Since Google won't update the awful stock camera app and the quality of the pictures taken with the third party apps on the play store is garbage.
I will crop my pictures using a Photoshop Script until we get a new app or I get the HTC One+/ One 2014 , to which size should I crop my pictures to get the maximum resolution posible of photos taken with HDR+ on?
The Nexus 5 camera takes pictures with 3264x2448 and when you use HDR+ it takes slightly smaller pictures (3200x2368) native 8 MP cameras take pictures with 3008 x 2000 resolution, would it be ok if i just chop 368 pixels horizontally and 192 vertically?
Chad_Petree said:
Since Google won't update the awful stock camera app and the quality of the pictures taken with the third party apps on the play store is garbage, I will crop my pictures using a Photoshop Script until we get a new app or I get the HTC One+/ One 2014 , to which size should I crop my pictures to get the maximum resolution posible of photos taken with HDR+ on? The Nexus 5 camera takes pictures with 3264x2448 and when you use HDR+ it takes slightly smaller pictures (3200x2368) native 8 MP cameras take pictures with 3008 x 2000 resolution, using my 3200x2368 pictures and cropping them to 3008 x 2000 won't slightly distort the picture?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cropping CUTS the image. It doesn't SQUISH it so no distortion is possible. You just wont be able to see parts of the photo you crop off.
Anyway, to get a 16:9 aspect ratio from a width of 3264, You would need to crop to a height of 1836.
4:3 means for every 4 pixels across the screen, it goes 3 pixels up the side of the screen. So if 3264 is the 4 across (3264 / 4 = 816 for each 1) then 816 * 3 = 2448
16:9 for every 16 pixels across, it goes 9 pixels up. So if 3264 is the 9 across (3264 / 16 = 204 for each 1) then 204 * 9 = 1836
Or in otherwords
Resolution is always WidthxHeight
Aspect ratio is always Width:Height
Take Resolution Width and divide it by Aspect Ratio Width to get a multiplier. Multiply the multiplier by the Aspect Ratio Height to get the resolution height.
rootSU said:
Cropping CUTS the image. It doesn't SQUISH it so no distortion is possible. You just wont be able to see parts of the photo you crop off.
Anyway, to get a 16:9 aspect ratio from a width of 3264, You would need to crop to a height of 1836.
4:3 means for every 4 pixels across the screen, it goes 3 pixels up the side of the screen. So if 3264 is the 4 across (3264 / 4 = 816 for each 1) then 816 * 3 = 2448
16:9 for every 16 pixels across, it goes 9 pixels up. So if 3264 is the 9 across (3264 / 16 = 204 for each 1) then 204 * 9 = 1836
Or in otherwords
Resolution is always WidthxHeight
Aspect ratio is always Width:Height
Take Resolution Width and divide it by Aspect Ratio Width to get a multiplier. Multiply the multiplier by the Aspect Ratio Height to get the resolution height.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Had to re read what you posted hahaha :'( , but I do what aspect ratio refers to, yes silly me, the picture won't be distorted, because I'm just chopping a piece of it, what I should have asked is wether cutting it to 3008 x 2000 will give me a true 16:9 aspect ratio, I cropped a HDR+ picture (3200x2168) and I got a 3200x1800 picture
Chad_Petree said:
Had to re read what you posted hahaha :'( , but I do what aspect ratio refers to, yes silly me, the picture won't be distorted, because I'm just chopping a piece of it, what I should have asked is wether cutting it to 3008 x 2000 will give me a true 16:9 aspect ratio, I cropped a HDR+ picture (3200x2168) and I got a 3200x1800 picture
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why would you choose to crop to 3200 width? Are you using an app with presets?
3200 x 1800
16 : 9
3200 / 16 = 200
200 * 9 = 1800
So yes
OR
3200/16 = 200
1800/9=200
So yes
.
rootSU said:
Why would you choose to crop to 3200 width? Are you using an app with presets?
3200 x 1800
16 : 9
3200 / 16 = 200
200 * 9 = 1800
So yes
OR
3200/16 = 200
1800/9=200
So yes
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes I'm using the Photoshop presets for 16:9 , why is it a different size than the size you're talking about ?
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Chad_Petree said:
Yes I'm using the Photoshop presets for 16:9 , why is it a different size than the size you're talking about ?
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok well I can confirm, that preset is 16:9 but you're also losing some width of the photo there too. The number in my earlier response is based on the maximum width of image produced by the N5 sensor. The optimum 16:9 resolution for an image taken from the Nexus 5 is 3264x1836, however your preset isn't much smaller so its a non-issue I suppose.
Of course for anyone else reading ( @Chad_Petree knows this) it will still only display as 2mpx 1920x1080 on a HD display. A higher resolution can only be achieved on a higher than HD resolution screen or printing to poster size.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
I believe the 3200 width comes from the HDR+ photos hes taking. The pictures are reduced in size presumably to better stitch the multiple images together.
rootSU said:
Of course for anyone else reading ( @Chad_Petree knows this) it will still only display as 2mpx 1920x1080 on a HD display. A higher resolution can only be achieved on a higher than HD resolution screen or printing to poster size.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, by the way I'll reserve judgment until I see them, maybe they will blow me away, but all this talk about 2k screens on phones, I think it's innecesary, putting more strain on the battery, just give me a damn phone that last 24 hours with heavy use, a normal sized phone not a phablet
bblzd said:
I believe the 3200 width comes from the HDR+ photos hes taking. The pictures are reduced in size presumably to better stitch the multiple images together.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That sounds like a plausible explanation, the photos taken with HDR+ are indeed a bit tinier
bblzd said:
I believe the 3200 width comes from the HDR+ photos hes taking. The pictures are reduced in size presumably to better stitch the multiple images together.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes you're right
---------- Post added at 10:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:49 AM ----------
Chad_Petree said:
Yes, by the way I'll reserve judgment until I see them, maybe they will blow me away
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They won't. It is impossible for there to be any visual improvement between a 2mpx image and a 6mpx image on a 2mpx screen. In fact, since the 6mpx image has to be condensed into 2mpx, it is even possible that a 2mpx image will look better than a 6mpx image.
The only time you will get blown away with more than 2mpx is if:
1) You have a screen with more than 2mpx (4k for example)
2) You're printing the image in an enlarged format
rootSU said:
yes you're right
---------- Post added at 10:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:49 AM ----------
They won't. It is impossible for there to be any visual improvement between a 2mpx image and a 6mpx image on a 2mpx screen. In fact, since the 6mpx image has to be condensed into 2mpx, it is even possible that a 2mpx image will look better than a 6mpx image.
The only time you will get blown away with more than 2mpx is if:
1) You have a screen with more than 2mpx (4k for example)
2) You're printing the image in an enlarged format
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was talking about 2k screens, not 2k videos on our 1080p screens, don't forget that when 1080p screens were announced we were quick to say they were gimmicks, but look how much better they look, and yes I realise that it probably has to do more with the fact that they come with new technologies and the resolution is not the main reason why they look better
Chad_Petree said:
I was talking about 2k screens, not 2k videos on our 1080p screens, don't forget that when 1080p screens were announced we were quick to say they were gimmicks, but look how much better they look, and yes I realise that it probably has to do more with the fact that they come with new technologies and the resolution is not the main reason why they look better
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not saying that they're a gimmick. 4k screens will become prevalent in the future. 2k seems like a pointless step to me though.
Watching a 1080 video on a 720 screen looks no better (in fact worse) than watching a 720 video on a 720 screen. The trick is, display whatever you are displaying at the native resolution for best results
...and yes, a 6mpx photo will look better than a 2mpx photo on a 2k screen. The 6mpx image will need to be condensed to fit but the 2mpx picture is a lower resolution so it will either need to be upscaled or simply not fill the screen.
However 1080 screens are 2mpx so a 2mpx photo will always look better than a 6mpx photo on the same screen because it is the native resolution of the image and screen.
So as long as you have nothing over and above 1080, a 6mpx image is pointless. That said, I prefer as full a resolution as I can get for future proofing.
Hi Guys,
I asked myself how the zoom on my Z3 should work.
As far as I know, the Z3 can Zoom into the sensor while taking 8mpix pictures.
While I tried it, it seemed to me that the quality gets really bad.
I was guessing that the indicator on the left is the indicator which separates digital zoom from the sensor-zoom.
As far as I thought the light grey indicator-bar shows the part which is the sensor zoom and the dark part is the digital zoom.
Considering the quality it seems to me that both modes are digital zoom. The picture looks really annoying while i use it.
I just thought maybe I'm doing something wrong - has anyone an idea how I can improve this or use it right or or or...
Regards,
Matthias
I didn't know about the 8mp restriction, i also tested it out in the shop, but in 20mp mode. The sections looked identical. However, as the sensor is not at it's limits at 8mp, i guess it could take a higher resolution and crop it to 8mp size at the zoomed in section.
Auto mode enables you to use the camera's Clear Zoom feature, which produces good-looking, lossless-like digital zoom.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the image is stretched by the software, which then attempts to fill in the blanks as best as it can. Well, thanks to the giant sensors on the Nokia Lumia 1020 and Sony Xperia Z1/Z1 Compact, zoom is no longer a problem. But instead of opting for bulky zoom lens (Galaxy S4 Zoom), they both rely on their massive resolution in order to get what we call 'lossless' zoom.
So what's lossless zoom, then? In simple terms, it means that zooming into a scene will only result in a negligible loss in quality. Think of it this way: there are so many pixels available with a camera like the one on the 1020 that you can 'crop' any part of the photo and still have more than enough pixels for a full-sized photo that will appear zoomed in. No upscaling, and no loss of quality. But how does it work in practice?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
More info about everything
http://www.phonearena.com/news/What...-work-in-the-Lumia-1020-and-Xperia-Z1_id52198
So conclusion is, it is all digital zoom
electrash said:
More info about everything
http://www.phonearena.com/news/What...-work-in-the-Lumia-1020-and-Xperia-Z1_id52198
So conclusion is, it is all digital zoom
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, it is something like digital zoom. But I think, the quality while zooming into an 8mpix picture should not be worse in quality (depending on the zoom factor) than the 20mpix picture.
When I take a 8 mpix picture, I assume that the image processor will take it in 20mpix and shrink it down to 8.
And what I would like to see is that
I could zoom in and it will just move into the sensor to a 1:1 size.
Another thing : while using the video mode, the stabilizer does an amazing job.
What about the photo-mode? I can't see any stabilisation there.
Since I only take 8mpi pictures, I guess the picture-frame could also be panned around the 20m of the sensor...
Regards,
Matthias
Maeffjus said:
Okay, it is something like digital zoom. But I think, the quality while zooming into an 8mpix picture should not be worse in quality (depending on the zoom factor) than the 20mpix picture.
When I take a 8 mpix picture, I assume that the image processor will take it in 20mpix and shrink it down to 8.
And what I would like to see is that
I could zoom in and it will just move into the sensor to a 1:1 size.
Another thing : while using the video mode, the stabilizer does an amazing job.
What about the photo-mode? I can't see any stabilisation there.
Since I only take 8mpi pictures, I guess the picture-frame could also be panned around the 20m of the sensor...
Regards,
Matthias
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In SA mode, phone take oversampled photo (which means he take 21mp, but he make HD pixel (one pixel combine colors from neibghours)... so when you take 8mpx it takes 20mp ovesampled.
When you zoom in, it will take more and more neibhours pixel to combine in one, so that means loseless.
Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the Samsung Galaxy A70 come out. A higher rating indicates that photos offer rich color (without over-saturating), sharp detail (with all subjects in-focus), and appropriate exposure (with even lighting).
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
Compared to the camera of the 3 years old S8+ (my wife's mobile), I find the camera of the A70 very very weak.
takes good pictures in bright light, however, once your light levels get lower the quality is bad (very grainy)
Is there any app one can suggest to use the sensor better? i find the camera modes not using the sensor to full capacity
i found that ALL the apps i tried see the sensor as 8 Mpix only
All the photo apps I have found show the main camera to be 8 mpix, this is due to Samsung using pixel binning which combines 4 pixels into 1 large pixel to try and improve low light pictures. So 32 divided by 4 gives 8 mpix images and all the apps including the gcam apk only see 8 mpix. Even raw mode apps such as light room show 8 mpix and produce around 15 mpix raw images. I have just seen a youtube review of the new xiaomi note 10 with a 108 mpix camera that pixel bins down to 27 mpix but interestingly has the ability to take a full 108 mpix image, although the images are not as good as the pixel binned ones I assume it would allow for full raw images to be taken which could be edited in light room. So the xiaomi is advertised as 108 and has the option for 108 images. The a70 is advertised as 32 with no way to take a 32 image imho this is false advertising, I am not aware of an app that allows pixel binning to be turned off but the xiaomi shows it can be done. What is needed is someone to develop an app to turn it off or like gcam develop the xiaomi camera app to use on other phones including the ability to use the full resolution. If anyone does know how to turn pixel binning off please comment. I do love the phone but the camera is the weakest aspect.
I didn't buy this phone for the camera. The phone was half the price of a Pixel device. The camera is an upgrade over my previous device which has a camera from 2014. I agree the A70 is not even in the same league as the devices that cost more. I recommend using the money saved and buy a standalone camera if you are serious about photography. I can overlook this flaw because I don't take a lot of pictures.
Mow Down said:
All the photo apps I have found show the main camera to be 8 mpix, this is due to Samsung using pixel binning which combines 4 pixels into 1 large pixel to try and improve low light pictures. So 32 divided by 4 gives 8 mpix images and all the apps including the gcam apk only see 8 mpix. Even raw mode apps such as light room show 8 mpix and produce around 15 mpix raw images. I have just seen a youtube review of the new xiaomi note 10 with a 108 mpix camera that pixel bins down to 27 mpix but interestingly has the ability to take a full 108 mpix image, although the images are not as good as the pixel binned ones I assume it would allow for full raw images to be taken which could be edited in light room. So the xiaomi is advertised as 108 and has the option for 108 images. The a70 is advertised as 32 with no way to take a 32 image imho this is false advertising, I am not aware of an app that allows pixel binning to be turned off but the xiaomi shows it can be done. What is needed is someone to develop an app to turn it off or like gcam develop the xiaomi camera app to use on other phones including the ability to use the full resolution. If anyone does know how to turn pixel binning off please comment. I do love the phone but the camera is the weakest aspect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can use full 32mb mode. In the camera app you see 3:4 , change it to the one that has 3:4H
Well back camera is ok - but front ? ... am I wrong - doesn't it have autofocus ? Is that possible ?
Khalid Madkour said:
You can use full 32mb mode. In the camera app you see 3:4 , change it to the one that has 3:4H
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi the 3x4h setting produces an 8mb image pixel binned from the 32mb lens, if you check the size of the images they are 4 to 6mb, they should be 4x as big with a 32mb lens. There is currently no way to get a full 32mb image either jpeg or raw, thats why all the camera apps show a max res of 8mb.
Mow Down said:
Hi the 3x4h setting produces an 8mb image pixel binned from the 32mb lens, if you check the size of the images they are 4 to 6mb, they should be 4x as big with a 32mb lens. There is currently no way to get a full 32mb image either jpeg or raw, thats why all the camera apps show a max res of 8mb.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When I chose the 3:4H mode in the stock camera I get images with a resolution of 6528x4896 which is 32mp.
Swizzy88 said:
When I chose the 3:4H mode in the stock camera I get images with a resolution of 6528x4896 which is 32mp.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi, Swizzy, the a70 camera pixel binns at 4 to 1, once the image is taken at 6528x4896 the processing combines 4 pixels to 1 increasing the pixel size to improve low light, this gives a finished image quater the size hence 8mp.
Check the gcam port thread and the comments people made about gcam only showing the main camera as 8mp.
Install gcam 6.2
I use default camera only for ultrawide and to use depht sensor on objects
samsung phones have the worst quality/price ratio. ?
---------- Post added at 02:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:08 PM ----------
my iphone 5s 6 years old, takes better pictures.
Marcury said:
Compared to the camera of the 3 years old S8+ (my wife's mobile), I find the camera of the A70 very very weak.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Camera is not weak, even if is good light. But keep in mind this is mid range. Older S8+ is flagship in which was added the best what was that time. So it's normal that Samsung S8+ maybe doing better photo, how u writing. But I have Samsung A70 and I can say for daily personal usage it is enough good quality and is not a shame to share it for others people, friends. Yes in bad light photo have a little bit noise. Keep in mind and fact that this is not professional camera, noise doing S8+ too. Noise at all is not good thing and with this facing a lot of smartphone and it doesn't matter which status it is: mid range or flagship, but that's why this phone or any newest other (probably, i'm not sure about very cheap mid range) have night mode which doing a little bit better photo as normal mode. Also, maybe my requirements is not so big as yours for camera, but a lot of experts, owners said that this is pretty good camera in generally. Photo is enough detailed and bright if you don't zooming it too much. If say honest strange thing is too take photo and zoom it a lot of at all. I looking into normal photo and don't looking for convergences of pixels, details
I found in youtube S8+ vs A70 camera compare (it is not yours? ), so maybe this will help to see others better and do not trust just yours negative opinion about this phone's camera (without fact that in bad light photo is really not good and have a little bit noises if say softy)
Video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpvpPzRnpog
My opinion in this video S8+ doing too colored photo. I like photo in which is real colors, but is not too much bolded. Red looks like creepy red, too much red here as possible to see. That's artificial, not real image. Brightness is enough the same from both models, of course there is some fusions in photo taken with Samsung A70, but these fusions most time is see when you zooming a lot of photo or doing that with camera as I mentioned. Then details is with noise a little bit, But I really don't know where did you found weakness in A70 camera (sounds from you like A70 photo is very bad what is not true my opinion and how I saw from others about this phone ), my opinion as I mentioned A70 doing enough good photo. I'm not professional photographer, but I seeing into phone camera not like in professional device with which you can do very impressive quality photo - even in night or when is bad light, so maybe that's why my strictness is not so big as probably yours. Also keep in mind most mobile camera in bad light doing photo with noise, S8+ is not exception as I mentioned too and S8+ is flagship. So maybe compare S8+ with S9 or better S10???
---------- Post added at 01:31 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:56 AM ----------
sebx_g1 said:
Well back camera is ok - but front ? ... am I wrong - doesn't it have autofocus ? Is that possible ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung A70 haven't auto focus: Front Camera - Auto Focus - No, see in Samsung web site https://www.samsung.com/uk/smartphones/galaxy-a70/SM-A705FZKUBTU/
---------- Post added at 02:08 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:31 AM ----------
xprzs said:
samsung phones have the worst quality/price ratio. ?
---------- Post added at 02:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:08 PM ----------
my iphone 5s 6 years old, takes better pictures.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I disagree. Sony than from afar does not match with Samsung's mid range or Samsung smartphones at all. For example: in my location is selling now Sony Xperia 10 Plus (price 360 euros) and Samsung A70 (price 337 - 350), the same shop, but Samsung A70 different colors have a little bit different prices. So prices is almost the same, right? But let's see what is inside phones:
Source: https://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?idPhone1=9646&idPhone2=9591
SHORT COMPARE
XPERIA 10 PLUS:
IPS LCD capacitive touchscreen. 1080 x 2520 pixels, 21:9 ratio (~422 ppi density). Corning Gorilla Glass 5. Qualcomm SDM636 Snapdragon 636 (14 nm). Octa-core (4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 Gold & 4x1.6 GHz Kryo 260 Silver). 64GB 4GB RAM, 64GB 6GB RAM. 12 MP, f/1.8, 27mm (wide), 1/2.8", 1.25µm, PDAF, 8 MP, f/2.4, 53mm (telephoto), 1/4", 1.12µm, PDAF, 2x optical zoom. [email protected], [email protected] 8 MP, f/2.0, 24mm (wide), 1/4", 1.12µm. A-GPS, GLONASS. Non-removable Li-Ion 3000 mAh battery. Fast battery charging 18W.
TEST result: Basemark OS II: 2159 / Basemark OS II 2.0: 1764 Basemark X: 15035
SAMSUNG A70:
Super AMOLED capacitive touchscreen. 1080 x 2400 pixels, 20:9 ratio (~393 ppi density). Corning Gorilla Glass 3 (strange decision from Samsung, but... we have what we have). Qualcomm SDM675 Snapdragon 675 (11 nm). Octa-core (2x2.0 GHz Kryo 460 Gold & 6x1.7 GHz Kryo 460 Silver). 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM (Sony don't adding even in flagship 8GB RAM memory - shame). 32 MP, f/1.7, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm, PDAF, 8 MP, f/2.2, 12mm (ultrawide), 1/4.0", 1.12µm, 5 MP, f/2.2, (wide), 1/5.0", 1.12µm, depth sensor. [email protected], [email protected]/240fps. 32 MP, f/2.0, 26mm (wide), 1/2.8", 0.8µm. A-GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS. Non-removable Li-Po 4500 mAh battery. Fast battery charging 25W.
TEST result: Basemark OS II: 2814 / Basemark OS II 2.0: 2737 Basemark X: 19341
This is not all specifications, but my opinion most important in smartphone. As you can see in most thing Samsung A70 is much more better as Sony which have biggest price a little bit, but looks much more worst as Samsung. I agree if you want to say that Chinese manufacturers making better smartphone for the same prices, yes i could buy Xiaomi Mi 9T, which in my location from the same shop cost 328 euros. But Xioami Mi9T:
1. Is Chinese smartphone. I have Xiaomi (Amazfit smart watch), so i know how they like to do a lot of bugs in software and how hard to fix it, to present world wide features, but most of them do not add in international versions.
2. Amazfit's, which is part of Xioami, support is very bad, agents looks like assholes from child's garden. But maybe with Xioami this problem is not exit, some saying it different support quality, but after smart watch i don't trust this company anymore. Even when is a lot of bugs in watch and so hard they fixing it.
3. This is compare of all these models https://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?idPhone1=9646&idPhone2=9591&idPhone3=9738#diff- in which you can see that Xioami Mi9T is a little more powerfull smartphone compare with these models (Qualcomm SDM730 Snapdragon 730 (8 nm), Octa-core (2x2.2 GHz Kryo 470 Gold & 6x1.8 GHz Kryo 470 Silver), Adreno 618), but i heard that apps like to force close often, maybe it's already fixed, but... also haven't memory card which for me is very important. Camera in Xioami Mi9T is much more better as Samsung A70 (48 MP, f/1.8, 26mm (wide), 1/2.0", 0.8µm, PDAF, 8 MP, f/2.4, 53mm (telephoto), 1/4.0", 1.12µm, PDAF, 2x optical zoom, 13 MP, f/2.4, 12mm (ultrawide), 1/3.1", 1.12µm), also recording is [email protected], [email protected]/120/240fps, [email protected], included steady shot. But battery is only Non-removable Li-Po 4000 mAh battery with only Fast battery charging 18W. So i disagree that Samsung compare quality and price is bad, coz Sony here looks much more worst and even compare with Xiaomi Samsung is not so bad. Some specifications better have Xioami, some Samsung. Which by the way is very important to me.
Mow Down said:
the a70 camera pixel binns at 4 to 1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ahem, no. Just no.
