Database Users

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.

HTC One vs Lumia 920 Imaging Comparison

Hey Guys!
What do you think about this HTC One vs Lumia 920 Imaging Comparison? I have used both HTC One & Lumia 920 but i must say i was a little disappointed to see the HTC One low-light performance. It doesn't perform how it was promised too. What was most disappointing was that it didn't even have "Light Assisted Focus" which made it difficult to take focused photographs in low light. What do you guys think about it? Did i miss anything? Did i overlook the "Light Assisted Focus" or am i right? Looking forward to your informative replies.

the Lumia 920 use settings similar to night mode on the One, so try night mode and more importantly try HDR which is the SGS4 night mode method but at much faster shutter
Regrading focus the "touch to capture" mode will solve it, when you touch your target, the camera will reach focus and take a shot
using HDR plus auto flash light, will "flash assist" the HDR capture and the results are incredible (similar to the method used in Lumia 925)
HDR (no flash, good shutter speed)
{
"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"
}
Night (Less noise, fixed ISO, slower shutter/focus)
Auto (Main low light quality, slow shutter/focus)
HDR (no flash, good shutter speed)
Night (Less noise, fixed ISO, slower shutter/focus)
Auto (Main low light quality, slow shutter/focus)
Zoe Mode (Fast shutter / focus, lowest quality)
finally comparisons are not allowed on this forum

I bought HTC One as a replacement to my Lumia 920 (and I still have it).
I have not made any proper comparison yet, however my immediate feeling is, that HTC One is a big downgrade in terms o camera performance, when it comes to IOS, picture quality and recorded sound quality. The only thing that HTC is superior in is (in my opinion) image sharpness/details, which are still lacking on the WIndows Phones.
Having said that, I treat Lumia as my idiotic experiment and I will probably never abandon Android again.
If I find a bit time I will do a picture comparison with both phones, side by side.

valdigre said:
I bought HTC One as a replacement to my Lumia 920 (and I still have it).
I have not made any proper comparison yet, however my immediate feeling is, that HTC One is a big downgrade in terms o camera performance, when it comes to IOS, picture quality and recorded sound quality. The only thing that HTC is superior in is (in my opinion) image sharpness/details, which are still lacking on the WIndows Phones.
Having said that, I treat Lumia as my idiotic experiment and I will probably never abandon Android again.
If I find a bit time I will do a picture comparison with both phones, side by side.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you make zoes with a Lumia too?

to be honest I don't think the comparison is fair. The image quality of the htc one is simply awful. Nearly every other phone i had made better pictures (ok the nexus 4 was a bad one ^^). that said, i have to admit it IS very decent in low light and color reproduction. but while other phones produce clean and detail rich photos in normal daylight, my one struggles to keep up with.
the camera is really the only thing I absolutly dislike about this phone (and as a sony fan that is a huge compliment toward htc).
what bugs me the most is that 4MP in reality isn't that awful at all, still htc decides to treat the picture with way to much smoothing, eliminating effectively that few details it captured. Despite I honor my camera in my phones a lot, I have to admit I would still miss the One if I'd sell it. After all, it's still 1 little detail.

Mooozer said:
to be honest I don't think the comparison is fair. The image quality of the htc one is simply awful. Nearly every other phone i had made better pictures (ok the nexus 4 was a bad one ^^). that said, i have to admit it IS very decent in low light and color reproduction. but while other phones produce clean and detail rich photos in normal daylight, my one struggles to keep up with.
the camera is really the only thing I absolutly dislike about this phone (and as a sony fan that is a huge compliment toward htc).
what bugs me the most is that 4MP in reality isn't that awful at all, still htc decides to treat the picture with way to much smoothing, eliminating effectively that few details it captured. Despite I honor my camera in my phones a lot, I have to admit I would still miss the One if I'd sell it. After all, it's still 1 little detail.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i agree with you HTC One is a great phone except that awful camera i dont know why they didnt use Omnivision or Sony sensor rather go with ST microelectronics

cihanleanne said:
i agree with you HTC One is a great phone except that awful camera i dont know why they didnt use Omnivision or Sony sensor rather go with ST microelectronics
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ST Micro is mic

I give HTC props for trying to buck the trend and do something "new" but it does have it's weaknesses.
Instead of trying to be different by using a 4MP and try to debunk the megapixel craze, they should have made a 8MP Ultrapixel camera and just market it as the new generation of cameras, and then appease all crowds.

I Am Marino said:
I give HTC props for trying to buck the trend and do something "new" but it does have it's weaknesses.
Instead of trying to be different by using a 4MP and try to debunk the megapixel craze, they should have made a 8MP Ultrapixel camera and just market it as the new generation of cameras, and then appease all crowds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think you understand what "Ultrapixel" is.

Itaintrite said:
I don't think you understand what "Ultrapixel" is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm sure I don't.
I have absolutely zero understanding of camera sensors, etc.
I'm generally a proponent of people feeling way too entitled to having some kind of super digital camera in their phone.
But if an OEM is going to try, go big or try again.

I Am Marino said:
I'm sure I don't.
I have absolutely zero understanding of camera sensors, etc.
I'm generally a proponent of people feeling way too entitled to having some kind of super digital camera in their phone.
But if an OEM is going to try, go big or try again.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Funnily enough, HTC did go big with "Ultrapixel".

