Related
Not used to making video's as all my previous phones
Universal,Hermes,TytnII,Raphael,Touch HD didn't make them too well.
So just tried out making video's while driving (as a passenger) and
they look stunningly good. There's lot's of sun/cloud changes
and it picks up beautifully.
Frame rate is above 20FPS average in MPEG 640x480. Nice.
EDIT : from comments below I see most people expect more. For once I'm on the satisfied side
What .. it too can't play 640x480 flawlessly ? I saw some benchmarks which played such videos at 200%.
Dr.Sid said:
What .. it too can't play 640x480 flawlessly ? I saw some benchmarks which played such videos at 200%.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you read his comment???? where does it say it cant play 640x480
A sample recording would be nice
Smooth playback is 24 fps and beyond. if it's between 20-24, it sucks.
It's the recording rate in 640x480 not the playback speed.
It will almost always keep the 23.99 frames per second while recording
So I meant to say, it's a great video recorder.
I think the title of this thread is a little bit naive!
C'mon 640 x 480 has been on most high end phones now since 2006!
We now have alot of phones with 640 x 480, a fair few with 720 x 480 (D1?) and one or two with 720p recording.
The hardware in this phone is capable of 720p as is that of the Palm Pre, Iphone 3GS and probably others too.
So, in summary - I dont see 640 x 480 as amazingly good at all!
On the topic, do any devs think it would be possible to up the recording to it's 720p capabilities?
See above. I accidently posted twice.
jamuk2004 said:
The hardware in this phone is capable of 720p
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Qualcomm advertises Snapdragon (rather over-optimistically in my opinion) as being capable of 720p video playback - where do they say it's capable of 720p capture?
My bad !
I did not notice he talks about RECORDING, I thought he talks about playback.
lucid said:
Frame rate is above 20FPS average in MPEG 640x480. Nice.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So video quality is "surprisingly mediocre", then. Is there any non-HTC smartphone in the world that can't manage at least 30fps at VGA resolution? The Samsung i8910HD can almost manage 24fps at a resolution of 1280x720. If the HD2 could better that, then maybe you could describe it as "amazingly good".
The Snapdragon probably should be able to record in 720P from a hardware point of view. My currrent phone, the i8910, records in 720P at around 22-24fps, and its only packing a 600mhz Cortex 8 CPU.
So i went to the registry and messed with some values a bit. I set the bitrate much higher than the default. It would still capture video @ about 25 fps. Can't really tell the difference in quality, but the filesize has increased by a 100%. I'll try to see if there are more reg settings to mess around.
NZtechfreak said:
The Snapdragon probably should be able to record in 720P from a hardware point of view. My currrent phone, the i8910, records in 720P at around 22-24fps, and its only packing a 600mhz Cortex 8 CPU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's a lot more to it than CPU power, I think - it's a bandwidth issue rather than MIPS. I wouldn't be surprised if Windows Mobile imposes some limitations too.
I have an iphone 3gs and the nexus one. Ive recorded video on both and when I transferred the video to my PC, I noticed the bitrate is on the low side compared to the iphone 3gs.
The 3gs gets 7,000+kbps while the Nexus one gets 2,000+kbps.
Knowing this, is there a way to get that bitrate to be higher? Closer to that of the 3gs? Is it due to the app or the camera on the nexus one? As good as this phone is, isnt it suppose to be better at recording video than the iphone 3gs or at the very least on par? What can I do to get the bitrate up? Its bad enough the FPS is around 17-20 compared to 30fps for the iphone 3gs but bitrate being so important to me, what can I do? I really like android OS but cant keep the phone if its video recording is going to be a couple notches lower than the 3gs. What do I do here?
That's really stupid I expected this phone to have a more capable camera. The comparison YouTube video I watched made the iPhones video recording look brighter and more vibrant with equal clarity but I thought the nexus had better specs in video recording. I know the iPhone has 3.2 MP to nexus's 5mp but I thought recording was supposed to be better on nexus.
Can anyone explain? I've read the respective specs but my eyes don't lie. And are software modifications/updates capable of increasing the quality of photos and recordings? Thanks
Also, why did I stop having a cursor when typing in xda? I had one when I got the phone...I didn't want to start a whole new thread to ask that...
I assume it may be the compression where 3gs = mov and nexus one = 3gp. However it is possible that this may be more of a hardware limitation than something as simple as compression.
I didnt even mention the audio recording which is pretty sub par. Im talking audio recording equivalent to phones from 2002. 8khz bit rate, seriously?
homerrulez said:
I assume it may be the compression where 3gs = mov and nexus one = 3gp.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The wrapper doesn't mean anything. Bit-rates don't either. Both .mov and .3gp are merely the headers and footers of video files. The main block, and the one that really matters is the codec being used. I can tell you that iPhone 3GS uses H.264, and the Nexus one probably does too since it's the exclusive codec of youtube , which is today's gold standard in video compression. Now, if each phone is using the same codec, you can turn on and off settings suit your needs. If you have more processing power, you can use that to shrink the file more. If you want the best battery life, you don't compress it as much.
Having said all that, 6Mbps is rather lousy compression for VGA output if Apple is using H.264. Full frame DVD quality is around 3Mbps properly encoded, and even taking into account the 3GS has to encode in real-time, and shoots 30 progressive frames a second (DVD's are around 24fps) 4Mbps would be the max if the camera was good, which is isn't (not bashing the iPhone specifically, all cell cams suck). 7Mbps would be reasonable if you were shooting 720p, but the 3GS can't do that.
So...summarizing
The Bitrate on the iPhone video seems insanely high, wastefully high. The Nexus One seems better, but is a little too low. Then again, I don't know what you're shooting so I'm just guess. 2Mbps could be perfectly fine if there isn't much movement.
DMaverick50 said:
That's really stupid I expected this phone to have a more capable camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The camera has nothing to do with bitrate. Here's a random frame from an ep of House, ripped from one of my DVD's and re-encoded using the same codec used by these phones, just with the quality settings set REALLY high. The bit rate on this episode is...drum roll please...2,000Kbps. It looks far better than anything the iPhone can shoot because 1)The camera used to shoot it was really nice and expensive and 2)It was encoded and re-encoded using software and hardware a lot nicer and more capable than you can fit on a phone.
homerrulez said:
I really like android OS but cant keep the phone if its video recording is going to be a couple notches lower than the 3gs. What do I do here?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're seriously basing your smartphone decision on its videorecording capabilities? If bitrate and/or video quality is 'so' important to you, why are you trying to record video with a phone to begin with? You can get a much better video camera for $600...
I noticed on an ipod touch 4, that the quality was HD.
I wonder why the the quality on the Android devices play in HQ.
Side by side, makes me cry to see what I am lacking.
Just odd Google's major product plays better on a non-Google device.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
I haven't used YoutTube App much BUT is there a point of playing it at higher quality?
480p = 640 x 480
480p = 704 x 480
our screens = 800 x 480
The benefit we get from 720p -> 480p is fairly minimum as you can see :/
Kinda making this up, but it might be because of the higher resolution display that the iphone and itouch have.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
yea the iphone 4 and ipod touch 4 does have a higher resolution
But when you're watching on a 4" screen does it really matter? Not trying to watch a movie off Youtube after all.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
gTen said:
I haven't used YoutTube App much BUT is there a point of playing it at higher quality?
480p = 640 x 480
480p = 704 x 480
our screens = 800 x 480
The benefit we get from 720p -> 480p is fairly minimum as you can see :/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
que? are those resolutions the old crappy TV lines that werent really even 480i?
480p= 720x480
720p ( i assume you meant) = 1280x720
So if our phones are 800x480, 480p would be a better image than a scaled 720p, I seriously doubt our phones have the scalers of most modern TVs or Monitors. Native resolution is pretty much always better. (the widescreen images being letterboxed 480p like out of a dvd player).
Yeah they have amazing, almost unnecessary resolution for a 3.5" screen. Great for text readability, but so is SAMOLED
So anyways, if a 960x640 (apple) device is actually defaulting to scaling 720p down, theyre actually shooting themselves in the foot... unless their scaler is a faroudja... but with iOS its all about status, so having that little indicator on the screen say HD, even though the device falls a bit short of actually delivering, and degrading the image by scaling when it is not necessary on such a small device (any phone), it just makes us look better . Wow, im used to having these discussions relating to CRT projectors, not phones So yeah, stick to native resolution or smaller.
That said, if our TV out option worked, then 720p or whatever the best output is would be a good default, if that option were plugged in.
ungovernable1977 said:
que? are those resolutions the old crappy TV lines that werent really even 480i?
480p= 720x480
720p ( i assume you meant) = 1280x720
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I meant what I meant but I forgot one 720 x 480..there are multiple standards for 480p based on the sample such as4:3 (640x480)..
ungovernable1977 said:
que? are those resolutions the old crappy TV lines that werent really even 480i?
480p= 720x480
720p ( i assume you meant) = 1280x720
So if our phones are 800x480, 480p would be a better image than a scaled 720p, I seriously doubt our phones have the scalers of most modern TVs or Monitors. Native resolution is pretty much always better. (the widescreen images being letterboxed 480p like out of a dvd player).
Yeah they have amazing, almost unnecessary resolution for a 3.5" screen. Great for text readability, but so is SAMOLED
So anyways, if a 960x640 (apple) device is actually defaulting to scaling 720p down, theyre actually shooting themselves in the foot... unless their scaler is a faroudja... but with iOS its all about status, so having that little indicator on the screen say HD, even though the device falls a bit short of actually delivering, and degrading the image by scaling when it is not necessary on such a small device (any phone), it just makes us look better . Wow, im used to having these discussions relating to CRT projectors, not phones So yeah, stick to native resolution or smaller.
That said, if our TV out option worked, then 720p or whatever the best output is would be a good default, if that option were plugged in.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Regardless of the quality the iphone degrades, it still looks better...that's what he meant lol so if it looks better with a scaled down 720p, imagine regular 720p
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
I am not talking about the resolution of the screen. I realize the iphone/ipod have higher res than our phones, and that relates to the sharpness. But I am talking about the actual content quality is actually much higher definition, as it takes longer to buffer because of this aswell. I know the Android app is better overall vs IOS version.
I watch alot of HD [HQ on our phones] of car videos and such, and yes it bothers me that it is not the best it can.
Not anything worth whining about Would be cool if we had [3g/mobile] [HQ] and [HD] options.
This is XDA, maybe we can hack it lol
*Thanks for all the replies by the way
Duh, been too long since I dealt with SD... you are correct.
But as far as 'looks good', its subjective, and looking at my friends touch, I really dont think video is even close... text is awesome... but theres too many factors, such as were you using youtube apps, or the actual site? Really though, I guess it boils down that you really prefer resolution over color, clarity, etc of the samoleds.... But everyone has their preference, I still prefer my Barco 808s projector running 720p CRT at 120" over most 1080p TVs... But to be fair most TVs are crap...
hayabusa1300cc said:
I am not talking about the resolution of the screen. I realize the iphone/ipod have higher res than our phones, and that relates to the sharpness. But I am talking about the actual content quality is actually much higher definition, as it takes longer to buffer because of this aswell. I know the Android app is better overall vs IOS version.
I watch alot of HD [HQ on our phones] of car videos and such, and yes it bothers me that it is not the best it can.
Not anything worth whining about Would be cool if we had [3g/mobile] [HQ] and [HD] options.
This is XDA, maybe we can hack it lol
*Thanks for all the replies by the way
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I noticed that too,compared even to my old iphone 3gs I just watch youtube videos using Dolphin Hd browser with AdobeAir flash installed,quality is definetly better than on YouTube app.
What I'm more concerned with now is actually watching a youtube video and not watching 3 seconds of it, it skipping, and then having to start over because it fails to load completely
The old youtube app was horrible and would always do that but the new one has been awesome so far.
Yea that's true, the new is way better for reliability lol
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
download a program called tubemate from the market. its free.
when you use this app, you browse it just like you would youtube , but when you watch a video you have 2 options. watch or download. when you watch it steams in poor quality, however if you download you can play it back in HD. its pretty cool. you can even download 720p ( on 4g its pretty quick)
Hi guys, I see a lot of GB roms mentioning YouTubeHD, yet I can't seem to get it to work, I get the HQ button that's always been there, but not 720p, any ideas?
Well, mobile HQ isn't 720p either. I don't see why you would want 720p in the first place, your phone doesn't have that many lines?
StephanV said:
Well, mobile HQ isn't 720p either. I don't see why you would want 720p in the first place, your phone doesn't have that many lines?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm quite aware of both of those things, but it has been mentioned that YouTube works in hd for the HD2 running Gingerbread. And I know from my own testing that a 720p encoded movie looks a lot nicer on the HD2 than a 800x480 encoded movie.
Uhm I haven't heard of any of that, and Google doesn't hint anything in that direction either, I think you're confusing some stuff. A lot of roms support 720p playback, but not in Youtube.
720p in se doesn't look beter than a 480p video by the way, on the contrary. You don't see the lines your screen can't show, and actually this may even result in a slightly worse video because of it.
A well encoded 480p video is at least as good as a 720p video, problem is that a lot 480p conversions suck. But that's not because it's 480p, it's because of the conversion.
That's why I don't think we'll ever have 720p mobile video. It's just wasted bandwidth over a nicely encoded 480p.
Oh, and I think Youtube HD just refers to the revamped app. Not 100% sure though so don't quote me on that.
StephanV said:
Uhm I haven't heard of any of that, and Google doesn't hint anything in that direction either, I think you're confusing some stuff. A lot of roms support 720p playback, but not in Youtube.
720p in se doesn't look beter than a 480p video by the way, on the contrary. You don't see the lines your screen can't show, and actually this may even result in a slightly worse video because of it.
A well encoded 480p video is at least as good as a 720p video, problem is that a lot 480p conversions suck. But that's not because it's 480p, it's because of the conversion.
That's why I don't think we'll ever have 720p mobile video. It's just wasted bandwidth over a nicely encoded 480p.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Totally 100% agree. There would be more chance of performance issues with a downscaled 720 video on a 480 screen. It DOES NOT look better than a properly encoded 480 video. It is not physically possible for it to look better as your screen cannot show anything more than 480 pixels in each of the 800 columns. End of.
StephanV said:
Oh, and I think Youtube HD just refers to the revamped app. Not 100% sure though so don't quote me on that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm quoting you
Nah mate - it is the HD functionality in the "recent" update that gives it the name.
Damn Britts!
StephanV said:
Damn Britts!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
.
Why is this not available on the newest version of nexus line?
If you pick a other app, is then possible to record 1080p 60fps?
Send with the App Tapatalk
????
Send with the App Tapatalk
Hmmmm cant see anywhere the answer
Send with the App Tapatalk
Technically speaking the Snapdragon is capable of processing 1080 @ 120 FPS, however there may be either a hardware limit on the sub-processor of camera (haven't even looked if there was one). As far as I can see from the kernel source posted on AOSP there is a high media profile for [email protected] fps and [email protected], Theoretically you might be able to just create another entry in the profile to enable it.
Bump..
Send with the App Tapatalk
I'm very very interested to this discussion! The last nexus 6 was 100% capable of recording fullhd videos @60fps but Google disable that function and nobody know why, I was absolutely sure that in this nexus 6p that record mode would be present! There are no reason why it should be disabled, who cares if I can record a bird at 240fps (in slow motion), how many times somebody use this functions? One in a month?
How many instead make some (normal) videos? Maybe two/three times a week or even more and recording @ 60fps instead of 30fps is like day and night! Damn Google.
Why would you ever want to record 1080p videos @ 60fps? You would never be able to tell the difference from from 30fps. The human eye can only see about 42-45 fps. If you shoot a video at 60fps it is actually going to look unnatural. Most that shoot 60fps do so only because they intend to slow it down to 30fps in post production.
30fps is the standard and it is rare to shoot video at higher frame rates. In fact, shooting at 60fps would reduce your shutter speed requiring more light to get a quality video.
nonnasmyladie said:
Why would you ever want to record 1080p videos @ 60fps? You would never be able to tell the difference from from 30fps. The human eye can only see about 42-45 fps. If you shoot a video at 60fps it is actually going to look unnatural. Most that shoot 60fps do so only because they intend to slow it down to 30fps in post production.
30fps is the standard and it is rare to shoot video at higher frame rates. In fact, shooting at 60fps would reduce your shutter speed requiring more light to get a quality video.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because 60fps looks a lot better - obviously.
I don't know how you, or anybody can even come close to thinking the 30 frames per second is OK when you have the option of 120 and 240.
Have you never seen a YT video with 60fps!? Yeah... You're blind if you can't see the difference. It makes no sense for Google to have those very high frame rate options but still not have 60 frames per second at 1080p.
Also, no, you are wrong about people slowing down 60 frames per second video. You would slow down 120 or 240, yes, but nobody in their right mind would use 60 frames per second down to 30 in today's world. You would just use the 60 frames per second video because it looks a lot smoother.
You sound very ignorant in your post. Nearly all of what you said is bull****.
nonnasmyladie said:
Why would you ever want to record 1080p videos @ 60fps? You would never be able to tell the difference from from 30fps. The human eye can only see about 42-45 fps. If you shoot a video at 60fps it is actually going to look unnatural. Most that shoot 60fps do so only because they intend to slow it down to 30fps in post production.
30fps is the standard and it is rare to shoot video at higher frame rates. In fact, shooting at 60fps would reduce your shutter speed requiring more light to get a quality video.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know about your source, but the human eyes are seeing the world at arround 2000fps.
PS: you can clearly see the difference between 30vs60 and you can see a little difference at 120fps
I think that poster is either a troll or a moron - or has been reading console forums (because anyone with half a brain knows that what they said is a complete lie)
Me thinks they didn't read before spewing garbage. Shame really...
marcoruzza said:
I'm very very interested to this discussion! The last nexus 6 was 100% capable of recording fullhd videos @60fps but Google disable that function and nobody know why, I was absolutely sure that in this nexus 6p that record mode would be present! There are no reason why it should be disabled, who cares if I can record a bird at 240fps (in slow motion), how many times somebody use this functions? One in a month?
How many instead make some (normal) videos? Maybe two/three times a week or even more and recording @ 60fps instead of 30fps is like day and night! Damn Google.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
nonnasmyladie said:
Why would you ever want to record 1080p videos @ 60fps? You would never be able to tell the difference from from 30fps. The human eye can only see about 42-45 fps. If you shoot a video at 60fps it is actually going to look unnatural. Most that shoot 60fps do so only because they intend to slow it down to 30fps in post production.
30fps is the standard and it is rare to shoot video at higher frame rates. In fact, shooting at 60fps would reduce your shutter speed requiring more light to get a quality video.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
iRub1Out said:
Because 60fps looks a lot better - obviously.
I don't know how you, or anybody can even come close to thinking the 30 frames per second is OK when you have the option of 120 and 240.
Have you never seen a YT video with 60fps!? Yeah... You're blind if you can't see the difference. It makes no sense for Google to have those very high frame rate options but still not have 60 frames per second at 1080p.
Also, no, you are wrong about people slowing down 60 frames per second video. You would slow down 120 or 240, yes, but nobody in their right mind would use 60 frames per second down to 30 in today's world. You would just use the 60 frames per second video because it looks a lot smoother.
You sound very ignorant in your post. Nearly all of what you said is bull****.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
warplane95 said:
I don't know about your source, but the human eyes are seeing the world at arround 2000fps.
PS: you can clearly see the difference between 30vs60 and you can see a little difference at 120fps
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
iRub1Out said:
I think that poster is either a troll or a moron - or has been reading console forums (because anyone with half a brain knows that what they said is a complete lie)
Me thinks they didn't read before spewing garbage. Shame really...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can definitely say that I can see it. Between 30fps and 60fps. Soooo much smoother and crisp. If you look a sample on youtube. You only want 60 fps.
Send with the App Tapatalk
The human eye does not "view" at around 2000fps, it doesn't actually see in any fps while viewing the natural world. The human eye sees things live, as in ~fps. Those of us with good eyesight can definitely see the screen refresh on lower rates like 60fps. My TV is 1080p hd @ 50hz (which is not fps) & its gotten so painful to watch it, that I am considering a new TV. When you watch a 60fps video on a 50hz TV, the refresh rate & the frames of the video don't coincide & make the experience jumpy. 30fps looks better because the fps is slower than the refresh rate.
On our 2k phone screens however 30fps looks jumpy because the resolution is higher & our eyes are trying to view it in the same manner as we view the natural world.
iRub1Out said:
I think that poster is either a troll or a moron - or has been reading console forums (because anyone with half a brain knows that what they said is a complete lie)
Me thinks they didn't read before spewing garbage. Shame really...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I actually studied photography and film extensively in college as it was my major. It is true that 30fps is standard and 60fps would look awkward. There are some human eyes that notice changes up to 200fps but those are basically jet pilots, the exception not the rule. No human eye would be able to notice 2,000 fps. That is not possible. Lastly, set your camera to 240 fps and see how everything gets darker. That isn't a lie. It is a fact that high frame rates will result in darker, noiser videos because they require more light.
60 fps is not a good speed to shoot at. Especially in a sensor without IS. You will get more jitter in your video. I produce video for a living, as In it is my job and I do it daily. You dont EVER record in 60 fps unless you are capturing very fast action or are intending to slow it down. And when you record in 60 FPS, you always export it at 30 fps or 25 fps from Premier pro of Final cut, whatever you use.
All I know is that on my Note 4, I only record at 60fps 1080p and wow does it ever look better then anything I've ever recorded in 30fps.
Delete.
Photography and videography are not the same.
60fps is better than 30fps for any and all reason regardless of whatever you think you know - nobody agrees with you if they've seen 60fps video. It's day and night, and if you read anything from YT users, gamers, normal humans, they all say 60fps is better - in any scenario.
Back on point, however, still mind blown that this wasn't included with the camera.
I use Premier Pro and After Effects, and 60fps is my only export option - I wouldn't even consider lower unless it was SHOT lower, but never is. Look at my YT page. Nothing under 60fps once I had my hands on a camera capable of 60fps. I practice what I preach.
I would NEVER shoot 60 fps video with an intention to slow it down, that's stupid - that's what 120/240fps are for - those are to be slowed down.
60 fps is for normal viewing speed - anything higher is OK to slow down, but 60 down to 30 - no thanks. That's just a waste of good 60fps footage.
Any one tried snap camera on N6P yet? http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2055140
nonnasmyladie said:
Why would you ever want to record 1080p videos @ 60fps? You would never be able to tell the difference from from 30fps. The human eye can only see about 42-45 fps. If you shoot a video at 60fps it is actually going to look unnatural. Most that shoot 60fps do so only because they intend to slow it down to 30fps in post production.
30fps is the standard and it is rare to shoot video at higher frame rates. In fact, shooting at 60fps would reduce your shutter speed requiring more light to get a quality video.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure if you were being sarcastic or not , but I can tell you 100% that a human eye can see beyond whatever you have stated. I game on a 144hz monitor , and yes I could tell and feel the difference between 30/60/144.
Back on topic , I found it very weird already when the Galaxy s6/note 5 with the fast processor not being able to record in 240fps . Also , I've noticed slow motion inconsistencies regarding the 6p's 240fps , some youtube videos look buttery smooth , some looks like some slideshow. No idea what's causing this , any thoughts?
nonnasmyladie said:
I actually studied photography and film extensively in college as it was my major. It is true that 30fps is standard and 60fps would look awkward. There are some human eyes that notice changes up to 200fps but those are basically jet pilots, the exception not the rule. No human eye would be able to notice 2,000 fps. That is not possible. Lastly, set your camera to 240 fps and see how everything gets darker. That isn't a lie. It is a fact that high frame rates will result in darker, noiser videos because they require more light.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't assume what others would find awkward. Guessing a lot like it since Google allows those to see it on Youtube. Even besides that, you say you can't see it or its "awkward". Okay. Me and plenty of others like it and can see the difference. Videos are not dark looking when I record ALL my videos with my iPhone.
Sad to see Google didn't include this with this latest Nexus device.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk