I've Compared Our Camera To That In The Note 2 And Ours SUCKS (!!!) By Comparison....

[Johnly]

Both devices are equipped with 8-megapixel rear cameras with the ability to record 1080p video. In general, Samsung adds a little color pop to the camera captures, giving images a nice vibrancy. On the HTC unit, you have a slightly wider angle lens, which means you?re able to capture a little bit more of the scene in than with the Samsung unit. The Samsung lens is a bit sharper, in my testing, than the HTC lens when you?re blowing pictures up and viewing it on a large canvas while HTC?s F/2.0 aperture makes for better low light image captures. In bars and shots where you?re not using the flash, HTC will give you a cleaner image with less noise than Samsung.

http://www.gottabemobile.com/2012/1...twins-separated-at-birth-on-verizons-network/

So the dna and note 2 camera have their strong points. Is one "better" than the other? I think not.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

 

[whiteshadow001]

Sigh. Can't please some people. If you want to put no effort into taking pictures and aren't creative enough to play with settings, get an iPhone.

I take it the majority of you don't own any other cameras or anything or are used to "point and shoot?"

Sent from my HTC Droid DNA using Tapatalk 2

I have a Sony NEX 5N mirrorless hybrid with an 18-55mm lense.

 

[iN8ter]

Both devices are equipped with 8-megapixel rear cameras with the ability to record 1080p video. In general, Samsung adds a little color pop to the camera captures, giving images a nice vibrancy. On the HTC unit, you have a slightly wider angle lens, which means you?re able to capture a little bit more of the scene in than with the Samsung unit. The Samsung lens is a bit sharper, in my testing, than the HTC lens when you?re blowing pictures up and viewing it on a large canvas while HTC?s F/2.0 aperture makes for better low light image captures. In bars and shots where you?re not using the flash, HTC will give you a cleaner image with less noise than Samsung.

http://www.gottabemobile.com/2012/1...twins-separated-at-birth-on-verizons-network/

So the dna and note 2 camera have their strong points. Is one "better" than the other? I think not.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

Samsung cameras are known for muted colors, and HTC typically has better contrast in daytime photos. Muted is not vibrant, but it's easy to fix with software. Problem is the areas where you struggle to fix photos from an HTC device, the Samsung images are fine.

Also, since Samsung compresses less that is a huge factor when you're cropping a photo at full resolution.

Samsung wins video. It's clearly better at that than HTCS.

Mom has a GS3 and One X. I tested them not even a month ago when I was down there to visit a few weeks.

If you take almost all of you pictures in the day, go HTC.

If you do a lot of full HD video, take pictures in dubious or low light more than occasionally, or tend to crop at full resolution a Samsung device is better.

If you're unsure, then go Samsung.

It's all pretty simple and samples from a website (usually their best of best samples) are misleading, Imo.

HTCs aperture advantage isn't an advantage because their high compression degrades quality to below that of Samsung devices especially so in low lighting. There is noise everywhere in the images especially in the darker areas.

To be honest, I was a bit disappointed with the One X as the camera displayed many of the issues that made me get rid of the Vivid back when.

The FFC on the DNA is nice, though.

HTC users need to send feedback and tell them to lessen the compression. Sony does the same thing. The Xperia ion has a good camera but the compression destroys all low light images. That phone lasted less than a day with me.

Sent from my AT&T Skyrocket using Tapatalk 2.

 

[anon(924308)]

Do you guys know of any apps that allow for some sort of 'manual' focus? e.g., adjusting focal length from some sort of slider instead of the standard 'touch to focus'. the autofocus on my DNA is always slightly off (I know it's capable of focusing at the correct length, it just always overshoots). Particularly troublesome in macro.

edit://just answered my own question, sort of. Camera FV-5 allows for focus lock, which is good enough. That app is such a treat to use!

 

[croppz]

lol @ people comparing DNA to the Note 2 constantly, only thing they remotely have in common is that they are bigger devices.

Here are some pictures I took with mine.

Im coming from an iphone 4, so I don't think this camera is that bad, IMO it's better.

 

[silvrstoned]

You just have to be very still. I think these look pretty good.

 

[iN8ter]

Well not to be a party pooper, but for the exception of the second jeep image all of those pictures (in last two posts) are full of noise, and that jeep picture I mentioned is a useless sample as it has been resized down so much. That being said, HTC Cameras tend to do well outdoors in lit scenes.

So the image of the bridge is surprisingly bad to me. It looks like it was taken with the HDR setting on (or edited somehow in a program, color reproduction seems rather dubious to me) and the background is borderline indiscernible because the entire image is over sharpened which doesn't go well with the noise, which litters the entire image (that's the surprising part, cause my Vivid took outdoor images that were 500% better than that, easily, and had almost no noise or over sharpening even when I cropped from full resolution - though it tended to oversaturate greens and reds a bit).

The quality of those images reminds me of when I had the Xperia ion, which leads me to think the images are being degraded by aggressive compression in the camera software (this happened in the ion, especially in low/dubious lighting, as well as the Vivid/Rezound). Samsung doesn't compress nearly as much (which is why their phones can pop out 8MP images of almost 4MB size).

There also seems to be focus issues in one or two of them, but I'll chalk that up to operator error. The puppy on the couch is the obvious one (and full of image noise evident even after resizing), so I'm willing to reserve judgment because camera/hand movement may have degraded the image quality unintentionally.

Lastly, the iPhone 4 Camera is bad by today's standards. It compared well. back when Galaxy S and HTC HD2/HD7/Inspire/Evo 4G were the latest flagships, but it's simply not that good anymore, so of course the images out of an Vivid/Rezound/One X/DNA/GS2/GS3/Note/Note 2 will look better.

How good a camera needs to be is largely subjective and depends on what use cases the owner of the device will put the phone through. You can take sample images in a carrier store, put them on your phone (those phones have WiFi Direct, NFC, and BT File Transfer) and view them on a computer when you get home. You don't need to buy a phone everytime you walk in a carrier store. Go visit the store and play with the phone a lot and pay attention to areas where you expect the phone to perform best multiple times. It's always good to give yourself time to get over the hype before making a purchasing decision.

Lord knows I've burned myself enough NOT doing that.

 

[Csan508]

Okay I have a Evo 4G lte which has the same camera and I can say this it's the best camera by far you just have to know how to set it up

Sent from my EVO using Android Central Forums

 

[croppz]

Well not to be a party pooper, but for the exception of the second jeep image all of those pictures (in last two posts) are full of noise, and that jeep picture I mentioned is a useless sample as it has been resized down so much. That being said, HTC Cameras tend to do well outdoors in lit scenes.

So the image of the bridge is surprisingly bad to me. It looks like it was taken with the HDR setting on (or edited somehow in a program, color reproduction seems rather dubious to me) and the background is borderline indiscernible because the entire image is over sharpened which doesn't go well with the noise, which litters the entire image (that's the surprising part, cause my Vivid took outdoor images that were 500% better than that, easily, and had almost no noise or over sharpening even when I cropped from full resolution - though it tended to oversaturate greens and reds a bit).

The quality of those images reminds me of when I had the Xperia ion, which leads me to think the images are being degraded by aggressive compression in the camera software (this happened in the ion, especially in low/dubious lighting, as well as the Vivid/Rezound). Samsung doesn't compress nearly as much (which is why their phones can pop out 8MP images of almost 4MB size).

There also seems to be focus issues in one or two of them, but I'll chalk that up to operator error. The puppy on the couch is the obvious one (and full of image noise evident even after resizing), so I'm willing to reserve judgment because camera/hand movement may have degraded the image quality unintentionally.

Lastly, the iPhone 4 Camera is bad by today's standards. It compared well. back when Galaxy S and HTC HD2/HD7/Inspire/Evo 4G were the latest flagships, but it's simply not that good anymore, so of course the images out of an Vivid/Rezound/One X/DNA/GS2/GS3/Note/Note 2 will look better.

How good a camera needs to be is largely subjective and depends on what use cases the owner of the device will put the phone through. You can take sample images in a carrier store, put them on your phone (those phones have WiFi Direct, NFC, and BT File Transfer) and view them on a computer when you get home. You don't need to buy a phone everytime you walk in a carrier store. Go visit the store and play with the phone a lot and pay attention to areas where you expect the phone to perform best multiple times. It's always good to give yourself time to get over the hype before making a purchasing decision.

Lord knows I've burned myself enough NOT doing that.

To be honest with you, if you want a great camera in a phone, go buy an iPhone 5. I have yet to see a camera in any android phone take a better picture than a 4s/5. And this is coming from a guy who despises apple.

This was the best pic I ever took with my iphone 4. I haven't been able to replicate it. If apple does one thing right, they put pretty good cameras in their phones...but that's all the credit I'll give them. Don't mind my mismatched signals hahaha

 

[iN8ter]

Oh please. GS2-generation HTC and Samsung high end devices take better pictures than an iPhone 4. GS3 and One X/DNA level camera phones take much better pictures than an iPhone 4. Lumia 920 blows the iPhone away, and I'm not even going to mention niche devices like the PureView and N8 which embarrasses it.

