Related
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...
Im dont know, every where I read, thay say that the cam is s..., and it takes 5 secs. from when I press till it takes the picture.
Is that right?
Stick with the Diamond, much better IMO. Only advantages of a HD is the bigger screen and more RAM, but I think the Diamond is much more useable.
To answer your question, that appears to be the case for me, yes.
"Only" the screen is a pretty major advantage, it's almost double the size. The Diamond isn't seriously usable for web browsing - the HD is. Ditto for video.
ChrisB said:
Im dont know, every where I read, thay say that the cam is s..., and it takes 5 secs. from when I press till it takes the picture.
Is that right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's rubbish and completely untrue. I find the camera to be quite excellent and picture quality very good in fact.
I don't blame you though for getting that impression. Before I got my own unit, I also had that false impression from reading all the complaints on this forum. But after getting my own HD, I'm really happy with it. This is despite not having flash.
eaglesteve said:
That's rubbish and completely untrue. I find the camera to be quite excellent and picture quality very good in fact.
I don't blame you though for getting that impression. Before I got my own unit, I also had that false impression from reading all the complaints on this forum. But after getting my own HD, I'm really happy with it. This is despite not having flash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly the HTC Touch HD is a great phone. Some people reading forum like this think they get a good sampling of what people using the phone think about it. That is not true since it is mostly the maybe 1% that have troubles of some kind with their phone that write here. The rest of the people that are happy with their phone do not write about.
The only thing I can recommend for people considering buying the phone is to get the phone and try it out. You will most likely like it a lot.
Camera is not bad, but also not good. Don't buy it as a camphone.
I've got a nokia n82 and a touch hd.
If the cam is ****? Yeah, it is. Don't let people let you think different. I guess it's not worse than other htc-phones though, I haven't had one since the original touch (elf).
If it was daylight out here now (denmark, actually) I should have taken comparision shots for you, but it's not, and with the xenon flash on the n82 it is even more superior in this light.
That said, the touch hd is a fantastic device in every other aspect! I didn't buy it for the cam, and don't care about it's picture quality, since I've got my n82.
The camera is only suitable for taking pictures in well-lit area.
Forget about dark areas.
All in all I'm sufficiently pleased with it, as I did not expect anything great.
Hello
Yes the Cam is ****
very slow slow slow and it only does pictures in very light areas.
In the drak they are very dark - the missing flash is a desaster.
Do not buy the hd for taking pictures or videos
But also safe you monry on fu.. nokia modells
IMHO...
The quality of the photos that the Touch HD can take is far better than the three HTC devices I've used before. It's actually pretty good in my limited experience with it. However, the camera remains virtually unusable because of two things:
1 - the delay between tapping the screen and the photo taking the image while the camera fusses over the focussing and then thinks for a couple of seconds
2 - the lack of hardware button makes camera shake very hard to avoid
These two factors make it almost impossible to take a photo of a moving scene because of the unpredictability of the timing of the shot and the likelihood of camera shake.
Attached is a photo I've just taken in the low evening light that illustrates what should be a perfectly easy photo. I couldn't avoid camera shake even standing still and being ultra-careful. The exposure isn't bad though.
the cam is bad... only usable by normal daylight also video recording is very bad
well in normal daylight the cam is better than my n73. video is realy better...
Are there some tweaks or settings to speed up taking images? It's really slooooow...
TIP: Disable the "Auto Whiteness" in the camera.
I have spent the last 2 weeks playing with the camera and was very disappointed with low level lighting pictures at first, BUT! now I have ressolved this problem.
There is an option in the camera "Auto Whiteness", the sensor or software in the camera seems to be useless at judging lighting, so if you set this to manual and select the indoor lighting icon (looks like a light bulb) then the camera gives quite impressive low level lighting pictures.
Speed of the camera between pressing and taking a picture is about 3 seconds, not the worst shutter delay I have seen on a camera phone, but not the best. Hopefully HTC can address this with future software updates??
For me the main issue is the blurryness of virtually all pictures,
if its a picture of a person I have to ask them to be still, then I take a pic and then I have to ask them once more to be DEAD STILL.
Most people take stay still to mean don't walk off any where but with the Touch HD stay still means don't let one muscle move.
If you want a phone that takes decent picture then its not or you.
Its a multimedia phone (pics not included)
I have been playing with the HD for two days now, which meant finding all of the tweaks and then removing them until it works for me. The excellent tweak app (search for it here) recommends enabling the sport and burst modes of photo (works great) and then changing the maximum res to 3M (makes my phone crash!)
Anyway if you want to take really good SHAKE FREE pics the ONLY way is through the burst/sport options. The auto focus for the 'normal' cam is so crap that the shutter stays open forever. In sport or burst mode the camera has to ditch the refocus and just shoot - out of the 5 in sport or 30 in burst you will have two or 10 decent pictures. This was exactly the same on my old HTC P3900.
The video is still completely crap - although much improved if you shoot as for MMS.
If we're talking about very low light, even my Canon camera does not give good result. So I don't expect miracle from HD. Having said that, I have taken quite a lot of indoor shots with lights on and the result is not noticeably worst than what my Canon camera can deliver.
As for motion, I actually don't find any problem there. I have taken quite many shots with car moving towards and away from me and the sharpness is still there. No blurring at all.
I find vido recording to be really good.
The lack of hardware button is a non-issue for me. I find it very easy to just touch the screen, the try to hold it still for the process to be completed.
This is the best camera I've ever had in a phone, and I find myself using it quite a lot since getting my HD.
This is seriously the worst camera I've ever had in a phone. And the sad part is the auto focus which is way too slow and cannot be disabled. No other tweak will help really unless somebody will figure out how to set focus to infinity permanently.
Attached are photos taken with the HTC Touch HD at night in New York City last week:
YESSSSSS IT SUCKSSSSSSS!
Auto light balance is useless, shutter speed is miserably slow (not even for a still photo) , no flash , video is worthless. 5 MP not in full screen (in full screen it is 4MP) .
If you have kids and want to take a photo for them then please wait till thy sleep and start shooting , other wise you will be wasting only your time and battery .
It is even too bad in watching movies without setting hours and hours converting them!
I hope it is not a hardware issue and only software that can be updated later .
No cam-mobile , yes surf-mobile and nav-mobile.
The camera is so incredibly bad that sometimes I actually carry around my Blackstone without a sim card just to use the camera because I don't want to use the Hero's camera. They're both 5 mp but I think the problem is that the Hero doesn't have a stabilizer so everything comes out blurrier, and it's impossible to take closeups. I've tried it with both the default camera app and Camera Magic and they are both terrible. Anyone know if there's a way to fix this or if it's just a useless camera?
Same Problem with me. I'm using Villian Rom 2.1. Camera is very blurry
The shutter speed on the Hero is quite slow so you have to be very steady when you press the trackball. And it will help a lot if you only press the trackball when the autofocus brackets are green, which means it's focused properly. A lot of people just press the trackball without waiting for the auto focus brackets to turn green and then blame the cam for taking blurry pics.
Personally I think the Hero cam is pretty decent, my shots are mostly sharp and in focus as I do take my time to take pics. Having said that, it's definitely useless for taking action shots or night shots.
It's only happenned on 2.1 Rom. The picture taken is full of yellow and bad quality compare to Magic, back to 1.5 is fine.
The biggest problem with the camera for me is the length of time it takes to capture a shot.
It's basically pointless trying to take a photo of anything that is moving at all.
I don't know if HTC generally have a problem making cameras work but my old TyTNII had the same problem.
Really I don't see the point of putting a camera in a phone if you're not going to make it work properly.
Things also look better if you change the metering mode to average.
I've found the Hero's camera to be ridiculously dark in comparison to even the Dream. It's just borderline unusable, IMO.
On my HTC Touch Pro 2, the camera was amazing, 3.2mp i think with flash, very clear picture. I was all excited to try the 5mp from the Hero, geesh it realllly suck
Has anyone else noticed the F Stop/Aperature on the i9000.
It's a super low f2.6
As anyone who understands photography, the lower the number the more light is let in and as such means you can work and shoot better in poor/dim lit conditions.
The trade off is a Low Depth of Field.
I have quite a few cameras and at f2 they produce some stunning night photography.
Granted the sensor is not up to the same standards as that found in class camera lens but to have an f2.6 in this camera should still be great for shots that either require a bit of speed or for low lit situations.
Seeing as the i9000 does not have an LED Flash this is certainly going to help.
interesting piece of news thank you. sounds good!
i know quite a bit of photography, and in theory your right.
The only thing is that most phone cams have 'super big aperature', but since the lenses are very small and the sensors are also, it doesn't say anything about the quality.
Also the aperature doesn't say anything about the number of lumens the lens can catch.
it's just a calculation number.
aperature with your zoom factor make your depth of field and actually it stops there.
I have seen 4.5 lensen (on my dSLR) that can make perfect pics with no light at all, but also i've seen 2.8 lensens that suck totaly. simply because if the small lens opening.
On the other hand. Though it's still a calcuating number, it does give a good indication if you compare it to other phone cams.
Thanks for the input... appreciated.
I fully understand and agree in what you are saying.
If we look at the Nokia N97 which although not the best phone camera on the market it is known for taking surprisingly good low light photography.
Apart from the fact it has a dual LED for flash photography it's construction and lens is quite similar.
Taking aside the similarities, if you look at it's F-Stop it is slightly higher at f2.8 against an f2.6 on the i9000.
It's not much different I agree but even if it were one would expect low light or fast shooting to be on par with the N97.
I've seen shots taken with the N97 and was quite impressed at it's low light attitude.
Rarely during the day/night was the flash required.
I'm exceptionally pleased at the i9000's aperture/F-Stop and Focal range.
I for one am now not as concerned it does not have a dedicated Flash.
I'm quite excited about the camera as well. I almost never use the flash on my Omina I because I get much better results by playing around with the camera settings. The only problem is that the camera seems to have trouble focusing in low light/low contrast situations. With flash, the photos look washed out and are still out of focus. Hopefully the manual focus option and "fast auto focus" the gsmarena review mentions mean that it is possible to get good low light photos with the Galaxy S even without flash.
That said, I'm put off by the reports about video recording being choppy/crashing and the camera failing to load.
latraviata said:
That said, I'm put off by the reports about video recording being choppy/crashing and the camera failing to load.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same here a bit... I saw videos of the Samsung Wave camera 720p video and they look better than the samples of the Galaxy S
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHQs_DpFFoI <-- Samsung Wave.. very very nice especially the plants.
So I've been taking a few pictures on my phone, and I have noticed that the Galaxy S2 is very very inconsistent in taking quality photos. I can have a great clear shot of some mid-ranged photos, but far distanced photos have horrible quality. I understand if you take pictures of something really far, obviously it won't be that good, but when I compared to my friends iPhone 4, the 8MP is barely on par with it. Do any of you know what might be the problem? I've tried using auto focus and manual focus, but it is always blurry.
It seems to be an hardware problem. I find the sgsw camera pretty good, especially the dynamic range. My only concern is with indoor pictures, a bit noisy and cold.
Can you upload and provide some shots samples?
Everything on auto? It might help to know which ROM/mod you are using.
I'm not an expert in mobile digital photography but if I can see your blurry distant shots it might be able to tell if I get better result with my device.
The S2 tends to like low shutter speeds (1/4s - 1/20s) ALL the frigging time.
It will select this slow shutter speed even when it should raise the ISO and get a faster shutter speed.
This is why the S2 often takes blurry photos, because even 1/15 or 1/19sec is not fast enough to take a photo sharply with a 28mm lens (effectively what the S2 is).
The slowest shutter speed the S2 should use is 1/30sec to ensure the photos aren't blurred by *camera* vibration/shake. (But, if the *subject* is moving, like a child, then 1/60s or 1/80s are the minimum that are needed to freeze the subject).
This is why the photos are so often blurry as soon as the light gets slightly low - cloud day, in shade, etc. I don't have a solution sorry!
Proof: check the EXIF data of the blurry photos you take. Most will have a stupidly low ISO (like ISO25, ISO50) and a stupid low shutter speed.
Yes I have noticed that the shutter speeds are quite low...now I'm assured that its not just me
I can take SOME really good photos, but almost every other pictures are very blurry even at a close distance.
Everything is on default, except I have enabled Anti-Shake or something like that, and I am using CheckROM 3.1.1 (KJ3)
The first 2 are taken at a considerably good range, with no zoom or any effects, just a normal shot, but then the outcome was very weird.
The last one was a closer shot, but in a darker area, and that one was a little bit more clear
I don't want to be captain obvious, and I am sure you are a better photographer than me but can you check if the focus mode is set to macro if it is then change to auto focus.
Since this happened to me once i set to macro and forgot and all the photos were blurry.
I just felt that might be the reason.
I am guessing that what you're doing is pressing on the "Capture" button without focusing on the subject yet?
I do find that it's best to press to focus on the area you want to take and then press the main capture button to capture it. It seems like the focus hasn't focused on what you want to take.
It's quite annoying because then that means I have to press in the middle and then press the capture button to take a decent shot. I wish I could just hold down the capture button to focus, then release to shoot.. which works sometimes but not as good as what I said above.
Here you have 2 images, far and close focus. You can see the great quality of the camera. Take a look at the focus settings: better in auto mode if you don't want to manage it in all photos. Maybe you have some problem in the camera hardware... so warranty is the best option here.
There are at least 2 types of camera modules in SGS II.
Check this:http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1098834
Mine also had this problem (blury at far objects), the soultion is set the metering to matrix in camera menu.It works for me.
iocar said:
Yes I have noticed that the shutter speeds are quite low...now I'm assured that its not just me
I can take SOME really good photos, but almost every other pictures are very blurry even at a close distance.
Everything is on default, except I have enabled Anti-Shake or something like that, and I am using CheckROM 3.1.1 (KJ3)
The first 2 are taken at a considerably good range, with no zoom or any effects, just a normal shot, but then the outcome was very weird.
The last one was a closer shot, but in a darker area, and that one was a little bit more clear
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
are you using macro mode to take farer objects ?
thats why it is more clear when you are taking photo of the specimen (3rd one)
or the camera firmware is broken , if not ,it may be the hardware issue
I always touch the place where I want to focus, and that is why I am confused
Yes I was using Macro, but only because it had the best quality...Auto-Focus doesn't really help as it never focus properly, as in when I press the "Capture" button, most of the time it goes to red and doesn't turn green. I am holding the phone still and don't know why
The camera firmware is also up to date
What I don't get is that my old HTC Desire can take photos that are much more crisp than my Galaxy S2
Try resetting the camera settings see if that works,try a third party HDR camera app or Camera 360,if quility is still bad in the 3rd party app then it could be a hardware fault
Sichroteph said:
My only concern is with indoor pictures, a bit noisy and cold.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
auto contrast I find helps take better indoors
Cant say I've had any problems with the camera. Love the macro focussing.
It seems obvious that your device doesn't behave like it should and have focus problems. I can have the exact same results with macro mode activated (and not shooting close objects)
I would suggest :
- trying another camera app (like TheiPhoneKiller suggested)
- trying a totally stock rom
- trying a rom like CM7 or MIUI
If you still got totally unfocused shots, you may very well have an faulty device. Try to get a replacement unit if you can.
(And did you try the fix kisstom suggested?)
Well... my shots is certainly much more grainy, since i upgraded to 2.3.5 - even if shot outside in bright sunshine. And many of the pictures is becoming more yellow than before - especially when using the flash-LED, so something has happened when i upgraded... this is one of my big complaints about the new upgrade. My old W800i 2Mpx beats the SGS2 in pure quality of the pictures now (but that was also, and still is, a VERY good camera for a phone)...
When comparing the newest pictures to some of the old pictures i have shot in the past, it's clear to me that i have a loss of quality since upgrading. How do i check manually, if there's a new camera-software version available - as i can't seem to find any in the Samsung apps, even if i have read somewhere that there's a newer one, comparing to my version of the camera-software???
But a least it's still not as crappy as my old HTC's camera - THAT was lousy...
Frankly speaking, 'Camera quality is bad' makes no sense. If you've said it's bad than this or that then I'd take it. Have used all the SE phones as I loved their image quality and I'll say after playing with the Satio, C905 I don't think this one would beat them. We are talking about a small image sensor here. So the main job is how good the post image processing is, some part still depends on the lens though.
The thing is I didn't buy this one for camera, believe me or not, after purchase, that is almost six months now, I've shot barely 10 pics with it. For normal usage and as a professional can't go without 350D, and for short tours and holidays I still shoot with my C905 , but not GSII.
But still this Camera is capable of taking some great pics, posting some of them here, after seeing them you certainly can't say Camera quality is bad.
The very bests I've found,
-> ithehappy
Well - i used to have that image quality too, but it has become somewhat impossible to shot such good pictures, since upgrading... i suspect that it's because my camera firmware still is TBEC28 (but of course not sure of it)
iocar said:
I always touch the place where I want to focus, and that is why I am confused
Yes I was using Macro, but only because it had the best quality...Auto-Focus doesn't really help as it never focus properly, as in when I press the "Capture" button, most of the time it goes to red and doesn't turn green. I am holding the phone still and don't know why
The camera firmware is also up to date
What I don't get is that my old HTC Desire can take photos that are much more crisp than my Galaxy S2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Confused!!! Are you saying that you always have macro focus on?
If so then turn it off. My cousin complained about the exact same thing, blurry and red box when trying to focus. Went through his settings, turned macro off and everything was good again.
Also auto focus will not work correctly if macro is on, unless your taking really close range pics, which is what macro focus is for.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
well i am on 2.3.5 Images are really Perfect for me am seriously impressed the Quality iam on kI8 here is one example
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/708/20111118205552.jpg
iocar said:
Yes I was using Macro, but only because it had the best quality
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's exactly why your pictures are blurry at a distance.
Macro focus is for close-up pictures, use auto focus for longer distances