Related
im waiting for my advantage to come and had a quick question for thoose that have the device already. do images look clear and crisp on the screen while browsing the web? i know its a vga res, but i get confused by the whole dpi thing. will the images look similar to the iphone images. not the browser im talking about the images themself. i read a comment saying that browsing on the advatange was like browsing on four kasier screens will the images not look better on the advantage because of the bigger screen? or will they look alot better than a 2.8 inch screen or 3.6 (i think iphone) screen?
cjmedina said:
im waiting for my advantage to come and had a quick question for thoose that have the device already. do images look clear and crisp on the screen while browsing the web? i know its a vga res, but i get confused by the whole dpi thing. will the images look similar to the iphone images. not the browser im talking about the images themself. i read a comment saying that browsing on the advatange was like browsing on four kasier screens will the images not look better on the advantage because of the bigger screen? or will they look alot better than a 2.8 inch screen or 3.6 (i think iphone) screen?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Images won't look 'better' as such aside from the increase in size. Fonts and icons however look infinitely better. The kaiser's screen is quarter vga, meaning its resolution (pixel count) is a quarter of the Athena's. The size of the Athena's screen is also bigger but this is not necessarily a given: the toshiba Portege g900 has an even higher resolution screen than the Athena and yet a substancially smaller display.
The iphone display is of a very different aspect ratio to the relatively 'square' athena display, being 1.5:1, so its resolution could never tally with the Athena. The slightly different dimensions work very well for the multimedia functions for which the iphone is optimised, most noticeably widescreen movie playback. Its actual resolution is 480 by 320 pixels, and it is very colourful crisp and sharp as well as transflective (meaning it can easily be seen in daylight: the athenas's display is not) and scratchproof.
The iphone aces the Athena on multimedia performance, given its great mp3, video and browsing capabilities. It does exactly what it supposed to do well. The athena is let down by an unsupported video chip, making it (and most HTC devices) not perform as well as it could with video playback. It also doesn't have as intuitive or attractive a UI as the Iphone. What it DOES have is lots of software, including alternative browsers, better offfice utilities, more potential for personalisation and a replaceable battery. The best screen between the two for me is the Iphone's, though it is 1.5 inches smaller so many would prefer the bigger athena display.
For the difference between qvga and vga though you have to see a kaiser and athena screen side-by-side
.
I have included a screen capture for you, the picture is this good on my athena
(personally I think it is very good)
ice_coffee said:
I have included a screen capture for you, the picture is this good on my athena
(personally I think it is very good)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
im sorry, i just have to ask is that man in the pic hold an old revolver... jesus does the asain women carry a musket and a horn with gun powder in it. lol j/k
irus said:
im sorry, i just have to ask is that man in the pic hold an old revolver... jesus does the asain women carry a musket and a horn with gun powder in it. lol j/k
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LMAO... I was wondering the same thing.
ok thanks guys just wanted to make sure the images dont look all smashed like they do on a 2.8 inch screen.
The screen on the advantage is 3" x 4" @ 480 x 640 which is 160 pixels per inch
the screen on the iPhone is 3" x 2" @ 480 x 320 which is also 160 pixels per inch
the screen on the TytnII (kaiser) is 1.68" x 2.24" @ 240 x 320 which is 142 pixels per inch
A ppi count alone does not give a true reflection of the difference in resolution and size. On the face of it the Tilts ppi statistics seem to bear little difference to the athena's and iphone's. In reality both the Athena and Iphone have clearer, sharper and brighter screens which accomodate web pages and document viewer/editors in a more enjoyable fashion.
Htc's crappy, non-transflective Qvga screens are to me inexcusable on modern windows mobile devices and yet still they insist on shipping out these sub_standard slider devices. i had my Tilt/vario 3 for a week and thought it was cheap, poorly built and that components such as the 3.2mp camera were substandard given the expense of the device.
Anyway. If the next iphone has 3g, a 5mp camera with autofocus and dvd-quality video and a huge wealth of free software (and a group of talented developers constantly working on every programming need) and isn't just on O2 (in the UK) or AT&T (in the U.S.) and doesn't cost the earth....well i might give one a go.....
Hey guys.
