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.
Related
So I went from a moto v600 to a mpx220 to a audiovox 5600 (Typhoon), and now finally a AT&T Tilt (Kaiser), and I am actually considering going back to my typhoon... cuz... well... the Kaiser is just annoying me (slowness, texting, touch screen, blah blah blah)
I would like to know how the camera is, especially in low light, because the Kaiser is just crap imo compared to my older phones.
Thanks
To be brutally honest? Crap.
But it does the job. (Depending on your reasons for taking the photo with a camera phone I guess)
I haven't tested it in low-light conditions yet. It's a fixed-focus f/2.8 camera, so in theory the shutter speeds should be alright for low-light photos.
Edit: I've attached a photo of the box under my desk.
It's absolute crap in low-light. I was in a pub a couple of days ago and the pics I tried to take were awful. Tried to adjust it, increased the brightness - no change.
It's a great camera... for the outdoors. It's actually better than any of the cameras on any of my previous phones (other than a Sony I had). Here's a pic I took the other day:
.
it is as good as any other competitor nowadays.
the only good cameraphone I've used is Sony Ericsson K800. K810 and C702 etc just suck compared.
K800 had auto-focus and real flash.
I just remembered which phone it was that had the great cam in it. It was the Sony-Ericsson S710a. It was too bad that the cam was only 1.3Mpx though.
.
It's terrible. Impossible to focus as there's no auto focus. To be fair though I didn't buy mine for the camera. I prefer having a seperate camera.
Don't you guys think the colors are off for the camera ?
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
Hello everyone. I've had a Note 2 since it came out 2012, and so far the Z2 is the only phone that I think is a good enough replacement. I want to get one in December for my birthday, but one thing isn't clear to me.
In a lot of reviews, the camera quality, especially in 20mp manual mode, isn't that good, it looks out of focus or has blurry spots. Other, more recent reviews, show a better camera quality, and when I handled one myself in a showroom for an hour or so, testing it against my N2, the quality was much better, like what I expected from this phone.
Were the bad reviews, like the one on GSMarena, made with pre-production phones, or are there earlier revision phones out there, with worse cameras than the more recent ones? I'm going to order mine online, I don't know if it's from newer or older stock, and as much as I browsed the forum, it isn't clear to me if there are camera differences between revisions.
Its actualy not that bad
Ill attatch some pics i took a couple months ago
sandulea said:
In a lot of reviews, the camera quality, especially in 20mp manual mode, isn't that good, it looks out of focus or has blurry spots. Other, more recent reviews, show a better camera quality, and when I handled one myself in a showroom for an hour or so, testing it against my N2, the quality was much better, like what I expected from this phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
20 mp manual mode may not be satisfactory, i agree. but you should decide if 20mp is necessary or necessary in what circumstances.
What Sony did is concentrating on 8mp Auto mode with extensive image post-processing and 8mp photos are pretty good (for me).
Camera isnt the only thing I've looked for in a smartphone. Looks and material quality, battery life, dust and water ressistance... together with a maybe-not-the-best-but-good camera did it for me.
Using the auto mode (8mp) is indeed fine.
Im perfectly satisfied, maybe because I dont expect much from a phone. I mean, sure, the megapixels are high these days but that doesnt change the fact that the sensors are so small and quality will always be inferior to a "real" camera.
Hi,
A camera is a very important factor for me when buying a phone,
I bought my Redmi Note 3 after reading some underwhelming reviews about the camera, thinking "oh well, how bad can the rear camera be?" - well, the camera is really under performing, very soft images, noticeable noise in almost every scenario, very disappointing.
My question is that,
Is it really a hardware issue, or just poor camera algorithms coding?
if the former, I will just look for another phone and sell mine,
otherwise, I will (try to) wait patiently until the appropriate software update will come
Thanks
check this out
https://www.reddit.com/r/Xiaomi/comments/5ci866/why_do_people_mock_the_redmi_note_3_camera_it/
Camera is nothing but decent , specially at natural light conditions.it seems great at night condition without flash due to low aperture.miui 8 greatly improved my camera experience.i found alomost zero noise in night shots. Enough for a $200 phone
I think it takes good pictures but I found that any kind of motion will blur the picture (even just walking and snapping a pic), so motion sucks, try taking a picture of a moving dog it will just be a blur, low light also sucks, but if you take still pictures under good lighting pictures look great, I think there is a soft spot for this camera it's just hard to find, also lowering the resolution to 12MP will take 16:9 widescreen photos rather then 4:3 photos in 16MP mode
Part of the problem is it never wants to increase the shutter speed properly in order to keep iso low. It tends to take most pictures at 1/25th or so, which is great for static but not for moving objects where you need a faster shutter speed to freeze motion.
ferez said:
Hi,
A camera is a very important factor for me when buying a phone,
I bought my Redmi Note 3 after reading some underwhelming reviews about the camera, thinking "oh well, how bad can the rear camera be?" - well, the camera is really under performing, very soft images, noticeable noise in almost every scenario, very disappointing.
My question is that,
Is it really a hardware issue, or just poor camera algorithms coding?
if the former, I will just look for another phone and sell mine,
otherwise, I will (try to) wait patiently until the appropriate software update will come
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
low light shots are average.
daytime shots are great.
did you tweak the default settings?
which ROM are you on?....try to be on latest MM dev or china rom
also try using open camera.
at this price range, show me a phone which gives better images?
I tried all the tweaks available including using Open Camera, nothing really helped.
I ended up selling it and buying an Mi4C - the difference in photo quality is unbelievable (at a price of around 90$ new)
Had 7 different smart phones this year, and Redmi Note's camera was the weakest among them, for me it's very noticeable.
I'm comparing it to my old HTC 10 and the quality is night and day. It's blurry/fuzzy, the colors are washed out. It reminds me of the quality of my old cheap webcam from 10 years ago.
Because you didn't turn off all the skin toning and skin lighting junk that's on by default. I was able to shoot selfies with more detail than any model would ever want to see on themselves so I know it isn't the camera's fault.
CHH2 said:
Because you didn't turn off all the skin toning and skin lighting junk that's on by default. I was able to shoot selfies with more detail than any model would ever want to see on themselves so I know it isn't the camera's fault.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, everything is disabled. It's terrible quality.
Mudig said:
It's terrible quality.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My testing and photos say otherwise. Like I said, way more detail in the selfies I've taken than most people who sit for me would ever want to see in a photo. It's not the camera.
Hey, coming from a Nexus 6 ... this is a major improvement.
Okay let's settle this, 5 mp camera is not the best out there, especially compared to iPhone 8's new front facing camera or even Samsung's I guess, although I can only tell based on what I see on internet, as I don't own them. Makes me wonder why it's so hard to create a perfect phone? I mean you did almost everything perfectly right, put a damn 8 mp camera with ois or whatever and hit a home run, why did they choose this front facing camera is beyond my understanding
Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk
Because the reality is that in order to actually see a doubling of resolution, you actually have to quadruple the megapixel count. So to see twice the detail of a 5mp sensor, you would have to use a 20mp sensor. 20mp at selfie cam size would be insane. The cameras that are using 16mp selfie cameras (such as the HTC U11) are actually using the main shooter from the V30. But to squeeze that extra sensor in with OIS would require more room and produce more heat which would cause issues with amp glow on your other sensors. Digital imaging can be a real P.I.T.A. even with dedicated cameras. Cellphone cameras are a miracle that they even produce anything worthwhile. And that's usually due to being conservative in your approach to what hardware you use.
CHH2 said:
Because the reality is that in order to actually see a doubling of resolution, you actually have to quadruple the megapixel count. So to see twice the detail of a 5mp sensor, you would have to use a 20mp sensor. 20mp at selfie cam size would be insane. The cameras that are using 16mp selfie cameras (such as the HTC U11) are actually using the main shooter from the V30. But to squeeze that extra sensor in with OIS would require more room and produce more heat which would cause issues with amp glow on your other sensors. Digital imaging can be a real P.I.T.A. even with dedicated cameras. Cellphone cameras are a miracle that they even produce anything worthwhile. And that's usually due to being conservative in your approach to what hardware you use.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks! I already learned something interesting today Is that the reason why the Nokia 8 and the HTC U11 have larger bezels as well in order to have enough room to tackle these technical challenges?
emmanuelw said:
Thanks! I already learned something interesting today Is that the reason why the Nokia 8 and the HTC U11 have larger bezels as well in order to have enough room to tackle these technical challenges?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, bezels really only exist to hide hardware that they haven't figured out how to downsize or place elsewhere. To get tiny bezels, you have to use tiny camera, earpiece, and proximity sensor hardware or just get rid of them. OIS units make things much bigger as you have to put a ring of motors around the object you're stabilizing. Earpieces/speakers take up a lot of space. I'm guessing Google used the headphone jack space to add more battery and the second speaker, with the second speaker adding more bezel. Proximity sensor is probably the smallest thing in the bezels. Display drivers used to be a big contributor (Moto 360 flat tire was a display driver if I remember right) but with the modern OLED panels they just, er, tuck 'em.
Not passing judgement on the quality of the selfie cam, but I notice that as with the main camera, it too has a "wide angle" setting.
But with only the single camera, necessarily this means that the non-wide setting is digitally zoomed, plus I'd bet there's heavy software correction going on to get rid of all of the wide angle distortion. Perhaps that's asking too much from a 5 MP sensor?
However, I rarely take selfies, and when I do, I'm often trying to squeeze in the other people that are with me, or some scene in the background, so maybe I'll find the native wider angle appealing? Hard to tell in-store with all the florescent lighting.
Mudig said:
No, everything is disabled. It's terrible quality.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed, turned all that off too and it still looks like crap.
Maybe find something better looking to shoot? The camera does really well.
CHH2 said:
Maybe find something better looking to shoot? The camera does really well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol wow dude is talking about a selfie this guy says find something better to shoot lmao.
I've never taken an awful photo with the front facing V30 camera. I really don't understand how anyone thinks it's awful.
Sent from my LG-H931 using Tapatalk
From my experience, it only does poorly in low light, that is, compared to 2017 flagships. I don't think it's nearly as bad a many claim it is.
If you look at a lot of of comparisons with the between the likes of the note 8, iphone x and pixel 2, it holds up really well. The biggest difference is really between the pixel 2 and pretty much every other flagship front facer, it has by far the best front facing cam on the market by a good margin imo. The v30 front cam can look really good, is just dosen't produce quite as much detail as the others, and maybe lacks in dynamic range a bit.
If you turn on flash in low light, you see better results. It’s not real flash obviously but I’ve been impressed when it gets it right.
maybe youre ugly lol jk