Database Users

Camera comparison, iPhone 4S is the best

I am not happy either but it seems that 4S is really the best that you can buy in mobile phone when it comes to camera.
http://www.gsmarena.com/8mp_shootout_2011-review-673.php

Yep, they did it again. I wonder why OEMs don't try to make better cameras with good lenses on Android devices...

5m is good enough for me
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App

Megapixels are not important at all, iPhone 4S has Sony camera and yet SE can not come close to iPhone camera in mobile phones, I really dont get it, they at Samsung should buy 10 iPhones and then try everything to make somethin better in camera department and also in housing quality, sometimes I think that people in Samsung have never seen iPhone in person or felt how it feels in hands with that perfect quality.

Not so fast.. They used one daylight and one night shot. The difference between the 4S and the GS2 was pretty small, with the GS2 winning some of the measures. It depends on priorities. For me the GS2 just takes it actually.
Video on the GS2 can be modified to have higher bit rates than the 4S, and it does improve the video.

I would too like to see better camera improvement on future generation phones. Yes, phones aren't dedicated cameras and won't give the same quality as one, but using your phone as a camera is just so convenient, especially carrying around a thin phone compared to a bulky camera. Would like to see a camera that snaps quick like the Galaxy Nexus with a better lens/sensor.

Absolute BULL****!
Hands down iphone4s offers best video recording?
If you prefer un-natural colours, poor low light footage and an 'extremely choppy video- when moving sideways....
Are they for real?
Funded by apple?
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

this is BS gsmarena has already done a test and they said the gs2 was far superior so were do they get this crap from

PC World did a much more thorough comparison:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/241955-2/smartphone_camera_battle_iphone_4s_vs_the_android_elite.html
Great cameras on both phones!

damirbusic said:
Megapixels are not important at all, iPhone 4S has Sony camera and yet SE can not come close to iPhone camera in mobile phones, I really dont get it, they at Samsung should buy 10 iPhones and then try everything to make somethin better in camera department and also in housing quality, sometimes I think that people in Samsung have never seen iPhone in person or felt how it feels in hands with that perfect quality.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe you havent seen an Xperia arc camera. Ive had one and it beats the iphone hands down. Not only have I seen this online but me and friends with iphones have compared them and even they concede that the arc is superior.
Granted the 4S is better than the 4 but then its a newer phone, expect newer sony phones to beat it again all over.

I have S2 and 4s, but I have to say 4s is better (for me) when taking a pic..
such as capture speed, exposure, and color..
similar but better, how should I say that
but when it comes to video recording S2 rocks
I'll post both photos from S2 and 4s later..

diggedy said:
Maybe you havent seen an Xperia arc camera. Ive had one and it beats the iphone hands down. Not only have I seen this online but me and friends with iphones have compared them and even they concede that the arc is superior.
Granted the 4S is better than the 4 but then its a newer phone, expect newer sony phones to beat it again all over.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Comparing your arc to your friend's iPhone 4S does not constitute a proper test. Post picture comparisons here and let us judge for ourselves, because unless you do so, your argument is void and you come off as a simple fanboy. I mean you are arguing that the tests done by review sites are completely full of ****, yet fail to provide any evidence to prove your point other than your word. So in your opinion, in whom do you think we have more faith: you, or the tech sites that have years of experience and none of the obvious bias?
Looking at comparison shots across multiple review sites that have the know-how on how to take a proper photograph, I have yet to see a single shot taken with the Xperia Arc that would immediately crown its camera the king of those found in mobile phones. Its camera is good, but far from the best. The N8 is the clear winner there.
Judge for yourself(arc s left and iPhone 4s right):
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}

Have to give that one to the 4S. The Arc looks unfocused (way less texture detail in the walls).

iPhone 4 has perfect 720p video but it is shaky as hell ! GS 2 has also great video but I think that it could be sharper and also I dont see stabilization option in video department ? I also use only 720p because I dont need 1080p.
Higher bitrate on Galaxy does not have better video, sound is great now with that tweak but I think that there is no test on the internet that says that Galaxy SII has better camera than iPhone 4S, I dont like that but I must accept it, and Galaxy is out for a long time now.

damirbusic said:
iPhone 4 has perfect 720p video but it is shaky as hell ! GS 2 has also great video but I think that it could be sharper and also I dont see stabilization option in video department ? I also use only 720p because I dont need 1080p.
Higher bitrate on Galaxy does not have better video, sound is great now with that tweak but I think that there is no test on the internet that says that Galaxy SII has better camera than iPhone 4S, I dont like that but I must accept it, and Galaxy is out for a long time now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The PC World test I linked to did put the SGS2 ahead of the iPhone 4S, but the pictures clearly speak for themselves; the camera in the iPhone 4S is much better.

