Camera issue: Straight lines - Xperia Z1 Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting

I've just been running some tests on my Z1 camera.
I noticed that it's virtually unable to produce straight lines.
I've attached a picture of my PC's monitor (in admittedly difficult light) and as you can see the normally straight lines of the bezel and windows all bulge.
Does anyone else have that issue? Is my camera a duff one?
I'm extremely hesitant to send it in to Sony for repair. Currently they have my old Xperia Z for repairs, to replace the camera module that developed black spots. It's been three weeks and still waiting for it to come back (UK repair centre).
It's those kind of issues that make choosing a Sony extremely frustrating, as much as I want to love the brand.

It's.from the lens of the camera. If someone else's camera doesn't show that aberation you should go to Sony. Only way to get it right is post processing every picture.
Sent from my C6802 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

For comparison I took some shots with an old 350D, with kit objective (18-55mm).
One shot with at 18mm, one at 55mm, one with my Z1 and one with an old Xperia Pro.
350D:
18mm IMG_1805
55mm IMG_1806
Z1:
DSC_0111_
Xperia Pro:
DSC_1426

Exry said:
For comparison I took some shots with an old 350D, with kit objective (18-55mm).
One shot with at 18mm, one at 55mm, one with my Z1 and one with an old Xperia Pro.
350D:
18mm IMG_1805
55mm IMG_1806
Z1:
DSC_0111_
Xperia Pro:
DSC_1426
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your Z1 is also quite bumpy, not perhaps not as much as mine.

naujoks said:
Your Z1 is also quite bumpy, not perhaps not as much as mine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Although I don't know how much of distortion is acceptable, it's probably because of the very low focal length and wide angle? I'm no photographer but I expected it to bulge a bit.

yeah i mentioned this in the camera thread in the general section. every Z1 i've tested does this (10+ phones plus every image i've seen of a grid or line from the z1 on this forum). depending on the way the lense is mounted most deformation will normally appear towards the extreme top or bottom of an image.
ps. if you bought your phone from a uk network and are outside of your in store exchange period and wanted to get it repaired (not that i think there are any current z1's without this problem and therefore a lense that would be much better to be put into your phone) than send it through the network shop for a warranty repair and it will be repaired or replaced by anovo (all network shops use them) in around 5 working days.

That´s not unexpected.
If you make a wideangle lens this small there will be always quite a lot of distortion. Almost all cameras nowadays correct this distortions in the image-processing.
The problem is that the optical distortion changes with very close focus-distances and most software-corrections only adjust to the lenses focal-length (when having a zoom-lens), but not to the focus-distance, so the software-correction is wrong.
It seems that Sony does a combination of optically correcting the distortion in the lens, additionally to the software-corrections, which causes this very complex distortion, which quite strong pincushion-distortion in the center while still having some barrel-distortion at the edges of the image.
In distances 1m+ there is hardly any visible distortion left.

*R2D2* said:
That´s not unexpected.
If you make a wideangle lens this small there will be always quite a lot of distortion. Almost all cameras nowadays correct this distortions in the image-processing.
The problem is that the optical distortion changes with very close focus-distances and most software-corrections only adjust to the lenses focal-length (when having a zoom-lens), but not to the focus-distance, so the software-correction is wrong.
It seems that Sony does a combination of optically correcting the distortion in the lens, additionally to the software-corrections, which causes this very complex distortion, which quite strong pincushion-distortion in the center while still having some barrel-distortion at the edges of the image.
In distances 1m+ there is hardly any visible distortion left.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's very interesting and the most insightful reply on this topic in any thread yet, thanks. My only concern is that i have read a report of a picture of a horizon have both the barrel distortion and pincushion problems which is at some distance. I'll have to check for long distance distortion. If it's not there i'm happy.

Thanks for the replies!
On top of the above problem I also noticed a distinct out of focus area (top left corner in my case) in shots taken at a wide distance.
I can't say I every detected either of these problems on my old iPhone 5. Maybe Apple's camera is simply better and the algorithms even things out more.
I'm currently having the Z1 and the Galaxy Note 3 at home and try to decide which one to keep, and it's proving very difficult. Both phones have their distinct positive and negative sides.

naujoks said:
Thanks for the replies!
On top of the above problem I also noticed a distinct out of focus area (top left corner in my case) in shots taken at a wide distance.
I can't say I every detected either of these problems on my old iPhone 5. Maybe Apple's camera is simply better and the algorithms even things out more.
I'm currently having the Z1 and the Galaxy Note 3 at home and try to decide which one to keep, and it's proving very difficult. Both phones have their distinct positive and negative sides.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the bottom right side of my pictures are blurred. gsmarena had a similar issue with their test unit.

Today I conducted some more tests with both Z1 and GN 3.
At 100 ISO the Z1 showed considerable noise and much less in focus than the GN3, in good light.
At first I thought that the Z1 camera complaints might be not so visible to the untrained eye and that the average user such as myself wouldn't notice anything amiss, but the differences in direct comparison are really striking.
There are many things I like about the Z1, and its design is far superior to the GN 3, but knowing that there are virtually no conditions under which the Z1 would be able to take good pictures is a deal break for me, so the Z1 will go up on eBay. Hopefully better luck in 6 months with the Z's next iteration.

naujoks said:
At 100 ISO the Z1 showed considerable noise and much less in focus than the GN3, in good light.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think Sonys decision not to kill all detail with heavy noise-reduction was a good (although unexpecting when looking at their cameras which usually use quite heavy NR). Chroma-Noise is very well under control up to the highest sensitivities and the luminance-noise is very fine grained and not objectionable at all. Unfortunately thats not true for ISO 1600+, where NR gets so high everything becomes a blurry mess. Of course these sensitivities are hardly usable for 1/2,3"-Sensors, regardless of the strength of the NR
Finally you can always use some additional NR in PP, but you never can bring back detail that has already been destroyed by heavy processing.
Also contrast (at least in manual) mode is quite low (at least for a consumer-device), which leads to surprisingly good DR, unlike the blocked shadows (which also hide noise) you get on most phones (and most compact-cameras as well). Again increasing contrast in PP is not a problem, unlike the other way around.
I just hope this won´t change with future Firmware-updates.
Of course there will be less in focus as well, a bigger sensor + larger aperture means less DOF and therefore less in focus.
This can also become a problem at close focus-ranges, because the focus-plane is in reality not flat, instead it is somewhat spherical shaped. At close focus-distances therefore soft corners can become a problem.

demoniality said:
My only concern is that i have read a report of a picture of a horizon have both the barrel distortion and pincushion problems which is at some distance. I'll have to check for long distance distortion. If it's not there i'm happy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've taken pictures of a sea horizon...
They get the strange distortion too
---------- Post added at 11:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:20 PM ----------
*R2D2* said:
I think Sony's decision not to kill all detail with heavy noise-reduction was good.
I just hope this won´t change with future Firmware-updates.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm completely agree
High detail is better than a very little bit of noise
I think the only thing I would like to see in next firmware is a stronger sharpness algorithm. XZ with Honami Camera driver produces sharper pictures (obviously they get more grain and pixelled than XZ1 when zooming in because of sensor, lens and mpx)

*R2D2* said:
I think Sonys decision not to kill all detail with heavy noise-reduction was a good (although unexpecting when looking at their cameras which usually use quite heavy NR). Chroma-Noise is very well under control up to the highest sensitivities and the luminance-noise is very fine grained and not objectionable at all. Unfortunately thats not true for ISO 1600+, where NR gets so high everything becomes a blurry mess. Of course these sensitivities are hardly usable for 1/2,3"-Sensors, regardless of the strength of the NR
Finally you can always use some additional NR in PP, but you never can bring back detail that has already been destroyed by heavy processing.
Also contrast (at least in manual) mode is quite low (at least for a consumer-device), which leads to surprisingly good DR, unlike the blocked shadows (which also hide noise) you get on most phones (and most compact-cameras as well). Again increasing contrast in PP is not a problem, unlike the other way around.
I just hope this won´t change with future Firmware-updates.
Of course there will be less in focus as well, a bigger sensor + larger aperture means less DOF and therefore less in focus.
This can also become a problem at close focus-ranges, because the focus-plane is in reality not flat, instead it is somewhat spherical shaped. At close focus-distances therefore soft corners can become a problem.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
An interesting and well informed reply, however, in my test shots we were not just talking about "a bit" of noise, but a considerable amount, and the picture was noticeably less sharp than the GN 3 picture I took, with its 13MP camera. So if there are any advantages to be had on the Sony, I can't see them. And while I theoretically could tinker with improving the pics in Photoshop I don't think I would have had the patience to do this with every little picture I take.
So, out of the box, the Samsung produces the better pictures, with less hassle for me, and I don't need to have specialist knowledge in photography or Photoshop in order to get a good result, and that's what tipped the scale for me.

hi sorry but i cant understand what whitelines the OP is talking.
i upload a picture, can tell me if mine have any problem?
---------- Post added at 12:15 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:14 AM ----------
hi sorry but i cant understand what whitelines the OP is talking.
i upload a picture, can tell me if mine have any problem?

shawnhalu said:
hi sorry but i cant understand what whitelines the OP is talking.
i upload a picture, can tell me if mine have any problem?
---------- Post added at 12:15 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:14 AM ----------
hi sorry but i cant understand what whitelines the OP is talking.
i upload a picture, can tell me if mine have any problem?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was talking about CROOKED lines, not white lines.
And yes, you have them too.

shawnhalu said:
i upload a picture, can tell me if mine have any problem?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Look at the somewhat waved appearance of the tab bar.
But what worries me more in your picture is the softness on the right side, that is obvious even at this rather small image-size. It may be a result of not holding the camera parallel to the screen (the softer bottom definitely is), but if you always get a soft right side, your camera-lens might be misaligned.

*R2D2* said:
Look at the somewhat waved appearance of the tab bar.
But what worries me more in your picture is the softness on the right side, that is obvious even at this rather small image-size. It may be a result of not holding the camera parallel to the screen (the softer bottom definitely is), but if you always get a soft right side, your camera-lens might be misaligned.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
haha i cant see the softness u stating. i try take afew more picture head on and let u see. thanks

naujoks said:
I was talking about CROOKED lines, not white lines.
And yes, you have them too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
actually i cant see the crooked line where is it?
---------- Post added at 10:47 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:43 AM ----------
naujoks said:
I was talking about CROOKED lines, not white lines.
And yes, you have them too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
*R2D2* said:
Look at the somewhat waved appearance of the tab bar.
But what worries me more in your picture is the softness on the right side, that is obvious even at this rather small image-size. It may be a result of not holding the camera parallel to the screen (the softer bottom definitely is), but if you always get a soft right side, your camera-lens might be misaligned.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
photo retake for u, can u help me have a look of the softness and the crooked line?

shawnhalu said:
photo retake for u, can u help me have a look of the softness and the crooked line?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First picture again shows severe softness on the right side, just look how hard it is to read the text.
Corner-sharpness isn´t the greatest with this camera, which is to be expected considering the relatively large sensor with a relatively small lens, but this shouldn´t extend that far into the picture.
Your camera seams to be especially strange, as the corners are actually sharper, the small text of the clock in the bottom right corner for example is much easier to read then the text in the center right side, which is very unusual. Normally the corners are the softest, but as you use 16:9, which crops the extreme corners, there shouldn´t be much of a problem at all.
There is nothing to notice on the rest of the pictures.
I don´t really know what´s going on there, the strange sharpness-pattern could be a result of the rather unusual distortion and the correction for it, but then left and right side should be identical. A misaligned lens/sensor should show worse corners (top right corner is quite good as well).
If the camera had some image-stabilization I would say, that maybe the moving sensor/lens-element moved to an area of the lens which isn´t optically as good, but as this camera doesn´t have any stabilization this isn´t possible.
One guess would be that there is some dirt on one side of your lens, or the covering-glass, or maybe some scratches.
Another guess would be that the camera chose one of the multi-shot-modes. Sonys cameras usually are quite good discovering softer parts of the image and multiple instances of the same objects their multi-shot-modes, but of course the algorithm isn´t fool-proof, so their might be a chance that software combined a softer image in the final picture on the right side, while not using this soft image on the left side.

Related

seriously guys.. your honest thoughts on the camera...

I find every picture I take with the diamond sub par and not even 3 megapixel standard. my resolution is def set to highest. even my missus's iphone produces sharper more defined pics. diamond pics are soft, cloudy and blotchy when zoomedl auto white balance is useless, always gets things wrong and I have to always fiddle around with manual settings. what are your experiences?
Original files are in zip.. When you hold the td perfectly still the photo's are ok.. when te conditions are worse, i.e. your walking/moving, in darker places, the quality runs back quickly.
I found the camera amazing (except for in the dark, while contra-light doesn't seem to matter that match). Good quality, high-res pictures if you allow it to focus correctly and hold still. Some good modes too.
Prety much the same. Only way to get a reasonable pic is to remove the back when I need as good a quality as possible, and when I do so they're passable. Find auto WB is ok outdoors, but rubbish indoors (badly washed out), and needs a bit of fiddling to get the best out of it.
Bit of a nause, but I'm not a prolific snapper, so it's not the end of the world for me.
camera is amazing on light.
but in the dark it is really ****.
studz said:
Prety much the same. Only way to get a reasonable pic is to remove the back when I need as good a quality as possible,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is exactly what has been said before, i completely agree and I did some tests on it to. Both my images showed that with the cover on, cloudy, misty pictures and with the cover off, good quality, reasonably sharp pictures.
intel286 said:
camera is amazing on light.
but in the dark it is really ****.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do also agree that indoors and in low light the quality isn't that great but outdoors especially in good light the pictures are pretty good. Would be great if there was some sort of software tweak or software upgrade that would improve the quality of the pictures produced.
But at the end of the day we all know it all goes down to the quality of the camera that the manufacturer has used in the device. Im reasonably happy with the 3.2 megapixel that was used but with things like the Samsung i900 Omnia coming out / recently out with a pretty good 5 mega pixel hopefully HTC will take note and upgrade the cameras in future devices.
Im happy with mine, taking the back cover off can be a pain, but it works for me! (For now, hehe!)
Compared to what I just came from (a terrible VGA cam in a Motorola V3), I think the camera is amazing. It's not up to proper camera levels, but if I was after a camera for more than the occasional picture, I'd buy a proper digital cam or one of these phone/camera hybrids.
It does require a steady hand though, and it very low light it's not good, but even in relatively poor light it still did better than I was expecting.
Its just 'OK' in the light and useless in dark.
okay. tried with the cover off and theres definately an improvement, although still not perfect. however, its going to be a major pain in the arse to take the back cover off everytime I want to take an improv picture.
darthbane2k said:
okay. tried with the cover off and theres definately an improvement, although still not perfect. however, its going to be a major pain in the arse to take the back cover off everytime I want to take an improv picture.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
push the lense cover out....worked for me
but then you have the problems or crap getting in the back of the phone
Pretty good during the day, but at night it turns to ****, my guess is that it tries to prolong the shutter speed instead of increase the gain / ISO sensitivity.
HTC need to learn 2 program.
liamhere said:
push the lense cover out....worked for me
but then you have the problems or crap getting in the back of the phone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what if we cover the hole with clear screen protector film?
it would warp the image, short of proper optics you cant just cover a hole an take a picture through it, what we need it some sort of shutter on the back panel, quite easy to manufacture if someone could be bothered
Tendou said:
Pretty good during the day, but at night it turns to ****, my guess is that it tries to prolong the shutter speed instead of increase the gain / ISO sensitivity.
HTC need to learn 2 program.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you have any idea what does it take in terms of sensor circuitry to increase ISO sensitivity?
you have any idea how expensive a good camera sensor is (not the crap you see in consumer cameras, which are also **** in the dark)?
guys, I think you're just being unrealistic about what a phone camera should do.
I cleaned up my cover lens and I pushed it more that I wanted and ups it is out so now Im glad with clean photos and once a time I clean up hole back under cover...
...but about steady hand and good not blurry pictures...does anybody worked sports or burst mode with resolution higher than size "L"
kultus said:
I cleaned up my cover lens and I pushed it more that I wanted and ups it is out so now Im glad with clean photos and once a time I clean up hole back under cover...
...but about steady hand and good not blurry pictures...does anybody worked sports or burst mode with resolution higher than size "L"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
can popping out the lens cover really damage the phone?
well
you'll get dust inside, this shall be most notably when wearing it in pocket...
i managed it by putting a plastic seal around it:
i took one of those cable holders which came with the diamond (e.g. holding the headset together) cut it in the middle (so it was half as high as before) and placed it around the lense
now its closed again (teste with very fine sand) and i got much better photos....
(sry for the bad english ;D - I hope you can get what i mean)
Im wearing it in my pocket and its not that horible than I expected so its your choice...no damage btw glue is still there so its the matter of 2 sec to stick it up...
If you don't want to remove the lens cover, then clean the cover. Have a look at your cover and you should see why the picture comes out the way it does.
I.ve been watching this forum for more on this issue. The camera is crap. I upgraded to the htc rom because it said it made camera improvements. Bull***t. It’s still the same. I take loads of photos and almost all with the diamond have some sort of blurriness. If you have some sort of movement when the photo is taken then it blurs’. Examples below. Because of what another member posted about the same problem. I will be contacting htc support.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=412397
My old 2.0 mp Artemis and 3.0 mp Tytn II never had this problem.
Photos with the diamond
http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/j.../IMAGE_041.jpg
http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/j.../IMAGE_022.jpg
http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/j.../IMAGE_014.jpg
i.ve tried without back cover and it makes no diference

[Q] Rear camera blur problem. Anyone?

This is my first post here, so first of all, hello everyone and greetings from Finland!
I bought the IS about two weeks ago. Today I took my first outdoor pics and noticed a strange phenomenon. If I focus on a distant object (typical for outdoor shots), the extreme right-hand side of the photo is quite mushy and blurred. The affected area is only about 200 pixels wide (starting from the edge) and goes all the way from top to bottom. Everything else, including the left side, is tack sharp (well, as sharp as it can be with this camera anyway). This happens with every photo, if the focusing distance is relatively long. Close-range shots (indoor pics, for example) are just fine, also the right-hand sides of the photos turn out sharp. This is very strange.
I'm a very experienced photographer, so it's not my technique. Something is wrong with the optics alignment, sensor or it could be a software issue. With optical problems the close-range shots are usually more problematic because of short depth-of-field, which makes the alignment errors much more visible.
Anyone else having similar experiences? Take an outdoor shot using a focusing distance of, let's say, 20-50 meters (or yards) and see if the right side of the image is as sharp as the left side. Make sure there's something with lots of detail near the edges of the image. I would be much less worried, if both sides of the photos were softish. After all, that would be quite typical for less-than-stellar optics found in camera phones. It's the asymmetry that bothers me.
This is actually my only gripe with this phone. Apart from this unpleasant surprise I really like the IS.
Pete
P.S. No fingerprints on the lens, it's clean!
There's an ongoing thread about the camera quality issue.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1021940
chobie said:
There's an ongoing thread about the camera quality issue.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1021940
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the tip!
I did a bit more controlled experimenting and sadly it seems that also close-distance shots suffer from the same right-hand side blurriness. If I take a photo of a completely flat surface, focusing on the center part of the viewing area, the extreme right-hand side of the photo is soft. There's nothing wrong with the left-hand side. Also, the affected area is almost 400 pixels wide (wide angle setting, no zooming). I also rotated the phone 180 degrees and took comparison shots. And...the left-hand side was blurry.
Maybe I have a bad sample. I can't exchange it for a new one, so I guess I have to live with it or have the local HTC service take a look at it. I'm not too keen on doing that.
Pete
Nothing like this in mine. Photos are good. No blur at the right.
cooljais said:
Nothing like this in mine. Photos are good. No blur at the right.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for your comment, good to know your camera is working fine!
I'm suspecting there's dirt inside the lens assembly or on the sensor. My IS is now being serviced at the local HTC service center. I'll let you know how this turns out.
Guess caused by auto focusing

Possible camera defect

Camera quality on my Xperia Z is great apart from the corners of each picture (especially the top corners), which are always very blurred compared to the rest of the image. I've tried all sorts of different settings, seems to make no difference.
Does anyone know if this is just the way things are with the Z, or a defect which they might fix/replace under warranty?
Post pictures taken from your cam.
kdavidyates said:
Camera quality on my Xperia Z is great apart from the corners of each picture (especially the top corners), which are always very blurred compared to the rest of the image. I've tried all sorts of different settings, seems to make no difference.
Does anyone know if this is just the way things are with the Z, or a defect which they might fix/replace under warranty?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The design of lenses have this inherent fault, corners are always more soft than the center.
However post some shots so we can see, because if you are claiming that they are very blurred it would be good help diagnose if the quality does seem worse than the norm. Also double check that the lens is in fact clean all over.
kdavidyates said:
Camera quality on my Xperia Z is great apart from the corners of each picture (especially the top corners), which are always very blurred compared to the rest of the image. I've tried all sorts of different settings, seems to make no difference.
Does anyone know if this is just the way things are with the Z, or a defect which they might fix/replace under warranty?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here since 2009 and still don't know how to read:silly:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2116920
Dsteppa said:
Here since 2009 and still don't know how to read:silly:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2116920
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok thanks for the heads-up but I could just as easily have posted this as a thread (i.e. 'Possible camera defect', and without the 'Q'). I wasn't aware of the restriction on questions here.
Let me rephrase: "It seems to me that there's a defect with my camera which blurs the corners of pictures. Does anyone else have a similar experience with their camera?" (Or does that count as a question too?)
Here are some links to pictures, anyway, assuming the thread doesn't get deleted (and thanks to those who posted asking for them):
As long as there's nothing in the top corners, it takes really nice pictures:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zww62ysjtsicr1v/2013-06-06 10.52.43.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/4r3lzcdeuuk7rb0/2013-07-20 19.34.35.jpg
But these three (taken to test for this fault) clearly show blurring in the top corners (comments on whether this is excessive are welcome):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/8odsgf5xdkpld5f/2013-04-20 17.55.15.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/xs3r79awos2dc65/2013-04-20 17.56.42.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5um2bst8i2tgji5/2013-05-07 14.00.20.jpg
I have the same problem. When I'm holding the phone in landscape mode, the left corners are also very blurry.
I experienced the same problems with my Xperia Neo, but in contrast to the Xperia Neo, the Xperia S didn't had that problem.
I'm very disappointed in Sony, because I have more problems with my Z
Sent from my C6603 using xda app-developers app
Bump - does anyone else experience blurring in the top corners of their pictures? Thinking about returning under warranty, as I use the camera quite a lot. Sample photos linked below...
As long as there's nothing in the top corners, it takes really nice pictures:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zww62ysjtsicr1v/2013-06-06 10.52.43.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/4r3lzcdeuuk7rb0/2013-07-20 19.34.35.jpg
But these three (taken to test for this fault) clearly show blurring in the top corners (comments on whether this is excessive are welcome):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/8odsgf5xdkpld5f/2013-04-20 17.55.15.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/xs3r79awos2dc65/2013-04-20 17.56.42.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5um2bst8i2tgji5/2013-05-07 14.00.20.jpg[/QUOTE]
kdavidyates said:
Bump - does anyone else experience blurring in the top corners of their pictures? Thinking about returning under warranty, as I use the camera quite a lot. Sample photos linked below...
As long as there's nothing in the top corners, it takes really nice pictures:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zww62ysjtsicr1v/2013-06-06 10.52.43.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/4r3lzcdeuuk7rb0/2013-07-20 19.34.35.jpg
But these three (taken to test for this fault) clearly show blurring in the top corners (comments on whether this is excessive are welcome):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/8odsgf5xdkpld5f/2013-04-20 17.55.15.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/xs3r79awos2dc65/2013-04-20 17.56.42.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5um2bst8i2tgji5/2013-05-07 14.00.20.jpg
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
[/QUOTE]
I'd say send it back, must be a hardware failure.
I'll be sending mine back for dead pixels on the damn sensor. New sensor so lots of problems.
kdavidyates said:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zww62ysjtsicr1v/2013-06-06 10.52.43.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/4r3lzcdeuuk7rb0/2013-07-20 19.34.35.jpg
But these three (taken to test for this fault) clearly show blurring in the top corners (comments on whether this is excessive are welcome):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/8odsgf5xdkpld5f/2013-04-20 17.55.15.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/xs3r79awos2dc65/2013-04-20 17.56.42.jpg
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5um2bst8i2tgji5/2013-05-07 14.00.20.jpg
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do not see really problems with this, I am sure it is a slight misalignment of the lens, this happens on P&S cameras, they are typically worse than this in all corners. This effect even happens on some of the most expensive DSLR lenses, the more wide angle typically worse the issue.
If you can get the whole phone replaced because of this then you will be extremely lucky.

Little trick to improve SDE (screen door effect)...

Just stumbled upon this because the GVR was making my face sore after wearing it a while. I had already replaced the stock foam pad with the alternate one which has the nose bridge. For more padding I simply took the original "noseless" pad and put it on first. I then placed the full pad on top of it, attaching the nose section to the velcro so it stays in place - in other words, double foam.
WOW.
What I didn't expect was the MAJOR REDUCTION IN SCREEN DOOR EFFECT which has been achieved simply by moving the GVR another 1/4 inch from my face. I was looking at the Mars 360 photos and I thought, "Damn these look clear." Then I looked at some others and noticed the pixels all seemed about half the size they were previously. To really test it I loaded up The Hobbit in Oculus Cinema. WOW! SO much better. Again, pixels half the size. It makes sense. Your eyes are twice as far from the lenses so pixels half as big. Incredible.
The best analogy is that instead of feeling you are looking through a screen door, it looks like the image is projected on canvas. Much much more pleasant.
So apparently the biggest cause for the screen door effect on the GVR is it's just too damned close to your eyes. I also found focusing much easier and eye strain reduced - and oh yeah, face hurt less. I find the screen looks better with this mod if I wear the GVR a bit lower on my face as well.
Give it a try. Watch the Hobbit without the "double-stuff" then watch it with - you'll see the difference.
P.S., Some have commented that this will reduce your FOV and cause focus issues at the edges. Please remember that you are only moving 1/4 in from the lenses. IMHO there is no perceptible FOV loss and no additional focus problems at the edges. The only thing which changes is the image is so much better.
Anyone try this? Any improvement? For me it's night and day.
When you get the chance, can you post a pic of what the modified padding looks like?
Buddy Revell said:
When you get the chance, can you post a pic of what the modified padding looks like?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just follow my instructions. Put the noseless pad on the bottom and the nose pad on the top. Simple.
But if you do that you lose so much of the picture...
ickna11 said:
But if you do that you lose so much of the picture...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What? How? You don't lose any picture at all. You simply stack the padding on top of each other. It just causes the lenses to be 1/4 inch further from your eyes so pixels look smaller. How are you losing picture?
Was just looking at 360 pics again like this. It's a whole new device. Instead of looking big and distinct pixels look like grains of sand.
mitchellvii said:
What? How? You don't lose any picture at all. You simply stack the padding on top of each other. It just causes the lenses to be 1/4 inch further from your eyes so pixels look smaller. How are you losing picture?
Was just looking at 360 pics again like this. It's a whole new device. Instead of looking big and distinct pixels look like grains of sand.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You lose fov being further away, more of a binocular effect.
ickna11 said:
You lose fov being further away, more of a binocular effect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not even remotely correct. No perceived loss of FOV at all. Binocular effect actually seems lessened as the image quality is so much improved. Remember, we are talking 1/4 inch here.
mitchellvii said:
Not even remotely correct. No perceived loss of FOV at all. Binocular effect actually seems lessened as the image quality is so much improved. Remember, we are talking 1/4 inch here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You lose fov being further away, this is a fact.
You also get a more distorted picture around the edges of the lens.
Not saying it doesn't make it more clear because you are further away, just pointing out what you lose when you do this.
ickna11 said:
You lose fov being further away, this is a fact.
You also get a more distorted picture around the edges of the lens.
Not saying it doesn't make it more clear because you are further away, just pointing out what you lose when you do this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No I'm sorry but you are wrong. Have you actually tried it or is this just your theory?
By moving back only 1/4 inch you lose maybe 1-2% of your field of view and there is no additional distortion around the edges but the image is dramatically better - night and day. So which would you rather have, tiny pixels and 98% of the FOV or huge pixels and 100% FOV? Miniscule sacrifice, huge gain.
mitchellvii said:
Just stumbled upon this because the GVR was making my face sore after wearing it a while. I had already replaced the stock foam pad with the alternate one which has the nose bridge. For more padding I simply took the original "noseless" pad and put it on first. I then placed the full pad on top of it, attaching the nose section to the velcro so it stays in place - in other words, double foam.
WOW.
What I didn't expect was the MAJOR REDUCTION IN SCREEN DOOR EFFECT which has been achieved simply by moving the GVR another 1/4 inch from my face. I was looking at the Mars 360 photos and I thought, "Damn these look clear." Then I looked at some others and noticed the pixels all seemed about half the size they were previously. To really test it I loaded up The Hobbit in Oculus Cinema. WOW! SO much better. Again, pixels half the size. It makes sense. Your eyes are twice as far from the lenses so pixels half as big. Incredible.
The best analogy is that instead of feeling you are looking through a screen door, it looks like the image is projected on canvas. Much much more pleasant.
So apparently the biggest cause for the screen door effect on the GVR is it's just too damned close to your eyes. I also found focusing much easier and eye strain reduced - and oh yeah, face hurt less. I find the screen looks better with this mod if I wear the GVR a bit lower on my face as well.
Give it a try. Watch the Hobbit without the "double-stuff" then watch it with - you'll see the difference.
P.S., Some have commented that this will reduce your FOV and cause focus issues at the edges. Please remember that you are only moving 1/4 in from the lenses. IMHO there is no perceptible FOV loss and no additional focus problems at the edges. The only thing which changes is the image is so much better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Surely gone to try this, thanks a lot!
Aedriaen
Aedriaen said:
Surely gone to try this, thanks a lot!
Aedriaen
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey its worth a try since there is nothing permanent about the mod. Everyone's eyes work differently with the GVR but for me its made all the difference.
Aedriaen said:
Surely gone to try this, thanks a lot!
Aedriaen
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As a quick test tried pressing GVR harder against my face to see if pixels size increased and they did, dramatically so. Also noticed tiny increase in FOV, hardly worth it to endure the bigger pixels.
mitchellvii said:
As a quick test tried pressing GVR harder against my face to see if pixels size increased and they did, dramatically so. Also noticed tiny increase in FOV, hardly worth it to endure the bigger pixels.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just a clarification: the pixels are not changing size. You are looking through a concave lens. The further back you move, the less "magnified" the view becomes. It simply looks clearer because you are getting closer to the original resolution of the image by "zooming" less. If you really feel that they were a whole foam buffer off in how close the lenses should be for clear viewing, you should probably be telling Oculus. That is the sort of stuff they want to know when they release an "innovator" edition.
twistedumbrella said:
Just a clarification: the pixels are not changing size. You are looking through a concave lens. The further back you move, the less "magnified" the view becomes. It simply looks clearer because you are getting closer to the original resolution of the image by "zooming" less. If you really feel that they were a whole foam buffer off in how close the lenses should be for clear viewing, you should probably be telling Oculus. That is the sort of stuff they want to know when they release an "innovator" edition.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is why the density solution will not work in this case. It does not apply.
twisted, if you own the GVR just for grins try my double-stuff solution and watch some movies. You'll see the difference.
mitchellvii said:
This is why the density solution will not work in this case. It does not apply.
twisted, if you own the GVR just for grins try my double-stuff solution and watch some movies. You'll see the difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know it isn't what you want to hear, but if enough people didn't find the lens placement "optimal" the way they are, the headset would have been designed with deeper lenses. There are others that have the same issue, but they are the exception. I, on the other hand, do not suffer from this "severe" issue. It has nothing to do with density. I think it's best left between you and your optometrist. Good luck.
The closer the better for me. The extra pad makes it too blurry for me. I think the gear vr pad around the nose was removed from first goam pad because it brings your face even closer.
I went ahead and tried both and couldn't find a good focal point for my eyes. Sadly it made it far worse for me. Awesome it works for you tho and was with a try for me. I wear contacts to see, then readers to see anything closer than 3 feet. Ha
Compusmurf said:
I went ahead and tried both and couldn't find a good focal point for my eyes. Sadly it made it far worse for me. Awesome it works for you tho and was with a try for me. I wear contacts to see, then readers to see anything closer than 3 feet. Ha
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Doubt it makes any noticeable difference (tried it myself and the experience/immersion was just way worse than normally and the pixels were just as visible). This did though give me an idea - to try the Gear VR without any padding at all in order to get it as close to your face as possible. Liked it a lot more and is worth a try if the pads that came with the device don't make for a comfortable fit for you (also a lot easier to get decent focus!). Btw. has anyone figured out a way to switch seats in the cinema without the controller? Setting up the sixaxis every time I want to watch a movie is a bit of a chore (want the screen to be as big as possible, and the front seat is the only one that offers anything like that). Don't really get why void cinema doesn't allow you to move closer and farther away from the "screen"(want it to fill my entire FOV).
mitchellvii said:
just for grins try my double-stuff solution and watch some movies. You'll see the difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, while I was in the Gear VR tonight, I made a point of trying to experience it through your eyes to understand what you are going at better. You know what? I did start to see it through your eyes and it only confirmed what I was saying for why you are not experiencing it like others are (as well as others that have posted with similar reactions, such as as the Official Oculus Forum where a member was very similarly disappointed for the same reasons.) You might have 20/20 vision, but you also might consider you have focus issues.
I had to start rejecting the focal point of the image and start staring at the pixels to see what you were seeing. I also kept moving the face plate away from my eyes and back to look for the pixel size change. After doing this for a few minutes where I ignored the image, my eyes began to obsess over the pixels, noting the RBG field, and was less able to focus on the actual image. Quite frankly, this is a like a person watching an old CRT TV while focusing on the pixels rather than the program overlaid on the screen. You could see those old pixels at a normal viewing distance from within a living room much as you perceive the Gear VR pixels. At any rate, because of the exercise it became distracting when I was trying to go back to focusing on the actual image while I was looking at 360 Photos. Just moving my head around I'd lose focus on the image and follow the pixels. Taking a break to reset will get me back to enjoying it.
This is why you are getting more resistance than agreement. You are focused on the wrong point and that is not what the majority does., but you aren't alone.

Pink camera spot issue/ color shading

Here's a thread I made on the Nokia forums: https://community.phones.nokia.com/support/discussions/topics/7000022066
"Here's something I noticed today - taking a picture in certain low light conditions produces a pink/reddish spot in the middle of the picture.
So far I've only been able to reproduce it in my own room, with natural light coming through blue curtains on beige/brown objects.
After doing some research, it appears this issue is rather well documented on many phones from different manufacturers, the Galaxy S2, S5, Xperia phones. Some sources say it might just be an issue with all smartphone sensors, referred to as "color shading", some just hide it better. My old Galaxy S3 appears to have it too, although nowhere near to the same extent. If I may, here's a couple links from androidcentral and xda of people talking about it.
What I'm wondering now is how widespread this is on the Nokia 8 in particular and whether there's any hope of having it better after a replacement. Interestingly enough, the front camera doesn't have that issue, even if it might be the same sensor (is it?), but maybe it's due to the optics too, which are probably quite different.
It also appears possible to compensate for it in the software, so I wonder what are the chances of that in case it's common on the Nokia 8.
I'll try adding a few examples I took in the comments. "
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They haven't approved my pictures there yet, so here's an imgur album - https://imgur.com/a/VccdP
Apparently it happens on certain black fabric and not only in natural light.
I replased my phone to new one for that reason...this was 6 months ago.
Its the sony image sensor issue same as xperia z3
---------- Post added at 09:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:25 PM ----------
simon-sf said:
I replased my phone to new one for that reason...this was 6 months ago.
Its the sony image sensor issue same as xperia z3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Btw its still there but not so bad...try to use iso speed under 600.
simon-sf said:
I replased my phone to new one for that reason...this was 6 months ago.
Its the sony image sensor issue same as xperia z3
---------- Post added at 09:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:25 PM ----------
Btw its still there but not so bad...try to use iso speed under 600.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So there are variances between devices then. How bad was your first phone and how much did the new one improve? Any chance you could try taking a photo of a worst example? Say black fabric in a dimly lit room.
The pink spot was clearly visible in mousebad...bow its better image from this one coming soon.
Nro:1 nokia camera app
Nro:2 open camera , iso speed 500
So its stil there.
Opencamera raw
I guess that does look a little better. Maybe.. Difficult to tell how much the scenarios match. Either way, I've turned the phone in for warranty, will see what happens.
Can you update us what happens? I just got this phone too and have the same issue sadly though the local Nokia agent isn't a very strong one I don't think they'll replace my handset. Anyway anyway out of curiosity... What color are your phones that are making this issue? Mine is the copper and I think that's the issue some how
Today morning we look go worker nokia 8 128gb version it has pinky too.
angvil said:
Can you update us what happens? I just got this phone too and have the same issue sadly though the local Nokia agent isn't a very strong one I don't think they'll replace my handset. Anyway anyway out of curiosity... What color are your phones that are making this issue? Mine is the copper and I think that's the issue some how
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mine was tempered blue. I very highly doubt the color has anything to do with it.
Nothing to say so far, will probably hear back next week. I'm only wondering if they got the idea that it's happening on all the pictures, as I only showed the bad examples and didn't note 'low light' in the problem description. I hope they're able to reproduce the issue themselves.
VonZigmas said:
Mine was tempered blue. I very highly doubt the color has anything to do with it.
Nothing to say so far, will probably hear back next week. I'm only wondering if they got the idea that it's happening on all the pictures, as I only showed the bad examples and didn't note 'low light' in the problem description. I hope they're able to reproduce the issue themselves.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I managed to solve it by contacting Nokia support, they told me to hold the volume up button and power button to clear cache.
After that the pink shade went completely, I couldn't replicate it at all.
Another thing I was wondering is are the lenses exactly centered on the hole opening of the lenses? Mine isn't exactly centered
Look closely to the picture attached. Could this be the culprit?
My upper sensor not fully center.
angvil said:
I managed to solve it by contacting Nokia support, they told me to hold the volume up button and power button to clear cache.
After that the pink shade went completely, I couldn't replicate it at all.
Another thing I was wondering is are the lenses exactly centered on the hole opening of the lenses? Mine isn't exactly centered
Look closely to the picture attached. Could this be the culprit?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you sure? I restored factory settings before bringing it in and it didn't change a thing.
And I can't really tell with the picture at an angle. I never noticed anything like it on my phone. Not completely centered across the length of the phone or the width?
VonZigmas said:
Are you sure? I restored factory settings before bringing it in and it didn't change a thing.
And I can't really tell with the picture at an angle. I never noticed anything like it on my phone. Not completely centered across the length of the phone or the width?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did factory reset too that didn't help though! The volume up and power button helped though.
Not centered as in the lense itself inside the round circle isn't centered! Check the bottom lense in the picture I attached. The lense is slightly shifted downwards
angvil said:
I did factory reset too that didn't help though! The volume up and power button helped though.
Not centered as in the lense itself inside the round circle isn't centered! Check the bottom lense in the picture I attached. The lense is slightly shifted downwards
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds almost too good to be true, but I've got no way to test it out right now. Any chance you could take some pictures where it would've been visible before? Say a black mouse pad or whatever.
Yeah, I can see that. May have to do with where the sensor rests since that's the stabilized color one? Try seeing how it is when taking a video.
I got my phone back. Of course, the service center couldn't replicate the issue. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt as it's not easy to notice, even if I did try explaining the situations where it's the most visible. Oh well. I never noticed it on my SIII in four years, though it's not as clear, so I guess I'll just live with it.
Also clearing the cache made no difference no matter how many times I tried.
So its still there?
simon-sf said:
So its still there?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, nothing changed. I got my old phone back, not a new one, just to clarify.
I am going to make sure that repair nan can see the spot in my phone...modules are going to chance so many times that there is no pinky.
simon-sf said:
I am going to make sure that repair nan can see the spot in my phone...modules are going to chance so many times that there is no pinky.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good luck. I'm honestly doubtful you can find one with no pink spot. Maybe minimally visible at best.

Categories

Resources