You're comparing the wrong images. Apple has post-processing built-into the camera software that HTC and Samsung does not. HTC I think had the option in my Vivid but it practically was inoperable (did basically nothing) and the Samsung Auto-Contrast toggle isn't the same. Apple basically Auto-Fixes every image before it saves it to the camera roll. It does this because it's a phone and they don't make the assumption that a not-so-tech-savvy user wants to push all their images through editing software like Snapseed or desktop software like Photoshop, Gimp, Photo Gallery, or Picasa before they post it on their blog or a social networking site. This is why iPhones are quite popular with people who like to take pictures. It does a lot of what someone like me would do before publishing a photo online, automatically. You just press the button and move on. This is why there aren't many settings exposed in their stock camera software - the software will attempt to fix the image automatically, anyways.

To have a comparable photo, you'd basically have to Auto-Fix all of your Android device photos in Snapseed and compare the edited version to the iPhone photo.

To illustrate what I'm talking about. If my phone was an iPhone, hypothetically speaking... Instead of saving this raw JPEG that it actually took:

2448?3264 pixels ? 3406KB

The iPhone will actually post process the image and save something similar to this (simply Auto-Fixed in Snapseed):

2448?3264 pixels ? 5879KB

And in both cases, you can clearly see that phone takes sharper images than the DNA, however, Samsung phones tend to produce muted colors which is the one noticeable area (IMO) where HTC outperforms them - because the Galaxy handset tends to overexpose the image. However, that is demonstrably easier to fix than the noise and focus issues displayed in most of the images above.

I don't need to buy an iPhone 5, cause I know how the camera software works on both phones and I know how to achieve similar if not equal or in many cases even better results with my Skyrocket. The thread talks about the DNA which is an Android phone that shares many of the same photography-based characteristics and shortfalls compared to an iPhone (as in, the phone doesn't hold your hand throughout the entire picture-taking process) and my advice is not for a user to simply box themselves into a particular phone type, or brand (which is a rather ignorant and short-sighted statement to make, iMo), but to actually evaluate the phone's photography prowess over a factorable period of time a bit more deeply if taking pictures (or video) is a high priority for them.

If my Skyrocket can take images that sharp, there is no reason for a One X or a DNA to fall short of that mark. Those skyrocket images are better than the iPhone images you posted (the focus isn't as good, the greens are oversaturated, the image is generally sort of soft and I can tell just by looking at it (largely due to the bad sharpness in the grass/leaves detail) that it would be noisy as hell in those areas - far beyond what was displayed in the DNA images nevermind the image I posted), even at it's super duper reduced size which hides noise and artifacts. The GS2 optics compare favorably with the iPhone 4S, especially when you factor in low light/flash photography and other areas. They are about equal for video. Making your images look good on an Android device simply takes more work - not a lot more, just MORE... slightly.

Share to Snapseed - Auto Fix - Save and it will go to the Snapseed folder (preserving your original). Done.

 

[croppz]

Actually had no idea about how the iphone camera worked. Thanks for the info. And now that you mention it, something with their retina displays have a lot to do with how their pictures come out too. I've noticed my friends iPhone 5 pics look great on his iPhone but when viewed on my device they aren't all that great. This is viewing them on instagram so there's no MMS compression or anything.

 

[iN8ter]

Actually had no idea about how the iphone camera worked. Thanks for the info. And now that you mention it, something with their retina displays have a lot to do with how their pictures come out too. I've noticed my friends iPhone 5 pics look great on his iPhone but when viewed on my device they aren't all that great. This is viewing them on instagram so there's no MMS compression or anything.

Filtered instagram images are basically edited JPEGs, so the images degrade by default since they're basically saved twice. I'm not sure if Instagram compresses images. I don't use it, but I do know it crops to a square (so if you're taking a crop from an image and applying a filter there's two levels of degradation built in to that process).

I don't think Apple has anything comparable to Sony's Mobile Bravia Engine running on their devices to optimize how images and video display on them.

I don't ever compare or observe image quality on a smartphone screen. The small screen really acts as a placebo and it's best done on a real PC or laptop. That's why I said, take images from the store model and just transfer them to your phone and load them on your computer. With WiFi Direct you can do this with video as well.

I don't think there are many people on this forum who have shared an image online only to find out it looks 3x worse at full size on a computer screen than it looked on their phone

 

[PsychDoc]

To be honest with you, if you want a great camera in a phone, go buy an iPhone 5. I have yet to see a camera in any android phone take a better picture than a 4s/5. And this is coming from a guy who despises apple.

This was the best pic I ever took with my iphone 4. I haven't been able to replicate it. If apple does one thing right, they put pretty good cameras in their phones...but that's all the credit I'll give them. Don't mind my mismatched signals hahaha

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/530012_3657386993108_979312330_n.jpg

Sadly, as another Apple hater, I have to say I agree with you. I don't care what kind of alchemy Apple is using in their iphone cameras -- whatever it is, it works. Android devices would do well to (ahem) borrow some of this camera technology for their phone cameras. I don't have the time or interest to open up each one of my phone shots and then apply "auto-fix" to each one one by one. Why isn't it the default software which could be disabled if you wanted to? Is there any way to bulk "auto-fix"all the pics in your gallery? Or to set it as the default software processing program?

 

[iN8ter]

Sadly, as another Apple hater, I have to say I agree with you. I don't care what kind of alchemy Apple is using in their iphone cameras -- whatever it is, it works. Android devices would do well to (ahem) borrow some of this camera technology for their phone cameras. I don't have the time or interest to open up each one of my phone shots and then apply "auto-fix" to each one one by one. Why isn't it the default software which could be disabled if you wanted to? Is there any way to bulk "auto-fix"all the pics in your gallery? Or to set it as the default software processing program?

Why can't Apple have controls for Exposure, White Balance, Scenes, and the like in their camera software. The only thing you can turn on and off on their Camera is HDR and the Flash for the most part. You cannot bypass their camera software tinkering witih your images - and in some cases the results are less than great.

Again, it depends on your requirements.

Editing ATM...

1. Low light image. Dark Room with only small blue lights above the animals. No flash photography was allowed in the room. Have fun on an iPhone 4 or 4S in this room. Used Night Time mode in the stock camera software. No editing was done to the image, period:

2. Outdoor on the train. No editing, period:

3. Outdoor on a very sunny day. No editing, period:

4. Indoors dubious lighting. No editing at all.

Look at the edges of that picture and compare it to the iPhone 4 image, and even most of the images from the DNA, even the resized images (these should display resized, I think, I'm using PWA to host them). There is a lot less noise there. Colors are on point. White balance is practically flawless, and an iPhone 4 or 4S default camera app would die trying to get a usable image of that snake without using a flash, but an HTC or Samsung device with a Night Time mode should not have too many issues. Even if flash was usable, it would ruin the image because the glass would reflect so much light back at the camera...

You don't need to use Auto-Fix to get a decent image out of this phone (at least mine), but clearly (as demonstrated above), the image looks substantially better when a good piece of software can be used to adjust the levels. An already good camera looks great. I was simply stating that comparing raw jpeg output from a Galaxy/HTC smartphone with - practically speaking - edited output form an iPhone isn't a 1:1 comparison.

And yes, there are programs that can batch edit photos, or you can Auto-Upload to DropBox, do it on a PC, and still have them all available to you on your phone when you need it there... It's really not hard if you know what you're doing.

The question is, why do you people not have an Apple iPhone?!

Lastly, why does anyone who dares to say anything positive about the iPhone feel the need to label themselves as an Apple Hater. Are people here really that susceptible to peer pressure from random internet forum personas?

Apple's devices have competitive optice and their software trickery is rather ingenious from a mass consumer point of view. I've never said anything other. But I think people are really overestimating the quality of their camera simply because they're bitter they got an HTC phone, which is a rather bad choice if you care that much about the camera on your phone. In any case, at least it's not a Motorola...

Personally, as someone who uses the crap out of my camera I wouldn't waste money on any HTC phone. I have Gigabytes of images I took with my Skyrocket so don't assume those I posted are best of best images. There are probably 300 other images I've snapped with it in all sorts of conditions that are equal or better quality. This phone's camera performs fairly consistently.

 

[JHBThree]

Why can't Apple have controls for Exposure, White Balance, Scenes, and the like in their camera software. The only thing you can turn on and off on their Camera is HDR and the Flash for the most part. You cannot bypass their camera software tinkering witih your images - and in some cases the results are less than great.

Again, it depends on your requirements.

Editing ATM...

1. Low light image. Dark Room with only small blue lights above the animals. No flash photography was allowed in the room. Have fun on an iPhone 4 or 4S in this room. Used Night Time mode in the stock camera software. No editing was done to the image, period:

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-...AAAAACAg/8touJ0GeQRg/s800/20120922_113547.jpg

2. Outdoor on the train. No editing, period:

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-...AAAAACAg/l20O2vYTC1U/s800/20120728_115158.jpg

3. Outdoor on a very sunny day. No editing, period:

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-...AAAAACAg/T07zjk2hmUk/s800/20120909_134524.jpg

4. Indoors dubious lighting. No editing at all.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-...AAAAACAg/oFK2RFilWaM/s800/20121019_140755.jpg

Look at the edges of that picture and compare it to the iPhone 4 image, and even most of the images from the DNA, even the resized images (these should display resized, I think, I'm using PWA to host them). There is a lot less noise there. Colors are on point. White balance is practically flawless, and an iPhone 4 or 4S default camera app would die trying to get a usable image of that snake without using a flash, but an HTC or Samsung device with a Night Time mode should not have too many issues. Even if flash was usable, it would ruin the image because the glass would reflect so much light back at the camera...

You don't need to use Auto-Fix to get a decent image out of this phone (at least mine), but clearly (as demonstrated above), the image looks substantially better when a good piece of software can be used to adjust the levels. An already good camera looks great. I was simply stating that comparing raw jpeg output from a Galaxy/HTC smartphone with - practically speaking - edited output form an iPhone isn't a 1:1 comparison.

And yes, there are programs that can batch edit photos, or you can Auto-Upload to DropBox, do it on a PC, and still have them all available to you on your phone when you need it there... It's really not hard if you know what you're doing.

The question is, why do you people not have an Apple iPhone?!

Lastly, why does anyone who dares to say anything positive about the iPhone feel the need to label themselves as an Apple Hater. Are people here really that susceptible to peer pressure from random internet forum personas?

Apple's devices have competitive optice and their software trickery is rather ingenious from a mass consumer point of view. I've never said anything other. But I think people are really overestimating the quality of their camera simply because they're bitter they got an HTC phone, which is a rather bad choice if you care that much about the camera on your phone. In any case, at least it's not a Motorola...

Personally, as someone who uses the crap out of my camera I wouldn't waste money on any HTC phone. I have Gigabytes of images I took with my Skyrocket so don't assume those I posted are best of best images. There are probably 300 other images I've snapped with it in all sorts of conditions that are equal or better quality. This phone's camera performs fairly consistently.

Consistency is key, which is why the iPhones camera is so highly rated. It does better than most in the dark (better than Samsung, certainly, thanks to its optics), and its quality is very consistent. What they do to get it doesn't really matter; the results do.

 

[croppz]

Consistency is key, which is why the iPhones camera is so highly rated. It does better than most in the dark (better than Samsung, certainly, thanks to its optics), and its quality is very consistent. What they do to get it doesn't really matter; the results do.

Yup. It flatout works which is why a lot of people buy that phone. Im content with my DNAs camera. Takes like 5 seconds to change settings anyway.

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Android Central Forums

 

[anon(924308)]

So in general, when it comes to Android smartphone cameras, Samsung > HTC? Where would LG or Motorola fit in this spectrum?

With the DNA's cam, I'm a mix of resigned/content. I'm using FV-5 instead of the stock app, which is great when I have the time for more control. Either way, it's mediocre at best in indoor/low-light; the focus on my sister's 4S is better, regardless of our f/2.0 (I'm forced to use AV-Lock because it can never quite get the right focal length). For some reason I always see "your hands are shaky, get a tripod if you can't handle low ISO" as a defense--but that's really not the point of a smartphone cam, is it?

I wish one of these phone manufacturers would partner with Zeiss optics and bring a top-of-the-line camera to Android. Not a 41MP monstrocity, but something where the camera was one of its notable features. They're coming out with "smartcam" point-and-shoots, you'd think someone would design an in-between phone. I love my DNA and wouldn't think of trading it out now, but I do have a tinge of regret for not even testing out the Note 2 before making a decision.

 

[JHBThree]

Yup. It flatout works which is why a lot of people buy that phone. Im content with my DNAs camera. Takes like 5 seconds to change settings anyway.

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Android Central Forums

Oh don't get me wrong, if you tweak you can get some pretty fantastic pictures from the others. The DNA is on the short list to replace the iPhone 5 I have now, and one of the reasons is because the camera is so good. Besides, if I need a totally amazing customizable camera for something, I have a Sony NEX that can do the job.

 

[iN8ter]

Disregard.

 

[whiteshadow001]

From what I've seen, Sonys new xperia z and zl has Stella camera that are better than the dna and the iPhone. I almost want to wait and get the z but I need to know if its coming to VZW. If not I'll end up with the DNA unless Samsung brings the s4 with that octa core exynos out first

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD