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

[madlaw1071]

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

Kevin, we need a new forum rule...when you, me(and Jerry below) agree in a thread, close it down lol

 

[hpilot]

I have yet to take a good picture with this phone. All the outdoor shots are extremely washed out - I mean a lot. I don't know how people get the nice shots they post here. I just took some test shots outside in perfect lighting conditions, and they are not even usable. My three year old Samsung Nexus S takes way better pictures. I don't get it...
Check this out:

[/URL][/IMG]

 

[joshwithachance]

It wasn't until I tried the Note 2 that I began to REALLY appreciate the UltraPixel camera on the HTC One. Daylight photos are pretty much on par with every other smartphone, albeit sometimes a bit washed out or noisy. But it's in the lowlight photos that it SLAYS. And the front facing camera is unmatched by any other phone, in both terms of quality and field of view.

 

[hpilot]

It wasn't until I tried the Note 2 that I began to REALLY appreciate the UltraPixel camera on the HTC One. Daylight photos are pretty much on par with every other smartphone, albeit sometimes a bit washed out or noisy. But it's in the lowlight photos that it SLAYS. And the front facing camera is unmatched by any other phone, in both terms of quality and field of view.

So you think the photo in post #122 is good?

 

[badbrad17]

I have yet to take a good picture with this phone. All the outdoor shots are extremely washed out - I mean a lot. I don't know how people get the nice shots they post here. I just took some test shots outside in perfect lighting conditions, and they are not even usable. My three year old Samsung Nexus S takes way better pictures. I don't get it...
Check this out:

[URL=http://s398.photobucket.com/us...bucket.com/albums/pp68/hpilot123/IMAG0045.jpg[/URL][/url]

Looks blurry. I may be stating the obvious but make sure the lens doesn't have a finger print on it. It also looks like you are shooting into your light source which is never a good option. Light should be at your back.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Android Central Forums

 

[zedorda]

So you think the photo in post #122 is good?

I don't think "on par" translates to "good" when all phone cameras suck compared to real cameras in general.

Quantify "good" without the use of personal opinion, please.

 

[hpilot]

I changed the White Balance from Auto to Daylight and the picture got better. I guess the auto mode in this camera just doesn't work. Anybody have settings that work well?

[/URL][/IMG]

 

[hpilot]

Looks blurry. I may be stating the obvious but make sure the lens doesn't have a finger print on it. It also looks like you are shooting into your light source which is never a good option. Light should be at your back.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Android Central Forums

Actually I made sure the light was at my back. Like I said, this was in perfect lighting conditions. However, your point about the lens smudge was right on - it was. From now on, it is the first thing I will check. Thanks.

 

[SCjRqrQCnBQ19QoYCtdl]

I changed the White Balance from Auto to Daylight and the picture got better. I guess the auto mode in this camera just doesn't work. Anybody have settings that work well?

[URL=http://s398.photobucket.com/us...bucket.com/albums/pp68/hpilot123/IMAG0002.jpg[/URL][/url]

It helps to select a focus/exposure point. If the picture is too bright, tap on a lighter area. This will reduce the exposure. If the picture is too dark, tap on a darker area. This will increase exposure.

 

[hpilot]

I don't think "on par" translates to "good" when all phone cameras suck compared to real cameras in general.

Quantify "good" without the use of personal opinion, please.

I would quantify "good" as adequate.

 

[warpdrive]

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

Once again thank you for replying with as much helpful information as posable when talking about Alex's review. I'm also quite sure I'm the one you are talking about when you asked Alex some questions and woke him up while he was sleeping.

While I'm more a fanboi of htc and understand far more of the software htc uses to capture images as compared to samsung. I'm glad for any info on what samsung does or doesn't do.

So to say that the anti shake setting doesn't help with a sharper image or at least say it hurts image quality instead of helping it is quite shocking and is something that I'll have to test this out in the future to see exactly what Alex means.

I also want to thank you for further explaining about how you don't just shoot on auto for every shot and that you indeed do change the settings to capture a more reliable image consistently with your htc one. Doing so on both the S4 and the One will result in a picture that is far better then just always using auto. But doing so is also a far cry then just pointing and shooting and knowing that you got a good image. Your statement even now undermines the meaning of simplicity as compared to the S4. In other words you acknowledge that you don't just point and shoot as you have implied in the past and that you do indeed change settings to get a more reliable image with the One. While also stating that if you don't do this the htc one will give you inferior photos as compared to doing so. So in turn what I'm trying to get at is that when people do read your replies, at times you can mislead them by what you are NOT saying. Some people would even go so far to say that such constant misleadings by staff (such as yourself) here could be a sign of unfavorable bias toward the htc one. So in the future please watch what you say or how you say things as we the community don't really want a repeat of what happened in the S4 forum.

As for tap to focus, at least on the htc one when you do this the software automatically changes the metering from center to spot metering. I know that in almost all reviews that this is never mentioned. This can be both helpful or harmful depending on if you want such an effect and understand that it happens. If by chance that you don't know that this happens, you can get what Alex calls a wonky photo.
Example: when back lit, using tap to focus on the One to properly expose a subject's face can be quite helpful. But taking a picture of a car with his headlights on at dusk you wont want to tap anyplace near the headlights of the car or the rest of the image including the car will be dark or black.
Again, I can't speak too much on what if any changes are done with the S4 with regards to tap to focus. But I have used it and I don't think it chages any settings. You have to pardon me for my lack of knowledge when it comes to the software that Sammy uses for the S4 as I'm more knowledgeable about htc and thier devices. Yet with that said I understand why you would want to at least use more tap to focus on some testings, but that may be a great discussion for another time.

Posted via Android Central App

 

[madlaw1071]

I changed the White Balance from Auto to Daylight and the picture got better. I guess the auto mode in this camera just doesn't work. Anybody have settings that work well?

[URL=http://s398.photobucket.com/us...bucket.com/albums/pp68/hpilot123/IMAG0002.jpg[/URL][/url]

This picture is quite awful given the adequate amount of light. CAVEAT, I'm viewing it on a 23" 1080p monitor. There is ZERO detail to the bushes below the palms, looks like a blurry mess. The palms themselves are quite muddled. OMG just noticed the flowers look terrible too.

 

[TheyStoleMyName]

This picture is quite awful give the adequate amount of light. CAVEAT, I'm viewing it on a 23" 1080p monitor. There is ZERO detail to the bushes below the palms, looks like a blurry mess. The palms themselves are quite muddled. OMG just noticed the flowers look terrible too.

I'm not sure if the cameras capable of that much resolution at that size of screen. Plus it's at kind of a distance too. Try finding a pic that's closer and try it out

Sent from my HTC One using Android Central Forums

 

[CSI Guy]

For those of you that have cloudy looking pics, this is most likely lens flare. Keep the sun at your back and you will have far better pics. This is a camera phone not a Cannon 1D.

 

[warpdrive]

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

Ah, but that is just it. When you say that larger pixels capture more light, the proof would be improved detail or greater dynamic range. The problem is that yes I feel that the software is the culprit. And while I agree that it may be improved in an update, it also may not be improved due to many factors that can harm the final image if htc were to fix it. The problem is that there are far too many hardware and software limitations that a cellphone camera has and in this case I couldn't garentee that this can be fixed. But I'd like to take this subject one step further.

Remember my original argument? That besides the f2 lens and optical image stability, that it wasn't the large pixels that helps in night photos but the auto setting that uses a higher iso level that makes such a huge differance?

The reason I still say this is because at least at this time the larger pixels do indeed capture more light, but not necessarily in light intensity to help with low light but in a slightly cleaner image at best if at all. But even that is way too hard to prove using Alex's methods as both phones were never shot at the same iso levels in daylight and maybe in night mode as well.

But what has been proven is that htc decided to use an auto mode that drastically uses a higher iso level then the competition. This auto mode is such a great improvement at low light shooting that it is far better then its own night mode. Unlike its larger pixels the auto mode actually alows the htc one to shoot in lower light. So to say that larger pixels help with low light is not wrong if it does indeed add more details or have more dynamic range. But since at least at this time it doesn't add more dynamic range and it doesn't help capture more details in low light, but the auto setting does in fact allow you to capture more light intensity durring a low light shot or use a faster shutter speed, the auto mode is actually more useful or helpful in low light. In fact the night mode on the One is so gimped that it maxes out at iso800 like some old auto or manual mode might do. Yet the auto mode's max iso is so high that I'm not sure anyone has stated what it is yet.
But like what Alex was eluding to, this auto mode is not always ment for daylight. The reason is that because it uses a higher then normally needed iso, you will by default have more noise or artifacts as well as inferior dynamic range as compared to the same shot but taken at a lower iso level on manual settings.

Oh Kevin, I hope I didn't get carried away in my reply to you. You do seem eager to hear my thoughts on such matters and you have been most kind with me that I don't mind at all to talk forever on such a great camera that the htc one has.

Posted via Android Central App

 

[AdamsHouseCat]

A 1080P monitor displays 1920 X1080, which equals 2 magapixels. Files bigger than 2MP do not "display" any better than this (unless zoomed).

 

[Kevin OQuinn]

@warpdrive: Please understand that 95% (maybe even higher) of my pictures are taken on straight auto. So, my statement about just pointing and shooting is accurate. Only when I get an unacceptable picture will I try to do something about it. So, no, my statement is not misleading at all. Also, yes, I do like the One. A lot. I don't hide that fact at all. I don't think that it's automatically the best at everything, though, and recognize that it has weaknesses. That's not a crime. It's just being human.

I think that it's been established that a pixel can only do it's job when it captures an adequate amount of light. So be able to capture more light will allow a pixel to do it's job easier. So, I'm going with software being the issue IN GENERAL. Yes, it might also be limited by the rest of the hardware, but I'm not sure we'll ever know that for sure.

 

[hpilot]

This picture is quite awful given the adequate amount of light. CAVEAT, I'm viewing it on a 23" 1080p monitor. There is ZERO detail to the bushes below the palms, looks like a blurry mess. The palms themselves are quite muddled. OMG just noticed the flowers look terrible too.

You are right - it is awful. I didn't try out the camera when I first got the phone because everyone said it was so good. Now it is too late to return it. For comparison, here is a photo I took with my three year old Nexus S that every one said had a terrible camera. I guess I am stuck now.

[/URL][/IMG]

 

[SCjRqrQCnBQ19QoYCtdl]

Ah, but that is just it. When you say that larger pixels capture more light, the proof would be improved detail or greater dynamic range. The problem is that yes I feel that the software is the culprit. And while I agree that it may be improved in an update, it also may not be improved due to many factors that can harm the final image if htc were to fix it. The problem is that there are far too many hardware and software limitations that a cellphone camera has and in this case I couldn't garentee that this can be fixed. But I'd like to take this subject one step further.

Remember my original argument? That besides the f2 lens and optical image stability, that it wasn't the large pixels that helps in night photos but the auto setting that uses a higher iso level that makes such a huge differance?

The reason I still say this is because at least at this time the larger pixels do indeed capture more light, but not necessarily in light intensity to help with low light but in a slightly cleaner image at best if at all. But even that is way too hard to prove using Alex's methods as both phones were never shot at the same iso levels in daylight and maybe in night mode as well.

But what has been proven is that htc decided to use an auto mode that drastically uses a higher iso level then the competition. This auto mode is such a great improvement at low light shooting that it is far better then its own night mode. Unlike its larger pixels the auto mode actually alows the htc one to shoot in lower light. So to say that larger pixels help with low light is not wrong if it does indeed add more details or have more dynamic range. But since at least at this time it doesn't add more dynamic range and it doesn't help capture more details in low light, but the auto setting does in fact allow you to capture more light intensity durring a low light shot or use a faster shutter speed, the auto mode is actually more useful or helpful in low light. In fact the night mode on the One is so gimped that it maxes out at iso800 like some old auto or manual mode might do. Yet the auto mode's max iso is so high that I'm not sure anyone has stated what it is yet.
But like what Alex was eluding to, this auto mode is not always ment for daylight. The reason is that because it uses a higher then normally needed iso, you will by default have more noise or artifacts as well as inferior dynamic range as compared to the same shot but taken at a lower iso level on manual settings.

Oh Kevin, I hope I didn't get carried away in my reply to you. You do seem eager to hear my thoughts on such matters and you have been most kind with me that I don't mind at all to talk forever on such a great camera that the htc one has.

Posted via Android Central App

You continue to insist on things that just aren't true or gibberish.

Gibberish:
"...the larger pixels do indeed capture more light, but not necessarily in light intensity to help with low light but in a slightly cleaner image at best if at all."

Not true:
"This auto mode is such a great improvement at low light shooting that it is far better then its own night mode."

The auto mode has a different purpose than night mode. The night mode allows for lower shutter speeds, but this is not useful if there is subject movement. The auto mode attempts to maintain a higher shutter speed to stop subject movement. You are hung up on what your definition of "nite mode" and "auto mode" are, and not adapting to what the purpose of the modes actually is.

Not true:

"Unlike its larger pixels the auto mode actually alows the htc one to shoot in lower light. So to say that larger pixels help with low light is not wrong if it does indeed add more details or have more dynamic range."

As has been explained to you numerous time, the larger pixels are more sensitive to light than smaller pixels. You keep harping on larger pixels being of no benefit in low light, but you are wrong.
There are benefits of this beyond dynamic range. Other benefits include lower noise for a given ISO and higher useable ISO levels. This definately helps shoot in lower light.

Not true:
".... but the auto setting does in fact allow you to capture more light intensity durring a low light shot or use a faster shutter speed, the auto mode is actually more useful or helpful in low light. "

The auto setting doesn't allow you to "capture more light intensity". It allows the camera to use higher ISO levels to keep shutter speed higher. This isn't capturing more inensity, it is applying more gain to the signal. Whether that is more useful or not depends on your intent with the shot. Do you want a night scene with traffic and streaks of taillights? Then nite mode is more useful. Do you want lower noise picture of a city full of buildings at night? Then night mode is more useful. Do you want a shot of people chatting in a dark bar where your subject is moving as people do? Then auto mode is more useful.

Not true:

"In fact the night mode on the One is so gimped that it maxes out at iso800 like some old auto or manual mode might do. Yet the auto mode's max iso is so high that I'm not sure anyone has stated what it is yet."

It is not gimped. It serves a different purpose than the auto mode as explained above. You don't need night mode if you want to use a high ISO. The purpose is to give you less noise for night scenics. If it is gimped, it is not becuase of the ISO, but becuase of the lack of long enough exposures.

 

[TheyStoleMyName]

A 1080P monitor displays 1920 X1080, which equals 2 magapixels. Files bigger than 2MP do not "display" any better than this (unless zoomed).

True but they only will display up to a certIn size at a certain resolution before it gets grainy.

It depends in the screen size. You can have a 5inch 1080 screen and a 50in 1080 screen The larger the screen the more grainy it'll look unless the mp is higher, there are also other factors involved with having a grainy or bad photo.

For example my phone's camera looks good full screen with some pics on a 21inch monitor and some dont. It's a 4 ultra pixel camera, technically an 8-10 mega pixel.

Sent from my HTC One using Android Central Forums