Related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30COabYrr64
The colours are too saturated, the camera wobbles and skips just as much and the mic sounds poor compared.
Surely a software issue?
Have no clue what cnet is trying to do there but the actual quality is much better.
Sound recording is really impressive and the OIS is working well too as one can see in the following videos from xsever.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loxDegj3fFE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJ7pAF1JsWA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7AvFi08yNk
I want to see a video of him walking around, I'm seeing that weird jelly effect still in those though and he is only sitting or standing still and moving the camera side to side. The colours still look so fake........
Not the smooth video they showed in the press confs.
I will be shooting another video today with White Balance set to Daylight and as I walk.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=GBupRpL_3Io
Even they say the iPhone 5 cam is better.
Maybe some software related issues? Like allways when new phone comes out...
http://reviews.cnet.com/nokia-lumia-920/
Yeh cnet confirm the camera being overhyped in the review.
Good in low light, not as good in day time.
I really don't trust cnet. I seen the video and it looks like they were favoring the iphone 5. They went to 4 solo shots of the iphone 5 while they only had 2 for the lumia. I'll just have to wait on xserver to test it because his trying his best to provide everyone with a fair review.
Conspiracy: apple paying cnet
Sent from my LG-P930 using xda app-developers app
Here are direct photo comparisons between different phones and the Lumia 920. The is part of a CNET review for the US version in their US office, which is more favorable of the camera.
http://www.cnet.com/8301-17918_1-57...0-camera-vs-htc-windows-phone-8x-vs-iphone-5/
And more direct comparison picks from Slashgear
http://www.slashgear.com/nokia-lumia-920-pureview-camera-hands-on-vs-samsung-galaxy-s-iii-01255193/
Frankly I can't decide whether this camera is good or bad based on these pictures. It wins some, but not by much. It can lose pretty bad though, especially with how unsharp and vague a lot of images look. It's not the winner Nokia was touting. Indoor shots are better in some instances, worse in others. Night shots are "brighter" but not necessarily better. I can edit the photos of a competing phone by turning up the gamma and get close to the same thing that Nokia produces. The smooth video also isn't as great as I once thought. It makes me nauseous, and details are still very lacking even if there isn't any major instances of blur.
The reviews on the phone are contradicting. The verge review shows great pictures, much better than cnet's or slashgears and their unit is not even on final software. The camera performance just doesn't seem consistant.
Well I'll judge myself when I get mine next week.
It seems to me Nokia focused too much on low light photos because the day time photos lack detail.
I added many more videos with different settings here: http://forums.wpcentral.com/showthread.php?t=200158
A Nokia French community member has confirmed on Twitter that there will be an camera update soon.
Actually, I'm very happy with my phone anyway
I recently switched to the Lumia 920 from my Samsung Infuse. I've noticed that the Lumia's photos aren't anywhere near as sharp as my Infuse's photos. I'm finding the culprit to be the lower (72ppi) pixel density. My Infuse had a 96ppi camera and photos were much better, even without the IS that the Lumia has.
Why, Nokia? You've fooled us with the optical IS and 8.7MP sensor. The least you could have done is met the pixel density of a year and a half old phone.
I would post some sample photos, but can't yet.
The reason the photos are soft is because of Nokia's aggressive post processing. They are aware of the issue, so I'm sure an update is in the works to rectify the issue.
Also, you can edit the photo by doing the auto-fix or using another photo editing app from the store to sharpen them for now.
Dapk1nmasta said:
I recently switched to the Lumia 920 from my Samsung Infuse. I've noticed that the Lumia's photos aren't anywhere near as sharp as my Infuse's photos. I'm finding the culprit to be the lower (72ppi) pixel density. My Infuse had a 96ppi camera and photos were much better, even without the IS that the Lumia has.
Why, Nokia? You've fooled us with the optical IS and 8.7MP sensor. The least you could have done is met the pixel density of a year and a half old phone.
I would post some sample photos, but can't yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
if those numbers are correct, a lower pixel density in the camera module is actual a good thing. it means that each individual pixel is larger and is able to sample more light resulting in less distortion due to noise. this is a good thing as it represents a departure from the megapixel race where the number of megapixels was increasing but the light going to each one was decreasing leading to little improvement if not a reduction in picture quality. if you do look at the megapixels though, the infuse only has an 8MP sensor vs 8.7MP for the 920 (although this isnt quite true as a maximum of around 8MP are ever used in the 920, the rest are to provide the ability to change aspect ratio of the images.
i think americasteam sums up the real reasons for what you are seeing above. you should notice even so that the images are more consistent and do not blur as easily (ignoring the sharpness issue) I do hope the update comes soon, im looking forwards to having sharp amazing quality images which really stand out!
additionally, if you observe when you take a picture, for a fraction of the second, the picture is sharp as you see on the screen. Then suddenly it is soft as the post processing is complete.
Review from Engadget is up, and looks like most of it is good except low light performance of camera. Hope there is fix for this.
https://www.engadget.com/2016/07/30/zte-axon-7-review/#gallery=419900&slide=4003963&index=14
I'm still not sure why people seem so obsessed with low light camera performance. When I look at my album, less than 5% of the pictures are of low light scenes. I'm not going to let such a menial metric determine whether or not I buy this.
Adiyel said:
I'm still not sure why people seem so obsessed with low light camera performance. When I look at my album, less than 5% of the pictures are of low light scenes. I'm not going to let such a menial metric determine whether or not I buy this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Doesn't matter what % you take in low light. low light pictures are the best how you know your camera is good.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using XDA-Developers mobile app
Adiyel said:
I'm still not sure why people seem so obsessed with low light camera performance. When I look at my album, less than 5% of the pictures are of low light scenes. I'm not going to let such a menial metric determine whether or not I buy this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If it takes good pictures in low light, then it will probably take great pictures in brighter conditions. Some of us take more pictures at night time, at concerts, or simply want the option to take better quality pictures.
Apropos camera quality, I've almost never liked my iPhone 6's low-light shots, but have absolutely no complaint about the other 98% of the times I take a picture during daylight. So in case you wanna measure it "as of worst case", sure, but I don't think there's a clear way to translate that performance directly to "quality". Specially for a tiny smartphone sensor without interchangable lens etc.
When it comes to the Axon 7's camera, exposure (pictures come out darker from what I've seen) and that grain I see in some pictures are the only "worries" I think I might have when I switch (currently waiting for UNKNOWN EU shipping dates). And both of those problems might as well be fixed via software.
MKBHD [1] said it a couple of times, nowadays we tend to measure smartphones by what's wrong with them, instead of what's right about them. So I understand, why people complain about a not so good low light camera performance.
But I'm with @Adiyel. It's the same for me, I almost never take photos in low light, so I don't care about low light camera performance.
[1] Quote from MKBHD's OnePlus 3 Review
Axon 7's low light photo results is the only con I know Axon 7 has at the moment....well.....beside the availability problem here in Europe at the moment.
We are judging phones from their flaws since if you see phones with relative similar price, you will start to compare the pros and cons. Since phones these days are already good, looking for their cons are the better comparison rather then going over their pros. In the end, you simply want a the best phone for your money.
aaa said:
Axon 7's low light photo results is the only con I know Axon 7 has at the moment....well.....beside the availability problem here in Europe at the moment.
We are judging phones from their flaws since if you see phones with relative similar price, you will start to compare the pros and cons. Since phones these days are already good, looking for their cons are the better comparison rather then going over their pros. In the end, you simply want a the best phone for your money.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well then from both of you and Cypher's points of views, other phones don't have dual-facing speakers with DOLBY ATMOS AND High-End DAC, so all of them are out of the question. See? Not the best way to compare things...
I don't know about reviews and how it is done, but atleast in real life use I think camera is decent and this is coming from someone who have used Lumia 1520, iPhone 6 & LG G4 in past. My fiancé got same phone and we were texting back and forth on whatsapp yesterday and few selfie she sent in pitch black dark room with just the screen light looked pretty decent to me on my LG G4. If you go pixel peeping even you can find flaws with pics of D800 and 5D mk iii. I think when I get mine from B&H I'd not be upset with the camera atleast based upon what I saw yesterday.
Low light is an issue imo because night-life is a popular time to take pictures for a large amount of phone users. The majority of this forum might be married with kids and/or cave-dwellers but let's not rationalize away things that could use improvement.
macallik said:
Low light is an issue imo because night-life is a popular time to take pictures for a large amount of phone users. The majority of this forum might be married with kids and/or cave-dwellers but let's not rationalize away things that could use improvement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah sure you can complain all you want. Was just throwing in my two cents, and I'm really sad that you won't be able to take great pictures in the dark, where you should be drinking and getting on with the girls instead Coming from a "cave-dweller".
P.S. People should check their upgraditis once in a while. 400 bucks get you this far, and I think you won't find so much more features, if any, in many other phones with the same price.
MeggaMortY said:
Yeah sure you can complain all you want. Was just throwing in my two cents, and I'm really sad that you won't be able to take great pictures in the dark, where you should be drinking and getting on with the girls instead Coming from a "cave-dweller".
P.S. People should check their upgraditis once in a while. 400 bucks get you this far, and I think you won't find so much more features, if any, in many other phones with the same price.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Night-life is about doing things at night, not just being in a bar/club.
Personally, I think the Axon 7 suits my needs greater than the OP3 (a similarly priced phone) in most ways. Photo quality is an area that the phone is being outperformed however.
macallik said:
Low light is an issue imo because night-life is a popular time to take pictures for a large amount of phone users. The majority of this forum might be married with kids and/or cave-dwellers but let's not rationalize away things that could use improvement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No I'm not trying to rationalize low light performance. All I'm saying is what I've seen so far is good enough for my use, yes there is always room for improvement. But I don't see any other device in this price range with all this feature set giving any better low light pictures then what Axon 7 does at this period of time, There might be devices in future that will beat Axon 7 for price feature category. But at present I feel this is best value for your money. And with more RAM + more powerful processor - point I don't get is if you are not a gamer, does it really matter ?
macallik said:
Low light is an issue imo because night-life is a popular time to take pictures for a large amount of phone users. The majority of this forum might be married with kids and/or cave-dwellers but let's not rationalize away things that could use improvement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with this. Have you seen Linus Tech's review of the Axon? For night scenes, most people are rocking iPhones, Galaxies, LGs, and oddly enough, ZTE phones (4th largest in the USA). Only recent phones really have passable lowlight, and it's easy enough to spend a couple minutes in snapseed and make a night photo really usable.
I also think a problem our generation has is that we judge this phone's lowlight based on other phones, but its performance wouldn't change if these phones didn't exist (the 2016 galaxies).
Like the other guy said earlier, the performance is passable. And lowlight isn't an indication of how good a cam is...it's more indicative of how versatile and stable the performance is across different scenarios. Look at the TechRadar review, and look at the walkway scene. The Axon pulls in far more detail than the S7. Period. Lots of small pixels has a tradeoff for great daytime detail and performance. Large pixels and lower resolution has compromises, too.
Overall, the Axon does so many things right for so little money. How many phones can say that? How many offer what the Axon 7 does at or below is cost? The list is VERY small, trust me.
I would prefer an artificial light / indoor light review as I class that as low light. So many recent phones I have had are awful inside the house and loads of my photos are I doors with my children just having fun and of you want a camera test that would be a great one. Best phone so far including s7 and s7 Edge for taking photos of a baby bouncing in a bouncer is any of the Sony xperia Z range using timeshift burst. One click and an instant 40 photos (I think) 20 before shutter and 20 after now that's amazing at freezing moving images just a shame resolution was a little low and phones heat up) all the same it's a clever bit of software ahead of its time.
Hello guys,
DXOMark just released the review for the Pixel 3.
https://www.dxomark.com/google-pixel3-camera-review/
Here is my reaction:
"This is a joke. Night-Mode: High Res always on (even without zoom), better image saturation, plus better HDR Quality. Meaning: Even better shots at daylight. AND it makes night images awesome.
DXOmark. Shame on you.
1. The Pixel 3 with always Night-Mode-Shots will easily score beyond 110+ - but obviously - we can't trust DXOmarks scores anymore. They do not show the full capability and power of a smartphone camera.
Also the comparison shots with the Pixel 2 zoom is NOT valid. Just get a port of the Pixel 3 camera api on your Pixel 2 and you will have the same super res zoom and the better zoom results, because it's just a software trick. And again, DXOmark proves that they are NOT consumer friendly. On the contrary.
Take a look at xda-developers, guys. There you can see the truth.
2. Shooting pictures with the Pixel 3 is a homerun, you point and click, easy. With other phones the chance of getting bad shots / blurry ones is alot higher if you are on the go or can't stop long enough to stand 100% still.
It doesn't matter which people I talk to, Pixel 3 users are always stunned by the quality of 99% of their pictures. The moment I turn to Samsung / Huawei / Apple users they still like their pictures, but do admit that they often have to delete images because of miserable shots.
These "pictures" here do not show the reallife - performance, because they are still images. But in the real life you do not stand still all the time. On the contrary. If you are on the move with your friends, you want to take your phone out, make a pictures quickly and be done with it. The Pixel 3 is your friend there.
3. Giving a score for video quality without offering comparison - videos (or any video material at all) is a joke.
You are giving us tabulars without any means of checking their validity. You guys should go and check out the German "Stiftung Warentest", the largest German consumer organisation comparing goods and services in an unbiased way. Their tests span dozens of pages and they enable self-testing.
Please take a note or two and improve your methods. They are NOT thorough.
All these factors MUST be taken into consideration at a smartphone camera test. But here.. they are not. Which means that this "review" is not comprehensive."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would like to have your opinion on the matter.
Edit 21.02.2018 16:05 - I think they just deleted my criticism, it's not available anymore on the review - comment page. Well done.
I agree with you and i want to add another thing that DXOMark is missing. About all the smartphone have extra modes only aviable for the back camera (Night mode for p20 pro for example) while with the pixel 3 those modes are aviable also for the front camera. How this cannot be counted in a camera review!? I would say thay DXOMark is giving scores only under they restricted conditions and are not valid in general.
Well, didn't you remember Huawei in October saying they didn't want to "release the test" of the Mate 20 Pro because it would crush the competition?
Companies can dictate whether or not a review is being released?
lol.
Guess who pays DXOMark the most. Mine is apple.
I don't agree with everything you said. There are some valid points in that DXO review. From my experience, the pixel has some issues of underexposing and oversharpening. This might work well when taking pics of landscapes or objects but not on people. I'm not arguing that the pixel doesn't take great shots, it really does but not in every scenario. As far as night shot goes, it's a great feature but I haven't found much use for it as I would rarely switch to that mode unless I wanted to impress someone.
malek777 said:
I don't agree with everything you said. There are some valid points in that DXO review. From my experience, the pixel has some issues of underexposing and oversharpening. This might work well when taking pics of landscapes or objects but not on people. I'm not arguing that the pixel doesn't take great shots, it really does but not in every scenario. As far as night shot goes, it's a great feature but I haven't found much use for it as I would rarely switch to that mode unless I wanted to impress someone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed, the whole point of DXO is to test the cameras auto mode performance. I would even argue they should stop considering portrait mode and zoom with secondary cameras to really level the playing field.
But the Pixel getting the highest video score shows how tests don't always align with people's preferences. Most would agree the Pixel video recording is just average to the consumer. And the pictures people love didn't get the highest score.
FYI
Digital Trends did a great camera comparison and write up that you should all check out. Very fair and honest.
https://www.digitaltrends.com/photography/best-smartphone-camera-of-2018/
PuffDaddy_d said:
FYI
Digital Trends did a great camera comparison and write up that you should all check out. Very fair and honest.
https://www.digitaltrends.com/photography/best-smartphone-camera-of-2018/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A good review, and I agreed with their picks for most categories.
What I found 'unfair' is the bokeh shot comparison (PORTRAIT MODE: TSUKIJI MARKET), where their complaint about the Pixel 3 was linked to a person the in the background positioned in the worst possible space for the AI to effectively do its work. If you compare the shot by the Pixel with the others, none of the photos include an object between the model's hand and her face, except for the Pixel (and to a much lower extent, the LG V40, displaying similar cutout mistake). Such 'obstructions' handicap faux-bokeh software significantly. The reviewers also fail to comment on the messed up skewer on the iPhone XS Max - they only noted this for the iPhone XR.
Otherwise I think it's a very fair review, and the Pixel deservedly wins overall.
I just would like you to post here and the reason why you take your photos in different modes. 48 mp mode is aside, so for regular photos do you use default 4:3 with 12 mp (4000x3000), wide srceen 16:9 with 9 mp (4000x2250) or full screen mode with 7,2 mp (4000x1800)? I´m not sure if the mesures are right but more or less.
I just love the phone and its screen so I´m not sure about this because enjoying the full screen at photos also takes into account a loss of quality, but is it remarkable for you? Do you preffer taking photos using all Oppo Renos 2´s potential or is it just a very Little loss of quality and it deserves the usage of its full screen? Thanks for posting.
Nobody else taking part in this poll? Come on, there's no much to do in these times so post your thoughts about the different modes if you want.
By the way, thanks to the one that voted the only option selected here. I'd really like to know his/her reasons and thoughts about it.
Tell you the truth not even sure what modes there are, just left it on default most of the time.
The whole 1 week I've owned it....love to hear which mode one should be using for regular pics ..
I've noticed that it seems eerily quiet here on all fronts of Reno 2/z.
Maybe there hasn't been a big uptake for this model outside of china.
Thanks for answering. The update came here in Spain a few weeks ago and now we're enjoying COLOR OS7. Modes are very simple and has to do with aspect ratio which implies default, 16:9 aspect ratio and full screen. That involves a different resolution as I explained. Nothing else. Just messing around with this because default mode seems ridiculous as photos are seen on this device as its screen is enormous. But I guess that default mode gives you the best quality although order modes offers a better experience when seeing photos in the Oppo Reno 2. So that is.
goulash2011 said:
Tell you the truth not even sure what modes there are, just left it on default most of the time.
The whole 1 week I've owned it....love to hear which mode one should be using for regular pics ..
I've noticed that it seems eerily quiet here on all fronts of Reno 2/z.
Maybe there hasn't been a big uptake for this model outside of china.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, I have never seen a phone with so little discussion.... Never.
Can't even unlock bootloader
Little discussion may be a good news. That means the phone is so good and has little or nearly no problems and fulfills all owners needs. That's what I feel when handle it daily.
Thanks for voting here the two people they did. Not a massive participation but enough to clear my mind about this.
4:3 without zoom
16:9 when I need zoom
Never liked 4:3 aspect so I ho for the 16:9 one.
Not sure what the 48mp is doing. I'm a photographer and prefer small size and quick shots in a mobile device