Guys.. I love my Exec, but one facility that seems to be very low quality is the camera. If I hold the Exec next to my SPV M2000 and compare the look of the viewfinder image on the screen, the SPV looks so much better ... is this normal, or is there something wrong with the cam?
I'd appreciate your toughts
compare actual pictures, this spun me out, but after actually taking pictures, and comparing them on a pc, the exec is actually quite good, for 1.3m the viewfinder dosent do the pics justice at all
and the panoramic option is wicked, here's an example of a 3 picture panoramic
Carnivor: isn't that the first level of Quake? I'm sure if you pan down a bit there's some lava and platform jumps
Looks good - I've never used my Universal's camera (well, other than the flash!). Will have to give it a go.
V
Thanks Carnivor
Thats good advice... I'll give it a go... and the pic of the church is very impressive.
(and good luck with the wedding!)
Me and the missus were playing around with the Panorama option on my Exec last night (well, I ama big lad :wink and I must say it's rather good.
What Really Grinds My Gears is, the time it takes from pressing the button till camera taking the image!! always a couple of seconds!! ANY IDEAS? Thanks.
not sure if i have done something right or wrong, or wrong that might be good, but my camera seems absolutley fantastic on my exec, it has a 1.3 megapixel camera, but in the settings i have
large 640x480
1m 1280x1024
2m 1600x1280
does this mean i have 2mp camera, or just 1mp camera that pretends its 2mp :?
JASJAR IMEI Range
Dear All,
Can someone give me the IMEI range for the IMate Jasjar? I have just bought one and when I tried to register it the IMate site says the number was not valid. I then contacted support and they said the same thing.
I had the same problem reistering my PDA2k with Imate.
Thanks in advance.
Hugh
I've used my camera on several occasions. Sometimes, it's ok, sometimes, the quality just makes me shake my head. What's the best camera settings? Any advice?
thanks!
p.s. joey, on the 2m thing. I read somewhere that it's just 2m extrapolated resolution... i suppose that means it's not real...
copied this from Earner's forum:
it's not true megapixels. I mean, the extra pixels aren't data, they are extrapolated.
Say you have pixels like this
█████
The hack would ASSUME there is a natural blend in there and then extrapilate accordingly. ie:
█████
This "extra" pixel isn't recorded data, but it appears that your camera is a higher megapixel.
i have a dud CMOS sensor in my external camera :'-(
lots of dead pixels on the saved image
i don't use it much so i don't care
Related
Even though the XDAIIi cam is 1.3mp the images it produces are awfull!
The upgrade from 0.3mp to 1.3mp is a big selling point for this device, and some people are making the upgrade based on this alone!
Ive taken a couple of pics for you guys to compare.
Any confirmations or comments are welcome!
25 views and not a single comment?
Why aren't you guys more talkative?
RE
OK bro!
From the 3 photos posted the one by XDA II is definitely the best.
Have you make sure the XDA IIi got its best setting for the resolution concerned like its ambience, contrast, saturation, gamma and sharpness?
I would like to upgarde to IIi if its available in my country but now I have second thought after seeing its camera capability. I hope when it's release it would have the camera issue resolved.
Well, it looks worse but it may just be your brightness, contrast, etc..
Hey, BTW, when did XDAII start taking photos at 480x960? Mine can only do 480X640 no matter how I tweak the settings... Did I miss something?
dewild1 said:
Well, it looks worse but it may just be your brightness, contrast, etc..
Hey, BTW, when did XDAII start taking photos at 480x960? Mine can only do 480X640 no matter how I tweak the settings... Did I miss something?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well spotted!
No, that was my mistake it was only 480x640.
Thanks for the feedback guys.
I have tinkered with the settings somewhat, I tried to match them before taking the shots and have tinkered with the XDAIIi settings alone to try and improve it aswell, however no luck.
There is a 'night' settings on the IIi although it makes the pics even worse, and has white flecks all over the image!
It's such a shame, WM2003 SE is great! Integrated WiFi is awesome!
This cam really lets it down though.
I've finally made my decision:
Mines going back. It just doesn't cut it.
So then, how long before the next WM device from O2?
And what can we expect?
upgrade the ROM and see~
Have U ungrade ur ROm to i-mate's latest ROm? I realize that the camera's "nightmode" indeed remove those white flecks. But I admit my xdaII's camera (WM2003SE download from xda-developer) is nicer than the original PDA2's camera
On my PDA2,I reckon the resolution is much higher; it's hard to tell on computer screen but once U magifiy it (ZOOM in) then U will find L is L (640x480) and why we need XL 1024x640
The next concern: anyone know any patch or .cab to improve the camera spec in order to get better quality of pic? cheers~
...
The quality very depends on the settings and adjustments. I took 5 pics(3 indoor,2 outdoor)with my Himalaya(VGA Cam). There are too many differences which causes the adjustments. Take a look...
i got an xda 2i believeing it will be better than the xda2.
everything is good in it but it dosen't have the fonix voice dail as promised.
and the camera suck's big time.
is there any upgrade for the camera?
if yes can someone post it here?
thanks in advance.
fonix voice dail is on the seperate disk in the box you have to install it
as for the camera i havn't really used it yet
as for cmos cameras in general then i never found one which had a quality i felt was good
Mpixels dont seem to matter much
it's cmos vs. dcc (the type used in real digicams)
cmos just cant seem to get colours right
and are pretty sensitiv to bright light and dimm light and...
and the optics in them are poor aswell
but i hear people say that some sony E and nokia have a better quality
but i've never seen good quality myself
also read that nokia is putting propper optics in some cam soon
but that dont solve the cmos tech issues
But have you seen the quality of Nokia's 6630/6680 and of course the amazing SE K750i. Those of the K750i are really of an quality that you can go to the shop and let them be printed on photopaper (or do it at home of course). And look how small the phone is! It has by far the best camera of all (western) cameraphones and they achieved to put it in such a small package. I don't know what HTC were thinking with these crappy ass camera's. Why put in a camera when it's almost completely useless? Better let it out and save some money. Hopefully the new ones will be better (althought the pics I've seen taken with the HTC Hurricane aren't impressive either).
Uploaded to a new thread cos they were screwing up another thread on a different topic...
The comparison camera: My 4 year-old Canon Ixus 300
This is how far behind the pace the Universal's camera is... :roll:
Lets be honest though, the universal isnt really marketed for having a great camera. Its good for taking quite snapshots, but if your are that serious about taking pictures, get a nokia N90 or a digital camera. Its not really the camera what is bad, its just the really bad, plastic lens what is.
Can your 4 year old Ixus make phone calls, browse the web, check your emails, listen to music, watch movies?!?!
I was going to post comparisons about how far behind my alienware laptop my Universal is when playing Halflife, but I couldn't get it to run on my Universal :lol:
lol - OK, don't take this out of context please.
Someone in another thread was curious about the camera's abilities,
so I posted these pics as an illustration, but they screwed up the other
thread so I moved them to a new one. (See? They're even screwing
up this one too! ) Maybe the pics are useful for people who are
curious about the Universal's camera.
The camera quality isn't the reason why someone would buy the
Universal (understatement of the year!), but people will be interested
to know just how good/bad it is. This thread is an objective
demonstration just for them. 8)
I carry a nice 3.2 MPx Casio Exilim S100 - small, loads of useful features and otherwise fills the camera niche. The Exec replaced my P900 + x50v setup. I now use the x50v for development testing.
No probs for me using the universal for photos!!
Sorry guys. I'm quite happy with my jasjar for photos (considering it ain't a dedicated digitl camera!!)
I'm sure that HTC could really put a better camera on the Universal and in all WM devices; the problem is that they don't care ....they have so much space that they can put the K750 i sonyericsson camera module :lol:
If you have a look at the first comparison shots at the top of the kitchen, the Universal shot is clearer than the canon shot, look at the clock on the stove, the universal shot is clearer, you can hardly read the canon pic.
Re: No probs for me using the universal for photos!!
mackaby007 said:
Sorry guys. I'm quite happy with my jasjar for photos (considering it ain't a dedicated digitl camera!!)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
woah!!!!!! this is realllllllyyyy gooooddd!!!!
I guess its built to handle outdoors really well!
@seal
the point is, they are taken at different resolutions....what you need to see in the comparison is, the color quality and richness....!
San
Yes you are right there.....
Re: No probs for me using the universal for photos!!
dreamtheater39 said:
@seal
the point is, they are taken at different resolutions....what you need
to see in the comparison is, the color quality and richness....!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No no no!
Two of the pictures (the small ones) are taken at the same resolution
so that we can directly compare them! The Canon shot is a thumbnail.
Click on it to get the 640x480 version to match the 640x480 Universal
pic.
Re: No probs for me using the universal for photos!!
SiliconS said:
dreamtheater39 said:
@seal
the point is, they are taken at different resolutions....what you need
to see in the comparison is, the color quality and richness....!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No no no!
Two of the pictures (the small ones) are taken at the same resolution
so that we can directly compare them! The Canon shot is a thumbnail.
Click on it to get the 640x480 version to match the 640x480 Universal
pic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think you just added the 640x480 version recently by editing your post didnt you??
we just had the 1280pic from the universal, and the 640pic from your canon....of course....until you edited it unless....there was a problem with my browser!
Cheers!
S
[quote="The camera quality isn't the reason why someone would buy the
Universal (understatement of the year!), but people will be interested
to know just how good/bad it is. This thread is an objective
demonstration just for them. 8)[/quote]
If thats the case, then its alright. I dont like people dissin the device cos it doesn't take great pictures. No device on the market does what the jasjar can do, n i dare someone to argue with me on that
Sorry if we hijacked your thread.
can somebody post more pictures??? especially those taken with bad lighting conditions....
a couple pics in pitch dark, with the flash turned on...along with night mode on would be great too!
@universal
Noone would argue with you for sure you sure love your device!!!
San
universaldoc said:
.. No device on the market does what the jasjar can do, n i dare someone to argue with me on that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mate you should see the quality of pictures from the SE K750i they are really fantastic. Also the K750's battery lasts my wife 7 days and it is on 24hrs a day. So no competition for the JJ/Exec but makes you think
Like universaldoc wrote there is no other device like the universal, some phones might have a better camera but can they log into your computer on the other side of the world and fully control it..... The answer is clearly NO....... What is being said here is the Universal, despite its little problem, is a Phone/PDA in one that does is all. We will have better in the future but at this present time there is no comparison to anything Ericsson can make and that goes for in the future with Ericsson.
@seal, I know what is being said but not everyone wants all the features of the Universal. For me I still to use my PSP for videos over my Exec and I prefer the music reproduction of my Nokia 9500 (OGG) and Palm LifeDrive (DRM) over the Exec; the Exec music reproduction is very bass light.
I think that the camera is pretty ok with right settings...
@jah,
I agree that the camera is better on the SE K750i, probably the best after the Sharp V203SH.
But i just feel that it is rather unfair to diss the Universal based on the camera. As i have said before, if camera is a criteria for considering the universal, then i am speechless.
Just to make myself clear, i would have purchased the universal even if it did NOT have a camera
I am pretty much dissapointed with the pictures I have obtained with my Universal's built in camera.
Sometimes - most of the times - dont really beleive it is a 1.3 MPixels cam.
So,
1. Do you think using another software to take pictures would improve performance/quality?
2. It is possible to use another software to manage the camera?
3. Maybe, it's just me not being able to use it properly. Any advice to get good quality pictures?
have you checked the pictures on your pc?
i thought this until i looked on the pc and they were actually pretty impressive, dont be fooled my the on screen preview after youve taken a pic
yes... checked them out on a PC.. but no good quality. The problem is that if you're taking good quality pictures.. the it must be me.. :?
Anyway I recon that good pictures can be obtained under good conditions (light, etc.), but indoors... no way, at least for me.
i've seen on my HTC wizard that in the registery the camera can be edited things like bitrate too, havent tried it yet.
Ive gone from a D500 to this. Both 1.3 megapixel cameras, but the images from the samsung are far larger and far better quality. The images I get from my XDA are terrible.
maybe -hope so - it's just the software.
Could the camera be used with another soft? maybe from another WM5 device.
HTC has used extremely cheap and low quality camera sensors :-( Theres not much you can expect from its camera....so i guess its wise to accept the fact and move on :S
There are tons of dead pixels, and fails to reproduce the colors accurately...its just a "i have a cam on my phone too" feature, and nothing of any practical use!
cheerio
s
its enough to get the point across say car accident , for insurance or the poice, it would be enough to convince surlly.
Took some pictures yesterday for first time on Universal, on top of a hospital roof, sun shining.
So as normally happens in those situations you can not see what you are taking properly due to the screen contrast etc. in the sun. ( same on all camera phones I have had )
Just used the standard settings, didnt change anything, have just downloaded them onto the PC and I am quite impressed with the quality.
On par if not better than some of the camera phones I have had in the past.
Just checked settings and I was on 640 x 480 capture size and ambience auto.
So for me a thumbs up to the quality from a camera phone.
share one of those beautiful pics...
wanna check if it's just me..
Perhaps a silly question - but have you made sure your camera settings are at 2M (1200x1600) to take your photos. The exec defaults to a much smaller size.
cheers
hehe, yes.. thanks.
I'm just saying that quality doesnt fit in in a 1.3 Mpixels camera, my POV.
The camera is useless imho. sometimes its good to catch stupid pics of people who have parked terribly or funny signs on petrol station doors but all in all they would have been best just leaving it out.
The only solution is to get a decent camera.
JAmes
I'm an amateur photographer (with the lovely Nikon D50), and no doubt the Universal's picture quality is not very good. However, I see it as a bonus add-on for the Universal rather than a proper feature. Say, I don't carry the Nikon D50 into my lessons at school all the time (until recently, when we had our very last lessons at school for the rest of my life!); with the Universal I was able to quickly take pictures of my classmates sleeping in our maths lessons or film our chemistry teacher burning jelly babies (they literally scream and burn when they react with some solution!).
Anyway, my conclusion is that the camera on the Universal is good for quick snaps, but not good for family portraits. :wink:
PS: HTC, come on, you call yourselves "High Tech Computer Corporation" and you can't even manage a tiny camera?
Whilst on the topic, yesterday I tried to take pictures of a beautiful wheat field in the sun, but the picture I got was just a very dark image, no matter where the sun was relative to the lens. Changing the settings to "Sunlight" or "Automatic" did not help either.
Very disappointed, and you don't often get this lovely weather in the UK!
To the OP, there's no easy way to say it: the camera is crap, like 99.99% of all mobile phone cameras. The CCD they use are cheap as dirt, and unless you're experiencing optimum conditions (such as bright, bright sunshine outdoors), there's no way you'll ever take any decent pic with this phone regardless of the software.
Glad I could clear that up! :twisted:
It does not seem that bad to me,
settings = 2M(1600x1280) and daylight
I have not resized the pic , so sorry if it runs off screen :wink:
This is just before my ride to Turkey and back from UK
Stu..
Bagmanstu:
Nice outfit!
mdaexecfan said:
there's no way you'll ever take any decent pic with this phone regardless of the software.
Glad I could clear that up! :twisted:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly - it's a phone/PDA with a free camera, not a camera with a phone/PDA... Miracles you will not get!
The quality is acceptable to me but getting the best result is sometimes difficult. My major problem the handling, choosing the right settings for the occasion is a bit awkward.
@Bagmanstu: Cool
Sure the camera doesn't have much of a lens, and the zoom is really interpolated; but I really have my doubts that the camera is actually a 3.0MP.
Have there been any in depth tests to prove the camera's resolution???
How big a file should it be with the 3.0M super fine photos?
I take photos at the highest resolution and there is still pixel 'blocking'. I know HTC is new to this, but it is a let down. My old Sony 2.0MP takes better photos.
Clearly u have mistaken abt the relationship between MP and picture quality.
Higher MP does not necessarily mean better images taken.
If u compare a logitech quickcam IM's photo to that of the microsoft 2MP one. u will realise that althought the IM only supports VGA but
picture quality is much better......
The 4 most important factors in photography: Skill, Lens quality, lens quality, lens quality.
And you did realize that when you use the 3 MP mode, there is no zoom available?
A typical 3 MP "Super fine" image will be around 900-1400 KB depending on colors and detail of the object/situation you photograph. A "Fine" photo will land around 450-750 KB.
There is no noticeable difference between "Fine" and "Super fine" modes except in close up, high contrast photos.
I have attached 2 photos for your comparison. Yes, the camera is of poor quality as seen by these 2 images.
http://bayimg.com/DAEKGaABO
http://bayimg.com/DaEkHAABO
Oh, and to double check the resolution, just take a picture, save it to your PC and open it up with any image editing program and see for yourself.
keithwwalker said:
Sure the camera doesn't have much of a lens, and the zoom is really interpolated; but I really have my doubts that the camera is actually a 3.0MP.
Have there been any in depth tests to prove the camera's resolution???
How big a file should it be with the 3.0M super fine photos?
I take photos at the highest resolution and there is still pixel 'blocking'. I know HTC is new to this, but it is a let down. My old Sony 2.0MP takes better photos.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you really expect super great pictures on the data centric device? Sure SE Phones do a better job of this, but what else can they do?
If you want a high quality camera or anything else techy, always buy a dedicated device for the job. Simple.
Personally speaking I find the camera quality more than acceptable for a PPC/Phone, as a matter of fact I would go as far to say that it is the best in class out of all PPC Phones. Just MHO though.
mackaby007 said:
Personally speaking I find the camera quality more than acceptable for a PPC/Phone, as a matter of fact I would go as far to say that it is the best in class out of all PPC Phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've got the same impression about the cam,
at least compared to my old HTC Magician
Camera
The quality of the camera is probably the only reason why I have not let the X7501 fully replace my N95 as a phone!
thetruth1983 said:
The quality of the camera is probably the only reason why I have not let the X7501 fully replace my N95 as a phone!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lmao, scnr
mojo2000 said:
lmao, scnr
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've got an N95 and its camera isn't much better in my opinion, though it copes with moving subjects slightly better and video is VASTLY superior. I prefer B&W shots on the Ameo though. The flash on the Ameo is much brighter too - I still don't understand why HTC don't provide an automated flash function though - very annoying!
Sorry if I gave the impression that I was expecting a first rate camera with the 7501.
I purchased this for the following reasons, ranking in importance:
PDA
Phone
GPS
Media Player
Camera
With that said, there is another component to a good photo beside: Skill, Lens quality.
That is the software that puts all the image together.
My old Sony 2.0MP had a Carl Zeiss lens and the end product was still crap compared to the Canon's of the day. The internal software was the let down. So too the HTC.
keithwwalker said:
Sure the camera doesn't have much of a lens, and the zoom is really interpolated; but I really have my doubts that the camera is actually a 3.0MP.
Have there been any in depth tests to prove the camera's resolution???
How big a file should it be with the 3.0M super fine photos?
I take photos at the highest resolution and there is still pixel 'blocking'. I know HTC is new to this, but it is a let down. My old Sony 2.0MP takes better photos.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Calavaro said:
The 4 most important factors in photography: Skill, Lens quality, lens quality, lens quality.
And you did realize that when you use the 3 MP mode, there is no zoom available?
A typical 3 MP "Super fine" image will be around 900-1400 KB depending on colors and detail of the object/situation you photograph. A "Fine" photo will land around 450-750 KB.
There is no noticeable difference between "Fine" and "Super fine" modes except in close up, high contrast photos.
I have attached 2 photos for your comparison. Yes, the camera is of poor quality as seen by these 2 images.
http://bayimg.com/DAEKGaABO
http://bayimg.com/DaEkHAABO
Oh, and to double check the resolution, just take a picture, save it to your PC and open it up with any image editing program and see for yourself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude, when was the last time you really cleaned?
another big factor of picture quality is the sensor size...
most people down know this but the bigger teh sensor the better the picture quality...
that is why a dslr with a big sensor though it may have a 3 MP pixel size will alwasy be better than a point and shoot thats 8 MP
this gets into photography .. but basicly craming more pixels into a same sized sensor will seldom yield better results ... just maybe allow you to blow up the picture a bit more thats it...
having said that i think the camera on the athena is excellent compared to other phones of the nature
I disagree with the fact that len quality is the most important factor.... Len is very important but tt is when you r using something with a gd sensor.... the image processor and sensor.... b it cmos or ccd will
b the one that makes the most difference when it comes to image quality.......
Calavaro said:
The 4 most important factors in photography: Skill, Lens quality, lens quality, lens quality.
And you did realize that when you use the 3 MP mode, there is no zoom available?
A typical 3 MP "Super fine" image will be around 900-1400 KB depending on colors and detail of the object/situation you photograph. A "Fine" photo will land around 450-750 KB.
There is no noticeable difference between "Fine" and "Super fine" modes except in close up, high contrast photos.
I have attached 2 photos for your comparison. Yes, the camera is of poor quality as seen by these 2 images.
http://bayimg.com/DAEKGaABO
http://bayimg.com/DaEkHAABO
Oh, and to double check the resolution, just take a picture, save it to your PC and open it up with any image editing program and see for yourself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
bLiTz^ said:
I disagree with the fact that len quality is the most important factor.... Len is very important but tt is when you r using something with a gd sensor.... the image processor and sensor.... b it cmos or ccd will
b the one that makes the most difference when it comes to image quality.......
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
sensor is imp ... but like i said its sensor size...
and being how most cell phones are small... you cant fit a big sensor in it... so image quality willbe sub par always...
you made me laugh out loud with that comment....you're right!!
for gods sake calavaro if you dont want to dust, just blow that dust away.......sneeze or something!!
of course you wanted it there for effect!?!?
in keeping w/ the thread though, i have a trion w/ a 2 mp and it is the best i've had in all my pda/phones...how does the advantage compare to that camera? anyone??
dan
[email protected] said:
you made me laugh out loud with that comment....you're right!!
for gods sake calavaro if you dont want to dust, just blow that dust away.......sneeze or something!!
of course you wanted it there for effect!?!?
in keeping w/ the thread though, i have a trion w/ a 2 mp and it is the best i've had in all my pda/phones...how does the advantage compare to that camera? anyone??
dan
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can't remember if the Trion is the same as the Hermes?! If it is, I had a Hermes and loved the camera...for a PPC, but I rate the Athena camera slightly ahead in every way.
i do find the athena camera superior to every other camera phone i have seen...
i especially like the focus... it definately makes the picture quite al ot sharper
any other camera with a fixed focal length produces far inferior results...
the reason is because it is fixed at infinity ... so it doesnt have to focus necessarily ...
basicly becaused of a fixed focal length at infinity you get a much softer picture...
and it is a common known fact among photographers the infinity focal length produces sub par results ...
for example they dont use the infinity focal length to take landscape pictures... it really depends per lens but they use a dif formula to calculate the best length...
the long and the short a variable focal lens will top a fixed focal length always...
in short if you cant focus ur lens like most pda phones athenas is better...
Haha. I do dust. I live in a 3rd world country with massive traffic in the center of a big-ass city. I even have maids helping out. That's the best that can be done on a day to day basis. So how about, you know, focus on the issue at hand?
No matter how you look at it, a camera on a phone will never be as good as even the simplest point-and-shoot camera. Yes, quality has improved, but it's still way behind.
So what's up with those red lines at the top left corner? about half the pictures I take has this "effect". Seems to happen mostly in high light conditions.
leoni1980 said:
I've got an N95 and its camera isn't much better in my opinion, though it copes with moving subjects slightly better and video is VASTLY superior. I prefer B&W shots on the Ameo though. The flash on the Ameo is much brighter too - I still don't understand why HTC don't provide an automated flash function though - very annoying!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The N95 indeed has a poor quality STILL capture, however the VIDEO capability is amazing.
Calavaro said:
Haha. I do dust. I live in a 3rd world country with massive traffic in the center of a big-ass city. I even have maids helping out. That's the best that can be done on a day to day basis. So how about, you know, focus on the issue at hand?
No matter how you look at it, a camera on a phone will never be as good as even the simplest point-and-shoot camera. Yes, quality has improved, but it's still way behind.
So what's up with those red lines at the top left corner? about half the pictures I take has this "effect". Seems to happen mostly in high light conditions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is becaues of teh sensor size i mentioned before ..
its just not possible unless you want to carry a huge phone... (thickness)
and though the athena is big its really not that thick...
i really don't get it. most of the comments posted praise the Athena camera. Personally i think the camera is pretty good and sharp and the fact it can produce a 3mp photo is excellent.. BUT.. after using it for 2 months.. it is only great for outdoor and scenery shots (or if your subject does not move too much). in a NORMAL (and i say normal as in if you are in doors and the lighting condition is considered very good) indoor situation, if your subject just moves a little.. the whole picture becomes blur.. try this.. take a shot outdoor while u shake ur camera.. (result.. decent picture)... go indoor and move your camera.. (result.. sucks)..
i for one bought the phone to also take pictures of my kid especially when we go out shopping.. but the camera feature simply cannot make it..
question: when indoors.. the camera is like perpetually in night mode (i mean everything is like in slow motion.. jerky..) weird?!?!? even if i am using my old xda ii, it does not do this.. why oh why?
i do understand what most of u guys are saying about a weak sensor.. but i for one is a disappointed customer.. a phone with such a powerful cpu yet the picture and video quality is terrible.. sigh...