Database Info

[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

Camera auto mode is horrible

Is anyone experiencing this, I don't see many threads?
Tonight I did a camera comparison with a friends IPhone 6 and the IPhone 6 was far superior in every sense. Images from the Z3 generally seem grainy and lack detail and sharpness.
I see a few people have mentioned that the camera is better of you manually set the options. This isn't what a smartphone is for when you need to snap a quick shot, by the time you've done all that you've missed the moment.
I swapped my LG G3 (which also took better shots) for this and I'm really underwhelmed by the camera on the Z3, which ironically is its main selling point.
Can anyone suggest some third party camera apps which would perform better?
Also do you think Sony will fix this, i owned the original Z and can recall having some camera issues. I didn't think they would still be present 4 years on.
The Z3 camera was hyped up so much, I really can't see why. Great on paper, not so good in the real world.

Xperia Z3 D6603
rm83855 said:
Is anyone experiencing this, I don't see many threads?
Tonight I did a camera comparison with a friends IPhone 6 and the IPhone 6 was far superior in every sense. Images from the Z3 generally seem grainy and lack detail and sharpness.
I see a few people have mentioned that the camera is better of you manually set the options. This isn't what a smartphone is for when you need to snap a quick shot, by the time you've done all that you've missed the moment.
I swapped my LG G3 (which also took better shots) for this and I'm really underwhelmed by the camera on the Z3, which ironically is its main selling point.
Can anyone suggest some third party camera apps which would perform better?
Also do you think Sony will fix this, i owned the original Z and can recall having some camera issues. I didn't think they would still be present 4 years on.
The Z3 camera was hyped up so much, I really can't see why. Great on paper, not so good in the real world.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
superior auto mode is basically a 8 mp with hdr and flash with some adjustments better go with the manual so you can choose a higher mega pixel.

nolihowell said:
superior auto mode is basically a 8 mp with hdr and flash with some adjustments better go with the manual so you can choose a higher mega pixel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I installed Pro Capture and it seems a lot better. Sony is doing half a job. You cannot supply excellent hardware and not take advantage of it with the software. It seems most people are impressed by the specs of the camera more than its ability to actually take a picture! I cannot believe how much hype surrounding this camera there was.
Have you tried the xposed module 'superiorauto 20mp'? which forces the SA mode to shoot at 20megapixels?

Poor Camera Results

My pictures are coming out flat, with very poor contrast and colour rendition. I've owned mainly Samsungs before, and their cameras, even lower in MP, have given excellent results. I was expecting something lot better with a 20MP camera, but the quality I'm getting is comparable to maybe a 5MP camera. I use the Superior Auto mode, with full 20MP resolution.
Anyone else disappointed with the camera as well?

I'm not disappointed with it but seems some people are. Have you looked in the General section? There's a thread for voicing your opinion on the cam: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2887635

J_Kirk said:
My pictures are coming out flat, with very poor contrast and colour rendition. I've owned mainly Samsungs before, and their cameras, even lower in MP, have given excellent results. I was expecting something lot better with a 20MP camera, but the quality I'm getting is comparable to maybe a 5MP camera. I use the Superior Auto mode, with full 20MP resolution.
Anyone else disappointed with the camera as well?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just talked about that few days ago...
I was comparing Note4 and Z3 and Note 4 kicked Z3s ass...
Z3 can take great photos outside when there's a lot of light but in lower light conditions photos are terrible...
You can always switch to manual shooting mode and set few things but you won't get nothing special...
That's the only thing I would like to see improved in next gen Xperia...
I'm absolutely satisfied with everything else..
OK, that and maybe X-pen, Sammy has S-pen so why shouldn't we have X-pen
It's amazing addon for many things (I'm using S-Pen to sign documents in PDF, without needing to print them out) and emailing them after signing...
Z3 powered by Tapatalk

funky0308 said:
I just talked about that few days ago...
I was comparing Note4 and Z3 and Note 4 kicked Z3s ass...
Z3 can take great photos outside when there's a lot of light but in lower light conditions photos are terrible...
You can always switch to manual shooting mode and set few things but you won't get nothing special...
That's the only thing I would like to see improved in next gen Xperia...
I'm absolutely satisfied with everything else..
OK, that and maybe X-pen, Sammy has S-pen so why shouldn't we have X-pen
It's amazing addon for many things (I'm using S-Pen to sign documents in PDF, without needing to print them out) and emailing them after signing...
Z3 powered by Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Note 4 kicked Z3s ass ?
Whay don' t you buy one!

TheTeslaCoil said:
Note 4 kicked Z3s ass ?
Whay don' t you buy one!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hahah...grow up buddy..
I have both device and I'm in Xperia threads for a years... So please - save your kind words for someone else...
Z3 powered by Tapatalk

funky0308 said:
Hahah...grow up buddy..
I have both device and I'm in Xperia threads for a years... So please - save your kind words for someone else...
Z3 powered by Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The kind words are for you.
Enjoy your KNOX.

funky0308 thanks for your feedback. I feel exactly the same.. Z3 is a great device, EXCEPT for the camera. I've used Note, Note2, 3 AND 4, but never found much use for the Spen other than scribbling and drawing etc. in my free time. So I don't miss it at all. A 5.5" screen, however, would help tremendously.

Sony Xperia XZ Premium Reviews

GSM Arena posted the first full review:
http://www.gsmarena.com/sony_xperia_xz_premium-review-1610.php

look at video comparison (XZP-XZs-S8) http://www.gsmarena.com/vidcmp.php3?idType=5&idPhone1=8593&idPhone2=8599&idPhone3=8161

First thoughts, S8 wins. What do you think?

Sony camera is much improved and very competitive with the other flagships from what I've seen around the web. I've got no issues going with the Sony.

If the parameters were the same, I would give you the reason, but this is not the case.
XZP: ISO 800 , 1/32s
S8: ISO 250 1/10s
Honestly the Xperia XZ Premium does a better job considering that the iso is higher

http://www.meltystyle.fr/xperia-xz-...tphone-et-on-y-a-participe-exclu-a603618.html

zeph_syk said:
First thoughts, S8 wins. What do you think?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you take everything into consideration, no I don't agree at all.

kiosk123 said:
look at video comparison (XZP-XZs-S8) http://www.gsmarena.com/vidcmp.php3?idType=5&idPhone1=8593&idPhone2=8599&idPhone3=8161
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unfortunately the s8 looks a lot better than the xz premium in these tests.
I dont want the s8, but decent alternatives look limited at the moment!

shineyads said:
Unfortunately the s8 looks a lot better than the xz premium in these tests.
I dont want the s8, but decent alternatives look limited at the moment!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I dont think...
Look at the heart, photo from S8 is overexposed, on Xz Premium is darker and have more details...
Or look on brushes, photo from xz premium looks more detailed, on S8 looks like watercolor...

kiosk123 said:
I dont think...
Look at the heart, photo from S8 is overexposed, on Xz Premium is darker and have more details...
Or look on brushes, photo from xz premium looks more detailed, on S8 looks like watercolor...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To me the heart looks underexposed on the Sony and the brushes in general are noisier than on the s8 (although neither are fantastic).

I dont like the lowlight photos. Really dark...

shineyads said:
To me the heart looks underexposed on the Sony and the brushes in general are noisier than on the s8 (although neither are fantastic).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its because Sony have only 2.0 aperture, maybe have noiser photo but more detailed

kiosk123 said:
Its because Sony have only 2.0 aperture, maybe have noiser photo but more detailed
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For me there's no point have detailed photos when it's so noisy though.
Will be interesting to see if the Oneplus 5 has a dual camera setup and the quality they can produce.

Stuff have posted their review... and they're not overly enthusiastic about the camera either (although battery life seems OK)...
https://www.stuff.tv/my/sony/xperia-xz-premium/review-0

Hmm I'm bit a bit disappointed yet again I was really hoping for good things. I don't want the S8 because I hate curved edges. So I'm left with waiting for the Google pixel 2 or sonys next flagship in September/October which will be an improved on this..! Urgh I hate waiting lol. I think Sony really need to focus on their algorithms like the pixel takes excellent shots!

figo_rulz11 said:
Hmm I'm bit a bit disappointed yet again I was really hoping for good things. I don't want the S8 because I hate curved edges. So I'm left with waiting for the Google pixel 2 or sonys next flagship in September/October which will be an improved on this..! Urgh I hate waiting lol. I think Sony really need to focus on their algorithms like the pixel takes excellent shots!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I strongly recommend you have a look at the HTC U11 that was launched today - it seems to be everything that I wanted the XZ Premium to be! The camera beats the S8 and Pixel (according to dxomark) and it supports hi res audio too. Benchmark wise it beats the XZP (if benchmarks are your thing). It doesn't have 960fps slow mo or a 4k screen, but realistically I think those are more gimmicks than something that would be used often (although if the XZP supported Daydream then it would make it more useful), but it does have it's own gimmick of squeezable sides which can be used to take photos, launch apps, etc. The only downside is the battery is slightly smaller at 3000mAh, but HTC seems to optimise previous phones pretty well from what I have briefly read.
There's a hands on review here (it's still being written, so keep checking back if it hasn't been completed yet...
http://www.gsmarena.com/htc_u_11_hands_on-review-1609.php

shineyads said:
I strongly recommend you have a look at the HTC U11 that was launched today - it seems to be everything that I wanted the XZ Premium to be! The camera beats the S8 and Pixel (according to dxomark) and it supports hi res audio too. Benchmark wise it beats the XZP (if benchmarks are your thing). It doesn't have 960fps slow mo or a 4k screen, but realistically I think those are more gimmicks than something that would be used often (although if the XZP supported Daydream then it would make it more useful), but it does have it's own gimmick of squeezable sides which can be used to take photos, launch apps, etc. The only downside is the battery is slightly smaller at 3000mAh, but HTC seems to optimise previous phones pretty well from what I have briefly read.
There's a hands on review here (it's still being written, so keep checking back if it hasn't been completed yet...
http://www.gsmarena.com/htc_u_11_hands_on-review-1609.php
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I saw this earlier I was very impressed with the DxO mark of 90! I love the photos taken by the Pixel so I'm sure the HTC will be in the same class. My only gripe is I heavily rely on a 3.5mm headphone jack and charging at the same time due to my needs at night so this is what is keeping me from the HTC unfortunately it plays a big role in my work. 3000mah battery doesn't phase me as the S8 did better in terms of battery life compared to the Xz premium which has a bigger battery. I think software plays a big part in optimisation for camera/battery.
The search continues... :laugh:

shineyads said:
I strongly recommend you have a look at the HTC U11 that was launched today - it seems to be everything that I wanted the XZ Premium to be! The camera beats the S8 and Pixel (according to dxomark) and it supports hi res audio too. Benchmark wise it beats the XZP (if benchmarks are your thing). It doesn't have 960fps slow mo or a 4k screen, but realistically I think those are more gimmicks than something that would be used often (although if the XZP supported Daydream then it would make it more useful), but it does have it's own gimmick of squeezable sides which can be used to take photos, launch apps, etc. The only downside is the battery is slightly smaller at 3000mAh, but HTC seems to optimise previous phones pretty well from what I have briefly read.
There's a hands on review here (it's still being written, so keep checking back if it hasn't been completed yet...
http://www.gsmarena.com/htc_u_11_hands_on-review-1609.php
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
4k hdr is no gimmick

sfex3best said:
4k hdr is no gimmick
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You'd only really notice the difference side-by-side with a screen without it, plus there really isn't much 4k hdr content out there to make use of it. If only it had been Daydream compatible.
I'd be interested to know how you'll be using the 4k hdr extensively when the phone comes out?

shineyads said:
You'd only really notice the difference side-by-side with a screen without it, plus there really isn't much 4k hdr content out there to make use of it. If only it had been Daydream compatible.
I'd be interested to know how you'll be using the 4k hdr extensively when the phone comes out?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had the z5 premium and also have 4k hdr tv with a ps4 pro so I know what the 4k hdr fuss is all about. It's hard to notice it but once I go back to a general game which has no hdr support you can really tell. I mean its not night and day difference but you can tell.
I had the z5 premium I loved it. Sharpness and quality was fantastic. Pictures I took when viewing the images in that high res display were brilliant . I had some that looked unbelievable.*But the phone itself was difficult to hold and the battery was average not terrible and not great. Both these things have been fixed on the xz premium with looped edges and the supposedly 8hour screen on time screen.
Support for 4k screen wasn't great back then either. Although this time I believe they have already added 4k hdr support in amazon prime and I believe more to come.
The only people who'll tell you this "4k hdr is gimmick thing" are high end reviewers who blindly go over things and haters.
So anyway back to your q I'll probably be using it to view my amazing camera pictures on that high res screen. Along with 4khdr amazon prime content. YouTube apparently has 4k but no hdr and lets hope Netflix does too. And like I did with the z5premium I will download some movies in 4k too
Along with all this I'll be testing out vr although not Daydream compatible it may still work out with riftcat and pc vr. And of course im a huge fan of ps4 remote play too.
Overall the xz premium device according to many reviews I've seen is pretty much the complete package. So yeah im hyped for this one

Help me understand this camera

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