It's not bad in daytime, it's just not great. Only good/meh. It blows away even the L920 in night time though.
Overall I'd like to see HTC take on the L1020 with a huge sensor. 1/1.5 with 14.5MP would destroy the L1020 for low light, although it would have less sharpness (need at least 20MP to eliminate bayer artifacting through oversampling).

townay said:
ST Micro is mic
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No its not when i fix tear the Htc one it was ST Microelectronics

Se some posters suggesting an 8mp ultra pixel camera in future htc units. But is that even possible without destroying the slim design? If you want to build a sensor with the larger ultra pixels and pack twice number of pixels, the sensor must become much larger. And then you probably must move the lense further away from the sensor to cover it with light (the image). Hence you need to build a thicker device.
Maybe this is why Nokias are on the hefty side.
But hey, this is just a humble theory based on my limited knowledge of sensors and optics.
Skickat från min HTC One via Tapatalk 2

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).

Camera produces cold photos - very disappointed! Can it be fixed? White balance?

I just bought this phone, and I'm extremely disappointed in the camera. My wife has a note4 which takes great photos, which I've been using pretty much every day as we recently had a child (our first). My main reason for buying a new phone was to always have a good camera on hand for taking photos of our son. I hate big phones though, hence why I didn't buy the note4.
Anyway, after buying the z3c, it turns out that I hate the photos it takes They are all completely lifeless and cold. When I take a photo with the note4, what I see on the screen is pretty much exactly what I see in real life. With the z3c I can clearly see the difference right away (and it's not just the phone screen). I've tried experimenting with settings in manual mode as well, but I'm not having much luck. Granted I'm not claiming to know much about these things. I don't care if it's not the highest resolution or the sharpest details (or not at this stage at least), I just want some colors that looks like what I'm seeing with my eyes. I've gone back to using the camera from my wifes phone again despite my own phone only being a week old, which is a bit sad.
Is there anything I can do about this? I feel like there should be a simple adjustment somewhere, but I can't find it. The colors on the screen were horrid as well, but I've adjusted those by using the "white balance" settings (where I significantly increased red and green while leaving blue at 0). Is there a similar setting for the camera or is there a different app I can download where I can make this adjustment?
I just want to be able to use my camera...
Here is an example. I took two photos, one after the other, using the z3c and the note4. He moved a little bit so they are not identical, but zoom in on his face and you'll see what I mean. One of the photos has got some color and in the other he looks pale and lifeless. The color in the first photo seem to match what I am seeing in real life (he is half asian, so somewhat yellow skin tone) It's a bit hard to show, but you'll just have to trust me that the photo which has more yellow in it is significantly more accurate. This is not even the worst photo either, this one is probably passable if looked at in isolation, but just one example I quickly snapped just now. They are all like this (or often worse) and it has led me to not wanting to use my camera at all.
EDIT: as a new user I was not able to add a link, but as this is just to dropbox, I hope it's OK that I present it like this. You will have to piece it together if you want to view it:
www dropbox com/sh/vb68vqquykxj13m/AAArXwsdSZHKdJCzz25Tu3Qxa?dl=0
Any suggestions on how I can fix this without having to manually post process the photos are much appreciated. I should note that I really love the phone in all other aspects so far, but the main reason I bought it was for the camera as mentioned.
EDIT: sorry, maybe this belongs in the questions forum. If so I apologize and feel free to move it.
EDIT: to clarify, I found what looks like a white balance setting, but it's only 4 preset modes. But maybe that is all we've got. I'll try and experiment with them and see if any produces better result than wb auto.
EDIT: those settings above seems to seriously mess with the colors, at least in current low light room I'm in. Despite loving the phone, I'm considering cutting my losses while it's still current and try to sell it In which case i would probably pick up a Samsung galaxy s6 instead, which should have an equivalent camera to the note 4. It's much bigger than I prefer though, and inflated price due to hype and being a new model as well

The s6 has a better camera in most conditions. That said the difference isnt that bad. On my screen both photos look very similar.
Anyway the usual thing, try in manual mode 8mp, slightly lower expo, multi, and adda tiny bit of clarity in google photos - seems to give best results on average

bilboa1 said:
The s6 has a better camera in most conditions. That said the difference isnt that bad. On my screen both photos look very similar.
Anyway the usual thing, try in manual mode 8mp, slightly lower expo, multi, and adda tiny bit of clarity in google photos - seems to give best results on average
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not the best example, you probably have to zoom in on face to see the difference. I might try and take a better example photo, but basically I lose all yellow in his skin tone and all I get is white and red.
I'll try your suggestions as well. Thanks.

You'll see from my camera thread and others that the Z3 is simply a poor performing camera indoors. There's little you can do to fix it.
Sent from my Xperia Z3 Compact

PuffDaddy_d said:
You'll see from my camera thread and others that the Z3 is simply a poor performing camera indoors. There's little you can do to fix it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've read your thread now, and it doesn't paint a very positive picture. I still don't understand why it's so bad though, especially since the hardware seems good. From my point of view, I would be OK if pictures are not sharp enough or not capturing as much details as they could, but the poor color replication is a deal breaker.
Do you know if there is any sign that they are working on improving the software? Maybe with the release of z4/z3+ they might release a software update applicable to z3 as well? I know I'm grasping at straws, but still. You'd think they'd try and fix it. If nothing else, it's embarrassing that all competitors are significantly better despite using sonys sensor. This should be their absolute strongest point, their ace card, and instead they are getting destroyed.

