Database Info

Touch Pro Camera sharpness ... normal?

Hi Guys!
I'm really happy with my Touch Pro for about a month or so, but one thing really dissapoints me : the camera. Before this TP I had a N95 and it really has a great camera; fast, vivid and sharp.
I have tried virtually every available setting in the TP Camera, but I keep getting pictures that aren't really sharp. Best result is pictures taken from a short distance, but when I try to shoot for example my house or street (daylight!) it's a bit blurry.
What's with your TP camera's; are they 'great' of do you have the same impression as I do?

well the HTC company has come from far considering the camera`s.
when al the other manufactor`s like samsung or nokia had 1.3 and 2.1 MP in their phone`s, htc was still stuck with 0.3 MP in their phone`s.
second while for all the other manufactory`s the camera function was very important to them, it wasn`t for htc.
htc never was sold as a camera phone but as an PPC or PDA with a camera.
and don`t forget that a company like sony and samsung already made very good foto and video camera`s it was easy for them to implement a good camere in their phone.
so altouch you now have a nice 3.2MP with autophocus on youre HTC it stil isent a real photo camera.
it just can take picture`s and good ones for the majority of people.
still if you want to take a proffesionel looking foto you got to do it with youre real camera
personaly for me the camera in the HTC is good for a quick snapshot or a nice picture.
sure i would like to see a better camera on the Touch pro or diamond, but if it was just the good camera i wanted i was getting me a sony ericsson.
probably you did aspect more from the camera of youre HTC, and that is to bad.
maybe you did not do any research on the camera`s in the past.
or you didn`t see picture`s taken with an HTC before you bought yours and so i can understand the disappointment you are having.
but you probably haveto live with it.
there are also some settings you can adjust with, maybe you got to try it out.
point is, HTC has a camera on it but it is not the most important thing on the phone.

Are you touching the round button first to get a focus, before you depress it fully to take the shot? Lightly placing your finger on the button causes the indicator on-screen to go green, indicating focus has been achieved. If you don't do it in these two steps, the camera hasn't focussed properly and your shots will be fuzzy.
I tend to get pretty good shots with mine.
It's all there in the manual.

You really can't expect much from the pinhole camera. The focus is strictly software contrast detection fixed focus, so it will be nowhere as good as a real camera with true autofocus. Basically it's stuck at a super high aperture (fstop, like f22) so that it can focus on everything. It can't really truly "focus." With such cheap cameras, it's possible some just aren't calibrated right. I'm still waiting for those liquid lenses that were suppose to revolutionize camera phones 2 years ago or the Squiggle 5mm focusing motor.

What i found a lot of people doing is they hold the thumb over the button and hear the fake focus noise and think thats it, when it fact you have to keep your thumb there until you hear the focus beeps. Usually takes 2-3 seconds. I'm actually kinda impress how macro the focus can get. Noise is pretty bad though, you'll need to reduce the image by at least 1/4th to get rid of it via subsampling.

Thanks very much for all your quick replies!
Yep; I'm using a light touch on the button and wait for the auto-focus to become green before completely pressing. I also tried other settings like pressing once and waiting for the picture to be taken.
I complete understand your filosophy about that the HTC builds PPC's / PDA's and not camera-phones like the Sony or Nokia. In that light; the pictures of the 3.2MP camera aren't too bad.
However, I am used to carrying my phone with me everywhere and sometimes would like to take a picture without carrying my normal camera around. That was going really great with the N95; so great that most of the time I left my real camera at home. Now, with the HTC, I have to remember to carry my camera with me when I am going somewhere I might want to take a picture. That sucks in my opiniion
I did extensive research on the phone I wanted and the TP was the best match for my needs. I thought. Never thought about checking the camera-quality. Stupid me.
But... I am not thinking of getting rid of the phone because of the camera. Yet.

I don't think it's a focus problem, I think the problem is the low quality of the lens. Yes, unfortunately TP doesn't have nearly the quality of a N95 or similar, but the N series has always been about great multimedia cameraphones, which isn't TP's market. I'm not justifying the bad quality, I'm just saying I didn't expect a great camera from a professional phone.

what about the camera quality compared to a 2mp BlackBerry camera??
just curious

msmith1991 said:
what about the camera quality compared to a 2mp BlackBerry camera??
just curious
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I also have a BlackBerry Pearl from my work and its camera is about the same quality as the Touch Pro. Sometimes even a bit sharper but less colourfull. It hasn't got autofocus.

G Tablet FF Camera upgrade?

I'm just curious, and still have not found the answer I was looking for via search.
Can the 1.3mp camera be replaced with a better a 5mp camera on the G Tablet?...
Assuming The hardware exists, and that it is compatible, is possible I am sure a new kernel is needed, what about the possibility of adding 720 recording like the hd2(android version) or the nexus one?
Any thoughts would be appreciated, and thanks in advance.

I would personally love to see the addition of a 5 or 8MP rear-facing camera. Yeah, I know it would involve some massive hardware hacking, but it would be a nice addition.

Is that pain and suffering really worth the upgrade? There would be no way to use the camera effectively because you would have to have you back to what you were shooting. My opinion would be to go buy an HD video camera for $150. Cheaper and easier than hacking your tablet up.

This is one thing that frustrates me about my G-tablet. I took some videos of the family out in the snow the other day and it was a real pain trying to capture the video since the camera only faces forward. The video turned out alright since we were outside and in good light. I've found that unless you are in really good lighting, the camera does not perform well. The quality didn't even compare to most of the devices that are out on the market now (latest Android 720p phones, iPhone/iPod Touch).
I'm looking forward to the NI Adam's swivel camera. It should be really nice for not only video chatting (front-facing) but also being able to film other things from different angles. For example, it would be nice to angle the camera almost completely to the back to film other people in front of you or angle the camera perpendicular to the device if you want to lay it on the table and do a timed photo or something similar. The camera is supposed to be higher resolution on the NI Adam, but higher MP doesn't necessarily equal higher quality so I'm crossing my fingers.

I wonder if now that we have kernel source there wouldn't be some way to add support for usb webcams? I imagine the only reason no one has done it yet is because most android devices don't have usb ports.

joshua.lyon said:
This is one thing that frustrates me about my G-tablet. I took some videos of the family out in the snow the other day and it was a real pain trying to capture the video since the camera only faces forward. The video turned out alright since we were outside and in good light. I've found that unless you are in really good lighting, the camera does not perform well. The quality didn't even compare to most of the devices that are out on the market now (latest Android 720p phones, iPhone/iPod Touch).
I'm looking forward to the NI Adam's swivel camera. It should be really nice for not only video chatting (front-facing) but also being able to film other things from different angles. For example, it would be nice to angle the camera almost completely to the back to film other people in front of you or angle the camera perpendicular to the device if you want to lay it on the table and do a timed photo or something similar. The camera is supposed to be higher resolution on the NI Adam, but higher MP doesn't necessarily equal higher quality so I'm crossing my fingers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The FF camera is only meant for video chatting.

First off, thanks for the replies. I was looking for feedback and info and I need more, please keep them coming.
Second, I too like the idea of a rear cam pics and video, and yes I understand I wouldn't be able to take pics without my back facing, I still want it to be a web cam; The question is can I replace that cam with a better one, even if it may only be a 2.0 or 3mp? If you are going to do video chat, or maybe even streaming videos would a higher mp camera help or hurt?
Third from my understanding there may be room for a rear camera, as well as room for modules that can be added like gps. If I can get any more info and can keep the cost reasonable, I may look into both.
I like the g tab cause its a Do It Yourself-er that has tons of potential, and since I have some time on my hands, I am looking to make any one(or more) of these a potential project.
Thanks Again for the input

Skyydragon said:
First off, thanks for the replies. I was looking for feedback and info and I need more, please keep them coming.
Second, I too like the idea of a rear cam pics and video, and yes I understand I wouldn't be able to take pics without my back facing, I still want it to be a web cam; The question is can I replace that cam with a better one, even if it may only be a 2.0 or 3mp? If you are going to do video chat, or maybe even streaming videos would a higher mp camera help or hurt?
Third from my understanding there may be room for a rear camera, as well as room for modules that can be added like gps. If I can get any more info and can keep the cost reasonable, I may look into both.
I like the g tab cause its a Do It Yourself-er that has tons of potential, and since I have some time on my hands, I am looking to make any one(or more) of these a potential project.
Thanks Again for the input
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's no way to install a rear facing camera. All these projects you mentioned have been looked into by others and have basically determined not worth it.

jfholijr said:
There's no way to install a rear facing camera. All these projects you mentioned have been looked into by others and have basically determined not worth it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If they all have been looked into and determined not worth the trouble, then I will concentrate my efforts elsewhere, I wont waste my time.
Apologies for wasting valuable thread space on this, and thanks for the input.

levrin said:
I wonder if now that we have kernel source there wouldn't be some way to add support for usb webcams? I imagine the only reason no one has done it yet is because most android devices don't have usb ports.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
FWIW, My Odroid T had a functioning USB webcam running android 2.1 and then 2.2. There were some driver issues, but they got them worked out.

Could this camera firmware can updated to Karbonn Titanium S5 ?

Got my Nokia Lumia 900, got a Q

Morning all,
Got the phone a few days ago, excellent phone.
Quick, awesome looking, solid phone.
But I've noticed the camera is appalling. Outside daylight photos are okay but not great, inside photos are poor. Why is that? Surely for a 8mp camera the photos should be better. My camera settings seem to be correct.
I compared my Nokia Lumia camera with the SGS3 and they're miles apart.
Is this normal or is there a bug that Nokia know about and will be releasing an update for?
please let me know your thoughts. Ta

I have no idea why people expect a camera's resolution ("8mp" or otherwise) to have any significant impact on the image quality. More pixels does not make an image any better focused, better lit, less grainy, truer color, less chromatic aberration, or any other such effect. It does increase the maximum detail that the image can store, but does nothing at all for the minimum quality. Besides, people have ridiculously inflated expectations of pixel count, typically resulting in just wasting a bunch of starage space keeping huge files that are never viewed at full resolution anyhow. Your phone's screen is well under half a megapixel, for example.
That said, I can't say for sure why the Lumia 900 would have a worse-than-expected camera. To somebody used to a *real* camera, all phone cameras suck (yes, even the much-vaunted iPhone 4S) but it is entirely possible that there's a firmware issue affecting the image quality. The HTC HD7 had a long-running issue that made photos come out rather pink, for example.
Out of curiosity, are you using the flash, or do you have any special settings in the camera app selected (possibly by accident)? It would also help to know in what way the pictures are poor.

Must admit mine was abit shady out of the box but after fiddling with a few settings I got it to a reasonable quality, Maybe play with a few settings and make sure you save them, My Titans Camera was near on the same to start with.

This might help you out a bit
http://mywpstory.com/2012/04/camera...-with-your-new-nokia-lumia-900-windows-phone/
This one is a little more broad, but it is from Nokia.
http://conversations.nokia.com/2012/05/21/10-photography-tips-for-nokia-lumia-900/

[Discussion] Quality of Camera's on Phones

It would be nice to hear some opinions on this following thoughts I've had, ever since I upgraded my phone last year from an iPhone 3G (2.5mp camera I think) to an Xperia Arc S, which at the time was the highest quality / size MP camera on a phone at 8MP, which is still a decent size for a phone camera today, as mid-ranged phones usually start at around 5-8MP and the super smart phones these days are running upward of 10MP, I think 13MP is the highest, at least on Android, that Nokia Symbian phone was like... 42MP? Or at least the fidelity / quality resembled that due to its massive lens housing, god knows what was in there, but if I remember rightly it was only 5MP images... Someone correct me.
Anyway, with my Arc S at 8MP, the images are fairly decent, I mean they're never going to be used for print, so it doesn't really need to be higher. However, as an art graduate, I spend time when I can taking photographs, and I have a 14MP Sony NEX 5, which as standard is already a better quality sensor than the tiny ones that make it into a phone.
My first point is it's still only 1MP higher than these smartphones, which makes me think; say I upgrade my phone in 1 year when 16MP is the highest, now we've gone over, for me I'm reluctant to go higher than my camera because I'd probably be swayed to using the phone more for photography, though the phones would probably have to be double the MP of a decent camera to really compare.
Secondly, Lenses, well the one on my Arc S is fairly standard, though probably more complex than some others as I think it has 7 layers of various shaped pieces of glass. But when it comes down to it, any photographer will tell you it's almost 100% the lens that really makes a photograph what it is, the phones are getting better quality, but the lenses probably aren't, the phones are constantly trying to get thinner which doesn't help matters, but phones have actually gotten fatter sue to bigger screens needing bigger battery, so I'm unsure on this part of the topic.
The lenses I use on my NEX are Canon FD mounts, a format from the early to mid 70's all the way up to about 1994, they are manual lenses because of their age and incompatibility with modern auto-focus, but the quality is superb, and I'm not just saying it, one of the lenses is a 1.4 50mm prime, and can do some great shots, though the camera isn't full frame so the lens works out at 75mm, but I also have a 28mm 2.2 (I think?) prime, which works out around 42mm and is really good.
Both lenses are dated between 1972 and 1982, and no current phone could replicate the fidelity, bokeh and colour, which is one of the reasons why proper cameras will always have the advantage. (The NEX doesn't have a mirror inside so can replicate the original setup of older cameras easily, meaning a huge number of adaptors allows tons of different lenses to become available)
However with the Nokia pureview phone (still don't remember its name... 850?...) It had a body capable of housing some very interesting tech, that hasn't really been used since, at least to my knowledge. Seeing some pictures online really showed you what this phone was capable of, I think the resolution of the images were in the ten thousands X whatever, and remained really sharp, for a phone at least. Maybe it's lack of success is due to it been on a non-leading OS at the time, I can imagine people would want a camera with maybe an Android phone? (Which apparently, Nokia are working on) so maybe it will see it's true colours shine on a larger base OS. If this tech is worth the larger body size of a phone, people are going to want it...
And lastly, Convenience. One of the main points of having a camera is to be able to capture moments WHENEVER, and having a decent camera on a phone has been a growing trend over the past few years, with the growth of social networks, YouTube and Instagram. And you're more likely to have a phone with you than a camera for a situation that's spontaneous.
So what are peoples thoughts? A few months back Jessops one of the leading camera sales company in the UK went into administration, with only a few stores been saved;
Will we see a heightening trend amongst phones been used instead of standalone cameras?
Will they (DSLR's etc) be phased out completely?
Are you an avid photographer with your phone, or do you use a standalone camera?
Am I wrong?
I'd like to hear some opinions, hopefuly some educated ones on the subject will give a sense on the spectrum of issues.
Another point to consider, Smart-Cameras, the new trend of cameras running Android, though I don't think any have interchangeable lenses.
Thanks for reading, also... You may need to change some 'if's to 'of's because my phone has a habit of changing my words.
Sent from my LT18i using xda app-developers app

I use my phone for everyday rubbish shots (whatsapp and such) and storing information (bustimes, lists, important stuff i take a snapshot of.) .
It will NEVER replace my DSLR.
It simply lacks the functionalities of one. So long as I can't set aperture and change lenses, it's not a real camera. I need my telezoom and macro lenses.
You can't seriously expect a phone, even that 42mp one to be as high - quality as a dslr. Too many pixels crammed into way too small a sensor. As it has always been with phones.
Not to mention, phones lack the power of a dslr. Ever tried taking nightshots with a phone? They're bad. Very bad. Or high speed shots. Nuhuh, they cant. Or far-zoom?
Lets face it, cameras on phones are not meant for professionals. They're meant for people on facebook, twitter and instagram.
Send From My Samsung Galaxy S3 Using Tapatalk 2

ShadowLea said:
I use my phone for everyday rubbish shots (whatsapp and such) and storing information (bustimes, lists, important stuff i take a snapshot of.) .
It will NEVER replace my DSLR.
It simply lacks the functionalities of one. So long as I can't set aperture and change lenses, it's not a real camera. I need my telezoom and macro lenses.
You can't seriously expect a phone, even that 42mp one to be as high - quality as a dslr. Too many pixels crammed into way too small a sensor. As it has always been with phones.
Not to mention, phones lack the power of a dslr. Ever tried taking nightshots with a phone? They're bad. Very bad. Or high speed shots. Nuhuh, they cant. Or far-zoom?
Lets face it, cameras on phones are not meant for professionals. They're meant for people on facebook, twitter and instagram.
Send From My Samsung Galaxy S3 Using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Man how can you compare a DSLR with a smartphone camera??, a DSLR is a camera with an awesome quality and the smartphone camera is only a phone with a decent camera and not for pro- photographers.. i would always choose a DLSR over a smartphone camera. And by the way i agree with ShadowLea that you can't cram 42mp in a small lens!!! it is outrageous!

Well, it's to do with trends, if you agree or not is a different matter, but lots of pro photographers and teachers will tell you if you ask, about how important this new revolution is, the quality you can get is pretty good, even compared to digital cameras less than 10 years ago.
If it can take photographs then it's a valid form, there are pro photographers then spend lots of their time using phones for photography, 5MP and decent light is enough, some of these phones are better quality than the point and shoot cameras of recent past.
Instagram, though trendy is a very valid post processing tool, just because the majority of people use it recreationaly it doesn't diminish its power, and usage.
People use Polaroid cameras all the time, and they're quite limited, and the quality can vary greatly. You can't change the lens, and you can't really adjust any settings.
Polaroid is probably most comparable to the quality of the mid range smartphones.
As for the Nokia 41MP camera phone, if you actually look at the images you can get a good sense of the quality. The short article can be found here:
http://www.extremetech.com/electron...review-camera-finally-coming-to-windows-phone
You can also easily find examples by doing an image search on Nokia Pureview.
The convenience of a very good quality camera phone can allow for great photos, which is why it's really taking off as a trend.
Denying it is the same arguments as saying Digital is better than Film, though there are still counter arguments, benefits and people still use film cameras and Polaroid.
There's a statistic recently that goes something like; there have been more photographs taken in 2012 than all previous years since photography's invention combined.
I'm not sure if that's word for word correct, but I think it was on a Vsauce YouTube video not long back.
Sent from my LT18i using xda app-developers app

I think you need to understand that Professional stands for "getting paid for your work" or "being an accomplished/awarded photographer" and not "I can hold a camera!".
Yes, there have been more photo's taken in the last year than since the invention of the photograph. I do hope you are also aware that this includes every halfbrained moron on Instagram and Facebook posting their friday-night drunk shots.
No selfrespecting real photographer uses a phone's camera for his or her work. The only ones that do are either A, doing an experiment, or B, people on the internet fooling themselves into thinking they're photographers.
PHONE CAMERAS DO NOT HAVE APERATURE SETTINGS. And that's where it all ends. There isn't a single pro or semi-pro who uses a fixed aperature camera.
42MP doesn't make a bloody difference if the sensor is meant for 2MP. The photo's may look fine on the internet, but newsflash: Your monitor is 72DPI, not 300. And a 6000x6000 pixel image is always going to look amazing when downsized to 1920x1080 or lower. (which is what every website does.)
As for trends, they're for the common cattle, not semi/professionals. People with knowledge and experience pay attention to specs, not to hypes.
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk 2

ShadowLea said:
I think you need to understand that Professional stands for "getting paid for your work" or "being an accomplished/awarded photographer" and not "I can hold a camera!".
Yes, there have been more photo's taken in the last year than since the invention of the photograph. I do hope you are also aware that this includes every halfbrained moron on Instagram and Facebook posting their friday-night drunk shots.
No selfrespecting real photographer uses a phone's camera for his or her work. The only ones that do are either A, doing an experiment, or B, people on the internet fooling themselves into thinking they're photographers.
PHONE CAMERAS DO NOT HAVE APERATURE SETTINGS. And that's where it all ends. There isn't a single pro or semi-pro who uses a fixed aperature camera.
42MP doesn't make a bloody difference if the sensor is meant for 2MP. The photo's may look fine on the internet, but newsflash: Your monitor is 72DPI, not 300. And a 6000x6000 pixel image is always going to look amazing when downsized to 1920x1080 or lower. (which is what every website does.)
As for trends, they're for the common cattle, not semi/professionals. People with knowledge and experience pay attention to specs, not to hypes.
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you're missing my point, I meant professional photographers that use iPhones for photography for non print, recreation, street photography etc.
Sent from my LT18i using xda app-developers app

For those interested in hearing a pro talk about it, I present, Chase Jarvis.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buDa-m65RyA&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Sent from my LT18i using xda app-developers app

Is it slow in camera functions?

In the Techradar review it mentioned they found it slow to move from shot to shot & slow saving. How fair a comment is this?
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/phones/mobile-phones/nokia-lumia-1020-1165253/review

Well, its no DSLR, but I've not missed a shot due to it being slow. It is saving larger than most Phones sized pics, so its would not be surprising if it took a few more milliseconds.
The pluses way out number any perceived minuses in my book...

JETninja said:
Well, its no DSLR, but I've not missed a shot due to it being slow. It is saving larger than most Phones sized pics, so its would not be surprising if it took a few more milliseconds.
The pluses way out number any perceived minuses in my book...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you think the review was unfair in this respect then?

Super Chimp said:
Do you think the review was unfair in this respect then?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The camera is a little slower than what I am used to, but it takes great shots. If timing is an issue I tend to use the Nokia Pro Cam application as my lens. It takes several pictures in rapid succession and overcomes this issue.
Overall, the phone and camera are exceptional in my opinion. Like everything else, there are some small tradeoffs.

N!njaDuck said:
The camera is a little slower than what I am used to, but it takes great shots. If timing is an issue I tend to use the Nokia Pro Cam application as my lens. It takes several pictures in rapid succession and overcomes this issue.
Overall, the phone and camera are exceptional in my opinion. Like everything else, there are some small tradeoffs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can I widen this out & ask owners of the 1020 how fair in general they felt that review was?

Super Chimp said:
Can I widen this out & ask owners of the 1020 how fair in general they felt that review was?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would say it is a pretty fair review of the platform more so than the phone specifically.
I find that there is an app for almost everything I need on the platform, but I am not a super active social media person checking in every few minutes on 10 different platforms.
The phone itself is smooth and I have yet to experience any snags. The reviewer makes mention of the camera making it weird to hold. I actually find that it helps it from slipping out of my hand and prevents the camera from laying against surfaces when you put the phone down. Who would have thought that a large growth coming out of a phone would actually have some appeal to me.
Just for balance I will mention that I use an android tablet, so this is not some MS/Nokia pitch. It is just a really nice phone.
Now they just need to release the wireless charging cover so I can stop missing my 920 so much.
Hope this helps someone.

The review is written by an obvious iOS fanboy. He bags on Win 8 constantly. Ok, I'm 54, so I can give a rats ass about no Instagram or Vine, yet I can find any app I want and i probably have close to 100 already. From Formula One to Yelp. And wow, its too much for him to swipe down a bit to check his email. Yes, I think it was a highly biased review. Waiting on the Anandtech review myself, but doesn't matter. I've had it over a week and dig it over all. It fast, games are good, surfing great, screen doesn't really show the finger prints like my Samsung Focus did.

I was a bit bemused by his comments about notifications as I wouldn't say iOS was the greatest on this under the current version.

the procam app takes an extra second to save an image, but it's also saving a 5mp and a 38mp (?) image at the same time, so it's a given. if quick auto setting type images are needed, the stock camera lens as well as the nokia smartshot (?) lens both take fast pictures.

Camera Sensor Speed
The Giant Sensor speed is too low for Slow Motion.
It would be enough for 720P@60FPS but not for higher Framerates.
Also the Delay between 2 Pictures is toooo long.
The Processing power is like the Galaxy S2 or so...
Wait for the Nokia Lumia 1030 with Galaxy Note 4 Processing Power and 50 Megapixel Sensor.
Also see this ﴾Cluick Here IU﴿