JHBThree
Well-known member
- Feb 15, 2012
- 4,096
- 147
- 0
Yep. The update that rolled out in Europe was already on US phones when they went on sale.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2
Camera how good is it.....really?
- Thread starter Bobbman
- Start date
Yep. The update that rolled out in Europe was already on US phones when they went on sale.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2
View attachment 69352
View attachment 69351
View attachment 69350
OK, I am a complete photo-imbecile. Point-and-shoot was made for me! That being said, I still like it when I get lucky and take a really nice picture, whether it's with my phone, my $80 point-and-shoot, or my slightly nicer Sony CyberShot. (Older, but still takes really nice pics!)
Tonight, my son's band had a gig and I took a few pics. The first is of the marquee out front. I thought it turned out very well, especially considering I didn't really put a lot of thought into it; I just walked up and snapped it when their picture was up.
I also took many pics and zoes during the show. Keep in mind, this is a very active alt-rock band, in a dimly-lit auditorium. The first pic I took on full automatic, the second was with manually adjusting the exposure down by 2, and the sharpness up by 2. It was obvious how much better the quality was by playing with these settings. I could have kept fiddling with these all night to see what was best, but I was really there to hear my son, not to worry about my phone!
I wish I could learn what the correct settings are for each situation; maybe, someday, I'll take the time, now that these phones are getting so capable.
I think all of your shots came out great. But since you asked I'll give you a hint or two to help with settings.
Htc seems to like to over sharpen thier images, maybe even worse on past phones. But while it is better on the htc one, it is still too much. By setting the sharpening to -1 you will lower it enough for it not to be bad and as a bonus you will also get less noise in most of your images. Others, like Brian from Anandtech pointed this out also, but he lowers it to -2. This removes alk the over sharpening and reduces the noise more. I just feel that it is too much of an adjustment, but try it if you feel like it.
But always keep it on -1 or -2 for all of your shots.
Again, there are times when harsh lighting can fool your camera. If you are going to take a picture of a building with plenty of sky in it you may get a result like some of Alex's tests did. To avoid a dark building that might have a perfect sky, try tap to focus on the building to at least get a perfectly exposed building.
Another way to improve this problem is to try HDR or high dynamic range. This will improve the shot almost every time.
There may be times that the lighting creates a contrasty image. Like sidewalks washed out and and other things look under exposed. Or if some of the bright areas of a photo may turn pure white such as what we call highlights. In matters like this try HDR first, but if it doesn't work then set the contrast to -1 so as to get back some details that turned white. If extreem, then set the contrast to -1 and set the exposure to -1 as well. That will help allot.
For Back lighted subjects, use tap to focus to get a perfect exposure if your subject.
I'm sure you'll do fine with this phone in the future. It has a great camera. Enjoy
Posted via Android Central App
JHBThree
Well-known member
- Feb 15, 2012
- 4,096
- 147
- 0
Just to add, here are the exact details. All of the images had these same values.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2
Attachments
KoukiFC3S
Well-known member
- Oct 9, 2009
- 1,723
- 123
- 0
The last few pages were quite entertaining. I think the One's camera is very very good. During daytime it will use a faster shutter speed thanks to the f2.0 and its bigger pixels. What this means is that it will be able to capture movement better. This is really good for action shots of kids, pets, etc.
Love this pic that Android Police took (I cropped it):
The shutter speed was so fast it froze the bee's wings in motion.
The camera also shines indoors where there is not as much light.
And at night there is no contest.
All in all this is a very versatile camera. Very happy with it.
Love this pic that Android Police took (I cropped it):
The shutter speed was so fast it froze the bee's wings in motion.
The camera also shines indoors where there is not as much light.
And at night there is no contest.
All in all this is a very versatile camera. Very happy with it.
Not disagreeing with the results, but how does larger pixels alone equate to a faster shutter speed then smaller pixels again?