I can't figure why anyone even bothers doing pointless amateur comparisons, I only can guess that flaming and clicks...
When it comes to photo, there's usually more than meets the eye that should be taken in consideration when considering a shoot-out:
1. Details about the camera: the sensor itself ( circuitry and pixel pattern/array),pixel density on the sensor, optics ( CZ vs plastic)
2. Details about the camera usage specs- firmware dependent: init time, focusing interval, focus points, capture response time, ISO values-what values are useable, dynamic range, shutter speeds.
MAYBE most important
3. OS-dependent details: jpeg/compression algorithm, color rendering algorithm, noise reduction algorithm, ...
Give me a RAW file from any sensor and I can make the photo better looking than anything.
Given that fact they are making a review about cameras, though cell phones cameras, they should have the decency to ask someone that has written a review about cameras.
It's like writing about wines and declaring one to be the best solely by the time and volume it took to get the girl into the bed.

This is interesting. I would like to have a phone with the perfect camera. Such a thing doesn't exist. So I have chosen the phone that is best all around.
If all I wanted was a great camera and didn't care about any other features I would take what my wife has, a Nokia N8.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium

I have both the phone. The quality and video recording is indeed better on the iPhone 4S from what I can see in my eyes.
But c'mon guys? When did the S2 come out? You really gonna think 'Apple' won't be spying or checking up on competitors to release something 'atleast' better during iPhone 4S production?

These reviews are easilly manipulated.
PC world gave a much better non biased review and it puts the SGS2 above the Iphone 4s in the camera department.
One thing is sure is that the SGS2 gives better night shots then the Iphone 4S.....The Iphone 4S gives a brighter picture but loose a lot of details.

I've hated phones that use noise reduction/edge sharping to scrub out the detail and replace it with digital artifacts. Whats wrong with grain.
So from that stand point I love what Apple is doing with their unit. Detail isn't something you can get back once its lost.

Small review on the camera on the Note 2 vs iPhone 4

I have decided to do a little comparison test with the Galaxy note 2 and my old iPhone 4. I have only recently come aboard the good ship Android, so I am still finding my way around. Although I fully understand that the camera does not make or break the phone, for me it is one of the features that I rely on now and again.
I love taking a picture with my SLR but there are times when you cannot use the SLR, or times when you do not want to take it out so for me the camera is something I use. If it had been my sole requirement i would have probably chosen the Nokia 808 Pureview, but Nokia decided to cripple their phones using their chosen software - but that's is another debate.
I didn’t want to do a tremendous amount of testing so I decided to use the stock apps on both phones. I have paid a little more detail to the Note 2 with looking at the normal picture setting and the low light function. I may use another application on the note as the standard camera app is not the best.
I placed a book, a battery and a sound card in my photo booth. The reason for these items was to get something with a plain colour (the book) something that is small but has a little bit of detail (battery) and something that has a lot of detail (sound card). All tests were conducted indoors, nothing outdoors as of yet.
iPhone image:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Note 2 Image:
From both images you can see there is a definite difference. The iPhones image has a little more ‘viberance’ to it. Overall the colour on the iPhone looks better overall whereas the note 2 image looks a little washed out, however this is purely subjective and I like my photos to have a little more saturation. When viewing photos on the AMOLED screen they do look incredibly vibrant, however, on a normal monitor they do not. What is quite interesting is that the file size of the iPhone 4 image is actually larger than that of the 8 mega pixel file form the Note 2. This could be for a number of reasons; one could be the amount of sharpening applied in the processing, another could be the amount of saturation the software adds to give it a little more ‘zing’.
When testing the sharpness and detail of a camera most magazines tend to do 100% crops showing how much detail can be resolved. The comparisons have been done below.
iPhone first, then Note 2.
Crop with low light mode enabled
From this quick demo you can see that there is a slight difference between the iPhone and the Samsung photos. Personally I don’t think its hardware related, I’m pretty sure that it is software related. I am going on the browse for some add free, free camera software and take a few photos with that.
Once again I would like to stress that this is just an indoor shot, and I have simply not had time to do any outdoor shots. Maybe I will try some on the weekend and report back then.
What do you lot think?

Like yourself it seems, photography is a big hobby of mine and whilst I use a DSLR normally too, I'm more than happy to have my Note 2 with me for quick snaps.
Looking at your test shots, I'd say overall there's not much between them.
iPhone is definitely more vibrant, but the Note 2 shots look more natural. Looking at the uncropped shots, the Note 2 seems to give a clearer image but when viewed at 100% the iPhone seems to have captured slightly more detail. I'd say the Note 2 controls noise better, especially with low light mode. Even without low light mode the Note 2 seems to use more noise control than the iPhone. The downside to this is that more noise control can lead to softer shots, which is why the iPhone shots looks a touch sharper, if a little grainy.
Could all just be my eyes though
Random fact... the Note 2 was originally meant to ship with a 13MP Sony sensor, but Sony couldn't produce enough in time to meet Samsung's deadline so instead it shipped with an 8MP sensor. As you probably know, more MP doesn't always mean a better image as cramming more pixels on a small sensor means each pixel can capture less light, but it would have been interesting to see what the images would have been like had it got the 13MP sensor.

I really wish nokia would have licensed their Pureview tech to Samsung. Would make it a little better.

Though the GS2 and the GN2 both have an 8MP camera, I find the GN2's camera far superior. I suspect this may have something to do with the faster CPU, but not sure. I have used both extensively.

Dylanlewis2000 said:
I really wish nokia would have licensed their Pureview tech to Samsung. Would make it a little better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I really wish Nokia would produce android devices as well...
Sent from my GT-N7100 using xda app-developers app

The iPhone clearly takes sharper images in this comparison, at the expense of noise. Contrast appears to be much better with the iPhone as well, the GN2 photos look a little 'washed out'. Colours are more vibrant with the iPhone as well but perhaps too much?

A semi pro photographer here, hobby too. I never liked any cell phone's camera to be honest. But when I had my C905, things were little better. It had an impressive camera, almost replaced my Ixus for now and then, here and there shots. Then I got the Satio. Another good one. Then don't know what happened, I stepped into Samsung! My first Sammy was a i8910, it had a good camera. So I thought let's continue with Samsung. Next was Wave S8500, I didn't buy it for camera anyway. Then I got the infamous SII. Well after using it for more than year, I can say I was 'fairly' happy with it. Now, Note 2, I don't know, right from the first shot, till now, I DO NOT like this camera, how the photos are appearing, are below average in my eyes.
It's always about 'post software processing' in a mobile camera. A tiny sensor can never produce great photos. So it all matters how the photo is being processed after taking it via the camera firmware provided. That's where a brand plays it tricks. Most of them have Sony's sensor, so talking about hardware is meaningless. Now, here in Note 2, the post processing seems either to be not full or poorly done. Optimizing a photo is bad! An average user, who really would care about the 'background' processes, all they will see the ultimate photo, and there Note 2 fails. Photos turn out grainy, with noise. The biggest letdown is the led flash. At night, in parties, when it's dark, and you don't have your SLR or it's not the place for it, of course you'll need flash. The flash is terribly weak, and badly spread.
Anyway, writing too much, I'm short, after owning 7 or 8 high end cell phones, with their average camera, this Note 2 camera is the most disappointing in my eyes.
However, I don't give a damn, I always (you know what I mean) carry my 350 or D90 (yeah, I know, they are average DSLR), so I'd not bother much about this, BUT not everyone is like me or like OP, for them a 700$ mobile phone should provide 'fairly good' output, where this device, F A I L S.
Now, one thing you see, I really won't bother by some fanboys quoting my comment and say otherwise, knowing I've spent my hard time and money, for more than a decade behind photography. So thanks to them in advance anyway
Sent from my GT-N7100

The main issue comes down to the camera using iso 800 on auto mode in many scenes, i.e indoors, which is just bizarre. Set it to a lower value manually and the graininess gets a lot better.
Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 2

If you want more vibrant colours in the settings select SCN/Panorama.

Nokia 925 Vs Htc One's camera. Nokia better?

Seems like Nokia 925 is giving HTC One's camera a run for its money.
It has similar features while have double the MPs and better low light performance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rH_vPz6hcW0&list=HL1373932162

No one said the one's camera was the end all, be all of performance.
Sent from my HTC One

ECEXCURSION said:
No one said the one's camera was the end all, be all of performance.
Sent from my HTC One
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is a major part of htc one. the main feature that set it aprt form the rest including dual speakers and 1080p screen res.
but for the camera to be better they had to cut down to 4mp.
Nokia seems to have achived better results with 8mp which is sad for me as a htc one owner.
Ofcourse nokia uses windows which truly sucks.

Something "better" always comes out after you purchase the "latest and greatest."
Performance is always improving and considering the 925 is an update on the 920, what did you expect?
Sent from my HTC One using xda app-developers app

I think the camera in my 920 totally blew away the camera in my One, but I get the impression the One can still be improved with some software tweaks. The 920 wasn't awesome on the initial software either.
Sometimes though I get really great pictures out of my One, its just not very consistent.

RaXxaa said:
Nokia seems to have achived better results with 8mp which is sad for me as a htc one owner.
Ofcourse nokia uses windows which truly sucks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They HAVE to have one killer feature to make people forget that they'll never get any apps.
Sent from my HTC One

Oh good grief. It's packing a slightly better camera but the same dual-core S4 processor that was in last year's One XL, only 16GB of storage, and an inferior 332ppi display. It's an obsolete phone and it hasn't even been released yet.

Well you couldn't have seriously thought the ones camera would be forever superior to all future devices...
Sent from my HTCONE using xda premium

iElvis said:
Oh good grief. It's packing a slightly better camera but the same dual-core S4 processor that was in last year's One XL, only 16GB of storage, and an inferior 332ppi display. It's an obsolete phone and it hasn't even been released yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your other points were valid, but 332ppi inferior?
Like the cameras in our phones, people take ppi too seriously.

RaXxaa said:
It is a major part of htc one. the main feature that set it aprt form the rest including dual speakers and 1080p screen res.
but for the camera to be better they had to cut down to 4mp.
Nokia seems to have achived better results with 8mp which is sad for me as a htc one owner.
Ofcourse nokia uses windows which truly sucks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You don't need to hate on Nokia and windows. Why do you need more than 4MP? I doubt you have a single display higher than 2-3MP.
Sent from my HTC One using xda premium

eallan said:
You don't need to hate on Nokia and windows. Why do you need more than 4MP? I doubt you have a single display higher than 2-3MP.
Sent from my HTC One using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Holy cow that's a terrible argument.

Well, I have just swapped from Lumia 920 to HTC One and I knew straight away, that the upgrade will be a real camera downgrade, and not just because of megapixels.
HTC One's camera handles very poorly at very bright sun light, hdr is underperforming as well but other than that, it is more then enough for daily shots.
Moving from WP back to Android was absolutely worth it, I don't know why I was tempted to give WP a chance.
Very little quality apps, terrible battery life. The only thing I miss is the WP keyboard

henrybravo said:
Holy cow that's a terrible argument.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure it is guy. That's why your rebuttal was so good
Sent from my HTC One using xda premium

eallan said:
Sure it is guy. That's why your rebuttal was so good
Sent from my HTC One using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Arguably, the Bayer filter makes it equivalent to a 1MP photo.
The filter basically means that the photo is in a Pentile layout. That means effective resolution compared to a theoretical RGB sensor is less.

RaXxaa said:
Seems like Nokia 925 is giving HTC One's camera a run for its money.
It has similar features while have double the MPs and better low light performance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rH_vPz6hcW0&list=HL1373932162
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You should probably go buy the Nokia. Thank you.

I Am Marino said:
Your other points were valid, but 332ppi inferior?
Like the cameras in our phones, people take ppi too seriously.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HTC One's 468ppi > Nokia's 332ppi
Therefore the Nokia's display is inferior to the HTC One's I'd say. At least on paper...

I Am Marino said:
Your other points were valid, but 332ppi inferior?
Like the cameras in our phones, people take ppi too seriously.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My One X had a display in that range, and I could see the difference between the two. 332 isn't bad, it's just inferior to 468.

eallan said:
Sure it is guy. That's why your rebuttal was so good
Sent from my HTC One using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ahh yes, you are correct - my uncharacteristically poor rebuttal was lame because it was 2 in the morning here and I was going to bed. I will get back to being myself below.
"Why do you need more than 4MP? I doubt you have a single display higher than 2-3MP"
Try cropping and zooming an image that is 4 mp versus one that is, say, 8 mp or higher, and you'll see what I'm talking about.
Let's take this photo for instance. It's one I just randomly pulled off the public internet, hence the watermark.
The original:
Cropped:
If this were a 4 mp photo, since I have cropped roughly 50% of the area of the photo, it would now be a 2 mp photo. Everyone will tell you, rightly, that a 2 mp photo these days is pretty unacceptable - no one remotely interested in taking good photos would buy a phone or camera with a 2 mp sensor. You can't print the photos very big and they will just look soft. You can argue that the photographer should have just been closer to the people to begin with and framed the shot better in the first place. Well, in the world of walking around with a smartphone, when taking candid unplanned photos it is impossible to always frame the shot to the point where cropping isn't desirable.
Now I'm not saying people that are manipulating photos like this will necessarily be the type to use a 4 mp smartphone camera, but it does happen. Recently I took a picture of one of my sons at his graduation using my HTC One (my wife had the Canon DSLR camera). The picture quality was good, but there was a jubilent kid within the frame of the shot giving the "devil horns" symbol and sticking his tongue out to someone. When I cropped this kid out of the shot, I was left with basically a 2 mp photo. Had this picture been taken on 10-20 mp camera for example (a common pixel count range for middle to upper-middle quality cameras these days) the final result would have been a much more acceptable 5-10 mp. Of course, more megapixels is not always better (sensor quality is paramount), but that is an entirely different topic that's been discussed ad nauseum.

The problem is that most here on xda think cell phone companies are only manufacturing devices for us here on xda. Which we're only a small percentage.
Cell phone companies are manufacturing devices for the general consumer which excludes us since we have a more understanding of how things or some things work and know they can work better.
My point is that the general consumer, well most, will never crop nor will go and print out a poster size picture they took with their mobile device. They are just going to snap a shot, share it on a social site or to a friend or family.
By the way, didn't mean to thank you on your other post. Freebie

RaXxaa said:
Seems like Nokia 925 is giving HTC One's camera a run for its money.
It has similar features while have double the MPs and better low light performance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rH_vPz6hcW0&list=HL1373932162
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Use HDR, that guy probably used night mode for HTC One. Nokia also uses some kind of software editing after it takes the picture to make it brighter.
Here is a HDR Photo in extreme low light. The only light in the room is that light comes from monitor.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
And same image with night mode
And this is from HTC Sensation, low light mode

Xperia Z1 2nd Place in DxO Mark's Overall Mobile Camera Ranking

Apparently, DxO Mark just gave out a score to Xperia Z1 and amazingly, just sits at 2nd place behind the Pureview 808 in overall Mobile Camera Ranking! :victory:
And that's without the "firmware updates" that will supposedly improve the camera!
I can't post the link as I'm still within the new user limitation of posting outside links. But if you're curious to see it, just do a quick google search for DxOMark and Xperia Z1!
More details:
Actually, the stills for Z1 stands at 5th place, however the video was deemed to be outstanding and the best in the mobile cameras and just 2nd place in their database behind the GoPro Hero 3!
If you're wondering what happened to the 1020, they also have an article on it and while they deemed the stills to be amazing and 2nd only to the 808. However, video was said to be lacking.
What are your thoughts?

bloodfire1004 said:
Apparently, DxO Mark just gave out a score to Xperia Z1 and amazingly, just sits at 2nd place behind the Pureview 808 in overall Mobile Camera Ranking! :victory:
And that's without the "firmware updates" that will supposedly improve the camera!
I can't post the link as I'm still within the new user limitation of posting outside links. But if you're curious to see it, just do a quick google search for DxOMark and Xperia Z1!
More details:
Actually, the stills for Z1 stands at 5th place, however the video was deemed to be outstanding and the best in the mobile cameras and just 2nd place in their database behind the GoPro Hero 3!
If you're wondering what happened to the 1020, they also have an article on it and while they deemed the stills to be amazing and 2nd only to the 808. However, video was said to be lacking.
What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess the big sensor is the key here. Dxomark doesn't reflect the real life though. I'm not very happy with the z1 camera... far too noisy especially at 20mp. Still better than my older nexus 4 anyway.

j0sh0 said:
I guess the big sensor is the key here. Dxomark doesn't reflect the real life though. I'm not very happy with the z1 camera... far too noisy especially at 20mp. Still better than my older nexus 4 anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just curious, what settings are you using? I'm pretty satisfied with the Z1 Camera of mine, but that was after tweaking some of the shooting settings I'm in. At first, I was pretty disappointed as well but now I think I'm good.

bloodfire1004 said:
Just curious, what settings are you using? I'm pretty satisfied with the Z1 Camera of mine, but that was after tweaking some of the shooting settings I'm in. At first, I was pretty disappointed as well but now I think I'm good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I bought the phone yesterday so I'm still testing it. At the moment I like to shoot in manual mode at 8mp with image stabiliser on.

j0sh0 said:
I bought the phone yesterday so I'm still testing it. At the moment I like to shoot in manual mode at 8mp with image stabiliser on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah ok. That's good then. Shooting at 20MP especially in low-light results in (I'm not sure why) worse pictures than shooting at 8MP 4:3 .. in my tests, it resulted in darker images.
I also like to shoot at 8MP 4:3 to take advantage of the oversampling and leave the rest of the settings to Auto. One thing though is that I turn off the Stabilizer. I found that turning it on resulted in the camera choosing a much higher ISO than intended compared when leaving it off. This may be due to its detection of slight handshake movements and it tries to compensate by upping the ISO in favor of a faster shutter speed.

bloodfire1004 said:
Ah ok. That's good then. Shooting at 20MP especially in low-light results in (I'm not sure why) worse pictures than shooting at 8MP 4:3 .. in my tests, it resulted in darker images.
I also like to shoot at 8MP 4:3 to take advantage of the oversampling and leave the rest of the settings to Auto. One thing though is that I turn off the Stabilizer. I found that turning it on resulted in the camera choosing a much higher ISO than intended compared when leaving it off. This may be due to its detection of slight handshake movements and it tries to compensate by upping the ISO in favor of a faster shutter speed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes shooting at 20mp is useless. Pics are so noisy... it's a shame. At 8mp the image quality is pretty good and yes, with the stabiliser on the iso is higher for that reason. But I prefer a bit more noise other than a blurred image.

j0sh0 said:
Yes shooting at 20mp is useless. Pics are so noisy... it's a shame. At 8mp the image quality is pretty good and yes, with the stabiliser on the iso is higher for that reason. But I prefer a bit more noise other than a blurred image.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice. What metering and focus are you using? Particularly for macro / night shots. I find that using Single Auto Focus setting doesn't keep the whole image in focus and just the middle part, but I find that the multi-auto focus setting doesn't do too well either particularly in macro shots. Currently, I shoot in landscape mode when shooting macro.

I'm using metering average (it seems to do a better job with white balance as well). About focus I always use touch focus... I like to choose what I want in focus...
I love th bokeh management of the lens.. look at this for example
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}

j0sh0 said:
I'm using metering average (it seems to do a better job with white balance as well). About focus I always use touch focus... I like to choose what I want in focus...
I love th bokeh management of the lens.. look at this for example
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ohh nice, I'm gonna try that out Thanks!

j0sh0 said:
I bought the phone yesterday so I'm still testing it. At the moment I like to shoot in manual mode at 8mp with image stabiliser on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And there's you mistake - the software image stabiliser introduces noise. Switch it off.

Timaustin2000 said:
And there's you mistake - the software image stabiliser introduces noise. Switch it off.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I know... but as I said I prefer a slighty noiser image than a blurred one. I'll try again without stabiliser anyway.

j0sh0 said:
Yeah, I know... but as I said I prefer a slighty noiser image than a blurred one. I'll try again without stabiliser anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hopefully new update has improved superior auto mode...

Try night mode can reduce noise.
Sent from my GT-I9500 using xda app-developers app

Why is everyone so scared of noise I just don't get it. If the fine detail is their don't worry about the noise.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

Yeah. The Z1 does lovely bokeh.

here is theDxO report for the Z1 which i could not find on DxO's website.
matheus_sc said:
I dont think samsung software is better, have more mods, but is very large and camera lags, i have gs4 9500 until last week
Sent from my C6903 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What i find telling from that review is this graph.
Above 80 lux the S4 shots have more 'texture' than the Z1.
Contrary to what people might think the Z1 has the best noise reduction indoors.

bloodfire1004 said:
Apparently, DxO Mark just gave out a score to Xperia Z1 and amazingly, just sits at 2nd place behind the Pureview 808 in overall Mobile Camera Ranking! :victory:
And that's without the "firmware updates" that will supposedly improve the camera!
I can't post the link as I'm still within the new user limitation of posting outside links. But if you're curious to see it, just do a quick google search for DxOMark and Xperia Z1!
More details:
Actually, the stills for Z1 stands at 5th place, however the video was deemed to be outstanding and the best in the mobile cameras and just 2nd place in their database behind the GoPro Hero 3!
If you're wondering what happened to the 1020, they also have an article on it and while they deemed the stills to be amazing and 2nd only to the 808. However, video was said to be lacking.
What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not much of a fan of them anymore, after I wrote to them to see if they would do the Xperia Z test again after Sony updating the firmware to fix the bad camera quality, they didn't even respond to me. On the flip side it is Sony's fault for shipping substandard equipment, get all the important things right first, especially the camera when they are making such a big deal about how amazing it is.

DxO finally got around to testing the G2. Overall G2 placed 6th. However in the photo section it ties with the Z1 in terms of score. A closer examination of the parameters tested shows the Z1 edges ahead slighlty.
Where the Z1 comes out ahead : Exposure & Contrast, Colour, Noise Reduction, Flash
Where the G2 comes out ahead : Autofocus, Texture, Artifacts
4 > 3 or Z1 ahead by a little.
What lets the G2 down is video, where its ranked 15th to the Z1's 2nd place.
If you consider phones alone, Z1 has the best video out there.
Now we have to wait for DxO to test the Note 3 to see whether it will affect the Z1's ranking.

Sorry to jump here like that, I don't even know all this stuff but after read what you guys saying is like the camera on Z1 was made for experienced people who know how to set up the device. This is a phone anyway and I like to go around and shooting everything but almost of the pictures are crap. That how shouldn't be with a camera on a phone with 20mpx.

Sony's Camera isn't great, but it could be worse...

We all give Sony a hard time for releasing flagship devices with mediocre camera performance. I personally can verify that my previous HTC phones (One mini, One S, and even the Ville aka MyTouch 4G) dating back nearly 4 years all had better color reproduction, white balance, indoor performance, and faster focus and shutter response. None of those were even considered flagship devices at the time of release. We assumed Sony's problem was the software, so many of us searched for 3rd party camera apps such as Google Camera, A Better Camera, Camera FV-5, etc... and some even claimed to get better results using these apps. I've tried just about all of them (free versions only) and never saw any dramatic improvement to make me replace the default camera app. I finally decided to compare shots side by side on a couple of my personal favorite camera apps and here's what I noticed:
The 3rd party apps over-exposed the scene with far too much flash, giving it that cold LED light look, and washing out some of the natural colors. But worst of all, they weren't as clear when zooming in as the default app was. Pay close attention to the can of WD40 in the back. Only the stock app makes the word "Directions" visibly clear. All photos were taken using Auto Mode at 8MP - the setting the average person will use daily.
Sample Photos In Order (from left to right):
- Sony Stock Camera App
- Google Camera App
- OpenCamera App
https://goo.gl/photos/ihkstAg95Ag8rybX7
I took a few comparison shots in scenes that I thought would cause the stock app to falter, but it kept coming through and beating the competition. For example, when taking a picture of a poster that was covered by a slight shadow, the stock app was the only app smart enough to use flash; thereby making the words of the poster much clearer. In another indoor scenario, the competition once again over exposed the scene with too much flash, washing out the colors again. I may post these photos later if you request them.
Moral of the story:
Compared to other smartphones (especially flagships), Sony's camera is simply one of the worst performers. <-----(This is a click-able link to the results of a test article) There is no argument here and someone from Sony needs to do something about it. But as for the stock Sony camera app, it appears to utilize the camera better than 3rd party apps can. So if you want to make the best of out our bad situation, stick with the stock camera app.

I agree that the camera on the Z3C is somewhat lacking.
Outdoors in good light it can produce some really nice photos (some of the time) although even in good conditions it still seems to make a mess of things on occasions. Indoors and low light it's just plain terrible. I've done a back to back comparison with my rather elderly SGS3 and in most circumstances the SGS3 knocks the spots off the Z3C.
The problem is marketing.
In order to produce compelling marketing material, Sony developed the 20MP sensor and put this in all their flagship phones. This is way too many MP for such a small sensor and as such the quality suffers badly in anything other than bright sunlight. Even when interpolating the image down to 8MP you still see way more noise than the equivalent true 8MP sensor and the details are mushed to buggery. I'd be happy for the resolution on smartphones to top out at 10MP, which should be enough for 4K video and multiple aspect ratios (not that I think 4K video from a smartphone has much use).

sensor not bad, driver sometimes is...
Exmor IMX220 Shoot Out – Meizu MX4 Pro vs Sony Xperia Z3
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}

Wajk said:
sensor not bad, driver sometimes is...
Exmor IMX220 Shoot Out – Meizu MX4 Pro vs Sony Xperia Z3
indeed sony's pic are washed out but the looking at the "lay's" and "muji" comparision, meizu's pics are blurred.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

We all know auto mode sucks isn't that right? Well Sony hasn't designed this phone for you, i have taken some absolutely stunning photos that my friends think were taken with a proper camera. The truth is that I'm a photographer that tries to push the hardware and software to the limit and if your having a good day you can produce stunning works of art. Sure there's a bit of noise but you can't expect fullframe image quality on this sensor. Taking a backwards step from my Nex7 to the Z3 compact was a great learning experience. If you're a photographer that likes to push the limits of a camera this one is for you, if your the average joe your wasting your time. Think about it, when you buy a camera what is the point of using auto mode when it limits the amount of control you have over a photo. Its like driving an automatic transmission car at a drag race.

As a photographer, you of all people should understand that a camera phone is not likely to be used when taking serious photos. This is designed to be a point and shoot replacement for selfies, pictures of food, group photos of friends in a restaurant, etc... This phone's camera isn't a complete failure by any means, but it simply doesn't perform as well as phones from 2-3 years ago under the most basic condition (indoors). I'm just finding it difficult to explain why my $500 flagship phone takes overexposed, blurry photos when my old phones (none of which were even flagship models) did not.

Starlith said:
We all know auto mode sucks isn't that right? Well Sony hasn't designed this phone for you, i have taken some absolutely stunning photos that my friends think were taken with a proper camera. The truth is that I'm a photographer that tries to push the hardware and software to the limit and if your having a good day you can produce stunning works of art. Sure there's a bit of noise but you can't expect fullframe image quality on this sensor. Taking a backwards step from my Nex7 to the Z3 compact was a great learning experience. If you're a photographer that likes to push the limits of a camera this one is for you, if your the average joe your wasting your time. Think about it, when you buy a camera what is the point of using auto mode when it limits the amount of control you have over a photo. Its like driving an automatic transmission car at a drag race.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am also a photographer (enthusiastic amateur and no expert for sure) who has worked for a software company in the digital imaging industry for 7 years. I get to sample a lot of cameras; including pre-production test mules, some of which never make it due to unrecoverable issues. I have tried the Z3C in every conceivable mode and it's still a disappointment in low light and unpredictable when it's good light. A brief summary of the biggest issues I've seen would include:
1) Poor light performance - It's not even low light, the performance is poor in moderate lighting conditions (20MP is too much for such a small sensor and lens)
2) Unpredictable auto focus - It misses what should be an easy AF fix more often than it should do
3) Too much NR - TBH this is a personal criticism of almost every camera currently made, but the NR on the Z3C is a bit nasty
4) Even the best shots seem to lack "definition"
I'm not saying that the camera is a complete dead-loss, but for a flagship smartphone it's not as good as I would expect. I don't think that I've taken a single picture with it where I've got home, uploaded it to my PC and thought it was really good. I've checked back through my SGS3 pictures and at a glance the best images look like they've come from a "proper" camera, I can't say that for many of the Z3C images. I'd really like to be able to get RAW images out of the camera to see what is possible with decent post processing, but it doesn't seem like that is going to happen any time soon.
If you could give some hints about how to get the most out of the camera, then I for one would very much appreciate it.

mad-marco said:
I am also a photographer (enthusiastic amateur and no expert for sure) who has worked for a software company in the digital imaging industry for 7 years. I get to sample a lot of cameras; including pre-production test mules, some of which never make it due to unrecoverable issues. I have tried the Z3C in every conceivable mode and it's still a disappointment in low light and unpredictable when it's good light. A brief summary of the biggest issues I've seen would include:
1) Poor light performance - It's not even low light, the performance is poor in moderate lighting conditions (20MP is too much for such a small sensor and lens)
2) Unpredictable auto focus - It misses what should be an easy AF fix more often than it should do
3) Too much NR - TBH this is a personal criticism of almost every camera currently made, but the NR on the Z3C is a bit nasty
4) Even the best shots seem to lack "definition"
I'm not saying that the camera is a complete dead-loss, but for a flagship smartphone it's not as good as I would expect. I don't think that I've taken a single picture with it where I've got home, uploaded it to my PC and thought it was really good. I've checked back through my SGS3 pictures and at a glance the best images look like they've come from a "proper" camera, I can't say that for many of the Z3C images. I'd really like to be able to get RAW images out of the camera to see what is possible with decent post processing, but it doesn't seem like that is going to happen any time soon.
If you could give some hints about how to get the most out of the camera, then I for one would very much appreciate it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you, it does have its limits and they are really weird limits. For example when in manual mode anything that is set to auto including white balance and focus is either hit or miss, there is no touch metering, i have taken some stunners but they required me to work hard for it such as adjusting wb, iso, focus mode. Even the background defocus app which produced amazing photos btw i had to work really hard for. All that work on a phone is exhausting. Too many apps complicate the camera app and the post processing algorithm is inconsistent. Im interested what the results would be with a lens similar to the iPhone 6. The best thing about the camera is the wide angle lens but no one really cares for that.

Starlith said:
I agree with you, it does have its limits and they are really weird limits. For example when in manual mode anything that is set to auto including white balance and focus is either hit or miss, there is no touch metering, i have taken some stunners but they required me to work hard for it such as adjusting wb, iso, focus mode. Even the background defocus app which produced amazing photos btw i had to work really hard for. All that work on a phone is exhausting. Too many apps complicate the camera app and the post processing algorithm is inconsistent. Im interested what the results would be with a lens similar to the iPhone 6. The best thing about the camera is the wide angle lens but no one really cares for that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I personally don't even like the wide angle lens. It just forces me to stand that much closer to my subject to properly frame the shot. Then, if using flash, you blind them because you're standing 1 foot in front of their face. Anyway, I thought a sony branded lens/sensor was being used on most high end phones these days... even the iPhone? We just got stuck with poor image processing.

PuffDaddy_d said:
I personally don't even like the wide angle lens. It just forces me to stand that much closer to my subject to properly frame the shot. Then, if using flash, you blind them because you're standing 1 foot in front of their face. Anyway, I thought a sony branded lens/sensor was being used on most high end phones these days... even the iPhone? We just got stuck with poor image processing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When you buy a phone you don't expect it to take pictures like an SLR Camera would, that being said though I still think 20 mp is more than enough for taking snapshots. If you complain about the camera quality then you shouldn't have bought a phone in the first place and buy a DSLR instead.

and if you came from a Nokia flagship this difference is even bigger ....

Revontheus said:
When you buy a phone you don't expect it to take pictures like an SLR Camera would, that being said though I still think 20 mp is more than enough for taking snapshots. If you complain about the camera quality then you shouldn't have bought a phone in the first place and buy a DSLR instead.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've already got several DSLR's thanks very much. I don't think that anyone is expecting DSLR like quality, in fact you seem to be the only person who has brought this up.
I think that what people would like is the the camera on Sony's flagship smartphones to be comparable with other smartphones, especially the ones that have the same sensor hardware!!! It's a disappointment that the 2/3 year old SGS3 produces superior photos than the current Sony flagships, the current Samsung 16MP cameras are vastly superior.

Revontheus said:
When you buy a phone you don't expect it to take pictures like an SLR Camera would, that being said though I still think 20 mp is more than enough for taking snapshots. If you complain about the camera quality then you shouldn't have bought a phone in the first place and buy a DSLR instead.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have completely missed the point of this thread. It has nothing to do with expecting DSLR quality from a camera phone. We just don't want pictures to look like they were taken from a flip phone from 2006 - which is what this camera looks like when taking photos indoors. A flagship phone needs a flagship camera, and Sony's image processing has left us without, while all other major manufacturers are using some form of Sony image sensor and getting much better results.
But as my original post indicates, the best photos I've been able to get from this camera are with the stock camera app. All others seem to fall short when viewed on a larger screen.

ray_J13 said:
Wajk said:
sensor not bad, driver sometimes is...
Exmor IMX220 Shoot Out – Meizu MX4 Pro vs Sony Xperia Z3
indeed sony's pic are washed out but the looking at the "lay's" and "muji" comparision, meizu's pics are blurred.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Seems to me the camera glass on her Z3C was a bit smudged... That would explain the haze.
And the small details on the Z3C look much better and cleaner at 100% zoom than on the Meizu, even if the Z3C was a bit out of focus.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

I'm so disappointed in this camera. I took my Z3C and my old HTC Droid Incredible 2 to a concert last night. Inc2's pics were much crisper and cleaner. The videos were better as well (at 720p), though the sound on the Z3C's vids were better. Inc2 is what, 4 years old?
Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk

Crewville96 said:
I'm so disappointed in this camera. I took my Z3C and my old HTC Droid Incredible 2 to a concert last night. Inc2's pics were much crisper and cleaner. The videos were better as well (at 720p), though the sound on the Z3C's vids were better. Inc2 is what, 4 years old?
Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, this is our point exactly! The Z3C camera has far more advanced technology in it, yet the results are sub par to midrange and outdated phones. Care to share any of your pics for reference?
Sent from my Xperia Z3 Compact

PuffDaddy_d said:
Yes, this is our point exactly! The Z3C camera has far more advanced technology in it, yet the results are sub par to midrange and outdated phones. Care to share any of your pics for reference?
Sent from my Xperia Z3 Compact
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can upload the vids and couple pics. None of the pics are really the same for comparison since i was in the crowd at the concert though. But you can get a general idea.

PuffDaddy_d said:
Yes, this is our point exactly! The Z3C camera has far more advanced technology in it, yet the results are sub par to midrange and outdated phones. Care to share any of your pics for reference?
Sent from my Xperia Z3 Compact
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's my vids. One is from my old Droid Incredible 2 (2011, running GB) the other is from my Z3C (2014, running LP). I'll let you guys judge which vid is better.

That concert looks like it was a lot of fun! I watched both videos on full screen and i personally think the top video looks better - less grainy and handled the bright lighting much better.

PuffDaddy_d said:
That concert looks like it was a lot of fun! I watched both videos on full screen and i personally think the top video looks better - less grainy and handled the bright lighting much better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, just cleaner and sharper overall. Thats the Droid Incredible 2 video (720 only as well, Z3C is at 1080 lol).