Related
HI All
Now we have time to play with our new phones, what do you guys think of the screen and most importantly the sub pixel count , what a difference that has made
For a long time the screen res has ment a lot to me as I wanted a phone with a high res display like the iphone 4 for but without the constraints of Itunes.
Now I feel Samsung have done done them self proud, even the Apple fanboys at Engadget gave it SG2 a very good review.
but what do u guys think ..
does it look sharp....
are the colours amazing
when u zoom in does the text look sharp
have u compared it to an Iphone 4 screen and said... yeah mine looks better( the phone nothing else )
does the adjustment of the colour ( Backgrounf Effect) make the colours look more realistic and not the oversaturated look as befor on the SGS
Please read and comment as I love my screen on the SG2 and think Iphone 4's screen is amazing and a quite a high benchmark to beat and has it been beaten or SG2 needs improvments
the great wizard said:
HI All
Now we have time to play with our new phones, what do you guys think of the screen and most importantly the sub pixel count , what a difference that has made
For a long time the screen res has ment a lot to me as I wanted a phone with a high res display like the iphone 4 for but without the constraints of Itunes.
Now I feel Samsung have done done them self proud, even the Apple fanboys at Engadget gave it SG2 a very good review.
but what do u guys think ..
does it look sharp....
are the colours amazing
when u zoom in does the text look sharp
have u compared it to an Iphone 4 screen and said... yeah mine looks better( the phone nothing else )
does the adjustment of the colour ( Backgrounf Effect) make the colours look more realistic and not the oversaturated look as befor on the SGS
Please read and comment as I love my screen on the SG2 and think Iphone 4's screen is amazing and a quite a high benchmark to beat and has it been beaten or SG2 needs improvments
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd say this is good, retina better, but 720 & 1080p as some people are asking for is totally over kill. Do pixels really bother you that much?
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
Slightly brighter than my SGS 1 .
jje
iPhones screen is better, and video is clearer on iPhone 4 because of the screen. but this is still the second best screen in my eyes.
if res is everything to you get the gs3 when it comes out, it should have 300dpi screen, so iPhone won't have any advantages left in it's pockets.
root and change dpi size to 182
It will look awesome.
NIK516 said:
iPhones screen is better, and video is clearer on iPhone 4 because of the screen. but this is still the second best screen in my eyes.
if res is everything to you get the gs3 when it comes out, it should have 300dpi screen, so iPhone won't have any advantages left in it's pockets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Videos dont look better on the iPhone for a number of reasons, the main one being the puny size of its screen. For a start its too small, its also the wrong shape making anything you play either letterbox badly or crop. The iPhone also cant handle high bitrate HD MKV movies like the SGS2 can.
Its not all about resolution with screens. I think as a package the SGS2 screen beats the Retina.
rovex said:
Videos dont look better on the iPhone for a number of reasons, the main one being the puny size of its screen. For a start its too small, its also the wrong shape making anything you play either letterbox badly or crop. The iPhone also cant handle high bitrate HD MKV movies like the SGS2 can.
Its not all about resolution with screens. I think as a package the SGS2 screen beats the Retina.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
agreed! the native support for avi, mkv etc and the vivid nature of omled is brilliant.
i was told its not 1080p but its better then 720p ?
1280x800. HD 720 is 1280x720
rgarjr said:
1280x800. HD 720 is 1280x720
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so slightly better then 720p?
Slightly. It just has added height. It is a 16:10 ratio instead of 16:9. Its not a big difference, and is basically the same thing between 1920x1080 versus 1920x1200.
Personally, the extra height is a plus.
Aspect ratios are a funny beast. HDTV (720p as well as 1080p or FullHD in marketing terms) is 16:9. 800x480, which I consider to be the "classic" Android resolution--it's been more or less standard from the time of the Nexus one, up through the SGS2--has a 15:9 (aka 5:3) aspect ratio, so it is slightly wider when held in portrait than a GNexus. The Note is 1280x800, so at 16:10 (or 8:5) it lies in between the two--not as skinny as a 720p phone, but not as wide as a "typical" 800x480 phone.
On a complete tangent, I miss when 16:10 was the standard for monitors. Most monitors now are 1080p rather than 1920x1200; the latter is really a superior resolution for a computer imo.
Don't forget it uses Pentile display, not RGB, so there are less subpixels than regular screens. With that said, I thought my Note has excellent screen.
5.3"
1280x800
285 Pixels Per Inch (PPI)
WXGA HD Super AMOLED - PenTile
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Galaxy_Note#cite_note-0
So when encoding a video what should I set the resolution too ?
phillyrican said:
So when encoding a video what should I set the resolution too ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1280x720 to keep the same aspect ratio
No its 1280x800, which is .625 aka 16:10, not .5625 which is 16:9. It doesn't matter though, keep your video at its original ratio, if you want to stretch the video, let the video player do it.
I dont understand why no android tablet manufacturer will make a 4:3 tablet. Anyone that has used one will tell you it is better for reading and web surfing which are the main uses for a tablet. Most movies are 2.35:1 anyway so you're going to have black bars regardless...
In china you'll find a lot oft 4:3 android tablets
IMO 16:10 displays are the best, becuase they are not to high for movies (small black stripes) and not to slim for reading and surfing.
Just compare 10" Android Tablets with a n iPad and you'll know what's the best!
Gesendet von meinem S3 mit Android 4.1.2
I agree with you. One of the Lenovo tablets are 4:3 though. 16:10 is just weird to hold in portrait mode.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
slide83 said:
I dont understand why no android tablet manufacturer will make a 4:3 tablet. Anyone that has used one will tell you it is better for reading and web surfing which are the main uses for a tablet. Most movies are 2.35:1 anyway so you're going to have black bars regardless...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
4:3 is objectively worse. Why? Because it isn't functional.
Here's the reasoning.
On a 8:5 screen, in portrait mode, you can view more information. (this is due to how tablets can zoom out) Therefore, it is more productive in portrait mode for that sole reason. Don't bother me with arguments of "it looks funny" or BS like that, it's childish. Form fits function, not your subjective opinions about what looks better. And functionally, 8:5 is better.
You might argue that 8:5 is less productive in landscape mode, but that's null and void because you shouldn't use a tablet in landscape mode if you're, say, browsing the web, or typing up a document. Portrait mode will fulfill your needs much better. Using landscape mode in such tasks is like trying to fit a square peg through a round hole.
With that out of the way, about landscape mode. Media in landscape mode is objectively better on 8:5 because there are less black bars. Granted, there still are some, but there are less than the gargantuan abominations you'll see on a 4:3 screen. Moreover, in the specific case of the nexus 10, 720p can be scaled perfectly at a ratio of 4:1 to fit the screen.
As for media, all the media I watch is in 16:9, maybe you should consider primarily watching chinese cartoons as well?
tl;dr : 4:3 is archaic and deprecated, don't know why you would want it.
/thread
In fact 16:9 (16:10 on tablet but a part is for the status bar so it's about 16:9) makes developers scale up the application from phone version easier.
Keion said:
4:3 is objectively worse. Why? Because it isn't functional.
Here's the reasoning.
On a 8:5 screen, in portrait mode, you can view more information. (this is due to how tablets can zoom out) Therefore, it is more productive in portrait mode for that sole reason. Don't bother me with arguments of "it looks funny" or BS like that, it's childish. Form fits function, not your subjective opinions about what looks better. And functionally, 8:5 is better.
You might argue that 8:5 is less productive in landscape mode, but that's null and void because you shouldn't use a tablet in landscape mode if you're, say, browsing the web, or typing up a document. Portrait mode will fulfill your needs much better. Using landscape mode in such tasks is like trying to fit a square peg through a round hole.
With that out of the way, about landscape mode. Media in landscape mode is objectively better on 8:5 because there are less black bars. Granted, there still are some, but there are less than the gargantuan abominations you'll see on a 4:3 screen. Moreover, in the specific case of the nexus 10, 720p can be scaled perfectly at a ratio of 4:1 to fit the screen.
As for media, all the media I watch is in 16:9, maybe you should consider primarily watching chinese cartoons as well?
tl;dr : 4:3 is archaic and deprecated, don't know why you would want it.
/thread
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
/facepalm
Thanks for the good laugh.
4:3 is better for apps
16:10 is better for movies and potentially side by side apps. My hope is Google will add side by side apps in the future. 4:3 would be pretty useless for that use case.
slide83 said:
/facepalm
Thanks for the good laugh.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
0/10 put some effort into your trolling.
You can't pretend to be stupid and fail at it too.
Seriously, back in my day, trolling used to mean something.
>I dont understand why no android tablet manufacturer will make a 4:3 tablet.
There's a few models, like Lenovo S2109, but yep, it's weird. I cry every time peeps try to use a 16:9 or 16:10 in portrait. It just looks so painful. All these sad tabs have their functionality halved by being restricted to landscape.
MS has standardized on 16:9, and looks like Goog has standardized on 16:10. Apple is the only one going with 4:3 on tablets. Not coincidentally, Apple is the only one who pays the most attention to detail and ergonomics. The iPad Mini w/ no-bezel sides has the perfect shape, especially when it gets the Retina treatment next year.
I can understand the no-4:3 for the larger size. Video-watching is a major use-case, and the stretched AR is better for vids. It's also a fashion thing, as display vendors have trained consumers to associate 4:3 with old fogey CRTs. What they don't bother to tell you is that 4:3 LCDs would cost more money to make since it has larger surface area.
The reality is that people want to watch videos more than reading.
I've found 16:10 to be pretty close to an A-spec sheet of paper (A4 in terms of size, and I have no clue about US sizes) and I often use it in portrait for viewing scanned in stuff. It also seems to make a sort of touch typing possible in landscape. That at least makes it more useful in the EU.
Also, I think the benefits of 16:10 in landscape far outweigh the advantages of 4:3 in portrait. Portrait doesn't really offer anything special, to be honest, it just rotates the app.
Tablet is for the multimedia content. and 16:10 (like the Nexus 10) is best of two worlds: great for movies and great for portrait browsing. Web pages have sidebars even on 4:3, but at 1600x2560 they fit perfectly showing more vertical content. I see no one complaining about newspapers having long columns, and 10:16 is nowhere near that.
slide83 said:
I dont understand why no android tablet manufacturer will make a 4:3 tablet. Anyone that has used one will tell you it is better for reading and web surfing which are the main uses for a tablet. Most movies are 2.35:1 anyway so you're going to have black bars regardless...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Too each their own I guess. I much prefer the 16:9 ratio for my devices (monitor, TV, tablet, etc.)...
Still it would be nice to have choices for those that want something else.
Wish I could remember what it was called(thinking something like Golden View/Aspect) that explains one of the reasons for 16:10 and 16:9 aspects. The range of site a person has is more of a stretched rectangle than your standard 4:3 aspect ratio.
crash822 said:
Wish I could remember what it was called(thinking something like Golden View/Aspect) that explains one of the reasons for 16:10 and 16:9 aspects. The range of site a person has is more of a stretched rectangle than your standard 4:3 aspect ratio.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As you'd expect, with two circular eyes. Also, 16:10 is no harder to hold or use than 4:3 (maybe in portrait?).
via Tapatalk
I like landscape mode better. Like e.more said, 4:3 has been etched into consumers minds to mean old school tube t.v.'s and such. 16:9/16:10 is the best of both worlds. I hardly use my tab in portrait unless an app forces it. Like instagram for example.
demandarin said:
I like landscape mode better. Like e.more said, 4:3 has been etched into consumers minds to mean old school tube t.v.'s and such. 16:9/16:10 is the best of both worlds. I hardly use my tab in portrait unless an app forces it. Like instagram for example.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ultimate Rotation Control. Find it on Google Play, will solve the issue with forced rotation.
Regards.
4:3 will get your more screen real estate if the screens are the same size and it suits what the iPad is trying to do as it doesn't make you want to hold it sideways. The iPhone 5 screen is really tall and thin like those 16:9 tablets and it makes you want to hold that phone sideways which is odd, they need to add more width to it.
I don't think many people are watching movies on tablets, why would you when you can just plug it into your TV?
Venekor said:
4:3 will get your more screen real estate if the screens are the same size and it suits what the iPad is trying to do as it doesn't make you want to hold it sideways. The iPhone 5 screen is really tall and thin like those 16:9 tablets and it makes you want to hold that phone sideways which is odd, they need to add more width to it.
I don't think many people are watching movies on tablets, why would you when you can just plug it into your TV?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think lots of people watching movies on their tab. For me, it seems more like a in your face experience. Since the tab is closer to your face vs. A television set. Throw on some headphones and watching movies on a tab can be very intense. Especially with horror movies.
Another great thing is having them stored on device then linking it to t.v. through HDMI port. For when you want to watch it on a big screen with surround sound or whatever.
demandarin said:
4:3 has been etched into consumers minds to mean old school tube t.v.'s and such.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
4:3 is 'dominant' in tablets because of the iPad. TV and monitors have been using widescreen as a standard for probably over a decade now. The only advantage 4:3 has is that it works well for the ecosystem Apple has made (ie. They don't want to 'fragment' and break apps), all other entertainment industries have moved away from 4:3
Venekor said:
4:3 will get your more screen real estate if the screens are the same size and it suits what the iPad is trying to do as it doesn't make you want to hold it sideways. The iPhone 5 screen is really tall and thin like those 16:9 tablets and it makes you want to hold that phone sideways which is odd, they need to add more width to it.
I don't think many people are watching movies on tablets, why would you when you can just plug it into your TV?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you're just really conservative, because you're being a bit melodramatic. 16:9 doesn't suddenly force you to hold it sideways except with tablets.
I just sold my transformer prime infinity...and coming from that, im disappointed with the screen. How could a lower resolution screen on the prime look sharper than the one on the nexus?
Well I was just looking around here and I don't have a Nexus 10. I got a Galaxy Note 10.1 and from my experience the picture matters a lot.
I mean there are a lot of wallpaper sites with ultra HD and optimized wallpapers for retina display, but the same resolution is not always the same sharpness. some are crappy cropped or zoomed.
Use quickpic to set your background picture. The stock gallery app sometimes crops the pictures false.
And pictures with a resolution below the maximum resolution will always look a bit crappy. that means that when you are using a fullHD picture, which was nice for transformer prime, it can look less sharp on a display with higher resolution like nexus 10
I too come from Prime and there is no contest, this screen is sharper than Prime by miles.
How stuff looks will depend on what you are seeing.
If you have set regular wallpaper, it will look all blurry thanks to resolution. Even so called HD wallpapers will look blurry on this. You need to go search for wallpapers for MacBook Pro retina and use those on this tablet using quickpic. None of the apps from Android market have good wallpapers that are having native resolution of this tablet.
Text is sharp and crisp on this.
Most arcade games are not optimised for this screen and look terrible or blurry. That is not screen's fault.
Desktop web pages look nice full and crisp. So only real issue of lack of sharpness comes into picture when the content is not ready for screen. That includes apps, images and games.
I also come from Prime.
I wouldn't say the Prime screen looks sharper than the Nexus 10. Reading text on the N10, for example, the resolution is really amazing, very nice on the Nexus 10.
The colors and brightness and blacks is a different story. The Prime had those 3 much nicer than the Nexus 10. I loved playing Marble Blast on the Prime, the graphics looked amazingly vivid. On the Nexus 10 they appear as meh.
Its the prime infinity. Drastic difference. What a shame. Gonna put the nex up 4sale.
suzook said:
I just sold my transformer prime...and coming from that, im disappointed with the screen. How could a lower resolution screen on the prime look sharper than the one on the nexus?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's mainly because a lot of apps and mobile sites and such aren't made for the resolution. It's made for a smaller resolution, so to make up for that, the apps, mobile sites, and whatever else are all upscaled to fit the 2560x1600 resolution. While upscaling allows you to view things bigger, it will also make everything else a slightly blurry. There are upscaling algorithms to make it look better, but basically it's impossible to make upscaled images look as good as a native 2560x1600 image.
A 720p 10" screen (Note 10.1) will show a 720p video the cleanest because the video outputs a ratio of exactly 1:1 pixels.
A 1080p 10" screen (TF prime) will show a 720p video a bit blurrier because the video outputs a ratio of 2.25:1 pixels.
A 1440p 10" screen (N10) will show a 720p video the blurriest because the video outputs a ratio of 4:1 pixels. (I know the N10 has a 1600p screen, it's just to make calculations slightly easier)
Now when using a 1080p video, a 720p screen will show no improvement because the screen can't output those extra pixels.
When using a 1080p screen, the screen will look sharper than that 720p screen because you have more information. Consider watching TV of a 10x10 resolution vs 1920x1080 resolution. The 1920x1080p resolution will look far better
Once again, the 1440p will look slightly blurry.
Now when you use a 1440p video, you can probably guess which screen will output that video the cleanest.
So basically, this high resolution thing is good mainly for texts as of right now since nothing is really optimized for a screen beyond 1080p.
Anyone who thinks its possible for a much lower resolution screen to be sharper is a fool. This screen is absolutely dazzling. Though content displayed is obviously going to have an affect.
And just to shove some numbers in your face:
N10 - 300.24 PPI (2560x1600 @ 10.055") 4,096,000 pixels (78% MORE)
Prime Infinity - 226.42 PPI (1920x1200 @ 10") 2,304,000 pixels
That's a huge difference.
404 ERROR said:
It's mainly because a lot of apps and mobile sites and such aren't made for the resolution. It's made for a smaller resolution, so to make up for that, the apps, mobile sites, and whatever else are all upscaled to fit the 2560x1600 resolution. While upscaling allows you to view things bigger, it will also make everything else a slightly blurry. There are upscaling algorithms to make it look better, but basically it's impossible to make upscaled images look as good as a native 2560x1600 image.
A 720p 10" screen (Note 10.1) will show a 720p video the cleanest because the video outputs a ratio of exactly 1:1 pixels.
A 1080p 10" screen (TF prime) will show a 720p video a bit blurrier because the video outputs a ratio of 2.25:1 pixels.
A 1440p 10" screen (N10) will show a 720p video the blurriest because the video outputs a ratio of 4:1 pixels. (I know the N10 has a 1600p screen, it's just to make calculations slightly easier)
Now when using a 1080p video, a 720p screen will show no improvement because the screen can't output those extra pixels.
When using a 1080p screen, the screen will look sharper than that 720p screen because you have more information. Consider watching TV of a 10x10 resolution vs 1920x1080 resolution. The 1920x1080p resolution will look far better
Once again, the 1440p will look slightly blurry.
Now when you use a 1440p video, you can probably guess which screen will output that video the cleanest.
So basically, this high resolution thing is good mainly for texts as of right now since nothing is really optimized for a screen beyond 1080p.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I actually have to disagree with you a little bit here. 720p video should look just as good on the Nexus 10 as it does on the Note 10.1. 1280x800 times 2 is 2560x1600. Because of that each pixel of a 720p video will take up exactly 4 pixels on the Nexus 10; however those 4 pixels on the N10 are the same area that would be a single pixel on the Note 10.1. This is a clean ratio. On the TF700 you got to 1920x1200 which is 1.5 times 1280x800. This is not a whole ratio and means that pixels of a 720p video will take up between 1 and 4 pixels on the TF700 display (determined by a fancy algorithm for scaling images).
The Nexus 10 playing 1080p video should have about the same blurriness as the TF700 playing 720p video.
Nitemare3219 said:
Anyone who thinks its possible for a much lower resolution screen to be sharper is a fool. This screen is absolutely dazzling. Though content displayed is obviously going to have an affect.
And just to shove some numbers in your face:
N10 - 300.24 PPI (2560x1600 @ 10.055") 4,096,000 pixels (78% MORE)
Prime Infinity - 226.42 PPI (1920x1200 @ 10") 2,304,000 pixels
That's a huge difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you have a prime to compare it to? Sorry, but text IS crisper on the prime. I see it with my 20/20 eyes.
suzook said:
Did you have a prime to compare it to? Sorry, but text IS crisper on the prime. I see it with my 20/20 eyes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol as a former owner of both (returned Prime C1 for 700 a C6 then returned that, and I started the thread in Prime forums for users who Asus lost our first mailed GPS dongles)- your fooling yourself or you got a N10 with a bad screen
Sent from my SCH-I535 using XDA
suzook said:
Did you have a prime to compare it to? Sorry, but text IS crisper on the prime. I see it with my 20/20 eyes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can most likely blame that on googles new font rendering in 4.2. They turned down the font hinting a lot. It would be nice if it was configureable like in Linux. It the same way on the galaxy nexus and nexus 7 in 4.2.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda premium
The problem with this screen is calibration and black levels.
Colors are extremely washed, red is a poor red, same with blue. This totally kills the screen. If you compare this with ipad screen, you will cry. Not because of viewing angles, not because of brightness, because of colours. Google was really smart when they decided not to calibrate their screens, same with nexus 4, while other OEMs take care of this thing deeply.
And black, despite numbers of the reviews, its quite poor, mostly because every single unit has light bleed (some with a hard mess, others this problem is smaller)
As a result, a top screen with such a poor implementation. This could be best screen in an tablet ever, and now it is a mediocre one, with many pixels, but nothing else. And it's a ****ing software issue, thats so sad.
Straf said:
And it's a ****ing software issue, thats so sad.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
light bleed is not a software issue
Techie2012 said:
light bleed is not a software issue
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, meant the calibration thing, it's about software. Black thing is because a bad manufacturing process, probably because of low price tag., or crappy manufacturers.
blackhand1001 said:
You can most likely blame that on googles new font rendering in 4.2. They turned down the font hinting a lot. It would be nice if it was configureable like in Linux. It the same way on the galaxy nexus and nexus 7 in 4.2.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow...that blows. Maybe we need a 4.1 ROM??
I saw light bleed as soon as I turned my N10, but that's not the reason I just called to return it -- it was the uneven brightness. The top 1/2 inch of the screen is noticeably darker than the rest of it -- not visible when watching a movie or playing games, but very distracting when surfing and reading books, especially in portrait mode.
Since I haven't seen anyone else complain about this issue, I'm hopeful the replacement will be better.
Yep, I completely agree with one of the previous posters, this is definetly a black level issue. I put the iPad with a Retina Display right against a Nexus 10 both playing the same 1080i MKV. The iPad clearly won.
I still like the Nexus 10 a lot and I find it very comfortable to use because of how thin it is and how light it is, but to improve the product I think Google missed it some here. They could lowered the resolution considerably (1920 x 1080 is more than fine), improved on black level, and used the same processor. The lower resolution would have allowed that processor to scream since it wouldn't have been as taxed to interpolate so many pixels.
I don't know if it is a software issue or not, but if it is I really hope Google releases a fix. If there was a way to adjust Gamma or Contrast it might help considerably.
suzook said:
Did you have a prime to compare it to? Sorry, but text IS crisper on the prime. I see it with my 20/20 eyes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's no way on earth text (or other computer generated content like the UI and icons) will look better on a 147PPI display (Prime) vs. 224PPI (TF700) or 300PPI (N10). The reason is as 404 Error did a great job of explaining is that text is a 1:1 match pixel wise; the more pixels the sharper the image. Photos and videos display even the clearest content over multiple pixels so the advantage of a higher PPI becomes less pronounced. And the human eye (even yours) can't resolve sharpness over 229PPI beyond 15". So, your 20/20 eyes are decieving you. The N10 has less contrast and isn't as bright as older displays so that might be what you're reacting to.
Straf said:
This could be best screen in an tablet ever, and now it is a mediocre one,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well lets hope this guy will change that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJ9H-TtObBY
tacitust said:
I saw light bleed as soon as I turned my N10, but that's not the reason I just called to return it -- it was the uneven brightness. The top 1/2 inch of the screen is noticeably darker than the rest of it -- not visible when watching a movie or playing games, but very distracting when surfing and reading books, especially in portrait mode.
Since I haven't seen anyone else complain about this issue, I'm hopeful the replacement will be better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mine has this problem and so do at least a few others. See http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2007676
I'm still debating if it annoys me enough to justify an exchange.
I have a friend which have a htc one x+ and his aspect ratio when taking photo is 16:9 . How can i do that on my s3?
Srry for my english .
Use the 6MP camera setting.
But that setting doesn't deincrease the photo quality ? So what is the best option , 16:9 or 4:3 for a professional photographer ?
dezeubby said:
But that setting doesn't deincrease the photo quality ? So what is the best option , 16:9 or 4:3 for a professional photographer ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The one x+ do the same.. Decrease to 6mpx..
Professional photogtapher? Think 4:3 but is a too expand world to riassume all in 2 ratios xD