1Coopgt
Well-known member
- Apr 9, 2014
- 651
- 74
- 28
When ever possible always shot with the sun behind you . Photography 101 rule of thumb .
The Droid Turbo Camera Quandry
- Thread starter PowrDroid
- Start date
When ever possible always shot with the sun behind you . Photography 101 rule of thumb .
wolf_walker
Well-known member
- Jan 29, 2013
- 168
- 0
- 16
Did some photo observation and it's.. almost disappointing but not surprising.
Bare in mind this is still preliminary.
Low light non-HDR the GS4 has less noise. HDR mode (on not auto on the DT) the DT has less noise than the
GS4 does in HDR or non, and takes HDR photo's considerably faster. From a few brief comparison shots with the flash inside, the DT
pics looked bad, plenty well lit but just bad.
Outside well-lit is a mixed bag so far, you can tell the higher resolution sensor in the DT but that isn't really that important unless
you are trying to print images really large, for regular internet or display on even a large TV they both have plenty.
The DT is faster than the GS4 stock camera but only by a hair, the drag to focus then tap to shoot is superior on the DT,
and (a major plus), the DT is able to adjust balance and such for a specified point on the screen and the GS4 cannot(which is a huge
failing and the GS3 shared it too, don't know about the GS5) If your shot is a room with a window outside where it's bright, on the GS3/4
you have to actually re-frame the shot to have the camera either use the light level of the window(and the room is then pitch black), or use the lower light level of the room, you can't tap where you want it to sample from). So huge win for the DT out of the gate on that score.
Honestly they both look so (relatively) crappy compared to even a couple hundred dollar or less point and shoot, it's hard to get too excited or disappointed either way.
The DT camera works fine for a cell phone, and other than the point sample function, I'd have to say the GS4 is easier to get nice shots with at the moment, but with some effort the DT is capable of better. I might try and setup to do some comparison shots, but unless you have a well calibrated and known display, you aren't going to see what I see or anyone else see's either. Differences between the two, yes, but not a true representation.
Further, with the lack of manual control and inconsistent nature of non-dedicated software, you can take two shots back to back and they will look like two different cameras from the same device which is super annoying trying to compare things.
Unless one is coming from a phone with a really outstanding camera I would not let any of this deter one from going with the DT.
You'd be far better served by a small pocket point and shoot in your glovebox or backpack and having the great screen and huge battery and
fast cpu on the DT IMO. Maybe Android L will have a better camera and/or they will update the firmware or something, part of the problem is there is very little lens/hardware and a lot of software going on with these things and that is a recipe for crappy photos.
I have high hopes the OIS helps out with low light on the Nexus 6, but it's still too big for me.
Bare in mind this is still preliminary.
Low light non-HDR the GS4 has less noise. HDR mode (on not auto on the DT) the DT has less noise than the
GS4 does in HDR or non, and takes HDR photo's considerably faster. From a few brief comparison shots with the flash inside, the DT
pics looked bad, plenty well lit but just bad.
Outside well-lit is a mixed bag so far, you can tell the higher resolution sensor in the DT but that isn't really that important unless
you are trying to print images really large, for regular internet or display on even a large TV they both have plenty.
The DT is faster than the GS4 stock camera but only by a hair, the drag to focus then tap to shoot is superior on the DT,
and (a major plus), the DT is able to adjust balance and such for a specified point on the screen and the GS4 cannot(which is a huge
failing and the GS3 shared it too, don't know about the GS5) If your shot is a room with a window outside where it's bright, on the GS3/4
you have to actually re-frame the shot to have the camera either use the light level of the window(and the room is then pitch black), or use the lower light level of the room, you can't tap where you want it to sample from). So huge win for the DT out of the gate on that score.
Honestly they both look so (relatively) crappy compared to even a couple hundred dollar or less point and shoot, it's hard to get too excited or disappointed either way.
The DT camera works fine for a cell phone, and other than the point sample function, I'd have to say the GS4 is easier to get nice shots with at the moment, but with some effort the DT is capable of better. I might try and setup to do some comparison shots, but unless you have a well calibrated and known display, you aren't going to see what I see or anyone else see's either. Differences between the two, yes, but not a true representation.
Further, with the lack of manual control and inconsistent nature of non-dedicated software, you can take two shots back to back and they will look like two different cameras from the same device which is super annoying trying to compare things.
Unless one is coming from a phone with a really outstanding camera I would not let any of this deter one from going with the DT.
You'd be far better served by a small pocket point and shoot in your glovebox or backpack and having the great screen and huge battery and
fast cpu on the DT IMO. Maybe Android L will have a better camera and/or they will update the firmware or something, part of the problem is there is very little lens/hardware and a lot of software going on with these things and that is a recipe for crappy photos.
I have high hopes the OIS helps out with low light on the Nexus 6, but it's still too big for me.
- Nov 30, 2012
- 1,923
- 12
- 38
Here's some more kindling to throw on the fire and muddy the waters. (Love mixed metaphors)
While the original Moto X suffered from some crippling camera issues out of the gate, this year’s model is routinely capable of delivering quality photos. The only real complaint that has surfaced in using the Moto X is the tendency to misfire, such that the camera focuses on the wrong thing when taking the photo and you wind up with a perfectly in focus background with a blurry foreground. This can be mostly eliminated with the focus and exposure tool in the camera app, but it’s worth pointing out that the Droid Turbo doesn’t have this problem at all. In fact, the 21MP sensor locks on to the correct focus point with surprising accuracy even without Motorola’s focus tool.
Motorola Droid Turbo really is just a super powered Moto X. Again. | Android | Geek.com
While the original Moto X suffered from some crippling camera issues out of the gate, this year’s model is routinely capable of delivering quality photos. The only real complaint that has surfaced in using the Moto X is the tendency to misfire, such that the camera focuses on the wrong thing when taking the photo and you wind up with a perfectly in focus background with a blurry foreground. This can be mostly eliminated with the focus and exposure tool in the camera app, but it’s worth pointing out that the Droid Turbo doesn’t have this problem at all. In fact, the 21MP sensor locks on to the correct focus point with surprising accuracy even without Motorola’s focus tool.
Motorola Droid Turbo really is just a super powered Moto X. Again. | Android | Geek.com
wolf_walker
Well-known member
- Jan 29, 2013
- 168
- 0
- 16
It's not enabled by default, but I really like the drag-to-focus and tap to shoot interface.
I have so much muscle memory of tap to focus and then use a separate shutter button I keep
doing it wrong but I'll get used to it eventually. Nice setup.
I have so much muscle memory of tap to focus and then use a separate shutter button I keep
doing it wrong but I'll get used to it eventually. Nice setup.
I also really like the drag-to-focus feature. It is the only feature besides toggling HDR that can give us a better shot.
I keep hearing that the software is the issue. Is this software that can only be updated through a system update, or the type of issue where we can download Camera FX or a similar app and take better pictures than the Moto Camera one.
I had the Droid razzor max for a couple years. Hated the camera except for mundane work pics. When ever I tried to get good family shots it was pitiful. Just got the Droid Turbo. NA NA naysayers, your wrong the new camera (21mp) is AWSOME ! I just did a low light pic in my attic of a painting I am doing... you be the judge.. I AM SO HAPPY WITH THIS CAMERA !
Attachments
Clocks
Well-known member
- Aug 27, 2010
- 2,009
- 18
- 0
I have the paid camera FX. No change in shutter speed believe it or not...
And just for kicks some quality comparisons
Thanks. How would you describe the two? I see the Camera FX showing more detail on the braid of the headphone cable, but other than that, not much difference.
Clocks
Well-known member
- Aug 27, 2010
- 2,009
- 18
- 0
That's probably because camera fx will save at 100% jpeg where the default is probably 90 or 95.
I always use the stock camera. Never found a difference with the 3rd party cameras unless you want to mess with a bunch of settings every shot.
Premium1
Trusted Member
- Nov 7, 2011
- 3,532
- 266
- 0
I don't think the camera is *that* bad, now that being said, I really can't tell much of a difference between photos taken on most flagship android devices these days except for a few areas. Now I am no professional photographer and maybe I just don't have the eyes to pick out all the "issues" with the camera. Now that being said, I am going to wait until lollipop is out before picking one up, to see if lollipop will enhance the camera among other things. But like others said, it is mainly because everyone has different expectations when it comes to phones and cameras.
- Nov 30, 2012
- 1,923
- 12
- 38
I messed around with several camera apps with my Maxx HD, but ended up using the stock app. The colors with the third party apps were not accurate. Think about it, the stock app is optimized for the sensor in your particular camera whereas third party apps are one size fits all.
I went from a T-Mobile Note 4 And figured to save $5 from getting a Verizon one and get this phone instead since I thought I would like it and Wanted to buy it at Bestbuy since they are offering Game Unlocked which costs $120 for 2 years and basically offers 20% discounts off all new games for free and a $150 Bestbuy Gift Card to boot if you activate a new line with Verizon. They didn't have any models of the Turbo up and the rep was actually curious about the phone since he never seen it himself before. I love the phone Hardware and software with the exception of the Camera. Since I am coming from a Note 4, Note 3 and a Nexus 5 and I think the software used with Samsung is better then Motorola for Camera for DIS( Digital image stabilization) from my experience with the Turbo and the Note 4 and Nexus 5 both have OIS which i think if the Turbo had it would help. I found slight movement made by me made the pictures blurry with the Turbo where it would look ok with the Note 3 which also has DIS and not OIS. I also found the pictures to be a bit washed out with the Turbo compared to my Note 4 , Note 3, Nexus 5 , iPad Air 2 even and a friends iPhone 5S. This is just my opinion of the Camera and ultimately the only persons opinion is your own and if you like the quality then that is fantastic
This is a great phone and takes wonderful pics provided subject is still and hand doesn't shake....All because of shutterlag..I hope and pray the update
L will correct this..Correct the shutterlag and it'll be perfect.
L will correct this..Correct the shutterlag and it'll be perfect.
wolf_walker
Well-known member
- Jan 29, 2013
- 168
- 0
- 16
I got some really nice shots yesterday afternoon as the sun was going down.
And with our tree cover it's seldom really sunny here. The shutter lag is seemingly
random, which means the software is computing something we aren't aware of and
having a hard time with it for whatever reason. Sometimes it's there, sometimes
it isn't at all. I can't repeatably say it's the difference between low light and well lit but
I still suspect that is part of it. I got photo's yesterday of our dogs in (walking) motion that snapped
quick and were not blurry, and some great close up of flowers and some really tuff shots of the wife
in the garden with part shade/part sunlit and it handled them as well as I'd expect any cell cam to.
It's liveable given the battery and screen, but it's not outstanding imo.
Low light without flash will continue to be a problem I suspect unless the stars happen
to align correctly. Even high end cameras need hardware image stabilization or a tripod and
one's hand off the device to do well there, it's just the way of things.
And with our tree cover it's seldom really sunny here. The shutter lag is seemingly
random, which means the software is computing something we aren't aware of and
having a hard time with it for whatever reason. Sometimes it's there, sometimes
it isn't at all. I can't repeatably say it's the difference between low light and well lit but
I still suspect that is part of it. I got photo's yesterday of our dogs in (walking) motion that snapped
quick and were not blurry, and some great close up of flowers and some really tuff shots of the wife
in the garden with part shade/part sunlit and it handled them as well as I'd expect any cell cam to.
It's liveable given the battery and screen, but it's not outstanding imo.
Low light without flash will continue to be a problem I suspect unless the stars happen
to align correctly. Even high end cameras need hardware image stabilization or a tripod and
one's hand off the device to do well there, it's just the way of things.
No argument was made. OP is concerned that the reviews he read are all over the map in terms of camera quality and he seeks feedback from those who own a Turbo.
It's all subjective, nothing like trying the camera out yourself, everyone has an opinion, is it info you seek? Road test it. I do own a 64gb turbo and am loving it. Did you take the plastic off?
Posted via the Android Central App
I didnt like the camera thus I returned it. Found slight movement made it blurry and didn't like the fact you can't choose where it should focus on. If you like it then great because that's all that matters. Personally I think the best camera on a phone that I have tried is the note 4. Tried the iphone 6 plus and while was solid was a bit noisy and was decent overall
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
I just couldn't go with the Samsung TW again after spending time with the s3, for me it was the whole of the device, nearly stock Android, good camera, great battery, quality build, bleeding edge hardware, it's been 7 days and I am more than satisfied with it. Beautiful device.
Posted via the Android Central App
Trending Posts
-
-
Question Samsung galaxy S25 or iPhone 15pro max which one good Opinions please- Started by SamuelMiz
- Replies: 2
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram