Photo Zooming Flaw? - Venue Pro General

I am a photographer and purchased the DVP for the nice AMOLED screen to showoff my work but have discovered what might be either a DVP or WP7 flaw when zooming in on photos.
I have a couple of shots of Chicago lights from 10,000' at night and the picture is razor sharp and looked fantastic on my HD2 at any zoom level. I have the same file synced on the DVP as an original quality file and it looks good at the default zoom level but even the smallest amount of zoom causes it to be come quite blurry and remains so at all zoom levels. All detail of the city lights disappears with zoom. I have looked at all my photos whether from local synced or "cloud" files.
Anyone else notice this anomaly?
Also, the camera "lens" that is part of the back cover looks like it is just a dust/dirt guard that is made of cheap plastic that is an optical disaster. I will put it through some tests and see if it might be better to just remove it or replace it with super thin glass disk.

jetjockgordo said:
I am a photographer and purchased the DVP for the nice AMOLED screen to showoff my work but have discovered what might be either a DVP or WP7 flaw when zooming in on photos.
I have a couple of shots of Chicago lights from 10,000' at night and the picture is razor sharp and looked fantastic on my HD2 at any zoom level. I have the same file synced on the DVP as an original quality file and it looks good at the default zoom level but even the smallest amount of zoom causes it to be come quite blurry and remains so at all zoom levels. All detail of the city lights disappears with zoom. I have looked at all my photos whether from local synced or "cloud" files.
Anyone else notice this anomaly?
Also, the camera "lens" that is part of the back cover looks like it is just a dust/dirt guard that is made of cheap plastic that is an optical disaster. I will put it through some tests and see if it might be better to just remove it or replace it with super thin glass disk.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No flaw....but a by design scenario. Go back and read up about WP7, pictures and the cloud. You'll see the problem.

alodar1 said:
No flaw....but a by design scenario. Go back and read up about WP7, pictures and the cloud. You'll see the problem.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, with all due respect, I have been reading pretty much everything about the DVP and WP7 but have not seen any article or discussion that addresses a photo zooming problem. I do understand that some may think the AMOLED screen lacks sufficient resolution but that would not explain why a photo is sharper zoomed out rather than zoomed in. It also does not seem to to matter if a photo file is located locally or remotely.
Do you have any references to where the problem is discussed?

Related

Camera Fix for the HD

I searched for a camera fix for the HD camera with no success. Does anyone know if there's going to be a fix in the near future? I'm sure that ya'll have the same problem that I do. Camera takes pictures that look old & rustic. Brownish tint to them & not very sharp for a 5 MP camera. I have adjusted all the settings for light & junk but nothing fixes it. As far as I'm concerned, it should take pictures IDENTICAL to a normal 5 MP digital camera. I can promise you that it's not doing that. Any help would be great, thanks in advance.
Vampire2800 said:
I searched for a camera fix for the HD camera with no success. Does anyone know if there's going to be a fix in the near future? I'm sure that ya'll have the same problem that I do. Camera takes pictures that look old & rustic. Brownish tint to them & not very sharp for a 5 MP camera. I have adjusted all the settings for light & junk but nothing fixes it. As far as I'm concerned, it should take pictures IDENTICAL to a normal 5 MP digital camera. I can promise you that it's not doing that. Any help would be great, thanks in advance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why should it take pictures identical to a 5MP camera. The lens on the front is going to be vastly different, the sensor maybe 5MP, but what is the spacing on the sensor pixels? The closer together, the noisier the image. Colour balance will be down to the sensor too.
Regards
I'm not talking about the front camera. The normal camera on the back. I understand about the pixel thing, but it still shouldn't be so brownish, right? The pictures look like an old Polaroid picture. You know, the one's that spit the picture out as soon as you took it. Old, brown & nasty looking.
My pictures come out fine...
Hmmmmmmm...................... I'll just keep playing with it.
Vampire2800 said:
I'm not talking about the front camera. The normal camera on the back. I understand about the pixel thing, but it still shouldn't be so brownish, right? The pictures look like an old Polaroid picture. You know, the one's that spit the picture out as soon as you took it. Old, brown & nasty looking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not being flippant, but is it possible you might have a dirty lens?
Lol, that was the first thing I tried. Cleaned both sides of the back cover & cleaned the lens on the camera. Good idea, though.
The "5mp" doesn't really mean much, as stated earlier, if the sensor and lens are poor quality. As far as I know, HTC haven't released a phone with a reasonable quality camera, yet.
I bounce between different smart-phones (just coming back to WM now, after a year with S60). I can say that many of the S60 devices (in particular the Nokia N95, but also the N82 with Xenon flash) have very good cameras, being similar to low-end digital cameras in daylight. They lack optical zoom and tend to over-compress images, but have good quality lenses.
imho hd camera is excelent
pictures look old & rustic only if you make them inside house without using the artificial light setting, and this is also a general rule, not specific to HD.
Never seen a good phone camera yet, including the latest 8mpixel ones. They're all terrible.
Never
This camera will NEVER take pictures anywhere near what real cameras do. The photo sites are so tiny, they are smaller then the length of waive of light. Therefore noise, lack of dynamic width, etc. No patch will ever fix that. Sorry
open back cover , clean the lens , you will see a huge difference in quality
Vampire2800 said:
Lol, that was the first thing I tried. Cleaned both sides of the back cover & cleaned the lens on the camera. Good idea, though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not that I'm doubting you or anything but you do realize that the back cover only has a hole through to the lens?
You might try setting the brightness higher:
If you touch the small rectangle near the bottom right side of the screen (when holding landscape)
Then select the gear symbol, then select brightness from the menu and hit the "+" until it looks better that will remove most of the darkness.
The camera is a plain disappointment. In the time the camera autofocusses, I could have bought a Sony Ericsson C905's, create a good looking photo (with xenon flash) and upload it to imageshack.
If 'your object' makes the slightest move, your photo will be blurry . This is also the case when you attempt to make a photo of someone that isn't aware he or she has to be waiting for the autofocus lag. Head moves >>> blurry pic.
iPhone camera shots are way better quality, don't ask me why. Overall my Touch HD scores 8/10, where atleast 1 full point is taken up by the camera
and it's better don't speak about the very laggy video recording
mach03 said:
iPhone camera shots are way better quality, don't ask me why.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Too many megapixels on a tiny sensor = major noise problem = blurring from denoise.
Even 2mpixels is too much for sensors this size, but people buy on marketing numbers of megapixels, not quality. You can just imagine the whining that would occur if the Touch HD came out with 1.3mpxiels, even though it would produce better pictures.
arfster said:
Too many megapixels on a tiny sensor = major noise problem = blurring from denoise.
Even 2mpixels is too much for sensors this size, but people buy on marketing numbers of megapixels, not quality. You can just imagine the whining that would occur if the Touch HD came out with 1.3mpxiels, even though it would produce better pictures.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hehe, thats true.
mpixels dont count as much as the general public belives. the more mpix. the higher rezolution you can print the picture in. but for ordinary photos, 1.3 mpix would be enough, as long as the optics is good.
Personally, I rarely use a phone camera.
I use either my Olympus 720SW or Canon EOS.
​
the camera sucks **** compared to the n95 and the video recording is horrid. i know it's not meant to be as good as a dedicated camera but this is pretty bad given the price of the device.
i concur with mach03, move the camera a slight bit and eveyrthing gets blurred. one way i've semi gotten aorund this is to unlock the burst functiona nd take a sequence of pics and hope one or two coems out alright, not the most economic way to do it though...
i would ahve thought that maybe there's a way to tweak the camera to stop the blurring or even affect how much light is picked up by the lens which should also help with clarity
Vampire2800 said:
I'm not talking about the front camera. The normal camera on the back. I understand about the pixel thing, but it still shouldn't be so brownish, right? The pictures look like an old Polaroid picture. You know, the one's that spit the picture out as soon as you took it. Old, brown & nasty looking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A silly idea, but seriously, did you check if maybe, just maybe, you left the "sepia" effect turned on???

Noise in pictures

I'm wanting to find out if the noise in some of the photos i've taken is normal for the HD2
I expect noise in a camera like this, it's just the nature of having such a small high mega pixel count sensor, I just wanted to find out if what im experiencing is normal. I've got a week left on my 14 days and would like to exchange it if it's not normal
This is probably the worst of them all that I did lastnight
http://twitpic.com/1cs2cl/full Look at the banding noise at the bottom of the frame.
http://twitpic.com/1cs4lj/full This one has some too, but not as bad as the other
http://twitpic.com/1cs50y/full This one looks like it may be a optics problem, look at the red halo around the sykes sign. the 1st time i took the pic i though maybe there was a smudge on the lens so i wiped it and still had the same result
Perfectly normal.
You're taking pictures at night and even standalone digital cameras would struggle to take a decent picture in those conditions.
The Camera will be ramping up the ISO which increases the noise anyway (and as you pointed out coupled to a small sensor just isnt great), the only way to take a decent picture with noise that isnt noticable is to use a tripod, a very small aperture and a very long shutter.
This, being a phone, doesn't have the luxury of that kind of control.
Just take pictures during the day and they are decent enough.
i get it too, including the exceptionally bright flash that usually washes out most photos, just have to live with it im afraid, or fiddle with camera settings, see what happens, but you'd have to constantly change them between night and day....
Thanks, Yeah i expected the noise in pics from the phone. Just the banding was concerning me a little bit.
It actually does pretty good at night in certain situations, there are more pics on my twitpic account from last night that came out ok, very little noise, though a bit more blur. im guessing it probably picked a lower ISO for those.
ieilisuk said:
Just take pictures during the day and they are decent enough.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have to agree, the camera on the HD2 is outstanding in the daylight, nearly rivals the Sony T33 that ive carried around for a long time for quick snapshots. I just wish they could put a small optical zoom on the camera, even something as small as the 3x optical zoom im used to the with T33. im sure that's asking a bit much with the space constraints within a phone. Im still happy none the less.
The camera in my old Wizard was worthless, i barely ever used it. It was passable outside on a bright day, useless under normal indoor lighting conditions or darker.
Found myself in several situations where i wanted to take a pic but didn't have the T33 on me. HD2 = problem solved =)
I just noticed that there is a TMO USA HD2 specific forum. Since this is about a TMO USA HD2 could one of the mods move this thread over there? Like to see what kind of response i get from other USA version users

HTC HD2 vs EOS 400D

just a small comparison between a professional camera and HD2's camera.What do you think? ( only cropped for same resolution, no color correction or anything)
HTC
EOS 400D
__________________________________________________________
HTC
EOS 400D
__________________________________________________________
HTC
EOS 400D
__________________________________________________________
HTC
EOS 400D
__________________________________________________________
Apart from the awfully wrong white correction, the HD2 isn't shooting the worst pics outthere, it seems.
With much light the camera is good enough for snapshots.
I think the EOS400D body needs to be sent back to Cannon and have the sensor cleaned and calibrated. And the lens needs to be cleaned.
the pics with the HD2 seem warmer on the flower and china doll. But the pics of the building and sign, are not that good. The 400D looks a lot better (except the depth of field, were the HD2 is sharper).
I have been playing with my camera a bit, and I cant get rid of the pink spot. I installed the update, and it made it better. But I still have a very noticable pink halo around 90% of my pics.
Detail on the HD2 is good once resized to 800pix wide or so, perfectly good for web use but not much more. And yes, the color balance is very often completely off, usually skewed to magenta...
+1 on your EOS being faulty, shot one is ok but shot 2 looks problematic
wolfee said:
I think the EOS400D body needs to be sent back to Cannon and have the sensor cleaned and calibrated. And the lens needs to be cleaned.
the pics with the HD2 seem warmer on the flower and china doll. But the pics of the building and sign, are not that good. The 400D looks a lot better (except the depth of field, were the HD2 is sharper).
I have been playing with my camera a bit, and I cant get rid of the pink spot. I installed the update, and it made it better. But I still have a very noticable pink halo around 90% of my pics.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
stoolzo said:
+1 on your EOS being faulty, shot one is ok but shot 2 looks problematic
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i m not a pro photographer. how do you understand that my eos is faulty or un-calibrated? is it that bad? can you help me a little?what should i do?
The EOS is all good to me, just a couple tiny dust spots visible on photo 3, but nothing else...
The colors can seem "wrong" next to the HD2's ones... but it's the HD2 being wrong
I cant see anything wrong with your eos tbh. The eos out does the hd2 in every picture except i think the last one. The difference I can barely notice. The first picture especially you can see how the eos brings out the purple in the center of the flower. It is crisp and has a more vibrant colour. Also the hd2 white on the flower is not very clear.
However we are talking a pro camera and a phone and I think for snap shots my hd2 is the best phone camera i have ever had. Especially in the dark in a pub etc as that flash is blinding!! If i wanna take landscapes i'll crack out the T90 or the fuji finepix.
EDIT After looking again at the last picture i think i prefer the hd2's. I can see what kilrah means about magenta as the blues in the hd2 version of the last image is slightly more vibrant. If you look at the sign on the building in the background ( the long thin one with the white writing) i think the blue is nicer than that of the eos. Thats not to say that the eos hasn't actually captured the correct colour but the hd2 colour is nicer.
I'm all for HD2 pictures, but let's be honest here, you should learn how to take better pictures with the 400D. In capable hands, there's no way you can compete a DSLR vs a puny smartphone with a static lens.
totally uneven comparison
I own both, and of course in "tailored" shots you can notice only what appear to be bare differences (Except the horrible pink staining effect which is visible everywhere even if background colours may tend to cover for it), yet in "daily life" shots you cannot actually make much out of it... also remember HD2 has a complete unalterable assembly, while much of the eos 400d power comes from the lens that you mount on it, and I am not really comfortable at all to compare my 18-200 OS sigma lens to the plastic on the HD2
If I need to shoot items I want to sell online, I always do it with my HD2, or even if I need to get quick shots of things where the main thing is to "get the idea", but I would never fathom to use the HD2 in a real shooting situation... like when I'm on vacation. I would simply lose every pleasure in shooting if I had to do it with a phone camera.
lude219 said:
I'm all for HD2 pictures, but let's be honest here, you should learn how to take better pictures with the 400D. In capable hands, there's no way you can compete a DSLR vs a puny smartphone with a static lens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i didnt try to take good or stylish pictures.only took daily shots in a hurry, no manual settings or photoshop corrections.other way of course canon will shot much better pics. but i wanted to show that hd2 is also pretty good
Except photos 1 (flower) all pics from the HD2 are better than from Eos, more crispy-sharp, more depth, more details
... but this is only my personal sunbjective impression, I´m no prof. photographer though
troed said:
Except photos 1 (flower) all pics from the HD2 are better than from Eos, more crispy-sharp, more depth, more details
... but this is only my personal sunbjective impression, I´m no prof. photographer though
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you're missing the pink that stains everything in the center of the viewport
Also, if I had to define detail, I'd say hd2 shots, when zoomed in, show a very, very "washed out" aspect all over the area, while zooming in all the way shots by the 400d you can only see the normal amount of moiree
its an interesting comparison, maybe we should leave it there as it doesn't really mean anything beyond showing the HD2 pics arent too bad at all - which we already new
I have the hobby of photography.
All pictures from canon are a lot better than htc, and it's normal.
The canon sensor it A LOT bigger than a phone sensor.
You can notice that the canon pics are sharper, have a better exposure, a better white balance, a smoother out of focus, are less grainy. In some you have the impression that are crispier, but it's due to oversharpening (and if you like would be easy to obtain in pp on the canon shots)
About the depth of field, due to the smaller sensor of the htc (the smaller the sensor the deeper the depth of field), in most shots everything is in focus. But in photography this is a flaw. If, for example, I shot a portrait, I would prefer to have the face in focus, and all the rest out of focus.
On the other hand, on a reflex, you can choose the depth of field you prefer opening or closing the diaphragm
There are new sensor on the way and I'm sure that in future quality of our phones will be more and more similar to quality of point and shot cameras,
but will never reach the quality of reflex for the lack of BIG, HEAVY, good lenses.
Stop criticising the guys photographic skills with his EOS. All he was trying to do is compare an image from the HD2, with an image from a dedication digital camera, to show that the HD2 isn't all that bad. And people jump in expecting him to take photographs like Edward Weston. Give the man a break!
On topic: Nice comparison. Good to see that compared with a proper digital camera, the HD2 is still pretty good.
can you share your camera settings in hd2?
brightnes
iso
white balance
image properity
flicker adj.
thank you
HD2 has a bit of a magenta cast.
On the other hand, this shows how good the HD2 camera is.
HTC has come a long way from the 1Mb and 2Mb shooters that came with the BlueAngel and Prophet. HD2's photos now gets compared to that of an SLR.
Buy a decent camera, and also buy a decent PDA/smartphone. End of story.
There are so many *freakin* experts here.
madindehead said:
Stop criticising the guys photographic skills with his EOS. All he was trying to do is compare an image from the HD2, with an image from a dedication digital camera, to show that the HD2 isn't all that bad. And people jump in expecting him to take photographs like Edward Weston. Give the man a break!
On topic: Nice comparison. Good to see that compared with a proper digital camera, the HD2 is still pretty good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks dude you understand me

Are there apps that take better photos and videos than the stock Camera app?

Hi, I don't know how various settings affect the results. However, I wish to be able to take excellent photos and videos under different conditions. Are there any good apps that take better photos and videos than the stock Camera App? I am using GB. Thanks
+1
Or 1up
Might be dependant on hardware cause of varying quality pics
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
what is wrong with pictures taken by the stock camera app? can you provide some example of a 'bad picture'?.
if you want an interface that is more DSLR like try https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.flavionet.android.camera.lite
here are some of my pics, i dont feel that they are of bad quality for a 'phone camera'.
http://www.flugbaerchen.de/lnkimg/egypt12/20120506_164915.jpg
http://www.flugbaerchen.de/lnkimg/egypt12/20120525_151334.jpg
http://www.flugbaerchen.de/lnkimg/egypt12/20120506_191654.jpg
I am happy with the stock camera.. Many features too
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
Perhaps it is better to talk about this via samples.
Any suggestion on better camera settings is appreciated.
I guess I may need an app that stores a set of preset settings
for taking photos/videos under different environments. Thanks.
In photo 1, I do not know why the ceiling lights are like that.
I changed various settings but there was no improvement.
In some cases, the overall color of the room changed.
In photo 2, the room appeared to be dark but it was not.
I changed the flash to auto, on along with changing other
settings. The room still appeared to be dark.
In photo 3, again, that place was not dark. Setting the flash
to auto or on did not help.
In photo 4, everything including the room appears to be somewhat yellowish.
In reality, the wall is white and the pillows are gray.
madbird said:
what is wrong with pictures taken by the stock camera app? can you provide some example of a 'bad picture'?.
if you want an interface that is more DSLR like try https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.flavionet.android.camera.lite
here are some of my pics, i dont fell that the are of bad quality for a 'phone camera'.
http://www.flugbaerchen.de/lnkimg/egypt12/20120506_164915.jpg
http://www.flugbaerchen.de/lnkimg/egypt12/20120525_151334.jpg
http://www.flugbaerchen.de/lnkimg/egypt12/20120506_191654.jpg
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the suggestion but I am not a professional. I don't know how various settings affect the results. By the time I have tested out various settings, things that I want to capture will have been gone.
ah now things are getting clearer . your pictures looks a little bit like something is wrong with the 'white balance' of your camera. so you can try different settings for the white balance, the default should be automatic (AWB). I'm not an photoexpert too, but maybe some one else can guide you further with this.
Thanks for pointing this out. I also tried white balance but it did not help. Perhaps I did not do it properly. Hoping somebody could provide some tips. Are the strong glares from the ceiling lights in photo 1 also caused by the white balance?
hajime_android said:
In photo 1, I do not know why the ceiling lights are like that.
I changed various settings but there was no improvement.
In some cases, the overall color of the room changed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This effect on the ceiling lights is due to a hardware fault, there are no settings within the phone that can correct this. You can try, like me, and use photoshop. For me, its no problem because I have used photoshop for many years, but others are not so fortunate. This fault is well documented. Samsung know about it, yet have done nothing to correct it. The only way is to send the unit back to the retailer for a new unit. I tried three or four brand new units and they were all the same.
In general. The camera has limitations because of its size and proximity to other circuitry that may introduce noise etc. Its 8megapix with a tiny lens, so as is, I feel it does a pretty good job (apart from that pink dot that is). To get better pictures, consider post processing with photoshop. If that's not an option, and quite frankly I would not recommend purchasing it just for pics from any camphone, try the GIMP, its free and does an awful lot to enhance your pics. You can find the GIMP here www.gimp.org it will run on linux, windows and the Mac
Hope that helps
So, getting something like Camera ZOOM FX won't help.
hajime_android said:
So, getting something like Camera ZOOM FX won't help.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope. sorry about that.
bigstarrynight said:
This effect on the ceiling lights is due to a hardware fault, there are no settings within the phone that can correct this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is there a name for this hardware fault? Does the S3 has this problem as well?
hajime_android said:
Is there a name for this hardware fault? Does the S3 has this problem as well?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good question. I know the S2 does, and we all know about the Galaxy Note. I can see evidence of the problem on a slashgear.com presentation, and its that presentation that stopped me from going over to the S3. However, there are plenty of youtube tests where it seems pretty good. The S3 has only just been released, so it might be a while more before any issues become apparent. I think its one where you try before you buy. Personally, I'm not touching either the S3 or the 'Note until I have proof that the issue has been resolved.
Edit. The fault is commonly known as "the pink dot"
In photo 1 was the lens clean? Might sound obvious but even the slightest bit of grease or diet can affect how sources of light spear in photos. Typically in any photo I take where I light bulb or something similar is in the picture if the lens was not completely clean I got a similar effect as in photo 1
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
spfraggle said:
In photo 1 was the lens clean? Might sound obvious but even the slightest bit of grease or diet can affect how sources of light spear in photos. Typically in any photo I take where I light bulb or something similar is in the picture if the lens was not completely clean I got a similar effect as in photo 1
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, there must be a lot of pink dirt around. My crappy clam phone must have pink dirt repellent, because no matter how greasy the lens gets, pics from it don't have a pink dot. Neither does my DSLR when the uv filter gets filthy, or my specs come to that. Sorry, but the dirt bit on this issue is a red herring. The camera has a defect.
I use UCam. A lot of "pro" settings and also some cool. And... you can disable shutter sound.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
i think you should send the device to service/repair, because i think this is an hardware issue. i saw a lot of pictures taken by the note (not only my own device) and they are al just fine with the standard settings.
I just noticed that there is a protective film covering the back camera. Probably Samsung put it there to protect the lens. Do you think this is the cause to all of my problems? Am I supposed to remove it? For the first few days after purchase (3 weeks ago), the Note took excellent photos. As for last week and the week before that, it depends. The thin protective film has been there right from the beginning. Let's say the protective film covering the lens caused the pink dot, how do you explain why the cafe in photos 2 and 3 appeared to be dark whereas in reality, it was not. Also, photo 4 looks yellowish overall.
Hi,
Protective film would most likely create the effect on pic one. (which would be visible when a direct light source or reflection is in the frame.)
Pic two - could be a metering issue. Try changing the (cog wheel =>) metering setting and / or exposure level.
Yellowish photo is the result of incorrect "white balance". Change the white balance setting to incandescent.
I'm using both the stock ICS camera and camera zoom fx. On my previous phone the fx produced much better photos than the stock one. On my G - Note I don't see much difference.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using XDA
hajime_android said:
I just noticed that there is a protective film covering the back camera. Probably Samsung put it there to protect the lens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes you are supposed to remove it. It does say so in the instructions that came with your phone. Check the camera after you have done this.

camera video quality

I took a couple of videos and the quality to me just isn't that great. This is with the UHD setting. Just isn't that clear for UHD.
I agree I had lots of noise/grain in mine. FHD60 seems a bit cleaner
This is a pic zoomed in half way. Looks awful. I bought this phone because the camera was supposed to be unreal. Is this normal or just maybe I have a bad cam?
Shot some video in a dark bar venue of a band playing. Using the main lens and manual settings, it turned out really well. The wide angle left a bit to be desired as shot but I think I have an idea for that lens. Shot with 1080 at 30fps high bit rate. Posted it in another thread over the weekend.
And at full zoom
Shot at 1080 30...
anth75 said:
Shot at 1080 30...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looks as though you may have a dirty lens.
The light in the room is a give away of grease or finger prints across lens. As the ceiling light starts to chase across your shot.
Same thing can cause grainy pictures. As it effects even a camera shot the same way.
Always try cleaning the lens if the shot seems to be poor.
shwnr11 said:
Looks as though you may have a dirty lens.
The light in the room is a give away of grease or finger prints across lens. As the ceiling light starts to chase across your shot.
Same thing can cause grainy pictures. As it effects even a camera shot the same way.
Always try cleaning the lens if the shot seems to be poor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've tried to clean the lens, no luck. Do u think it's the phone itself?
Did you set to record in high bit rate?
Personally, I think the camera, both video and still, is the weakest part of the phone. I am not happy with that, but will live with it until the Note 8 comes out.
And you removed protector of the camera lens?
anth75 said:
Shot at 1080 30...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What other settings did you use? (ISO, Shutter Speed, Bit Rate, Filters?)
I will say that it looks like you're using the digital zoom, which is always problem #1. Never use digital zoom unless you have to do so. Whoever came up with this gimmick should be dragged out into the street and hung. It just doesn't get you anything but a mess. Optical zoom is optimal. Bipedal zoom is your secondary option. Digital zoom just shouldn't be an option. It is quite literally the option you choose when you want to have some sort of shot, any shot, and you don't care about the quality of the shot. This goes for any device from a cellphone up to a DSLR.
---------- Post added at 12:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:21 PM ----------
This was shot in a very dark bar venue with mediocre stage lighting. (Strike one against getting decent footage.) ISO 3200 (Another strike against any decent footage as you're maxing out the gain on the sensor.) 1080 at 30fps so I used a shutter speed of 1/60. I used the high bit rate setting. The refocusing is me touching the screen as I couldn't tell if I had good focus since it was dark and my eyes kinda suck these days without readers. I was playing with the audio settings and had no idea how to set it for a concert so I cheated and used approximately what I found for concert settings in the HD recorder app.
Considering the conditions..... the V20 did extremely well! I could pick things out in the audio that I couldn't live in person. In person, it was just a wall of sound sometimes. The video turned out amazing for being a tiny camera sensor. The only real thing I can knock the V20 on is the video stabilization. There needs to be settings somewhere so I can turn the OIS and EIS off and on so I know if it is on or off.
Are you using the stock cam app? I don't see anything where I can change the zoom type.
anth75 said:
Are you using the stock cam app? I don't see anything where I can change the zoom type.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup, stock camera app. There is no setting for changing the zoom type. If you aren't clicking the one tree/three tree buttons, then you are going through a digital zoom. Only clicking those two buttons uses purely "optical zoom" although in reality, you're just completely switching cameras. (Different sensors and different lenses which presents its own issues since the wider view uses a smaller sensor and smaller aperture while the main shooter uses a "larger" sensor and larger aperture.)
Using pinch to zoom or the zoom slider means you're going through digital zoom. So if you start at the widest setting with the wide view and start zooming, the image quality is only going to get worse until you pop over into the main imaging group. Then if you continue to zoom, the image quality will degrade again. The best quality you're ever going to get out of any single focal length imaging assembly (which is what we're technically dealing with here, two single focal length imaging assemblies) is at its native focal magnification and at its base ISO. Which the photo options says is 50 but that's not always necessarily true, I'd have to look up the native sensor ISO online to be sure.
Did an unprocessed and processed test with my v20. By far the best dynamic range of any phone camera I've worked with.
---------- Post added at 01:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:07 PM ----------
CHH2 said:
What other settings did you use? (ISO, Shutter Speed, Bit Rate, Filters?)
I will say that it looks like you're using the digital zoom, which is always problem #1. Never use digital zoom unless you have to do so. Whoever came up with this gimmick should be dragged out into the street and hung. It just doesn't get you anything but a mess. Optical zoom is optimal. Bipedal zoom is your secondary option. Digital zoom just shouldn't be an option. It is quite literally the option you choose when you want to have some sort of shot, any shot, and you don't care about the quality of the shot. This goes for any device from a cellphone up to a DSLR.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The only positive thing I found about the digital zoom on the v20 which is unique in my experience is that when you're shooting 1080p on other phones, even though it's a 4k sensor it zooms up on the post sampled 1080p frame instead of taking advantage of the 4k sensor and zooming up without any quality loss. The V20 appears to do just that and up to a point there's no fidelity loss with the digital zoom because you're sampling a smaller section of the sensor..
vargala81 said:
And you removed protector of the camera lens?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't remove that. It helps protect the glass from scratches and shatter.
anth75 said:
This is a pic zoomed in half way. Looks awful. I bought this phone because the camera was supposed to be unreal. Is this normal or just maybe I have a bad cam?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you gain any insight to help fix your grainy pic issues? I'm having the same problem. I keep seeing people suggest to remove the plastic protector but it has cutouts for the lenses and the sensors so I don't see how that makes a difference. I'm taking pictures without any zooming but when I take a look at the results and zoom in to different parts to review, it looks horrible and grainy.
arn82 said:
Did you gain any insight to help fix your grainy pic issues? I'm having the same problem. I keep seeing people suggest to remove the plastic protector but it has cutouts for the lenses and the sensors so I don't see how that makes a difference. I'm taking pictures without any zooming but when I take a look at the results and zoom in to different parts to review, it looks horrible and grainy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What is your photo size set at? 16mp or 12mp?
arn82 said:
Did you gain any insight to help fix your grainy pic issues? I'm having the same problem. I keep seeing people suggest to remove the plastic protector but it has cutouts for the lenses and the sensors so I don't see how that makes a difference. I'm taking pictures without any zooming but when I take a look at the results and zoom in to different parts to review, it looks horrible and grainy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I haven't. I wouldnt take the plastic off. As you said, it has cutouts for the lens. Not impressed at all with the camera
I'm amazed at your low light video. I also thought the camera was the weak point of the phone. Guess I need to work on my manual focus skills.
Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

Categories

Resources