Related
I'm looking for a new phone for my wife. She currently has a nexus s and is moderately happy with it but it's on its last legs.
The main criterion for her is a camera (that, and Sims type games but most phones are equally capable there) . We have 2 kids under 4 so we take a lot of pictures.
I'm trying to find the phone with the camera which will best capture moving targets indoors. Reducing blur without constantly readjusting settings and quick access to the camera (dedicated button?) are important.
I have an S3 and it's ok but not as good as I'd hoped (I know we're talking about phones here and when I need a good shot a have a dslr)
So, what do people recommend? S3 and HTC onex get the most press for cameras. She'd use an iPhone if that was best (I don't think it is) I hear good things about the nokia 920 but don't really want to take her down the windows road. Again, most shots will be of moving kids indoors, not stationary objects in full light (which is what most review sites use)
sony xperia z
the Sony xperia z comes out on the 28 of February
Quad core
13 mega pixel camera
waterproof
ect.
metmettem said:
the Sony xperia z comes out on the 28 of February
Quad core
13 mega pixel camera
waterproof
ect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're right. I'd say Xperia Z is the best Camera phone so far. Has XMOR senser & superior auto+ mode. So you can get standard cam quality pictures.
badgerpapa said:
I'm looking for a new phone for my wife. She currently has a nexus s and is moderately happy with it but it's on its last legs.
The main criterion for her is a camera (that, and Sims type games but most phones are equally capable there) . We have 2 kids under 4 so we take a lot of pictures.
I'm trying to find the phone with the camera which will best capture moving targets indoors. Reducing blur without constantly readjusting settings and quick access to the camera (dedicated button?) are important.
I have an S3 and it's ok but not as good as I'd hoped (I know we're talking about phones here and when I need a good shot a have a dslr)
So, what do people recommend? S3 and HTC onex get the most press for cameras. She'd use an iPhone if that was best (I don't think it is) I hear good things about the nokia 920 but don't really want to take her down the windows road. Again, most shots will be of moving kids indoors, not stationary objects in full light (which is what most review sites use)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Though it's easy to take snaps using phone & convenient as well; I'd still prefer a good quality 'Camera' for taking pics. I use a HX9V. It gives super clear images. So reconsider upon your decision.
Finally, the choice is yours.
Samsung galaxy camera
You may want to look at the Samsung galaxy camera (and then just buy her a cheaper phone) - it can take take pictures and play sims games.
I think Galaxy S4 will be equipped a best camera but now it is not released
Galaxy S3
The mentioned Sony will probably take great pictures, but one thing I know from having a kid is that you need a FAST camera -- one that doesn't take a few seconds to focus and snap the shot (my S1 did that :/)
The Galaxy S3 takes good pictures (I've had a few positive comments from people who have seen pics from my phone) and is ridiculously quick at it, meaning you don't miss a special moment. The stock camera app also has a burst mode with auto-detecting the best shot (though you make the final choice).
davydm said:
The mentioned Sony will probably take great pictures, but one thing I know from having a kid is that you need a FAST camera -- one that doesn't take a few seconds to focus and snap the shot (my S1 did that :/)
The Galaxy S3 takes good pictures (I've had a few positive comments from people who have seen pics from my phone) and is ridiculously quick at it, meaning you don't miss a special moment. The stock camera app also has a burst mode with auto-detecting the best shot (though you make the final choice).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The sony xperia z is as fast as the s3 so it should take pictures as fast without delay.
If it does delay at all im sure somebody will create a custom ROM that is faster
hi friends. the topic says it all. but here is the catch.
i have to go on a trip. its my first time ever out of the country so i really need a great CAMERA PHONE.
i know 808 sweeps floor with Both S4 and S3 for its camera performance but i still need an idea from u guys, cause u guys are the best
i have owned S3 and its camera is great. but not a good low light performer. its THE GREATEST PHONE for sure. and S4 will not be available till end of this month.i really need to decide within like 2 days to go for any set.
are there any friends here who owned 808 and S3 together? cause i have never used 808 but every read only good about its camera.
pls suggest me. i will not go for 920 cause windows phone sucks! well, Symbian sucks ever worse but its camera is comparable to DSLRs so im asking just to confirm from u guys.
i expect good and sincere help cause i love xda
*EDIT* and one more question what can be the price of used 808 as i have no idea at all about its resale
thanks in advance for ur time and help
aami.aami said:
i have to go on a trip. its my first time ever out of the country so i really need a great CAMERA PHONE.
i know 808 sweeps floor with Both S4 and S3 for its camera performance but i still need an idea from u guys, cause u guys are the best
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haven't you answered your own question???
Questions should go to the proper forum section, but we have camera discussions here too.
With that said, not to leave you without an answer, the PureView 808 is obviously the best camera phone on the market. The good news about the GS4 is however that it does awesome good light photos which at 13MPs are good for digital zooming or later cutting which is usually a problem with phones (no optical zoom). The bad news is that, despite improving tremendously, absolute dark shots are still problematic, and if half your shots are taken during nights or very limited lights, the Lumia 920 is the one to choose. If 80% of your shots are taken in low but not dark conditions, average lights and ideal scenery, the GS4 is an excellent all-around performer for a phone.
But you can judge the quality for yourself over this thread:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2213853
price of a used around 320-350$ for now
aami.aami said:
pls suggest me. i will not go for 920 cause windows phone sucks! well, Symbian sucks ever worse but its camera is comparable to DSLRs so im asking just to confirm from u guys.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, its not comparable to a DSLR, but its much better then the S3/S4 and all the other phones. If you want a good low light phone, go for the 808/920 or htc one.
But if you want to shoot REALLY NICE pictures, you should get a dslr.
For example the Sony Alpha 57: currently avaible for 440€ in Germany. The supplied objective is ok but you can improve the quality with an alternative one.
All the phones avaible ARE NOT WORTH COMPARING WITH A GOOD DSLR!
None. If you are going on a trip, you should get a DSLR.
Symbian sucks ever worse but its camera is comparable to DSLRs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am sure you have never handled a DSLR. Don't spread FUD here.
hot_spare said:
None. If you are going on a trip, you should get a DSLR.
I am sure you have never handled a DSLR. Don't spread FUD here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks to all of u guys for such quick and great responses!!
and dude i said "COMPARABLE" quality to DSLR
here, see for urself:
http://www.gsmarena.com/pureview_blind_test-review-773p2.php
and BTW, Olympus E-PL2 is a mid range DSLR! and 808 beat that!
and here,
http://www.gsmarena.com/nokia_808_pureview_low_light-review-775.php
it is said that, "The Nokia 808 PureView is on its march to becoming iconic, trashing the Olympus PEN E-PL2 Micro Four Thirds camera in our blind test and then matching the Canon 5D Mark III for resolution in the process."
so yeah... it does have Great sensor with great performance...
and i have chosen to go for it
aami.aami said:
thanks to all of u guys for such quick and great responses!!
and dude i said "COMPARABLE" quality to DSLR
here, see for urself:
http://www.gsmarena.com/pureview_blind_test-review-773p2.php
and BTW, Olympus E-PL2 is a mid range DSLR! and 808 beat that!
and here,
http://www.gsmarena.com/nokia_808_pureview_low_light-review-775.php
it is said that, "The Nokia 808 PureView is on its march to becoming iconic, trashing the Olympus PEN E-PL2 Micro Four Thirds camera in our blind test and then matching the Canon 5D Mark III for resolution in the process."
so yeah... it does have Great sensor with great performance...
and i have chosen to go for it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Technically, Olympus E-PL2 is not a DSLR. It's a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera.
And "Micro Four Thirds" should have told you the size of the sensor. Compare this to a size of a typical APS-C sensor.
If I am looking to take photos, I would rather get a typical DSLR.
Matching 5D Mark III in photography? I would better ask the editor to get his eyes checked. 808 is neither good phone, not a good camera. It's much better than typical mobile camera, but can't be compared to a good DSLR. It even worse than a point n shoot like RX100.
I don't need photography lessons from blind test in GSMArena.
808 is comparable to my 5D mark III? Please. I'll advise you to stick with your current phone and get something like Canon 650D or 60D.
Sent from my Xperia Arc S using xda premium
aami.aami said:
pls suggest me. i will not go for 920 cause windows phone sucks! well, Symbian sucks ever worse but its camera is comparable to DSLRs so im asking just to confirm from u guys.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you just want the best camera but not the window phone based phone, why not try HTC One which owns the ultrapixal camera.But note that the best camera on smartphone is still the pureview camera on Nokia Lumia 920. And the windows phone system don't sucks like what you imagined.
Dannyada1988 said:
why not try HTC One which owns the ultrapixal camera..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If 2 micron is ultrapilxel, what do you call a 5 micron? Elephant-pixel or dragon-pixel?
I wonder if you know that even a 6 year old phone like Nokia N95 had a bigger sensor and bigger pixel-size. In 2007 they had a phone with 1/2.5 inch sensor and 2.2 micron pixel pitch.
Don't remember anyone calling it ultrapixel!
hot_spare said:
If 2 micron is ultrapilxel, what do you call a 5 micron? Elephant-pixel or dragon-pixel?
I wonder if you know that even a 6 year old phone like Nokia N95 had a bigger sensor and bigger pixel-size. In 2007 they had a phone with 1/2.5 inch sensor and 2.2 micron pixel pitch.
Don't remember anyone calling it ultrapixel!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ultrapixel is just a marketing term aka a name. is it so hard to understand that? HTC figured that it would be rather embarrasing to sell a flagship with only 4MP on board so they coined this term.
Its like apple coined the retina display term. theres nothing to do with retina there. its just a name.
And how big fat and heavy was that n95? 808 is best cameraphone out there but nokia coundnt sell it. people dont want fat phones anymore. not most people.
Seems like you don't want a dslr. If you want REALLY GOOD picture quality and that's all you care about you could still get a decent digital non-dlsr camera which is much smaller than a dslr. I mean you already got a decent phone anyways so why throw so much money on 808 that's got nothing but a camera? Better spend something like $350 on a decent camera with superb quality. That price range can already get you something much better than any smartphone camera's
Sent from my HTC One X using xda app-developers app
joslicx said:
ultrapixel is just a marketing term aka a name. is it so hard to understand that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Captain Obvious strikes back with vengeance.
i know it very clear 808 just cant compete with DSLRs but u should give the credit where it is due. 808 does compete with some of the low end DSLRs and i said LOW END!!
and 920 is only better than 808 in terms of steady videos cause of its OIS and thats it!
808 captures true colors and u can get the punchier colors while chossing vivid mode or increasing the contrast
i just wish, GOD just WWWIIIISSSSHHH that HTC had used some high quality and higher pixel count sensor in ONE! that would have been awesome!
ultra pixel of HTC ONE is like the 12MP sensor of N8 when it was introduced years ago! and then Nokia perfected that with 808. i was literally hoping a great phone from HTC this year at least, but alas... Ultrapixel should be evolved and it definitely would be, into something comparable to what Nokia did with 808!
now my current wish is Nokia choses to go Android and introduce Pureview Phase 3 phone with FHD screen and camera with double the performance of 808... (just a wish )
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
Hi everyone,
So I've been looking at the mate 8 as my next purchase, and Some reviews state the camera quality isn't good due to software/firmware issues. Other reviews state the camera quality is really good. I was wondering what owners opinions are? If it does have exposure and focus issues, are they sorted if you use a different camera app? I don't know if different apps can alter issues that might be related to firmware?
Thanks
Ian
I wouldn't consider myself a power user but I'm very happy with the camera so far. I would mostly be taking pictures of friends and family etc and quality is just fine for me
I'm the same, mainly I'll be taking pictures of the family and scenery, that kinda thing. I'm not what you'd call a professional photographer by any means. But it is said the best camera you have is the one on you at the time, so I just want to make sure it's a relatively good one
Thanks
Ian
Camera was bad with the first update
But with latest update it became better
But if you are seeking for great camera go for lg or sam
If you wanna a power horse phablet go for mate 8
That's the thing, I've had both Samsung and LG phones before, and while the cameras were good I wasn't keen on the phones themselves. I've had a G3, a Note 4, an S6 and a Oneplus One. I was half considering a Oneplus 2, but only because of the price. £249 is cheap for a high spec phone. I'm not keen on the nexus line of phones either. I know they are popular, and you probably think I'm mad. But they are just a bog standard android phone. If I'm paying more than £400 for a phone I want it to do more than the straight forward stuff, straight out the box. Other wise id just get an iPhone. Half the stuff on the Mate 8 I'll probably never use I admit, but the fact its there is what I like. Does that make sense?
Has anybody tried a different camera app from the play store to see if that improves the pictures, or isn't it as simple as that? I'm not sure how apps, firmware, API's and hardware all tie in together, so I apologise in advance if that was a stupid question.
Thanks
Ian
The camera is a so and so in my eyes. It's ok, but very soft, in daytime but I wouldn't pick it to take pictures of kids indoor. Right now the best all around camera I have is the Nexus 6P, mostly because it will do really good indoors and most of my pics are indoors. I read that there will be a upgrade for the camera after 162 firmwarewize. Otherwise, it's a really good phone. Apps doesn't do better than stock camera.
Skickat från min HUAWEI NXT-L29 via Tapatalk
The camera is fine. It's not the best camera out there in terms of image quality when you zoom in on the pictures but it does the job. It has good colors and good exposure. It's fun to shoot with. I think quality should be able to be fixed with software update. I find that some indoor night shots almost have the same amount of detail as some of the ones shoot in daylight. The processing seems to heavy creating artefacts in images taken even in daylight.
The Mate 8 is pretty much the perfect phone in every way except the camera is not top notch. Excellent screen that is more clear and has better contrast than the screen on my iPhone 6S Plus. The battery life is the best you can get on any phone now. The build quality is fantastic. Audio quality in headphones is top notch, best I've every heard in any phone the dynamic range and clarity is amazing. Even better than my Meizu Pro 5 that has an internal DAC and amplifiers in it. It is super fast and has a very smooth and responsive UI.
Thank you for your input. You guys have confirmed the fact that the mate 8 will be my next phone just got to wait for it to come into stock again now!
Thanks
Ian
http://forum.xda-developers.com/mate-8/general/post-camera-picture-t3303629
next time just use ForumSearch
As it stands today, the Pixel Camera is considered by most to be the Gold Standard. Most of the magic happens after the picture is taken via software. Why can't One Plus figure this magic out to some degree? The sensors are more than capable. The stock camera doesn't take bad pictures, but certainly inconsistent. My Pixel 2 XL blows the stock camera on the One Plus 7 Pro out of the water. The Gcam mods help and I appreciate the work by those devs, but this should be handled by One Plus. Is the software magic that hard to replicate by One Plus?
Lesser Version said:
As it stands today, the Pixel Camera is considered by most to be the Gold Standard. Most of the magic happens after the picture is taken via software. Why can't One Plus figure this magic out to some degree? The sensors are more than capable. The stock camera doesn't take bad pictures, but certainly inconsistent. My Pixel 2 XL blows the stock camera on the One Plus 7 Pro out of the water. The Gcam mods help and I appreciate the work by those devs, but this should be handled by One Plus. Is the software magic that hard to replicate by One Plus?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes it's a bit difficult. Here's why...
https://www.phonearena.com/news/Nig...-Ultra-wide-cameras-on-OnePlus-7-Pro_id117647
Στάλθηκε από το GM1913 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
I always thought it looked amazing, especially on the phone's display.
I guess if you're more into cameras you notice these things.
Also looks great to me...
slayerh4x said:
I always thought it looked amazing, especially on the phone's display.
I guess if you're more into cameras you notice these things.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All depends on your expectations. I think the pics from the stock camera looks pretty great, especially in good light. The original poster is comparing the photo quality to the Pixel 2 XL, so I can't make that comparison personally. For me, on one hand, if I really want the best image quality, I'll use my "real camera". On the other hand, I'm usually pretty impressed when I do use my 7 Pro for snapshots.
To address the original poster's question, the big difference is that Google has nearly endless cash and resources to throw at what they think is important. And it's pretty clear they look at the camera on the Pixel line as a discriminator; and versus the likes of Samsung and Apple (if not in sales numbers, than by device price and "flagship" device status). Where OnePlus is a pretty small company, content with existing in a more "value" priced space (even if the price keep incrementally bumping up with each iteration). OnePlus phones doesn't quite max out the specs in every category (we all know that), but they give us a great device for a great price.
A big notch, chin, and bezel usually comes with the pixel camera
Google and other OEMs have extensive resources in their software department. Google has AI and resources to focus on photography. It's amazing me that Oneplus cameras can rival many flagships.
galaxys said:
A big notch, chin, and bezel usually comes with the pixel camera
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This made me laugh this morning......thanks!
Robert235 said:
Google and other OEMs have extensive resources in their software department. Google has AI and resources to focus on photography. It's amazing me that Oneplus cameras can rival many flagships.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My thoughts exactly. Not only does Google have the cash to burn, but also massive amounts of data to draw upon for their AI machine learning. Plus, development of image AI probably has tons of applications for other Google projects, besides just the camera app or the Pixel phones. So it probably makes perfect sense in the bigger picture for Google to be spending resources on the camera app and related technologies.
None of this really applies to OnePlus. They are just a relatively small company making some nice phones.
This whole subject on phones and cameras makes me laugh all the time. I'm an enthusiast photog and do a lot of photography. I have some serious equipment just to give some background. These phones are point and shoot cameras. They do extremely well in all situations really. They generally take a photo at comparable quality as a DSLR from 10 years ago. if I need serious photos, I'll look out my gear. These phones are more than enough for 90% of anyone taking photos. I can use my OnePlus 7 pro in manual mode and get photos good enough to be used professionally. In auto I can get better than most DSLR cameras from 10 years ago.
Every phone camera has flaws, including pixel, Samsung, Huawei and apple. That's why in these photo camera comparisons the op7 is best in a certain situation, Samsung is better here and apple is better there. This is why people like myself still spend $3-4k on camera like a Nikon D850. I use my phone camera probably 85% of the time, they are still that good