Related
Feel free to say that my expectations are too high, but I was anticipating better results from the camera than I have been seeing. Even in the most favourable of light the detail contained within the images is far lower than the headline 8 megapixel spec would have one believe and the JPEG artefacts are strong and ugly.
Just by way of one example here is a pair of images side by side. On the left we have unedited output from the Note. On the right we have unedited output from my DSLR, simply resized to match the pixel dimensions of the Note for direct comparison.
{
"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"
}
The details in the image from the Note are very mushy and the colours are washed out, which I find a little weird as a scene shot with sunlit grass a couple of days back had the grass looking like it was neon. There are strong artefacts in the twigs on the tree and the details in the yellow bush on the right, the brickwork, the cracks in the pavement and the leaves on the ground are just not there.
I know it's not really fair to compare a phone camera with a DSLR, but DSLR photography has set the standard by which I judge image quality, and the Note, to my eyes falls way short. I don't know how other phones compare, but is this as good as it gets in a phone or is the Note well off the pace compared to others?
I also find that for use as a camera both the power switch and volume (zoom) rocker are poorly placed. In my efforts to gain a good, solid grip on the phone I often find myself pressing these buttons by accident, and that is not a good thing. Also, has anyone tried using the camera zoom? The results are diabolical. It's straight in the bin for anything shot with the zoom, at least by my photographic standards.
So what do you guys think? Impressed or disappointed?
If that image has been zoomed in I would say it's decent. As you mentioned it is totally unfair and you cannot compare a tiny sensor on a mobile phone which cost £500 to a dedicated DSLR which costs upwards of £400 which job is to do just photos. It could be just the phone is compressing the Jpegs a little too much but I'm sure with custom roms that can be addressed.
I forgot to add that megapixels are just marketing. It has a lot to do with the sensors and lens that are used. You may find a 5 mp camera knocks the socks of a 10 mp camera.
Can you put the original photos side by side?
From what I understand, in terms of photo quality, the only phone cameras that even match Point and Shoot cameras are the Nokia phones with Carl Zeiss optics.
Everything else will be well below that... and since DSLR is way above typical P&S cameras, I'd say the result you're seeing is exactly as expected. (In other words, megapixels mean nothing)
dangit, ninja'ed by indie.
Apples and Oranges
You've got to be joking.
In reverse:
I have considered doing a comparison of the video with 1080p HD SDI output from my video camera, but I'm afraid the Note's video might be better, after looking at these images: Note 1080p at 7.5% of the cost.
Seriously, the sensor of the note is probably very good, but the pinhole lense means it will have its limitations. It has a very good image if you consider this.
Here's a good article debunking the myth that more megapixels makes for a better image.
http://www.practicalphotographytips.com/Megapixel-Myth.html
Realistically, when talking about mobile phone cameras, you should really only be comparing like with like - comparing the Note's camera with a DSLR camera isn't going to show the Note up favourably under any conditions!
Regards,
Dave
its a very good Camera for a phone.
your trying to compare a dslr with a phone.
get real. its the glass that makes a dslr so good hence why lenses cost hundreds to thousands of dollars .
you bought a phone with a very good Camera installed, probably the one of the best on the market.....for a phone.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using XDA App
tdodd I would like to see it compared from a user and not from a review site, next to a photo from the SGS2 or from a P&S camera worth half or at max 2/3 of the Note's price.
I totally get the megapixel myth. I know very well the folly of assuming that more megapixels equals more quality. I also know the pitfalls of viewing digital images at 100%, but I don't like the output from the Note even when viewed without zooming in on my 17" laptop. It's equally unappealing on my 40" 1080p TV as well.
Unfortunately the only comparison I can make is to my DSLRs, since I don't have another phone camera worthy of the name and I hate the output from my compact camera almost as much as from the Note. What I really would like to know is how photos from the Note do compare with other phone cameras. Is it better, worse or similar? How does it compare with the new iPhone 4S, for example? Perhaps others would also like to know the answer, and since I have not seen the topic discussed, or mentioned in reviews, I thought it was worth raising.
I'm impressed with the camera and it's one of the main reasons I chose the Note (as I liked the camera on the S2) but that's because my expectations are more reasonable even though I have multiple cameras systems up to a full frame Nikon setup. For a phone camera I think it's very good, better than the Sensation's 8MP camera however it's not as good as a compact never mind a DSLR but it's always to hand whereas my compacts are not so it's handy to catch those shots that I'd otherwise miss. I was surprised how often I ended up using the S2 camera as the results were reasonable, the phone convenient and handy for uploading straight to online galleries.
You have to bear in mind the resolution doesn't really matter, the issue is the absolutely tiny camera sensor which is smaller than those used in compacts and those in compacts are far smaller than the crop DSLR/mirrorless cameras. The best of the camera phones is the Nokia N8 which boasts a sensor bigger than most compacts (up to the size of the enthusiast compacts like the LX5, S95 etc.) but it and Symbian are finished and the N9/Lumia 800 both use more conveniental camera phone sensors.
John
People! You really bought this phone for the camera? I'm sad... This phonelet (phone and tablet) has the largest screen on a phone. And some awesome specs. The camera will never be as good as a pro camera. The iphone 4s has a good camera in it. If that's the case may I suggest getting that? I think this camera is fine for a phone. I am getting this phone for its specs in general and not only the camera. Knocks the socks off most other phones in every other regard.
Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk
Galaxy Note camera
I find the galaxy note camera to be quite good and very useful as a point-and-shoot. It's better than the iPhone 4 that I used to use. For images that are used for the web it is great. As a professional photographer who uses 21 megapixel full frame cameras everyday, I find this camera refreshing. It's more of a creative abstraction tool than a serious photography tool. I use it for concept and location documentation mostly.
I really cant believe you put up a cell phone camera compared with a DSLR and put the thread title "I'm not impressed"
That's literally like saying "My Honda Civic doesn't do 0-60 in 3.4 seconds like my Ferarri 458, not impressed" You didnt buy your hypothetical honda civic for it's acceleration and you didnt buy your phone to replace a dedicated DSLR camera.
tdodd said:
What I really would like to know is how photos from the Note do compare with other phone cameras. Is it better, worse or similar? How does it compare with the new iPhone 4S, for example? Perhaps others would also like to know the answer, and since I have not seen the topic discussed, or mentioned in reviews, I thought it was worth raising.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try this goo.gl/jy5G3 (I'm still not allowed to post links but this way should work) - it's gsmarena's article "8 megapixel mega shootout." They've compared iPhone 4S, Galaxy S II, Sony Ericsson Xperia arc S, HTC Sensation XE, Nokia N9 and HTC Titan. It's very complete article but just take Galaxy S II as Galaxy Note because the both cams I believe are almost (if not exactly) the same. And long story short:
"If we had to recommend a cameraphone, it would be the iPhone 4S. The still camera was either the best or a close second in each category we tested. Also, it stole the show when it came to video recording. It goes to show that when Apple put their hearts to it, they can quickly climb to the top (and it was a steep climb too, if you remember the cameras on the early iPhones).
In a typical Apple fashion, the 4S focused on being perfect and wouldn't care for anything less - things like 720p or lower quality setting for stills.
Even so, the things that were included are highly desirable - native HDR mode, AE/AF lock and video stabilization can certainly make a difference.
The Samsung Galaxy S II is the runner up when it comes to overall performance - its still camera and camcorder beat the others most of the time. It used to be the standard-setter for 8MP/1080p mobile cameras but after 8 long (in tech terms) months on the market, it's time to cede that title.
The HTC Sensation XE is an alternative, if you value FullHD video more than still images. The Nokia N9 is a good option for those that need high dynamic range in their photos, but we're not that impressed with its overall performance.
While the Sony Ericsson Xperia arc S scored average marks among the best 8MP shooters, it's still a respectable cameraphone.
The Titan managed to surprise us. We weren't expecting much of a WP7 phone by HTC, but it offered very balanced still camera performance (with a knack for poor lighting) and solid video output (for a 720p shooter)."
Regards
I would wager the camera is the same from the galaxy s 2 which is ALMOST the same as the iPhone 4s. I have all three. I'd say the 4s is best by a hair with the other two being identical.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
neverthemore said:
Try this goo.gl/jy5G3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the link. That was very helpful, and that is the kind of information I was hoping to elicit from this thread. Hopefully others will find it informative too.
Here's how I tell if a camera on a phone is good:
Take a picture of a paper or hand out with lots of text on it. Make sure the paper fills the screen/picture. Zoom in and see if all the text is legible and easy to read. This his how I use my spart phone cameras. On the Note it will be particularly important since I will be able to take a picture of a paper, then zoom in and "draw" on it with the stylus.
The Camera on the iPhone 4 does a great job at this, and I hope the note is at least as good. My Flyer's camera just barely gets the job done...so meh.
zkyevolved said:
People! You really bought this phone for the camera? I'm sad... This phonelet (phone and tablet) has the largest screen on a phone. And some awesome specs. The camera will never be as good as a pro camera. The iphone 4s has a good camera in it. If that's the case may I suggest getting that? I think this camera is fine for a phone. I am getting this phone for its specs in general and not only the camera. Knocks the socks off most other phones in every other regard.
Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, I didn't buy the phone for the camera nor did I say that. Pretty much all devices including phones and cameras are a matter of balance choosing what you want or need balanced against what features you're prepared to trade off. After surprising myself how often I used the S2 camera when I had a loan one the fact the Note had the same camera was a big plus combined with the incredible screen, fast processor etc.
I don't expect my phone camera to match the quality of my professional cameras as even compacts and crop DSLRs cannot do that but at the same time I don't expect my professional cameras to fit in my pocket and weigh in at much under a kilogram either. If I was buying a phone purely for the camera, it would the N8 which has a sensor unlikely to be matched in a mainstream phone for a long time if at all.
John
tdodd said:
Thanks for the link. That was very helpful, and that is the kind of information I was hoping to elicit from this thread. Hopefully others will find it informative too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh? You said you thought the Notes camera was crap compared to a DSLR and It looked more like you wanted people to join in on that opinion.
Xaddict said:
Oh? You said you thought the Notes camera was crap compared to a DSLR and It looked more like you wanted people to join in on that opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I'm sorry if that's the impression I gave. My concerns were raised before I even took the side by side photos for comparison. I only shot those as an illustration to others rather than simply moaning without supporting evidence.
There are several reasons I upgraded to the Note. The screen was the main one, then the processing power, but also the camera. Since my previous phone was the Orange San Francisco, with 3.2 megapixels (yes, I know, means sh!t), no flash, and almost universal condemnation for the IQ, I really wanted the camera part to be a significant step up - something I really could make use of as an alternative to a compact for impromptu shooting. All I was saying is that I find the camera disappointing. It's an improvement on my previous phone without doubt, but combined with awkward ergonomics of the phone as a camera, it is not a feature I will use as much as I had hoped.
If others are happy then that's fine, but for me it has not provided the solution I was hoping for. I just wondered what other people thought. Now I know.
I don't know how you can even compare a photo from a phone, to that of even the cheapest SLR.
You are talking a pinhole size sensor, versus something that is almost if not bigger than a postage stamp.
The smaller the sensor, and, the more "megapixels" you have, the worse the signal to noise ratio will be, which results in a "grainy" or noisy photo.
At 100% resolution, most modern camera-phones produce a descent photo in good light, but, if you zoom in to 400%, expect a LOT of noise. It's simple physics.
You cannot cram enough "light gathering" sensors on such a small surface, without getting noise.
Review from The Verge
If you watch the video, HTC One only has 4mp but claiming it that it has Ultrapixels. What does that mean?
knightrazor said:
Review from The Verge
If you watch the video, HTC One only has 4mp but claiming it that it has Ultrapixels. What does that mean?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It means that the pixel is as huge as dSLR pixel.
This means that the quality of the camera pixel is like dSLR although its lower resolution.
Its like you use 10MP Canon dSLR but crop it in the middle. It is that awesome. Probably the best camera ever in smartfone. Will kill off every competitiors. Nokia Pureview also lose to dSLR camera in HTC ONE.
kkcheong said:
It means that the pixel is as huge as dSLR pixel.
This means that the quality of the camera pixel is like dSLR although its lower resolution.
Its like you use 10MP Canon dSLR but crop it in the middle. It is that awesome. Probably the best camera ever in smartfone. Will kill off every competitiors. Nokia Pureview also lose to dSLR camera in HTC ONE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you even know what a digital SLR is? the HTC phone camera is not a DSLR, nor will it every compare to one, a larger sensor and 14bit colour depth this is what really sets any DSLR from any point and shoot or phone camera.
The 2-micron pixel width in this phone???, my DSLR is over twice this 4.3-micron pixel pitch.
The proof of the quality will obviously come, but prelim reviews state that it is not as good as the Nokia.
HTC already tried this once with the HTC One, with their most stupid marketing. "HTC One Versus DSLR Images, Can You Spot The Difference?". I wrote to them and told them how stupid this marketing was. 364x268 (0.1 megapixel) photos were the comparison, so I sent them sample photo's from my Nokia N70, Blackberry 8900, HTC Desire and my 4Mp Canon G3 point and shoot. Reduced them in size to 364x268 and challenged them to tell the difference between any of them. They very quickly removed this challege from their website about 6 hours afterwards.
Don't get me wrong I am sure this camera is stunning, but it's no DLSR in terms of quality and neither is any point and shoot on the Market. Just the same as ANY cropped DLSR will compete with a full frame DSLR.
danw_oz said:
Do you even know what a digital SLR is? the HTC phone camera is not a DSLR, nor will it every compare to one, a larger sensor and 14bit colour depth this is what really sets any DSLR from any point and shoot or phone camera.
The 2-micron pixel width in this phone???, my DSLR is over twice this 4.3-micron pixel pitch.
The proof of the quality will obviously come, but prelim reviews state that it is not as good as the Nokia.
HTC already tried this once with the HTC One, with their most stupid marketing. "HTC One Versus DSLR Images, Can You Spot The Difference?". I wrote to them and told them how stupid this marketing was. 364x268 (0.1 megapixel) photos were the comparison, so I sent them sample photo's from my Nokia N70, Blackberry 8900, HTC Desire and my 4Mp Canon G3 point and shoot. Reduced them in size to 364x268 and challenged them to tell the difference between any of them. They very quickly removed this challege from their website about 6 hours afterwards.
Don't get me wrong I am sure this camera is stunning, but it's no DLSR in terms of quality and neither is any point and shoot on the Market. Just the same as ANY cropped DLSR will compete with a full frame DSLR.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry for the exaggeration. I just trying to get the point across about megapixel Vs photosites.
UltraPixel ?
kkcheong said:
Sorry for the exaggeration. I just trying to get the point across about megapixel Vs photosites.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Another marketing Gimmick .Make fools of intelligent .
As Said in India " It's easy to make fool of intelligent rather an idiot "
knightrazor said:
Review from The Verge
If you watch the video, HTC One only has 4mp but claiming it that it has Ultrapixels. What does that mean?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In answer to your question, HTC are trying to be different (Marketing move to gain lots of interest).
The pixels that gather the light are larger (Ultra), allowing more light to be captured. Meaning the camera should be amazing in low light compared to most other phone cameras.
http://www.techradar.com/news/phone...in-htc-one-explained-1132205?src=rss&attr=all.
My Canon G3 point and shoot camera was only 4Mp, the photo's from this camera are stunning, great lens and sensor, 4Mp is the optimal balance (quality/noise) for this image sensor size.
more megapixels really only gives you benifit from printing larger prints, or allowing a high quality crop of a shot. How many people print about A3 type size? not many and certainly from a phone.
TheMask007 said:
Another marketing Gimmick .Make fools of intelligent .
As Said in India " It's easy to make fool of intelligent rather an idiot "
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not true. Higher megapixel is gimmick. Reducing megapixel and increase photosites is not gimmick. Its science.
Thanks for that in depth explanation.
danw_oz said:
The pixels that gather the light are larger (Ultra), allowing more light to be captured. Meaning the camera should be amazing in low light compared to most other phone cameras.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And I thought that the only way to gather more light is to have a lower aperture. Well with this, it's a good move to capture low light images with more details (less depth of field). This makes it perfect for concerts.
danw_oz said:
more megapixels really only gives you benifit from printing larger prints, or allowing a high quality crop of a shot. How many people print about A3 type size? not many and certainly from a phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup, it also reduces files sizes. This is good for phones with non expandable memory. I always choose the option to have a smaller MP as these pics are only to be viewed on a laptop. If I wanted to do prints, I'd take my dSLR to shoot pics.
Here is another explanation on the ultrapixel
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2013/02/htc-zoe-camera/
I agree with what HTC says
More megapixels crammed into a sensor of the same size, ie 8, 13 mp in a sensor of the same size, will make the pixels themselves smaller. Less light is captured, more noise produced.
Reduce the amount of pixels and suddenly there are bigger pixels and more light can be captured. I think it will be good for the camera, as a cropped 2mp picture from a DSLR is waaaaay better than a 8mp picture from my incredible s or a one x.
Think of a wire grid fence, if you have more wires there will be more holes, but less light will be able to come through
Dunno how they will market it though. Makes it seem like the old nokias with 2mp cam are the best lol
knightrazor said:
Review from The Verge
If you watch the video, HTC One only has 4mp but claiming it that it has Ultrapixels. What does that mean?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nothing. It's meaningless guff.
The HTC One has a slightly (VERY slightly) larger image sensor, and halves the number of pixels to roughly double photodiode area. That (should) mean much better low-light sensitivity and noise, but much worse resolution. (Still plenty for a typical consumer print, though.)
It simply trades off resolution for low light / noise performance. And the "Ultrapixel" doesn't exist. There have been numerous cameras in the past with the exact same pixel size as the HTC One, including camera phones. Few of them have been available for a few years, or made with current tech, but that's beside the point.
"Ultrapixel" is just a marketing brandname meant to give you the warm fuzzies and make you forget about megapixels.
kkcheong said:
It means that the pixel is as huge as dSLR pixel.
This means that the quality of the camera pixel is like dSLR although its lower resolution.
Its like you use 10MP Canon dSLR but crop it in the middle. It is that awesome. Probably the best camera ever in smartfone. Will kill off every competitiors. Nokia Pureview also lose to dSLR camera in HTC ONE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Complete and utter rubbish. The smallest pixel of any SLR belong to, if I'm not mistaken, the Nikon D3200. It has nearly double the pixel size of the HTC One's camera. And even a cheap consumer DSLR lens is in a different league to a smartphone lens, especially at the center of the image frame.
It is utterly unrealistic to expect even remotely similar per-pixel image quality from a DSLR and the HTC One, even for the central four megapixel crop.
Well the 4mp nothing at all
Even got 41mp also useless if don't have good camera lens
MP just the image resolution only
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
XeactorZ said:
Well the 4mp nothing at all
Even got 41mp also useless if don't have good camera lens
MP just the image resolution only
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://s1297.beta.photobucket.com/user/ivicask/media/HTC_ONE_NEXUS_4_COMPARE_zps973ef748.jpg.html
I made compare HTC ONE 4.3M cam and Nexus 8M,
as you can see in this zoomed in picture in Nexus does have more pixels, but HTC ONE has more details and colors.
Here is full original image taken from ONE S
http://mobilesyrup.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/IMAG0031.jpg
Also Camera sample
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ez_HaOhtxnA
So in short, best phone camera so far if you ask me!
HTC marketing is getting ridiculously stupid, and HTC fanboys are following suit. The megapixel race is not a LIE. In bold, because HTc marketing material likes to make it bold. Megapixels is not the only factor in determining image quality, but it is an important one. But HTC wants you to believe it doesn't matter, AT ALL. So damn stupid. If it doesn't matter, then go reduce an image to a 32x32 icon. Beautiful isn't it! Looks exactly the same as the original! So stupid. HTC is just making a compromise between larger pixel sizes and resolution. The images will be worse in outdoor shots since it doesn't have as good a resolution, but indoor and low light shots will look better since it can gather more light. The question is, how much better? So far from what I can tell, the video and picture samples at the HTC event, which is indoors in low light, are not that impressive. It's definitely gonna be worse in bright outdoor use.
danw_oz said:
Do you even know what a digital SLR is? the HTC phone camera is not a DSLR, nor will it every compare to one, a larger sensor and 14bit colour depth this is what really sets any DSLR from any point and shoot or phone camera.
The 2-micron pixel width in this phone???, my DSLR is over twice this 4.3-micron pixel pitch.
The proof of the quality will obviously come, but prelim reviews state that it is not as good as the Nokia.
HTC already tried this once with the HTC One, with their most stupid marketing. "HTC One Versus DSLR Images, Can You Spot The Difference?". I wrote to them and told them how stupid this marketing was. 364x268 (0.1 megapixel) photos were the comparison, so I sent them sample photo's from my Nokia N70, Blackberry 8900, HTC Desire and my 4Mp Canon G3 point and shoot. Reduced them in size to 364x268 and challenged them to tell the difference between any of them. They very quickly removed this challege from their website about 6 hours afterwards.
Don't get me wrong I am sure this camera is stunning, but it's no DLSR in terms of quality and neither is any point and shoot on the Market. Just the same as ANY cropped DLSR will compete with a full frame DSLR.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I accidentally thanked you.oops. I don't know what DSLR is, but I'm quite sure that htcs new image sense will be quite beyond par for pretty everyone except your absolute perfect photographic self. Also, since you're such a good photog, such an unimpeachable artist,...please share where this work cod be viewed critically. I know artists would love to see it.
Thanks
From my Evo LTE, yup.
katamari201 said:
HTC marketing is getting ridiculously stupid, and HTC fanboys are following suit. The megapixel race is not a LIE. In bold, because HTc marketing material likes to make it bold. Megapixels is not the only factor in determining image quality, but it is an important one. But HTC wants you to believe it doesn't matter, AT ALL. So damn stupid. If it doesn't matter, then go reduce an image to a 32x32 icon. Beautiful isn't it! Looks exactly the same as the original! So stupid. HTC is just making a compromise between larger pixel sizes and resolution. The images will be worse in outdoor shots since it doesn't have as good a resolution, but indoor and low light shots will look better since it can gather more light. The question is, how much better? So far from what I can tell, the video and picture samples at the HTC event, which is indoors in low light, are not that impressive. It's definitely gonna be worse in bright outdoor use.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, how many megapixels do you think you need?
To answer that question, think about what you're viewing the picture on. A PC monitor? What's the resolution of that? Unlikely to be much higher than 2560x1440; that's 3.6MP - any more than that and the extra detail is wasted.
Or maybe you're thinking of printing the photo? 300 dots per inch is plenty of resolution for a colour photo. So, to produce a 7" by 5" print, you only need about 3MP in the image. Even if you want to print out a picture filling an A4 page, you still only need around 8 or 9MP. Are you really going to be printing out your photos larger than an A4 page? And if you are, are you going to be viewing them from less than 12 inches away? (If the viewing distance is greater than that, you don't need 300dpi).
What's more, adding additional MP isn't free. The smaller the pixels get, the more the detector suffers from noise (and removing the noise from the image means you effectively lose the extra resolution), and the more the low-light performance suffers.
And finally, with the kind of aperture sizes and the quality of the lenses you're dealing with, you're unlikely to be able to resolve anywhere near 8MP worth of real detail anyway.
The camera on the HTC One isn't exactly revolutionary, but I think HTC should be congratulated for a move in the right direction: away from a design whose sole purpose is to include a big number for marketing purposes, and towards actually producing a better quality image.
i agree with shasarak, i used to work as photographer, and with our 5mp it was enough for pictured used in public advertising (5 meters * 3 meters)
Yeah pretty much what shasarak said. Thank god HTC had some bloody sense to not load it with more needless MPs as a marketing gimmick.
scottspa74 said:
I accidentally thanked you.oops. I don't know what DSLR is, but I'm quite sure that htcs new image sense will be quite beyond par for pretty everyone except your absolute perfect photographic self. Also, since you're such a good photog, such an unimpeachable artist,...please share where this work cod be viewed critically. I know artists would love to see it.
Thanks
From my Evo LTE, yup.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
DSLR stands for Digital Single Lens Reflex http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_single-lens_reflex_camera, if you are up to it you can read the section 2.6 Larger sensor sizes and better image quality
I don't really understand what you are asking or in fact even trying to say, but if I have it right http://www.flickr.com/photos/dan-wilson/ Is my photography site, Thanks.
Nokia's pure view ends up producing a 5mp picture only thing is that it puts the quality of a 41mp(resolution) in to a smaller frame so when u zoom in u don't loose picture quality.....HTC one does sumthing similar but zooming in will reduce quality [email protected] the end pictures are clear enough to see every detail in the full frame no need to zoom in, its a good tech for those who understand....as for the iPhone's wonderful camera(like it or not) its just a perfect cocktail of very good lenses(which in a way let in lots of light, main reason y it looks bluish and not purplish) plus good apature and good sensors......megapixels =size , good lens+apature+sensore = great picture quality.
Sent from my Desire Z using xda premium
Thx for explanation.
Finally someone with knowledge and sound reasoning. People really need to cool down while in discussion. At the end of the day, it will be just another phone and it will not wake up next day and go to work for you. :good:
Shasarak said:
Well, how many megapixels do you think you need?
To answer that question, think about what you're viewing the picture on. A PC monitor? What's the resolution of that? Unlikely to be much higher than 2560x1440; that's 3.6MP - any more than that and the extra detail is wasted.
Or maybe you're thinking of printing the photo? 300 dots per inch is plenty of resolution for a colour photo. So, to produce a 7" by 5" print, you only need about 3MP in the image. Even if you want to print out a picture filling an A4 page, you still only need around 8 or 9MP. Are you really going to be printing out your photos larger than an A4 page? And if you are, are you going to be viewing them from less than 12 inches away? (If the viewing distance is greater than that, you don't need 300dpi).
What's more, adding additional MP isn't free. The smaller the pixels get, the more the detector suffers from noise (and removing the noise from the image means you effectively lose the extra resolution), and the more the low-light performance suffers.
And finally, with the kind of aperture sizes and the quality of the lenses you're dealing with, you're unlikely to be able to resolve anywhere near 8MP worth of real detail anyway.
The camera on the HTC One isn't exactly revolutionary, but I think HTC should be congratulated for a move in the right direction: away from a design whose sole purpose is to include a big number for marketing purposes, and towards actually producing a better quality image.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is it using the IMX258? Or is it something newer?
Are all three lenses the same?
First of the lens is the optics. Sensor is the silicon under it, what film was in the old analog days. Both have effect on the outcome.
I have no plans to open the phone but IMX258 looks like to fit within the specifications well. Sony dominates the sensor market so it's very unlikely to find anything else there.
Regarding the optics, as there is are not a typically blue "ZEISS" logo, but yet it's printed so they are somehow involved. I don't believe in manufacturing in Germany as they barely do their own top of the line lenses there anymore. Maybe Zeiss machinery and tools might have been used for creating these lenses, or maybe licensed design etc. Probably no classic radiocative micro-contrast woodoo, but it doesn't matter, (yet it would be fun to hear a story what they actually provide). Whenever Zeiss optics are involved they tend to help providing pleasant image rendering to the human eye, not necessarily a benchmark winner in synthetic sharpness tests.
Todays smartphone/small image sensors are way ahead their larger brothers, I would not bet on an magical jumps in technolog, rest is physics. A physically bigger sensor will help collecting more light, and there for increase low light performance, and possibly also some dynamic range.
These dual sensors RGB+monochrome is of course just some software magic algorithms pushing more contrast into the images. Maybe we see layered sensors soon, like Foveon or even a triple sensors that Red, Blue and Green each get their own. But again, it's up to Sony to cook the sensor magic.
Hello, can anyone confirm that all 4 camera sensors on Xperia 1 II are made by Sony? Rumors saying that at least two sensors are made by Samsung. Is it true? Thanks
It's true. The telephoto and selfie are both made by Samsung. The phone itself reports this as such.
The "12MP" 70mm telephoto is actually a 21MP Samsung sensor with a ~50mm equivalent lens. The Xperia gets 70mm by cropping in on the sensor.
Can anyone explain the camera array on the Find X5 please? I know it has two 50mp sensors, one for wide angle and a standard. It also supposedly has one 13mp 2x optical zoom, however if I zoom in, it is still using the standard 50mp lens until I zoom past 10x at which point the small lens below the two main lenses kicks in.. I’d have expected it to be at the specified 2x telephoto. (I tested this by covering each lens with a finger). Also, there’s a fourth lens/sensor next to the 13mp lens.. anyone know what that is? I can’t tell when I’m getting true optical zoom and when it’s hybrid or digital. Thanks!
ehello indeed really strange when I try to know on my X5 pro some sensor and on the time 2 no matter which one I hide with my finger I always see something on my screen!!! so basically if you plug a sensor with your fingers it switch to another sensor is really strange!!!! moreover for me the photo part is even worse since Android 13 because a lot of pictures now are blurry I really don't understand what this is about. if someone can also look for the zoom because it's really strange thank you
EAnd I'm not going to lie I bought it for that photo part is but then I'm really disappointed!!! It was sold by many websites as excellent in photos frankly apart from on The quality of the colors I am ok but on the rest we know we are laughed at. By the way "dxomark.com" Haven't even bothered to test it, it's very simple because it has exactly the same photo part as the X5 classic version. I bought the one believing that would be better than my xiaomi 11 pro Well I should have waited, sure I would be more careful in the future because buy a phone at 1200€ to have the same photo part has something ready with Oppo Find X3 pro me Stay in the throat.
JI spoke too fast, Dxomark Finally did their test, they gave it a score of 130, that seems a bit much to me, I would like to know which android version was the device