Related
I'd like to clear up a little misinformation about watching movies on the Flyer after upgrading to Honeycomb.
I kept reading that the upgrade ruined movies on the Flyer because the soft Back, Home and Menu buttons are visible on the Flyer at all times. And maybe aht's tru with some apps, but if you're using the stock movie app, those one-screen buttons go black after a couple of seconds.
Yes, there's still the loss of screen real-estate on movies formatted for 16x9, and it would be nice if the movie app would auto-hide the notification bar instead of just blackening it, but the soft buttons being visible at all times is simply not the case.
Also, keep in mind that "Panavision" formatted movies don't suffer any loss of screen size, since there was a black bar above and below to begin with.
Buttons actually "showing" or not seems like a silly distinction when the notification bar is still there hogging real estate.
And the stock player is a joke for format compatibility. Several other players have vastly better compatibility. I've hardly even used the stock player, except to verify that it sucks as bad as the stock HTC player on my phone. So yes, I think many people on here are referring to 3rd party video players.
I've tried HoneyBar, after several people on here recommending it. But it seems to make some apps act wonky, so I uninstalled.
OMG!
{
"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"
}
SO let's really clear something up. Just what video format are some of you playing on the Flyer , that needs the "entire screen" ???
Facts:
1. The Flyer and View screen is 1024x600 pixels.
2. HD video has a 16:9 ratio
3. Perfect fit without distortion for 16:9 = 1024 x 576 Pixels
4. The HoneyComb system bar is 48 pixels high
5. 600-48 is 552
6. 576 - 552 is 24 pixels
7. at most, with a properly formatted HD video you are missing 24 pixels so your
8. optimum screen format will be 976x552 pixels with no distortion.
9. if you allow it to stretch to fill all available pixels its will be 1024 x 552 with a 5% vertical pinch.
10. The highest video resolution you can play is still less than 720p format which has a resolution of 1280x720. But that is the closest standard HD.
11. Playing 1080i or P on the Flyer is a huge waste of storage space since the screen cannot reach that resolution, but the hardware will decode it , if its properly formatted.
12. For optimal performance use one of the hardware supported formats.
HTC Flyer Supported Video formats
3gp, .3g2, .mp4, .wmv (Windows Media Video 9), .avi (MP4 ASP and MP3), .xvid (MP4 ASP and MP3).
HTC Flyer Supported Audio formats
aac, .amr, .ogg, .m4a, .mid, .mp3, .wav, .wma (Windows Media Audio 9)
13. If you must use a non-supported format because you don't have time or are too lazy to convert a video then you need to use a 3rd party player. Which will offer more codecs. Some will be software codecs which will work, but may degrade performance especially if you insist on trying to feed it 1080p or i.
14. Remember that some things people call "formats" are not formats, but containers, MKV and AVI for example. MKV is just a container file and can contain almost any video format so all bets are off with such containers unless you know what is actually inside.
DigitalMD said:
SO let's really clear something up. Just what video format are some of you playing on the Flyer , that needs the "entire screen" ???
if you allow it to stretch to fill all available pixels its will be 1024 x 552 with a 5% vertical pinch.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
5% is 5%. Whether this is important to you is completely a matter of personal taste. And I would never stretch any video to fill the screen, even if by 5%. Looks ugly as hell and obvious its stretched.
So what you really need is a table with a screen 1,920 pixels wide by 1,080. Which they do actually make, but I don't think it will fit in your pocket.
I think its really just more a matter of people wanting to fully utilize the screen that they are holding in their hands. Or the video image being smaller than they were used to on GB. I'll agree with you the difference is very minor. If the Flyer had always been on HC, people may not even be complaining about this.
DigitalMD said:
So what you really need is a table with a screen 1,920 pixels wide by 1,080. Which they do actually make, but I don't think it will fit in your pocket.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Come of your fanboy horse for a second and let people rant about a real issue.
That 5% does make a difference, especially when viewing and editing PDFs heavy with text, which btw, is what the Flyer was made for.
I am willing to pay/donate a nice reward to the developer who makes a mod, ala Honeybar, that actually works with most apps and doesn't cause distortions.
jamus28 said:
Come of your fanboy horse for a second and let people rant about a real issue.
That 5% does make a difference, especially when viewing and editing PDFs heavy with text, which btw, is what the Flyer was made for.
I am willing to pay/donate a nice reward to the developer who makes a mod, ala Honeybar, that actually works with most apps and doesn't cause distortions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That case (document reading) is really a wash ,since all that happened is the bar moved from the top of the screen to the bottom , taking up the same amount of space. Honeybar should work fine for that application.
Since the operating system has no support for hiding the system bar , by design, anything a developer does to hide it is going to be a hack like honeybar and will cause display problems with some apps, like honeybar does.
Gingerbread runs fine on flyer. Switch back and sup complaining about something that exist on all honeycomb tablets, and that multiple apps exist to fix. There was never any realistic expectation that the honeycomb bar world not be there.
Sent from my HTC Flyer P510e using xda premium
Sure the lose of screen real estate sucks but I like that better then having the capcitive buttons lit while watching Netflix on GB. Now if someone could kill the magic pen light.
DigitalMD said:
Since the operating system has no support for hiding the system bar , by design, anything a developer does to hide it is going to be a hack like honeybar and will cause display problems with some apps, like honeybar does.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
mcord11758 said:
Gingerbread runs fine on flyer. Switch back and sup complaining about something that exist on all honeycomb tablets, and that multiple apps exist to fix. There was never any realistic expectation that the honeycomb bar world not be there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This site exists for developers to come up with solutions and enhancements for problems that exist with the stock operating systems. To respond to this issue with "stfu and stop complaining" goes against the very philosophy of xda.
I'm not complaining for the sake of complaining. Gingerbread had support for fullscreen apps to hide the bar. I'm simply hoping a real developer (which neither of you are) will be able to code a solution into a rom, kernel, or application. I am willing to pay for that solution.