There's a new competitor in town. SE is definitely looking to gain some market share with the Idou scheduled launch Q2 '09. some specs listed are :
Sony Ericsson Idou
GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900
HSDPA 900 / 2100
Coming soon. Exp. release 2009, Q3
TFT touchscreen, 16M colors
360 x 640 pixels, 3.5 inches
Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g, DLNA
Symbian OS
12.1 MP, 4256 x 2832 pixels, autofocus, xenon flash, video, video LED flash, secondary VGA videocall camera
- Built-in GPS
- aGPS function
- Camera images geo-tagging, face and smile detection
- Google maps
- FM radio with RDS
- MP3/AAC/MPEG4 player
- Organiser
- Built-in handsfree
- Voice memo/dial
- Java MIDP 2.0
Some links:
Engadget
Phonedog
Some other video
What are your thoughts on this new model.
The SE Idou has a smaller screen, lower resolution, not WinMo, no North American 3G (Telstra model has 850).
The only positive that jumps out is the camera, but that's not enough to overcome the above negatives for me. Sorry, not interested.
I bet the Idou-NOT camera will still be shooting 3gp video in 320*240 resolution
My 3 and a half year old Universal has a bigger, higher resolution screen than the Idou. If that's progress I'm not impressed.
That phone was epic back in the day! Still has some decent specs now!
really cant stand all those nonstandard resolution.
heck, enough's enough already with vga wvga q and square stuff!
crashDebug said:
really cant stand all those nonstandard resolution.
heck, enough's enough already with vga wvga q and square stuff!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well get used to it - it's the same resolution that all the new touchscreen Symbian handsets are coming out with such as the Nokia 5800 and the Samsung OmniaHD.
The reason they've gone for it is that it's a 16:9 aspect ratio.
There's no point trying to compare the Touch HD to the Idou as one of those handsets isn't even available yet.
In fact, going on SE's recent form, I'd be very surprised if they get it into shops this year. And I'd even go so far as to say that someone like Samsung or LG will have released a different 12mp handset before Idou is available.
Also, why on earth does anyone think that 12mp on a phone is going to be a good thing?
Think about how poor the camera on the HD can be, do you really think cramming in an extra 7 million pixels will make things better?
Too low res for me - 800*480 is simply a sweet spot, it's the major thing HTC got right.
I bet the 12mp camera takes shockingly bad pictures too. That's more than almost all aps-c DSLRs out there (and the few that tried 14/15mpixel didn't sell, because they took worse pictures than the 10/11 models).
Idou would be a good phone. If this (or N97) is out now, I would not have bought the HD. Don't get me wrong. I am very satisfied with HD (with all the tweaks and cooked roms). Coming from a S60 N95/82 and after using HD for the last 3 months I have to honestly say somehow WM is still not as good an OS compared to Symbian. Symbian is still more robust, nimble and more efficient.
not impressed with it's spec's compared to some of the 2009 htc devices on the horizen...like the Firestone, etc.
I don't know for sure, but normally cameras with these resolution ain't better than any 5 MP camera. Its not the resolution that limits the capacities, but its the lens.
mib1800 said:
Coming from a S60 N95/82 and after using HD for the last 3 months I have to honestly say somehow WM is still not as good an OS compared to Symbian. Symbian is still more robust, nimble and more efficient.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everyone has their own preferences.
Until the Nokia 5800 was released, I'd never used a Symbian phone that I liked. I just don't feel the way the menus are laid out works all that well.
johnpatcher said:
I don't know for sure, but normally cameras with these resolution ain't better than any 5 MP camera. Its not the resolution that limits the capacities, but its the lens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's both.
Yes the lens makes a big difference but so do the number of pixels.
By cramming more pixels onto the same size of sensor, each pixel is smaller and consequently less light hits it.
Because less light hits it, the picture will appear duller unless you increase the amplification of the signal from each pixel. But if you do that, you also increase the amount of noise, which is detrimental to the picture quality.
Even with premium components it's impossible to amplify a signal without having noise appear but there's no way that a phone is going to be fitted with premium components, so the noise will be much worse than it would be on a digital camera of the same quality, not to mention that proper digital cameras would also tend to have a physically larger sensor anyway, so they wouldn't have to crank the amplification up so much.
Even the C905 (which is, according to GSMArena the best 8mp camera-phone on the market from a camera perspective) already has serious issues with noise and, at best, Idou will have a sensor of the same physical size but with more pixels.
However I've already read rumours that the sensor will, in fact, be smaller than the C905's which will make it all even worse.
Step666 said:
It's both.
Yes the lens makes a big difference but so do the number of pixels.
By cramming more pixels onto the same size of sensor, each pixel is smaller and consequently less light hits it.
Because less light hits it, the picture will appear duller unless you increase the amplification of the signal from each pixel. But if you do that, you also increase the amount of noise, which is detrimental to the picture quality.
Even with premium components it's impossible to amplify a signal without having noise appear but there's no way that a phone is going to be fitted with premium components, so the noise will be much worse than it would be on a digital camera of the same quality, not to mention that proper digital cameras would also tend to have a physically larger sensor anyway, so they wouldn't have to crank the amplification up so much.
Even the C905 (which is, according to GSMArena the best 8mp camera-phone on the market from a camera perspective) already has serious issues with noise and, at best, Idou will have a sensor of the same physical size but with more pixels.
However I've already read rumours that the sensor will, in fact, be smaller than the C905's which will make it all even worse.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with everything you said, and being a photographer I'm very familiar with issues you described.
However, Sony is leading the market in compact digital cameras, and as such, it would not surprise me that these 12 megapixels turn out to produce "decent quality" photos.
Decent for average Joe Snapshooter, of course. Because, although for last 5 or so years I have been listening to "OMG, they're putting EVEN more pixels onto that tiny sensor", somehow the manufacturers are still running the megapixel race, and image quality has had a small but steady quality improvement. First time I heard this sentence was when first big megapixel jump happened: from 1 megapixel to 2.
So, let's just wait and see before bashing the new Sony, at least camera-wise.
I'm not waiting, I hold out zero hope for Idou or any other 12mp handset.
I've seen both 100% crops and A3 printouts from the C905 and as I said before, noise is a huge problem.
I just don't see how adding extra pixels is going to do anything but make matters worse.
Also, since when have Sony been leading the market for compact cameras?
I must admit I'm not as au fait with everything since the pixel numbers went through the roof but last time I checked, Nikon and Canon were sharing the spoils.
Rozenthal said:
Decent for average Joe Snapshooter, of course. Because, although for last 5 or so years I have been listening to "OMG, they're putting EVEN more pixels onto that tiny sensor", somehow the manufacturers are still running the megapixel race, and image quality has had a small but steady quality improvement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There have been tests recently that showed the best compact ever made was the Fuji f30, a 4 year old 6 megapixel model (people pay a ton of money for them on ebay). Even with improvements in tech since, they've not been able to counteract the quality decrease that cramming more megapixels in causes. Fuji themselves tried to reign back the megapixel race, hold at 8 max for quality reasons, but marketing trumps all and they've had to give it up.
I had a 15mpixel Canon pocket camera recently, the quality was awful.
arfster said:
There have been tests recently that showed the best compact ever made was the Fuji f30, a 4 year old 6 megapixel model (people pay a ton of money for them on ebay).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't suppose you have a link?
I tried my fair share of Fuji cameras in the past and was never hugely impressed by them, so I'm a little surprised at that.
Also, for them to try and position themselves as the voice of reason in the megapixel war is rather hypocritical since they were the manufacturer who traditionally always aimed for more, staying on with interpolation long after most other manufacturers had given up on it.
Hey everyone!
So i've used the Desire HD's camera for a bit, and I find it's got potential. I used to have a HD2...and remember there was a registry edit fix and also settings in the camera app that were published here on XDA to improve picture quality...well i've found out that pictures are a lot clearer and sharper when these settings are applied on the Desire HD:
Go into the Camera app...
Press the menu button on your desire hd...
Turn OFF auto-focus
in the Image adjustments sub-menu, turn sharpness all the way to 2...
Take pictures, and as a good example of comparison take a before and after picture.
In the after pic, tap on what you want in focus. The overall quality of the picture will be a lot clearer! There is also less noise and the object will be in focus, and pepper and grain effect is largely eliminated! Try it out and report back
Elemental_Fire
Update 1 (00:09-10/12/2010):
Thanks to the knowledge and sharing of fellow XDA members, I have determined that what seems to impact/affect images the most is the sharpness settings. Contrary to my settings, you can also go into Image adjustments in the camera app and turn off the sharpness setting fully. This is done by turning the sharpness circle dial all the way to -2. It seems that when set on default, the sharpness algorithm is ineffective at determining the level of sharpness that should be used. As a result, images are reproduced with unwanted image effects such as distinct grainyness, noise and also seemingly out-of-focus/blury pictures! So you can use either -2 for smooth pictures that are good quality, or +2 for sharper pictures that are good quality! At the end of the day, it depends on what you as the photographer prefer Haha i'm making this sound like the Desire HD is a professional camera...it's certainly more than suitable for quick snaps that won't comprise on good memorable photos in 8MP
Update 2 (00:51- 10/12/2010)
Uploaded sample pictures!
will give this a try in the morning!
Is that +2 I take it not -2? I'll check this out in morning
Sent from my Desire HD
Yep, plus 2
yup the pictures are much better!!
i just hated all tht noise and grainyness!
Thanks a lot!!!
I didnt really notice the difference, I think im just horrid at taking photos haha
they do look slightly better i think!
I haven't tried this yet myself but its nice that the hd remembers these settings after a power cycle - I expected all settings to revert to default.
That does not help any here.
I think the compression is just screwed up very badly, or we don't have anything like a 8MP sensor in our phones.
You can see that very easily if you photograph or film some intricate pattern like in snow, frost, test patterns (printed on paper) or such. It just smears and blurs the hell out of these photographs and no settings in the user interface will help against that.
Now, a sensor actually resolving 8 Megapixels, on the other hand, should be capable of resolving to about four 1920x1080 computer screens worth of distinct pixels. Unfortunately when I view the photographs on the screen, in actuality I still those see smears and other artifacts even when I zoom the image to about ~25% of the screen's. So... ~0.5 MP or less resolution in reality? Beh, fail.
Meh, it is an 8mp sensor...I just assume HTC don't implement and make use of the best available lens, sensor size and compression rate....but the camera isn't bad at all..i'll upload some pictures i've taken recently, they're quite defined! Certainly more clearer, sharper and yet containing less noise than my old HD2 gosh colours on that were washed out
sharpness plus 2 will increase the digital treatment which seems to remove more noise and add more sharpness, maybe a little better than the default semi sharpness which a mess
however the camera is indeed 8MP it is ridiculous to state otherwise!! turn off sharpness all the way to -2 and all this digital artifacts will be gone as well as fake sharpness, you will be able to get full 8MP camera quality without HTC mending with them, you can improve photos further by using the auto fix or high contrast from within the gallery
of course noise will be introduced depending on the available light and of course with sharpness -2 it will be a little soft since it receiving zero digital treatment, take it to any photo editing application and you can boost the sharpness properly
really i don't get all the random posts camera quality, i'm getting amazing results even managed to amaze my iphone 4 colleagues, the only part where HTC really failed is the default noise reduction/sharpness algorithm (Sharpness 0) its a real mess thankfully it can be turned off
i should make a detailed thread about the camera and be done with it
after using it a few times, im still sticking to my D700
I`m quite happy with the point and click results but for serious pics i use my ancient Canon EOS 500.
ofcourse it will never beat a DSLR! only the satio and the nokia n8 come close but those sucks in their own ways
its not a perfect camera, but damn better than everyone make it sound, and pretty amazing for a phone, everyone complaining including some reviewers didn't even bother to experiment with the basic settings
the best words i found for this camera are in the Engadget review particluary this line ( Noise-masking blur is distributed very well, in our opinion, works especially well if can content yourself with downsizing the images from the max 8 megapixel size), gsmarena kept complaining about the sharpness and never mentioned it can be turned off
oh and it wipes the floor with the iphone 4 camera
the only two issues in this phone are the lack of ips in the screen and the size for those who can't handle it and no the battery is fine
hamdir said:
ofcourse it will never beat a DSLR! only the satio and the nokia n8 come close but those sucks in their own ways
its not a perfect camera, but damn better than everyone make it sound, and pretty amazing for a phone, everyone complaining including some reviewers didn't even bother to experiment with the basic settings
the best words i found for this camera are in the Engadget review particluary this line ( Noise-masking blur is distributed very well, in our opinion, works especially well if can content yourself with downsizing the images from the max 8 megapixel size), gsmarena kept complaining about the sharpness and never mentioned it can be turned off
oh and it wipes the floor with the iphone 4 camera
the only two issues in this phone are the lack of ips in the screen and the size for those who can't handle it and no the battery is fine
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
agreed 100% with your post. Although the lack of ips is no issue imo.
thank you, ips is only an issue when use the phone flat on your desk or sharing with others, its a slight issue when old desire slcd/amoled, iphone 3Gs and ipads have much better view angles
but yea its no biggie, its my first HTC device where i found no need to flash custom stuff
Makes very little difference for me. I have to wonder about anyone that says this is a great camera - what are you comparing it against and have you ever used a Nokia for instance with Carl Zeiss optics?
xspyda said:
Makes very little difference for me. I have to wonder about anyone that says this is a great camera - what are you comparing it against and have you ever used a Nokia for instance with Carl Zeiss optics?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes nokia n900 and the DHD is better
i will post my results soon in full resolution
Here is a pic i took of my cat earlier today. Open in new tab to see the full resolution.
hamdir said:
i should make a detailed thread about the camera and be done with it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please do!
I for one am interested to finetune my camera app!
http://www.wpcentral.com/wpcentral-nokia-microsoft-live-blog-new-york-city
Nokia 920 has an LCD screen. Not good.
Wireless charging seems cool though.
Anyone else watching?
Really? LCD screen not good? 1280 x 760 resolution on a 4.5" display (which is more dense than the majority of 1280 displays which are 4.7"+), ClearBlack technology (which should mean deep blacks for an LCD, like the One X, possibly even getting deeper than that display), and according to wpcentral the fastest display on a smartphone (which I imagine means fastest response time).
The Janitor Mop said:
Really? LCD screen not good? 1280 x 760 resolution on a 4.5" display (which is more dense than the majority of 1280 displays which are 4.7"+), ClearBlack technology (which should mean deep blacks for an LCD, like the One X, possibly even getting deeper than that display), and according to wpcentral the fastest display on a smartphone (which I imagine means fastest response time).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I'm kind of disapointed with the camera sensor as I was expecting a higher or equal resolution to the Nokia N8 (12MP) it's just under 9MP. But it's improved camera tech is supposed to make you forget about this.
Sure it records 1080 P video @ 30 FPS but doesn't give you micro sd expansion slot and only 32 gb internal I can fill 32 gb easily with my N8 and that records 720p
Tech details don't seem to be as abundant as with the N8. I can plug any external drive into that and expand the capacity further.
Plus they kind of killed the hype recently by not providing an actual representation of what the camera can do.
djfuego said:
Yeah I'm kind of disapointed with the camera sensor as I was expecting a higher or equal resolution to the Nokia N8 (12MP) it's just under 9MP. But it's improved camera tech is supposed to make you forget about this.
Sure it records 1080 P video @ 30 FPS but doesn't give you micro sd expansion slot and only 32 gb internal I can fill 32 gb easily with my N8 and that records 720p
Tech details don't seem to be as abundant as with the N8. I can plug any external drive into that and expand the capacity further.
Plus they kind of killed the hype recently by not providing an actual representation of what the camera can do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do photography as a hobby. I've owned 2 DSLRs and a bunch of other sorts of cameras (point and shoot mainly) and I'd like to say one thing: Megapixels DO NOT determine photo quality. the LENS and IMAGE PROCESSOR do that.
Lets look at an analogy
Let's say you're trying to paint a picture of a natural scenery. You need 1: A good eye that will take in details of the landscape. You need the eye that will be able to contrasts between colors, and pick up all the information such as the leaves, trees, water, etc. etc. If someone has glaucoma, cloudy vision, or is simply blind, they won't be able to take in the scenery. You will also need 2: A good and dexterous hand that will convert what you're seeing into a painting by making skillful brushes of the paintbrush. If you have crappy coordination skills or are unable to correctly translate what you're seeing into proper shapes and curves, you're going to have a crappy picture at the end.
your LENS=eye and the image processor=Hand/Coordination.
Those are the two things that will determine the quality of the picture. Megapixels just determine the size of your canvas. A 3.2 MP camera can deliver better shots than a 12 MP camera!
The 920 is using Carl Zeiss F/2.0 lens and I'm not sure about what image processor it has. As for the lens (you have the N8 so you can attest to this), you will know that CZ makes excellent quality lenses made of pure glass. 90% of lenses I've used in microscopy labs were all CZ. Whats gonna make or break the picture quality is the image processor. I'm not sure which one they're using.
Wait for some test shots to come out, but I have high expectations for Nokia on this phone.
I've already gone into detail on the 920 camera in other threads, but the image sensor size is in fact 1/3", which is larger than the 1/3.2" sensor the iPhone 4S, One X, and Galaxy s3 have. Along with backside illumination and mechanical stabilization, it really is a great smartphone camera and I wouldn't have expected any better for a late 2012 smartphone.
I had a possibility to compare HTC One and HTC One X side by side. I couldnt believe my eyes - 8MP camera of HTC One X couldnt even match up, HTC One photo is soo crisp and cristal clear and ..ohh, ahh. ISO rating goes up to 1600 but when comparing at ISO 100, photo is absolutely few times brighter than HOX.
Now the screens. I really like my HOXs screen. But than I compared it at full brightness with HTC One.
this happened:
https://twitter.com/miHah1/status/306137264126316544
/jelous, can you run only "GLBenchmark 2.5 Egypt HD offscreen or onscreen(1080)" on it ?
That One X screen looks really dark...Not a fair test
TheChiller said:
That One X screen looks really dark...Not a fair test
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He states both at full brightness
Dude please can you do the same under sunlight?
The OneX was just good so I hope the One is better
Unless you've disabled the 'Reduce screen brightness' in your Powersaver options then regardless of how high you set your screen brightness - It'll never be at maximum.
There is no way that's maximum brightness, it would hurt your eyes in such dark conditions.
Ashalak said:
Unless you've disabled the 'Reduce screen brightness' in your Powersaver options then regardless of how high you set your screen brightness - It'll never be at maximum.
There is no way that's maximum brightness, it would hurt your eyes in such dark conditions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't use power saving for anything but cpu downclock, I forgot to mention that.
both phones are at the highest brightness, the thing is that HTC One is so much brighter that camera automaticaly lowers exposure of picture and makes HTC One X so dark.
HTC One has absolutely one of the best screens out there! No doubt!
miHah said:
I had a possibility to compare HTC One and HTC One X side by side. I couldnt believe my eyes - 8MP camera of HTC One X couldnt even match up, HTC One photo is soo crisp and cristal clear and ..ohh, ahh. ISO rating goes up to 1600 but when comparing at ISO 100, photo is absolutely few times brighter than HOX.
Now the screens. I really like my HOXs screen. But than I compared it at full brightness with HTC One.
this happened:
https://twitter.com/miHah1/status/306137264126316544
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So the pictures you took with the HTC One looked better then the pictures taken with the One X? I'm more interested in that. I want to see the screen in person really badly, but I already know its going to look better then every other screen out there. :laugh:
ErikWithNoC said:
So the pictures you took with the HTC One looked better then the pictures taken with the One X? I'm more interested in that. I want to see the screen in person really badly, but I already know its going to look better then every other screen out there. :laugh:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The reason why pictures taken with HTC One looks better than with HTC One X:
1. HTC One has optical stabilization, which means even if you move just a little bit, image will be still so it will not be blurry and have more details. The difference between HTC One and HTC One X is similar as in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9q8k7KnMUe8&feature=youtube_gdata_player
2. HTC One lets more light in so it can produce more detailed picture. "the more the light = higher shutter speed = less blur = more detail". At same conditions HTC One X lets less light in so it needs slower shutter speed and creates blurry pictures.
3. HTC One has 4MP widescreen, and HTC One X only has 6MP if you are shooting widescreen so HTC One X actually has only 20% more MP than HTC One which has nothing to do with image quality. It only matters when you crop the image but again, if you crop image from One X that is just a bit bigger but has less light, slower shutter speed and almost always some blur the results are ..lets say "not useful for cropping".
4. HTC One has ISO from 100-1600 and HTC One X only has 100-800. Again that means HTC One lets more light in and image is more detailed and is not blurred that much. But high ISO means more noise on the other hand. Comparing ISO 800 between the phones = more noise on HTC One X and also less light - double win for HTC One.
So what are actually MP good for? Cropping. Period.
when you hit certain number of MP, it has no effect if you still raise them up. It is like a gas in a car..car needs some gas to run, if you give it more gas it will be heavier and consequently less efficient and slower but it will still run as if it would have "just enough" gas. But when you have a faster/sports car it will require more gas - like the "big" cameras with bigger sensor size can have more MP.
