Interesting information regarding the camera on the Evo...

[wrapkgb]

It's probably a driver issue. If it's not it's a software issue within the camera app.
Omnivision probably releases their own driver I'm assuming in Linux. Chances are Apple and Omnivision worked pretty close together to make sure the driver would work well when it was ported to iOS 4. Since the Iphone 4 will use the same camera for the next couple of years (means lots of profit for 1 camera model), it only makes sense.
HTC probably isn't hard pressed to work so hard on 1 phone. In any case, I've sent am email to Omnivisions technical department to try and get some demo pictures in low light conditions, and 1080/720p video so we can see what the sensor is REALLY capable of. Hopefully they can provide a demonstration... I also requested any driver set they may have for it.

Strong work! Hopefully they'll get back to you with some good info!

 

[NicksGarage]

Can't wait to hear the outcome of this.

 

[Mdorty]

Hey Jerzy, keep us updated on what Vaelek has to say on this. I'd be interested to hear a dev's opinions/thoughts.

 

[Jerzyiroc]

This is the logcat that comes up when you turn the camcorder app...
QualcommCameraHardware startCamera: camsensor name ov8810, flash 1

Qualcomm Camera Hardware? The hardware is Omnivision

 

[Darth Mo]

This is the logcat that comes up when you turn the camcorder app...
QualcommCameraHardware startCamera: camsensor name ov8810, flash 1

Qualcomm Camera Hardware? The hardware is Omnivision

You need to clarify who makes the sensor and who makes the image processor. Those can be two COMPLETELY different things. The sensor catches light and converts it to electrical signal, the image processor decides what a photo is going to look like based on those signals.

It's likely that the phone doesn't have a dedicated image process (ie Canon's DIGIC line) and it's all done in software which mean that it would be a Qualcomm call in the case of the Evo since it's heart is made by Qualcomm.

Not saying you're not on to something, just that you're jumping to a conclusion without enough info.

 

[C01E]

The driver is irrelevant. If it was attempting to use some other driver, the camera wouldn't work at all. Period. In fact, it would likely crash whenever you tried to use it.

SO I guess you have never intentionally loaded the wrong driver in windows to force something to work eh?

My Netgear wireless card thats using a driver for a COMPLETELY different chipset to force it to work in windows 7 would like to speak with you...

 

[anon(53030)]

Very interesting

 

[Darth Mo]

SO I guess you have never intentionally loaded the wrong driver in windows to force something to work eh?

My Netgear wireless card thats using a driver for a COMPLETELY different chipset to force it to work in windows 7 would like to speak with you...

That's pretty much impossible, unless you're confusing terms. The reason we have drivers in the first place is because of the variance in architecture from different manufacturers that have to run on the same platforms.

Different OEM can use the same chips, so a given driver may work for two different brands. Broadcom manufactures particularly common chipsets used by Netgear, Dlink, Airlink, and a number of lesser knows OEM.

If the driver written for your specific manufacturer doesn't work, it's possible that another manufacturer using that chipset has made a newer driver for it that is more compatible.

 

[2CupsWithString]

That's pretty much impossible, unless you're confusing terms. The reason we have drivers in the first place is because of the variance in architecture from different manufacturers that have to run on the same platforms.

Different OEM can use the same chips, so a given driver may work for two different brands. Broadcom manufactures particularly common chipsets used by Netgear, Dlink, Airlink, and a number of lesser knows OEM.

If the driver written for your specific manufacturer doesn't work, it's possible that another manufacturer using that chipset has made a newer driver for it that is more compatible.

This reminds me of nvidia/ati before unified drivers.

Aside from that, this is probably a bigger software issue than just the driver for the camera, whoever coded it. The driver just tells the kernel how to get the device going but we need libraries to use it right and we need to know what APIs are in those libraries so a camera app can use them, that being said the camera app itself has to support whatever methods can be used to get the camera the best it can be. That's why there's no be all end all android camera app. Android supports a bunch of camera native api calls but it's up to the kernel to use the camera right in the first place to return better image data to the app.

I don't know if this would even be possible to get "fixed" on a stock Evo, I think this would be something like a custom kernel and some supporting bits to get the most out of it.

 

[Caitlyn McKenzie]

Okay, so I decided to do a lot of research into these sensors. Here's the thing, and I know it's going to bother a lot of you:

The iPhone's sensor is better.
These two sensors are not identical, even discounting the 5 to 8MP difference. The 5MP sensor that the iPhone has, has another feature.

http://www.ovt.com/products/sensor.php?id=65

Embedded TrueFocus ISP, enabling better denoise, sharpening, gamma correction and color correction

The EVO's sensor does not have this.
http://www.ovt.com/products/sensor.php?id=61


Based on what I've read there, any driver differences wouldn't matter. There's only so many things you can modify/control from the driver, all of which we already have access to in the camera application (exposure, contrast, etc). The only other way to make a picture look better would be a completely different camera firmware (which I imagine you can only install once due to its One Time Programmable memory), or lots of post-processing.

Now we can stop arguing over irrelevant stuff and just enjoy our EVOs as is.

 

[Jerzyiroc]

Okay, so I decided to do a lot of research into these sensors. Here's the thing, and I know it's going to bother a lot of you:

The iPhone's sensor is better.
These two sensors are not identical, even discounting the 5 to 8MP difference. The 5MP sensor that the iPhone has, has another feature.

OmniVision



The EVO's sensor does not have this.
OmniVision


Based on what I've read there, any driver differences wouldn't matter. There's only so many things you can modify/control from the driver, all of which we already have access to in the camera application (exposure, contrast, etc). The only other way to make a picture look better would be a completely different camera firmware (which I imagine you can only install once due to its One Time Programmable memory), or lots of post-processing.

Now we can stop arguing over irrelevant stuff and just enjoy our EVOs as is.

You beat me to the punch. I was just on the same page about the iPhone 4's camera. Gotta say I'm a bit disappointed. While it is just a phone at the end of the day, htc spent a lot of time bragging about it's camera and video HD capabilities when they had no business doing so. It's practically false advertising. What bothers me is the camera still a very good camera. HTC is absolutely clueless with making a decent camera and camcorder app. It's still a good camera and has potential. Hopefully a developer can unleash some stuff. If not w/e. Still love the phone.