White balance is the key for my photos... Auto WB always produces unatractive photos. Cloudy, and sunny settings add some warmth to the photo.

tompab said:
I've read your thread now, and it doesn't paint a very positive picture. I still don't understand why it's so bad though, especially since the hardware seems good. From my point of view, I would be OK if pictures are not sharp enough or not capturing as much details as they could, but the poor color replication is a deal breaker.
Do you know if there is any sign that they are working on improving the software? Maybe with the release of z4/z3+ they might release a software update applicable to z3 as well? I know I'm grasping at straws, but still. You'd think they'd try and fix it. If nothing else, it's embarrassing that all competitors are significantly better despite using sonys sensor. This should be their absolute strongest point, their ace card, and instead they are getting destroyed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I couldn't agree with you more. I read an article where someone managed to compare the display of the Z3 vs the Z3+ and noticed that the plus has a warmer tone. Probably still to early to know is the camera software has improved any though. Sadly, I've started to use filters on the shots that look too cold to help earn them up a bit... More of a workaround than a solution.
Sent from my Xperia Z3 Compact

tompab said:
I just bought this phone, and I'm extremely disappointed in the camera. My wife has a note4 which takes great photos, which I've been using pretty much every day as we recently had a child (our first). My main reason for buying a new phone was to always have a good camera on hand for taking photos of our son. I hate big phones though, hence why I didn't buy the note4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've got a Z1c(not Z3c) and S6 but I think I can share you some ideas here. Sony tends to like cold WB while S6 produces warm WB. Indeed, they both got pros and cons in my experiences bcoz Samsung is also easy to produce over-warm coast and sometimes not real good, it is just too warm, though in your case I admit this time warm WB got real better result.
If you want a smaller phone, you can consider the upcoming S6 mini(SM-G9198) with 4.6" 720P, s808, 2GB ram, 16GB rom, NFC, 16MP rear camera, 5MP front camera. Sony focus is just all bad(actually the image quality isn't bad though you can't compete it with Note4/S6) and Samsung is like 10 times better when you talking about the speed and focus part.

TheEndHK said:
I've got a Z1c(not Z3c) and S6 but I think I can share you some ideas here. Sony tends to like cold WB while S6 produces warm WB. Indeed, they both got pros and cons in my experiences bcoz Samsung is also easy to produce over-warm coast and sometimes not real good, it is just too warm, though in your case I admit this time warm WB got real better result.
If you want a smaller phone, you can consider the upcoming S6 mini(SM-G9198) with 4.6" 720P, s808, 2GB ram, 16GB rom, NFC, 16MP rear camera, 5MP front camera. Sony focus is just all bad(actually the image quality isn't bad though you can't compete it with Note4/S6) and Samsung is like 10 times better when you talking about the speed and focus part.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I will be very interested to see how that 16mp cam performs, if its anything like the S5 or S6 I may very well convert. Especially if they get the nicer build of the S6 in too, Just please no glass back.

S6 build also means glass back. I have no problems with glass. I'm not too fond of the diplay, Pentile matrix means less subpixels (=less sharpness) and effective resolution similar to qHD. It's clearly visible (rubbih harpness/dottiness) and just bad for the money.
PuffDaddy_d said:
I couldn't agree with you more. I read an article where someone managed to compare the display of the Z3 vs the Z3+ and noticed that the plus has a warmer tone. Probably still to early to know is the camera software has improved any though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Z3+ takes warmer pictures indeed but there's even more digital noise reduction:
{
"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"
}

majaczos said:
S6 build also means glass back. I have no problems with glass. I'm not too fond of the diplay, Pentile matrix means less subpixels (=less sharpness) and effective resolution similar to qHD. It's clearly visible (rubbih harpness/dottiness) and just bad for the money.
Z3+ takes warmer pictures indeed but there's even more digital noise reduction:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honestly, I can't even see the difference in color tone between these photos. At most, I see that the plus didn't focus properly in this shot.
Sent from my Xperia Z3 Compact

PuffDaddy_d said:
Honestly, I can't even see the difference in color tone between these photos. At most, I see that the plus didn't focus properly in this shot.
Sent from my Xperia Z3 Compact
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same here... its splitting hairs to say there is any difference in color tone. That could easily be randomness with the Z3 being warm in the next shot.

Look at the concrete. It's much warmer. Another pictures (from gsmarena):
Z3:
http://cdn.gsmarena.com/vv/reviewsimg/sony-xperia-z3/camera/gsmarena_015.jpg
Z3+:
http://cdn.gsmarena.com/vv/reviewsimg/sony-xperia-z3plus/camera/gsmarena_102.jpg

majaczos said:
Look at the concrete. It's much warmer. Another pictures (from gsmarena):
Z3:
http://cdn.gsmarena.com/vv/reviewsimg/sony-xperia-z3/camera/gsmarena_015.jpg
Z3+:
http://cdn.gsmarena.com/vv/reviewsimg/sony-xperia-z3plus/camera/gsmarena_102.jpg
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, yeah, the concrete does look warmer with the plus, but these are very obvious. Though, I question why it appears that so much time passed between shots. The sky is clear in one photo but is cloudy in the next. Overcast conditions will affect the white balance as well. Still a bit too soon for me to judge.
Sent from my Xperia Z3 Compact

Cronis said:
I will be very interested to see how that 16mp cam performs, if its anything like the S5 or S6 I may very well convert. Especially if they get the nicer build of the S6 in too, Just please no glass back.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is no much info yet so I can't tell about S6 Compact but we can make some safe guess here and probably quite close to the true specification.
1. Probably used the new ISOCell 16MP to save cost. We all know that S6 got two sensors which is Sony IMX240 and Samsung ISOCell. This time the ISOCell is improved and better than the one on S5, so it is a 2nd gen. It got better color during at low light while IMX240 got more details. On day time, both sensors are almost identical. Mine S6 got IMX240.
2. OIS is removed for cost.
3. Aperture down to f/2.2 or f/2.4 depending the price strategic
If Samsung willing to give it a f/2.2 then it is safe to say it is a killer for Z3c though Z3c will still own some advantages like waterproof and best battery life. Not sure about microSD card thing. Consider it got a powerful s808 so as a small flagship, very possible to own a f/2.2 aperture.
https://shopmeenova.appspot.com/st/p/mrg2.html
I use this otg to solve my storage problem on S6.

Aperture eans nothing without sensor's size. Z3 can have higher aperture because IMX220 one of the biggest sensors on the (mobile) market right now.
We know nothing about the S6 mini, SM-G9198 sounds like SM-G9098's replacement:
http://gadgets.ndtv.com/samsung-sm-g9098-1608

majaczos said:
Aperture eans nothing without sensor's size. Z3 can have higher aperture because IMX220 one of the biggest sensors on the (mobile) market right now.
We know nothing about the S6 mini, SM-G9198 sounds like SM-G9098's replacement:
http://gadgets.ndtv.com/samsung-sm-g9098-1608
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it is impossible to be the next G9098 bcoz it got only 3.7" size while G9198 is 4.6" with such powerful s808 cpu, they are in total different market segment.
Aperture is real meaningful in any size bcoz my One S(8MP 1/3.2") got f/2.0 so I know about it and Iphone 5s/6/6+ got only 8MP 1/3" f/2.2 but they are doing very well at low light too.

TheEndHK said:
I think it is impossible to be the next G9098 bcoz it got only 3.7" size while G9198 is 4.6" with such powerful s808 cpu, they are in total different market segment.
Aperture is real meaningful in any size bcoz my One S(8MP 1/3.2") got f/2.0 so I know about it and Iphone 5s/6/6+ got only 8MP 1/3" f/2.2 but they are doing very well at low light too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe they want to reduce bezels? Or make it bigger? SM-G9098 has very powerful CPU as well, actually it was the most powerful back in 2014..
They're ok in low light situations (partially thanks to decent image processing) but you can't trick physics.

majaczos said:
Maybe they want to reduce bezels? Or make it bigger? SM-G9098 has very powerful CPU as well, actually it was the most powerful back in 2014..
They're ok in low light situations (partially thanks to decent image processing) but you can't trick physics.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
G9098 is 3.7" size while G9198 is 4.6", the different is big enough because there is no 4.6" size flip phone becoz when you put a 4.6" screen together with a physical keyboard, the phone will be very fat and large and customer will end up prefer to get a Note4/5 instead with similar size. But I like the good old day flip phone style, actually I want to see more coming out.

Thanks for all the help guys. Just thought I'd give an update if anyone is interested.
I still really dislike the z3c camera and was considering selling the phone and picking up a galaxy s6. I do however like the other aspects of the z3c, so I ended up buying a proper camera instead. I can use my wife's note4 for a quick snap if I don't have my camera nearby. It's a compromise, but I think it made more sense.

So the S7 camera performs better than the Z5/Z5P ? I can't stop laughing...

Ok I'm Kinda mad here... There are things I don't understand and I will probably never....
How on earth, would every review on the internet including youtube videos give the upper hand to the S7 camera which has SONY IMX260 R EXMOR that has 7.18 mm sensor size and a 1.4 μm x 1.4 μm unit cell size while the Z5/Premium has the "exclusive cutting edge" RS EXMOR IMX300 with 7.87 mm sensor size and 1.1 μm x 1.1 μm pixel size ?
And please don't tell me about image processing ? Why on earth a giant Japanese corporation such as SONY specialized and leader in photography, videography, pictures and music Entertainment without forgetting their BIONZ image processor that compete or even wins over Nikon EXPEED and
Canon DIGIC can't do image processing right on a freaking CMOS sensor ?
Now yeah the Z5/P pictures are decent and although very good on a very sunny day.... I'll remain quiet for the low light part....
So to sum it up... a Samsung with an IMX260 12MP sensor is on par or outperforms a Sony IMX300 23MP ( 25MP ) sensor...
Funny isn't it ?

It's not funny at all.
Still,I find that Z5 camera is best on market atm.
Xperia Z5 via Tapatalk

Very easy good hardware and bad software.
Sony can't compete software wise with who had nexus phones.
Samsung LG know better about android and how to create a better software cause they took lot of info from Google while they have Nexus phones.

Well money talks. S7 just cant match Z1+ line. Take a look at original S7 full resolution photos. Photo IQ is awfull on the S7. Over-sharpening that creates awfull halos and contrast, to much texture detail, texture extraction that gives a gritty look and to much noise reduction that makes for a blurry image with lost detail and plastic look. S7 has borderline the bad CRT chromatic aberration look and reminds me of old cheap digital cameras.
I'll quote one of my other posts wher one can see that even in an unfair comparision that favors the S7 my Z1 just performs much better. Much better and if making things more even by choosing 2048x1536 for my Z1 photos and same or similar for S7 my Z1 just walks all over the S7. Z5 does no worse unless in SA or the NR goes wonky.
When I look at S7 photos in good and low light it just reminds me of the bad CRT "chromatic aberration" look. Great artistic value but the persons S7 destroys IQ beyond reparation. https://www.flickr.com/photos/gavinfabl100/
I mean even the Z1 blows it out and Z5 even more. Look at this comparision which favors the S7 as the images are shown at 100% size which means my Z1 is showing a far bigger image aswell as in worse lighting conditions with far less photons in the ambient to capture (see shutter speed difference) yet it performs better. Would I scale it down to same size as the S7 it would be a brutal comparision leaving the S7 in the dust. One can choose 2048 pixel width to see this in the links.
Stock original photos, default camera apps.
S7 buildings.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/gavinfabl100/25743187832/sizes/o/
Z1 buildings.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/csls/25516883060/sizes/o/
S7 forest.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/gavinfabl100/25837956126/sizes/o/
Z1 forest.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/csls/25019022984/sizes/o/
Might take some time some day with the Z5c and capture photos in same locations once the sun is about same (wild weather over here).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And here are more S7 samples.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/gavinfabl100/25837956126/sizes/o/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/gavinfabl100/25208922064/sizes/o/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/gavinfabl100/25404249180/sizes/o/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/gavinfabl100/25021532094/sizes/o/
And here is low light.
Will check files once released here and compare CRC to see if they changed algorithms. As for the S7 I agree, it does moderately good but far worse than Sonys Xperia Z1+ line. The biggest issue on the S7 besides tending to go overboard with sharpening and noise reduction which smoothes out to much and gives a bad fake plastic look (often easily visible around fine-grain detail like branches and leaves) is that it also when post-processing brightens up the image by tweaking curves. Most software does this but should be catiously used to extract detail from low contrast areas. Samsung goes overboard often giving it the 'fake ISO' look where black turns grey. Xperia Z1+ phones give quite a bit better low light photos same ISO for ISO and shutter speed while not even having to resort to major curve tweaking just minor or barely any and it does it selectively in a often excellent way. I assume the BIONZ is really a power beast for such dedicated tasks but sensors in Sonys phones are just better even though older and they are coupled with great optics.
It's just now that Samsung is starting use similar tech that Sony already employed in their mobiles years ago. I think Iphone 6s also got a bit of it but it relies mostly on multi-frame photo composition to create higher ISO like the Nexus 6p HDR+ does. Xperia Z1+ also does this but only when doing ISO 6400 (atleast the Z1) else not. Problem is you need to keep scene static else you get ghosting and bluriness. Haven't checked it fully out for the Z5c though but it should do better.
I guess you could say the S6 gives more detail and less blur but it also has way to much curve tweaking as the S7 but just much worse for same low light situations. S6 just turns to a mess at ISO 1000+ and low light while S7 does better. Both S6 and S7 also automatically (atleast in auto mode) if stable does multi-frame capture in low light to create improved noise reduction. Why some S6/S7 photos at say ISO 1000 looks bad and others much cleaner. Scene has to be static though and mobile firm. Same concept you can find in ProCapture camera app and their noise reduction mode.
Photo example of the S7 post-processing and curves.
Without HDR enabled.
{
"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"
}
With HDR enabled.
Sony avoids this in most cases and dont go overboard like that keeping blacks deep and rich aswell as colors punchy and representation of captured scene is far better.
And a Z1 sample from manual mode 8MP, 1/8 ISO 3200. Little and smart use of brightening via the changing curves despite high ISO of 3200 keeping the blacks quite well, global contrast and colors punchy despite heavy tungsten lighting!
Manual mode, 1/8 ISO 1600 of same scene two days apart around same time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

The sensor is just one part of the camera, there are so many other elements that can make it better or worse.
That's like saying one restaurant has better steak and complaining as somewhere else uses better cows - it's all about the cooking of the meat and the accompaniments that go with it.
In photography's case it's about the lens system, the image stabilisation and the post-processing. As posters above have said, the software controlling the Sony sensor in the S7 is great, no doubt.
Answer me this: if you give an amazing camera to a bad photographer will you get a better photo than giving a bad camera to a good photographer?

Answer me this: if you give an amazing camera to a bad photographer will you get a better photo than giving a bad camera to a good photographer?[/QUOTE]
Let me answer :
Are you able to drive faster in a Bentley than in a Renault even if you are a bad driver ?
Yes !!!
Same with photos quality (not photo skills)
I agree that the human factor is there but can not excuse all Sony conservative attitude plus Sony do not want to let 3rd party improve their lack of dev.
But still happy with my Z5 result... It is a phone and we do not have to expect the same quality as a Reflex

NJ72 said:
The sensor is just one part of the camera, there are so many other elements that can make it better or worse.
That's like saying one restaurant has better steak and complaining as somewhere else uses better cows - it's all about the cooking of the meat and the accompaniments that go with it.
In photography's case it's about the lens system, the image stabilisation and the post-processing. As posters above have said, the software controlling the Sony sensor in the S7 is great, no doubt.
Answer me this: if you give an amazing camera to a bad photographer will you get a better photo than giving a bad camera to a good photographer?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I understand what you're trying to say but is it justified ? Is it possible that SONY can't make a software that control their own sensors ? Is it acceptable that other companies using SONY sensors whether modified or not, can make better use of it ?
SONY that has been in the photography industry since decades can't deal with their own driver and post processors on a mobile phone ?
Again the pictures on the Z5P are good but try going zoom to 100%... most of the details are missing compared to rivals.... not sure if it's lack of sharpness whatsoever but certainly the post processing needs work.
Look at their Z5 camera promotion bragging about the auto-focus speed... I literally had to find one single time I could get a a clear photo of somebody moving.
Don't get me wrong I'm a huge fan of the device but it just puts me on my nerve that we have the best hardware and the " best " brand name yet we always have excuses for the camera behavior.

Xeon said:
I understand what you're trying to say but is it justified ? Is it possible that SONY can't make a software that control their own sensors ? Is it acceptable that other companies using SONY sensors whether modified or not, can make better use of it ?
SONY that has been in the photography industry since decades can't deal with their own driver and post processors on a mobile phone ?
Again the pictures on the Z5P are good but try going zoom to 100%... most of the details are missing compared to rivals.... not sure if it's lack of sharpness whatsoever but certainly the post processing needs work.
Look at their Z5 camera promotion bragging about the auto-focus speed... I literally had to find one single time I could get a a clear photo of somebody moving.
Don't get me wrong I'm a huge fan of the device but it just puts me on my nerve that we have the best hardware and the " best " brand name yet we always have excuses for the camera behavior.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In my opinion it's quite obvious with the Z5 premium that Sony spent more time focussing on the display than the camera's image processing. Sony could do a lot more with the camera than they do, but there are numerous other factors Sony consider when designing a smartphone. Evidently they either A) do not have the skills, B) don't rate it high enough or C) think they nailed it when it comes to the camera.
I agree that Sony should have done more with it, but I bought the phone knowing that they hadn't and I'd buy it again over Samsung's TouchWiz interface. I prefer my DSLR for photography, for me the rest of the phone is more important.
And, in answer to your first question, yes - what I said is justified. Whether it's what you'd have done if you were part of Sony's dev team, who knows, but what they did is make a very good phone with a camera that could be better.

NJ72 said:
In my opinion it's quite obvious with the Z5 premium that Sony spent more time focussing on the display than the camera's image processing. Sony could do a lot more with the camera than they do, but there are numerous other factors Sony consider when designing a smartphone. Evidently they either A) do not have the skills, B) don't rate it high enough or C) think they nailed it when it comes to the camera.
I agree that Sony should have done more with it, but I bought the phone knowing that they hadn't and I'd buy it again over Samsung's TouchWiz interface. I prefer my DSLR for photography, for me the rest of the phone is more important.
And, in answer to your first question, yes - what I said is justified. Whether it's what you'd have done if you were part of Sony's dev team, who knows, but what they did is make a very good phone with a camera that could be better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well to be honest, SONY only brags about their camera performance in their devices.... This time in September they mentioned nothing but the 4K screen and the IMX300. No major change to the device design, software is close to stock android and the IP68 has been there for ages.
http://www.sonymobile.com/global-en/products/phones/xperia-z5/
See ? They are so proud of their camera that this is the only marketing card in their hands for now. As for lack of expertise, I really doubt but I can nothing but believe that they thought they nailed it when in fact it's still horrible in low light conditions.

The big problem I have with the Z5 is its shutter lag and no burst shooting. So you're left with rapidly tapping the shutter button which only gives you about 3fps. On the S7 you get a burst mode at over 20fps.
It's ridiculous how their ads show an instantaneous shutter but it could be no further from the truth. Even with Marshmallow the shutter lag is still pretty bad. This seagull was standing on the bridge when I pressed the shutter and the camera captured when it already started to fly away.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/j5hcj2jeazzjs77/DSC_0988.JPG?dl=0
Even HTC M9+ Supreme Camera has faster shutter and better manual options than Z5. It uses IMX230 and is a pretty bi

FYLin21 said:
The big problem I have with the Z5 is its shutter lag and no burst shooting. So you're left with rapidly tapping the shutter button which only gives you about 3fps. On the S7 you get a burst mode at over 20fps.
It's ridiculous how their ads show an instantaneous shutter but it could be no further from the truth. Even with Marshmallow the shutter lag is still pretty bad. This seagull was standing on the bridge when I pressed the shutter and the camera captured when it already started to fly away.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/j5hcj2jeazzjs77/DSC_0988.JPG?dl=0
Even HTC M9+ Supreme Camera has faster shutter and better manual options than Z5. It uses IMX230 and is a pretty bi
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is what I'm talking about... you see... in your pic nothing looks OK, what was the focus doing ? i can't find any part of the pic clear....
One thing I noticed is that even Whatsapp camera looks awful. I understand that the pic is compressed and the post processing is non existent but on my Xperia Z the difference wasn't noticeable that much.

gm007 said:
Very easy good hardware and bad software.
Sony can't compete software wise with who had nexus phones.
Samsung LG know better about android and how to create a better software cause they took lot of info from Google while they have Nexus phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry but I tend to disagree. I dont think OEM release need google assistance. In fact SONY is very conservative when it comes to camera software. I bet they know how to unlock raw mode and compatibility yet they don't want to.
It's obvious that the post processing has been inconsistent across the Xperia line. A bit of trial and error if you want my opinion....
What you say about bad software is correct however unjustified. I can't accept it from an industry leader such as SONY.
OK the camera is almost perfect in manual mode if you want to go hardcore and adjust every possible value and mode for a snapshot but I don't want to spend 2 minutes for that :
Look at the difference between iPhone 6S and Z5 camera.... this lack of details is what makes me go nuts.

Xeon said:
This is what I'm talking about... you see... in your pic nothing looks OK, what was the focus doing ? i can't find any part of the pic clear....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This has been zoomed a bit using "clear image zoom" which just oversharpens things. It could be fine if they just use something that rounds off the edges for up sampling, but you see a lot of jagged circular blobs throughout the edges. I had taken a few pictures of this bird standing there but the camera kept overexposing the scene. Then I brought the exposure down and tried taking a photo - the bird a still standing there the moment I pressed the shutter.
The only thing to get around no burst mode is using 4K video. You can capture 8MP stills while you film but sometimes it causes the video to stutter and it takes a long time to save them. The stills also look worse than the video itself - the contrast is lower with washed out colours. It's better to grab frames after filming but you'l need another app to do this and I'm not sure which one as I do it on my computer using Media Player Classic. You can also crop to 1080p which is better than using the digital zoom in the app - unfortunately the bitrate of 4K video is a bit low so you can see some artifacts when cropped to 1080p ...
Is the shutter lag due to software or hardware? it's hard to say. Low resolution photos from Facebook messenger can be taken instantaneously, but all the third party apps I've tried exhibit shutter lag - I think even worse than the stock camera app... and don't forget only 8MP works with third party apps.
If the images were downscaled to 8MP or something, they would be good compared to some other cameras but that defeats the purpose of having 20/23MP.
Imagine seeing the loch ness monster and you took a photo but the shutter lag means your photo doesn't show it because it dove into the water

I will give you a small example why sony is bad software wise,
In lollipop we had fingerprint scanner test in the diagnostic menu and the test was not working.
So instead to fix it in marshmallow they removed the test completely lol.

Xeon said:
Ok I'm Kinda mad here... There are things I don't understand and I will probably never....
How on earth, would every review on the internet including youtube videos give the upper hand to the S7 camera which has SONY IMX260 R EXMOR that has 7.18 mm sensor size and a 1.4 μm x 1.4 μm unit cell size while the Z5/Premium has the "exclusive cutting edge" RS EXMOR IMX300 with 7.87 mm sensor size and 1.1 μm x 1.1 μm pixel size ?
And please don't tell me about image processing ? Why on earth a giant Japanese corporation such as SONY specialized and leader in photography, videography, pictures and music Entertainment without forgetting their BIONZ image processor that compete or even wins over Nikon EXPEED and
Canon DIGIC can't do image processing right on a freaking CMOS sensor ?
Now yeah the Z5/P pictures are decent and although very good on a very sunny day.... I'll remain quiet for the low light part....
So to sum it up... a Samsung with an IMX260 12MP sensor is on par or outperforms a Sony IMX300 23MP ( 25MP ) sensor...
Funny isn't it ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, and it's no surprise, it has been the case forever.
There was never any need for Sony to stupidly try to play the MP race again, seems they didn't learn from the point and shoot and DSLR MP race/nonsense. It's all marketing BS to say hey we've got something that no one else has.
Push the boundaries of the ideal MP for a certain sensor size, then you will always have problems with different types of noise entering your photo, due to sensor heat and the sensors small size and not being able to dissipate that amount of heat effectively, as a result to clean all this up they end up having to have pretty aggressive noise reduction algorithms, this also keeps the jpg photo size down a fair bit, handy for a phone unless you want to run your storage out in no time flat. Approx 25-35MB per photo @ 23MP low light high ISO these could have been even bigger.
Realistically would have just been better off running at 12MP and requiring much less noise reduction because due to less heat build up in the photo sites of the sensor.