Switching back to GB is certainly not a solution. HC is faster and much more capable in the scribe notetaking and editing fields. Thank you for your suggestion though.
you have hurt my feelings.
There are a couple different apps that remove the bar. Lee Droid, a real developer has enabled hw buttons. I would not hold my breath waiting for another solution. Also since ics uses a similar bar I guess in general you will be dissatisfied with Android moving forward. The bar is part of honeycomb. I remove it for videos and video games, otherwise it is a welcomed addition
Sent from my HTC Flyer P510e using xda premium
redpoint73 said:
I think its really just more a matter of people wanting to fully utilize the screen that they are holding in their hands. Or the video image being smaller than they were used to on GB. I'll agree with you the difference is very minor. If the Flyer had always been on HC, people may not even be complaining about this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Believe me, I would prefer to have the hardware buttons enabled also, as ICS is rumored to allow. In order to maintain the correct aspect ratio on 16x9 movies, the Flyer's stock player shrinks the image horizontally as well as vertically so you do lose a fair amout of screen real-estate. But the reason I started this thread was beacase I had read many posts in this forum that complained about the Honeycomb soft buttons being visible while watching movies, but neglected to mention that the stock player darkens them so its not an issue.
In my case, the stock player works fine for me. That's because I have over 200 DVDs that I've digitized as H.264 MP4's using DVD Catalyst 4, and they play just great with the stock player. And that's all I really need. I'm sure there are others in my position.
I'd hate to think that there are folks who will avoid the Honeycomb update due to being misinformed, as I was. That's because the Honeycomb update brings so many other killer features. I've been doing a lot of typing on my Flyer using a bluetooth keyboard (tablets are for content consumption only? LOL! Not mine!!!) and having the up,down,left,right arrow keys map correctly in landscape mode is just fantastic. Also, having the pen available in all my apps is awesome. As i noted in a different thread: it's just crazy, ironic and frustrating that HTC killed off this marvelous tablet at the very same time that they released the Honeycomb update that really makes it shine!
dsf3g said:
. As i noted in a different thread: it's just crazy, ironic and frustrating that HTC killed off this marvelous tablet at the very same time that they released the Honeycomb update that really makes it shine!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you other comments and share the love, but HTC didn't kill the Flyer, production of the Flyer was done and finished and over back in June. This is common and typical. HW makers do a production run of as many of an item as they think they can sell and then move on to the next product. They cannot afford to idle a production line and wait and see. In the case of the Flyer and View, HTC made way more than they could sell at their target price of $500 ++ and closed out the remaining stock at below cost. A common practice. Nothing crazy about it, simple business decision. They could not produce more at a price they could sell for a profit.
Does anybody have handbrake settings for converting video best for the Rezound? I tried to play a couple mp4's that I had saved on my comp but it just made the rezound freeze up. I had a video left over that I had converted using settings for the DROID X and it plays fine on the rezound but the video quality is capable of being much better on the rezound. The mp4's that I tried were 1280x544 so they should have played with maybe a widescreen bar on the top and bottom as the rezound is 1280x720p.
I haven't encoded anything myself or played around with different codecs on the phone, but I have copied some videos that play really nicely on the phone. They are encoded as follows with an .mkv extension:
H264 mpeg-4 AVC
624x352 29.97
Audio: mpeg aac (mp4a)
Stereo 48kHz
Don't know if that helps you at all but maybe it will give you a clue.
EDIT: I got the specs off the LMFAO video that comes with the phone. It has an .mp4 extension. Here they are:
{
"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"
}
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk
feralicious said:
I haven't encoded anything myself or played around with different codecs on the phone, but I have copied some videos that play really nicely on the phone. They are encoded as follows with an .mkv extension:
H264 mpeg-4 AVC
624x352 29.97
Audio: mpeg sac (mp4a)
Stereo 48kHz
Don't know if that helps you at all but maybe it will give you a clue.
EDIT: I got the specs off the LMFAO video that comes with the phone. It has an .mp4 extension. Here they are:
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
good way to research video encoding info
A couple videos that I have are mp4's that are 1280x544. They played great after converting with handbrake. Only thing I changed was the video codec to MPEG-4 and the fps to 29.97. The video looked immaculate although the widescreen bars were on the top and bottom on an already smaller screen. I'm trying to test different aspect ratios in order to get a full screen video.
rezound is 16:9 so that should cut down on different aspect ratios you try
tschmid5 said:
A couple videos that I have are mp4's that are 1280x544. They played great after converting with handbrake. Only thing I changed was the video codec to MPEG-4 and the fps to 29.97. The video looked immaculate although the widescreen bars were on the top and bottom on an already smaller screen. I'm trying to test different aspect ratios in order to get a full screen video.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It really depends on the source you are using. you'll only get full screen without letterboxing/pillaring if the source is the same aspect ratio as the screen itself. (16x9, 1280x720, 1920x1080)
So when you convert you only want to change the numbers in a way that keeps the same aspect ratio as your source (just do the math to figure it out). If you change the aspect ratio you are going to squeeze or stretch the picture or you will blow it up to fill the "height" and the sides will get cropped and you wouldn't have the whole frame.
It seems you have widescreen films that are 2.35 ratio. Widescreen standard is 2.35 or 2.40. Most films are 1.85. HD is 16x9/1.78 (1920x1080 or 1280x720), SD is 4:3/1.33. So yes, they should have played with black at top or bottom or else the picture wouldn't look right. Same as on your TV. If you watch a widescreen film on your TV you will have the same letterboxing.
feralicious said:
It really depends on the source you are using. you'll only get full screen without letterboxing/pillaring if the source is the same aspect ratio as the screen itself. (16x9, 1280x720, 1920x1080)
So when you convert you only want to change the numbers in a way that keeps the same aspect ratio as your source (just do the math to figure it out). If you change the aspect ratio you are going to squeeze or stretch the picture or you will blow it up to fill the "height" and the sides will get cropped and you wouldn't have the whole frame.
