Camera how good is it.....really?

[Wullie32]

I must say mind, whenever I look at shots comparing the two phones in different conditions, and looking in the photos thread on each phone's forum, I'm struggling to see the massive difference between the two even in daylight. The shots from the One seem to look great.

 

[warpdrive]

I must say mind, whenever I look at shots comparing the two phones in different conditions, and looking in the photos thread on each phone's forum, I'm struggling to see the massive difference between the two even in daylight. The shots from the One seem to look great.

That's just it. There isn't much of a difference. The htc one will be slightly better in low light, but slightly worse in bright. The difference is so slight, that it is silly to say one is better then the other.

Posted via Android Central App

 

[TimmyB]

That's just it. There isn't much of a difference. The htc one will be slightly better in low light, but slightly worse in bright. The difference is so slight, that it is silly to say one is better then the other.

Posted via Android Central App

Totally agree with both of you. Anyone that REALLY cares about the quality of photos to THAT level should be using a REAL camera, with a real lens setup. If it were possible to take stunning pictures with these tiny little phone-style lenses, don't you think the camera stores would have gone out of business by now? I mean, who's going to walk into a camera shop and drop $200 to $1000 on a lens when their phone can take the "same" picture? Never going to happen, folks.

Both cameras are fine. If you like one better than the other, buy it. That's called capitalism.

 

[SCjRqrQCnBQ19QoYCtdl]

Ah, it's not that you can't ask an honesty question, it's just that now your question has changed. Let me explain.

There are a few reasons why the HTC One can take fantastic low light shots. The first is the f2 lens. It let's in a quarter of an f-stop more light then the Samsung S4 (or 3/4 of an f-stop more then the S3). The next thing is the optical image stability. At slow exposures, this will help with camera shake.

Now I'm not saying that a 4mp censor is not good or helpful in low light, just that it doesn't help in any way to capture more light then say an 8mp censor of the same size.
Clearly we agree that the 8mp censor has 100% more resolution to work with when we talk about capturing detail.
I'm also sure we can agree that on paper, a lower pixel count censor like on the HTC One "should" capture far more dynamic range (think detail in the shadows and highlights). Sadly, due to poor software, highlights (and sometimes shadows) are blown out in reality.

But is it only the f2 lens and optical image stability that helps? No. But ultra pixel technology is not it as well. So what is it that does help?
I personally think what helps the most is that htc switched the auto and night modes to make night mode its default auto mode (and the original night mode does in fact shoot at a higher then normal iso by default). So, under htc's now new auto mode, it shoots by default at a higher iso then any other cell phone. A nice trick, in fact perfect for what most like myself would want from a cellphone regardless of pixel density. This is why even in daylight, the HTC One will shoot at a higher then normal iso as compared to a typical phone. Say iso200 as compared to iso100. This is also why in daylight the htc one also had more noise then other phones in daylight pics.

As for Samsung, if anything they can do the same if they wanted with thier software. It doesn't take much to make the software shoot at a higher iso level.

One more thing, please don't talk about my logic or anything else I didn't say. You are sounding confrontational like in the past and it isn't helping you. If you want to talk facts, then let's do just that.

Posted via Android Central App

You keep claiming that larger pixels don't help, but you continue to be wrong. What causes you to continue to deny basic digital photography physics? Are you hell bent on trying to prove lower resolution is the wrong approach? Why? Why continue to deny that larger pixels aid in low light?

 

[Johnny Roberts]

Silly debate. We're talking cell phone cameras. they're for quick photos on the go. Both cameras do what they're supposed to do, and in good conditions, can even be great. I love my s4 camera. I like my One camera. I have realistic expectations.

 

[SCjRqrQCnBQ19QoYCtdl]

That's just it. There isn't much of a difference. The htc one will be slightly better in low light, but slightly worse in bright. The difference is so slight, that it is silly to say one is better then the other.

Posted via Android Central App

I haven't seen any low light shots with the s4. Can you link me to some that are good?

In the s4 forum I found 3 examples and wasn't impressed with any of them compared to the One.

this one which he said was iso 1000 and 1/10 second
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/05/06/agy5uze9.jpg

This one looks pretty good, no exposure info. Very noisy though. This looks like output from the one at about 2500 iso

forums.androidcentral.com/attachments/samsung-galaxy-s4/67699d1368214802-galaxy-s4-camera-pictures-lets-see-what-you-got-uploadfromtaptalk1368214800942.jpg

This one he said was even dark and he was disappointed in the low light capabilities.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7490029/2013-05-03 12.39.24.jpg

 

[Greg Wilkins]

I guess the camera is ok? But is it just me, or does it make snoop look like he's wearing a bandanna suit? Surely, a camera with better low light performance would fix this! Right?

Posted via Android Central App

 

[Kevin OQuinn]

I saw this and thought it was good info. Well need to finish reading it later.

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/does.pixel.size.matter/

Posted via Android Central App

 

[warpdrive]

You keep claiming that larger pixels don't help, but you continue to be wrong. What causes you to continue to deny basic digital photography physics? Are you hell bent on trying to prove lower resolution is the wrong approach? Why? Why continue to deny that larger pixels aid in low light?

Because they don't. Unless you are saying that the htc one has better dynamic range then it does. ..and then you would be all alone in that theory.

Larger pixels help with a better pixel to noise ratio. That is it. In other words for the lay person, larger pixels help in both bright light and poor light with added detail in such things as shadows and highlights. But the added detail can't help make up for resolution in the case of the htc one. I would even say that because of such a poor lens, htc has to over sharpen in software to aid in giving more detail in an image.

Posted via Android Central App

 

[SCjRqrQCnBQ19QoYCtdl]

Because they don't. Unless you are saying that the htc one has better dynamic range then it does. ..and then you would be all alone in that theory.

Larger pixels help with a better pixel to noise ratio. That is it. In other words for the lay person, larger pixels help in both bright light and poor light with added detail in such things as shadows and highlights. But the added detail can't help make up for resolution in the case of the htc one. I would even say that because of such a poor lens, htc has to over sharpen in software to aid in giving more detail in an image.

Posted via Android Central App

Wrong, you need to do some research.


You referred to Anandtech -

Anandtech:

"Other downsides to smaller pixels are again a loss of sensitivity, partially from having a smaller integration area, partially from other things like the smaller active region for the sensor and a change in drive voltage."

And with regard to "Ultrapixels":

"The result is, like anything else, a tradeoff but in the other direction - improved low light sensitivity and dynamic range at the expense of spatial resolution."

So according to Anandtech, smaller pixels are less sensitive. Larger pixels provide improved low light sensitivity and dynamic range. (However, I don't think the dynamic range has been delivered - or if it has, then the dynamic range of the 13mp cameras must be terrible. I am hopeful that tweaking the software will deliver on the dynamic range front.)

 

[warpdrive]

Wrong, you need to do some research.


You referred to Anandtech -

Anandtech:

"Other downsides to smaller pixels are again a loss of sensitivity, partially from having a smaller integration area, partially from other things like the smaller active region for the sensor and a change in drive voltage."

And with regard to "Ultrapixels":

"The result is, like anything else, a tradeoff but in the other direction - improved low light sensitivity and dynamic range at the expense of spatial resolution."

So according to Anandtech, smaller pixels are less sensitive. Larger pixels provide improved low light sensitivity and dynamic range. (However, I don't think the dynamic range has been delivered - or if it has, then the dynamic range of the 13mp cameras must be terrible. I am hopeful that tweaking the software will deliver on the dynamic range front.)

I'm not saying that I disagree with Brian at Anandtech. What I'm saying is that there is MORE to it then what he is saying.

Or do you want to disagree that the htc one does indeed shoot at higher iso levels then other cell phones on auto? Because not even Brian will agree with you on that.

Last edit on this post, I promise...
As for the dynamic range of samsung's camera, it is clear from all the reviews that it is far from terrible as you may think it must be.

Posted via Android Central App

 

[SenseMonkey]

Totally agree with both of you. Anyone that REALLY cares about the quality of photos to THAT level should be using a REAL camera, with a real lens setup. If it were possible to take stunning pictures with these tiny little phone-style lenses, don't you think the camera stores would have gone out of business by now? I mean, who's going to walk into a camera shop and drop $200 to $1000 on a lens when their phone can take the "same" picture? Never going to happen, folks.

Both cameras are fine. If you like one better than the other, buy it. That's called capitalism.

Agreed! I'd call it consumerism though, the act of buying something we dont need but want lol.

Courtesy of My LT3VO

 

[TheyStoleMyName]

I think the cameras great. It'll have it's downfalls just like any smartphone camera because it's a smartphone camera. The clarity is amazing, very little grain effect while zoomed in proper lighting, zoomed in after the pic was taken was a heck of a lot better that most phones I've has, ans really no shutter lag.

Ppl say it's grainy and bad but slit of other ppl like it. It's better than my lumia 900, one x, one x plus, lgog, gs3, and gn2 by a long shot. Alot off ppl say it's only a 4mp camera. Do some research urself on the ultrapixel tech. And just because a phone has a high no camera doesn't mean it's good, there are more factors involved than just mp's.

Sent from my HTC One using Android Central Forums

 

[doomstang]

Megapixels and Ultrapixels: The Galaxy S4 versus HTC One camera shootout | Android Central

Why quote me and post a link to an article on htc one vs sgs4 when I posed pics from Evo LTE vs One?

 

[charlee08]

For a mobile phone, it takes pretty darn good pictures. It's no digital camera, but it does good Imo.

Sent from my HTC One

 

[SCjRqrQCnBQ19QoYCtdl]

I'm not saying that I disagree with Brian at Anandtech. What I'm saying is that there is MORE to it then what he is saying.

Or do you want to disagree that the htc one does indeed shoot at higher iso levels then other cell phones on auto? Because not even Brian will agree with you on that.

Last edit on this post, I promise...
As for the dynamic range of samsung's camera, it is clear from all the reviews that it is far from terrible as you may think it must be.

Posted via Android Central App

Well, I think then, at this point, you are agreeing that the larger pixels should help in low light.

Does it shoot at higher ISO than other cameras? It does, because it can. And it does when it needs to. When it shoots at 1/17 second, I would say it needs to. There the OIS is a big aid. When it shoots at 1/60 second it is because it can and there the larger pixels are a big aid. Whatever ISO a the software is choosing doesn't really change the fact that the larger pixels allow less noise at that higher ISO. The f2 lens is a help all the time - except when there is too much light I suppose.

So is there a software component? Of course. How stupid would it be to use larger, more sensitive pixels and use the same software settings of a phone with smaller less sensitive pixels.

Have they got the software perfect? Doubt it, and actually I hope not. I hope there are further improvements.

 

[Habiib]

Might be safe to say though (looking at reviews and both phones threads) that the gap between the lowlight quality between the S4 and One (HTC One being somewhat better) is smaller than the gap between the daytime shots (S4 being much, much better)

I doubt that. Coming from GSMArena, how can they be taken remotely serious when they pull something like this off with the same camera? I'll wait for anyone to explain this.

 

[JHBThree]

Because they don't. Unless you are saying that the htc one has better dynamic range then it does. ..and then you would be all alone in that theory.

Larger pixels help with a better pixel to noise ratio. That is it. In other words for the lay person, larger pixels help in both bright light and poor light with added detail in such things as shadows and highlights. But the added detail can't help make up for resolution in the case of the htc one. I would even say that because of such a poor lens, htc has to over sharpen in software to aid in giving more detail in an image.

Posted via Android Central App

You were proven totally and completely wrong on this subject previously, and I would recommend you not attempt to fight this battle again.

A sensor with larger pixels captures more light. If you argue against that, you argue against the basic physics of how camera sensors work.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Gathomblipoob]

 

[SCjRqrQCnBQ19QoYCtdl]

I doubt that. Coming from GSMArena, how can they be taken remotely serious when they pull something like this off with the same camera? I'll wait for anyone to explain this.

What is this about then?