Database Info

Nokia 808 PureView start selling in Malaysia Today

One of the many fans awaited device is Nokia 808 Nokia PureView generated using the Symbian (Nokia OS) and comes with 41-megapixel camera. Now, it is known in local selling prices for these devices is RM1899, and will be available starting tomorrow.
As a general aware, early this week, several Nokia Store has been available to provide test units at Nokia Store, and finally, having anticipated it will go on sale from tomorrow.
In terms of specifications, Nokia 808 AMOLED screen size PureView bring 4.0-inch, 16GB of storage space built with micro-SD slot supporting up to 32GB, 512MB RAM, 1.3GHz ARM-11 processor chips, 41-megapixel camera Carl Zeiss, VGA front camera, FM radio built, and also generated using Nokia Belle.
For those of you who like it, can get started tomorrow, but for those who want to try first, may be heading to the Nokia Store across the country, and experience the 41-megapixel camera that comes with it

Why did you post here? 808 isn't a WP7, and it's not a Nokia-lovers forum...

emoskremo said:
One of the many fans awaited device is Nokia 808 Nokia PureView generated using the Symbian (Nokia OS) and comes with 41-megapixel camera. Now, it is known in local selling prices for these devices is RM1899, and will be available starting tomorrow.
As a general aware, early this week, several Nokia Store has been available to provide test units at Nokia Store, and finally, having anticipated it will go on sale from tomorrow.
In terms of specifications, Nokia 808 AMOLED screen size PureView bring 4.0-inch, 16GB of storage space built with micro-SD slot supporting up to 32GB, 512MB RAM, 1.3GHz ARM-11 processor chips, 41-megapixel camera Carl Zeiss, VGA front camera, FM radio built, and also generated using Nokia Belle.
For those of you who like it, can get started tomorrow, but for those who want to try first, may be heading to the Nokia Store across the country, and experience the 41-megapixel camera that comes with it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm, that's the one with awesome sauce on it. When you get a chance to use it, post a review !

no comment. =|
Whats the point of this topic..is it telling us that Nokia came out with a camera instead of a phone..or the opposite?
I mean seriously!! Okay, i agree that this device has a 41mp camera..but what for?? Its already left behind man..nokia should just learn to accept that. lol
I used to be a loyal nokia user..but it kinda sucks when they just abandoned Symbian just like that instead of developing it further...and joined with windows and linux to compete with android and apple..how low can they go?? hahaha...

And it is not real 41 megapixeplsssssss camera.
Of course, packing a larger sensor with more than three times the number of pixels doesn't translate into better photos: smaller pixels collect less light, which worsens image quality. The thing is, Nokia doesn't really want you to use the full resolution of its sensor. Not for giant photos, anyway.
Instead, the 808 defaults to a 5-megapixel resolution. Through a process called pixel oversampling (though some might call it pixel binning), Nokia combines seven pixels into one superpixel. Doing that helps eliminate image noise in low-light conditions and, according to Nokia, makes noise virtually nonexistent when shooting in good lighting. So while the 808 can be set to take 38- or 34-megapixel images depending on the aspect ratio used--4:3 or 16:9, respectively--it's not why Nokia used such a high-resolution sensor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is digitaly generated image that equals to 41 MP cam. So in general they didn't do anything "awsome".........inovative yes
I hope apple would not sue them for this hahahahaha

^
ohhhh apple........

If only there was a "like" button..I would have clicked it.. lol

1899rm damn that's expensive...and the only good thing about this phone is the camera...everything else is completely outdated....1.3ghz, belle os, low ppi screen only 512 ram. only dedicated photography buffs need apply

chaki- said:
And it is not real 41 megapixeplsssssss camera.
It is digitaly generated image that equals to 41 MP cam. So in general they didn't do anything "awsome".........inovative yes
I hope apple would not sue them for this hahahahaha
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You've misunderstood the information. Check http://www.nokia.com/global/products/pureview/ to see how but basically the only digital manipulation is actually in converting the 41 mp data down to the default 5 mp image. This is what is being referred to in the bit you quote, it is referring to how the high res data from the sensor is reduced in order to take lower res photographs.
Having seen the full res pictures it takes I can assure you the camera is definitely awesome and blows away a lot of proper dslr's.
It does actually have a 41 megapixel sensor, as you can read in nokias explanatory pdf availabe from their website.
It uses a 41 mp sensor but defaults to 5 mp pictures due to image size.
You say it is a digitally generated image, all non film camera images are, however in this case the image is not as may be implied generated via extrapolation of a lower res ccd but actually is down sampled from a very high res one.
This is also why the digital zoom is limited to just 2x because its unzoomed image is already so high it can use digital editing to crop the full image to produce a zoom which is still super high resolution.
Dave
( http://www.google.com/producer/editions/CAownKXmAQ/bigfatuniverse )
Sent from my LG P920 using Tapatalk 2

41 Mpixel - absolutely awesome..

41 MP and what ? i think nothin' maybe you can text message and call your friends and that's all. I've got nokia mobile phone and i'm feelin' like punishin'.

You must be fkin stupid to buy these phone.

trellva25 said:
1899rm damn that's expensive...and the only good thing about this phone is the camera...everything else is completely outdated....1.3ghz, belle os, low ppi screen only 512 ram. only dedicated photography buffs need apply
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's one of the best cameras in the market and you can update your Facebook status or call mom. What's outdated about that.

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

[Q] New revision not taking 41mp photos

Gfs phone (I would never buy a phone that m$ had their hands on)
Had Nokia replace the device due to a bad charging port and she ended up with a different hardware revision (3.3.0.2 not sure what she had before but it's different)
Since then she's complained that the cam doesn't take the quality pics it used to. I ran through the cam settings and the highest I can set is 5mp for jpeg and 34 on dng. Nowhere near the advertised 41 that her old device was shooting at before. Is this the cam app or a limitation of the new hardware itself? Either way the camera is the ONLY reason she wanted this phone, and I know there is no logical reason for a casual photographer to need this kind of resolution. But I would expect more than 5mp jpegs from the 'best' cam on a phone atm.
Thanks in advance for any help in the matter ~Dan

So looking in to it, but it seems this cam has always taken pics in 5/34. But I don't thinks she's even getting a that. Sample pics as enclosed in auto macro and infinity focus. Obviously this thing is not taking pics like it should.
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B24oiB-uu3o5QVhnekVCREFfTnM/edit?usp=docslist_api
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B24oiB-uu3o5Rktacl9aZHBKTWM/edit?usp=docslist_api

Obviously they don't look that bad on her phone. However once compressed to an sms this is how they come out. Here's why they look like when uncompressed. http://1drv.ms/191mb1X

Its always the case was.
Hi,
You got it right. 1020 never took 41 MP photos. It always took one big and one small photo. One for your imaging/editing/printing purpose. Another for sharing online.
Seems, it uses sampling technique and took 2 photos simultaneously. (Sorry, I am not tech guy). Hence, they required 41 MP sensor.

Its to do with the sensor size not being the same as the aspect ratio that the photos are taken in.

Question Asking about the quality of the Pixel 7 pro camera

hi GPpro7 users,
I would love to have your answers as users about this :
I have had two old Samsungs (A5 and S8), and they have "old" 12mp cameras...and I have been thinking that nowadays, that's 5 years later, cameras had gotten amazing and I would buy myself one of those, reading about your device the pixel pro 7, about the iPhone, the xiaomi mi11 ultra, the honour magic 4 ultimate, the S22 ultra, the iPhone 14 etc...
I went mad when I read about affordable 48mp, even 64mp and 108 mp cameras that are affordable...and completely puzzled when I read the reviews. Only to end up comparing my own shots to the sample images I could find online, understanding that to my knowledge those cameras produce plain 12mp at all, and any attempt to enlarge them to the claimed say 64 or 108mp size will just give me an unusable image with atrocious quality, whatever the phone.
Then I found about this tool that lets you compare cameras for real after I had read the complete commercial nonsense fuelled reviews online:
Camera comparison tool
see for yourselves how supposedly camera of the year doesn't look 1200€ less cheap than my S8...it is just amazing...no phone really beats others, even old phones...it's all low-quality 12Mp jpegs, that's about not an even decent 8mp jpeg...
And I wanted to buy one because I photoshop for a living, and last camera I had was around 2005, it produced good 8mp raw images, so I could make them great quality material for photo-montages, and therefore produce prints that'd be larger than A4.
It seems I wouldn't even be able to do that with nowadays top-level smartphones that claim they offer 108Mp...and I'm asking because the online info, or basic science, about it online is just misleading.
Please, I would love your own feeling-experience with your device that is supposed to bear awesome 50mp cameras, rather than trust anything that was posted online from reviews to camera samples that could be anything. When they say 50mp, the quality of raw files is the one of average enlarged 8-12mp compressed jpegs, or not ?
Thank you

You get way better pictures on newer phones.
The only time you might see similar results are with perfect lighting.
Thats it.
The sensors are better.
Its one of the few things that actually evolve on phones.
I've had Xiaomi phones with 'AMAZING MEGAPIXELS'.
Its never amazing.
In low light they are so bad compared to flagships from Sony, Samsung and Google.

thank you you summed it up, I couldn't find any info anywhere behind the advertising techniques, I wonder if I can get pro quality , that's actual 50mp fine results, for using it professionally, so I'll be waiting for further replies.
Everything they advertise looks like nothing but better looking -less noisy and all - 12mp jpegs at all, plus good zooming abilities in a few cases, but not as the name suggests, high end pro cameras at all.

I take photos for work on fabrics and carpets. I need an excellent camera phone that takes photos with colors as similar to real colors as possible.
What is the best android phone for my needs?

fashion_live said:
I take photos for work on fabrics and carpets. I need an excellent camera phone that takes photos with colors as similar to real colors as possible.
What is the best android phone for my needs?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
None, get yourself a DSLR or a mirrorless camera if you need "accurate" colors. All of the phones have their own way of post-processing the photos and almost none of them result in accurate colors.

Nath_h57 said:
thank you you summed it up, I couldn't find any info anywhere behind the advertising techniques, I wonder if I can get pro quality , that's actual 50mp fine results, for using it professionally, so I'll be waiting for further replies.
Everything they advertise looks like nothing but better looking -less noisy and all - 12mp jpegs at all, plus good zooming abilities in a few cases, but not as the name suggests, high end pro cameras at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you're talking about RAW, not none of the OEMs offer non-binned images in RAW. You always get the binned output even when shooting RAW photos.

ekin_strops said:
If you're talking about RAW, not none of the OEMs offer non-binned images in RAW. You always get the binned output even when shooting RAW photos.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thank you, yes from the advertisement or product description, one hopes for a say 108 mp good quality camera, that will offer you PLENTY of sharp details in every photograph, like...can zoom anywhere and get a new A4 to exploit. And I'm very disappointed...

ekin_strops said:
None, get yourself a DSLR or a mirrorless camera if you need "accurate" colors. All of the phones have their own way of post-processing the photos and almost none of them result in accurate colors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks but I know. My question is about camera phones

There are some really good YT Vids comparing phone cameras.
Marques Brownlee did a few really involved comparisons of various modes and features of the newest phones. The Pixel Devices, 6 Pro, 6A and 7 Pro were the top picks

fashion_live said:
Thanks but I know. My question is about camera phones
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
check the comparison tool link I posted in the first post. Recent Xiaomi phones seem interesting regarding colour fidelity.
but anyway it relies on the ambient light as you shoot too , an app like Color Grabber may help

HipKat said:
There are some really good YT Vids comparing phone cameras.
Marques Brownlee did a few really involved comparisons of various modes and features of the newest phones. The Pixel Devices, 6 Pro, 6A and 7 Pro were the top picks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I dont need best camera phone, i need best camera phone with realistic and natural colors

fashion_live said:
I dont need best camera phone, i need best camera phone with realistic and natural colors
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I get that, but this is a phone first, not a camera and you're not going to get everything you would with an actual camera, at least at this point, although Phone cameras have come a long, long way.
I think people need to be reminded this is a communications device, primarily.
The point of the videos is that those things are taken into consideration in the comparisons.

The sensor is 48 MP, but it blends groups of 4 pixels together resulting in a 12 MP image. You can't blow the image up and recover those additional pixels.

96carboard said:
The sensor is 48 MP, but it blends groups of 4 pixels together resulting in a 12 MP image. You can't blow the image up and recover those additional pixels.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
50mp binned to 12.5mp on the primary

Thank you very much because everything online is VERY misleading, regarding 500 - 1500 euros investments.
I am flabbergasted because the ads and product descriptions pretend it's 50mp or more pro cameras, and they happen to be plain okay (not even but...) 12mp digicams. Nothing worth spending 1500 euros it seems. I just expected I could invest like 800 and get a pro camera too that would just let me shoot a photo, get awesome 50mp quality, zoom on the raw file and get another A4 size good cropped shot etc...on top of the disappointment, the misleading info and product description is truly disgusting

MrBelter said:
50mp binned to 12.5mp on the primary
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is the pixel binning process performed by hardware or software? Is it theoretically possible to have the option of full-resolution images as a future software update?

tiagobt said:
Is the pixel binning process performed by hardware or software? Is it theoretically possible to have the option of full-resolution images as a future software update?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The same sensor does produce 50mp images on other phones so presumably it is handled by software, personally I don't think Google will allow it.

It's definitely a software thing as my OnePlus 9's stock camera software does enable you to disable the pixel binning and take a full 50MP photo. The results are pretty terrible though because OnePlus' camera just leaves a lot to be desired.

Yes ! it's all about that, and about the availability of non-binned therefore 48mp or more images online for comparison, it took me ages to find only one of those from a Xiaomi 12s phone, so the actual quality of the camera is actually visible !!! (and not that great !) although the Xiaomi 12t pro and maybe 12s ultra are the best ones I've found so far.
The thing is they show 12mp shots shrunk to our phones' dimensions, or as a shrunk jpeg so that looks good, but that's nothing like the actual camera"s quality that only gets visible on those original non-binned shots, that's a pic that's about an iMac's screen size and it seems very little progress has occurred in five years, the best cam gives okay to good enough results in daylight but that goes with manual retouching. Unless someone proves me wrong...

Personally i don't see what the fuss is about, 12.5mp is more than adequate for printing even at A3 and as they say the best camera is the one you have in your hand, the megapixel myth seems alive and well.
My first DSLR was only 8MP and i did plenty of (paid) weddings and air shows with that.