It seems you have widescreen films that are 2.35 ratio. Widescreen standard is 2.35 or 2.40. Most films are 1.85. HD is 16x9/1.78 (1920x1080 or 1280x720), SD is 4:3/1.33. So yes, they should have played with black at top or bottom or else the picture wouldn't look right. Same as on your TV. If you watch a widescreen film on your TV you will have the same letterboxing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I've learned that through the past couple years purchasing blu rays, some are just filmed that way, nothing fixes it, just got to deal with widescreen bars on an already widescreen high definition television...very frustrating lol.....although I think on a screen the size of the rezound, stretching or anything of that nature would hardly be noticeable, I converted one at 1136x544 and it was a little bit better, slight bars on the top and bottom but didn't really notice any stretching after even tho the default aspect ratio was changed
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk
tschmid5 said:
Yeah, I've learned that through the past couple years purchasing blu rays, some are just filmed that way, nothing fixes it, just got to deal with widescreen bars on an already widescreen high definition television...very frustrating lol.....although I think on a screen the size of the rezound, stretching or anything of that nature would hardly be noticeable, I converted one at 1136x544 and it was a little bit better, slight bars on the top and bottom but didn't really notice any stretching after even tho the default aspect ratio was changed
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It doesn't need to be "fixed". That's the way the filmmaker intended it to be. They can't help it if TVs are a certain aspect ratio and can't accommodate the various aspect ratios films use. Film has been around a lot longer than television. I can assure you that the people who put in a lot of hard and detailed work making those films would hate to know people were changing them just to get rid of the letterbox or pillaring that's supposed to be there so you see the image properly.
Movie theaters use the same screen for all films they show, they just adjust the projector's output to the correct aspect ratio. They don't change the aspect ratio to have every film fill up the entire screen.
So don't worry about the black...it's supposed to be there.
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk
feralicious said:
It doesn't need to be "fixed". That's the way the filmmaker intended it to be.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL, you're technically correct of course but it is still annoying as hell to have a brand new widescreen tv with a brand new blueray player And have to look at black bars on the screen.
As far as movie ripping for the Rezound, I rip 5-6 discs a week from Netflix to mp4 files for my phone.
I used to use a CuCusoft app for all my ripping in my PC (along with AnyDVD running at all times)no matter what device it was going to be shown on. I have used the same app for years and it always worked perfectly, but I was never 100% totally satisfied with the results on my Rezound.
I was trying all different settings (the app has about 50 different presets) but a few weeks ago, it finally refused to rip a disc from Netflix which has never happened before.
At that point, I decided to try an app called 1ClickDVDTOIPOD which my boss swears by. I installed it and went to the option screen. The ONLY settings you can change are screen resolution (there are two settings to pick from) and a
sliding scale for quality.
I picked the higher resolution which is 640x360 and slid the quality all the way to the highest setting which is 3725 Kbps. That makes a really big file, but I have a 32 gig card so space isn't a problem. There where 4 episodes of the TV show The Shield on the disc, and the app ripped them so fast I couldn't believe it actually worked.
I copied them all to my phone and tried playing them in my movie app (I have used Act 1 for years and find it is by far the best app of it's kind). The video quality and playback quality of the files is absolutely stunning. It fills the whole screen with no black bars if I set it to aspect full. Needless to say, I am happy with the results and will continue to use the exact same setup for the foreseeable future.
jmorton10 said:
LOL, you're technically correct of course but it is still annoying as hell to have a brand new widescreen tv with a brand new blueray player And have to look at black bars on the screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure how to interpret your LOL, but I'm both technically correct and absolutely correct. But if the movie is that uninteresting that you are watching the black bars you should watch better movies!
Making every movie made fill the screen would be like having only one shape of picture frame and taking every painting and stretching it and squeezing it to fit that one particular shaped frame. Paintings and films are simply not all made in the same aspect ratio.
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk
feralicious said:
I'm not sure how to interpret your LOL, but I'm both technically correct and absolutely correct. But if the movie is that uninteresting that you are watching the black bars you should watch better movies!
Making every movie made fill the screen would be like having only one shape of picture frame and taking every painting and stretching it and squeezing it to fit that one particular shaped frame. Paintings and films are simply not all made in the same aspect ratio.
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well said. good advice on earlier posts since it's been ages since I've encoded mobile video. 17 movies so that are more crispy then potato chips
feralicious said:
Paintings and films are simply not all made in the same aspect ratio.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure what paintings have to do with it, but it's never made much sense to me that all films are NOT made in the same ratio.
jmorton10 said:
I'm not sure what paintings have to do with it, but it's never made much sense to me that all films are NOT made in the same ratio.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The shape of a painting is determined by the artistic view of the artist and the spatial needs to portray that. So I used it as an example to show that you can't just take something that was made a certain shape (aspect ratio) and shove it into a different one just because your existing frame (TV) is a different shape (aspect ratio). It just doesn't work.
The director has made an artistic choice to use a certain aspect ratio. CinemaScope, the really widescreen framing, allows more to be seen in the screen and gives the director more options in framing in which certain moods or perspectives can be shown. For example, Lawrence of Arabia was shot in CinemaScope and one of the advantages to that was that you really get a sense of the vastness of the desert with the wider screen. You just wouldn't get that in a 1.85 ratio. Sometimes it's that there's a desire to show more in the screen without having to pull out to a wider shot. There's different reasons behind it but it's usually an artistic choice made by the director.
Luckily with TV we have the ability to use letterboxing or pillaring to compensate for that and fill the empty space with black. If they didn't letterbox the film they would pan and scan it and then you really lose the intention of the director. If you're not familiar with pan and scan, what it is is when there's a wide shot and you see one character on each side of the screen, facing off, pan and scan would break that into two shots instead of one and first show you the left side/character then cut/pan to the right side/character. Not at all how the director shot it and intended it to be seen and giving the scene a different feel and the viewer a different experience when watching it. A scene that may have been filled with tension loses it with that method. So you don't even get to see the movie as the director made it just so you don't have to see black on your TV. Blasphemy I say!
For technical reasons it's also due to technological progress. As they learned how to use/shoot the film differently in order to get wider images they started using it for artistic reasons. As to TV, if everything was to be uniform we'd still be on 4:3 TVs and no one would have ever gone to HD/16x9 format. And remember, now we're mixing two formats. Films were not thought of being made to fit a TV when TV was 4:3. But now that HD scaling is the standard for new TVs you're wondering why films don't fit into that box perfectly. They weren't made for TV.
Seems like the camera by default oversaturates everyting!
I found this on the Sprint community forums[/URL] so I thought I would share it as it made my pictures look a lot better
ACHAN18 said:
Camera>options>image adjustment> saturation>-1. that should fix the redness
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't have a good subject to show you what I mean, so I just took a picture of a picture from my LCD (Google images! Yay!)
Please post your own examples and tell me if you think it makes the pictures look better!
The original Sprint thread: http://community.sprint.com/baw/thread/90509?start=15&tstart=0
If you read that thread people are flipping out over this issue, but -1 Saturation seems to fix it for me
What do you guys think?
[EDIT: I moved the texts boxes as they were backwards! Left pic is -1 saturation; right pic is default! The chunks of the girl's shoulder in the text boxes is inverted!]
Kujila said:
Seems like the camera by default oversaturates everyting!
I found this on the Sprint community forums[/URL] so I thought I would share it as it made my pictures look a lot better
I don't have a good subject to show you what I mean, so I just took a picture of a picture from my LCD (Google images! Yay!)
Please post your own examples and tell me if you think it makes the pictures look better!
The original Sprint thread: http://community.sprint.com/baw/thread/90509?start=15&tstart=0
If you read that thread people are flipping out over this issue, but -1 Saturation seems to fix it for me
What do you guys think?
[EDIT: I moved the texts boxes as they were backwards! Left pic is -1 saturation; right pic is default! The chunks of the girl's shoulder in the text boxes is inverted!]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did this morning while I was comparing the pictures with my galaxy nexus, you just need to be careful some pictures will look like crap after this, one thing I hate is taking pics in the dark with this phone it doesn't focus like the nexus pictures look blurry, any suggestions?
Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2
I found that you can actually tap the screen on the subject you want to focus on and the phone will make a sound and focus accordingly to what you tapped...
Did you try that yet?
Thanks
Kujila said:
I found that you can actually tap the screen on the subject you want to focus on and the phone will make a sound and focus accordingly to what you tapped...
Did you try that yet?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In dark light conditions does work but doesn't turn on flash so is just focusing on the dark which ain't helpfull at all
Try to take over 10 pictures in the dark, and it sucks
{
"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"
}
Unlike the galaxy nexus in the first try
Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2
i found that it's better if i make sure the flash is on, rather than auto...
maybe a software fix will be in the works
yeah set flash to ON
also select "Close up" instead of automatic and then tap the object
The main problem is that the display is oversaturated. Washing out the pictures you take won't help the display problem.
PS: That thread is about the display saturation, not the camera saturation. There are a couple of camera posts in it, but they are off-base.
I just shot some test images of an X-Rite Digital Color Checker SG reference target.
I shot with 5500K lights and with just the camera's flash, with normal saturation and with the saturation turned down one click. I let the camera use automatic color balance, as there is no setting for my 5500K lights.
I then opened the images in PhotoShop 6 and took readings off the various color and grayscale patches.
With the saturation set normally, the images were slightly oversaturated, but not bad. The gray scales were very good on the whites, but as you get darker, they have a lot of green fall-off.
I think the camera shoots well enough. The green fall-off may be partly due to the automatic white balance trying to cope with my 5500K lights, but is is visible in the flash images too. It's not bad.
Taking one click of saturation out definitely ruins the images. It's far too much. If you could take out a tenth of a click, it would be pretty close to perfect.
Unreasnbl said:
The main problem is that the display is oversaturated. Washing out the pictures you take won't help the display problem.
PS: That thread is about the display saturation, not the camera saturation. There are a couple of camera posts in it, but they are off-base.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I havn't noticed any oversaturation of this display. The only place I notice it is in the camera app.
Lol its a cell phone camera not a Canon 7D. I really think alot of people are starting to expect way too much from cell phone cameras lol.
SPreston2001 said:
Lol its a cell phone camera not a Canon 7D. I really think alot of people are starting to expect way too much from cell phone cameras lol.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As I said above, I have tested the camera and it is fine. It's the best cell phone camera I have ever used or tested.
The display is not fine, but people keep confusing the display problem with a camera problem.
Since the OP quoted and referenced a display problem thread in this camera thread, I thought I would try to clear things up. The advice quoted by the OP is bad advice.
So again ... the camera is fine. Don't try to "fix" what's not broken.
IMO it's not the camera that saturates the pics it's the screen. When I tranfer my pictures on to my mac they look fine. If you browse pictures on Facebook with the phone you get the same oversaturation of color. Somene should work on a fix for the screen not the camera.
Unreasnbl said:
As I said above, I have tested the camera and it is fine. It's the best cell phone camera I have ever used or tested.
The display is not fine, but people keep confusing the display problem with a camera problem.
Since the OP quoted and referenced a display problem thread in this camera thread, I thought I would try to clear things up. The advice quoted by the OP is bad advice.
So again ... the camera is fine. Don't try to "fix" what's not broken.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah the display is a bit saturated but overall im satisfied with the display especially the viewing angles!
Unreasnbl said:
I just shot some test images of an X-Rite Digital Color Checker SG reference target.
