Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the Huawei P40 Pro+ come out. A higher rating indicates that photos offer rich color (without over-saturating), sharp detail (with all subjects in-focus), and appropriate exposure (with even lighting).
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
Some real life shots of the different zoom levels, overcast day as you can see.
0.5x 1x 3x 10x 20x
Attached photos but they are compressed i think so ZIP file also with the originals
Some colour shift between lenses which i hope they sort out
XDA_RealLifeReview said:
Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the Huawei P40 Pro+ come out. A higher rating indicates that photos offer rich color (without over-saturating), sharp detail (with all subjects in-focus), and appropriate exposure (with even lighting).
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Talking about lightinng, taken just yestarday. Amazing thunderstorm! Amazing phone! All photos taken in manual mode.
(sorry, as im new I cant post my photo, any help? I've tried to put a google photo link but it doesnt appear, shoul be the resolution? Thank you!)
IMG_20200824_155908-01 by Cam todd, on Flickr
IMG_20200824_175315 by Cam todd, on Flickr
IMG_20200824_174605 by Cam todd, on Flickr
Not for nothing, that top picture is horrendous. That HDR didn't work at all around the tree.
Fujimens said:
Not for nothing, that top picture is horrendous. That HDR didn't work at all around the tree.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That was a filter I added to given that effect..the original pic not like that
The problem is filters only work with the data they are provided and tune it. The HDR error is not in the filter, but in the original. And that's a problem.
Fujimens said:
The problem is filters only work with the data they are provided and tune it. The HDR error is not in the filter, but in the original. And that's a problem.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We can't know for sure without seeing the original. If the filter literally adds a glow around the edges of darker objects, accentuating them against the sky, then it's working as intended and the HDR is not to blame. Since filters can be pretty fancy these days, rather than simple colour shift ones of the past, I'd reserve judgement. Some phones can even insert AR characters or masks with "filters"... Kermit the frog doesn't look like a filter to me, but some programmer thought he was.
cambofuk said:
That was a filter I added to given that effect..the original pic not like that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
BikeHelmet said:
We can't know for sure without seeing the original. If the filter literally adds a glow around the edges of darker objects, accentuating them against the sky, then it's working as intended and the HDR is not to blame. Since filters can be pretty fancy these days, rather than simple colour shift ones of the past, I'd reserve judgement. Some phones can even insert AR characters or masks with "filters"... Kermit the frog doesn't look like a filter to me, but some programmer thought he was.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not how filters work. You made that up out of thin air. This is a common problem with most every HDR system, even the very best ones will have errors like this and the filter effect you're seeing here is that it enhanced the contrast between the lighter and darker rendered areas of the sky. The problem is the rendering that was cooked into the original and the tree is the classic test example for HDR accuracy and refinement. It may not be a huge difference in the original, but the data is there and the filter amplifies it. The end result is that if this issue is cooked into the original, it makes processing latitude, whether using simple filters, or using professional processing software, extremely limited, if not time consuming.
You're trying to fake technical talk. I'm a photographer, I do this every single day for a living and part of the problem with dealing critically with smartphones and trying to get improvements is that there are people online who act like they designed the phone and are being personally attacked and then lie about what's going on to cover for the company. It's weird as hell where the phone is a tool in some countries, to some people, while in other countries, the phone is your social score. The HDR processing screwed up, BFD. No need to make up transparent lies and excuses and pretend everyone else knows as little as you.
Fujimens said:
That's not how filters work. You made that up out of thin air. This is a common problem with most every HDR system, even the very best ones will have errors like this and the filter effect you're seeing here is that it enhanced the contrast between the lighter and darker rendered areas of the sky. The problem is the rendering that was cooked into the original and the tree is the classic test example for HDR accuracy and refinement. It may not be a huge difference in the original, but the data is there and the filter amplifies it. The end result is that if this issue is cooked into the original, it makes processing latitude, whether using simple filters, or using professional processing software, extremely limited, if not time consuming.
You're trying to fake technical talk. I'm a photographer, I do this every single day for a living and part of the problem with dealing critically with smartphones and trying to get improvements is that there are people online who act like they designed the phone and are being personally attacked and then lie about what's going on to cover for the company. It's weird as hell where the phone is a tool in some countries, to some people, while in other countries, the phone is your social score. The HDR processing screwed up, BFD. No need to make up transparent lies and excuses and pretend everyone else knows as little as you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here is the original.i used a filter on snapseed.
2020-09-18_06-28-30 by Cam todd, on Flickr
Thread's been cleared of what were definitely some off-topic posts, that were starting to border on flaming.
Chill out, stay civil, and stick to the thread's topic.
Thanks :good:
Low light:angel:
Pictures straight from the phone...no filters...no editing...https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
0,8...1...3...10...20...30x
...more...https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
---------- Post added at 12:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:24 PM ----------
...and some edited...
Related
Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the Planet Gemini PDA come out. A higher rating indicates that photos offer rich color (without over-saturating), sharp detail (with all subjects in-focus), and appropriate exposure (with even lighting).
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
It's - again - a video telephony camera. Not really meant for taking photos. It will, in good light, make a page of typed text readable. If you need a picture, it works. If you need a good picture, use something else.
wikholm said:
It's - again - a video telephony camera. Not really meant for taking photos. It will, in good light, make a page of typed text readable. If you need a picture, it works. If you need a good picture, use something else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I expect to see info about the external camera add on here.
Anyone got information about it? Is it better than the internal one even thou it's the same amount of megapixels (yes I am very much aware this is a very bad mesurement of camera quality, but one might suspect that the built in front facing camera and the external one is the same kind of camera if they are both 5MP).
Hi everyone I know some are using bluetooth camera eyes which are not attached to good effect, the camera onboard is pants at best really retro back to the 80s not worth the money. I know the kodak (i think) bluetooth eye camera is good but expensive but if your willing to by that you may as well invest in a proper camera or better mobile.
Real shame they sub'd out on the this accessory as skype calls are not really doable so very poor overall a clip on via the C USB could be an option but not looked into that as yet.
ATB
Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the Moto G7 Power come out. A higher rating indicates that photos offer rich color (without over-saturating), sharp detail (with all subjects in-focus), and appropriate exposure (with even lighting).
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
IMO the noise reduction filter is to strong on this phone especially in lower light which can end up eliminating a lot of fine details, but there is a way to adjust it if you dont mind using another camera app, download Open Camera from google play and after launching app select the gear icon in upper right (Settings) then find Camera API and change it to "Camera2 API" this will unlock extra settings, now you can goto Processing Settings and you'll see Noise reduction ,you can completely disable NR here or choose Fast, High Quality or Minimal, personally I like Minimal.
Hopefully this helps someone :good:
Thanks for the tip. Have you compared Open Camera results with the GCam apk that's been shared on this forum?
greenmatrix said:
Thanks for the tip. Have you compared Open Camera results with the GCam apk that's been shared on this forum?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did shortly after posting previous comment and would have to say Gcam might be the superior app lol, there's no noise reduction settings but it still does a pretty amazing job at overall picture quality with HDR+ or HDR+ Enhanced enabled, especially in lower light, Not sure if i'm using the 'best' gcam version the one im using is GCam_6.2.030_N7P_test1.3a but if I discover something better I'll update.
I found out the camera glass is not very durable, even with a case, I'm on my third lense, and now the actual camera lense is scratched.
Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the Nokia 9 PureView come out. A higher rating indicates that photos offer rich color (without over-saturating), sharp detail (with all subjects in-focus), and appropriate exposure (with even lighting).
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
I've been using the light L16 for a long while. I assume it would work the same. Images on the Pure View may render a bit slow "on device" , since it dosent have to be exported into lights Lumen software. I'll see once mines arrives though.
lsmith1981 said:
I've been using the light L16 for a long while. I assume it would work the same. Images on the Pure View may render a bit slow "on device" , since it dosent have to be exported into lights Lumen software. I'll see once mines arrives though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, with all the sensor data on it does take a while to merge all the image data. The amount of time varies based on the scene and detail.
Harfainx said:
Yes, with all the sensor data on
it does take a while to merge all the image data. The amount of time varies based on the scene and detail.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's instant surprisingly, their software team has done a excellent job on that part. Even though it uses the SD820 and their custom ASIC together, everything works just fine. I'm sure with the SD845 and the ASIC chip, things would work much better on that device.
https://light.co/technology
lsmith1981 said:
It's instant surprisingly, their software team has done a excellent job on that part. Even though it uses the SD820 and their custom ASIC together, everything works just fine. I'm sure with the SD845 and the ASIC chip, things would work much better on that device.
https://light.co/technology
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I meant it takes a while on the Nokia 9 Pureview. I've had everywhere from about 4 seconds, up to 25ish seconds to process a photo.
As I'm eager to get my hands on this device mainly for the capabilities of the camera, is it possible for some of the lucky early owners to share a few RAW files.
At least two people here have it, and we don't have one real-life sample to check out.
I really can't believe there are no real and meaningful reviews for this phone...
here is a sample
bo6o said:
As I'm eager to get my hands on this device mainly for the capabilities of the camera, is it possible for some of the lucky early owners to share a few RAW files.
At least two people here have it, and we don't have one real-life sample to check out.
I really can't believe there are no real and meaningful reviews for this phone...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's three in a wetransfer link. Too big to post DNGs on here. These have quite a bit of good depth data and were fun to edit. Didn't share my edits in this grouping though.
https://we.tl/b-AHQfp0iCcp
Thanks man, can I reuse the link and/or unedited exported with LR images on other forums, to shutdown some huawei fans
I'm amazed by the details, it is really good. Could you share some b/w dng's please? Huawei mate 9 with only one bw sensor took amazing shots , so I'm really curious at what the Nokia 9 can do
More dng samples please
Guys, can you please post more dng samples? outdoors for base iso, indoors for high iso? When I developed the dngs posted here, they are all quite great actually, even at iso 1600. That's the flowers shot. The same flower shot in jpg is quite oversharpened and noisy, with ugly artefacts, dark shadows and blown out highlights that are not present in the jpg. The subway shot is iso 1400, basically noise free. The doughnut shot is iso 208 and man, it is absolutely amazing in terms of both detail and noise. I think the bad quality you see in jpgs is simply bad processing by the nokia camera app. I think that this hardware is capable of great photos. Wondering if SNAP camera HDR app would work on this. Thanks!
mesicm said:
Guys, can you please post more dng samples? outdoors for base iso, indoors for high iso? When I developed the dngs posted here, they are all quite great actually, even at iso 1600. That's the flowers shot. The same flower shot in jpg is quite oversharpened and noisy, with ugly artefacts, dark shadows and blown out highlights that are not present in the jpg. The subway shot is iso 1400, basically noise free. The doughnut shot is iso 208 and man, it is absolutely amazing in terms of both detail and noise. I think the bad quality you see in jpgs is simply bad processing by the nokia camera app. I think that this hardware is capable of great photos. Wondering if SNAP camera HDR app would work on this. Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I will try to add some tomorrow. Did some compare shots with the xz3 and a rx100 vi
https://we.tl/t-N9cRshSrlb
If people are interested I can do a bit more in depth comparison
I think the shadow recovery is amazing, almost no noise increase, and this on a phone.
1st photo supplied by @phunkyp , increased the brightness of the dark background in a raw editor.
But i think the general sharpness isn't the best compared with well lit single sensor photos, what do you think? For example in the samples of @stefanve those details in the trees just look strange somehow. But there is definatly a lot to play with in the editor (2nd photo by him). Yes its a bit much.
Here are a couple of extra test shots. 3 files per scene. DNG, JPG from the default camera app and one from the LR camera. The LR shot should be using only one of the 5 camera's so we can see the difference between one vs 5 camera's
https://we.tl/t-deZimhn8Sz
Personally I don't think that the camera has on point focus (maybe that is why they use very aggressive sharpening in de jpegs) but overall I think it is really good for a phone, lots of detail and light. This is one of the view phones (that I used) that gives me usable photo's the other one being the Lumia 950 XL and the Mate 9 (but only in b&w)
Is Lightroom not capable to get raw from the Nokia cam? That would be interesting to compare, Lightroom single Cam dng vs Lightroom HDR dng vs Nokia 5 cam dng.
No sadly , it is not possible to save the raw data with de LR camera app.
edit wrong post.
Here are some pictures with Nokia 9. All photos was taken with Auto mode and someone with bokeh or monochrome with raw. I'm not a professional of photography
https://photos.app.goo.gl/56KAUxN8mWk78qfL6
Enviado desde mi MI 5s mediante Tapatalk
I took a few pictures and I am not a professional photographer either, but hope it will help you. Nice weekend
https://photos.app.goo.gl/kgqrWZcYMxRYKGxm9
I will be free from work tomorrow. Then I go outside with the children and take pictures with this phone. I will then place them in the same folder.
Love the monochrome mode.
Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the LG V50 ThinQ come out. A higher rating indicates that photos offer rich color (without over-saturating), sharp detail (with all subjects in-focus), and appropriate exposure (with even lighting).
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
The cameras are good, generally. Well rounded, and well color balanced between lenses. The colors seem more natural or true. Pictures aren't as brightly colored saturated as some other devices.
---------- Post added at 11:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:02 PM ----------
The focal distance of the wide angle lens, for a "macro" shot is about 7 or 8 centimeters, which at that distance provides very clear, roughly 2x magnified images. It works quite well, and I am very pleased with this performance.
Does the camera take quick pictures? I had the V30 before and a common problem which they had was that there was a lag between pressing the shutter button and the picture being taken. This would mean that I would frequently miss photos of my kids, creating a blurred picture. I have read this was mixture of the phone taking a while to set exposure and slower shutter speeds being favoured in order to keep iso and noise low.
themancc said:
Does the camera take quick pictures? I had the V30 before and a common problem which they had was that there was a lag between pressing the shutter button and the picture being taken. This would mean that I would frequently miss photos of my kids, creating a blurred picture. I have read this was mixture of the phone taking a while to set exposure and slower shutter speeds being favoured in order to keep iso and noise low.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really quick. Also night mode is really fast.
Says it all great camera and this is with night shot.
snaske65 said:
Says it all great camera and this is with night shot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are those?
They are zooanthoids in my fish tank. They are a soft coral.
Usually you dont get there color to well because of the blue night light, thebpicture gets washed in blue.
This camera can filter a lot of that out. A lot og phones cant.
Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the come out. A higher rating indicates that photos offer rich color (without over-saturating), sharp detail (with all subjects in-focus), and appropriate exposure (with even lighting).
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
I installed the Gcam port hoping it would give me more accurate colours, but unfortunately it is not what I was hoping for. Coming from the Poco f1, the Gcam was a dramatic improvement. Comparing Gcam on Poco vs. K20 Pro, Poco wins hands down. Not 100% about the Miui cam. Wish I could change the colour temperature / white balance easier. Not super excited about the photos
forzenl said:
I installed the Gcam port hoping it would give me more accurate colours, but unfortunately it is not what I was hoping for. Coming from the Poco f1, the Gcam was a dramatic improvement. Comparing Gcam on Poco vs. K20 Pro, Poco wins hands down. Not 100% about the Miui cam. Wish I could change the colour temperature / white balance easier. Not super excited about the photos
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Need GCam source
Really? No one has uploaded any pictures on day light? Pfffffffffffff
I just saw MKBHD is review of K20 and he said front facing camera quality is garbage and also shows some really bad pictures, is it true or he's is overlooking something.
bot88 said:
I just saw MKBHD is review of K20 and he said front facing camera quality is garbage and also shows some really bad pictures, is it true or he's is overlooking something.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not true, I took decent images with mine. (China ROM)
Back camera is good but front camera needs a lot of improvement
This is what the camera is really capable of. I am pretty impressed.
bot88 said:
I just saw MKBHD is review of K20 and he said front facing camera quality is garbage and also shows some really bad pictures, is it true or he's is overlooking something.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Visit the comments on that video u'll know what you need ! I think that front camera was damaged or not working accordingly .
Very nice photos, but a little over saturated...
The back cameras are garbage. If the app detects a face, it smudges it too badly, no matter what settings you use. The colours are good in jpg, but the raw files are very desaturated and with such a bad quality, that I can't believe you get something in jpg. I believe this is a software problem, because it's the same with all the three sensors, and I have some hopes for fix.
check this out
bo6o said:
The back cameras are garbage. If the app detects a face, it smudges it too badly, no matter what settings you use. The colours are good in jpg, but the raw files are very desaturated and with such a bad quality, that I can't believe you get something in jpg. I believe this is a software problem, because it's the same with all the three sensors, and I have some hopes for fix.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
same as Huawei algorithms do, same as Iphone XS, don't bother shooting portraits with a phone if u want faces that aren't water painting mush
vandal4e said:
same as Huawei algorithms do, same as Iphone XS, don't bother shooting portraits with a phone if u want faces that aren't water painting mush
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Keeping the functionality, if just adding a dng option is possible, everything will be fine and possible to fix. Guess there's a reason to keep the computational photography away still...
Here are photos taken by all three back cameras (taken from same place):
Thx, great collection
cile1977 said:
Here are photos taken by all three back cameras (taken from same place):
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice photos. They were taken by you? Were they processed in photoshop or any other software?
Could you please share some details?
abstract123 said:
Nice photos. They were taken by you? Were they processed in photoshop or any other software?
Could you please share some details?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks! Yes, I have taken those photos. No, they were not processed in any way - came directly from phone...
cile1977 said:
Thanks! Yes, I have taken those photos. No, they were not processed in any way - came directly from phone...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The correct answer is "processed by the phone". The RAW images would be different and the processing on this phone is "good" having in mind what you get for raw file. I'm in real wonder what's wrong but I believe this sensors can do better...
Here is one from short distance:
My review (croatian language): https://android.bswireless.hr/2019/...iji-mobitel-s-najbrzim-snapdragon-procesorom/