Samsung Galaxy Note 3 - Does anyone else think the camera sucks?

[back2Dfuture]

I don't think even he can solve the problem of motion blur in low light.Yes you can increase the EV but that only lowers the shutter speed and that makes motion blur worse.

I think the only solution is too use an app that has a higher ISO setting and deal with the noise later through processing.Using a higher ISO allows a faster shutter speed so you can eliminate motion blur.

I won't be selling my N3 because I can live with it and I love the photos it takes in good to moderate lighting but if the N4 with Isocell works as promised I will be trading up.I hope Samsung is reading this thread.

 

[Almeuit]

Man... If you're going to talk about ISO settings.. Shutter speed.. And processing the image after a shot it sounds like a photographer.

That isn't a bad thing it's just.. This is a camera on a phone... Any real person who cares that much would be using a way better... Real... Camera.

Sent from my T-Mobile Note 3 using AC Forums.

 

[Trees]

Just thought I would share my personal opinion when it comes to the camera on this phone.

To be completely honest, the camera was one of the main reasons I purchased this phone. There were others like the battery and screen, but the camera was always a very reliable aspect on previous Galaxy devices. Even my Galaxy S3 still takes amazing photos compared to some more current smartphones. However, this time around it seems that Samsung has really skimped on optimizing the camera in both the software and hardware departments. I started to realize this when instead of making it better they added an absurd "Golf" mode and loaded the UI with bloated, gaudy effects that were honestly nausea inducing. With the Galaxy S4 (which I owned for a short time) photos came out very well, both indoor and outdoor. Of course, indoor photos were a bit less sharp and overall had less quality to them than did photos taken outdoors, but this was to be expected and is to be expected really on any camera unless it has certain optimizations to keep photos usable. Given my history with these Galaxy devices, I felt that the Galaxy Note 3 would be a sizeable upgrade in the photography department, but I was disappointed to say the least. Let me first say that of course, photos taken outdoors with plenty of lighting come out looking very good and sometimes breathtaking. However, this scenario is not available at all times, and for me at least, most of my photos for most purposes would be taken indoors with indoor, AKA not as good, lighting. With previous phones, this was no issue; I am now used to the slight grain found in photos taken indoors. This does not bother me really. With the Galaxy Note 3 though, photos taken in indoor lighting are flat out unusable. Rather, photos taken of people or any moving subject are just atrocious. It is not that there is too much grain or they are too dark but rather that they are so blurry. Subjects in my photos have a ghost effect to their skin because the so called "digital stabilization" feature takes a solid two seconds to process, and of course this is really just a fancy name for letting the lens capture more light AKA upping the exposure a bit. I have tried using the camera with this feature off, but photos are equally blurry, and a lot more dark. For someone like me who does not always have the most perfect lighting or conditions to take great photos, this is a deal breaker. I have reverted back to using my Nexus 4, given that it can take a recognizable picture in indoor lighting as opposed to capturing images of what seems to be a blurred spectre.
Also, the camera software that comes stock on the Galaxy Note 3 seems to have some extremely aggressive sharpening implementaion applied to any photo you take. Sometimes taking still lifes indoors can lead to this implementaion rearing its ugly head - there will be some amount of noise in the photo (assuming you hold your hand very still while the "digital stabilization" works) due to this sharpening. I tried using a different camera app and this problem was not present, confirming that the problem lies within the stock Samsung camera app on the Galaxy Note 3.

Due to all this, I will be selling my phone in the coming weeks. It was a real bummer to be so disappointed by what I assumed to be the best camera experience on a smartphone currently available, but when the phone cannot even take a recognizable photo in indoor situations with moving subjects (AKA a very common real life scenario), I cannot say that it comes even close to that. For anyone thinking of purchasing this phone, please take this into consideration and even wait it out a little bit more while more capable and apt alternatives find their way into the market. Like I said, my Nexus 4 takes better indoor photos, which is really surprising.

What is the different camera app that you used? I've experienced similar blur and graininess problems that you and others have pointed out.

 

[back2Dfuture]

Most people these days don't carry their dedicated cameras around all the time.The best camera is the one you have with you.Compact camera sales have fallen dramatically over the years.

Instead of just patting each other on the back and living in denial,I prefer to accept there is a problem and find the best solution,particularly for those who demand more from their photos.

There are apps that you can use to improve low light performance.Camera Zoom FX has full control over ISO up to 1600.When you use 1600 ISO ,shutter speed increases to at least 1/50 sec and this is fast enough to capture a moving subject without blur.There will be significant noise but you can process them out a bit for photos you wish you wish to keep.

 

[z06mike]

To truly compare the low light ability of the sensor.No over processing,same ISO and shutter speed.

I have done these tests with the N1 and N3.The N1 has the more sensitive sensor even with a slightly slower f2.4 lens.Fact is cramming more pixels in the same size sensor makes the individual pixels smaller and less light sensitive.

To truly compare, take two pictures and see which is better. Most people don't care or know about ISO, shutter speed, f-stops, bracketing, metering, etc. The one thing they care about is how does it perform. If one takes a better picture at an ISO of 1600 vs 800 for the other phone, then that's that! You don't have to have the exact same settings or processing to truly compare.

 

[back2Dfuture]

I agree most people would probably be satisfied with the N3 camera.I have repeatedly said it doesn't suck.It has it's strengths.In fact most people would be satisfied with the photos in the first post of this thread.The OP is obviously more of a connoisseur and notices the washed out processed look.My wife would definitely not notice.

Samsung knows it is a weakness otherwise they wouldn't be introducing Isocell.

 

[back2Dfuture]

For those that care,there is a free app called shot control that gives you full control of ISO up to 1600 plus EV control which adjusts shutter speed.You can play around with the settings to get a good low light shot with a high enough shutter speed to eliminate motion blur.

 

[z06mike]

I agree most people would probably be satisfied with the N3 camera.I have repeatedly said it doesn't suck.It has it's strengths.In fact most people would be satisfied with the photos in the first post of this thread.The OP is obviously more of a connoisseur and notices the washed out processed look.My wife would definitely not notice.

Samsung knows it is a weakness otherwise they wouldn't be introducing Isocell.

I agree with you 100% on this. My wife/mom just want to take a pic and don't care about what type of processing is done what settings they need to leave it on.

 

[anon8126715]

What happened to the gentleman that was doing the full-on review with app suggestions, comparisons, etc?

Posted via Android Central App

Lets hope his new year's resolution is less procrastination...

 

[back2Dfuture]

Under soft indoor lighting,you could try this setting with the stock camera app...800 ISO and -0.5 Exposure value.This gives acceptable brightness and noise but with a higher shutter speed than if you just use auto with SS turned off.This will minimise motion blur but of course photos will not be as bright using SS.If you use auto ISO the shutter speed seems to be always around 1/16 sec which is quite slow.

 

[back2Dfuture]

Lets hope his new year's resolution is less procrastination...

He hasn't posted in more than a month.I think he's left us for dead.lol

 

[back2Dfuture]

I think have found the reason a lot of people complain about motion blur.If you leave it in auto ISO,the shutter speed is stuck below around 1/20 sec in low light situations which is too slow.You need at least 1/30 sec.If you manually set ISO the shutter speed appears to be faster.

For those that do not know how to check the ISO and shutter speed of a photo taken,open the photo in gallery,open the menu touching the bottom left hand corner of the phone and scroll down for details.

 

[anon24860]

Yes, that's the case with even fast lenses. I have a Panasonic gf1 with a 1.7 pancake lens, which is very fast. Even THAT can only capture so much in low light. You run into movement issues (on both sides of the camera) and depth of field issues. The lower the aperture number, i.e. the faster it is and the more light that the lens lets in, the narrower the field of view is (the amount of "front to back" that stays in focus). If you can shoot at 20 aperture instead of 2.4 (remember, the "faster" the lens, I.e. the lower the number and the more light the lens lets in because the opening is bigger) everything in the shot will be in focus. But you need a lot of light.

If you are shooting in low light, you have to choose a slower speed and a lower aperture number, I.e 2 vs 20 for instance).

The problem then becomes one of shutter speed limitation. As B2DF said, below 1/30 runs a risk of blur, not only if the subject moves, but if you aren't rock steady with the camera.

That's why the recommendation of setting the ISO is made.

I can only comment vis a vis the Motorola line, but this camera is far superior. As far as older Note models go, the main difference, as has been repeatedly said, has to be packing more pixels into the same space. B2DF has given those of you who are disappointed a workaround to bridge the gap. It's not just about phones in cameras. Even those of us with DSLRs, which I have, and high end compact 4/3 bodies and lenses, which I use most often, have to make these decisions and compromises.

 

[Eric Mazariegos]

What is the different camera app that you used? I've experienced similar blur and graininess problems that you and others have pointed out.

I used the stock AOSP camera app found on Nexus devices. Download here if you want com.google.android.gallery3d


Also, @back2dfuture THANK YOU for suggesting that ISO and EV combo. .. it is working really great for me and so far I can take pics of my rambunctious dog better than before...

 

[back2Dfuture]

I used the stock AOSP camera app found on Nexus devices. Download here if you want com.google.android.gallery3d


Also, @back2dfuture THANK YOU for suggesting that ISO and EV combo. .. it is working really great for me and so far I can take pics of my rambunctious dog better than before...

In stronger indoor lighting you can also try ISO 400 and -1.5 EV.Shutter speed should be quite fast and photos with less noise than using ISO 800.Even moving subjects like dogs and cats will be quite sharp.The trick is to get a fast enough shutter speed while getting a good compromise in brightness and noise.It takes a bit of practice to understand the lighting available and the setting required.

In very dim light there is not much you can do but most smartphones don't perform well in very dim light.We just have to wait for Isocell.

 

[anon24860]

BTW, my previous post was intended for readers who didn't understand what you were trying to say. Obviously, I wasn't talking to you. I'm going to post a very low light shot at 1/10 that actually came out well. Not that it doesn't have serious flaws, but reproduces decently well on a screen the size of a Note 3. People sometimes forget that some of the best B&W (and some color as well) shots in the past century have their fair share of noise (read grain). It adds character. I would never claim that the smearing that you'd see in the photo that I'm about post is "acceptable", but seen at the appropriate size, doesn't matter much.

Bottom line is, you work away from the limitations of ANY camera and work around and right up to the boundaries. At some point, you're going to either get away from point and shoot and/or just accept that the shot can't be made.

I'm sure that even the Nokia has its limits.

 

[anon24860]

 

[yotavota]

Re: Does anyone else think the camera sucks?

My advice for people complaining about phone cameras? Buy an actual camera!! Phone cameras are not meant for SUPERIOR photography..

This is good advice.

Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk

 

[back2Dfuture]

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/01/01/amyjaqa8.jpg

That's all very well but can you take a photo of a moving dog at night with indoor lighting using 1/10 shutter speed?

I can also take some great low noise photos in dim light using Night Camera but I need to hold the camera rock steady for 10 seconds.Not exactly good for a lot of situations.

I am addressing the problem of the N3 having such a low shutter speed when used indoors rendering it next to useless for most real life situations.There has been numerous complaints about blurry photos and the problem is the low shutter speed indoors when in auto mode.

 

[back2Dfuture]

Here is basically the summary of the N3 camera when used in normal indoor lighting.I am not even talking about dim light.The sensor is not very light sensitive.In order to get sufficiently bright photos it needs more exposure in the form of slow shutter speed.Sometimes when your hand is steady and the subject is still,you get quite good results.Other times when there is even slight movement,you get a fuzzy photo.Turning on smart stabilisation doesn't help because it's even slower to take a photo.Again you can get very good results provided the subject doesn't move and you don't mind a washed out oil painting looking photo.Trying to increase the shutter speed via EV is not easy either as the camera just wants to use the seemingly default 1/17 sec when used in indoor lighting.It knows that increasing shutter speed will render photos too dark.

My N1 is more capable of taking a sharp photo indoors when there is a little movement.I set it to ISO 400 EV 0 and I get relatively bright noise free photos at 1/100 sec and at this shutter speed easily capable of sharp photos with some movement.