Database 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

Friends Evo...

I was playing with my friends EVO and loved how much bigger the screen was. Most people liked the 4 inch display, but im one of those guys that thinks bigger is better. The phone itself was nothing special. Seemed to be as responsive as my vibrant, but games were not as smooth and the Vibrants screen blew it away. The colors on the EVO looked faded and just didnt stand out. Just wish Samsung made it with a 4.3 Super amoled screen
But i guess i cant complain to much, its still larger than my iphone4's screen. And i can use 3G!!!!!!!
Sorry about my rambling.

I know what you mean, it would be nice if It had a bigger screen; but I doesn't matter to me since I came from a Mytouch lol. Hopefully there will be a successor of the Galaxy S family next year that will appeal all of our needs. Imagine a phone with Super AMOLED, 4.3 inch screen, FFC, 8 megapixel camera with flash, FM Radio, working GPS and to top it off Vanilla Android. One can only dream ^_^.

ElahC said:
I know what you mean, it would be nice if It had a bigger screen; but I doesn't matter to me since I came from a Mytouch lol. Hopefully there will be a successor of the Galaxy S family next year that will appeal all of our needs. Imagine a phone with Super AMOLED, 4.3 inch screen, FFC, 8 megapixel camera with flash, FM Radio, working GPS and to top it off Vanilla Android. One can only dream ^_^.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There have been leaks of a 4.3 inch SAMOLED successor to the Galaxy S. It's being called the Galaxy SX.

ElahC said:
I know what you mean, it would be nice if It had a bigger screen; but I doesn't matter to me since I came from a Mytouch lol. Hopefully there will be a successor of the Galaxy S family next year that will appeal all of our needs. Imagine a phone with Super AMOLED, 4.3 inch screen, FFC, 8 megapixel camera with flash, FM Radio, working GPS and to top it off Vanilla Android. One can only dream ^_^.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm good with the 4" screen. I don't need a bigger phone filling up my pockets.
On a side-note, the number of megapixels in the camera is more marketing than anything. All that tells you is how much data the camera subsystem returns to the software...it tells you nothing about the quality of the camera sensor (or the lens in the case of actual digital cameras). I've seen way too many high-megapixel devices with lousy camera sensors to place much importance on that number. A cheap camera sensor + lots of megapixels = more bad picture. Don't be fooled...look at the quality of the pictures, not the number of megapixels.

I think Samsung is coming out with a tablet... stick that your pocket

dex1701 said:
I'm good with the 4" screen. I don't need a bigger phone filling up my pockets.
On a side-note, the number of megapixels in the camera is more marketing than anything. All that tells you is how much data the camera subsystem returns to the software...it tells you nothing about the quality of the camera sensor (or the lens in the case of actual digital cameras). I've seen way too many high-megapixel devices with lousy camera sensors to place much importance on that number. A cheap camera sensor + lots of megapixels = more bad picture. Don't be fooled...look at the quality of the pictures, not the number of megapixels.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hehe I completely agree with you, and thanks for the heads up on megapixels.

Coming from the HD2 to the vibrant I must say I like the 4 inch screen a lot better. 4.3 is just a little to much for me.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

NO TY!
I refuse to get anything bigger than 4 inches. I can careless how amazing the phone is. If I can't fit in my pocket and my hands comfortably than I do not wan it.

Yeah the 4.3" on the hd2 was a bit much for me. I'm a girl so not only was it huge in my hands but huge for my pocket or anything else. I think 4 is the sweet spot
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

Agreed , 4 inch is the right size.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

disturkis4u;7590471 I think 4 is the sweet spot [/QUOTE said:
Then I'm the man for you!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

thunderstruck! said:
Then I'm the man for you!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ROFL! Ziiiiing

m3ta1head said:
ROFL! Ziiiiing
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now I know how the catholic church feels... BUZZING!
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

I came from the HD2, and it was too clunky.
I could use the phone fine with one hand.
my hands aren't small, but 4" is perfect and i get 720p video recording and a better GPU/Screen.
I love the 4" form factor

Lol, so many "That's what she said" jokes here.
I think Droid X would be the better 4.3" phone since it's skinnier than the Evo/HD2 which is better when holding it in the hand, but I like the 4" size. It's the perfect size imo.

Addel said:
Now I know how the catholic church feels... BUZZING!
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i didn't get it at first, but upon a second read, i must grant you 400 internets.
Well played good sir.

dex1701 said:
I'm good with the 4" screen. I don't need a bigger phone filling up my pockets.
On a side-note, the number of megapixels in the camera is more marketing than anything. All that tells you is how much data the camera subsystem returns to the software...it tells you nothing about the quality of the camera sensor (or the lens in the case of actual digital cameras). I've seen way too many high-megapixel devices with lousy camera sensors to place much importance on that number. A cheap camera sensor + lots of megapixels = more bad picture. Don't be fooled...look at the quality of the pictures, not the number of megapixels.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did not know this before. Thanks for the tip. Also i'm perfectly happy with the picture quality the Vibrant has. I am extremely pleased with the phone overall but the screen and the camera are what i'm loving most about it this week. haha

S4 camera is really blurry?

Hi there, not sure if this is a common problem or not.
Whenever I take a photo on the phone it appears okay, but when I start to zoom in it comes out really blurry. The camera's set to 13mp and even on 9.6 it's blurry too. Is it like this for everyone?

Welcome to the primary drawback of digital zoom.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using xda app-developers app

The quality will get more poor whenever you zoom in. I haven't had any issues with poor quality while zooming yet, but I'll have an eye open for it.

Pagnell said:
Welcome to the primary drawback of digital zoom.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha, I meant after I'd taken the picture. Back when I owned an iPhone 4 a couple years ago, zooming in after taking the picture was still crystal clear, and that was only a 5 megapixel camera..

samb222 said:
Haha, I meant after I'd taken the picture. Back when I owned an iPhone 4 a couple years ago, zooming in after taking the picture was still crystal clear, and that was only a 5 megapixel camera..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well... I think I get what you mean, and it has to do mainly with the resolution of the screen. When visualising pictures in a FullHD screen (2MP) the available real size is "only" 2.5times the display size on each direction. (Screen is ~2kx1k, 13MP is ~5kx2.5k pixels). And when you zoom in you quickly reach (and surpass) the real (sharp) size.
With an old phone (say 800x480) you had plenty of zooming to do before reaching the 5MP size.
The complementary reason to this is that the camera 13MP sensor is not proportionally sized with respect to good 8MP ones.
Having said all this, I find the quality of the S4 pictures to be OUTSTANDING for a mobile device.

pintycar said:
Well... I think I get what you mean, and it has to do mainly with the resolution of the screen. When visualising pictures in a FullHD screen (2MP) the available real size is "only" 2.5times the display size on each direction. (Screen is ~2kx1k, 13MP is ~5kx2.5k pixels). And when you zoom in you quickly reach (and surpass) the real (sharp) size.
With an old phone (say 800x480) you had plenty of zooming to do before reaching the 5MP size.
The complementary reason to this is that the camera 13MP sensor is not proportionally sized with respect to good 8MP ones.
Having said all this, I find the quality of the S4 pictures to be OUTSTANDING for a mobile device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah that makes more sense, thanks
Which mode/settings do you use? My pictures are good but nothing spectacular.

samb222 said:
Ah that makes more sense, thanks
Which mode/settings do you use? My pictures are good but nothing spectacular.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I usually leave it on Auto Mode although some times I do have to lower the ISO level because it tends to like high ISO values unnecessarily. I'm not a Pro photographer though.. there's probably some thread about tips and tricks to get the best out of it.
Thanks.

Post a full res picture here so we can see if they're ok.

exec99 said:
Post a full res picture here so we can see if they're ok.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This picture came out surprisingly well for a change haha. Still interested on your opinions though

Have you removed the plastic lens protector?. To do so, remove the back plate and proceed carefully with your fingernail

inolvidable said:
Have you removed the plastic lens protector?. To do so, remove the back plate and proceed carefully with your fingernail
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, removed it

I'm getting lots of softness and graininess on the front camera.

I'm having the same problems with the front camera. It's so frustrating as it didn't happen with the S2!!

Camera seems too zoomed in?

No mods on my s4. Stock camera. All the way zoomed out, it feels like its too close.
So for example, if i wanted to take a picture of a 36x36 painting, i have to be farther away to fit it into frame than my s3.
Has anyone else noticed this?

mic_crispy said:
No mods on my s4. Stock camera. All the way zoomed out, it feels like its too close.
So for example, if i wanted to take a picture of a 36x36 painting, i have to be farther away to fit it into frame than my s3.
Has anyone else noticed this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, it is because the FoV is different on the lens. (field of view)

Thats the word i was looking for....
So im guessing this is not like quake 3, where i can adjust the FOV?

mic_crispy said:
Thats the word i was looking for....
So im guessing this is not like quake 3, where i can adjust the FOV?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not at all, its mostly because the megapixel count. cameras in phones cant have such a high pixel capture and great field of view all at once... yet

jetlitheone said:
Yes, it is because the FoV is different on the lens. (field of view)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
jetlitheone said:
Not at all, its mostly because the megapixel count. cameras in phones cant have such a high pixel capture and great field of view all at once... yet
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, thanks.
I just noticed it was very hard to take a full framed picture in a tight place.
Oh well.

On that note, could you just lower the RES to achieve the wider FOV?
Since the lense is better than the s3, the picture should still look better.

mic_crispy said:
On that note, could you just lower the RES to achieve the wider FOV?
Since the lense is better than the s3, the picture should still look better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
sadly, it doesn't work like that :|

mic_crispy said:
On that note, could you just lower the RES to achieve the wider FOV?
Since the lense is better than the s3, the picture should still look better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure its the solution your looking for, but try using the panaroma mode... Its a pain, but theoretically should work as long as you dont need flash or anything.

Thanks for the explanation. I had forgotten the field of view is smaller on the s4. I was trying to tell my wife that the camera looks too zoomed in all the time. The Optimus G Pro has a better FOV than the GS4

ronj1986 said:
Thanks for the explanation. I had forgotten the field of view is smaller on the s4. I was trying to tell my wife that the camera looks too zoomed in all the time. The Optimus G Pro has a better FOV than the GS4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, it's not quite like that. What you're seeing onscreen for the S4 is the aspect ratio of the pictures you're taking. So, you're getting an accurate representation before you take the photo. It's not anything but how it should be. The camera even thoughtfully has the aspect ratios of each megapixel setting in the settings menu. If you select a 16:9 setting, you get full screen because that's the aspect ratio of the S4's screen. 4:3 looks cropped because you don't want to distort your framing when you're lining up your shot. Just to clarify, this is a good feature, and not a bug.

burhanistan said:
Well, it's not quite like that. What you're seeing onscreen for the S4 is the aspect ratio of the pictures you're taking. So, you're getting an accurate representation before you take the photo..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. This issue being raised is field of view, not aspect ratio. The field of view on the GS4 is smaller than on some other camera phones because the equivalent focal length is longer. A smaller field of view is not better or worse, it is a matter of personal preference. With a smaller field of view, things will look somewhat closer and close up portraits will look less distorted. With a wider field of view, you can get more in the picture, but close up portraits will have distorted, somewhat cartoonish look. This is because there is more perspective distortion as result of squeezing more in the frame. For reference, the S4 has a equivalent focal length of 31mm, the iphone 5 33mm, and the HTC One 28mm. So just on the basis of field of view/focal length, the iphone would the best for close up face shots, the HTC One, the best for fitting in the most on the screen, and the S4 in between the two.

yeah i'm a little disappointed because i like wide angle. but as long as you can take a couple step back, its no problem.

Please read forum rules before posting
Questions and help issues go in Q&A
Thread moved
Thank you for your cooperation
Friendly Neighborhood Moderator

Is my camera performance typical? Or is there something wrong with my lens?

Coming from an iPhone 7 Plus I really want to love this phone. I knew the image quality from the camera wouldn't be as good but I didn't think it would be this bad.
If you look at the images I attached, unedited, no HDR, you'll see the corners are super soft, tons of fringing and chromatic abberation, and distortion.
Is this typical performance for this phone or did I get a dud?
Thanks for any input!
Andrew

Angdvl089 said:
Coming from an iPhone 7 Plus I really want to love this phone. I knew the image quality from the camera wouldn't be as good but I didn't think it would be this bad.
If you look at the images I attached, unedited, no HDR, you'll see the corners are super soft, tons of fringing and chromatic abberation, and distortion.
Is this typical performance for this phone or did I get a dud?
Thanks for any input!
Andrew
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What's wrong with it

Irvin16 said:
What's wrong with it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thought it was just me! I don't see anything wrong either.
Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

mayb lens defect
Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

I must apologize everyone, I've been shooting with Canon DSLRs for a while and now Fujifilm cameras. I guess I shouldn't really be comparing a $300 phone camera to those higher end cameras.
But I have noticed some very serious blurring and color artifacts in the corners of my photos. I just wasn't sure if this was across the board or if I had a specific problem. Here is a crop from the top left corner of the first photo of the tree.

Angdvl089 said:
I must apologize everyone, I've been shooting with Canon DSLRs for a while and now Fujifilm cameras. I guess I shouldn't really be comparing a $300 phone camera to those higher end cameras.
But I have noticed some very serious blurring and color artifacts in the corners of my photos. I just wasn't sure if this was across the board or if I had a specific problem. Here is a crop from the top left corner of the first photo of the tree.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you are familiar with DSLRs.. i would definitely use the advanced mode on the camera. You'll have a lot more control over the photos.
It's hard for me to say why the corner of that photo is blurry.. maybe the limb was moving? Closer? Dunno. It looks more like an autofocus thing. Try the "infinity" focus setting in advanced too.
I personally haven't gotten any kind of consistent blurring or artifacts in the images but I DO mostly use the advanced mode.
Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk