I've found some LG G2 video and photo samples with the originals that you can download. Photo quality seems really good but that 60 fps sample seems to run too fast? Or is it my PC??
Images here: http://optimusforums.com/threads/lg-g2-photo-samples.8836/
Video samples here: http://optimusforums.com/threads/lg-g2-video-sample.8837/
Honestly the photos and videos look and sound pretty terrible. I've seen some sample pics from Phonearena, pics from a couple korean sites, and video samples from other testers besides these. The photos are grainy, have drab colors, blur a lot, and seem to be constantly overexposed and over-contrasty losing all fine detail where all grays turn black and all bright shades turn white. The videos have LG's trademark OCD autofocus that keeps on bouncing and bouncing even on a perfectly still scene and all the image problems the photos suffer. The audio capture is grating and reminds me of the horrible audio capture of the GS3 and older HTC phones. I'd rank the camera chops below even last gen flagships.
Other than the amazing screen and thin bezels, the rest of the LG G2 is shaping up to be another copycat follow everyone else half effort. Poorly implemented OIS that barely exists (worse than even the HTC One), the same unimpressive 13MP camera from last year's Optimus G that many websites said was worse than the 8MP version, the same cheap plastic build but in this case you can't even remove the battery or expand storage space, and little in the way of innovation besides ho hum spec bumps.
I am mostly disappointed in the camera, as this is the year of the Lumia 1020's 41MP camera, Galaxy S4 Zoom's 10x zoom and large sensor, Xperia Z1 with 1/2.3" sensor, Oppo N1 which I am very siked for coming next month, a big camera bump for the iPhone 5S, a 13MP OIS camera from Samsung on the Note 3 which will surely be better than this, Motorola's ClearPixel, and HTC's Ultrapixel. Even though everyone is trying to compete with better camera's, LG just stuck with last year's lackluster faux 13MP one and tacked on a barely there OIS.
Cue ignorant or willfully in denial comments about not final firmware and prototype hardware and yada yada yada. I've been listening to the same excuses for years for dozens and dozens of phones from Nokia and HTC and Samsung and LG and whoever. You get what you see. That's that. The Lumia 920 isn't going to get any sharper looking even after a year of updates. The Xperia Z noise and terrible JPEG algorithm isn't going anywherer. The grain in that smaller Lumia 1020 sensor will be there forever. The cartoony smeared and overprocessed HTC pictures will stay that way. And LG's photos will always look like they were recorded on a VHS tape and played back on an old tube TV. Prototypes, pre-launch hardware, post-launch, hardware made a year later with a year worth of updates, same thing.
Photos when you zoom in to them look over sharpened and compressed. I agree that LG could have done better there with the camera. 920 OIS seems to be one of the best where the G2 doesn't seem that effective. Much like the HTC OIS. But if you look around on the youtube videos some 1020 and 920 videos are shaky and other less. I wonder why that is? Some people have steady hands where others don't?
Edit: New video up that shows the OIS does work now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekN9As4r7ms
Sigh not impressed either. I think katamari is right.
Sux cuz my s3 screen is broken and waiting for a worthy update. S4 is not an option, i hate pentile amoled and Samsung didn't learn from the s3. Reason enough for me to abandon Samsung.
HTC has ridiculous built in social shiat, not an option either.
I want a full hd full sub pixels display below 5inch. G2 was an exception cuz of the thin bezel. And to all the brands that bring out new high end phones without full hd display... well, see you next year maybe.
fallenwout said:
HTC has ridiculous built in social shiat, not an option either.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hate that about them... well did. Then I just rooted and uninstalled all that social crap that I don't use.
idk, i love my GS4 camera and think it easily kills my DNA, and the one in general, and the G2 looks to have pretty much the same quality as the GS4...so i'm excited.
jayochs said:
idk, i love my GS4 camera and think it easily kills my DNA, and the one in general, and the G2 looks to have pretty much the same quality as the GS4...so i'm excited.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've owned the S4 and I would say they are indeed about the same quality now. Video is only better because it shakes around less than the S4 due to the OIS. Its somewhere between the HTC one and 920 OIS. In the middle of the two in terms of OIS preformance.
Sound wise the LG G2 picks up too many high frequencies noises at times.
The sony Z1 we don't even know about that camera yet. So how can we comment on it.
Hendrickson said:
I've owned the S4 and I would say they are indeed about the same quality now. Video is only better because it shakes around less than the S4 due to the OIS. Its somewhere between the HTC one and 920 OIS. In the middle of the two in terms of OIS preformance.
Sound wise the LG G2 picks up too many high frequencies noises at times.
The sony Z1 we don't even know about that camera yet. So how can we comment on it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i'm excited. the audio in videos on the S4 was great; i record guitar videos from time to time, and the S4 rocked..i hope the G2 will be good, too!
Sample Photos - GS3 Comparison
I am the recent owner of an LG G2 and I was comparing the photo quality to my old GS3. I only did a few situations, but I thought I should share the results if anyone else is interested. GS3 photos taken @ 8MP and G2 photos @ 13MP.
The GS3 is definitely better at focussing on close objects.
I have some HDR and non-HDR versions there (it's easy to tell them apart). The GS3 HDR seems to be more aggressive, which can often result in a significant loss of contrast.
I also tested the OIS on the G2 by holding the phone with a shaky hand and taking burst shot photos, and it didn't seem to be very effective.
My photos (downsized to 1080p) are here:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0Bwrp4uluZCpNT19ObXhfZ1pwc2M&usp=sharing
The G2 takes very appealing photos IMO, and it's a step up from my GS3. They could be better, but I still think it's great for a phone.
Dean_me said:
I am the recent owner of an LG G2 and I was comparing the photo quality to my old GS3. I only did a few situations, but I thought I should share the results if anyone else is interested. GS3 photos taken @ 8MP and G2 photos @ 13MP.
The GS3 is definitely better at focussing on close objects.
I have some HDR and non-HDR versions there (it's easy to tell them apart). The GS3 HDR seems to be more aggressive, which can often result in a significant loss of contrast.
I also tested the OIS on the G2 by holding the phone with a shaky hand and taking burst shot photos, and it didn't seem to be very effective.
My photos (downsized to 1080p) are here:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0Bwrp4uluZCpNT19ObXhfZ1pwc2M&usp=sharing
The G2 takes very appealing photos IMO, and it's a step up from my GS3. They could be better, but I still think it's great for a phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you try with the camera mod?
With the original camera photos has lot of bad quality but with modded camera it just got great
Enviado desde mi LG-D806 mediante Tapatalk
Related
Hi guy's,... I thought the camera was good until i view it on my computer...it's kinda granny with lots of noise... it looks good in the 1080p display but not on FB or in my computer rofl. I guess something is really wrong with the camera.
hatyrei said:
Hi guy's,... I thought the camera was good until i view it on my computer...it's kinda granny with lots of noise... it looks good in the 1080p display but not on FB or in my computer rofl. I guess something is really wrong with the camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Welcome to mobile cameras, they all throw pixel count at you when what they really need are better sensors. I have NEVER had a phone camera take pictures that didn't have tons of noise and look like complete **** on a decent monitor. In my experience thus far, this camera is no different than others I've seen.
Agree^^
charlatan01 said:
In my experience thus far, this camera is no different than others I've seen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you compare to Maxx HD?
Sent from my HTC6435LVW using xda app-developers app
Great minds think alikeļ¼
Disagree.. maybe its your laptop... The pics from my rezound look awesome on my laptop
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app
Nokia has killer cameras. Even the old models, wish others would follw them
Sent from my Droid using xda app-developers app
Have been playing with the camera all day today. Compared to iphone5 this shows lot of noise especially in low light. When cmpared to gs3, noise is marginally higher in low light photos. Under good light conditions, this seems to produce most faithful color reproduction.
Just my observation
Yea, I just compared gsiii and DNA cameras, I think gsiii is better most of the time, but not in color reproduction. But honestly, they are both awful. :thumbdown:
Sent from HTC Droid DNA
I just downloaded camera 360 from the market, and its so much better than the stock camera.
I went downtown Detroit last night after Dinner, and even though I said that the S3 Camera is better, I'll retract my statement (different thread) after taking some low lights pics. The Low Light Pics on my S3 looked horrible.....but was pleasantly surprised by this camera. I attached a few pictures to show that the pics in low light actually look pretty damn good, especially since it was taken with a Phone, and I was a bit tipsy after drinking too much at Dinner (hands weren't exactly steady).
tdetroit said:
I went downtown Detroit last night after Dinner, and even though I said that the S3 Camera is better, I'll retract my statement (different thread) after taking some low lights pics. The Low Light Pics on my S3 looked horrible.....but was pleasantly surprised by this camera. I attached a few pictures to show that the pics in low light actually look pretty damn good, especially since it was taken with a Phone, and I was a bit tipsy after drinking too much at Dinner (hands weren't exactly steady).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Damn... I was going to pick up that phone today but after seeing these pics I don't think I am. A good camera is very important to me, maybe I'll get the Lumia 920 instead...
Well, what do you expect from a phone's camera? Whatever the camera's hardware is, if 90% of its settings are controlled automatically, the result is most probably going to suck. In a darker scene, this phone's software may want to bump the ISO higher than another phone's software, hence this noise and lack of detail. But anyway, a different camera app and you knowing how to use it will most probably show better results.
For me, a cellphone's camera is not much more than a barcode scanner.
Exactly. Phone cameras will always suck compared to a quality Point&Shoot. Smaller sensor, few manual settings, and software made by phone manufacturers, not Canon/Nikon. It's fine for a decent landscape shot or portrait on a sunny day but some people just have ridiculous expectations.
People spend thousands of dollars on camera equipment that works well in low light or for fast action. Maybe the iPhone 5 is marginally better than this, but I've played with my family's new iPhones and IMO the camera is still just a phone camera. If I wanted to take a good picture I'd bring something else.
Some comparisons
Some people didn't like my review of the DNA saying that I was too harsh on the 1080p 440ppi display. How could it possibly be worse than the 720p S3 panel? Well, I think these will speak for themselves:
First a short video shot by an iPhone 4S...DNA vs S3 playing Underworld Awakening. It's a bit hard to show how much the S3 dominates because it's a video of video playback, but the most accurate part is when Selene and Michael are kissing. You can see the skin tone is MUCH better:
http://db.tt/Z597Hcuc
Then the friend with the iPhone 4S and I went out and took some shots. He's taller than me, so the angles are a bit off, but you get the idea. 4S is on the left, DNA on the right:
http://db.tt/edmZQvMD
http://db.tt/cBAcLDwo
http://db.tt/9sHcE6yO
http://db.tt/hORDltQq
http://db.tt/G3pabYog
As you can clearly see, the DNA gets smoked when it comes to color and brightness. Either I have a bad panel or sensor or this camera/video playback is just simply inferior right out the box.
ilogik said:
Damn... I was going to pick up that phone today but after seeing these pics I don't think I am. A good camera is very important to me, maybe I'll get the Lumia 920 instead...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't forget-I was NOT really holding the camera steady (Tipsy), but my spouse had my S3 and the DNA's pics actually look better in those low-light shots than on the S3. I need to go to the Conservatory and take some daylight shots of all the tropical plants. THAT'S where I usually take my dSLR and even when I took the S3 there, the pics came out great,popping colors, etc.... Let's see how the DNA can handle those.