I agree with all who say that photo quality is terrible. I had an S8, the pictures taken with that looked very good out of the box. The picture processing on the A70 is just awful:
-It oversharpens way too much, especially in low light, the sharpening halos are painful to look at
-It does overly aggressive noise reduction which results in a serious lack of detail. Even by just zooming in a little bit it becomes clear that however the image looks "sharp" in 0% magnification there are literally no details captured as they are killed by the noise reduction
One other thing I don't really understand, is that the standard camera resolution is 4032x3024=12,1k=12 Megapixels. How can it be 12 megapixels, if the quad-bayer arrangement should result in 32/4=8 Megapixels, as the Gcam records in? If somebody could explain this i would be really happy.
I actually compared the photos from the A70 with my old (still working good) galaxy s5, and i was shocked, as in many scenarios the S5 actually produced much more detailed and vibrant pictures. That's when I decided to try the GCAM. I'm so happy right now, as this actually brings up the A70 camera quality to the level of the Galaxy s8 which I had previously as a company phone. With the GCAM the pictures are looking flagship-camera like with details properly captured, white balance is spot on (stock camera messes that up too, it takes too warm pictures almost in all scenarios), and the dynamic range is excellent too. And most importantly, there is no hideous oversharpening going on with the GCAM.
I'll link the images soon when i have a chance to upload them.
Swordfishx86 said:
Ahem, no. Just no.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you elaborate on that? I just wrote a comment, let me quote the respective part:
"One other thing I don't really understand, is that the standard camera resolution is 4032x3024=12,1k=12 Megapixels. How can it be 12 megapixels, if the quad-bayer arrangement should result in 32/4=8 Megapixels, as the Gcam records in? If somebody could explain this i would be really happy."
Thanks
8mp interpolated to 32mp
what the hell is binning?
it is good old interpolation
this is an awful phone, awful camera quality, (because of an awful sensor)
no software support, one ui 1.0 is far worse than its rivals.
they marketed the one ui 2.0 and android 10 updates, but they are constantly postponed... to an unknown date...
because the lier company is busy with releasing other crap phones (like the a71, 51 vsvs)
they do not have any respect to the old customers, they just flood market
by flood marketing, every 3-4 months they release 3-4 new crap models, they are almost the same hardware as the older models.
they have many marketing lies, and they hope to fool more new customers by these marketing lies.
Yep the camera is terrible.
I was hoping they would do something via updates - but no.
I love the screen, size is great for me. Performance is good for my use, battery good. In screen finger print sensor is sub par but I can put up with it.
But the camera - oh dear - it's not as if the phone is a cheap and nasty phone - but the pictures it takes look like it is....
In most respects it's the best phone I have ever had (I don't do flag ships) - but they camera!!
I think you get the picture (pun intended).
Cheers
I posted an article on samsung community with pictures to compare the stock cam to gcam in lower light conditions. Also, I explain how the 32 megapixel sensor ends up shooting 12 MPG photos with "pixel binning". Let me quickly sum that up here as more people were asking this:
The 32MP camera is used in pixel binning mode, that results in a 8 MP shot (4 pixels are grouped as 1), AND the software actually UPSCALES that 8 MP shot to 12 by basically stretching the image with some AI quality retain helping process. What the actual hell. So yeah. Basically this phone takes 8 megapixel photos, which are then enlarged to 12.
I would have never thought that samsung would pull something as cheap as this on their customers. I'm now at a point that I'm going to use this phone for now, as it was basically free when I joined a phone fleet, but when it will come to my money, I will never opt for a samsung again. This is a shame btw, as the phone itself is not bad actually. Screen is epic, the battery is killer, and oneUI is actually very good, seems quite fluent and polished. Unfortunately the photo quality is not only bad thing (WIFI download speed is sluggish, touchscreen has sensitivity and touch registering issues, and fingerprint sensor is very unreliable), but the most ridiculous is the camera by far.
Below is my topic for the photo quality.
https://eu.community.samsung.com/t5...xy-A70-Camera-performance-issues/td-p/1565446
Cheers.