Posted via Android Central App
Now that that point has been made, lets stop beating the old horse with a new stick.
Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Android Central Forums
Kevin OQuinn
AC Team Emeritus
- May 17, 2010
- 9,267
- 496
- 0
I really want to keep the thread open, but you guys bickering is making that difficult.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2
Because people here keep ignoring some facts. First we don't take pictures with just a single pixel. We take pictures using all the pixels in place. So what a single pixel does on its own is far from the whole story.
Jerry himself eluded to what I'm getting at in just this thread. What larger pixels do is capture a better signal to noise ratio. But because it has gaps (lager ones at that) it is why during the day or in bright light it has more noise then say what a higher resolution or what smaller pixels capture that the larger ones can't.
Think of it this way. Draw 4 large circles touching each other like the number 88. Again, draw them large. See that large gap in the center of the circles? Now do the same but make them half the size. See how much the larger pixel example fails to capture light in the gap as compared to the smaller one?
Now, one of the reasons why we have noise is when the processor has to fill in the blanks. So at night the HTC one has a much cleaner image with less noise. But in daylight, it will have more noise then then the S4 due to the processor having to fill in the blanks that the gaps in the design of a larger pixel censor.
The subject had been beaten to death I agree. But what most fail to want to speak about here is the truth of the matter in that larger pixels have both strong points and weaknesses. But magically using a faster shutter speed on its own when all other things are equal is not one of them.
Posted via Android Central App
The Mrs took a few pictures the other night while I was trying to get our 2 little boys showered and into bed.
Well from the pictures she took of herself ........ I'd say the camera is GREEEEEEAT
Well from the pictures she took of herself ........ I'd say the camera is GREEEEEEAT
I'm sorry Kevin. I'm not trying to fight. I'm trying to understand why besides marketing that people feel that larger pixels on their own, with all things being equal, will equate to a faster shutter speed when in reality it does not.
It's why Alex states in his review that it is line the HTC one is designed me as a nighttime camera and the S4 in more like a daytime one
Posted via Android Central App
The Mrs took a few pictures the other night while I was trying to get our 2 little boys showered and into bed.
Well from the pictures she took of herself ........ I'd say the camera is GREEEEEEAT
I'm not surprised. I think it's great too.
Posted via Android Central App
Kevin OQuinn
AC Team Emeritus
- May 17, 2010
- 9,267
- 496
- 0
There are many different points being discussed in this thread.
One other thing, Jennifer is a Mod. What she posted wasn't meant to be discussed. It was a warning much like mine. Please, everyone, keep that in mind in the future.
Thanks.
Posted via Android Central App
- Oct 11, 2009
- 5,577
- 2,816
- 113
Except image sensors using multi-bucket pixels, like the ones designed for computational photography, aren't round. They're square, even down to the sub-pixel level. They are designed this way to minimize both empty space on the sensor, and the number of wires on the chip. Because of the way geometry works, there will be less unused space when larger collection points are used. Horowitz and Wan have a great paper on this exact subject if you're able to use the IEEE library, or possibly Stanfords, I suggest giving it a read.
You have been corrected on this many times. Larger pixels absorb more light per pixel. This is a fact. The larger pixels are more sensitive to light because they absorb more light per pixel. Having more pixels may absorb in aggregate a similar amount as fewer larger pixels, however, because each smaller pixel has less light striking it and absorbed by it, they are in fact less sensitive. There is a threshold of noise and a required amount of light that is required for each pixel to work effectively. If you have smaller pixels, they are not as effective in low light.
We spent about two days on this thread correcting you mis-understanding of how pixels work. Finally, that settled, then you went off on contrast. Now you are back on pixels.
This issue has been settled. You were wrong, yet you keep bringing it up.
I am not trying to be argumentitive here, but it is like you intentionally ignore facts just to keep an argument going. Why does it matter any way? The result is the One has a better low light camera and can shoot at higher shutter speeds in ANY given light.
The pixel size does not determine how sensitive the pixels are at absorbing light. The larger pixels do not charge or light up more when light is on then. The type of sensor and software determine how sensitive the pixels are, not the size. Its like saying u have a one inch pixel that absorbs more light than using the same pixels to cover an inch but there is a few million of them.
What a larger pixel does is in fact collect more light (image) for a picture, not collect a brighter light because it is bigger.
Also the shutter speed does not indicate that the pixels absorb more light. It just has a faster image sensor and better software.
Sent from my LG-E970 using Android Central Forums
I don't agree with you. And based on what you have writen above, I don't think you have a good understanding of the issues. I can find several references that explain why larger pixels are indeed more sensitive. Can you provide any credible reference that explains why they are not?
Until you can provide that reference, I won't argue with you.
Here is one indicating that larger pixels are more sensitive and perform better at high ISO. (Note with regard to shutter speed, better high ISO performance means that the camera with larger pixels can get an equivalent noise level for an image exposed with higher ISO and faster shutter speed than a smaller pixel camera which will need a lower ISO and therefore slower shutter speed for the equivalent noise level.)
Clarkvision: Does Pixel Size Matter
"Conclusions
Current good quality sensors in digital cameras are photon noise limited. This means there is no possible improvement in performance for the high signal region (bright things in an image) except to increase quantum efficiency of the devices and/or the fractional active area for which the sensor converts photons to electrons (called the fill factor). As both of these properties are reasonably high already, there is limited room for improvement. And even if these properties were improved, there would still be a big difference between large and small pixels. Larger pixels enable higher signal-to-noise ratios at all levels, but especially at low signal levels, assuming the lens scales with the sensor. The obvious improvement still possible would be to reduce the read noise, but that would likely improve large sensors also, thus large sensors with large pixels will always have an advantage for the same field of view, and correspondingly longer focal length lenses are used. Whether the difference in noise is great enough for you to choose a larger sensor, and thus likely a larger and heavier camera, is a decision you must make for yourself.
When choosing between cameras with the same sized sensor but differing pixel counts, the one with larger pixels (and fewer total pixels) will have better high ISO and low light performance (assuming read noise and fixed pattern noise are similar, which may not be the case), while the camera with more pixels can deliver images with finer detail in good light. You will need to decide where that trade point is. My models show the optimum in DSLR-sized sensors have pixels around 5 microns. You will need to determine what your prime imaging will be. For low light work, I might bias the pixels to a little larger than 5 microns; if low light/high ISO work is not as important, I might bias my choice to slightly smaller than 5 microns. For P&S cameras with small sensors, I prefer cameras with pixels larger than 2 microns.
Because good digital cameras are photon noise limited, the larger pixels will always have higher signal-to-noise ratios unless someone finds a way around the laws of physics, which is highly unlikely. Important to remember, however, is larger pixels enable more light to be collected, but it is the lens that delivers the light. An analogy is buckets of water. A large bucket will hold more water than a small bucket. But if you want to collect more water in a given time, one must turn the faucet on higher. So too with cameras and lenses: the bigger lens collects more light and delivers it to the sensor.
Image detail can be blurred by diffraction. Diffraction is more of an issue with smaller pixels, so again cameras with larger pixels will perform better, giving sharper images with higher contrast in the fine details. A direct example of this effect is a small sensor P&S camera can be diffraction limitied at f/5.6 to f/8, whereas the larger pixels in a DSLR will not show the same effects until f/11, f/16, and slower. And given the same pixel count in the P&S and DSLR, the DSLR will resolve finer details."
Last edited:
CSI Guy
Well-known member
- Feb 25, 2009
- 575
- 4
- 0
You are right Jerry and the use of a tripod will always make for a sharper photo. And for a phone camera, it is best to keep the sun at your back. You don't have the adjustments for backlit photos to my satisfaction. This will keep lens flare at bay.
Similar threads
- Question
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram