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

[JHBThree]

What is this about then?

Those are all different pictures taken from the same phone, but posted in different articles. Clearly gsmarena doesn't know what they're doing. (Or they know EXACTLY what they're doing and are trying to post iffy pictures)

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

 

[warpdrive]

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.

It shoots at a higher iso in auto mode because it was programed to, not because it can. It in fact shoots at the same iso as other phones in night mode because it was programed to, not because it can.

As for the lens or the f-stop, I'm not sure what you are getting at. I already stated that the two other reasons for the htc one's great camera is the f-stop and the optical image stability already.

What I'm disagreeing with is that larger pixels help with low light. They don't. At least they don't help any more then they help with bright light. Because in bright light they don't automatically just capture less light. Its physics like is being said above me, and you can't fight it. Yet if you do the math you'll see what I mean. Just do the math.

As for the software, I agree that it has potential to be improved. But then we are also talking optics and software limitations that we have no idea about. Dynamic range could or could not be improved. We all have no idea unless a new update comes out and improves it. I for one wont rule it out.

But I think it's clear, at this time the 4mp censor with the software being used today has poorer dynamic range then it should.

Posted via Android Central App

 

[warpdrive]

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

I understand that you think I'm arguing about a 2 micron pixel vs a 1 micron pixel and if in fact the 2 micron pixel captures more light or not. I'm sorry to say that I'm not. I agree that the 2 micron pixel captures more light.

What I am saying is that since the 1 micron pixel censor happens to have twice the amount of pixels, the 8mp censor captures the same about of light as a 4mp censor of the same size.
Or...while the 8mp censor has a smaller pixel size (by half as much), it has twice the amount of pixels and thus captures the same amout of light if all other things are equal.

Have a wonderful night my dear friend.

Like you say its physics or math. You can't fight it.

Posted via Android Central App

 

[badbrad17]

For anyone coming from a Galaxy S2, how does the One compare in daylight? We'll take it as read that it's better in low light.

I have both. The GS2 always took great daylight shots. Some that I printed excellent 8x10 prints. I haven't been able to play a lot with my htc one but the shots I've taken appear to be very good. Plus I do agree with other posts that it seems easier to take a good shot. With so many cameras you need to take 4 shots to get something decent. We don't always have this luxury, so in this regard the One is a winner.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Android Central Forums

 

[badbrad17]

I think the only thing to compare is which camera can take a great photo consistently. I think that this is why a lot of people have been happy with iphone cameras. They tend to produce good results consistently. It may not win if you set up a studio and do comparisons, but we don't do that in life. We usually have less than 30 seconds to take our photos and if the HTC One can do this as well or better than the S4 or any other camera phone then it's a success.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Android Central Forums

 

[SCjRqrQCnBQ19QoYCtdl]

It shoots at a higher iso in auto mode because it was programed to, not because it can. It in fact shoots at the same iso as other phones in night mode because it was programed to, not because it can.

As for the lens or the f-stop, I'm not sure what you are getting at. I already stated that the two other reasons for the htc one's great camera is the f-stop and the optical image stability already.

What I'm disagreeing with is that larger pixels help with low light. They don't. At least they don't help any more then they help with bright light. Because in bright light they don't automatically just capture less light. Its physics like is being said above me, and you can't fight it. Yet if you do the math you'll see what I mean. Just do the math.

As for the software, I agree that it has potential to be improved. But then we are also talking optics and software limitations that we have no idea about. Dynamic range could or could not be improved. We all have no idea unless a new update comes out and improves it. I for one wont rule it out.

But I think it's clear, at this time the 4mp censor with the software being used today has poorer dynamic range then it should.

Posted via Android Central App

My comment touched on more than just pixels because all the factors combine to give better low light performance. I didn't say you were disagreeing about those other factors, you obviously understand the positive effect of the Ones larger apertures and image stabilization.

However, you still seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding regarding how pixels (and digital imaging) work. Each individual pixel has to have enough of a signal (light) to register above the noise threshold. How big a pixel is determines how much light strikes that individual pixel. That is the basic physics. The surface area of the larger pixel is by definition larger and therefore by definition receives more light.

The 1/3 smaller pixels on the S4 each receive 1/3 the amount of light of the larger pixels on the HTC. Yes, the overall light received by the sensor is roughly the same (although likely that the larger pixels get marginally more due to less edge area between pixels), however, the HTC pixels receive 3 times as much light per pixel.

That means that the larger pixel can register more light per pixel and more variations of light between pixels. For your argument to make sense, the S4 pixels would have to each record the source signal as accurately as the HTC pixels while receiving only 1/3 of the source signal. If there is plenty of light (outside/daytime) this is true. But, in low light, the HTC can still register a signal when the S4 can not.

You keep saying to do the math, so, now you do the math.

Smaller pixel sensors are inherently less sensitive to light. You said you weren't disagreeing with Anandtech, and that is exactly what Anandtech said as well. Since you said you said weren't disagreeing with Anandtech, I thought you had figured it out, but I guess not.

And yes, as you say, larger pixels also get more light per pixel in good light, but the effect is not important with adequate light, because in that case the signal (light) is very strong so noise is not an issue. Even tiny little pixels have no trouble telling noise from signal in good light. Since the tiny pixels can perform well in good light, large increase in resolution provides an advantage (up to the limits of diffraction, anyway).

Regarding whether the software "tells it" to use a higher ISO, or it uses higher ISO because "it can" is really sort of talking past the point. The software tells it to use higher ISO than competing cameras because the larger pixels allow the camera to take better pictures at higher ISO, again because they are more sensitive to light. By taking the pictures at higher ISO, a faster shutter speed is used to get the correct exposure. This helps with moving subjects. So this gets back to my point about the software being different than other phones - of course it is different - the camera has different capabilities, different strengths and different weaknesses.

 

[SCjRqrQCnBQ19QoYCtdl]

I understand that you think I'm arguing about a 2 micron pixel vs a 1 micron pixel and if in fact the 2 micron pixel captures more light or not. I'm sorry to say that I'm not. I agree that the 2 micron pixel captures more light.

What I am saying is that since the 1 micron pixel censor happens to have twice the amount of pixels, the 8mp censor captures the same about of light as a 4mp censor of the same size.
Or...while the 8mp censor has a smaller pixel size (by half as much), it has twice the amount of pixels and thus captures the same amout of light if all other things are equal.

Have a wonderful night my dear friend.

Like you say its physics or math. You can't fight it.

Posted via Android Central App

But all else isn't equal. Pixels don't work that way.

Here is a simplification to think about:

Imagine that a pixel needs 5 photons of light to provide an accurate measure to the image processor. No imagine that each pixel on the one receives 10 photons during an exposure, well above the threshold for each pixel to provide the accurate measure.

How many photons does each pixel on the S4 receive? 3.3 photons. None of the pixels can register a measure and therefore the image processor just sees noise.

 

[warpdrive]

My comment touched on more than just pixels because all the factors combine to give better low light performance. I didn't say you were disagreeing about those other factors, you obviously understand the positive effect of the Ones larger apertures and image stabilization.

However, you still seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding regarding how pixels (and digital imaging) work. Each individual pixel has to have enough of a signal (light) to register above the noise threshold. How big a pixel is determines how much light strikes that individual pixel. That is the basic physics. The surface area of the larger pixel is by definition larger and therefore by definition receives more light.

The 1/3 smaller pixels on the S4 each receive 1/3 the amount of light of the larger pixels on the HTC. Yes, the overall light received by the sensor is roughly the same (although likely that the larger pixels get marginally more due to less edge area between pixels), however, the HTC pixels receive 3 times as much light per pixel.

That means that the larger pixel can register more light per pixel and more variations of light between pixels. For your argument to make sense, the S4 pixels would have to each record the source signal as accurately as the HTC pixels while receiving only 1/3 of the source signal. If there is plenty of light (outside/daytime) this is true. But, in low light, the HTC can still register a signal when the S4 can not.

You keep saying to do the math, so, now you do the math.

Smaller pixel sensors are inherently less sensitive to light. You said you weren't disagreeing with Anandtech, and that is exactly what Anandtech said as well. Since you said you said weren't disagreeing with Anandtech, I thought you had figured it out, but I guess not.

And yes, as you say, larger pixels also get more light per pixel in good light, but the effect is not important with adequate light, because in that case the signal (light) is very strong so noise is not an issue. Even tiny little pixels have no trouble telling noise from signal in good light. Since the tiny pixels can perform well in good light, large increase in resolution provides an advantage (up to the limits of diffraction, anyway).

Regarding whether the software "tells it" to use a higher ISO, or it uses higher ISO because "it can" is really sort of talking past the point. The software tells it to use higher ISO than competing cameras because the larger pixels allow the camera to take better pictures at higher ISO, again because they are more sensitive to light. By taking the pictures at higher ISO, a faster shutter speed is used to get the correct exposure. This helps with moving subjects. So this gets back to my point about the software being different than other phones - of course it is different - the camera has different capabilities, different strengths and different weaknesses.

The reason why I'm asking you to do the math is because in your example you are not finishing the math equation. Yes, I would agree that in your example the pixels on the htc one do in fact capture almost 3 times the amount of light as compared to the S4. But since the S4 has 3 times the amount of pixels, it captures the same total of photons or light.

As for the software, why differentiate what iso is to be used if not programed to do so? In other words, why use a higher iso in auto mode for both bright and dark subjects? Yet in night mode, you wouldn't want a higher iso and shoot at the same iso as other phones? You are not making sense or you are misunderstanding me. Yes, there are always other factors in play when we are going to get iso readings in a cellphone. What f-stop the lens has is a great example. But we are not talking about a quarter of a stop difference here as compared to the S4. We are talking about as much as a stop to a stop and a half differance or increase...even in daylight.

But what if the auto mode was originally the night mode on the htc one? It makes perfect sense to me that htc would want its night mode to shoot at a higher iso then most phones on the market today. It would solve so much headaches in low light photography and capture images in lower light then the competition.

But let's not stop there. What if we say that what is now the night mode, we find that it doesn't take photos above iso 800 and that it also users the same iso values as other phones. This sounds like the night mode was originally the auto mode and that htc made a choice to switch modes so that a typical user would just pick up his/her phone and get great results on what is now the new auto mode in both daylight and low light. To be honest, I think it was a brilliant move by htc if they didthis and they should be commended for it. But I honestly can not say that the htc one would cripple its low light picture capability by not being able to go over iso800 yet it can do so in auto mode with ease.
Yeah, the more I think about it, the more it makes sense that htc switched the auto and night modes before release.

Oh, again do the math or at least finish it. Sorry, I had to say it one more time.

Posted via Android Central App

 

[JHBThree]

The reason why I'm asking you to do the math is because in your example you are not finishing the math equation. Yes, I would agree that in your example the pixels on the htc one do in fact capture almost 3 times the amount of light as compared to the S4. But since the S4 has 3 times the amount of pixels, it captures the same total of photons or light.

Except that isn't how it works. The S4 captures less total light because of the size of its pixels. You're just glossing over the fact that the pixels that HTC uses are more than twice as large as those of Samsung. That is incredibly important. Its also why the S4 struggles in low light.

Again, we have been down this road before and it did not end well for you. There is absolutely no need to rehash this argument when its already been put to bed.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

 

[warpdrive]

Except that isn't how it works. The S4 captures less total light because of the size of its pixels. You're just glossing over the fact that the pixels that HTC uses are more than twice as large as those of Samsung. That is incredibly important. Its also why the S4 struggles in low light.

Again, we have been down this road before and it did not end well for you. There is absolutely no need to rehash this argument when its already been put to bed.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

There is only one problem with your reply. The S4 doesn't struggle in low light. In fact its hard for you to find a website that would agree that the S4 struggles in low light. In fact, most here in this thread agree with me that the image quality of both the S4 and the htc one are quite close in both bright and low light.
So struggle is what I would call a stretch.

It also doesn't explain a whole bunch of things I brought up including using a higher iso value just in auto mode or more noise in daylight, or poorer dynamic range...well I can go on and on, but I already said what I said.

But, to help make you happy, I agree with you in theory and on paper you are correct. But since in reality there are far more things that goes into creating a .jpeg, the results are what they are and far from struggling in low light.

Posted via Android Central App

 

[estebancam]

There is only one problem with your reply. The S4 doesn't struggle in low light. In fact its hard for you to find a website that would agree that the S4 struggles in low light. In fact, most here in this thread agree with me that the image quality of both the S4 and the htc one are quite close in both bright and low light.
So struggle is what I would call a stretch.

It also doesn't explain a whole bunch of things I brought up including using a higher iso value just in auto mode or more noise in daylight, or poorer dynamic range...well I can go on and on, but I already said what I said.

But, to help make you happy, I agree with you in theory and on paper you are correct. But since in reality there are far more things that goes into creating a .jpeg, the results are what they are and far from struggling in low light.

Posted via Android Central App

I have to finally get in here because you need to be corrected, my friend.

You see, pixel size DOES matter. A larger pixel contains a larger area for the gathering of photon information. You are basing all of your arguments on sensor size, which would be a good argument if the cameras you are comparing had the same amount of pixels. However, the HTC has 4MP sensor, while the Samsung has a 13MP sensor, on the same SURFACE AREA (which is what you consistently refer to), which equates to smaller pixels on the S4. You already know all this.

However, what you fail to understand is that it is the size of each pixel that matters most because a larger pixel can gather much more photon information before the pixel fills up and becomes white.

Let me give you an example. Let's say you have, on one hand, a small room. You also have two sizes of different baskets. Each occupies the same length and width, but one size of basket is three times taller than the other. If you were tasked to put as many apples in the room inside the baskets as possible, you would obviously go with the taller baskets because they can hold more apples.

The same works with pixels. The larger pixel has more room to fill itself up with more information about what it is trying to capture, thus, it has a much better signal to noise ratio, BETTER DYNAMIC RANGE (as is the fact with larger pixels), and overall takes a better photo, especially in lower lighting conditions.

Now, this is a trade off because although the samsung will produce more noisy shots, the level of detail captured by the sensor usually offsets the noice factor (which has to do with photographic frequency) in well lit conditions, not the case in low light.

In all, here is why, IN FACT, the S4 will not and cannot produce better shots in low light:

1) Much smaller pixels which turn white much faster in low light or well lit environments (if HTC has 13MP on larger pixels, imagine the results), thus, are not able to capture as much information or photons as a larger pixel
2) The aperture size on the HTC one is f/2.0, larger than that of the S4
3) OIS

You put those three very crucial things together, and you get a better shot. Simple as that.

 

[Kevin OQuinn]

There is only one problem with your reply. The S4 doesn't struggle in low light. In fact its hard for you to find a website that would agree that the S4 struggles in low light. In fact, most here in this thread agree with me that the image quality of both the S4 and the htc one are quite close in both bright and low light.
So struggle is what I would call a stretch.

It also doesn't explain a whole bunch of things I brought up including using a higher iso value just in auto mode or more noise in daylight, or poorer dynamic range...well I can go on and on, but I already said what I said.

But, to help make you happy, I agree with you in theory and on paper you are correct. But since in reality there are far more things that goes into creating a .jpeg, the results are what they are and far from struggling in low light.

Posted via Android Central App

http://www.androidcentral.com/megap...versus-htc-one-camera-shootout?style_mobile=0

This excerpt:

"All of our night shots were taken using the phones' dedicated night modes. And no surprises here -- the HTC One runs rings around the Galaxy S4 in night shots. The S4 didn't fare too badly here, but there's plenty of noise and fuzziness to be seen compared to HTC's 'Ultrapixel' camera."

Of course, we've all read it, and know what he said about overall performance. We seem to be focusing on low light performance now, so that particular section of the article stuck out to me.

Also this:

"On the other hand, the HTC One outperformed the S4 in low light shots. (No surprises there.) It?s also much more difficult to get a blurred shot on the HTC One -- there?s very little shutter lag, and features like burst shooting are easier to get to. (Simply long-press the shutter key.)"

That point is huge for me personally. Just point and click and your shot will probably be good with the One.

And to be fair I'll throw this in here too:

"On the whole, though, the Galaxy S4 produced the better-looking images in our testing, despite its comparative weakness in low light shots. The HTC One's camera is by no means bad, but its performance is clearly weighted towards indoor and low-light photography at the expense of daylight performance. The opposite is true of the Galaxy S4, which excelled in daylight photography, and is backed up by an excellent HDR mode.

Ultimately, both the HTC One and Galaxy S4 are great cameraphones, but for different reasons. Which camera is the best fit for you depends on the kind of shots you plan on taking."

Even the conclusion has the disclaimer that the One has better low light performance despite not winning the overall comparison.

I trust what Alex writes. I talk to him. I know him. I've met him. He's a great guy and really knows his stuff. And yes, if/when his results are wildly different than everyone else's he works extra hard to find out why.

Posted via Android Central App

 

[estebancam]

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

This excerpt:

"All of our night shots were taken using the phones' dedicated night modes. And no surprises here -- the HTC One runs rings around the Galaxy S4 in night shots. The S4 didn't fare too badly here, but there's plenty of noise and fuzziness to be seen compared to HTC's 'Ultrapixel' camera."

Of course, we've all read it, and know what he said about overall performance. We seem to be focusing on low light performance now, so that particular section of the article stuck out to me.

Also this:

"On the other hand, the HTC One outperformed the S4 in low light shots. (No surprises there.) It?s also much more difficult to get a blurred shot on the HTC One -- there?s very little shutter lag, and features like burst shooting are easier to get to. (Simply long-press the shutter key.)"

That point is huge for me personally. Just point and click and your shot will probably be good with the One.

And to be fair I'll throw this in here too:

"On the whole, though, the Galaxy S4 produced the better-looking images in our testing, despite its comparative weakness in low light shots. The HTC One's camera is by no means bad, but its performance is clearly weighted towards indoor and low-light photography at the expense of daylight performance. The opposite is true of the Galaxy S4, which excelled in daylight photography, and is backed up by an excellent HDR mode.

Ultimately, both the HTC One and Galaxy S4 are great cameraphones, but for different reasons. Which camera is the best fit for you depends on the kind of shots you plan on taking."

Even the conclusion has the disclaimer that the One has better low light performance despite not winning the overall comparison.

I trust what Alex writes. I talk to him. I know him. I've met him. He's a great guy and really knows his stuff. And yes, if/when his results are wildly different than everyone else's he works extra hard to find out why.

Posted via Android Central App

See, what I didn't get about his review is that he say the HTC One wins it out in low light AND indoor shots, while the S4 wins it out in daylight shots. I can agree with him on the S4 daylight shots, but the overall should clearly go to the One. I am not being partial or bias, but hear me out:

First, you have two sceneries that the HTC One will excel at: indoor and low light. Whereas the Samsung S4 only wins in one category: outdoor daylight. Based on that alone, there should be no clear winner, because there are some people that want to take many more pictures outdoors than indoors (S4 is for you) and there individuals who are largely indoors at home, business, night clubs or go out at night (HTC One is for you). That is a simple matter of preference.

Second, and especially the reason why the HTC One (based on his very own review) should have been picked the winner, is because look at the contrast in quality.... the HTC One does not perform far from the S4 when it comes to daylight shots. You will see some artifacting due to the lac of MP if you look closely, but nothing that is a dealbreaker. The difference in daylight quality between the two cameras is not a very wide margin.

However, the difference in quality between the two cameras in low light and indoor shots are day and night (no pun intended). The HTC One "runs rings around the S4" in low light photography, as well as indoors.

So, not only do you have the HTC One winning the most scenarios (although this is depending on the person), but the difference in quality in daylight is not by a wide margin to the S4, whereas the S4 cannot come close to the HTC One in low light photography.

This screams HTC One for overall winner.

 

[Jerry Hildenbrand]

As an aside:

Pixels are require a certain amount of electrical energy (they are photovoltaic sensors) to do anything. Smaller pixels that do not gather enough light to become active don't generate anything, which makes the camera software guess at the color that should be placed in that point. This often generates a noisy image.

An array of smaller pixels does not change the minimum amount of electrical energy each needs to activate, it just increases the chances that some pixels will get enough. Upping the size of the individual pixels is the logical path (from an electrical engineering point of view), but 4MP is not enough when displayed on a high-res monitor or zoomed in more than 1:1.

The correct way to solve this is to use a sensor that's larger in diameter, further back from the lens. Nobody is going to build this, because it means bigger, more bulky devices that nobody wants. Just ask Nokia.

I can tell you without a doubt that the HTC One does a much better job inside a building like the Moscone Center, but once outside Samsung's MPs win because they offer more detail. I spent hours (literally) testing just this last week.

I can also tell you that both cameras really suck when compared to a real camera (in all conditions), and it isn't worth the fussing and feuding the subject always causes

 

[warpdrive]

http://www.androidcentral.com/megap...versus-htc-one-camera-shootout?style_mobile=0

This excerpt:

"All of our night shots were taken using the phones' dedicated night modes. And no surprises here -- the HTC One runs rings around the Galaxy S4 in night shots. The S4 didn't fare too badly here, but there's plenty of noise and fuzziness to be seen compared to HTC's 'Ultrapixel' camera."

Of course, we've all read it, and know what he said about overall performance. We seem to be focusing on low light performance now, so that particular section of the article stuck out to me.

Also this:

"On the other hand, the HTC One outperformed the S4 in low light shots. (No surprises there.) It?s also much more difficult to get a blurred shot on the HTC One -- there?s very little shutter lag, and features like burst shooting are easier to get to. (Simply long-press the shutter key.)"

That point is huge for me personally. Just point and click and your shot will probably be good with the One.

And to be fair I'll throw this in here too:

"On the whole, though, the Galaxy S4 produced the better-looking images in our testing, despite its comparative weakness in low light shots. The HTC One's camera is by no means bad, but its performance is clearly weighted towards indoor and low-light photography at the expense of daylight performance. The opposite is true of the Galaxy S4, which excelled in daylight photography, and is backed up by an excellent HDR mode.

Ultimately, both the HTC One and Galaxy S4 are great cameraphones, but for different reasons. Which camera is the best fit for you depends on the kind of shots you plan on taking."

Even the conclusion has the disclaimer that the One has better low light performance despite not winning the overall comparison.

I trust what Alex writes. I talk to him. I know him. I've met him. He's a great guy and really knows his stuff. And yes, if/when his results are wildly different than everyone else's he works extra hard to find out why.

Posted via Android Central App

So you are what, agreeing with me in general? That both phoned take well respected images? Because I don't think I've said anything different then Alex.

But I do have a few things to say about the AC camera comparison of the htc one and S4.
First, unlike most other websites and what most would do in low light, Alex shot all the night shots in night mode. In night mode, the htc one shoots at the same iso levels as the S4 in auto mode. Nothing wrong with that, but if shot on auto it could shoot at a higher iso and thus maybe do even better, or worse if noise gets too out of hand at such a higher level of iso. Regardless, this was not what you and I originally talked about. At least for the most part we wete talking about auto mode. So I tried not to bring up Alex's review too much as he didn't use auto mode in low light.

Also, you once again state here "just point and shoot and it will probably be good. "
Well I guess you are right unless in daylight the htc one struggles in contrasty lighting and blowing out highlights or underexpose buildings when a clear bright sky is in the background. You know, typical daylight shooting for a tourist that left thier camera at home. In such cases 3 or 4 photos will need to be taken because just like Alex says "On the whole, though, the Galaxy S4 produced the better-looking images in our testing, despite its comparative weakness in low light shots."
So, while at night with out the use of digital image stability, yes you might have to take an extra shot or two to make sure you don't have camera shake. But on the htc one, durring daylight or under brighter lighting, you can not say that you will not get the results that Alex got and other websites as well. So expect to not be able to just point and shoot and expect to not have to make adjustments to help correct the flaws that are produced at times. I'm sorry, but I found your statement to be less then truthful to the public that is reading this.

One more thing about Alex's wonderful review. While I have no harsh feelings that macro mode was used with htc, I find it odd that it was ok to use a "mode" or setting on the one, but modes or sttings like anti shake (digital image stabilization) wasn't or wouldn't be used on the S4. In other words, Alex had no issue with using a setting to help get a better image with htc, but would not use a setting that could be used on the S4.
Sure, there would be less pixel count on the S4 with the digital image stability setting used, but I think that the S4 has plenty to spare. In fact he could have shot in 16:9 mode to make others more happy with his examples, and I dont even think that going to 9mp would be so bad.

In fact, unless I'm shooting a portrait I always shoot in 16:9 format with no real loss in quality. That my dear friend is something we can't say about the htc one. As to use a different format such as 4:3 for a portrait, the htc one will loose 25% of its 4 million pixels and I think we all agree that htc doesnt have many pixels to spare.

I do want to point out that almost everything I've said in this reply to you is not in anyway derogatory to Alex's review but just my thoughts. He did a great job and seems to agree that the S4 is no slouch when taking pictures. But then again, I dont remember you saying otherwise as well. It's why I may be wrong, but I think you are agreeing with me.

Posted via Android Central App

 

[warpdrive]

I have to finally get in here because you need to be corrected, my friend.

You see, pixel size DOES matter. A larger pixel contains a larger area for the gathering of photon information. You are basing all of your arguments on sensor size, which would be a good argument if the cameras you are comparing had the same amount of pixels. However, the HTC has 4MP sensor, while the Samsung has a 13MP sensor, on the same SURFACE AREA (which is what you consistently refer to), which equates to smaller pixels on the S4. You already know all this.

However, what you fail to understand is that it is the size of each pixel that matters most because a larger pixel can gather much more photon information before the pixel fills up and becomes white.

Let me give you an example. Let's say you have, on one hand, a small room. You also have two sizes of different baskets. Each occupies the same length and width, but one size of basket is three times taller than the other. If you were tasked to put as many apples in the room inside the baskets as possible, you would obviously go with the taller baskets because they can hold more apples.

The same works with pixels. The larger pixel has more room to fill itself up with more information about what it is trying to capture, thus, it has a much better signal to noise ratio, BETTER DYNAMIC RANGE (as is the fact with larger pixels), and overall takes a better photo, especially in lower lighting conditions.

Now, this is a trade off because although the samsung will produce more noisy shots, the level of detail captured by the sensor usually offsets the noice factor (which has to do with photographic frequency) in well lit conditions, not the case in low light.

In all, here is why, IN FACT, the S4 will not and cannot produce better shots in low light:

1) Much smaller pixels which turn white much faster in low light or well lit environments (if HTC has 13MP on larger pixels, imagine the results), thus, are not able to capture as much information or photons as a larger pixel
2) The aperture size on the HTC one is f/2.0, larger than that of the S4
3) OIS

You put those three very crucial things together, and you get a better shot. Simple as that.

I'm sorry but I agree with so much of what you said but at the same time I disagree with a few things.

First thing that I am totally not getting is your apple example. For someone who wants to correct me on pixels, you sure did use an example that doesn't in any way relate to pixel density. Pixels are not the same lenth and width yet somehow have a different hight. So when comparing say a 4mp censor and an 8mp censor of the same size, width is the only factor when talking about size and hight has nothing to do with it.

Next, while I agree that a lower pixel count censor should produce better dynamic range, in reality that is clearly NOT a fact when taking about the htc one. There are reasons for this that have little to do with the censor but I just can't take forever to repeat everything I've said countless times already.

The rest I not only agree with but have also stated so I'm not sure what your argument is about.

Have an awesome morning.

Posted via Android Central App

 

[estebancam]

As an aside:

Pixels are require a certain amount of electrical energy (they are photovoltaic sensors) to do anything. Smaller pixels that do not gather enough light to become active don't generate anything, which makes the camera software guess at the color that should be placed in that point. This often generates a noisy image.

An array of smaller pixels does not change the minimum amount of electrical energy each needs to activate, it just increases the chances that some pixels will get enough. Upping the size of the individual pixels is the logical path (from an electrical engineering point of view), but 4MP is not enough when displayed on a high-res monitor or zoomed in more than 1:1.

The correct way to solve this is to use a sensor that's larger in diameter, further back from the lens. Nobody is going to build this, because it means bigger, more bulky devices that nobody wants. Just ask Nokia.

I can tell you without a doubt that the HTC One does a much better job inside a building like the Moscone Center, but once outside Samsung's MPs win because they offer more detail. I spent hours (literally) testing just this last week.

I can also tell you that both cameras really suck when compared to a real camera (in all conditions), and it isn't worth the fussing and feuding the subject always causes

Exactly, exactly, and exactly. Lol

 

[Kevin OQuinn]

So you are what, agreeing with me in general? That both phoned take well respected images? Because I don't think I've said anything different then Alex.

But I do have a few things to say about the AC camera comparison of the htc one and S4.
First, unlike most other websites and what most would do in low light, Alex shot all the night shots in night mode. In night mode, the htc one shoots at the same iso levels as the S4 in auto mode. Nothing wrong with that, but if shot on auto it could shoot at a higher iso and thus maybe do even better, or worse if noise gets too out of hand at such a higher level of iso. Regardless, this was not what you and I originally talked about. At least for the most part we wete talking about auto mode. So I tried not to bring up Alex's review too much as he didn't use auto mode in low light.

Also, you once again state here "just point and shoot and it will probably be good. "
Well I guess you are right unless in daylight the htc one struggles in contrasty lighting and blowing out highlights or underexpose buildings when a clear bright sky is in the background. You know, typical daylight shooting for a tourist that left thier camera at home. In such cases 3 or 4 photos will need to be taken because just like Alex says "On the whole, though, the Galaxy S4 produced the better-looking images in our testing, despite its comparative weakness in low light shots."
So, while at night with out the use of digital image stability, yes you might have to take an extra shot or two to make sure you don't have camera shake. But on the htc one, durring daylight or under brighter lighting, you can not say that you will not get the results that Alex got and other websites as well. So expect to not be able to just point and shoot and expect to not have to make adjustments to help correct the flaws that are produced at times. I'm sorry, but I found your statement to be less then truthful to the public that is reading this.

One more thing about Alex's wonderful review. While I have no harsh feelings that macro mode was used with htc, I find it odd that it was ok to use a "mode" or setting on the one, but modes or sttings like anti shake (digital image stabilization) wasn't or wouldn't be used on the S4. In other words, Alex had no issue with using a setting to help get a better image with htc, but would not use a setting that could be used on the S4.
Sure, there would be less pixel count on the S4 with the digital image stability setting used, but I think that the S4 has plenty to spare. In fact he could have shot in 16:9 mode to make others more happy with his examples, and I dont even think that going to 9mp would be so bad.

In fact, unless I'm shooting a portrait I always shoot in 16:9 format with no real loss in quality. That my dear friend is something we can't say about the htc one. As to use a different format such as 4:3 for a portrait, the htc one will loose 25% of its 4 million pixels and I think we all agree that htc doesnt have many pixels to spare.

I do want to point out that almost everything I've said in this reply to you is not in anyway derogatory to Alex's review but just my thoughts. He did a great job and seems to agree that the S4 is no slouch when taking pictures. But then again, I dont remember you saying otherwise as well. It's why I may be wrong, but I think you are agreeing with me.

Posted via Android Central App

He didn't use digital image stabilization (anti-shake is what Samsung calls it) because it didn't help image quality. This was brought up in a different thread a while ago by someone, so I asked Alex. It also didn't result in a sharper image. Basically, he said it hurt image quality instead of helping it.

As for the "just point and shoot to get a good image" I have experienced that. Did you notice that he did HDR samples? That's the solution for daylight shots for the One IMO. They do process rather quickly, and I get good results using it. I would think most people would discover this, but I know better than to think that's true.

The other thing to consider (and I didn't ask him) is how much of a difference using tap to focus would make. Some of those sample sits would turn out better for both cameras if you just choose the focal point.

Posted via Android Central App

 

[Kevin OQuinn]

I'm sorry but I agree with so much of what you said but at the same time I disagree with a few things.

First thing that I am totally not getting is your apple example. For someone who wants to correct me on pixels, you sure did use an example that doesn't in any way relate to pixel density. Pixels are not the same lenth and width yet somehow have a different hight. So when comparing say a 4mp censor and an 8mp censor of the same size, width is the only factor when talking about size and hight has nothing to do with it.

Next, while I agree that a lower pixel count censor should produce better dynamic range, in reality that is clearly NOT a fact when taking about the htc one. There are reasons for this that have little to do with the censor but I just can't take forever to repeat everything I've said countless times already.

The rest I not only agree with but have also stated so I'm not sure what your argument is about.

Have an awesome morning.

Posted via Android Central App

You're right that height is irrelevant, but wider still captures more light. The fact that the One doesn't do add well with dynamic range almost surely has to be a software thing then, right? So it can most likely be fixed.

Posted via Android Central App

 

[npunk42]

Camera quality is really important to me.

If you need a good camera, just buy a good camera. Cell phone cameras are never really that good. They are convenient, available, but the pics are never high quality. No matter what "professional" effects your phone includes in its camera software, the original pic is never going to be very good.