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