I shot with 5500K lights and with just the camera's flash, with normal saturation and with the saturation turned down one click. I let the camera use automatic color balance, as there is no setting for my 5500K lights.
I then opened the images in PhotoShop 6 and took readings off the various color and grayscale patches.
With the saturation set normally, the images were slightly oversaturated, but not bad. The gray scales were very good on the whites, but as you get darker, they have a lot of green fall-off.
I think the camera shoots well enough. The green fall-off may be partly due to the automatic white balance trying to cope with my 5500K lights, but is is visible in the flash images too. It's not bad.
Taking one click of saturation out definitely ruins the images. It's far too much. If you could take out a tenth of a click, it would be pretty close to perfect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While its obvuious that you know more about photography than I do, I tend to disagree slightly with your statement. When I mms pictures to others with phones including iPhone 4s, ET4G, and NS4G the oversaturation of pink hues is still present. In addition, I believe if this was solely an issue of the screen then this oversaturatuon would be present across the board and not isolated to photographs taken with the on-board camera.
Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2
Yeah, pictures of my hands and arms look all bright pink, even when I view them on my laptop or desktop or tablet. In reality my skin is olive-ish and certainly not bright pink.
I am no expert at screens or photos so I'm really not sure what is going on with the pics.
The display oversaturation is constant, not just when using the camera. Watch some video on it.
The camera is a bit off, as I said above, but I think it's not bad.
Also, I have only tested my phone, I am sure there are some out there that are better and some that are worse.
mlin said:
While its obvuious that you know more about photography than I do, I tend to disagree slightly with your statement. When I mms pictures to others with phones including iPhone 4s, ET4G, and NS4G the oversaturation of pink hues is still present. In addition, I believe if this was solely an issue of the screen then this oversaturatuon would be present across the board and not isolated to photographs taken with the on-board camera.
Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the green in the screen looks like light-green, washed-out, something you only see in defect display,
especially when youre coming from a samsung phone,
especially the first time you open your phone and see the color in the apps youre used to in other phones,,
I couldnt help but noticed the same thing and tried to do some tests to see if it's a common problem for Xperia Z ultra, or is it just some of us happend to have the same kind of defect display
of all the tests, here are the most comvincing ones:
first,
{
"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"
}
left is the one i took on desktop , right one is the screenshot on phone while playing the same youtube video in youtube app,
clealy the one on phone is more "light-green",
this is the proof that the "light-green" is intended by Sony rather than due to defect in the display, otherwise we would see a darker green like the one on desktop, (cause the screenshots took in-phone are what the hardware drew, rather than what we see from outside/what the screen displayed)
the second one
is a screenshot took in-phone, while displaying a .png pic file, on the left,, compared to what it's like when the same .png file was viewed on my Windows7, on the right.
No difference was found.
I quickly tried another pic that wasnt initially on the phone, prepared by sony,,,
here's the results:
: No difference to be found,
(when comparing i put the 2 pic file in the same folder and used a viewing software to quickly go back and forth between the 2 pics during which the same place of the 2pic was kept at the same place, zoomed by the same level,,,, and found no difference)
then, I copied the official demo video(Xperia HD Landscapes.MP4) to my desktop, screencaptured a frame to compare to the same one played on phone,
here's the result:
the one on the right is what the video looks like when played on my desktop,,,the result doent need anymore of my words.
So the conclusion:
While initially you may find the color , especially in google apps(casue they are the apps with obvious color youre most familiar with), washed-out,
the screen is not defect and can show the color green 100% fine,
it's most likely due to some Sony's weird software tweak,
which happened to all the video the phone plays, where the green is really "light" and feels unpleasantly "washed-out".
I can only hope Sony fix this problem as fast as possible, cause compared to Samsung 's famous oversaturating tweak(actually more due to the "side-effect" of being able to display a wider color gamut), which made almost everything on their phone looked absolutely more stunning and awesome,, Sony's tweak can only be concluded as, considering their long history in the industry and all the hype/triluminous/bravio engine/blahblahblah said in their ads,,,,, the most embarassingly retarded fail I've ever seen by such a giant multinational corporation.
any ideas?
I went from Samsung Galaxy S3 etc to the Sony Xperia Z and Sony Xperia tablet 10.1. There is a difference between the two screens. The screen colours on the tablet are simply stunning and to my taste.
I have just made a return to Samsung and bought the Note 3 and can safely say that I prefer the picture reproduction on the Sony. Different screen technologies produce different colours, light, contrast and definition. To me I see this simply as taste and not a 'fault' in either device.
I prefer the colour pallet of my Xperia tabet 10.1 to the new Note 3. I think we have to understand its a preference. I don't arrive at the same conclusions you do. I prefer what you appear to dislike.
Regards.
Ryland Johnson said:
I went from Samsung Galaxy S3 etc to the Sony Xperia Z and Sony Xperia tablet 10.1. There is a difference between the two screens. The screen colours on the tablet are simply stunning and to my taste.
I have just made a return to Samsung and bought the Note 3 and can safely say that I prefer the picture reproduction on the Sony. Different screen technologies produce different colours, light, contrast and definition. To me I see this simply as taste and not a 'fault' in either device.
I prefer the colour pallet of my Xperia tabet 10.1 to the new Note 3. I think we have to understand its a preference. I don't arrive at the same conclusions you do. I prefer what you appear to dislike.
Regards.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's fine if it's only a tweak in the video playing,, if the green has to be lighter in a coloful video wiht all the other colors to contribute to a better viewing experience,
but the green and red in many apps in the phone are also washed out(doesnt in any way can possibly contribute to any thing except making you feel like looking at a 10 years old LCD with washed out colors)
I admit it really scared me at first, which may be the reason i did all these tests in the first place,,
I believe you cant compare with screenshot, as its just copying digital values of the screen. You will have to capture side by side with a good slr camera (live output) to compare results. I did a bit side by side comparison on some videos in a shop when i wanted to buy. But put off my purchase until i am sure.
KonW said:
the one on the right is what the video looks like when played on my desktop,,,the result doent need anymore of my words.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please add some words because I can't really see much difference there?
Hidden92 said:
Please add some words because I can't really see much difference there?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
here i did painting to help you see the difference:
Guzprom said:
I believe you cant compare with screenshot, as its just copying digital values of the screen. You will have to capture side by side with a good slr camera (live output) to compare results. I did a bit side by side comparison on some videos in a shop when i wanted to buy. But put off my purchase until i am sure.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
since screenshot showed us the difference we felt when looking at the display,,,it at least now represents the problem at hand,,
if it doenst, then the problem might be beyond screenshot(exp, quality of the glass above the LCD,etc), then we can use a camera to shoot the difference
KonW said:
since screenshot showed us the difference we felt when looking at the display,,,it at least now represents the problem at hand,,
if it doenst, then the problem might be beyond screenshot(exp, quality of the glass above the LCD,etc), then we can use a camera to shoot the difference
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, if your assumption that the colors are so because of sony preprocessing. I believe screenshot will only show the effect of display preprocessing by the hardware/software but it won't show the end result of the inherent properties (color gamut/ depth, warmth/white balance) of the screen itself. Correct me if I'm wrong. And I would be interested in an SLR shot.
Guzprom said:
I believe you cant compare with screenshot, as its just copying digital values of the screen. You will have to capture side by side with a good slr camera (live output) to compare results. I did a bit side by side comparison on some videos in a shop when i wanted to buy. But put off my purchase until i am sure.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly, screenshots do not give you the screen colors. The difference you see is only due to the JPEG compression. Do a color comparison with JPEG is also not accurate as well, different devices will show you different results even on the same screen. Only specific camera can really do it, can't be done with any commercial camera or camcorder as well. As the refresh rate and backlight are different between screen and screen orientation as well (portrait and landscape).
Envoyé depuis mon C6802 avec xda premium 4
bASKOU said:
Exactly, screenshots do not give you the screen colors. The difference you see is only due to the JPEG compression. Do a color comparison with JPEG is also not accurate as well, different devices will show you different results even on the same screen. Only specific camera can really do it, can't be done with any commercial camera or camcorder as well. As the refresh rate and backlight are different between screen and screen orientation as well (portrait and landscape).
Envoyé depuis mon C6802 avec xda premium 4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never said it's accurate, and as i said above it wont address the problems that could occur to affect the colors after hardware rendering,
it' like,, if youre asking your doctor what the reddness in your palm mean, what kinda of illness could it suggest, by sending him a pic file of your palm (in jpeg form might i add),,,, yeah it's not accurate nor is it real,,but it at least does the job, if your doctor says he needs further investigation then you can consider sending him a "specifi camera" taken over-100MB-in-size TIFF file of your palm for accuracy.
since the jpeg file i used here already showed very obviously the difference we felt when looking at the screen,, what's the point of using another more accurate file format?
Guzprom said:
Yes, if your assumption that the colors are so because of sony preprocessing. I believe screenshot will only show the effect of display preprocessing by the hardware/software but it won't show the end result of the inherent properties (color gamut/ depth, warmth/white balance) of the screen itself. Correct me if I'm wrong. And I would be interested in an SLR shot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i was wondering about the same thing while doing the comparison,,
for example,, in one part of a pic it asked for the color of RGB(0,255,0), the screen tried to display RGB(0,255,0) but it looked different in our eyes than the RGB(0,255,0) displayed elsewhere, say my windows7 desktop(LCD display also),
Now i screencap the display, that place in the screencap file should be recorded as RGB(0,255,0) too,
so when i view the file on my desktop windows7, if it looked "normal" then it should be a problem of the phone display , if it looked like what we felt on the phone, then the display shouldnt be defective. (becasue that proves that it only looked different casue sony tweaked it so that it displays RGB(0,200,0) for the color RGB(0,255,0) in that specifi frame to look more appealing to the eye, not that it wasnt able to show a deeper RGB(0,255,0) color)
Now you may have doubt that when i screencapture on the phone, will the pic file record that place as RGB(0,255,0)? what if it was recorded ,say a lighter green, RGB(0,200,0) becasue it's what it's lilke and the screen wasnt able to display the color other normal screen displayed as RGB(0,255,0).
well, if that's the case then the same pic file showing the same green should look different on phone and desktop, which is certainly not true as my comparison 2 and 3 showed.
So, that screencap did work, at least in that comparison.
and now fianlly ,,
I do agree that we should use a camera to shoot together of a desktop LCD and the phone displaying the same pic file (AMOLED would obviously display a "greener" green for RGB(0,255,0) becasue of its wider color gamut), and then compare the green in that shoot, to cover any other issues , especially ones that could happen after the hardware rendering.
You are just comparing Sony firmware compression of an image display on the screen. It is not even about accuracy. Plug your phone by HDMI to a TV and make a screen shot, do you think the rendering will show how the TV displayed your picture?
Test on the phone itself.
Here original picture
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/66462768/MG_0133.jpg
Here the screenshot of the same picture on my XZU
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/66462768/Screenshot_2013-10-07-14-26-12.png
How come thank the screenshot show more saturated colors than the original picture on my XZU?
As one test is not enough now have the screenshot of a Asus transformer prime
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/66462768/Screenshot_2013-10-07-14-23-14.jpg
The IPS+ on my tf201 show pictures lighter with more saturated colors than my XZU, but the screenshot give the opposite. Asus compression is different and Sony compression give even more saturated colors that the original picture.
Edit: uploaded to dropbox for avoid compression on XDA. Sorry for the size ^^
bASKOU said:
You are just comparing Sony firmware compression of an image display on the screen. It is not even about accuracy. Plug your phone by HDMI to a TV and make a screen shot, do you think the rendering will show how the TV displayed your picture?
Test on the phone itself.
Here original picture
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/66462768/MG_0133.jpg
Here the screenshot of the same picture on my XZU
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/66462768/Screenshot_2013-10-07-14-26-12.png
How come thank the screenshot show more saturated colors than the original picture on my XZU?
As one test is not enough now have the screenshot of a Asus transformer prime
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/66462768/Screenshot_2013-10-07-14-23-14.jpg
The IPS+ on my tf201 show pictures lighter with more saturated colors than my XZU, but the screenshot give the opposite. Asus compression is different and Sony compression give even more saturated colors that the original picture.
Edit: uploaded to dropbox for avoid compression on XDA. Sorry for the size ^^
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what is your point exactly?
of course they would look different,
different device has its different tweak of displaying colors,
in case you still dont see my point: some company , for exampl LG, tweak their saturation to look like the samsung or to look better(for example, if a pic ask for 25% green, the display is tweaked to show 50% deep green), a screenshot of course will show differently, unless it's the defective display that oversaturated or undersaturated the pic,,,which when screencaptured and showed at the same time in another display should look all the same.(explained in detail in my last post).
KonW said:
what is your point exactly?
of course they would look different,
different device has its different tweak of displaying colors,
in case you still dont see my point: some company , for exampl LG, tweak their saturation to look like the samsung or to look better(for example, if a pic ask for 25% green, the display is tweaked to show 50% deep green), a screenshot of course will show differently, unless it's the defective display that oversaturated or undersaturated the pic,,,which when screencaptured and showed at the same time in another display should look all the same.(explained in detail in my last post).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My point is simply to say you spend a lot of time to make comparison, but to compare nothing. A screenshot is an image taken from data directly stocked on the RAM before any image processing, and so before the XZU make any modifications (X Reality) for improve image on the screen. So you only compared image decoding and encoding and not image on the screen.
bASKOU said:
My point is simply to say you spend a lot of time to make comparison, but to compare nothing. A screenshot is an image taken from data directly stocked on the RAM before any image processing, and so before the XZU make any modifications (X Reality) for improve image on the screen. So you only compared image decoding and encoding and not image on the screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
then why you see the difference of the same pic file across devices?
KonW said:
then why you see the difference of the same pic file across devices?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try to encode a CD with Windows Media Player and Itune, both to MP3 at 320 kb/s, then use it on a sound system (if it is on poor quality you may not hear it), you'll hear that the sound is different. I am really sensible to sound and can clearly feel the difference. Same go for JPEG or PNG or any image compression, each manufacturer use his own build in encoding program and process. Even if the extension is the same at the end, the rendering will be different.
bASKOU said:
Try to encode a CD with Windows Media Player and Itune, both to MP3 at 320 kb/s, then use it on a sound system (if it is on poor quality you may not hear it), you'll hear that the sound is different. I am really sensible to sound and can clearly feel the difference. Same go for JPEG or PNG or any image compression, each manufacturer use his own build in encoding program and process. Even if the extension is the same at the end, the rendering will be different.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well except that we all already see other big differences like,, listening to 2 different songs,
so without your fancy ear capibilities we already can tell that it's different , and no matter how the comression or even bitrate is processed, 2 different songs do sound as 2 different songs
KonW said:
well except that we all already see other big differences like,, listening to 2 different songs,
so without your fancy ear capibilities we already can tell that it's different , and no matter how the comression or even bitrate is processed, 2 different songs do sound as 2 different songs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was talking about same song from the same CD, where did i say different???
bASKOU said:
I was talking about same song from the same CD, where did i say different???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
as my first replay already said, which is the point ive been making this whole conversation
if the difference is subtle, it may be casued by other issuses, like the compression you said, and if we can barely see the difference, more accurate camera shot and file format should be used to compare
but here, we already see the very different color density like we felt when saw with naked eyes
like if you hear song A sung by devices A as " oh l love you so much"
and you record it , compare it to the same song sung by devices B as " oh I like you so much"
and record it ,,and when you compare them , you dont even need to consider what compression or bitrate you used to record, casue no matter what, you can already clearly see the difference
and then you start to wonder if it's devices A 's maker tweaking, that made it to sing "love" instead of "like" to make it more appealing , or is it that it was defective and wasnt able to produce the sound "like", and so you start to do the comparison 2, and 3 i did.
got it?
KonW said:
as my first replay already said, which is the point ive been making this whole conversation
if the difference is subtle, it may be casued by other issuses, like the compression you said, and if we can barely see the difference, more accurate camera shot and file format should be used to compare
but here, we already see the very different color density like we felt when saw with naked eyes
like if you hear song A sung by devices A as " oh l love you so much"
and you record it , compare it to the same song sung by devices B as " oh I like you so much"
and record it ,,and when you compare them , you dont even need to consider what compression or bitrate you used to record, casue no matter what, you can already clearly see the difference
and then you start to wonder if it's devices A 's maker tweaking, that made it to sing "love" instead of "like" to make it more appealing , or is it that it was defective and wasnt able to produce the sound "like", and so you start to do the comparison 2, and 3 i did.
got it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hahahahahahahahahahaha, ridiculous. I stop here, enjoy!!
Envoyé depuis mon C6802 avec xda premium 4
bASKOU said:
Hahahahahahahahahahaha, ridiculous. I stop here, enjoy!!
Envoyé depuis mon C6802 avec xda premium 4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah maybe if you stopped earlier and read my first posts replied to u more you may end up saving some of my time ,, and yours
and you shouldve done so way earlier
Hello everyone,
I hope you all are doing well! Here is my review of the Reno8 which I received as part of the ambassadors programme.
My unit is in the Shimmer Gold colour with 256 GB storage. As with my previous review of the FInd X5, all thoughts and opinions are my own
{
"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"
}
I have been using the Reno8 as my daily phone over the last month's and have been able to test a lot of different scenarios. In this review I'll go through them and point out things that I have liked and also things I didn't in the following segments:
Unboxing
Design and build
Display
Gaming
Charging and battery
Camera and video
Sample photos
Verdict
Unboxing
Design & buildPersonally I absolutely love the new design language of the Reno devices. The sleek squared edges combined with a really incredible looking camera module make for a very premium look.
Each time I pick up the device I am impressed with how cool it looks.
Together with this design and very nice colour in shimmer gold it's definitely eye catching. Especially depending on the angle you hold the phone it's shimmering with a lovely gradient of different hues and colours.
Moving over to the sides on the left there's volume up and down buttons that feel tactile and on the right side a power button with the signature OPPO green detail and a even more tactile feel. On the bottom of the device we can find the speaker/microphone and USB Type-C port.
Overall feel of the phone is great too. It's refined, smooth, easy to handle. The new design makes this experience great. Although, there is one downside which are sadly the vibrations and haptics do not feel very premium. For example when typing the vibration motor is quite loud. However this could be improved upon in a software update making the vibration duration shorter for example.
DisplayOn the front of the device we have a flat 6.5 AMOLED display which has 90hz refresh rate, a hole punch selfie camera in the left top corner and a relatively large chin with small bezels around.
Colours on the display look vibrant and text is crystal clear. I was really surprised with the quality of the panel and there are no dark corners. I'm glad it's got 90hz as it makes the screen feel much more responsive.
Watching videos on the screen has been a joy. As well as playing games thanks to the smooth response rate.
You can also enjoy OLED features such as Always on Display and Edge lighting for notifications. The display also features a built in under screen fingerprint reader, which has been very fast and reliable when unlocking the device each time. I only wish it was placed slightly further up on the display to make it easier to reach like on the Find X5.
GamingThe performance of the MediaTek Dimensity 1300 processor paired with the 8GB Ram and massive 256 GB storage made the Reno8 well prepared for enjoying large and graphics demanding games.
During my testing I played a vareity of games ranging from Genshin Impact, Pokemon Unite, Minecraft, and casual games such as Pokemon Go or Pokemon Cafe Remix. Each game did run without issues, and while the graphics could not be maxed out, they were still enjoyable. Also with the addition of 90 Hz on the AMOED display, games could feel smooth and responsive.
Each game was handled well on the device, thanks to the gaming overlay I could always keep the crucial stats in check and adjust the game settings accordingly.
Charging & batteryUnfortunately the Reno8 doesn't have wireless charging but makes up for it with SuperVOOC 80W. Battery charging is insanely fast. It's been incredible to quickly connect the phone to the charger for half an hour and it's already done. In times when you are low on battery and forgot to charge this has been a really good help.
And even with the fast charging: Battery life is very good. It can easily last an entire day and a bit more. All while playing casual games, texting on WhatsApp or Discord, listening to music while on a bike ride with Spotify or watching some videos on YouTube.
Camera & videoThe famous photographer Chase Jarvis once said "the best camera is the one that’s with you" and the Reno8 can definetly make this come true in a large variety of situations.
Starting with the main camera:
Featuring a flagship sensor from Sony IMX766, capturing at 50MP. It is capable of taking great photos, which are sharp, have lots of great natural bokeh (blurry backgrounds) and detail.
A small downside I noticed (which I hope can be fixed with software update) is that it can be sometimes a little bit slow with processing the image which makes it not the best for action shots where you want to capture the moment. For example when taking photos of pets, the movement is often still captured making a blurry image.
Other features of the camera are excellent. As the tagline of the Reno suggests, it's the portrait expert. And it really holds true: The portrait mode is stunning and looks very realistic with beautiful bokeh. With a big selection of different styles, my favoruite was with the bokeh background. When analyzing the portrait mode photos, you can see features of the photo which is usually only visible on a real camera lens such as focus falloff. This is where parts of the picture are less blurry at the start and as the background is further away it gets blurrier.
Selfie camera
Taking selfies on the Reno8 has been really fun, especially in portait mode too. Featuring another flagship sensor the Sony IMX709 shooting at a massive 32MP. As you can see from the samples below the selfies are sharp and what you expect from a high quality sensor like the one in the device.
Video camera
You can choose to record up to 4K in video mode, although not every mode supports it. Overall the video quality is good, with very pleasing colours in my opinion and already features some nice software stabilization, which can be enhanced with super steady shot which is especially suited for some more action shots.
When shooting 4K video it is only supported in 1x and 2x using the main 50MP sensor. Switching to ultra wide 0,6x reduces the quality to a supported resolution of 1080p video. Furthermore another limitation of the video camera is that once you start recording, you can not switch between the different lenses. If you start in 0,6x you have to stop the recording to swap to 1x, for example.
AI Highlight Video: it can improve the clarity and also quality of the video especially in low light conditions. The resolution in this mode is maxed out at 1080p but available on all lenses
Photos
More images on:
https://community.oppo.com/user-main/1156982997707653125/index
VerdictSoftware experience has been overall very consistent on the Reno8. Currenly using ColorOS 12.1 and coming from the flagship Find X5 I was pleased how well and smooth performing the system was.
All features that I use in everyday were there and never let me down. I can rely on quick app start up times and especially fast installations.
I am excited to see what the latest update brings to the Reno with the announcement of ColorOS 13 I am anticipating the release and new features. Software wise I am very happy with the direction.
The Reno8 is an overall great phone, fit for everything the day can throw at it.
In my opinion OPPO has found a great balance of flagship features at a mid price point. The only complaints I had were very minor, and do not take from the everyday use experience which has been overall very consistent and reliable.
Packed with features, a great camera, and exceptional design the Reno8 is versatile, and comes in at a great price point. The great experience starts from the moment you unbox the phone, and continues on each day as you use and explore new possibilities with it. Be it from changing the way you charge your phone, to taking fantastic photos each day.
I hope you did find my review useful and please do let me know your feedback in the comments below!