danw_oz said:
No, and it's no surprise, it has been the case forever.
There was never any need for Sony to stupidly try to play the MP race again, seems they didn't learn from the point and shoot and DSLR MP race/nonsense. It's all marketing BS to say hey we've got something that no one else has.
Push the boundaries of the ideal MP for a certain sensor size, then you will always have problems with different types of noise entering your photo, due to sensor heat and the sensors small size and not being able to dissipate that amount of heat effectively, as a result to clean all this up they end up having to have pretty aggressive noise reduction algorithms, this also keeps the jpg photo size down a fair bit, handy for a phone unless you want to run your storage out in no time flat. Approx 25-35MB per photo @ 23MP low light high ISO these could have been even bigger.
Realistically would have just been better off running at 12MP and requiring much less noise reduction because due to less heat build up in the photo sites of the sensor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ironically their sales and marketing strategy is flawed to death and it's chaotic but they wanna do marketing they do it the wrong way.
Seriously they should start recruiting...

hawker_gb said:
It's not funny at all.
Still,I find that Z5 camera is best on market atm.
Xperia Z5 via Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
post like this really make me wonder about my specific device.... because i am totally with op here: the camera may be very good (the best?) in sunny/ bright conditions, but is just useless in darker situations (not just pitch black.. darker..). a camera like that can NEVER be called the best on market.. i would say

Barthlon said:
post like this really make me wonder about my specific device.... because i am totally with op here: the camera may be very good (the best?) in sunny/ bright conditions, but is just useless in darker situations (not just pitch black.. darker..). a camera like that can NEVER be called the best on market.. i would say
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They should have less NR in low contrast areas for photos as right now it is quite aggressive. Seems the area noise reduction aint so 'clever'. Previous Z phones perform much better in low contrast areas with no smudged out detail. My Z1 for example outdoes my Z5c easily in detail clarity across all contrast variables while keeping noise as low or even lower and resorts to less post-processing. I assume some can be attributed to not as wide sensor (26mm vs 23mm) and 1,2um vs 1,1um pixel size and perhaps the focus system (less electronical noise). They might heat up differently to. Will be interesting to see how the Xperia X performs since AFAIK it uses same or similar sensor as the Z5. Also seems Z5c uses more NR in superior auto vs manual mode despite same ISO.
But despite that it stands really good against competition and overall it just beats them.
Here is an example of the area noise rduction system it uses akin to BIONZ X algorithms just that it is to aggressive. Look at tree trunk and streetlight pole. High contrast area is sharp but low contrast area is smudged by the NR. The problem is it failed to detect that there are bushes infront smudging them out. This is the area NR not working as intended.

EQ2000 said:
They should have less NR in low contrast areas for photos as right now it is quite aggressive. Seems the area noise reduction aint so 'clever'. Previous Z phones perform much better in low contrast areas with no smudged out detail. My Z1 for example outdoes my Z5c easily in detail clarity across all contrast variables while keeping noise as low or even lower and resorts to less post-processing. I assume some can be attributed to not as wide sensor (26mm vs 23mm) and 1,2um vs 1,1um pixel size and perhaps the focus system (less electronical noise). They might heat up differently to. Will be interesting to see how the Xperia X performs since AFAIK it uses same or similar sensor as the Z5. Also seems Z5c uses more NR in superior auto vs manual mode despite same ISO.
But despite that it stands really good against competition and overall it just beats them.
Here is an example of the area noise rduction system it uses akin to BIONZ X algorithms just that it is to aggressive. Look at tree trunk and streetlight pole. High contrast area is sharp but low contrast area is smudged by the NR. The problem is it failed to detect that there are bushes infront smudging them out. This is the area NR not working as intended.
Well please accept my very subjective opinion... from first look the pic is catchy, nice, really nice colors but then the disaster...... it's certainly not a focus issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Xeon said:
Well please accept my very subjective opinion... from first look the pic is catchy, nice, really nice colors but then the disaster...... it's certainly not a focus issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Kinda hard to make out what you are reffering to but "disaster"? Z5 series applies to aggressive area based NR in low contrast areas, as for the rest the photo is quite good and natural looking. Certainly better than most S7 photos you can find of similar ISO, shutter speed and scenery type. Atleast the NR can be countered partially with texture detail and clarity filters to bring out contrast in smudged areas. S7 you cant do nothing to repair photos as they are beyond reparation.
Click on images to view them in Flickr default display size. Atrocious and beyond reparation. The Z5 IQ despite smudgy NR in low contrast areas is head and shoulders above the S7 IQ. Z5 looks to the DSLR side while S7 looks to the cheap old digital camera side.
S7. Atrocious, the borderline bad CRT chromatic aberration look. Like relief filter applied shifting pixels due to horrible post-processing and subpar sensor.
Z5. The area based NR problem is clearly visible yet it looks much more natural and better despite being taken in much worse lighting conditions as evident by shutter speed and postition of sun and shadows.
As for the highlights you made that is pretty much what I already noted though the left side is from lens problem, that unit has decentered lenses thus blurred sides, right and/or left. You can see that in S7 to depeding on unit. Such a unit should be replaced. And all cameras have to do some detail extraction in low contrast areas (shadowed/non directly lit areas) and thus wont be as detailed as lit areas.
Take a look at S7 photo with shadowed areas, see? Noisy, smudgy with blotches and horrible even though ISO is low. Atleast the Z5 smoothes it out mostly OK. (left and right side)
One more time! You see? (right side trees and bushes)
You still cant see it!? Well some more then!
To the right!
To the left!
To the left!
And all around! :laugh: