Related
Is it just me, or for the rating of (3.2?) the camera on this phone is terrible. Has such bad low light performance as well. Wouldn't surprise me to find that the 3.2 figure was achieved by interpolation rather than optical rating.
Any idea why it's so bad?
3.2 Mega Pixel is indeed the resolution for the camera, low light shooting is problematic with any phone camera regardless of the brand, if you want to take good pictures in low light setting you need a very good DSLR camera with iso 1600 upwards.
Scougar said:
Is it just me, or for the rating of (3.2?) the camera on this phone is terrible. Has such bad low light performance as well. Wouldn't surprise me to find that the 3.2 figure was achieved by interpolation rather than optical rating.
Any idea why it's so bad?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the camera is cheap because the phone is cheap with a 5.o mpx it will cost as much as a touch hd, but is a phone camera so it will work for quick pics not for lanscapes and sundowns
Crappy cameraaaaaaaaa
Get a decent digiatal camera to do your job right. Only case i''ll be forced to use it is maybe a car hit on the road just to prove facts . But then again i always carry my small camera with me so not even then hahaha
Funny that my k800i was able to provide much better pictures, not brilliant but far superior and acceptable quality for quick snaps. The tg01 quality is terrible, and gotta admit even in good light it's pretty bad. Even getting it without being blurred can be a problem sometimes.
I personally think either some compression is being used unncessarily behind the scenes or just the camera application sucks, well to be honest the app does suck, you can't even zoom (as far as I can tell), or change the amount of exposure. Changing the exposure is a basic feature.
For a while I was ironically carrying around the phone I used to own just to take pics with, I can't even take pics of car parts without thinking the quality is naff.
I realy regret passing my old omnia to my wife , it took great pictures for a camera phone and it also had exp+-, wb, iso setting eek and a bright very powerful and very usefull led light! Great phone allaround.
Camera sucks? Any phone camera (with it's small plastic lens) can take better pictures than the cheapest of the real compact cameras with true compound coated lenses...
I think that camera works quite well to use to take pictures of interesting items in a shop, books, compact disc, and the macro works really well.
Any photo camera under bad light conditions can't take good pictures.
On the other hand if you mean that the photo software is too basic, I agree. No white balance, exposure control, and so on. It would e great finding a camera software better for our TG01.
Hmm.. perhaps my complaint is really surrounding the software rather than the camera itself, although I still think the quality of pictures leaves much to be desired.
hi guys. im just curious how the video and pictures on the evo3d look compared to other 5 or 8mp cameras. are they sharp ect. how would the evo3d compare to say the iphone 4?
im in the market for a good camera phone
I personally feel the evo3d only takes great pictures sometimes - meaning it is hard to get good pictures.
The pictures tend to look better on the phone than when you look at them on a computer, where they tend to look more grainy when not in the brightest light. This feels like a step down from HTC's other offerings, which can look as good if not better than iphone pictures when pulled to your computer. I have gotten some fantastic pictures, but for the most part the camera has left me a bit wanting.
Playing around with 3d pictures is quite fun, and video recording is very good - particularly the audio, which was lacking in the evo4g.
eazye1984 said:
hi guys. im just curious how the video and pictures on the evo3d look compared to other 5 or 8mp cameras. are they sharp ect. how would the evo3d compare to say the iphone 4?
im in the market for a good camera phone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It takes a much better picture than the Evo4G did. Much sharper looking, even with 3mp less.
However in low light it still gets grainy...the sensor can't help that, but the software can...but it doesn't. It does, however, take fantastic macro shots for a cell phone...surprisingly.
The 5mp cam on the NS4G I had for a few weeks was phenomenal. When I came back to the E3D it really made taking pictures with it seem pointless...and that's not even taking into consideration the .5-1.5 second shutter lag from when you push the button.
For a freakin' cell phone? It's fantastic. I've never used an iphone4 camera but I've only heard good things. But after seeing what a Samsung 5.0mp sensor/lens/software combo can do I am completely down on the E3D's camera. Granted it does 3D and it is a rather compelling effect...though the problems with the 5.0mp single-cam shots get even more pronounced in 3D at 2.5mp.
YMMV, etc etc etc. It is a cellphone after all.
EDIT: Also any shots with motion are pretty much ruined before you take them.
I agree with nhutpham, post number 2. The camera is not nearly what it should be. This phone revolved around its camera's, I mean come on its not called "Shooter" for nothing. 3D pics turn out good, still shots do anyway. But standard pics, thats a whole other ball game. Low light produces bad pics, even with the flash. Some pics will get a greenish tint to them (whites) when using flash. Rather then use all the "auto" settings I find setting things manually will result in better 2D pics. The device was not purchased by me for the camera though. I bought for the dual core processors Though now that I have my dual core I am wishing HTC would have stepped it up on the 2D camera
i think at stock the pictures look ok. but when you adjust iso,sharpness,exposure,contrast in the settings it makes them look much more vibrant and sharp.
i took a compartive shot of small rocks and the evo3d looked crisper and better overall compared to the iphone 4. so the camera cant be all that bad
Maybe this might help. I'm actually surprised at some of the pictures on here.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1243765
Being a photographer myself, I am impressed with the camera... but not all of the time. It takes phenomenal pictures outside in a good sunny day and even in overcast. Take the camera inside in average lighting of just about anyone's living room when the sunlight isn't dominating the light, then I'd be reluctant to show it of.
The poorer the lighting, the harder it is to focus and the photos can get very grainy. HTC also chose to compress the photos quite a bit which affects the picture quality, but makes it easier on the phone and network to share and upload. This goes back to a previous comment that they look better on the phone than on a larger display - its the compression.
If you're willing to root and mod this phone, there is a camera mod in the CDMA dev forum for this phone with camera improvements which makes me that much more impressed with the camera. Although, I think all that was changed was the compression for photos and video.
If you are taking a still picture under good light they look really good. If you have kids and are planning to take any pictures of them forget it.
Let's just they are playing baseball and you want to take a picture of them at bat. They get up there and you click the shoot button. The picture is then shown to you for review and you say wait, who the heck is that. Well while you thought you were snapping a picture of your child, by the time the camera actually took the picture your child got a double, the kid after him grounded to third, and in your picture is the batter who was batting 2 guys after him.....Great picture of someone elses child and of course that kid moved so the picture is blurry as well.
Okay, maybe I am exaggerating a little. You would probably get the batter right after him and not 2 guys down in the lineup, but it would still be blurry unless he batted like a statue....
Green, but otherwise good
Ya unfortunately the shutter lag makes the phone worthless in taking non still images.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
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
Hi gang,
I come to you today a little sad and depressed. I live in Pittsburgh and its blue skies here today, 73 degrees.
Naturally I'm out and about taking pictures.
Quick background, I love cameras. Love the S6 active, but there were times I wish I had more manual settings ( all the time).
Enter the LG V10. Loved the presentation, advertisements, heck I love manual video mode. But I'm a little disturbed by the quality.
I'm one of those people that zoom in, not necessarily to critique but to enjoy the delicacies that my eye cannot normally see.
Day1 of the LG V10, I dropped some money and bought it.
Was a little curious why after I take a picture whether it's in manual or auto mode I have to wait a second until I take another picture. This is 2015, almost 2016. Not 2012.
Also, the compression LG uses on this is...to say the least, disappointing. I'm talking picture mode. I zoom in just once and its distorted, blended, blurred. Why, LG, why?
This is LG's chance to shine. Not with the processor gpu or RAM, but with the camera and Video.
I'm considering fresh installing and master resetting this just to see if the camera is any better after complete reinstall. Has anybody had any success? I'm...seriously disappointed. Not a Samsung fanboy but when I see greatness I appreciate it. I know Samsung will copy this on next flagship, more manual camera and Video settings but this is now, I want a great camera that can compete with the big boys with that f1.8.
Any suggestions? I don't want to take this back but on a beautiful day like today, these pictures should be turning out amazing. Sad That the RAW image is crap too. ?
Can anybody help or am I just whining (gulp)? Could I have a bad camera or not have an update?
sledgie said:
Can anybody help or am I just whining (gulp)? Could I have a bad camera or not have an update?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hate to say this, but sound like you are whining to me. Though I am not a camera savey individual...so I can't fully say. The camera...I can tolerate one second for anything. If I wanted true manual camera, I will buy a camera...a real one.
You could try factoring reset to see if that will change your perspective. Also you can return to the store and play with their store demo and see whats up.
From my stand point, i think you are whining lol
Thanks. I honestly want to hear what other people say. I can wait too, but the point is not to wait with these processors. Snap snap snap. Just was curious about how other individuals felt, not the reviewers who honestly almost never know what they are doing or have another objective in mind.
Also thanks for honesty. I figure I am whining, I just wanted to see something amazing today.
I think if hold the button down it will shoot in burst mode? Have you tried that?
Mytwuk said:
I think if hold the button down it will shoot in burst mode? Have you tried that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, that's not what I'm referring to, however. From the time you take a picture to the time it takes to take the next picture, there is a delay.
That being said, there must have been something wrong while taking pictures outside yesterday. Not sure what but pictures are a little better today for another wonderful clear blue skies and 73 degrees.
Btw it appears to be an autofocus issue. I'll press button and it will take photo but won't allow me to take another photo for over a second. Same on G4. Tried it in Best Buy last night then the S6. S6 can repeatedly take shot almost instantaneously after you take last shot. I'm still not sure why there is such a delay.
Is this happening for everybody? I keep reading in posts that everyone who loves this phone the camera is "fast" and I'm not sure what they are referring to?
In AUTO mode I think it has a lot to do with HDR. If you turn that off, it'll be much faster. I'm not exactly sure how much will you lose in quality though...
But in Manual mode, it's quite fast for me. I can basically take the next picture instantenously. It doesn't have that lag that it has in Auto mode with HDR on.
After I read this I tested again to see how quickly mine takes shots and the details. I've not done too much with the camera as of yet.
The results :
In Auto mode with HDR auto it fires off pics as quickly as I can press the button.
In simple mode there is a slight delay because when I touch the screen it wants to focus then snap the pic.
There is a little bit of grain upon zooming in with both modes which I've not noticed before. Seems like a little much for a 16mp shooter and I don't think it was that much on my G3. I think for what it is though it is very solid. As some others have said if you want the most crisp detail for zooming an cropping you can't beat a true DSLR camera but I don't think you're sacrificing alot by using this for everyday point and shoot.
Sent from my LG-H901 using XDA Free mobile app
Youre definitely NOT whining! I believed the v10 camera hype and bought one two days ago. And i agree 100% with you that the camera is not great. I'll even go further and state that it sucks. The shutter delay is bad and the quality is muddy and noisy beyond words in low light. This clearly stands as my last big mistake of 2015!
I agree. The cams are absolutely not what they are hyped up to be. Especially the front cams. The selfie quality is just horrendous. Both cams are very noisy, terrible in low light, and blow out lights, lamps, etc. to an excessive amount. If I didn't get the phone on AT&T's Next plan.... it would be going back. The cam/vid hype was a huge decision in getting it & it doesn't live up to it.
The best thing to do is complain on both their Twitter & Facebook pages, although they are more responsive on Twitter. I would like to think a lot of these issues could be remedied with software updates for the cameras.
Hello.
Today i have received my s9+. Very good phone but slo motion is very blurry and not sharp
Outside
youtu.be/rpME-jyc4Lo
In my livingroom i cant see anything
youtu.be/8y5TzER0c7Y
Normal camera works fine
Anyone knows why?
Danny
The super slow motion is capped at a max resolution of 720p. It requires alot of processing resources so the imagem quality has to be downgraded in order to record 960 frames in such a short amount of time
Actually it doesn't require a lot of processing resources, just like ARemoji, they just skimped out and gave room for improvement on the Note 9, and or the S10 or whatever they call it.
This is such a lazy reply that i had to stop working, just to reply.... super slow motion as you call it, is just under developed, and wasnt given the time and attention on this phone, much like the lazy front camera which is not even upgraded or new in any meaningful way.
androidmonger said:
Actually it doesn't require a lot of processing resources, just like ARemoji, they just skimped out and gave room for improvement on the Note 9, and or the S10 or whatever they call it.
This is such a lazy reply that i had to stop working, just to reply.... super slow motion as you call it, is just under developed, and wasnt given the time and attention on this phone, much like the lazy front camera which is not even upgraded or new in any meaningful way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So... Why are you here?
Slow motion is very good. But OP is correct that the quality is very poor. I think this is because the screen resolution is so high that on playback it's just blocky.
What I don't understand is how the videos that are rolling on youtube and the presentation itself was great! The one I shot at home is not acceptable at all.
Anything above 120 Frames per second needs a lot of lighting, and might also flicker with slow lights (like indoor lighting)
It's always best to use sunlight for slow motion like 960 Fps, to get the best shots try filming with lots of sunlight outdoor, the more light the cleaner and better the shots will be.
Well Sunday mothers day in here (UK) will be trying it outdoors and hopefully will be sunny!
I agree. The quality of super slo mo is more like a 240p video! Totally unusable indoors but expected better outdoors in the sun light. The promo videos were fantastic but this is such a disappointment
Just to update everyone, I have tried in very bright sunny conditions and it is fine and acceptable. Yes it could be improved but that's more of a limitation by the technology rather than something Samsung is in control of.
I have done some super slow mo indoor and outdoor....To get good results you need a lot of light. If you don't have additional light when indoors, the quality is average to poor....Outdoor with natural sun light is more then acceptable and high above average. Have tried it on a cloudy day and the quality was just above average
Also samsung probably added noise reduction in Post to the clips used in the ads (to make it look cleaner)
You need perfect lighting situations, it is 720 after all. If the subject you're recording is "close" to the phone it doesn't look AS bad