The difference is amazing!!!
WilliamStern said:
I just downloaded camera 360 from the market, and its so much better than the stock camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just downloaded the Camera 360 Ultimate from the Play Store and the difference is very, VERY noticeable. EVERY DNA owner needs to switch immediately. It's COMPLETELY a software issue. I'll be testing other camera apps right now, but this was a drastic improvement!!!
tdetroit said:
I went downtown Detroit last night after Dinner, and even though I said that the S3 Camera is better, I'll retract my statement (different thread) after taking some low lights pics. The Low Light Pics on my S3 looked horrible.....but was pleasantly surprised by this camera. I attached a few pictures to show that the pics in low light actually look pretty damn good, especially since it was taken with a Phone, and I was a bit tipsy after drinking too much at Dinner (hands weren't exactly steady).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
On my monitor those pictures look absolutely horrible, grainy and pixely. Are you using a stock camera or a 3rd party one?
NOsquid said:
Exactly. Phone cameras will always suck compared to a quality Point&Shoot. Smaller sensor, few manual settings, and software made by phone manufacturers, not Canon/Nikon. It's fine for a decent landscape shot or portrait on a sunny day but some people just have ridiculous expectations.
People spend thousands of dollars on camera equipment that works well in low light or for fast action. Maybe the iPhone 5 is marginally better than this, but I've played with my family's new iPhones and IMO the camera is still just a phone camera. If I wanted to take a good picture I'd bring something else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well no camera will ever be like buying a nikon but getting normal point&shoot quality pics isn't much to ask for, nokias are able to achieve it, seems to be just a part of the phone being skimped on. Nothing to stop me frfom buyin though, they are "good enough"
Sent from my Droid using xda app-developers app
docnok63 said:
Some people didn't like my review of the DNA saying that I was too harsh on the 1080p 440ppi display. How could it possibly be worse than the 720p S3 panel? Well, I think these will speak for themselves:
First a short video shot by an iPhone 4S...DNA vs S3 playing Underworld Awakening. It's a bit hard to show how much the S3 dominates because it's a video of video playback, but the most accurate part is when Selene and Michael are kissing. You can see the skin tone is MUCH better:
http://db.tt/Z597Hcuc
Then the friend with the iPhone 4S and I went out and took some shots. He's taller than me, so the angles are a bit off, but you get the idea. 4S is on the left, DNA on the right:
http://db.tt/edmZQvMD
http://db.tt/cBAcLDwo
http://db.tt/9sHcE6yO
http://db.tt/hORDltQq
http://db.tt/G3pabYog
As you can clearly see, the DNA gets smoked when it comes to color and brightness. Either I have a bad panel or sensor or this camera/video playback is just simply inferior right out the box.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude, something is definitely wrong with your lens. Half those pictures look flat out BLURRY. There are a bevy of example shots from the DNA, just google some and take a look. I'd upload some of my own if it werent for the fact they're already out there. Those pictures you took look like something my 2001 blackberry pearl took.
Theres alot of misrepresentation going around about the One's ultrapixel camera. Fact is, most people dont really understand what a technological breakthrough it really is. HTC published a white paper on it, and its good reading for anyone that is interested. Ive seen people say "Well, its just a suped up 4MP camera". Well, thats not really true. Do you all remember back when Intel released the Core 2 Duo processors? It was at the peak of the mhz war. The higher the mhz the faster the processor, right? Well, no. The Core 2 Duo was a breakthrough in showing its not just about mhz. Intel effectively showed a C2D chip at 2.5mhz was SIGNIFICANTLY faster than a previous 3.7mhz chip. Its all in the archetecture.
So, the link to the white paper is HERE. Its not super technical, but does a great job outlining why the Ultra pixel camera is different, and how its a huge leap in technology from previous cameras. Ive quoted a few notable excerpts from the paper below.
For years, a misconception among most consumers is that the higher the megapixel count, the better quality of images. Actually, the number of megapixels is only one of many factors that determine picture quality, with sensors and image processors each playing a critical role.
The 2.0 micrometer UltraPixel has effectively twice the surface area of the typical 1.4 micrometer pixel found on 8MP solutions from leading competitors and far larger than the 1.1 micrometer pixel on 13MP sensors.
In order to provide the best quality on our camera, we have designed our own HTC ImageChip 2 to perform some of the processing at the hardware level.
Aperture is the width that a camera lens opens when a picture gets taken.
Aperture is measured in f-stops, with the smallest f-stop numbers representing the largest apertures.
{
"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"
}
One of the biggest complaints about smartphone cameras has been blurry photos. There are two main reasons for this:
Length of time required to capture an image, resulting in misaligned light streams coming into the sensor.
The physical shaking of the hand while holding the camera or pressing the shutter button.
To address the first issue, HTC's camera is now capable of capturing full size photos in up to 1/48 of a second, compared to 1/30 of a second from other competitors and the HTC One X (2012). This is a significant improvement in shutter speed on a smartphone camera, producing photos and videos that are sharper and clearer in all conditions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And for those who would like an intro of how aperture works, HERE is a great link.
Yep, the One has a great image sensor for a cellphone. Sure it's pictures wont blow up as big as the S4's pictures, but these 4MP pics look great on my 55 inch G Series Panasonic plasma. I mean how much bigger do you want them? I'm not one to crop my pictures, nor am I one to use a digital zoom. My feet are my zoom (think of using a prime lens). I would like to see HTC remove the AA filter and give us just us the raw images. That would be pretty awesome, and in theory it would really show off what HTC is trying to do.
In the meantime I've been able to get some great shots, and that's good enough for me.
blackangst said:
Theres alot of misrepresentation going around about the One's ultrapixel camera. Fact is, most people dont really understand what a technological breakthrough it really is. HTC published a white paper on it, and its good reading for anyone that is interested. Ive seen people say "Well, its just a suped up 4MP camera". Well, thats not really true. Do you all remember back when Intel released the Core 2 Duo processors? It was at the peak of the mhz war. The higher the mhz the faster the processor, right? Well, no. The Core 2 Duo was a breakthrough in showing its not just about mhz. Intel effectively showed a C2D chip at 2.5mhz was SIGNIFICANTLY faster than a previous 3.7mhz chip. Its all in the archetecture.
So, the link to the white paper is HERE. Its not super technical, but does a great job outlining why the Ultra pixel camera is different, and how its a huge leap in technology from previous cameras. Ive quoted a few notable excerpts from the paper below.
And for those who would like an intro of how aperture works, HERE is a great link.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unrelated, Actually it was AMD that showed Intel that Mhz was the wrong way of looking at things. Intel turned the war around when they started thinking like AMD. AMD grabbed a lot of market share during those times. P2-PD years. Now back to the info on great camera tech
(photography geek here)
I applaud HTC's decision to back away from the megapixel war and focus on photosite size and light-gathering capabilities. Cell phones have been capable of taking decent photos in good lighting for some time, but its a rare phone that can take non-blurry, non-noise-laden photos in even most average room lighting. The typical lux ratings of the average living room are astonishingly low, actually -- it's a testament to the design of our eyes that we see so well when most cameras really struggle to gather sufficient light.
Anyway, as I said, I love the direction HTC has gone, although in reality I think they sacrificed too much resolution to reach their goal. 4MP is simply not enough in many scenarios. Go thoroughly read the in depth comparisons on some of the thorough HTC One / Galaxy S4 reviews (such as Anandtech's exhaustive review/comparo) and it becomes obvious: While the One holds a measurable advantage in low-light scenarios, its lack of resolution often negates any benefits that it offers. Given equivalent exposure, competitors' 8-13MP images can be downsampled to match the 4MP max output of the One, generally reducing the effect of visible noise, while offering vastly improved sharpness and details.
And the output from the One in low light, medium-high ISO situations is not nearly as clean or sharp as you would think based on the "Ultrapixel" claims. Any base, entry-model, bare bones point and shoot camera would outperform it in areas of detail, clarity, noise handling and dynamic range.
Still, it's true that the One can absolutely enable shots in extremely low lighting situations that other camera phones simply can't capture at all due to the limitations of their apertures and ISO ceilings. But in average low-light scenarios, the One isn't as far ahead of the competition as you would think after reading that white paper (don't forget, "white paper" is industry code for "scientific sounding paid advertisement").
All this said, I love the One and its camera, flaws and all. The fact that it enables me to get keepers, even if not the best, in situations when other camera phones would simply produce a dark, blurred mess, makes the tradeoff worth it. And since most of my phone photos go to a typical web gallery (i.e. - not huge printed output), the results are acceptable.
In the end, my point is simply that while HTC has gone in an excellent direction, they need to strike a better balance between sensor & photosite size and resolution. Other improvements, such as moving away from plastic lens elements, improved processing algorithms, etc would make up for a lot as well. A 6-8MP HTC One with Apple's sapphire lens elements and a little better image processing (HTC cameras simply struggle to nail colors and sharpness in auto mode, IMHO) would be ideal.
You're giving too much credit when you are using your core 2 duo analogy.
Yes i would choose a 4mp ultrapixel over a regular 4mp cellphone camera
but not to a 13mp 8mp even 6mp camera.
Point blank with a 4mp HTC One you still have 4mp and any zooming on a picture you take will lead to major blur. Esp if you are taking pictures to read text
I really like what HTC did with the camera but if I had to choose to swap that camera I would swap it with the 13mp on the oppo 5.
seattletecg said:
You're giving too much credit when you are using your core 2 duo analogy.
Yes i would choose a 4mp ultrapixel over a regular 4mp cellphone camera
but not to a 13mp 8mp even 6mp camera.
Point blank with a 4mp HTC One you still have 4mp and any zooming on a picture you take will lead to major blur. Esp if you are taking pictures to read text
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I totally disagree with this. My 8mp Nexus 4 takes crappy shots compared to my HTC one. Zoomed in shots of the same locations still look much better on the One also (I have been comparing the last 3 days). This to me proves that the number of pixel count means absolutely nothing in camera phones at this time.
I read every review online I could find of the cameras comparing the HTC one and GS4, and I was really shocked. The GS4 took some good detailed images but it didn't blow away the HTC One like I thought it would considering it has 9mp more. And in actuality all action shots taken between the two were won by the HTC One as the GS4 camera could not figure out what to focus on. This also proves that camera software makes a big difference.
So judging a camera by pixel count alone and not other factors will really invalidate your theory of bigger equals better as there is a lot more than "pixel size" that makes the difference of a camera phone.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA premium
Monk4Life said:
I totally disagree with this. My 8mp Nexus 4 takes crappy shots compared to my HTC one. Zoomed in shots of the same locations still look much better on the One also (I have been comparing the last 3 days). This to me proves that the number of pixel count means absolutely nothing in camera phones at this time.
I read every review online I could find of the cameras comparing the HTC one and GS4, and I was really shocked. The GS4 took some good detailed images but it didn't blow away the HTC One like I thought it would considering it has 9mp more. And in actuality all action shots taken between the two were won by the HTC One as the GS4 camera could not figure out what to focus on. This also proves that camera software makes a big difference.
So judging a camera by pixel count alone and not other factors will really invalidate your theory of bigger equals better as there is a lot more than "pixel size" that makes the difference of a camera phone. As I said in my prev post the oppo 5 camera would be the best thing for me. I think that phone has the best smartphone camera.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In reality I think it would of been better for a higher mp camera. This was taken with night mode, a lot of the pics I take has noise to it thanks to the 4mp camera that the one has.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2
Monk4Life said:
I totally disagree with this. My 8mp Nexus 4 takes crappy shots compared to my HTC one. Zoomed in shots of the same locations still look much better on the One also (I have been comparing the last 3 days). This to me proves that the number of pixel count means absolutely nothing in camera phones at this time.
I read every review online I could find of the cameras comparing the HTC one and GS4, and I was really shocked. The GS4 took some good detailed images but it didn't blow away the HTC One like I thought it would considering it has 9mp more. And in actuality all action shots taken between the two were won by the HTC One as the GS4 camera could not figure out what to focus on. This also proves that camera software makes a big difference.
So judging a camera by pixel count alone and not other factors will really invalidate your theory of bigger equals better as there is a lot more than "pixel size" that makes the difference of a camera phone.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know how well the nexus 4 camera is. But take pictures with the one with text in the distance and try to see how sharp that text is. I use my note 2 to take pictures of say phone numbers of houses for sale while i'm driving. I do the same with my htc one and I"m not able to make out the text. Also look at pictures on the web of htc one pics and look at pictures with words in the distance. No matter how you look at it its still 4 megapixels
---------- Post added at 05:58 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:40 AM ----------
gsm............arena.com/samsung_galaxy_s4_vs_htc_one-review-913p8.php
Great read. Inspired to look at old photos from my GS2, and its f-stop and "bokeh" ability.
Thanks a lot, will be late for work tmw morning
Why didn't HTC just make an 8 or 12 ultra pixel since everyone is saying the 4 makes blurry pictures when you zoom in? Why would HTC put a bad/average sensor in a flagship device? Are they saving the 8 or 12 ultra pixel for the HTC Two when it comes out next year? Can there even be an 8 ultra pixel? I'm just curious. I'm happy with the photos my One takes.
Sent from my HTC One
This is the starting, watch next year in HTC's next flagship(hopes for the best).
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2
yes they will get better, next year maybe a 6 ultra pixel or 8 would be the best but maybe years off.
I have to say I am super disappointed with the camera, its the one thing that makes me want the GS4, I am hoping some software mods can help, but I doubt it.
The camera just plain sucks. By far the worst thing about this phone. Good thing I got $ 100 rebate and a free car dock to kinda make up for it.
Ultrapixel is just a word they made up to hide the fact that its a 4 mp camera. The slightly larger sensor isn't doing it any favors. I have an old Sony 4 mp camera that blows this away.
Sent from my HTC One using xda app-developers app
shabazz18 said:
The camera just plain sucks. By far the worst thing about this phone. Good thing I got $ 100 rebate and a free car dock to kinda make up for it.
Ultrapixel is just a word they made up to hide the fact that its a 4 mp camera. The slightly larger sensor isn't doing it any favors. I have an old Sony 4 mp camera that blows this away.
Sent from my HTC One using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, its funny I installed Camera FX, and the pictures are 100% better, very clear not all fuzzy. Lol HTC cant make a camera that works better than a generic camera app. lol
veliksam said:
Why didn't HTC just make an 8 or 12 ultra pixel since everyone is saying the 4 makes blurry pictures when you zoom in? Why would HTC put a bad/average sensor in a flagship device? Are they saving the 8 or 12 ultra pixel for the HTC Two when it comes out next year? Can there even be an 8 ultra pixel? I'm just curious. I'm happy with the photos my One takes.
Sent from my HTC One
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Zoom with your feet instead of using the digital zoom. I'd prefer the Nokia camera, but this is a close second in my book. I look at pictures on my phone, laptop, and tv. These 4MP pictures look just fine on all three.
Sent from my HTC One using xda premium
For all you guys debating if the 4mp is good or not, look at the development of DSLRs. I've had people complain about my 10mp 4/3 camera have less mp than their LG but my camera definitely takes a whole lot better pictures.
Sensor size is all I have to say.
One also has an advantage of having an optical image stabilizer which is a whole lot better than digital.
Higher megapixel count is better for cropping. I'm supprised they haven't yet developed cropping zoom, which 4mp of a 13mp is about 3x zoom with no distortion. Also using the mp count would be good for cropped digital stabilization.
4mp is enough for Facebook and other things because Facebook takes 2mp 2048x1xxx on high quality, so even if needed, you can still crop out half the picture without distortion.
My only complaint about the One's camera is that it has a preference for ramping up the iso and using stabilization instead of the great flash in darker pictures.
Sent from my HTC One using xda app-developers app
FxCamera by Bitcellar Inc. is free from the market and fantastic. It has made every phone cam capture better than stock pics with all the phones and tablets I have used.
For unlocked users, you guys should try a custom rom on 1.29. Increases quality greatly.
veliksam said:
Why didn't HTC just make an 8 or 12 ultra pixel since everyone is saying the 4 makes blurry pictures when you zoom in? Why would HTC put a bad/average sensor in a flagship device? Are they saving the 8 or 12 ultra pixel for the HTC Two when it comes out next year? Can there even be an 8 ultra pixel? I'm just curious. I'm happy with the photos my One takes.
Sent from my HTC One
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem is in the size of the pixels.
You can only fit so many pixels on a cameraphone, the lens is only so big. So with a lower pixel count, you lose clarity but you have bigger pixels. bigger pixels let in more light which makes the pictures brighter in low lighting conditions. HTC looked at the data and saw that people were using their cameras for:
- selfies
-pictures of food in restaurants
- pictures with friends
- more selfies
-etc etc
and they were uploading them to:
- facebook (which has a ****ty resolution cap i think its 2mp or something)
- instagram (smaller cap then facebook)
-twitter (see above)
so on paper it makes sense for them to go this way. The majority of their customers dont need 13mp, they're never going to use 13mp.
So for what it is, I think they made the right move. That being said, being a 30 year old tech junkie I would have preferred 13mp not for the count but because pictures do look significantly clearer on say the SGS4 compared to the One in normal lighting conditions. But its not something to go up in arms about. At this point, whatever keeps HTC afloat I'm all for it.
First very thorough camera shootout between the three phones and Camera Phone (Samsung Zoom)
http://connect.dpreview.com/post/44...1-vs-nokia1020-vs-lgg2-vs-samsunggalaxys4zoom
oneguyks said:
First very thorough camera shootout between the three phones and Camera Phone (Samsung Zoom)
http://connect.dpreview.com/post/44...1-vs-nokia1020-vs-lgg2-vs-samsunggalaxys4zoom
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok. I must be blind but in the first set of shots the g2 captures better details than the nokia. The nokia has better color reproduction, though.
Also the images are all at different distances...
Overall it looks like the zoom is the best picture taker. While the lg can come off as soft its still a capable shooter that could get better with software updates...
And that's where support comes in, my experience with LG support is sketchy at best... The camera has great potential but could really use some (software) tweaking. QUestion is if LG will live up to that task...
Hella tough to pick a winner from the review above btw, they all have something to say for them
They may very well be at a slight difference in distance from subject, compounded by the lens differences. Its never a simple matter to get a camera comparison to be equal in all respects. This isnt trying to compare 50mm prime lens on the same test body after all.
The results are as you might expect. The nokia sony and samsung devices are more dedicated to camera performance and those companies have more expertise in that arena.
If we are lucky there will be some improvement to the camera from LG or rom tweaks, but in any case the g2 camera takes fine pictures for a smartphone. This review is what I expected based on specs and track records of the companies.
They should have put S4 i9505 instead of zoom
Darkestred said:
Also the images are all at different distances......
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Images are not taken at different distances. Some phones have wider focal length lens so they will have wider field of view. Also, camera with more MP will look to be zoomed in more as obviously they have more mega pixels!
This has nothing to do with distances.
oneguyks said:
Images are not taken at different distances. Some phones have wider focal length lens so they will have wider field of view. Also, camera with more MP will look to be zoomed in more as obviously they have more mega pixels!
This has nothing to do with distances.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Upon further inspection that could be a big portion of the 2nd set of shots but if that is the case I would have thought the nokia would look completely different on their far shots but it nearly matches up with each phone.
I have Z1 and a S4 Zoom and. So disappointed in my Xperia z1, the S4 Zoom wins by a mile when it comes to camera quality and outcome of pictures even though Sony boasts the Xperia z1 has 20.7mp on it. Don't believe the hype. S4 Zoom IMO has the best camera for a smartphone.
Sent from my C6903 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
B[]GDAWG said:
I have Z1 and a S4 Zoom and. So disappointed in my Xperia z1, the S4 Zoom wins by a mile when it comes to camera quality and outcome of pictures even though Sony boasts the Xperia z1 has 20.7mp on it. Don't believe the hype. S4 Zoom IMO has the best camera for a smartphone.
Sent from my C6903 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's because the s4 zoom is really a camera with an Android OS. It's a horrendous smart phone. All the rest are fantastic smart phones with cameras having a decent consideration. The s4 zoom is actually kind of stupid, it gets smoked by a ton of phones and its camera gets smoked by tons of cheaper point and shoots with a ton more features at a lower price point.
Sent from my LG-G2 using Tapatalk 2
LG G2 better in many ways.:good:
Magadaga said:
LG G2 better in many ways.:good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, well nope. Nokias have the best cameras IMHO. To be honest, I'm slightly disappointed in G2's camera. It's good and all, but it's been hyped a lot, so I expected something better. I don't complain though, these are smartphones after all.
Anyway, doesn't somebody know how could one play with the camera settings? Like tweaking and stuff, like xdabbeb's camera mod. I can't really figure out which files store the preferences and such.
oneguyks said:
First very thorough camera shootout between the three phones and Camera Phone (Samsung Zoom)
http://connect.dpreview.com/post/44...1-vs-nokia1020-vs-lgg2-vs-samsunggalaxys4zoom
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What a crap are the pictures taken by cellphones, horrible. This give you an idea how Nokia sponsors DPREVIEW. The color reproduction of Nokia and Samsung are totally off, horrible. The best of 4 is Sony with it faster lenses and color reproduction similar to LG, better skin tones with Sony and LG by long compared to Samsung and Nokia, the Nokia colors are the worse. LG has a very heavy noise reduction because its really small sensor, the smallest of the 4.
The G2 night escene shoot was bad mettered.
Last word, is incredible that the people that did the image size test in DPREVIEW was so bad done. They should have resized the images to the smallest resolution for the comparison.
---------- Post added at 01:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:03 PM ----------
B[]GDAWG said:
S4 Zoom IMO has the best camera for a smartphone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not agree with you, has very bad colors, slower lens and don't expect any descent picture (I can not say quality because you can not get quality out of a smartphone) with a zoom of 24-240, you wont even find a professional lens with that focal length difference.
Thanks HTC for bring a bigger mp camera to a phone that's suppose to be the little brother of the m8.........
http://mobile.theverge.com/2014/5/...tes-the-companys-flagship-phone-in-a-trimmed
...because we're ALWAYS complaining about the MP on our camera when we just upload the photos to instagram and fb..
You can't say that for ALL users. A lot of people don't need a expensive camera to take pics. Especially if you want to use that pic past Facebook etc. All I'm saying is instead of adding a second camera. HTC could have added more to the m8 to help keep it from being the same camera with a second camera. End of the day 4mp camera is a 4mp camera
When I want to use my pics past loading onto social apps. I use my note 3. But if I want to use this pic to upload then yes either my m8 or note 3 will do the job just fine
Sent from my SM-N900A using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
I'll agree that what smartphone camera is "better" depends on how you in particular use the camera. But just because a camera has more MP, does not make it "better" either. We'll have to wait and see if the camera on the One Mini 2 actually yields better quality images than the M8.
Unless you are blowing up or cropping photos a lot, 13 MP is too much and a joke for a camera phone. High MP smartphone cameras really struggle in low light. And unless you are taking pictures outdoors in broad daylight, its often low light.
I'll agree that HTC probably should not have opted for the dual camera on the M8. Kinda cool at times, but also pretty gimmicky. The money probably would have been better spent improving image quality on the single rear camera (even if not to increase the MP).
It's kinda a slap in the face to a certain degree. Here is the new m8 with the same camera with a secondary camera which is mostly gimmicky while nice at the same time. Then they decide to make the new HTC one mini from a 5 mp camera to a 13MP camera...........
Now will it have better pics? Probably not or probably so. For most people it don't matter, but after being in retail when trying to sell a customer the one the camera is its downside cause on PAPER the 4mp camera doesn't sound good at all compared to the other smartphones out in the market. People will buy the mini 2 because of it has higher mp count than the m8. While the m8 blows the mini in other specs that 13MP camera looks a lot better to somebody who doesn't care to have the latest and greatest specs.
While a higher mp count doesn't make a camera phone any better yes, but why bring the same thing to the table for your flagship but have a mid range phone with a better spec camera on paper WHEN it comes to mp count. .
Sent from my SM-N900A using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
903tex said:
but after being in retail when trying to sell a customer the one the camera is its downside cause on PAPER the 4mp camera doesn't sound good at all compared to the other smartphones out in the market. People will buy the mini 2 because of it has higher mp count than the m8.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unfortunately, Average Joe is always going to fall for that marketing gimmick of chasing big numbers, without having any real understanding of what they mean. How many times have you seen someone with a fancy, big screen 1080p TV; and the owner just has a standard definition program on it; and not even in the right aspect ratio (so the picture is all stretched out to fill the screen). That kinda crap drives me crazy!
I for one applaud HTC for turning their nose up at the megapixel arms race. Its gotten absurd. I mean seriously, do we really need a smartphone with a 41 MP camera? Of course not (I understand its actually a really good camera, but not because its 41 MP).
903tex said:
While a higher mp count doesn't make a camera phone any better yes, but why bring the same thing to the table for your flagship but have a mid range phone with a better spec camera on paper WHEN it comes to mp count. .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is a really good point. Why push a certain marketing strategy (and one that particularly bucks the trend) for one device, then do nearly the exact opposite for another device.
In any case, I don't think that the Mini 2 will really compete directly with the M8. Price point alone, even the Average Joe Blow is going to know its a flagship versus a "budget" phone. Don't know about the One Mini in particular, but for the most part, any HTC phone aside from the "flagship" tends to sell in extremely low numbers. At least here in the US (don't know about other regions).
redpoint73 said:
Unfortunately, Average Joe is always going to fall for that marketing gimmick of chasing big numbers, without having any real understanding of what they mean. How many times have you seen someone with a fancy, big screen 1080p TV; and the owner just has a standard definition program on it; and not even in the right aspect ratio (so the picture is all stretched out to fill the screen). That kinda crap drives me crazy!
I for one applaud HTC for turning their nose up at the megapixel arms race. Its gotten absurd. I mean seriously, do we really need a smartphone with a 41 MP camera? Of course not (I understand its actually a really good camera, but not because its 41 MP).
That is a really good point. Why push a certain marketing strategy (and one that particularly bucks the trend) for one device, then do nearly the exact opposite for another device.
In any case, I don't think that the Mini 2 will really compete directly with the M8. Price point alone, even the Average Joe Blow is going to know its a flagship versus a "budget" phone. Don't know about the One Mini in particular, but for the most part, any HTC phone aside from the "flagship" tends to sell in extremely low numbers. At least here in the US (don't know about other regions).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The same reason we need 4k Tv's and 2k screen on smartphones. To keep making them money lol! Exactly why say your not going to follow the trend but all your other phones are right in the trend? Lol but HTC could have tried a little harder for the m8 speaking of the camera of course. The phone is rock solid but don't have these commercials making fun of these mp trends and being different when your other devices join right in with today's trends.
Sent from my SM-N900A using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Some of my favorite shots have come from the camera on my M8. In terms of higher quality, I'm actually looking at the Sony G Lens, since it is supposed to take really nice shots, and is $200 at my local best buy.
Some people such as my self want a phone with camera and some prefer cameras that can be used as a phone.
Sent from my HTC One_M8 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
903tex said:
You can't say that for ALL users. A lot of people don't need a expensive camera to take pics. Especially if you want to use that pic past Facebook etc. All I'm saying is instead of adding a second camera. HTC could have added more to the m8 to help keep it from being the same camera with a second camera. End of the day 4mp camera is a 4mp camera
When I want to use my pics past loading onto social apps. I use my note 3. But if I want to use this pic to upload then yes either my m8 or note 3 will do the job just fine
Sent from my SM-N900A using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If I want to use my pics for something worthwhile, I use my Canon EOS.. otherwise I use a crappy phone camera.
lets all cut the crap. the camera is nice on the M8 and i do agree. to a certain degree. mega pixels don't make the camera. but it sucks for details when blowing up pictures or zooming we dont need 20 mp. but i think we should have something alittle higher
daddioj said:
lets all cut the crap. the camera is nice on the M8 and i do agree. to a certain degree. mega pixels don't make the camera. but it sucks for details when blowing up pictures or zooming we dont need 20 mp. but i think we should have something alittle higher
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
reviews for the one mini 2 have started surfacing. in ideal conditions it is resolving a lot more detail, by a huge margin. but anything other than ideal and the m8 takes it.
i think the 2.0 pixel size is great and all, but i think we couldve benefited a lot for 1.8 sized pixels and an extra megapixel. that configuration shouldn't lead to a large camera hump.
i'm happy with what i got either way, i do miss the old OIS from my old m7. but whatever, the m8 has proven to be a capable shooter. and my nx300 is always on stand by in case i need a real camera
Any advice on rooting the Mini 2. I receive it tomorrow from carphone warehouse (379sterling.) Has the original Mini gained from official CM11 support thus far?
Any insight on how to root my forthcoming mini 2 and gaining cwm and porting roms would be greatly appreciated.
Does anyone know what phone o could potentially port from for the Mini 2.
How difficult to root and install a custom cwm recovery?
Hello community!
I have just bought the new HTC One Mini 2, it is locked with EE network. It looks like I am unable to get the unlock code anywhere. Do you have any suggestion or advice?
Wrong board
what sucks is having a super light sensitive camera.. while living in Florida. It's always bright unless you paint your windows black.
So what if it has a camera with higher MPs. That doesn't make it a better phone than m8. Unless HTC comes up with a device having the same internals as the m8 but a better camera resolution, I don't see what is there to fuss about.
mindmajick said:
what sucks is having a super light sensitive camera.. while living in Florida. It's always bright unless you paint your windows black.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not so sure that having a more sensitive sensor (while better for low light situations) necessarily means that there will be too much light in bright situations. The camera controls the sensitivity (ISO based on the old "film speed" terminology) as well as the aperture (f-stop). It might be that the automatic exposure that the camera is trying to achieve (balance between ISO, aperture and shutter time) is too bright for your local conditions. In which case, you can manually lower the exposure by tapping the 3-top menu button in the camera app, tap EV and lower the exposure value.
redpoint73 said:
I'm not so sure that having a more sensitive sensor (while better for low light situations) necessarily means that there will be too much light in bright situations. The camera controls the sensitivity (ISO based on the old "film speed" terminology) as well as the aperture (f-stop). It might be that the automatic exposure that the camera is trying to achieve (balance between ISO, aperture and shutter time) is too bright for your local conditions. In which case, you can manually lower the exposure by tapping the 3-top menu button in the camera app, tap EV and lower the exposure value.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've messed with all the settings. I appreciate the feedback though...
Unfortunately, if i have any picture with a bright spot from the sun the whole picture gets washed out. Full indoor is fine and full outdoor is fine. But daytime pictures indoors with sun coming in the window- washed out. Granted- if i still lived in Philly (or most parts of the country) i doubt it would be an issue.
mindmajick said:
I've messed with all the settings. I appreciate the feedback though...
Unfortunately, if i have any picture with a bright spot from the sun the whole picture gets washed out. Full indoor is fine and full outdoor is fine. But daytime pictures indoors with sun coming in the window- washed out. Granted- if i still lived in Philly (or most parts of the country) i doubt it would be an issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any camera will have issues if there are areas in the frame which are very bright, or spotty lighting (mix of bright and darker spots). Or does it seem worse with the phone? Often forcing the focus to a different spot by tapping the screen helps a lot.
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.