I decided to take a vacation from my GSII and decided too give the DVP a try and wow! is a gorgeous unique phone. I bought this device for cheap and my expectations weren't high at all. First thing I notice the great looks of the DVP have then the screen quality blew me away, I was expecting a screen like the HD2 or HD7 but is great nothing like Super Amoled Plus but its still better than the first HTC Windows phones. Where the DVP fell short or more like flat on its face was the camera, the camera is just a hit and miss. Too bad the DVP will just be another good phone murder by such a bad launch I hope MS keep supporting this device.
That sounds about right as:
SAMOLED+: SGSII
AMOLED: V/VP
S/LCD: HD2/7, Streak5
I can attest that even if it isnt a SAMOLED+, it's still nicer then S/LCD.
Wish it was SAMOLED though, even without the + the difference between a bonded display/glass and unbonded is pretty noticable.
Esp if you end up getting dust under the screen
Dell doesnt need MS to help them screw up launches, they already hold the record for that. (it's every single launch, or at worst all but one launch screwed up)
The camera is due to it being a WP7 device? The V has a 8MP cam and the VP has a 5MP cam (though I cant speak for the actual image quality on each), dell wouldnt randomly downgrade the camera without reason.
TheManii said:
That sounds about right as:
SAMOLED+: SGSII
AMOLED: V/VP
S/LCD: HD2/7, Streak5
I can attest that even if it isnt a SAMOLED+, it's still nicer then S/LCD.
Wish it was SAMOLED though, even without the + the difference between a bonded display/glass and unbonded is pretty noticable.
Esp if you end up getting dust under the screen
Dell doesnt need MS to help them screw up launches, they already hold the record for that. (it's every single launch, or at worst all but one launch screwed up)
The camera is due to it being a WP7 device? The V has a 8MP cam and the VP has a 5MP cam (though I cant speak for the actual image quality on each), dell wouldnt randomly downgrade the camera without reason.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree the camera issue is all software not hardware if you look at the reviews of the Nokia N9 and the Lumia 800 or 900 the pictures come out more washout and the N9s pictures come out better with the same carl zeiss lens. Yeah this device was the most wanted of all windows devices and dell delayed the launch people were getting testing devices bugs and device issues more delays and the list goes on. I hope the designers of the DVP get another shot maybe in another company.
josemedina1983 said:
I agree the camera issue is all software not hardware if you look at the reviews of the Nokia N9 and the Lumia 800 or 900 the pictures come out more washout and the N9s pictures come out better with the same carl zeiss lens. Yeah this device was the most wanted of all windows devices and dell delayed the launch people were getting testing devices bugs and device issues more delays and the list goes on. I hope the designers of the DVP get another shot maybe in another company.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HTC didn't seem to have any problems with the software and produced good cameras in the Titan and Radar. The crappy camera is all Dell.
I think he misunderstood me, I believe the camera issue is mostly hardware.
I dont recall what the WP7 specs are for cameras (besides having a rear one),
WP7 is really anal about chassis requirements, they had to use a specific sensor for the camera?
The VP has a 'worse' cam then the V regardless and dell devices in general have ok at best rear cams.
My old iphone 3g had a better camera, but it was intentionally limited by both hardware and software (fixed focus, no digital zoom)
Keep in mind that the cam isnt a single unit, it's the sensor and lense (and the software backing it).
Even if all WP7 devices used the same sensor there's nothing stopping manus from using their own lenses.
Dell really skimps out on lenses, that's much more important then whatever sensor's inside regardless.
efjay said:
HTC didn't seem to have any problems with the software and produced good cameras in the Titan and Radar. The crappy camera is all Dell.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not arguing that the dell camera is a low quality cam but the issue is software more than hardware. Me mentioning Nokia n9 and 800/900 was an example about camera quality, they use the same camera same optics and they still didn't manage to get the same quality. Why? because the software needs improvement nothing is wrong with the lens used on the 800 or 900 so is it Nokia been lazy or Windows holding the lens back who knows. The camera on HTC are good to average but dell did a poor job on the camera.
Grats on getting your DVP. I dont know if anyone has this but when I take pictures with my DVP, there is a pink tone to the picture(and it's not from my fingers being near the lens or something). But anyways, great phone but what really gets me is that there is only one case for the DVP which is the Otterbox communter not counting all of those leather cases.
bugggaman said:
Grats on getting your DVP. I dont know if anyone has this but when I take pictures with my DVP, there is a pink tone to the picture(and it's not from my fingers being near the lens or something). But anyways, great phone but what really gets me is that there is only one case for the DVP which is the Otterbox communter not counting all of those leather cases.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I kinda doubt you can fix the pink spot try changing the camera settings maybe a miracle happens but that's another software issue. The other issue I have is dust under the screen I guess dell didn't seal the device correctly now I have to take it apart and clean it but I'm sure thats not gonna fix this problem in the long run.
Related
Is you XDA II camera still clear quality until now? I mean when you bought your XDA II means the camera is new and bright but now that your xda ii is old is your camera still in good quality? still bright? cuz i think mine become blur, i dont know why, i dont even dropped it yet. But i think it is only in my mind that it became blur, right??? HELP IS HIS TRUE??
Mine is still fine (6 months old)
Could it be your eyes got spoilt by all the fancy cameras with multi mega pixel quality that everyone seems to have?
Good heaven
Good Heaven. yours is 6 months but still the camera is still same as new?????? mine is 1 month, please post another that your camera is still ok... My device will be useless if no camera. I never drop it. Any one else???
help convince me plssssss
i never felt my cam was very good quality but it havent changed
and i dont really use it much
PLSSSSSSSS HELLLLLPPPPP!!!!!!
Just to confirm: I havent any decline in quality from my MDAII camera.
With VGA focus-free you cant expect the quality a lot low-cost digital cameras offer today . . .
It's OK for snapshots and to be honest this holiday I was suprised by the (relatively) good quality of the MP4 movies I captured.
my camera sucked from the first day i used it.
i NEVER used i since. quality is so bad - noone want's to have such pictures.
but judge yourself
regards ize|man
That one looks worse than mine, but of course lighting AND a steady hand do a lot!!!!
look..
i think that the camera will be good as digital cameras if there is a good light..
and try this to make it better..
go to camera..
and tab settings..then go to to tools..then adjest,,and options..and i think if u manged it will it'll be better..
and my i-mate (3 months old) and i dont see it changed or anything..
although i dropped it today very bad drop..and its fine..!
this is a picture i took
the details are absent and the bluer is bad
much like my old creative webcam which could be disconnected and used as a poor cam as well
have yet to see a cmos cam I liked quality wise
ofcause this is why real digital cams all use ccd and not cmos
[/img]
I think that picture quality is not so bad.
What really bothers me is that pixels seem not to be correctly "joint" (fitted?).
In other words, if you look at a poor quality picture, probably you will not see the subject defined and the picture will have "low-quality" everywhere; instead I have the feeling that qtek pictures could be easily improved just avoiding that sort of scattering and dithering between pixels which makes all blurred (just look at the picture attached before) and which is not related with resolution.
I hope someone can understand my opinion; it was a "matter of feeling", therefore hard to write in english (not being English of course :lol: )
I guess i was wrong, all of your xda's are older than mine and you even drop it ans still the camera never change. no one post that their cameras becomes weak or changed to bad. maybe your right, it is only my feelings. right?
i haven?t dropped it really well i did drop it down my shoe once while it was in the plastic case but i doubt that that would cause any damage
but i agree with the people who say the mp4 video clips look better of cause you don?t notice the imperfections of each frame as much in clips
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???
I noticed that my new TD2 has a very poor quality of the front camera compared to the D1. I don't know if it's faulty, but it looks like digital zoomed, even if settings are superfine and L size.
zooster said:
I noticed that my new TD2 has a very poor quality of the front camera compared to the D1. I don't know if it's faulty, but it looks like digital zoomed, even if settings are superfine and L size.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's just a crap camera... that's all. You wouldn't need a better resolution for video calling anyway. If you really need to make loads of self portraits, then rather find a friend.
AceofSpades25 said:
It's just a crap camera... that's all. You wouldn't need a better resolution for video calling anyway. If you really need to make loads of self portraits, then rather find a friend.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL !!
But I think that the back 5mpx camera is crappy too... (compared with my old Nokia N95 classic).
If the ambient light isn't PERFECT, the camera is useless...
Front camera is a VGA (640x480) CMOS unit with no zoom capabilities; It will look blocky on almost any screen nowerdays (It's even lower resolution than the screen on the phone itself). As for the rear camera being worse than the N95 classic, the N95 was fitted with Carl Zeiss optics; Specialist lenses for cameras, and fairly good quality considering the market. It was (and still is) a very good camera phone. HTC cameras are *notoriously* bad. Autofocus is great, but no use without a decent CCD and optics. Heavy blurring under motion and poor ambient light handling are typical issues. The trouble is that HTC don't make camera phones, they make PDAs with camera and phone capabilities. Still, it's better than the iPhone...
If you want a decent camera above all else, send your phone back and get either a Pixon or any SE phone / Nokia N series handset.
DeathJester said:
Front camera is a VGA (640x480) CMOS unit with no zoom capabilities; It will look blocky on almost any screen nowerdays (It's even lower resolution than the screen on the phone itself). As for the rear camera being worse than the N95 classic, the N95 was fitted with Carl Zeiss optics; Specialist lenses for cameras, and fairly good quality considering the market. It was (and still is) a very good camera phone. HTC cameras are *notoriously* bad. Autofocus is great, but no use without a decent CCD and optics. Heavy blurring under motion and poor ambient light handling are typical issues. The trouble is that HTC don't make camera phones, they make PDAs with camera and phone capabilities. Still, it's better than the iPhone...
If you want a decent camera above all else, send your phone back and get either a Pixon or any SE phone / Nokia N series handset.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK I know that... but why make a phone with *5mpx* camera with crappy lens ? Why don't make 3.2mpx camera with good lens ? Just marketing ?
And I`ll pay some extra 20$ for some LED flash too
Wait.. I said so 'cause the front camer on Diamond 1 was waaaay better!
This one looks ugly, dark, pixelated and zoomed. Just sh**ty!
I was supposing that it's kinda faulty. I would try how it is after a rom upgrade... atm still stick to the rom in signature.
Ok so its fairly obvious that the camera bites. Is there a decent app on the market which can take nicer pics?
htc camera's always been like this, even if there's an app, i think you will be better of getting to know the limitations, and get used to manually specify the settings, this way you can really get some decent shots with it. the main purpose of a camera in a phone isn't to replace camera's at all, it's a way of having a way of the ability to quickly take a snapshot when you forgot your camera.
learn to hold your hands still, the best thing to do with a HTC phone if you use the camera
and for the app, search the market in the free section, you can always try them out to see if one suite's you
dr.m0x said:
Ok so its fairly obvious that the camera bites. Is there a decent app on the market which can take nicer pics?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have to agree when it comes to using the flash the pics are cap all yellow and washed out. It's like the timing is off or the auto white balance is not changing to flash.
A toy camera out of a Christmas cracker could do better.
Example of flash pic
twitpic.com/34l2mp
it seems your camera didn't even focus on that event, the yellow glow can also be caused by a street light nearby? if street light was nearby it uses the flash to fill in the photo, and leaves the shutter open to receive the lighting as it is, so the faces don't shine etc. otherwise the timing and or white balance is of, or even possibly be a smudge on the flash or lens? finger near the flash unit could also cause this.
I took about 10 pics all look the same I ended up using my old n97 which took a perfect pic.
you still get the yellow from the flash indoors aswell and I tried all the white balance setting none look right with the flash.
If no one else is finding this maybe I have a bum phone.
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA App
So dose anyone else het pics as bad as me with the flash or should I take my phone back?
dr.m0x said:
Ok so its fairly obvious that the camera bites.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ok so its fairly obvious that this guy is rude and obnoxious and doesnt mind insulting a product we all paid a serious amount of money for.
I am a professional photographer specialising in weddings for over 12 years and the camera is perfectly adequate for a phone.
panyan said:
ok so its fairly obvious that this guy is rude and obnoxious and doesnt mind insulting a product we all paid a serious amount of money for.
I am a professional photographer specialising in weddings for over 12 years and the camera is perfectly adequate for a phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would say it depends what you are comparing it to. It rubbish compared to a good camera phone like the N86 or N97 but ok compared to the iphone. So if you have only had bad camera phones I guess that's why you may think it ok.
panyan said:
ok so its fairly obvious that this guy is rude and obnoxious and doesnt mind insulting a product we all paid a serious amount of money for.
I am a professional photographer specialising in weddings for over 12 years and the camera is perfectly adequate for a phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
my old nokia n95 camera thats 5 years old takes better photos, though ive found it does take nice close ups, SGS camera is perfectly adequate though
@jeffmason : have you tried setting the flash to 'on' instead of 'auto', mine takes blurry night photos too unless the flash is set to always on.
Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the Google Pixel 4a come out. A higher rating indicates that photos offer rich color (without over-saturating), sharp detail (with all subjects in-focus), and appropriate exposure (with even lighting).
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
Tom's Guide camera review(vs iPhone SE)
https://www.tomsguide.com/news/google-pixel-4a-vs-iphone-se-camera-face-off
Very impressed
I owned an iPhone 11 pro max before giving it away to a family member, and recently just returned a brand new Galaxy Note 20 Ultra. This pixel 4a slam dunks on the iPhone 11 pro and Note 20, all day. Aside from the dismal Selfie cam, the main camera produces incredible photos. IMO, much better than the iphone. And the samsung, may as well toss that junk in the trash. Well done Google!
You will never ever touch the pics this phone can produce for the price. There is nothing out there that comes even close.
Katsusreturns said:
I owned an iPhone 11 pro max before giving it away to a family member, and recently just returned a brand new Galaxy Note 20 Ultra. This pixel 4a slam dunks on the iPhone 11 pro and Note 20, all day. Aside from the dismal Selfie cam, the main camera produces incredible photos. IMO, much better than the iphone. And the samsung, may as well toss that junk in the trash. Well done Google!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fully agree with you ,the front cam is a disaster on this phone but back cam is probably what I have seen on reviews even is better than ip12pro for the main lens pics
Mehtasameer2087 said:
Fully agree with you, the front cam is a disaster on this phone but the back cam is probably what I have seen on reviews even is better than ip12pro for the main lens pics
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed, the front camera is not good. What I have noticed though is if you switch quickly from rear to front, for a split second the front camera actually looks good, then completely gets demolished from processing. Not sure what Google has going on with that, it's not any settings I can find that are doing it, no face smoothing or anything turned on.
Katsusreturns said:
Agreed, the front camera is not good. What I have noticed though is if you switch quickly from rear to front, for a split second the front camera actually looks good, then completely gets demolished from processing. Not sure what Google has going on with that, it's not any settings I can find that are doing it, no face smoothing or anything turned on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you already applied the november patch? Do you notice that since you have the phone? Because I have the feeling that since this update, front camera quality got a bit worse. Did anybody else observe this?
alguien24 said:
Have you already applied the november patch? Do you notice that since you have the phone? Because I have the feeling that since this update, front camera quality got a bit worse. Did anybody else observe this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Absolutely agree on that. I was searching for other users that noticed this and I ran on your comment. Photos got bit noisier, and with less detail, not like we know with google camera's quality. Also video quality has gotten worse.. Now the result looks like came out of a cheap phone. Im a bit calm though, because it looks like a software issue, and I hope it will get noticed by Google.
Katsusreturns said:
Agreed, the front camera is not good. What I have noticed though is if you switch quickly from rear to front, for a split second the front camera actually looks good, then completely gets demolished from processing. Not sure what Google has going on with that, it's not any settings I can find that are doing it, no face smoothing or anything turned on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haven't noticed that split second thing but yes I also don't have any options enabled
Katsusreturns said:
Agreed, the front camera is not good. What I have noticed though is if you switch quickly from rear to front, for a split second the front camera actually looks good, then completely gets demolished from processing. Not sure what Google has going on with that, it's not any settings I can find that are doing it, no face smoothing or anything turned on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not noticing a difference on front/rear toggle with Nov update. Agree front is over processed and mushy; seems to be a software issue as I find it hard to believe Google would toss a dime store sensor into this pup.
DB126 said:
Not noticing a difference on front/rear toggle with Nov update. Agree front is over-processed and mushy; seems to be a software issue as I find it hard to believe Google would toss a dime-store sensor into this pup.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Weird, mine still shows a difference when swapping. I am wondering if the split second I see that appears halfway decent is what you see normally, and is yet still no good lol. Somewhere on the forums here I saw a guy with a US version of the phone and another outside the country and there was a very substantial difference in the selfie cam quality. US version being the lesser of the two.
Katsusreturns said:
Weird, mine still shows a difference when swapping. I am wondering if the split second I see that appears halfway decent is what you see normally, and is yet still no good lol. Somewhere on the forums here I saw a guy with a US version of the phone and another outside the country and there was a very substantial difference in the selfie cam quality. US version being the lesser of the two.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Front is not great but no hesitation using for video chats and static captures. Those who relish ITM snaps are not going to be happy - especially if coming off a Galaxy, iPhone or similar. Even my modest Moto g7 leaves a better first impression.
Back camera is really fun to use for stills, like the reviews claim, very decent point-and-shoot camera for us casuals. I'm using cstark's PXMod and I'm really liking it so far.
00000-PORTRAIT-00000-BURST20210424172647389 hosted at ImgBB
Image 00000-PORTRAIT-00000-BURST20210424172647389 hosted in ImgBB
ibb.co
00000-PORTRAIT-00000-BURST20210424172618451 hosted at ImgBB
Image 00000-PORTRAIT-00000-BURST20210424172618451 hosted in ImgBB
ibb.co
I find the images are all too warm in colour temp, especially compared to the P3 & P3a, in fact every other phone & camera I've tried. Anyon emanaged to get a good neutral white balance? I've tried camera mods but none are quite there
None of smartphones today make good natural picture. They are mostly oversharpen to look good on the small screen. And the other thing is they have wide angle camera which are not good for photographing people. The people faces have distortion. Most of people don't care but I do. They should make the software for camera that would correct this distortion automatically. Some of Olympus SLR camera had these feature.