Lots of people are unhappy with the camera on the Z. I'm into photography and I thought I'd have a play with it to see what I could find out. I thought I'd post this as it may help people get more out of the camera and understand why they are getting bad results. I was initially very unhappy with low light shots, especially compared with my old Xperia Arc. I am now getting vastly better results.
1. "Superior Auto Mode" SUCKS. Really, really sucks.
Why?
First, it applies some sort of hyper-aggressive noise reduction/sharpening to most images. This means that even if you get a good capture, this mode then does its best to ruin it for you by artificially stuffing up details and actually adding noise (via over-aggressive processing).
Second, it does really stupid things with ISO. You may notice that on manual settings, ISO only goes up to 1600 (which is still way too high for this sensor). However, in auto, the camera will go up to at least ISO 2500 (confirmed by checking exif data). This is extremely bad for image quality and introduces huge amounts of colour noise which simply cannot be overcome by post processing. In addition, in auto mode the camera is very "high ISO happy", so it will bump up the ISO very quickly even in moderately good conditions.
What's more, while you can't use the (dubious) image stabilisation at manual ISO settings, you can you HDR. So you can get good night or dusk shots by using HDR and (say) ISO 400 in normal mode, which I deal with below.
Overall, I would avoid this mode unless you are in bright conditions or just need to get a basic shot without caring about quality.
2. HDR mode is real, but the images it takes are not taken simultaneously.
I'm sure I read Sony claiming that the sensor was in some way three layered and therefore that it could take HDR shots instantly. The reality is that while HDR mode works (weakly), it actually takes three separate shots over the space of maybe half a second.
The problem with this is that if things are moving in your image, they will either blur or have ghosts of themselves in the photo.
I verified this by taking an HDR shot of traffic at an intersection. I was able to see very dark and very light 'ghost' images of moving cars, even though the rest of the image was sharp and clear.
From this I am guessing that Sony has implemented an edge-matching algorithm to process the three exposures into one. This can cope with some camera shake, but cannot cope with actual fast moving objects. This theory is supported by the fact that the image size drops by one megapixel for HDR, i.e., the camera is giving itself a "border" to allow for shake.
It is also apparent that the level of HDR processing is very weak compared to what is possible with a proper camera and proper software. The exposure range and the amount of weight given to the high and low range exposures is very weak (confirmed by the level of saturation of the "ghost" cars in my test image, which were fairly faint).
Others have reported that the video quality suffers with HDR on. This is consistent with the HDR having to take triple the exposures then process them on the fly.
3. Image stabilisation is a gimmick
In manual mode, you can turn on image stabilisation. However, when you do this, you can't set a manual ISO level and can't use HDR. This strongly suggests that all that "image stabilisation" is really doing is messing with your ISO settings (as per "superior auto mode") to increase shutter speed in difficult conditions by ramping up ISO. This, of course, destroys quality.
4. You can use normal mode to control the ISO and get much better results, including at night
If you choose "normal" shooting mode, and then go to settings and scroll down, you will find an option to set the ISO of the camera manually.
Playing with this, I have been able to get much, much better results from the camera than are achievable either in "superior auto" mode or in any mode where ISO is set to "auto".
Specifically, I would say that the camera produces fair to excellent results (for a phone camera) at any ISO below 400, and acceptable results at 800 in some conditions. However, 1600 produces very noisy images and should be avoided if you are after image quality (as should 800, to be safe). That is consistent with the size of the camera and sensor. Even fairly good consumer DSLRs struggle at or above 1600, so it is not surprising that a tiny phone camera struggles at or above 800.
Using the camera at ISO 400 I have been able to take shots in very dark conditions which look great and show relatively little noise.
The lens is f/2.4 at its fastest, which is not ultra fast, but fast enough to capture a decent amount of light at ISO 400 or 800. You are better off sticking to these ISO levels and trying to physically stabilise your camera (i.e., balance it on something solid) than killing you image quality with higher ISO settings.
A comparison suggests that "normal" mode doesn't apply the stupid levels of sharpening and noise reduction (so called) that superior auto mode does. Shots seem to retain most of the natural sharpness and detail that the camera is clearly capable of producing.
5. The flash is bad but better than most
Direct flash generally sucks, and mobile phone flashes generally suck. Combine them for a lot of suckiness.
However, Sony has done a solid job with this flash, given the baseline difficulties with any direct flash. It doesn't seem to blast its subject and it seems to be at a low enough level to let ambient light fill in the background. I was able to get acceptable results in normal mode at ISO 400.
6. Metering
The metering on the camera is quite aggressive in its centre-weighted variation. If you are finding that photos of a light or dark object are causing the rest of the scene to blow out or go too dark, try the full averaged metering mode (which is slightly dark, but does a decent job).
7. My suggested settings
A. Daytime: Normal mode; ISO 100; HDR off (to avoid ghosts on moving objects); flash off.
B. Nightime: Normal mode; ISO 400; HDR off unless taking pics of buildings and holding camera v steady; metering full scene; flash off.
C. I want to produce horrible photos then complain: Superior Auto Mode.
I hope this helps someone! Using setting A above this camera produces some stunning pictures in good light. Using setting B it produces very good night pictures for a camera phone, particularly if you shoot at the highest resolution then resize later.
One other thing - what I would like to see Sony do to improve the camera so that users get the most out of it...
1. Dramatically reduce the default image processing in auto mode
2. Add a smart ISO setting, where the user can control the maximum ISO that the camera will select on "auto ISO". E.g. allow the user to set ISO800 as a cap, but have the camera use a lower setting if suitable for the conditions.
3. Add advanced options to allow the user to contol noise reduction and sharpening.
4. (In fantasy land) add a full manual mode.
What do you mean by "metering full scene"? Do you recomendo "multi-point automatic focus"?
JPWOA said:
What do you mean by "metering full scene"? Do you recomendo "multi-point automatic focus"?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, that's focus mode (which I don't have strong views about - I prefer single point for more control, personally). I.e., the way in which the camera picks the subject which will be in focus.
I'm talking about exposure, i.e., how the camera works out how bright or dark the scene is. In "normal" mode, if you go to settings, then scroll down, you will see a metering option. The choices are centre, average or spot.
I'm suggesting that at night "average" will be most useful as "centre" or "spot" take a limited part of the image and base exposure on that. At night a limited part of the image is likely to be extremely dark or light, which will make the exposure go nuts.
During the day "centre" works ok for specific subjects, and average is good for evenly lit scenes.
Thank you very very very much for your review.
I'll own a Xperia Z in a few days and, since i'm into photography too, I was worried about the quality pics I've seen.
Did you try the burst mode? Have you seen the post about burst mode avoiding (almost) all postprocessing and daylight pics look awesome?
What do you think? Does normal mode avoid this kind of overprocessing in good light conditions?
caitsith01 said:
...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed on pretty much most of what you say, in addition other camera apps that allow you to save 100% jpg quality or save as png also help.
f2.4 not ultra fast hmmm, I am sure you do not have very many lenses in your arsenal that are faster for your camera. I know I only have one, my F1.2 50mm lens, the rest are f2.8 or F4, they have to do for me because they don't make any faster sir, and if one day they even did, I am telling you I could not afford them .
Apart from that some good information shared.
---------- Post added at 01:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:38 PM ----------
juanmaasecas said:
Thank you very very very much for your review.
I'll own a Xperia Z in a few days and, since i'm into photography too, I was worried about the quality pics I've seen.
Did you try the burst mode? Have you seen the post about burst mode avoiding (almost) all postprocessing and daylight pics look awesome?
What do you think? Does normal mode avoid this kind of overprocessing in good light conditions?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes and no, because Sony are still processing the image to create the jpg files, and not saving at 100%. Think of RAW, I always shoot in RAW because then I am in control of the processing on the image WB,Sharpness,Brightness... not my camera.
Burst mode is great, because the Sony algorithms don't have time to apply all the settings to all the photos before they are written, so just pretty much write the file (like jpg in raw jpg). So a combo of all these things will significantly help further. To better this even further there are other camera apps that allow you to save at 100% jpg or even png for RAW like capture to a lesser extent
danw_oz said:
f2.4 not ultra fast hmmm, I am sure you do not have very many lenses in your arsenal that are faster for your camera. I know I only have one, my F1.2 50mm lens, the rest are f2.8 or F4, they have to do for me because they don't make any faster sir, and if one day they even did, I am telling you I could not afford them .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually I have a couple which are faster. For DSLR stuff f/1.4 and f/1.8 are only a couple of hundred bucks, and there are compacts available in that territory too.
For really solid low light performance at an acceptable ISO you really need something around f/2.0 or lower. Either that, or a better sensor which can produce minimal noise at ISO 1600.
juanmaasecas said:
Thank you very very very much for your review.
I'll own a Xperia Z in a few days and, since i'm into photography too, I was worried about the quality pics I've seen.
Did you try the burst mode? Have you seen the post about burst mode avoiding (almost) all postprocessing and daylight pics look awesome?
What do you think? Does normal mode avoid this kind of overprocessing in good light conditions?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have seen that thread - in my opinion the burst pics look similar to those I have been able to achieve in normal mode, i.e., nice clean edges, not a lot of detail loss, not a lot of noise added by over-sharpening.
I imagine the reason is that the camera isn't fast enough to ruin... er... process pictures when shooting in burst mode. Burst mode has some resolution limitations, though, plus who wants 10 copies of every photo?
To be honest many of the daytime shots I've taken look pretty close to what you would expect from an enthusiast compact, like one of the Leica-Panasonic or Canon G-series cameras. Not quite there, but close (and obviously lacking optical zoom).
Well i don't know but i took some samples for a quick compare. Though even the BURST Mode pics are a bit smaller in size, they give you still the most detail and Pictures overall look much better. That's at least my impression.
1- Burst Mode
2- Snap Camera (PlayStore)
3- Supperior Auto
4- Normal Mode ISO 100
5- HDR Kamera (PlayStore)
Decide for yourself.
caitsith01 said:
Actually I have a couple which are faster. For DSLR stuff f/1.4 and f/1.8 are only a couple of hundred bucks, and there are compacts available in that territory too.
For really solid low light performance at an acceptable ISO you really need something around f/2.0 or lower. Either that, or a better sensor which can produce minimal noise at ISO 1600.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am talk serious gear, not cheap 50mm lenses. And I didn't ask you if you could find cheap lenses, I asked you how many lenses you have faster than f2.4.
For solid low light performance, I would not be using a smart phone, nor would most others I am sure. Most people are using phones for snap shots nothing serious, or to capture that once off shot because you didn't have a better camera on hand.
Not any phones that I am aware of below f2.0
caitsith01 said:
Actually I have a couple which are faster. For DSLR stuff f/1.4 and f/1.8 are only a couple of hundred bucks, and there are compacts available in that territory too.
For really solid low light performance at an acceptable ISO you really need something around f/2.0 or lower. Either that, or a better sensor which can produce minimal noise at ISO 1600.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hi, thanks for your detailed explanation. i have one concern, though (just food for thoughts). you said that in superior auto applies more processing on the pictures. for what i've seen (and the examples provided by higgings are clear enough), the processing applies as well, but we have (dramatically) less colour shifting and probably less noise. the problem, to me, is still aliasing and lack of detail (if you compare in higgings pictures, burst mode, the door phone, you can clearly see the name plates, which isn't the case in the other pictures
anyway, good job, and thanks again
Thanks for this really informative thread.
One question though. In normal mode, the viewfinder, ie the screen, is really dark. I could barely make out any details in a well lit room but when I take a picture, the image comes out well lit. Increasing the exposure to 2.0 helps but not a great deal. The screen looks fine and bright in superier auto though. My settings are the settings you recommended. ISO at 100 and flash, HDR off. Any idea what's the issue? I've included a couple of photos to better illustrate this. Note, the dark picture which is in normal mode is attempting to focus on the same object as the superior auto mode in the same lighting situation.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
totally agree, most of all on superior auto...
normal mode, same photo,auto is 400 iso...manual iso 200 (just a little darker) superior auto 800/1600 iso
superior auto can be good only on daylight (difference between 40 and 100 is really small)
sacredsoul said:
Thanks for this really informative thread.
One question though. In normal mode, the viewfinder, ie the screen, is really dark. I could barely make out any details in a well lit room but when I take a picture, the image comes out well lit. Increasing the exposure to 2.0 helps but not a great deal. The screen looks fine and bright in superier auto though. My settings are the settings you recommended. ISO at 100 and flash, HDR off. Any idea what's the issue? I've included a couple of photos to better illustrate this. Note, the dark picture which is in normal mode is attempting to focus on the same object as the superior auto mode in the same lighting situation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi
I think this is a flaw with the camera software. It happens on mine too. It is trying to guess what the image will look like at that ISO. So the slower you set the ISO, the darker the preview. However when you take the picture it does its best to get a good exposure and generally succeeds.
So basically not much you can do about this, but it does make it hard taking shots in very low light. Another thing Sony should fix!
fartlec said:
hi, thanks for your detailed explanation. i have one concern, though (just food for thoughts). you said that in superior auto applies more processing on the pictures. for what i've seen (and the examples provided by higgings are clear enough), the processing applies as well, but we have (dramatically) less colour shifting and probably less noise. the problem, to me, is still aliasing and lack of detail (if you compare in higgings pictures, burst mode, the door phone, you can clearly see the name plates, which isn't the case in the other pictures
anyway, good job, and thanks again
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree that you can resolve those nameplates better in the burst mode picture, even though I think it might be slightly lower resolution (?). The "normal" mode shot looks softer, but looks to me like it still has less aggressive noise reduction/sharpening than the "superior auto" shot. I would like to know what ISO these were at - unfortunately the EXIF data has been stripped out.
Another area where the three pictures are noticeably different is the curtains in the lowest row of windows. The burst mode output is noticeably sharper. Normal mode is a bit more smudged and has the characteristic "painted" look of over-aggressive noise reduction, and superior auto mode is even worse in this regard (as well as the colour being completely different).
I obviously don't know exactly what's happening inside the camera, my original post is just what I've tried to work out from playing around with different settings.
I can say for sure that there was a drastic difference in noise for me taking the same dark night scene using superior auto and then manually dialling down the ISO. Using superior auto the noise in darker areas was so bad that the image was unusable, even for social media etc, whereas at ISO 400 it was acceptable and could have come from a reasonable quality compact camera. It may be that the ISO level is the primary problem, and that the aggressive denoise/sharpen algorithms make the problem worse (because running these on a super-noisy picture will produce messy results). So it might be running the same level of denoise etc in both modes, but because superior auto produces such messy base images the filters then make the pictures look shocking.
It really needs a "raw" mode, either producing real RAW images or producing "straight out of camera" JPEGS with minimal filtering.
caitsith01 said:
Hi
I think this is a flaw with the camera software. It happens on mine too. It is trying to guess what the image will look like at that ISO. So the slower you set the ISO, the darker the preview. However when you take the picture it does its best to get a good exposure and generally succeeds.
So basically not much you can do about this, but it does make it hard taking shots in very low light. Another thing Sony should fix!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah thank you. So for indoor pictures, if I wanted to see the preview, I don't have a choice but to increase ISO? That sucks really
I've flashed a 4.2 camera from this thread
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1970957
I found the quality is way better than the stock one, even it shot at 5MP
sillypilot said:
I've flashed a 4.2 camera from this thread
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1970957
I found the quality is way better than the stock one, even it shot at 5MP
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exemples ?
I also use the 4.2 camera. For me it's faster and the photos it makes are on par with the ones made using burst.
I've patched the 4.2 camera to support all of the resolutions Z/ZL support (9, 13, etc).
I'm uploading it now.
Update: here's the link
A few shots from yesterday.
At the car
Burstmode, mid.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/83964459/Bil%20Burstmode.JPG
iAuto
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/83964459/Bil%20iAuto.jpg
At my parkingspace
iAuto
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/83964459/Parkering%20iAuto.jpg
Burstmode, mid.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/83964459/Parkering%20Burst.JPG
Normal, 100ISO, HDR On
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/83964459/Parkering%20Normal%20100ISO%20HDR%20On.jpg
Window shot
iAuto
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/83964459/F%C3%B6nster%20Auto.jpg
Burstmode, mid.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/83964459/F%C3%B6nster%20Burst.JPG
So what do you think? There are some differences between the pictures indeed.
I have a note 3 sm n900.
But in my camera if the turn image smart stabilisation off the photos sre taken are very fast but they start cracking if i zoom in.. if i take a pic of a book or something the words arent very clear,i even tried keeping my hands very steady while taking the photos.
On the other hand enbablimg smart stabilisation, camera takes around one second to take a photo and the photos arr very clear.
This shouldnt be happening, right?
Whats the point of having smart stabilisation off if the photos look like taken from a 2MP shooter.
Please help.
Please reply.
I have been hurt by the community as my last problems didnt even get a reply.
Sent from my SM-N900 using XDA Free mobile app
begimaad said:
I have a note 3 sm n900.
But in my camera if the turn image smart stabilisation off the photos sre taken are very fast but they start cracking if i zoom in.. if i take a pic of a book or something the words arent very clear,i even tried keeping my hands very steady while taking the photos.
On the other hand enbablimg smart stabilisation, camera takes around one second to take a photo and the photos arr very clear.
This shouldnt be happening, right?
Whats the point of having smart stabilisation off if the photos look like taken from a 2MP shooter.
Please help.
Please reply.
I have been hurt by the community as my last problems didnt even get a reply.
Sent from my SM-N900 using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you aware of how camera sensors work?
Smart stabilization is meant to offset the use of higher ISOs/lower shutter speeds so that your pictures turn out less noisy. Given that the Note 3's max aperture is f/2.2, let's make an example.
In the daylight, your ISO can drop and thus picture quality can improve (this is very barebones, but it's for conceptual purpose). In essence, higher ISO = more noise, especially the smaller the sensor size. You can visibly see that the Note 3 has a very small sensor. In fact, even on APS-C cameras, noise performances starts to suck around ISO 3200~6400. ISO is meant to make each pixel brighter (or something to that effect), and the smaller those pixels are, the more noise you'll generate (again, not exactly, but that's the gist of what you're experiencing). So, with 13 megapixels fit onto the small sensor, you're likely going to start seeing noise at like, ISO800 (this is a random guess, but it's probably true).
Anyways, so during the daytime, there is a lot of available light, so the ISO can be reduced and exposure can be adjusted using shutter speed (assuming aperture stays the same). This improves picture quality as lower ISOs generally equate to less noise. However, as you get later into the night, less available light means that one of two things has to happen. Either your shutter speed gets slower to let in more light, or your ISO cranks up to become more sensitive to the available light (and thus more noise). Usually a combination of the two occur to get a trade off between quality and shutter speed.
A quick browse on google gave me, 1/15, f2.2, ISO 1000, as EXIF data from an iPhone 5s taking a picture at night. As you can see, the ISO is pretty high for the small sensor, and the shutter speed is quite low. As a rule of thumb, you generally want at least an equivalent shutter speed to the focal length, but given the crop factor of this lens, I have no idea what that'd actually be. But 1/15th is very, very hard to hold without some form of IS/OS, even on full-frame cameras. What you're experiencing is this effect. The low shutter speed to let in more light means that even if you breath and shift the camera 1cm, you'll get blur. It's not out of focus, but the subjects weren't in the same place because you moved, causing them to be rendered in shift. The noise is the result of the ISO being too high; the pixel sensitivity isn't that great, and so you're getting all kinds of weird colours that the phone is trying to represent without definitive data. Again, we're assuming that the aperture stays wide open under these conditions to let in the most light.
I hope you got the answer you were looking for. Basically, what you want is pretty hard to do, even with a full-framed DSLR (although it's becoming less true with recent image processing). You can't really turn of IS/OS and expect the pictures to be great. There's a lot of other things that are taken into account behind the scenes that are usually beyond your control on your phone. Smart stabilization using image processing algorithms to help mitigate the impact of higher ISOs and lower shutter speeds by post-processing the images you take on the fly. Such is the cause of the delay.
What version you're running , do you try to use any third-party camera app results may vary , did you increase exposure value, try to reser all camera setting to default
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
msasm09 said:
What version you're running , do you try to use any third-party camera app results may vary , did you increase exposure value, try to reser all camera setting to default
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Got it sorted out. In not so bright conditions the pictures start breaking and by turning on smart stabilisation it gets fixed. Credit goes to the last persom who explained. Best explanation ever. Hats off to u
Sent from my SM-N900 using XDA Free mobile app
Would people care to post tips about what are best settings to use in:
low light photos
fast subjects
etc,
Don't have this phone, but I can share some common knowledge.
There's a term often called "exposure triangle". Proper exposure is achieved by combining three variables - ISO, aperture, shutter speed. High ISO, wide aperture (low f-number) and low shutter speed give you more light. Depending on what you're shooting, you'd want to sacrifice one or the other. High ISO gives you more light at the expense of image quality. Wide aperture gives you more light at the expense of lower depth of field (which is not necessarily bad - e.g. may be intentionally desired). Low shutter speed gives you more light at the expense of not being able to give you a sharp image of something that's moving. Generally you can vary one to compensate for the other two. With most phones, the aperture is fixed, so you're left with only shutter speed and ISO.
For low light, you'd want to drop the shutter speed to something like 1/10 or 1/5 - if the subject is still and your hands are steady, you can have a sharp photo this way. The lower you drop the shutter speed, the lower ISO you will need to ensure proper exposure - and the lower the ISO, the cleaner the image given the exposure is proper - but don't try to keep the ISO low if it would result in an underexposed shot. Experiment with what is the lowest speed at which you can manage a sharp shot.
For fast subjects, it depends - sometimes 1/100 is enough, sometimes 1/500 is not enough - very much depends on what you're shooting (primarily how fast it is moving). Again, try it yourself.
killchain said:
Don't have this phone, but I can share some common knowledge.
There's a term often called "exposure triangle". Proper exposure is achieved by combining three variables - ISO, aperture, shutter speed. High ISO, wide aperture (low f-number) and low shutter speed give you more light. Depending on what you're shooting, you'd want to sacrifice one or the other. High ISO gives you more light at the expense of image quality. Wide aperture gives you more light at the expense of lower depth of field (which is not necessarily bad - e.g. may be intentionally desired). Low shutter speed gives you more light at the expense of not being able to give you a sharp image of something that's moving. Generally you can vary one to compensate for the other two. With most phones, the aperture is fixed, so you're left with only shutter speed and ISO.
For low light, you'd want to drop the shutter speed to something like 1/10 or 1/5 - if the subject is still and your hands are steady, you can have a sharp photo this way. The lower you drop the shutter speed, the lower ISO you will need to ensure proper exposure - and the lower the ISO, the cleaner the image given the exposure is proper - but don't try to keep the ISO low if it would result in an underexposed shot. Experiment with what is the lowest speed at which you can manage a sharp shot.
For fast subjects, it depends - sometimes 1/100 is enough, sometimes 1/500 is not enough - very much depends on what you're shooting (primarily how fast it is moving). Again, try it yourself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly as mentioned above pretty much, I will add a little more.
Normal cameras you can change the aperture which in turn will also affect the required shutter speed for the correct exposure in the given shot. Your phone does not have this, only a fixed aperture, how you phone regulates this is through shutter speed and adjusting your ISO. Manual with all cameras is recommend for best results, as your camera can make bad decisions for these exposures.
Perfect example I can give you is the other night I was trying to photograph christmas lights, the camera was trying to illuminate the entire scene over exposing all the lights, I had to compensate this by underexposing by one stop what the camera was trying to expose.
If you have ever photographed scenes with lots of black and or lots of white, with black your phone overexposes and you black becomes greyish the rest of the shot is bright white. With white your phone underexposes, the white has lots of details but the background is very dark of completely black. it each of these situations if you don't take control you will not get the best out of the scene.
Thank you contributors. I found out that by changing the exposure my screen darkens quite a lot but when I take the photo comes out a lot lighter. What is that about? Is it not wysiwig?
mihaid said:
Thank you contributors. I found out that by changing the exposure my screen darkens quite a lot but when I take the photo comes out a lot lighter. What is that about? Is it not wysiwig?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The camera is trying to show you a real time image, so in low light it has to keep the shutter faster to keep up with you moving the camera, if they didn't do this and it was showing you real time in low light you would have to wait the exposure time, this would get really annoying as you have to wait for each frame to refresh
So in summary they have a minimum shutter they show in the screen preview (not sure what this is) maybe 1/15 sec so it can keep up with you panning/moving the camera
The Sony display tries to improve the look of photos, you have noticed when you view a photo that it changes while you are looking at it.
If you want a less post-processing you can use "Landscape" mode. You will get visible color noise in low light situations but also more detail in dark areas. A bit like what G4/V10 does and depeding on scene it can be passable. In good lighting it brings out the details better than other modes. It does though like to up the ISO but it can be countered with the EV.
Does people even have the phone to make comments, the only settings in manual mode is change iso value that's it, there is no shutter speed at least not in Sony stock camera app
Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk
You can change most of the settings mentioned above using the Fv-5 app, try it
babarmaqbool said:
good
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Stop with the good spam in each thread please.
Sent from my SM-T710 using Tapatalk
Vcaddy said:
You can change most of the settings mentioned above using the Fv-5 app, try it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is not free (lite version is horrible) and can only shoot long exposure in 2.1 MP.
I bet it doesn't even shoot a real long exposure, I think it just shoots a video into a picture.
BTW, normal photos can only be taken in 8mp max.
This phone needs a real manual mode like the G4 because the phone really does not deal with low light well due to lack of control in the app. FV-5 is useless really as it's only 8mp and doesn't really do any better than stock on this phone or the G4
Jonathan-H said:
This phone needs a real manual mode like the G4 because the phone really does not deal with low light well due to lack of control in the app. FV-5 is useless really as it's only 8mp and doesn't really do any better than stock on this phone or the G4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed.
Long exposure in vf-5 app is only 2.1mp btw.