Database Info

[REQ][APPS]Are there any picture viewer apps...?

That DON'T distort when zooming in?
Here's an image:
http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/7324/b1floor1.jpg
Here's what it looks like at MAX ZOOM using the stock Gallery app:
{
"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"
}
Is there any app that doesn't absolutely destroy the image like this when zooming in? (Why the hell did Google do this crap...)
Any other solutions on the Windows side would be welcome too. (I tried printing to pdf, and printing to 17x22 scaled up, but still looks like garbage when zoomed in on the phone, yet perfect on my PC. Any other ideas?)

Following this subject with interest. noticed my pics from my nikon g11 looked like crap in gallery as well, while beautyful on my computer.

I thought it was just my pictures.
I couldn't understand it as they were taken with £700 Digital SLR.
Thinking about it now they are pixel perfect on my PC also.
Hmmm, disturbing this one.

Great, it's not just me!

Yes I'm having trouble with this too

This is a travesty

Look for Multi-touch Gallery in market

Here are Nemoplayer from acer liquid . works just fine on the N1 \ with widget.
http://www.4shared.com/file/211592145/72dee349/NemoPlayer.html
Thanks to Eugene.

Ryanmo5 said:
Look for Multi-touch Gallery in market
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, this works a little bit better. Unfortunately, I think this is just an Android limitation.
I did find however, that if I zoomed in on my PC, took a print screen, saved as another png, and then used pinch and zoom on the new image on my phone, it did not distort at all, finally. Quite a hassle, but I guess Android just doesn't like zooming.

It's asinine to load up a 2,000px X 2,000px image in it's entirety to dsiplay on an 800x600 screen.
The gallery probably downscales it to 800x600 size and zooms in on that temporary scaled picture.
(substitiute 800x600 with whatever resolution the nexus is)

muncheese said:
It's asinine to load up a 2,000px X 2,000px image in it's entirety to dsiplay on an 800x600 screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I disagree. It should display the exact picture that I have.
The gallery probably downscales it to 800x600 size and zooms in on that temporary scaled picture.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. There should be no "temporarily scaled picture". The picture is *physically and actually* changed, which should not be happening.
Especially on this so called "Superphone", there should be no reason that it mutilates pictures so that pixels are completely destroyed when zooming in.

quick question that doesn't need its own thread.
I am trying to install the Nemo Player .apk
When I download the file it downloaded as nemoplayer.apk.zip So I tried in my terminal while in fastboot ./adb-mac install nemoplayer.apk.zip and it said it could find the file. I had the file in the SD card, and in my SDK folder. And I also tried astro, but that didn't work either.
Can anyone point me in the right direction?
Cheers!

clandest said:
quick question that doesn't need its own thread.
I am trying to install the Nemo Player .apk
When I download the file it downloaded as nemoplayer.apk.zip So I tried in my terminal while in fastboot ./adb-mac install nemoplayer.apk.zip and it said it could find the file. I had the file in the SD card, and in my SDK folder. And I also tried astro, but that didn't work either.
Can anyone point me in the right direction?
Cheers!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unzip it

So I've noticed that with Multitouch Gallery, the picture is the clearest of all when zooming in, but still distorts if it's TOO wide or very square.
It will always attempt to fit the width of picture in the width of the phone. So best bet is to have a picture that's very tall and very slim. A square picture or an extremely wide picture is the worst, and will look absolutely terrible when zooming in.
The fact that Google coded it so that it absolutely must fit width-wize, and then distort when zooming in, is absolutely stupid.

Bump, for that banding thread

Hi everybody,
i've founded Picturen lite on Market, very simple and full quality image showing.
Perfect for me.

Jack'O said:
Hi everybody,
i've founded Picturen lite on Market, very simple and full quality image showing.
Perfect for me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I use quick pick. In my opinion its one of the best
Sent from my HTC EVO 3D X515m using Tapatalk

elevation_2 said:
I use quick pick. In my opinion its one of the best
Sent from my HTC EVO 3D X515m using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've tried it also, IMHO Picturen Lite is better.

Didn't think anything could eat quick pic. Will give pic lite a go. Cheers

Not eat I meant beat

Pictures taken with xt720

Since mighty Zn5 i have greatest respect for Motorola camera phones. Soon enough I hope I will change my X10 for xt720.
I would like to see your shots and hear your thoughts about xt720 cam, cause its a shame that this phone doesn't have thread like this of its own.
Thanks

actually the photos taken are not as good as it's counterparts..

well, only photos taken with xt720 you can find on internet are those on Esato forum http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/index.php?make=Motorola&model=MilestoneXT720 and most of them are mediocre except those indoors which are excellent. Majority of other photos, are taken from car or something, so they dont represent true quality. So I wanted to see some representative specimen here

If you check out XT720 reviews, most of them have pics from the camera (for the purpose of the review). I find the camera is pretty good (amazing with the flash in dark environments).

syrenz said:
If you check out XT720 reviews, most of them have pics from the camera (for the purpose of the review). I find the camera is pretty good (amazing with the flash in dark environments).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes I am aware fo that, but those photos are quickly taken during 1-2 days needed for review. But when you use cell and know its strenghts and weakneses you tend to make much better pictures. General story about xt720 camera is, pictures are mediocre, it has shutter lag bla bla bla etc. in which I dont believe according to few samples and specs of camera.
In some cases I like x10 camera, but I dislike: fake colours, low sharpness, idiotic flash, poor night mode, slow interface etc.
Check this xt720 picture out
{
"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"
}
Amazing sharpness even strong light goes directly in lens

I don't believe the quality of the pics are bad, they tend to look great for me for the most part. Shutter lag is there kind of though (sometimes takes a good moment for it to take the picture after pressing the button) .

and what camera apps do you use?
i has been using the stock app but found out that it compressed the jpeg file too much...

shutter lag as if "time between pressing shutter and actual taking of the photo"? And how big it is? half second, 1 sec?
I ve read somewhere that nightmode is not functioning at all, that its like normal mode + flash, not like normal nightmode with higher iso and exposure?
Post images

xt has good camera quality (I would say better than ZN5)
I don't know of what shutter lag are everybody talking about, but the only lag is happening when you take first picture with xenon flash (this is normal behavior because flash capacitor needs to fill up)
it has very good macro mode, light metering is great (ZN5 would burn some photos with xenon, but with xt this is not case)
auto focus is really quick, and noise is acceptable (mind you this is not camera, but cameraphone )

I fully agree with pajo.
This is a great camera and all functions well. I do notice the shutter lag, but it only happens SOMEtimes, 99% of the time there is no lag. So that 1 time it does happen is not worth mentioning. I use the stock app btw.
I also dunno what people are talking about the modes. Night mode doesn't work? Then why does it work fine here? Same for macro. Also works. Everything in the camera works (I use Dexter 2.2 btw, but even on stock 2.1 it works fine).
I love this phone and the camera

well since I consider Zn5 to be best camera phone after N8, than you put up quite a challeng here . Go post some night landscapes and normal night shots so I can see quality.
Btw concerning HDMI, is it only for playing videos, or you can use TV for playing games, browsing etc.?

Disappointed with the camera quality
Actually I have XT720 with standard OS 2.1
I'm VERY disappointed with quality of pictures.
Here is some comparison I made between my NEW 8Mpixel XT720 and my OLD 5Mpixel Nokia N95.
Please check at attached pictures (name of the pictures should be self explanatory)
Now you really think the camera is good....
I also compared the phone with Sony X10 and Samsung "latest galaxy something" and the worst quality is with Motorola XT720
If you want more test (even more official) take a look at
GSMarena website where they have picture comparison of latest cameraphone and, please, address me to a phone that is worst that XT720.
I just have a question:
Is the camera performing better with 2.2 Update?
Thanks

Teaching an old Dog new Tricks - How to build a DIY 3D Camera from two HD2’s

Firmware Upgrades are one way to revitalize old Hardware but we are still limited by the Hardware itself. So what best to do before donating the Device to XDA? How about a single dedicated usage like a DIY 3D Camera?
{
"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"
}
After careful consideration and plenty of “3D is not important for my decision” talk I decided on a Samsung 46” LCD 400Mhz 3D Capable TV. What a beauty and 3D came as a bonus with two glasses included. Unfortunately free content is rare so I thought and I set out to search for more material. As I soon found out Stereography has been around since the 1840’s. There is an abundance of Tools and Material you just have to find it.
I also realized there are a whole bunch of 3D Standards but found the Half-SBS (Side-by-Side) function to work best for me. This brought up an idea. I still had two HD2’s laying around and I figured from what I read Stereoscopy is really not that much more than taking two pictures side by side at the same time. Easy enough I used my 20 year old Stockis/Mechano set to construct a crude frame for the HD2’s.
It took a couple of tries to get the rig to be easy enough to carry with me and take pictures simultaneously. An Android or Windows Mobile App to synch the Cameras would be nice to have but for now it works fine manually. Up to this point I really didn’t expect too much from my contraption. Once I had the rig done I took some test pictures, hooked the Phones up to the Computer and transferred the files. With the “StereoPhoto Maker” for Windows I created the final Stereo Pictures and transferred them to the TV. Among other things I suggest you try Auto Alignment to optimize the 3D Image.
Eager to see the results I turned to my TV, put on my Glasses, and Voila a perfect 3D Image. I can now capture the world in 3 Dimensions and all this without going bankrupt in this dimension. Off course a little adjustment and practice in taking 3D Pictures will most likely be need to get the best results. Here are a few Tips and Tricks to get you started.
Intra-axial distance on 3D Cameras:
The intra-axial distance is the distance between the lenses of the Camera. Two HD2’s next to each other have a Intra-axial distance of 7cm. The average human intra-axial distance is 6.35cm. Furthermore the distance from the Camera to an Object should at least be 30x the intra-axial distance.
Optimal Average: > 1.90m
Optimal for HD2’s: > 2.10m
​
The Concept of Parallax on a modern 3D LCD TV:
The Distance an Object is felt from the Screen. Whereas the Screen has a zero or neutral Parallax.
Negative Parallax (comes out of the Screen)
Object shift -15pp to the left to get a negative Parallax effect.
Positive Parallax (goes into the Screen)
Object shift +12pp to the right to get a positive Parallax effect.
Objects are best felt as 3D when at the bottom of the image the objects come from the outside to the inside and at the top from the inside to the outside. Never the other way around or you will get a headache looking at the pictures in 3D.
HD2 / Phone Camera Tips:
The HD2 Camera is good enough to take these kind of pictures but you are preaty much limited to good light conditions. I prefer Portrait Pictures on my 46" TV. Turn off the Flashlight it will make a simultaneous pictures much easier to take.
3D Films with DIY 3D Camera
For 3D Films the timing is absolutly crucial. Use StereoMovie Maker to auto allign, rotate, and create the final 3D Movie. See Links in next Post. In order to keep it the picture sharp move the Camera slowly and stay atleast 2.10m away from the Object.

Reserved for more Information
Samples for comparison:
HD2 DIY 3D Camera Sample Image (Right click and select "Save As")
Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS20 3D Sample Image (Right click and select "Save As")
Software Resources:
http://www.stereomaker.net (Everything you ever needed for 3D) - Great work from Masuji SUTO
Stereoscopic Google Earth
StereoPhoto Maker (Software for 3D Images)
StereoMovie Maker (Software for 3D Movies)
Stereo Web Browser, 3D Galleries, Java Applets, Viewers, etc.
Other Resources:
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereo_camera (3D Camera at wikipedia.org)
• http://3dfilmtutorials.com/the-flip-flop-of-negative-and-positive-parallax (Parallax)

For what else can old Phones be used for?
Backup Cameras for Cars
GPS Tracking Beacons
View Finder for Telescopes/Binoculars
Webcam
IP Surveillance Camera
XMBC Remote
The list seems endless. I wonder what other creative ideas people can come up with.

you are one awesome guy!

Placeholder for another DIY Project
rajalm29 said:
you are one awesome guy!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks I appreciate the kind words but on a Site like XDA I am just a very small light. But I guess I have to take what I can.
I will replace this Post later on with the information for a "HD2 Binocular Viewer". Another little DIY Project I am working on.

Question S22 camera [Suspicious moon photos]

Hey gang,
I would love a developer or anyone in the know to investigate this potential bull**** moon filter that kicks in automatically when you zoom in on the moon. This first came to my attention on the Note 9. Basically it looks like the camera app is detecting the moon phase, then after a bright flash it loads the appropriate phase image.
While zooming in, the light and fuzziness just goes away and you have this clear image and no light, no stars or clouds, just this prefect moon shot. Tonight o tested through a dirty window and I got the same clear photo. I took two and noticed they are different hues between the shots. So.... anyone already know what's up or care to investigate? Maybe there's some moon phases photos in a directory somewhere.
If you need anything from me please hit me up.
Thank you
{
"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"
}

I remember reading posts from Samsung users claiming the moon pics from Samsung phones are very much real, unlike the ones from Huawei and other Chinese brands.
I'm not an expert on the matter because I never cared much about this stuff, personally I always thought all brands use some sort of AI for the moon shots.

The moon is super bright, when I focus my DSLR with a zoom lens on the moon I can't see any stars as well. To photograph the moon the camera uses daylight shutter settings.

ryant35 said:
The moon is super bright, when I focus my DSLR with a zoom lens on the moon I can't see any stars as well. To photograph the moon the camera uses daylight shutter settings.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh ****, on a DSLR too huh? Maybe this is just how it works then. Thank you

JAH0707 said:
Oh ****, on a DSLR too huh? Maybe this is just how it works then. Thank you
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At night, the moon is the brightest object in the sky. The human eye can compensate for the difference which allows us to see stars and moon at the same time. Most DSLR cameras and all phone cameras are not sophisticated enough to allow both stars and the moon to be visible. Pretty much every moon shot where you see both the moon and the stars are composite shots. Where the photographer exposed for the moon then exposed for the stars. Then take both shots and overlay one on the other.

There was an article written when the s21u was first released and they compared the s21u moon shots to shots taken using a DSLR of the same time. They found that the s21u moon shots were real and there was no overlay used.

JAH0707 said:
Hey gang,
I would love a developer or anyone in the know to investigate this potential bull**** moon filter that kicks in automatically when you zoom in on the moon. This first came to my attention on the Note 9. Basically it looks like the camera app is detecting the moon phase, then after a bright flash it loads the appropriate phase image.
While zooming in, the light and fuzziness just goes away and you have this clear image and no light, no stars or clouds, just this prefect moon shot. Tonight o tested through a dirty window and I got the same clear photo. I took two and noticed they are different hues between the shots. So.... anyone already know what's up or care to investigate? Maybe there's some moon phases photos in a directory somewhere.
If you need anything from me please hit me up.
Thank you
View attachment 5658259 View attachment 5658261 View attachment 5658263 View attachment 5658265
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Photographing stars with good detail takes about 20-30 seconds. A telephoto pic of the moon takes only a fraction of a second since it's so bright so you won't see much of any star detail in the background.

Funny I just took a couple photos the other day and thought the same, then I saw this post

Huawei fakes it for sure and OP's theory is spot on for Huawei.
Samsung - Well, I didnt expect that from Samsung,

JazonX said:
Huawei fakes it for sure and OP's theory is spot on for Huawei.
Samsung - Well, I didnt expect that from Samsung,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung isn't faking it. Here is a shot I took a few weeks ago. I had to do some Lightroom work.
I've taken enough pictures of the moon to know.

If you really need to go down the rabbit hole, here is the article that confirms Samsung is not faking it unlike Huawei. - https://www.gsmarena.com/myth_debunked_samsungs_100x_zoom_doesnt_fake_moon_photos-news-47487.php

A few months late, but there is a video of someone comparing the S22's telephoto capabilities with those of the Nikon P1000 and he did confirm that the S22 applies a filter to the moon with the 30x zoom. It's pretty obvious once you see the difference side by side. If you watch the video you'll see it relatively clearly. (Just look for S22 vs P1000 on YouTube, creator is named Versus, skip to 5 minutes)
The best method to test it out for yourself is to take a photo of the moon through some treebranches. Some people tried this and got the filter to only partially cover the moon this way. 2 of the pictures posted here also have this smooth artificial look, but it seems like the AI got the colors right.

Lunar Ellipse take 1.5 months ago in Tokyo

Took this last night and did a remaster on it.. noticed a square like the moon was pasted on top of the black background... looks faked to me... 

The original picture and then remastered.

Quite possibly the reason it's "debunked" is because people that are trying to debunk it are taking pictures not pointing in the direction of the moon.. the phone does have sensors in it which let it know what direction it's facing, where its looking and so on.. so if you're taking pictures of a ping pong ball in your house... the phone knows you aren't pointing it in the actual direction of the moon..

This is interesting, this would be an awesome conspiracy. It wouldn't be too hard to debunk: find a small circular object that would match the size of the moon and brightness (use an led or a pen light), use full zoom mode, aim the phone exactly where the moon should be.

Shot some days ago with my 22U/Exynos (edited with Lightroom on Android)
Just stepped out of the door, seen the moon, seen where the plane was flying, and took my chance

phatmanxxl, could probably spoof the phones sensors to trick it into thinking it's looking at the moon.. not sure what sensors would need to be spoofed but I'm guessing gps would be one of them.

Question Could have sworn there were HDR settings, what happened to them?

Have had a couple of bright daylight shots come out like garbage, low detail low quality smudged detail. so just happened to look in settings and no HDR/+. Maybe I'm getting it mixed up with my previous pixels but could have sworn there were HDR settings in Google camera on the 6a?

Strange. Reddit says...
Google is even more cryptic.
Raw mode be your next and better option. Those will require post processing which is done using a photo app that has an adjustable contrast curve option.

Thanks! Raw wouldn't have helped this shot. looks like needed the stacking that HDR provides. making sure I'm not crazy, the option was there before, no? It's definitely still kicking in in some cases but seems somehow auto / Left up to googles algorithms. Unfortunately that leaves us with a lot of garbage shots

Compared to a Canon pro cam all smartphone cams are a pain to use and limited especially for setup options and speed. I lose a lot of shots because that. I never liked HDR's; a properly exposed shot doesn't need it. Raws give you at least 2 full f-stop exposure and WB correction.
No option to shoot multiple burst exposures at different exposure settings either on smartphones.
Even on my Samsung N10+ the HDR setting when toggled on will decide for you if it will be used. That can and does screw up shots when on... sometimes. No real control
Perhaps Google will update that missing feature soon. Rather sloppy of them. Not near as inept as their lame idea implement forced scoped storage though.
That's a bomb I'm still running Pie and 10 to evade that terror.

The issue is these tiny sensors. The photo stacking/ computational photography helps exponentially. When it doesn't kick in, it can be very bad. You're right RAW can definitely help some but there's only so much it can do. Here's two shots, one when the computational kicked in and the other apparently not. These were taken on the fly (my gf and her kid, not random people), so obviously not great composition just an example of what I mean.
{
"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"
}

Not available for pixel 4a and above. It is default ON.

damian5000 said:
The issue is these tiny sensors. The photo stacking/ computational photography helps exponentially. When it doesn't kick in, it can be very bad. You're right RAW can definitely help some but there's only so much it can do. Here's two shots, one when the computational kicked in and the other apparently not. These were taken on the fly (my gf and her kid, not random people), so obviously not great composition just an example of what I mean.
View attachment 5770083
View attachment 5770085
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not much difference.
On a raw file (or maybe even a jpeg) you could do that and better using an adjustable contrast curve with settable adjustment points. Takes a bit of practice and a color calibrated monitor.

Wow man, the difference is massive. Look again at the detail in all areas. Detail completely smudged out in the faces, the animal, the plants.

damian5000 said:
Wow man, the difference is massive. Look again at the detail in all areas. Detail completely smudged out in the faces, the animal, the plants.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah just saw that. Not sure what the cause is though. The face is messed up. I suspect it's the jpeg processing algorithm.

It's also the animal, the plant life to the right can be seen easily. This is what I'm talking about in regards to the photo stacking, what enables these tiny sensors to get decent IQ.
But also, looking at the exif, the bad shot is at 1/7200 ISO 700, that's insanely dim for these little sensors, I'm assuming the digitally brightened. I'm GUESSING I may have been moving (or they were moving) and Google algorithm decides to snap a "sport" shot rather than have something completely unusable? In the case, if so, also no time for stacking in a "sport" shot. Just a guess.
The other 1/400 ISO 45, though I'm not sure how they calculate the latter with stacking/HDR. Whether it's an average of all shots or what.

damian5000 said:
It's also the animal, the plant life to the right can be seen easily. This is what I'm talking about in regards to the photo stacking, what enables these tiny sensors to get decent IQ.
But also, looking at the exif, the bad shot is at 1/7200 ISO 700, that's insanely dim for these little sensors, I'm assuming the digitally brightened. I'm GUESSING I may have been moving (or they were moving) and Google algorithm decides to snap a "sport" shot rather than have something completely unusable? In the case, if so, also no time for stacking in a "sport" shot. Just a guess.
The other 1/400 ISO 45, though I'm not sure how they calculate the latter with stacking/HDR. Whether it's an average of all shots or what.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The cam sensor temperature can also increase the noise floor level. With the lense and sensor size as small as they are it's a wonder they can do this good. The narrow depth of focus doesn't help things either.
Cam shake may also play a role as well; the lighter the cam the less stable the shooting platform. Smartphones have no handholds. Not near as easy to shoot with compared to a pro cam and lense that weighs 5 pounds. The larger lens are easier to shoot because of the added weight.
Smartphone cams are convenient but damn I lose a lot of keepers because of them in shutter lag alone.