Here is why there is so much HTC hate.

[YourMobileGuru]

That would be 100% incorrect no matter how it is said. No photographer will agree with you. This was already talked to death and others agreed with me. Just stop already.

sent with my 2 year old HTC evo3d

This whole argument is symantics and off topic. Its not going to matter to 99% of the people buying this phone and has nothing to do with the original post about Samsung paying people to bash HTC with false information.


Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Android Central Forums

 

[warpdrive]

This whole argument is symantics and off topic. Its not going to matter to 99% of the people buying this phone and has nothing to do with the original post about Samsung paying people to bash HTC with false information.


Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Android Central Forums

False information is false.
Truthful information is truthful.

Off topic? Agreed. But this forum is full of false information, I would just like to speak truthfully in here...others just would rather disagree.

sent with my 2 year old HTC evo3d

 

[badbrad17]

I'm a photographer, larger pixels never let in more light. It is the aperture that let's in more light.

Example: at iso 100, the HTC One's censor absorbs the same amount of light as a smaller pixel censor does at iso 100.
Sorry, but HTC repeatedly states that their ultra pixel technology let's in as much as 300% more light.

sent with my 2 year old HTC evo3d

Yet surprisingly the HTC One excels at taking good low light photos.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Android Central Forums

 

[badbrad17]

There are a few reasons why the HTC One's camera does so well in low light.

First it is the f2.0 lens. Compared to the S4's f2.2 or the S3's f2.6 lens, this is almost a full stop to 1 1/2 stops better.

Also, in full auto and not on night scene setting, the software seems to use a higher iso setting then another camera.
Example: on the One it might use iso 200 when the S4 or another phone might use iso 100. So by default, this will always help in low light better, regardless that it still does it in daylight.

The nighttime setting seems to make the iso more in line with other phones, so it uses a lower iso setting (maybe iso800 max) and thus a slower shutter speed.

So keep your iso set to auto and that will work better for low or ultra low light.

sent with my 2 year old HTC evo3d

So would you say the camera in the One X would still be a better camera than the One? That camera was always rated pretty high so it surprised me when they changed their direction with the lower megapixels etc.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Android Central Forums

 

[JHBThree]

That would be 100% incorrect no matter how it is said. No photographer will agree with you. This was already talked to death and others agreed with me. Just stop already.

sent with my 2 year old HTC evo3d

It is absolutely correct. Larger pixels capture more light. You are confusing the terms 'let in' and 'capture'. The aperture lets in light; the sensor captures it. It is not our fault if you have confused the terms.

Also, I can link you to the dozens of photography websites that state exactly what I just did and prove you wrong if you would really like me to. For now I'll spare you the embarrassment.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[anon5664829]

The reason one is illegal is that the posts were not true. Samsung was saying the HTC phones were faulty when they weren't. You can't lie about a competitors product. HTC didn't lie about Samsung in times Square.

Remember the I'm a Mac, I'm a PC ads? These bashed Microsoft all day long but were not lies. Same with the Samsung ads recently with all the iPhone buyers in the line up. Totally legit. Lying... Not legit.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Android Central Forums

No that was different, Apple bashed the PRODUCT,not the people.
Samsung is bashing Apple USERS. Major difference here.

 

[anon5664829]

Great analysis.

Again no it isn't.Apple bashed the product not the users.

 

[warpdrive]

So would you say the camera in the One X would still be a better camera than the One? That camera was always rated pretty high so it surprised me when they changed their direction with the lower megapixels etc.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Android Central Forums

The camera on the One is fantastic. Don't let anyone else say otherwise. It takes great low light shots. You'll be quite happy.

Yet there can be a deep learning curve.

sent with my 2 year old HTC evo3d

 

[warpdrive]

It is absolutely correct. Larger pixels capture more light. You are confusing the terms 'let in' and 'capture'. The aperture lets in light; the sensor captures it. It is not our fault if you have confused the terms.

Also, I can link you to the dozens of photography websites that state exactly what I just did and prove you wrong if you would really like me to. For now I'll spare you the embarrassment.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

You can't find one photographer who will say what you believe. After all, you don't want a camera that will over expose your image.

Go away troll.

sent with my 2 year old HTC evo3d

 

[JHBThree]

You can't find one photographer who will say what you believe. After all, you don't want a camera that will over expose your image.

Go away troll.

sent with my 2 year old HTC evo3d

Oh really? The professional association for electrical engineers, including those of digital photography begs to differ:

Pixels on an image sensor are analogous to a bunch of red, green, and blue paint buckets placed side by side. (Red, green, and blue combine to create all colors.) The bigger the buckets, the more paint (electrons) they can capture.Here?s where it gets a little tricky, so it?s best to explain by another analogy. Suppose you need to estimate how much rain falls onto a farm, and you have only a minute?s worth of rainfall to do your measurements. Imagine that you spread 100 empty soup cans around the property, capped by funnels that are 10 centimeters in diameter. You might collect only a few hundred drops in each. Now suppose you could double the size of the funnel. The amount that can be collected increases exponentially. Calculating how much rain falls on the field by extrapolating the water collected with, say, 1000‑cm funnels will yield vastly more accurate results. Here?s why: If your raindrops are really photons, the signal-to-noise ratio is dominated by the fact that the noise is equal to the square root of the number of photons. Thus the more rain each soup can collects, the higher the signal-to-noise ratio.

From:
http://m.spectrum.ieee.org/geek-life/tools-toys/pixels-size-matters

Since you can't admit you're wrong, when I have access to a computer I'll post a sample of the hundreds of websites that prove you don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[LegalAmerican]

Oh really? The professional association for electrical engineers, including those of digital photography begs to differ:



From:
http://m.spectrum.ieee.org/geek-life/tools-toys/pixels-size-matters

Since you can't admit you're wrong, when I have access to a computer I'll post a sample of the hundreds of websites that prove you don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

Right or wrong, no one is more conceited than this guy on these forums. Unbelievable how good he is at talking down to people.

 

[warpdrive]

Oh really? The professional association for electrical engineers, including those of digital photography begs to differ:



From:
http://m.spectrum.ieee.org/geek-life/tools-toys/pixels-size-matters

Since you can't admit you're wrong, when I have access to a computer I'll post a sample of the hundreds of websites that prove you don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

Great, you explained. Signal to noise ratio and why larger pixels are better. Try again, you didn't prove what HTC said.

sent with my 2 year old HTC evo3d

 

[JHBThree]

Great, you explained. Signal to noise ratio and why larger pixels are better. Try again, you didn't prove what HTC said.

sent with my 2 year old HTC evo3d

Yes, I did. Bigger pixels capture more light, which is exactly what htc said, almost verbatim.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Gathomblipoob]

 

[warpdrive]

Yes, I did. Bigger pixels capture more light, which is exactly what htc said, almost verbatim.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

What you quoted explained how with larger pixels you get a better signal to noise ratio....or in layman's terms, a more pure or clean image with lower noise.

Congrats

Now show how larger pixels capture 300% more light.


sent with my 2 year old HTC evo3d

 

[JHBThree]

What you quoted explained how with larger pixels you get a better signal to noise ratio....or in layman's terms, a more pure or clean image with lower noise.

Congrats

Now show how larger pixels capture 300% more light.


sent with my 2 year old HTC evo3d

Now I'm convinced you just can't read. Last sentence. Notice the word photon. Talks directly about the amount of light being captured. The 'bucket' is the pixel.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[JHBThree]

But since you asked, get ready for a barrage of links:

Clarkvision: Does Pixel Size Matter

But despite the read noise advantage, the larger pixels of the big camera collects so much more light per pixel that the image quality is much better than the small pixel camera (Figure 5). The light is delivered by the lens, and the lens is the real reason the large pixels are able to collect more light.

Digital Camera Sensor Sizes: How it Influences Your Photography

Further, larger pixels receive a greater flux of photons during a given exposure time (at the same f-stop), so their light signal is much stronger.

Pixel size - Learn - Snapsort

The size of each pixel is important because the larger the area the more light it can gather. More light means less noise, better color and more dynamic range.

Pixels: Size Matters - IEEE Spectrum

The lens focuses photons reflected by the scene being photographed onto that image sensor. Etched into the image sensor?s silicon are pixels (short for ?picture elements?)?technically, photoreceptor or photodiode sites. Each pixel is a single point that collects the electrons, which are then interpreted into information about color and light.

Basics of Digital Camera Pixels

A larger pixel has more light-gathering area, which means the light signal is stronger over a given interval of time.

sensor size, pixels resolution, dynamic range,|Underwater Photography Guide

The photosite, also known as a photodiode, is an area on the camera sensor that captures light and converts it into a signal...The term pixel and photosite are sometimes interchanged.

Understanding Sensor Design

The only way to add more pixels to a chip of a given size is to make the pixels smaller. But, as the pixels become smaller they are less able to capture photons, and therefore their signal to noise ratio decreases. (All electronic circuits have inherent noise. The more signal (photons) there is, the lower the noise is relative to that signal).

Digital Camera Image Sensors and Sensor Size

The better image quality is due to the fact that larger size pixels are able to gather more light and information about the quality of the light. Those larger pixels will also produce better images in terms of "noise" and "dynamic range".

Image sensors - Technical guide | Axis Communications

Each pixel on an image sensor registers the amount of light it is exposed to and converts it into a corresponding number of electrons. The brighter the light, the more electrons are generated.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/technology/personaltech/13basics.html?_r=0

The mechanics of this can be understood by thinking of a digital camera sensor as a flat sheet of material pocked with millions (hence ?mega?) of cylindrical, cuplike pixels. In other words, picture the digital sensor as a tiny cupcake tin.

Photons (light particles) pass through a camera?s lens and are captured by the cups in the tray. Each cup is either red, green or blue (the three colors that are the building blocks for all other colors). The more photons a cup catches, the brighter that cup?s color. Totally empty cups record black; totally full cups record white.

Larger pixels (cups, remember), with larger surface areas, capture more photons per second, which in electronics-speak means a stronger signal ? and in camera-speak means less noise and cleaner colors. Bigger pixels can also capture more photons per exposure without filling up, so larger pixels hold on to their color longer and don?t go white as quickly as smaller pixels.

So tell me, who doesn't understand how these cameras work, you, or all of the linked sites above? This is only a sampling as well, mind you. Man up and admit you were wrong.

 

[So Cold]

You guys realize that you're just going to get this thread closed at the rate you're going...

And am I the only one who thinks it's hilarious when this thread pops up in my recents titled "here is why there is so much htc hate" and the name next to it (the last person to post at that time) is one of the 2 biggest htc fanboys I've run into. Kind of ironic and makes me laugh, seems like the question answers itself sometimes...

Sent from my Note 2

 

[adriandb]

Again no it isn't.Apple bashed the product not the users.

I'm not sure how that's relevant to the discussion, but either way it's a flawed argument. Do you really think that Apple wasn't trying to portray PC users as dorks and Mac users as hip? That was kinda the point of the campaign.

 

[snookasnoo]

Samsung is a South Korean Chaebol which is essentially a syndicate and they have been charged with cirminal syndicate activities in Korea and other places. Nobody should be surprised by anything they do. It is amusing that they acted like it was surprise to them though.