disappointing.
On such a small sensor, more megapixels makes the picture worse.
It's the same reason why the best pocket cameras are three year old 6 megapixel models. The new ones are 15megapixel, and are way worse.
arfster said:
On such a small sensor, more megapixels makes the picture worse.
It's the same reason why the best pocket cameras are three year old 6 megapixel models. The new ones are 15megapixel, and are way worse.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you are right, maybe we should ignore the fact that cameras of HTC devices with more Mpix are better and focus on other specs like Screen/integrated Keyboard/processor/RAM/ROM.
I understand now why PRO 2 has a 3.2MP camera.
I totally agree with op but also the reasoning responses.
they marketed it as a 5 megapixel and its way below par with everything.
the phone is awesome and I wouldn't trade it with anything right now.
however I would totally sympathise with anyone who uses the camera as a deciding factor upon purchasing.
The camera is not a deciding factor but when you choose between 2 devices with same specs, one with 3.2MP and one with 5MP, you should know that you did not get anything as a plus. You only payed more.
It's only going to get sillier. New models are coming out with 8mp and 12mp, and the pictures they take are awful.
Jeez, even aps-c DSLRs from all manufacturers max out at 10/11mp, because it's counterproductive to have more (and they have sensors 245645363456546x bigger than a mobile).
So in other words, the 3.2MP of new HTC devices camera is better than the 5MP on the HD ?
The quality of the picture quality of the HD is heaps better than the pictures taken from the n95, it's just the shutter is much slower in low light on the HD, that's its weak point.
It will be a matter of time when a firmware upgrade is provided to increase the shutter.
Xeon said:
So in other words, the 3.2MP of new HTC devices camera is better than the 5MP on the HD ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At this sensor size, and with the same lens, 3.2mp will produce better pictures than 5mp.
Xeon said:
So in other words, the 3.2MP of new HTC devices camera is better than the 5MP on the HD ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
3.2MP on OLD HTC device is better than the HD in terms of usability, quality is still very very good in ideal conditions.
I find the photos pretty OK in daylight. It is an average 5MP just a little worse than the N95. Just use the default settings.
I had a N95 also. Like you said, the quality of the pictures is not as good as a 2 years 5MP device. That is what i am not getting.
Man I hate reading thread like this, the fact that you think 5MP determines picture quality suggests that perhaps you buy anything before thoroughly investigating!
N95, HD, both pic quality is still very poor compared to an actual dedicated SLR or Digital camera.
Megapixels are just "dots" 1 megapixel = 1 million dots etc, therefore yes the HD can take a 5 megapixel photo, however, "megapixels" do not necassarily determine picture quality, all sorts of factors make up picture quality, such as: human knowledge and experience, lighting, the quality of the lens and sensor combination, the size of the photodiode(s), the quality of the camera components, the level of sophistication of the imaging processing software, the image file format used to store it, etc. Different sensor and camera designs make different compromises. I have n95 too and find the quality between the two similar, crap! compared to my Nikon 6mp digital camera.
Simply you dont "get it" because perhaps you dont put enough thought or research into things. Im not having a go at you, I just would assume that after 2yrs with a piece of crap N95 you'd know better.
homer285 said:
Man I hate reading thread like this, the fact that you think 5MP determines picture quality suggests that perhaps you buy anything before thoroughly investigating!
N95, HD, both pic quality is still very poor compared to an actual dedicated SLR or Digital camera.
Megapixels are just "dots" 1 megapixel = 1 million dots etc, therefore yes the HD can take a 5 megapixel photo, however, "megapixels" do not necassarily determine picture quality, all sorts of factors make up picture quality, such as: human knowledge and experience, lighting, the quality of the lens and sensor combination, the size of the photodiode(s), the quality of the camera components, the level of sophistication of the imaging processing software, the image file format used to store it, etc. Different sensor and camera designs make different compromises. I have n95 too and find the quality between the two similar, crap! compared to my Nikon 6mp digital camera.
Simply you dont "get it" because perhaps you dont put enough thought or research into things. Im not having a go at you, I just would assume that after 2yrs with a piece of crap N95 you'd know better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And maybe you can explain for me why they are going through higher MPixels with newer phones if the picture quality will still suck ? This is my point of the whole thread. Dont you think it is just a commercial thing to get people interested in buying higher specs devices ?
Also check out this thread.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=491592&highlight=brightness+camera
Xeon said:
And maybe you can explain for me why they are going through higher MPixels with newer phones if the picture quality will still suck ? This is my point of the whole thread. Dont you think it is just a commercial thing to get people interested in buying higher specs devices ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course. That's been obvious for years now, same with mainstream cameras (except the dslr market, where image quality actually matters).
Xeon said:
And maybe you can explain for me why they are going through higher MPixels with newer phones if the picture quality will still suck ? This is my point of the whole thread. Dont you think it is just a commercial thing to get people interested in buying higher specs devices ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Higher Megapixels DO NOT determine picture quality it is merely and simply resolution, even on a high quality digital camera MP has less value than a good quality lens.
Hey guys.
There's a new competitor in town. SE is definitely looking to gain some market share with the Idou scheduled launch Q2 '09. some specs listed are :
Sony Ericsson Idou
GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900
HSDPA 900 / 2100
Coming soon. Exp. release 2009, Q3
TFT touchscreen, 16M colors
360 x 640 pixels, 3.5 inches
Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g, DLNA
Symbian OS
12.1 MP, 4256 x 2832 pixels, autofocus, xenon flash, video, video LED flash, secondary VGA videocall camera
- Built-in GPS
- aGPS function
- Camera images geo-tagging, face and smile detection
- Google maps
- FM radio with RDS
- MP3/AAC/MPEG4 player
- Organiser
- Built-in handsfree
- Voice memo/dial
- Java MIDP 2.0
Some links:
Engadget
Phonedog
Some other video
What are your thoughts on this new model.
The SE Idou has a smaller screen, lower resolution, not WinMo, no North American 3G (Telstra model has 850).
The only positive that jumps out is the camera, but that's not enough to overcome the above negatives for me. Sorry, not interested.
I bet the Idou-NOT camera will still be shooting 3gp video in 320*240 resolution
My 3 and a half year old Universal has a bigger, higher resolution screen than the Idou. If that's progress I'm not impressed.
That phone was epic back in the day! Still has some decent specs now!
really cant stand all those nonstandard resolution.
heck, enough's enough already with vga wvga q and square stuff!
crashDebug said:
really cant stand all those nonstandard resolution.
heck, enough's enough already with vga wvga q and square stuff!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well get used to it - it's the same resolution that all the new touchscreen Symbian handsets are coming out with such as the Nokia 5800 and the Samsung OmniaHD.
The reason they've gone for it is that it's a 16:9 aspect ratio.
There's no point trying to compare the Touch HD to the Idou as one of those handsets isn't even available yet.
In fact, going on SE's recent form, I'd be very surprised if they get it into shops this year. And I'd even go so far as to say that someone like Samsung or LG will have released a different 12mp handset before Idou is available.
Also, why on earth does anyone think that 12mp on a phone is going to be a good thing?
Think about how poor the camera on the HD can be, do you really think cramming in an extra 7 million pixels will make things better?
Too low res for me - 800*480 is simply a sweet spot, it's the major thing HTC got right.
I bet the 12mp camera takes shockingly bad pictures too. That's more than almost all aps-c DSLRs out there (and the few that tried 14/15mpixel didn't sell, because they took worse pictures than the 10/11 models).
Idou would be a good phone. If this (or N97) is out now, I would not have bought the HD. Don't get me wrong. I am very satisfied with HD (with all the tweaks and cooked roms). Coming from a S60 N95/82 and after using HD for the last 3 months I have to honestly say somehow WM is still not as good an OS compared to Symbian. Symbian is still more robust, nimble and more efficient.
not impressed with it's spec's compared to some of the 2009 htc devices on the horizen...like the Firestone, etc.
I don't know for sure, but normally cameras with these resolution ain't better than any 5 MP camera. Its not the resolution that limits the capacities, but its the lens.
mib1800 said:
Coming from a S60 N95/82 and after using HD for the last 3 months I have to honestly say somehow WM is still not as good an OS compared to Symbian. Symbian is still more robust, nimble and more efficient.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everyone has their own preferences.
Until the Nokia 5800 was released, I'd never used a Symbian phone that I liked. I just don't feel the way the menus are laid out works all that well.
johnpatcher said:
I don't know for sure, but normally cameras with these resolution ain't better than any 5 MP camera. Its not the resolution that limits the capacities, but its the lens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's both.
Yes the lens makes a big difference but so do the number of pixels.
By cramming more pixels onto the same size of sensor, each pixel is smaller and consequently less light hits it.
Because less light hits it, the picture will appear duller unless you increase the amplification of the signal from each pixel. But if you do that, you also increase the amount of noise, which is detrimental to the picture quality.
Even with premium components it's impossible to amplify a signal without having noise appear but there's no way that a phone is going to be fitted with premium components, so the noise will be much worse than it would be on a digital camera of the same quality, not to mention that proper digital cameras would also tend to have a physically larger sensor anyway, so they wouldn't have to crank the amplification up so much.
Even the C905 (which is, according to GSMArena the best 8mp camera-phone on the market from a camera perspective) already has serious issues with noise and, at best, Idou will have a sensor of the same physical size but with more pixels.
However I've already read rumours that the sensor will, in fact, be smaller than the C905's which will make it all even worse.
Step666 said:
It's both.
Yes the lens makes a big difference but so do the number of pixels.
By cramming more pixels onto the same size of sensor, each pixel is smaller and consequently less light hits it.
Because less light hits it, the picture will appear duller unless you increase the amplification of the signal from each pixel. But if you do that, you also increase the amount of noise, which is detrimental to the picture quality.
Even with premium components it's impossible to amplify a signal without having noise appear but there's no way that a phone is going to be fitted with premium components, so the noise will be much worse than it would be on a digital camera of the same quality, not to mention that proper digital cameras would also tend to have a physically larger sensor anyway, so they wouldn't have to crank the amplification up so much.
Even the C905 (which is, according to GSMArena the best 8mp camera-phone on the market from a camera perspective) already has serious issues with noise and, at best, Idou will have a sensor of the same physical size but with more pixels.
However I've already read rumours that the sensor will, in fact, be smaller than the C905's which will make it all even worse.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with everything you said, and being a photographer I'm very familiar with issues you described.
However, Sony is leading the market in compact digital cameras, and as such, it would not surprise me that these 12 megapixels turn out to produce "decent quality" photos.
Decent for average Joe Snapshooter, of course. Because, although for last 5 or so years I have been listening to "OMG, they're putting EVEN more pixels onto that tiny sensor", somehow the manufacturers are still running the megapixel race, and image quality has had a small but steady quality improvement. First time I heard this sentence was when first big megapixel jump happened: from 1 megapixel to 2.
So, let's just wait and see before bashing the new Sony, at least camera-wise.
I'm not waiting, I hold out zero hope for Idou or any other 12mp handset.
I've seen both 100% crops and A3 printouts from the C905 and as I said before, noise is a huge problem.
I just don't see how adding extra pixels is going to do anything but make matters worse.
Also, since when have Sony been leading the market for compact cameras?
I must admit I'm not as au fait with everything since the pixel numbers went through the roof but last time I checked, Nikon and Canon were sharing the spoils.
Rozenthal said:
Decent for average Joe Snapshooter, of course. Because, although for last 5 or so years I have been listening to "OMG, they're putting EVEN more pixels onto that tiny sensor", somehow the manufacturers are still running the megapixel race, and image quality has had a small but steady quality improvement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There have been tests recently that showed the best compact ever made was the Fuji f30, a 4 year old 6 megapixel model (people pay a ton of money for them on ebay). Even with improvements in tech since, they've not been able to counteract the quality decrease that cramming more megapixels in causes. Fuji themselves tried to reign back the megapixel race, hold at 8 max for quality reasons, but marketing trumps all and they've had to give it up.
I had a 15mpixel Canon pocket camera recently, the quality was awful.
arfster said:
There have been tests recently that showed the best compact ever made was the Fuji f30, a 4 year old 6 megapixel model (people pay a ton of money for them on ebay).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't suppose you have a link?
I tried my fair share of Fuji cameras in the past and was never hugely impressed by them, so I'm a little surprised at that.
Also, for them to try and position themselves as the voice of reason in the megapixel war is rather hypocritical since they were the manufacturer who traditionally always aimed for more, staying on with interpolation long after most other manufacturers had given up on it.
Comparing camera samples with best in same resolution category... done by PureViewClub : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbSjQS-2h1w
In my opinion 808 turns out best (but less vibrant colors but with so less noise and more detail) , next is lumia 920 and then SXZ (not far behind) i call it tie for 2nd place... then n8 and then SXS comes last due to heavy noise everywhere. but then it is just my opinion.
nikhiltanwar said:
Comparing camera samples with best in same resolution category... done by PureViewClub : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbSjQS-2h1w
In my opinion 808 turns out best (but less vibrant colors but with so less noise and more detail) , next is lumia 920 and then SXZ (not far behind) i call it tie for 2nd place... then n8 and then SXS comes last due to heavy noise everywhere. but then it is just my opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, nice find, thanks for posting that.
My take away is this (and I'm sad to say) there STILL is no perfect smartphone camera. I've owned an 808 Pureview and while it excels at most shots, it is not very good at closeup macro shots, as seen in this video.
I am glad for this video, though. The camera is the single most important feature in a phone to me right now. I keep thinking each new phone is going to have that "perfect" camera sensor, but it probably is not going to happen in the foreseeable future. The Z is certainly not the answer. I don't think the One will be much better. Even the Mighty 808 Pureview lacks in some regard.
I think I may need to rethink my priorities and pick the other features I like most in a phone.
stiffi2011 said:
Wow, nice find, thanks for posting that.
My take away is this (and I'm sad to say) there STILL is no perfect smartphone camera. I've owned an 808 Pureview and while it excels at most shots, it is not very good at closeup macro shots, as seen in this video.
I am glad for this video, though. The camera is the single most important feature in a phone to me right now. I keep thinking each new phone is going to have that "perfect" camera sensor, but it probably is not going to happen in the foreseeable future. The Z is certainly not the answer. I don't think the One will be much better. Even the Mighty 808 Pureview lacks in some regard.
I think I may need to rethink my priorities and pick the other features I like most in a phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wait till something like http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_w880_amoled_12m-2948.php comes again to mobiles (it failed last time)... but that phone will be thick... i think best option for a camera lover is lumia 1000 or EOS (for now)...
stiffi2011 said:
Wow, nice find, thanks for posting that.
My take away is this (and I'm sad to say) there STILL is no perfect smartphone camera. I've owned an 808 Pureview and while it excels at most shots, it is not very good at closeup macro shots, as seen in this video.
I am glad for this video, though. The camera is the single most important feature in a phone to me right now. I keep thinking each new phone is going to have that "perfect" camera sensor, but it probably is not going to happen in the foreseeable future. The Z is certainly not the answer. I don't think the One will be much better. Even the Mighty 808 Pureview lacks in some regard.
I think I may need to rethink my priorities and pick the other features I like most in a phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have a Pureview also. To get good macros you actually need to be a bit further away from the subject and zoom slightly, produces excellent macros that way. Without using that technique it does struggle a bit with finding focus in macro shots.
Regarding Pureview having less vibrant colours - they are less vibrant but more true to life in my experience. Have yet to find a phone camera with better colour reproduction, and I've tried nearly all high-end phones over the last 6 years.
It definitely isn't perfect, but it is a huge leap over every other phone out there so far - the sheer lack of noise is utterly staggering. Better than my Lumix FZ-100 in that regard, and while the FZ-100 is by no means an incredible camera, it still blows my mind a little how much better shots are from my 808 a lot of the time.
hehe, Talking about Camera Comparission. X10i vs Z
https://plus.google.com/photos/+DuanDao/albums/6070583356055960369
raazman said:
https://plus.google.com/photos/+DuanDao/albums/6070583356055960369
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They don't look very impressive to say the least... Pictures were taken in Irvine CA. I wonder who has access to a Nexus 6 this early down there?
How do we know these pictures were taken with a Nexus 6?
As far as the pictures go, they are very hit or miss. There are a few decent ones, but the majority of them don't look very good.
msal said:
How do we know these pictures were taken with a Nexus 6?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess it could be faked but:
Camera shamu
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In photo details.
This is quite disappointing, Nexus cameras aren't known to be amazing but for $649 I'd surely expect more than this.
Click on the posters image. He had the nexus 5 test device.
The colors look oversaturated, which I guess is typical for cell phones (except a handful of the older flagship Nokia phone cameras).
Anyway, preproduction devices often do not have fully calibrated cameras, so I wouldn't put too much stock in how these images look. This person is also clearly not a professional photographer. I don't think any meaningful judgments can be made until reviews come out from some of the better sites for photography in phones.
msal said:
How do we know these pictures were taken with a Nexus 6?
As far as the pictures go, they are very hit or miss. There are a few decent ones, but the majority of them don't look very good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The good ones were sadly made w/ an iPhone.
Underwhelmed to say the least.
650+ Should buy a high end everything, especially camera. They could of at least out sourced the camera for that price.
ericerk said:
The good ones were sadly made w/ an iPhone.
Underwhelmed to say the least.
650+ Should buy a high end everything, especially camera. They could of at least out sourced the camera for that price.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How can you tell it's from an iPhone?
msal said:
How can you tell it's from an iPhone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Photo details button. It's on the right of the picture.
ericerk said:
The good ones were sadly made w/ an iPhone.
Underwhelmed to say the least.
650+ Should buy a high end everything, especially camera. They could of at least out sourced the camera for that price.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't understand what you're talking about. Motorola doesn't make camera sensors. Neither does Google. Just about every phone manufacturer outsources the camera and there are only a handful of companies that actually make camera sensors for phones. The Nexus 6 has a Sony IMX214 Exmor RS sensor. The Sony sensors are in a lot of phones these days. The Sony sensors aren't bad. And it is absolutely absurd to make any conclusions about the Nexus 6 camera based on a couple random photos, from a bad photographer, on a pre-production device.
That aside, what do people expect anyway? The Nexus 6 has a 1/3 sensor like basically every other phone out there these days (including the iPhone) and that just makes for a mediocre camera. They are all more or less equally mediocre and there's no reason to expect anything different from the Nexus 6. It's not about megapixels, its about the actual physical size of the sensor. Phones have not changed from 1/3 sensors for a long time (because they can't do it and remain thin). Only the OIS is an interesting feature on the Nexus 6.
If you want a good camera, get a Nokia 1020 or Nokia 808 and just deal with the operating systems on those phones. They have huge sensors that are far superior to anything and everything else. Even five year old Nokia cameras, like in the N86, have much larger sensors than every phone out there. The only single exception is the Galaxy S5, which has a 1/2.5 sensor like the five year old N86, but the S5 is still nowhere remotely close to the 1020 or 808.
Those are your real choices. Everyone else has just thrown their hands in the air and excepted "good enough" cameras, because they'd rather make the phones super thin, than put good sensors in them. Superficial numbers and specs change, but phone cameras really are not progressing anymore. (Even Nokia has dropped the ball, now that Damian Dinning, the person behind the great cameras at Nokia like the 808, has left the company and the cell phone business.)
cb474 said:
I don't understand what you're talking about. Motorola doesn't make camera sensors. Neither does Google. Just about every phone manufacturer outsources the camera and there are only a handful of companies that actually make camera sensors for phones. The Nexus 6 has a Sony IMX214 Exmor RS sensor. The Sony sensors are in a lot of phones these days. The Sony sensors aren't bad. And it is absolutely absurd to make any conclusions about the Nexus 6 camera based on a couple random photos, from a bad photographer, on a pre-production device.
That aside, what do people expect anyway? The Nexus 6 has a 1/3 sensor like basically every other phone out there these days (including the iPhone) and that just makes for a mediocre camera. They are all more or less equally mediocre and there's no reason to expect anything different from the Nexus 6. It's not about megapixels, its about the actual physical size of the sensor. Phones have not changed from 1/3 sensors for a long time (because they can't do it and remain thin). Only the OIS is an interesting feature on the Nexus 6.
If you want a good camera, get a Nokia 1020 or Nokia 808 and just deal with the operating systems on those phones. They have huge sensors that are far superior to anything and everything else. Even five year old Nokia cameras, like in the N86, have much larger sensors than every phone out there. The only single exception is the Galaxy S5, which has a 1/2.5 sensor like the five year old N86, but the S5 is still nowhere remotely close to the 1020 or 808.
Those are your real choices. Everyone else has just thrown their hands in the air and excepted "good enough" cameras, because they'd rather make the phones super thin, than put good sensors in them. Superficial numbers and specs change, but phone cameras really are not progressing anymore. (Even Nokia has dropped the ball, now that Damian Dinning, the person behind the great cameras at Nokia like the 808, has left the company and the cell phone business.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What you're saying is fair, but It's not just random bias. I haven't seen a wonderful camera on a Moto phone since.... EVER.
I'm not getting it for the camera, I had the M8... I just want something that has a good camera. Something that doesn't shoot duds. I don't want a potato cam.
ericerk said:
What you're saying is fair, but It's not just random bias. I haven't seen a wonderful camera on a Moto phone since.... EVER.
I'm not getting it for the camera, I had the M8... I just want something that has a good camera. Something that doesn't shoot duds. I don't want a potato cam.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know a lot of people think the Moto cameras recently have been mediocre, but I really think, for the reasons I said, it's making a big deal out of relatively small differences. All of these phones have mediocre cameras with various limitations. The difference between good mediocre and medium mediocre is not that meaningful to me.
Like I said, if you want the best of the middle of the road cameras, get a Galaxy S5. If you want a truly great camera in a phone, get a Nokia 1020 or Nokia 808. Everything else is splitting hairs.
That said, I think the Nexus 6 (and Moto X) will be fine. As noted, it has a 1/3 Sony Exmor sensor, the likes of which can be found in perfectly respectable phones like the iPhone 4 and 5 and the Galaxy S4. It's not one of the newer generation Exmor RS sensors, but the advantages of those sensors has been overplayed. They're mostly still 1/3 sensors and so, whatever. A 1/3 sensor is never going to make for a great camera. But it is the status quo these days so it's not going to be subpar either (like for example the Nexus 4 that has a tiny 1/4 sensor).
cb474 said:
I know a lot of people think the Moto cameras recently have been mediocre, but I really think, for the reasons I said, it's making a big deal out of relatively small differences. All of these phones have mediocre cameras with various limitations. The difference between good mediocre and medium mediocre is not that meaningful to me.
Like I said, if you want the best of the middle of the road cameras, get a Galaxy S5. If you want a truly great camera in a phone, get a Nokia 1020 or Nokia 808. Everything else is splitting hairs.
That said, I think the Nexus 6 (and Moto X) will be fine. As noted, it has a 1/3 Sony Exmor sensor, the likes of which can be found in perfectly respectable phones like the iPhone 4 and 5 and the Galaxy S4. It's not one of the newer generation Exmor RS sensors, but the advantages of those sensors has been overplayed. They're mostly still 1/3 sensors and so, whatever. A 1/3 sensor is never going to make for a great camera. But it is the status quo these days so it's not going to be subpar either (like for example the Nexus 4 that has a tiny 1/4 sensor).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you'd like to chip in on the 700+ I have to put into this phone, I feel the right to have my own opinion on it.
I like a decent cam in the device.
I want to to be up to my standards, now yours. We don't know if this is the final hw version of the camera. We'll see that in a few weeks.
I want a nexus, w/ a non moto esque camera. The N5 was good enough. Except able.
For example the moto X took decent pictures... but they were really bad, and grainy and had weird artifacts. There was grain, and distortion in high light.
The moto x 2014 is crap in low light, the light ring isn't really conducive to light up anything.
The nexus 6 has the same set up, which makes me nervous. The camera is in theory the same as well.
All I'm saying is their track record is bad. Googles been talking about making better cameras on their flag ship devices for ages. So we're hoping w/ this one it's a home run
They weren't restricted in price in this variation. They put in very high end spec, and components. If the camera isn't just as good as the Galaxy S4 I will be upset. Very upset.
The S4 had a wonderful camera.
That's my bench mark.
ericerk said:
If you'd like to chip in on the 700+ I have to put into this phone, I feel the right to have my own opinion on it.
I like a decent cam in the device.
I want to to be up to my standards, now yours. We don't know if this is the final hw version of the camera. We'll see that in a few weeks.
I want a nexus, w/ a non moto esque camera. The N5 was good enough. Except able.
For example the moto X took decent pictures... but they were really bad, and grainy and had weird artifacts. There was grain, and distortion in high light.
The moto x 2014 is crap in low light, the light ring isn't really conducive to light up anything.
The nexus 6 has the same set up, which makes me nervous. The camera is in theory the same as well.
All I'm saying is their track record is bad. Googles been talking about making better cameras on their flag ship devices for ages. So we're hoping w/ this one it's a home run
They weren't restricted in price in this variation. They put in very high end spec, and components. If the camera isn't just as good as the Galaxy S4 I will be upset. Very upset.
The S4 had a wonderful camera.
That's my bench mark.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have the right to have your opinion but that doesn't make it a thoughtful opinion.
If you think the Nexus 5 was good enough, with a Sony Exmor IMX179 1/3.2 sensor, than it makes zero sense to think that the Nexus 6 with a newer technically better Sony Exmor IMX214 and slightly larger 1/3.06 sensor is worse, and it makes even less sense to think that the 2nd Gen Moto X with a newer generation Sony Exmor RS IMX135 and also slightly larger 1/3.06 sensor is worse.
People make all these subjective judgements about the cameras in the phones and don't realize that they all have more or less the same sensor in them from Sony.
What's more you based your initial judgement about the Nexus 6 camera on a couple random poorly taken snapshots linked to in the OP, from a pre-prodcution Nexus 6 that may not have even had the same sensor in it as the final production unit.
So yes you have a right to your opinion. But it is a very poorly reasoned, jumping to unfounded conclusions opinion, based on a misunderstanding of the actual sensors in these phones. Wait for a good site, like Dpreview to test the camera in the Nexus 6 or Moto X and then maybe you will have a basis for coming to some sort of conclusion.
But in the end, with the 1/3 sensors, these phones are still going to all be in the same ballpark. People can make a big deal out of minor distinctions, if they want to, but it's silly and not meaningful in real world situations. The reason to spend a lot of money on a phone like this is not for the camera.
cb474 said:
You have the right to have your opinion but that doesn't make it a thoughtful opinion.
If you think the Nexus 5 was good enough, with a Sony Exmor IMX179 1/3.2 sensor, than it makes zero sense to think that the Nexus 6 with a newer technically better Sony Exmor IMX214 and slightly larger 1/3.06 sensor is worse, and it makes even less sense to think that the 2nd Gen Moto X with a newer generation Sony Exmor RS IMX135 and also slightly larger 1/3.06 sensor is worse.
People make all these subjective judgements about the cameras in the phones and don't realize that they all have more or less the same sensor in them from Sony.
What's more you based your initial judgement about the Nexus 6 camera on a couple random poorly taken snapshots linked to in the OP, from a pre-prodcution Nexus 6 that may not have even had the same sensor in it as the final production unit.
So yes you have a right to your opinion. But it is a very poorly reasoned, jumping to unfounded conclusions opinion, based on a misunderstanding of the actual sensors in these phones. Wait for a good site, like Dpreview to test the camera in the Nexus 6 or Moto X and then maybe you will have a basis for coming to some sort of conclusion.
But in the end, with the 1/3 sensors, these phones are still going to all be in the same ballpark. People can make a big deal out of minor distinctions, if they want to, but it's silly and not meaningful in real world situations. The reason to spend a lot of money on a phone like this is not for the camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My opinion is based off of the moto x 2014. Nothing concrete has been released about the camera internals that I've seen.
I'm buying this phone even if it doesn't have a camera (That's a lie)
As I note above more than once, the Nexus 6 has the Sony Exmor IMX214 sensor. That information is readily available online. See: http://www.devicespecifications.com/en/model/617b3011. This is the same sensor as in the OnePlus One, a phone for which the camera has been praised a lot and the OnePlus One doesn't even have OIS.
That being said, the 2nd Gen Moto X, as I said, has a Sony Exmor RS IMX135. This is the same sensor as in the Galaxy S4, making it completely silly that you're so down on the 2nd Gen Moto X, but hold up the Galaxy S4 as your minimun standard that a phone camera has to meet. The IMX135 can also be found in the LG G3, the LG G2, the Note 3, amongst many other phones, further putting the lie to the idea that there are big differences between the cameras in these phones.
Doesn't camera software also play a role in how well a photo is taken?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk
DirgeExtinction said:
Doesn't camera software also play a role in how well a photo is taken?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To some degree yes. But it's relevance is pretty minor. Sometimes there are problems when a phone first comes out that are later corrected in software updates(colors being off one way or another). A lot of phones favor oversaturated colors, instead of more realistic colors, which is something determined by how the image is processed by the phone after it is captured. Some phones apply more sharpening effects, which at first glance make an image look, well, sharper, but actually eliminate some detail in the image (though you will only notice if you zoom all the way in to the pixel level--which is not what most people are doing, most people are downsizing images to send to people and therefore eliminating most of quality of the image to begin with). But again, this is all fiddling around the edges to compensate for what are essentially very small sensors that are simply physically limited in what they can do.
Also, these software effects are pretty much all things that can be changed in post-processing on a computer, so they are not ultimate limitations to the images that can be produced with a particular phone. But the sensor is such a limitation, there is no getting beyond what it is or is not possible with a paritcular sensor.
Looks like we're gonna get another mediocre camera in a Nexus device, nothing abnormal here. I don't mind too much, I rarely, if ever, use my phone as a camera. If I anticipate taking photos, I'll bring a real, decent camera with me. Otherwise the mediocre shots from the Nexus'll be just fine.
Was kind of hoping that they'd get the camera right this time, though. I would have been nice, especially for others who rely on it more, but it seems they put their money elsewhere.
PewPewK said:
Looks like we're gonna get another mediocre camera in a Nexus device, nothing abnormal here. I don't mind too much, I rarely, if ever, use my phone as a camera. If I anticipate taking photos, I'll bring a real, decent camera with me. Otherwise the mediocre shots from the Nexus'll be just fine.
Was kind of hoping that they'd get the camera right this time, though. I would have been nice, especially for others who rely on it more, but it seems they put their money elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you look at my posts above? The Nexus 6 has the same Sony camera sensor as the OnePlus One, which a lot of people have praised for it's photos. Plus it has OIS. Yes the Nexus 5 and especially the Nexus 4 had subpar cameras, by today's standards. But the Nexus 6 is pretty much on a par with all other flagships out there. It should be a step up (on a par with the LG G3, iPhone, Galaxy S4, etc.).
That being said, as I've argued above, all of the latest flagship phones these days have mediocre cameras, because of their 1/3 sensors, so in that sense the Nexus 6 will be no different. The only truly good flagship phone camera is the Galaxy S5, which has a larger 1/2.5 sensor. And the only phones with what could be called next generation, big step forward cameras, are the Nokia 1020 and the Nokia 808, with huge 1/1.5 and 1/1.2 sensors (respectively), mechanicals shutters, and other advances way beyond anything else.
But I think there's no reason to be down on the Nexus 6 for it's camera. It's keeping up with the pack.
Hey all, received my Note 4 today and the camera quality isnt great, the pictures look blurry even when keeping the camera perfect still. I have taken the plastic film of the lens. Just wondering if anyone else is having this problem
Can you upload an example? Does this happen in low light, outdoors or both?
They were all taken indoors, some with light from room light and sun light through window and others just with a room light (on ceiling). Obviously one with a flash (flash was on auto for all of them but was only used on one after changing iso and white balance). They all just seem a bit grainy and blurry... or is it just me, ill try get some outside tomorrow
Indoor shots will look worse because the ISO will be higher and there's more chance of blurriness with a slow shutter.
Also make sure that you take a photo soon after a focus lock. When I'm indoors,I tend to use touch to shoot and touch on the part of the image I want the camera to focus on.
Sent from my SM-N910U
indoor the camera sucks. the only mini fix i have found is to take iso off auto and put it on 100 for indoor shots.
Ill use the touch to take pic and try the iso at 100, i dont understand cameras lol
Also i read somewhere to put the metering mode on matrix, its comes on centre weighted so should i leave it on that?
The Note 4 camera isn't very good. For perfectly still shots it's not so bad but any movement at all and the pictures turn into a blur fest. There is something wrong with the software on the phone, there is lag in places there should not be. The note 3 out performs the 4 by a large margin. I think this lag is the reason the camera cannot handle movement. I have tested several Note 4's. Some from TMO and some from Verizon (mine is Verizon) and it affects all the ones I tested except for the demo model I tried at Target. For some reason that one blurred much less and was much quicker when snapping pictures.
I use my camera a lot, this will probably be a deal breaker for me. I was hoping to see a good rom that would fix the lag issues and hopefully the camera problems with it.
Couldnt it be fixed in a firmware update? I have also noticed it to be a bit sluggish in places.
Theres also a hair inside the camera, underneath the glass but luckily its not over the lens,theres a hair inside the heart rate sensor bit as well. So dont know if that will affect anything
Schwuar said:
Couldnt it be fixed in a firmware update? I have also noticed it to be a bit sluggish in places.
Theres also a hair inside the camera, underneath the glass but luckily its not over the lens,theres a hair inside the heart rate sensor bit as well. So dont know if that will affect anything
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That right there would be the ultimate deal breaker for me. Any hair, human or otherwise, in my phone is an automatic return or warranty repair. I can handle some non-uniformity of the screen and stuff like that, but hair? Ick.
I've noticed that the indoor camera sucks pretty bad. Everything's a bit yellowish. Images can be adjusted a bit with the included software, but still not great. Outdoor photos are not so bad. But considering how hyped the camera was on this phone, it's a major letdown.
I think the camera is great considering it's a phone and not a digital camera (people seem to forget that sometimes) Almost all Android camera's perform bad in low light because of shuttertime limitations in de Android camera API (it simply does not provide long opening times) . Not much any Android smartphone manufacturer can do about that. Also if you're using flash indoors it's a LED not Xenon flash. Even the cheapest digital camera is using a real flash and outperforms a LED flash device.
regards
Seems it will get much better possibilities in Android L
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8274/understanding-androids-camera-hal3
marleyb said:
I think the camera is great considering it's a phone and not a digital camera (people seem to forget that sometimes) Almost all Android camera's perform bad in low light because of shutertime limitations in de Android camera API (it simply does not provide long opening times) . Not much any Android smartphone manufacturer can do about that. Also if you're using flash indoors it's a LED not Xenon flash. Even the cheapest digital camera is using a real flash and outperforms a LED flash device.
regards
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All true. They just need to stop hyping these cameras as digital camera replacements and all that. It sets unrealistic expectations.
marleyb said:
I think the camera is great considering it's a phone and not a digital camera (people seem to forget that sometimes) Almost all Android camera's perform bad in low light because of shuttertime limitations in de Android camera API (it simply does not provide long opening times) . Not much any Android smartphone manufacturer can do about that. Also if you're using flash indoors it's a LED not Xenon flash. Even the cheapest digital camera is using a real flash and outperforms a LED flash device.
regards
Seems it will get much better possibilities in Android L
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8274/understanding-androids-camera-hal3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This camera is worse than what it should be. I hate to see apologists come in and make light of something that is obviously very wrong with the note 4.
TIGGAH said:
This camera is worse than what it should be. I hate to see apologists come in and make light of something that is obviously very wrong with the note 4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And your information is based on what? It's no apologize that Android camera API is limited, it's a fact. What you don't understand about that? In other words you can put a professional CCD chip in a Android phone and it can only profit to certain amount of it because of OS limitations to access the hardware. Lucky the Google developers have seen the light and in Android L there will be improvement.
Hell no! Ur camera is ok! Its just ur eyes
Sent from my SM-N910C using XDA Free mobile app
marleyb said:
And your information is based on what? It's no apologize that Android camera API is limited, it's a fact. What you don't understand about that? In other words you can put a professional CCD chip in a Android phone and it can only profit to certain amount of it because of OS limitations to access the hardware. Lucky the Google developers have seen the light and in Android L there will be improvement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have very realistic expectations of what the camera should/can do and it doesn't do it. Also the in general lag is not right for the processor this thing has.
Like I said the note 3 has it over the 4 performance wise.
I'm hoping it's just simple software fix and things will be in an acceptable state.
TIGGAH said:
I have very realistic expectations of what the camera should/can do and it doesn't do it.
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's your expectation, I can't argue with that. I do know for sure there is no Android Smartphone on the market, which camera performs better then a cheap 60 bucks digital camera . Which is logical because of OS limitations I mentioned.
TIGGAH said:
Also the in general lag is not right for the processor this thing has.
Like I said the note 3 has it over the 4 performance wise.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The lag (if there is any) is mainly caused by TW AFAIK . I can tell you from first hand that the Note 3 does not perform better then the Note 4 as they are laying both in front of me now in my desk. Also you have take in account, that the Note 3 is longer on the market and most bugs (if any) are tackled with software updates, while the Note 4 is just 4 weeks on sale.
TIGGAH said:
I'm hoping it's just simple software fix and things will be in an acceptable state.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're disappointed in your new phone because of your own expectations, if you can't live with it ,trade it in against? Honestly I wouldn't know which phone to choose then myself.
Thanks for this thread. Its convinced me to stick with my note 3 after all. I've been waiting for an honest discussion on medium/low light shots indoors with the note 4.
Funny how no review sites pick up on this issue. Hopefully lollipop will make my note 3 take better shots anyway.
To me there is no good reason now to get a Note 4, especially with lag reports.
A n6 is maybe still a consideration having dual speakers, which is now the only significant upgrade to me. That or pass on upgrading this year.
IMO the lag on the note 4 is no worse than that on any other android phone I've had (I'm on the third plus three different tablet models) and I don't think it's all that bad.
Drop by your local store and give it a try for yourself though from what I've read, there's no compelling reason to upgrade from a note 3.
skibadee said:
Thanks for this thread. Its convinced me to stick with my note 3 after all. I've been waiting for an honest discussion on medium/low light shots indoors with the note 4.
Funny how no review sites pick up on this issue. Hopefully lollipop will make my note 3 take better shots anyway.
To me there is no good reason now to get a Note 4, especially with lag reports.
A n6 is maybe still a consideration having dual speakers, which is now the only significant upgrade to me. That or pass on upgrading this year.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Some reports did compare..... and note 4 outperforms note 3 buy a huge margin.
1. Not all cameras have ois, not even the note 3. Note 4 has it and that allows for relatively long shutter speeds like 1/8s (I've seen note 4 do 1/4 once but that's rare). That's a huge upgrade from note 3.
2 . The note 4 uses sony's IMX 240 sensor which is 1/2.6 inch size. The note 3? And older generation sensor is of a smaller 1/3.06 size. Now. Note 3 is 13MP and note 4 is 16MP. So individual pixel size of both cameras is of the same 1.12 um size. However it's a known quantity that IMX 240 's has better iso performance than I'm 135. Thus note 4 should have better low light shots.
3.its been known that the note 3 takes bad low light shots due lack of ois and the old IMX135 sensor.
4. Almost all galaxy series engage in some kind of "image stacking" software to reduce noise in low light shots. Aka night mode. This is probably low light shots EXIF data is eroded .
As for the lag. What lag ? Jerkiness in viewfinder? Lag in auto focus?
From phonearena
" Outdoors at night, the Galaxy Note 4 soaks in quite a bit more light than the Galaxy Note 3, which results in more visible illuminated details at the expense of overexposure. Photos taken by the Galaxy Note 3 look decidedly darker and noisier in comparison. They are also much softer, while the Galaxy Note 4 retains fairly sharp detail. Low-light photography has seen a big improvement in the new phablet, and by dialling down the exposure setting a notch, you will emerge with more usable night photos than before. "
From Engadget
"But low-light performance is what impressed me the most about the Note 4. While ISOCELL helped improve the GS5 over the Note 3, it still wasn't very good. Optical image stabilization has made a tremendous difference here; objects that barely show up at all on other Samsung cameras can be easily seen on the Note 4. In fairness, the images still don't look as natural here as they do on the iPhone 6 Plus, but this is by far the best nighttime imaging performance I've seen on a Samsung phone."
If your note 3 does better low light shots than note 4. Your phone is probably faulty or you picked the wrong settings for the camera.
It's funny how so many people here expect unrealistic results from this camera. Is this camera better than a PnS camera? Nope.
This this camera worse? Not really.
If you're talking about junk market for PNS cameras. They use a 1/2.3 inch sensor which is not all much bigger than note 4.
A lot of them don't have OIS or Sony's newer image sensors ( Sony's sensors are widely used in many brands).Note 4's image quality is probably better
If you're talking about the mid segment. They use approx a 1/1.7 inch sensor which can probably do a little better low light shots. But they are not really cheap anymore. Eg canon s120. Olympus xz2 etc...
Note 4 loses out a bit here. But that's cause these cameras are meant to be an upgrade from smartphone cameras
If you're talking about about the premium segment. Eg canon gx7 gx1 Sony rx100. Most of them have 1 inch sensors which boast relative great low light performance.
(They still suck compared to mirrorless or dslrs though). However they are probably as expensive as your note 4 or even more.