Have a nice day
miHah said:
The reason why pictures taken with HTC One looks better than with HTC One X:
1. HTC One has optical stabilization, which means even if you move just a little bit, image will be still so it will not be blurry and have more details. The difference between HTC One and HTC One X is similar as in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9q8k7KnMUe8&feature=youtube_gdata_player
2. HTC One lets more light in so it can produce more detailed picture. "the more the light = higher shutter speed = less blur = more detail". At same conditions HTC One X lets less light in so it needs slower shutter speed and creates blurry pictures.
3. HTC One has 4MP widescreen, and HTC One X only has 6MP if you are shooting widescreen so HTC One X actually has only 20% more MP than HTC One which has nothing to do with image quality. It only matters when you crop the image but again, if you crop image from One X that is just a bit bigger but has less light, slower shutter speed and almost always some blur the results are ..lets say "not useful for cropping".
4. HTC One has ISO from 100-1600 and HTC One X only has 100-800. Again that means HTC One lets more light in and image is more detailed and is not blurred that much. But high ISO means more noise on the other hand. Comparing ISO 800 between the phones = more noise on HTC One X and also less light - double win for HTC One.
So what are actually MP good for? Cropping. Period.
when you hit certain number of MP, it has no effect if you still raise them up. It is like a gas in a car..car needs some gas to run, if you give it more gas it will be heavier and consequently less efficient and slower but it will still run as if it would have "just enough" gas. But when you have a faster/sports car it will require more gas - like the "big" cameras with bigger sensor size can have more MP.
Have a nice day
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Although I've already read up plenty on the camera in the HTC One, I appreciate your well thought out reply! I'm just glad to hear that the One is producing better photos then the One X (which I thought were fantastic).
miHah said:
I had a possibility to compare HTC One and HTC One X side by side. I couldnt believe my eyes - 8MP camera of HTC One X couldnt even match up, HTC One photo is soo crisp and cristal clear and ..ohh, ahh. ISO rating goes up to 1600 but when comparing at ISO 100, photo is absolutely few times brighter than HOX.
Now the screens. I really like my HOXs screen. But than I compared it at full brightness with HTC One.
this happened:
https://twitter.com/miHah1/status/306137264126316544
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry but your power saving was "Enabled", please test again without power saving.
Pls htc give htc one more color saturation than the droid dna...
Out of curiosity - are you able to see more detail / sharpness in the 1080 screen rather than the 720 one (ignoring brightness and colour levels)?
Ok but who is interested in 16:9 photo shooting...4:3 is still the most common!!! so when you want 4:3 from HTC One you will get only about 3Mpx photos and thats awful...
Mihah: please could you still give both phones to minimum brighness and show us the black level quality on new SLCD3 screen?
I think this whole ultrapixel thing is to reset the marketing of cameras in smartphones,instead of evolving to 13,16,24 mp they just go back to 4mp,next year 5 or 8mp (which will stay for another 3 years),so they are just buying time.
The results of ultrapixel are nice but not much better than a ''classic'' 8mp smartphone,the low light pics are brighter but still very noisy.
If the SGS4 will get a 13mp with the same low light results,it will be a huge slap for HTC
germanojose said:
Sorry but your power saving was "Enabled", please test again without power saving.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please read up - my power saving is for CPU only and does not effect brightness or anything
Which phone had more colour saturation???
Thanks
vegetaleb said:
If the SGS4 will get a 13mp with the same low light results,it will be a huge slap for HTC
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's impossible.
It's not physically impossible, clearly; but it's commercially and financially impossible.
The reason the One's low-light performance is good is mostly *because* the megapixel count is lower. Most smartphones have a camera sensor the same size - about a third of an inch across. If you cram three times as many pixels into that, each pixel has only a third of the area, and therefore (other things being equal) receives only a third as much light. To get the same low-light performance as the One, you therefore need a sensor three times as big (and an upgraded lens as well).
That can be done - the Nokia Pureview 808 has a sensor like that - but the problem is that it's expensive. To add a sensor like that would require Samsung either to massively increase the selling price of the phone, or to severely cut back on the phone's other features to keep the price down; and either one would be commercial suicide.
FUN PAGE
Hello guys and gals. I have made HTC One fun page on Facebook. Feel free to join us
Admins are welcome. (just pm. me on facebook page)
Pretty obvious the screens are on different brightness levels and the OP is drunk.