Database Users

CAMERA: Low Light

At the club, at the bar, or just in your mom's basement, nighttime is when you come out to play. Rate this thread to express how the Note5's camera performs when no or low light is present. A higher rating indicates that the camera sensor "sees" lots of light in dim conditions, and that the resulting photos have minimal noise. A higher rating also indicates that when the flash fires, the resulting photo is evenly-lit without any bright spots.
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!

The Pro mod adds a lot to the scence, it easier to capture good photos in low light with Note 5, but it can't hold a candle to the mighty G4 camera at low light, i have many photos with G4 and some with note 5, G4 wins easy, but Note 5 still does a good job.

Derpling said:
The Pro mod adds a lot to the scence, it easier to capture good photos in low light with Note 5, but it can't hold a candle to the mighty G4 camera at low light, i have many photos with G4 and some with note 5, G4 wins easy, but Note 5 still does a good job.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I have seen the G4 does better at close up things, maybe motion...I don't know about that. But in other cases with exposure and further away the Note seems to take the lead.
At dim room light it seems to be a big toss up....except again with close ups where the G4 seems to take a lead.

i agree my G4 does have better result in low light for preset option. not sure if in pro mode though.

So I've been KIND of missing my G4, which I still own, so this morning, with some lights on and some light off in the living room, I took the same shot with both phones, because I am sure that extra .1 aperature width really makes the difference....
But now I'm not so sure. These pics show clearly that the Note 5 gets all the points for color accuracy and at the least TIES with the G4 in terms of clarity and loss of details.
I think having the buttons on the back of the G4 lends itself to a more stable shot... I can press the volume button with my index finger while wrapping the rest of my hand around to stabilize. Whereas I either need to use the on screen shutter, or hold the phone and press down on the volume button which can make the phone shake or move.... does anyone else get what I'm saying?
Either way, this allayed my fear of missing out on the G4... which, while using it, was slower and buggier than the N5.

The Auto mode is very aggressive in noise reduction, which can make some photos really blurry, video is much worse, it's got even more blur.
I hope samsung will reduce it in Android 6, i hope we can create a group and let them know about this.

low light sucks compared to galaxy edge plus, i compared them hand in hand, with no lights turn on, only using a flash light to focus on a certain area

The only thing that bugs me is that in auto mode the iso is jacked all the way up and it manual mode when you go for a slower shutter you cant control exposure which usually over shoots. But sometimes the exposure is good.

Even with raw format you get some noise when using low ISO and slow shutter speed

The low light camera is decent. Much better than my note 3. I cant complaint to much, like the previous post, there will be some digital noise. I shut mostly in auto mode anyway, sometimes I'll mess with macro for foodie shots

Low light

At the club, at the bar, or just in your mom's basement, nighttime is when you come out to play. Rate this thread to express how the Moto X4's camera performs when no or low light is present. A higher rating indicates that the camera sensor "sees" lots of light in dim conditions, and that the resulting photos have minimal noise. A higher rating also indicates that when the flash fires, the resulting photo is evenly-lit without any bright spots.
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!

With flash it's 5 stars. Works pretty good without. Works as good as my S8.

I took some test shots on my phone today, using 3 different camera apps:
- The Stock Moto Camera
- The Stock Google Camera from the Play Store
- Modified Google Camera found Here. MGCB_7.0H_C2API_Full_PXL2_v.1.4_60FPS_noburst_v3
I tested in a large room with the lights off, and sunlight coming in. There are lots of shadows and dark areas, as well as very bright spots. I tested with HDR Off, HDR On, and HDR Auto (if applicable). I also threw in a wide angle, for comparison. (spoiler: Ew).
Some things that surprised me, in no particular order:
- The Stock Moto HDR actually did a decent job at brightening up the dark areas, and giving the shadows a bit of color. Not a ton of extra noise, either. However, the window was still washed out.
- Stock Google Cam didn't offer anything the others didn't, and HDR On/Off didn't seem to do a thing.
- Modified Google Cam definitely helped with the bright spots, as those are the only 2 pictures that you could see out the window, but it also introduced a LOT of noise in the shadows and dark areas. This is a known side effect of HDR in low-light, as I saw the same effect on my 5x when using HDR+ in low light.
I may try a different Modified Gcam, and try to input the settings manually. Hopefully that will result in better pics, as otherwise the Stock Moto camera seems to be our best bet for now.

The stock camera app in normal picture mode is not using good ISO/shutter speed combinations in low light at all. Take some and check the info on your images. It always goes for high ISO and faster shutter speed. It stops on 1/15 A LOT, and seems to adjust ISO from there. Switch to Professional Mode and force a slower shutter speed, lower ISO and now they look much better. HDR on this app is garbage with those auto focus settings too. It works much better with higher quality images with less noise, which the auto focus is incapable of providing in any low light situations.

I did some more tests with the v4.0 AIO modified Gcam, and there wasn't a difference.
I went back to the v1.4, and took some pics at home. These were very low-light, with candles the only light source in the room. I noticed similar trends:
Stock Cam is VERY blochy when you zoom in.
Stock HDR seems to brighten the whole image, but isn't very, you know, dynamic.
Stock Cam is way less noisy/blochy when you zoom in. It preserves much more detail.
Modified Gcam using HDR+ does a MUCH better job handling the candle light in the pic, as the light source isn't overexposed.
I may do some 100% crops and share them tomorrow, but Stranger Things 2 with the wife is more important atm. #sorrynotsorry.

crazyates said:
I did some more tests with the v4.0 AIO modified Gcam, and there wasn't a difference.
I went back to the v1.4, and took some pics at home. These were very low-light, with candles the only light source in the room. I noticed similar trends:
Stock Cam is VERY blochy when you zoom in.
Stock HDR seems to brighten the whole image, but isn't very, you know, dynamic.
Stock Cam is way less noisy/blochy when you zoom in. It preserves much more detail.
Modified Gcam using HDR+ does a MUCH better job handling the candle light in the pic, as the light source isn't overexposed.
I may do some 100% crops and share them tomorrow, but Stranger Things 2 with the wife is more important atm. #sorrynotsorry.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm using the manual Google APK here with HDR+ and it's also using very high ISOs, even in pretty good light. I have a lamp behind me, lights on in the room and both apps are using an ISO2400. If I manually set the ISO to 1200 or lower, I can still take a good photo by manually adjusting the shutter speed to 1/15, 1/10, or even 1/8 (anything lower and it's blurred). This HW should be capable of blazing fast auto focus so there is zero reason it's setting the ISOs so high. High ISO = more noise, less detail. Fast auto focus should mean that lowering the ISO in low light will focus better, faster, with less blur from the slower shutter speed. Something ain't right here.
HDR+ will clean up the noise from the high ISO setting some.

FrozenOx said:
I'm using the manual Google APK here with HDR+ and it's also using very high ISOs, even in pretty good light. I have a lamp behind me, lights on in the room and both apps are using an ISO2400. If I manually set the ISO to 1200 or lower, I can still take a good photo by manually adjusting the shutter speed to 1/15, 1/10, or even 1/8 (anything lower and it's blurred). This HW should be capable of blazing fast auto focus so there is zero reason it's setting the ISOs so high. High ISO = more noise, less detail. Fast auto focus should mean that lowering the ISO in low light will focus better, faster, with less blur from the slower shutter speed. Something ain't right here.
HDR+ will clean up the noise from the high ISO setting some.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's odd. Is this an issue you've been experiencing on the optimum configs (manual version) or with both modded apps?

FrozenOx said:
HDR+ will clean up the noise from the high ISO setting some.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, you're right on this. I did some more test last night, and the most consistent seems to be the modified Gcam HDR+. It preserves more detail while keeping the noise down.
Basically, I feel like these are all just playing around with settings and apks that are meant for other phones. I know the Gcam software can work wonders, and I know the sensor/ISP/DSP/CPU can support more than what the stock Moto Cam is doing, but getting a modded Gcam apk that's meant for out phones would be fantastic. Unfortunately, it'll take someone smarter than me to piece it all together.

Coming from a much older S3, the moto x4 camera is WAY ahead.
I have a small laser projector that only outputs 63 lumens.
The S3 camera could never get a photo on the highest setting.
The x4 camera does it easily.
Apples and Oranges possibly, but the camera is not nearly as "bad" as some
reviews stated.

That's Nobody said:
With flash it's 5 stars. Works pretty good without. Works as good as my S8.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is it really? I'm choosing between the S7 and the X4, the camera being the only thing making me lean towards the Galaxy.

gaurink said:
Is it really? I'm choosing between the S7 and the X4, the camera being the only thing making me lean towards the Galaxy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had an S7 for work until recently. Hated it. Battery life is worse than X4, too much bloatware, and the fingerprint sensor on it suuuuucked. Rear camera was about the same as X4 but front was inferior. No contest. Get the X4.

Please think twice believing reviewers.
Most of them hated Moto X4's camera coz it has a sluggish and mediocre quality when it comes to depth (portrait mode).
BUT I can assure you that my Moto X4 performs on par with HTC 10 when it comes to ALL lighting conditions.
I took photos side by side and the quality is the same. I even found that the Moto X4 does NOT need to auto trigger HDR in the lowlight pic I took (HTC did auto trigger HDR).
Both HTC 10 and Moto X4 have minimal noise and really looks almost the same given that they are using a different ISP (SD 820 vs SD 630).
I'll try to upload both pics so you can check them as well.

Quick one from today.

The Galaxy S7 will definitely has a better camera quality BUT the X4 also has a pretty good camera so you won't get disappointed.
BUT I'd rather choose Moto X4 since it is a new device while S7 is already almost 2 generations older (S9 is coming).

forbidden8 said:
Quick one from today.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is this using the stock camera app?

varunbala said:
Is this using the stock camera app?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes.

Four low light examples. They were taken in hostile lightning codtions by Gcam HDR+. No tripod. The quality and the dynamic range is at the same level as Nexus 5x, Pixel 1.

Can you share a gCam version that you use. And setting ...I try few, but for me quality of stock camera photos is better. Thx.

forbidden8 said:
Can you share a gCam version that you use. And setting ...I try few, but for me quality of stock camera photos is better. Thx.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
GCam5.1.018-Arnova8G2-V1.3-Front-HDR+
Nexus6p, nexus 6p, hdd+ on

tavcsor said:
Four low light examples. They were taken in hostile lightning codtions by Gcam HDR+. No tripod. The quality and the dynamic range is at the same level as Nexus 5x, Pixel 1.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does the portrait mode of gcam work?

Photo quality

Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the Google Pixel 3 come out. A higher rating indicates that photos offer rich color (without over-saturating), sharp detail (with all subjects in-focus), and appropriate exposure (with even lighting).
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!

So I don't have the phone yet (obviously), but I noticed in-store that the new camera app seems to use (or at least has the option to use) a "sweep" panorama now. In my rudimentary time at Verizon, it seemed to work well! I think they still have the traditional panorama shot options through a photosphere menu, but quite like before.
Had anyone exciting this yet, or see any reviews that cover it?!

If anyone cam post some jpeg & rae files taken together that would be awesome.
Even more awesomer would be the same shot taken with both p2 & p3

(Delete, wrong thread)

Heres a a few photos of my Father-in-law's koi pond at night. With a small spotlight on. Pretty good if you ask me

Hmm Tapatalk is working better for pictures I think. Here are a few others
Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

2 pics: 1 low light (cropped from 4:3), 1 portrait

Is it just me or does it feel like the camera on the Pixel 3 lags a bit when you take a photo compared to the Pixel 2? Same scene, taking with the 3 has a slight pause before the circle shows up and shows the picture taking animation. The Pixel 2 is able to take 3 shots in the same duration...

I'm not as impressed as I am when I went from 5x to pixel first gen . I just went from pixel one to pixel 3 and I'm not getting what all the hype is about. The photos are slightly better, the performance is not noticeable, the sot is a half an hour more with the same usage. I should have gone to Huawei mate 20 or something else.

This is the best quality camera I've ever seen on a phone. Its too bad I'm going to have to return it, because the phone quality is garbage. The camera is what is making the decision really painful (I don't think any other phone will compare), but I need a working phone.

Hello, I just bought the p3xl but I'm not really happy whith photos in low light , especially on Moving subjects (my daughter)... Indeed it's not possible to adjust manually aperture or Time... Do you have solutions, or maybe do you think I would be more satisfied by p30 pro or p20 pro... ? Thanks

matiew48 said:
Hello, I just bought the p3xl but I'm not really happy whith photos in low light , especially on Moving subjects (my daughter)... Indeed it's not possible to adjust manually aperture or Time... Do you have solutions, or maybe do you think I would be more satisfied by p30 pro or p20 pro... ? Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not sure you can take low light photos of moving subjects with any phone at the moment.
The pixel 3 is amazing in taking low light photos, but you do need some light, too

This is a nice upgrade over the pixel 1
Super rez zoomed in all the way

I have the p30 pro
BBobby said:
I am not sure you can take low light photos of moving subjects with any phone at the moment.
The pixel 3 is amazing in taking low light photos, but you do need some light, too
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's no comparison for taking shots of kids in low light

Low light

At the club, at the bar, or just in your mom's basement, nighttime is when you come out to play. Rate this thread to express how the Nokia 9 PureView's camera performs when no or low light is present. A higher rating indicates that the camera sensor "sees" lots of light in dim conditions, and that the resulting photos have minimal noise. A higher rating also indicates that when the flash fires, the resulting photo is evenly-lit without any bright spots.
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!

This is the area that I most confused about. They say that it lets 10x more light in than other phones, but the low light is not better than my Pixel 2 without Night Sight, let alone when I turn Night Sight on. It gets good results if you can do a longer exposure but in very low light to no light, this phone is not performing well for me.

Yup it couldn't beat an iPhone XS Max with just point and click. Might actually return this one. Darker grainier image is the Nokia. Lumia 1020 beats this one. Sorry.

alinefx said:
Yup it couldn't beat an iPhone XS Max with just point and click. Might actually return this one. Darker grainier image is the Nokia. Lumia 1020 beats this one. Sorry.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And does it have night mode?

I agree. Basically lo light is rubbish.

alinefx said:
Yup it couldn't beat an iPhone XS Max with just point and click. Might actually return this one. Darker grainier image is the Nokia. Lumia 1020 beats this one. Sorry.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If that's the best it can do in low light, I'm cancelling my pre-order.

Looking at photos, honestly it looks like the extra cameras are only used in raw shots. I think it's a really bad decision for that, but that's how it appears to me.
See the screenshots attached. Darker image is 'point and shoot'. Brighter image is raw of the same shot.
Edit for Google Drive link. DNG and original JPG are in there. Screenshots of both as well, in case you don't want it check the DNG file.
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=1-3ocYSlKpKW1gqi_ybGJOw1hEGo2jf0C

Harfainx said:
Looking at photos, honestly it looks like the extra cameras are only used in raw shots. I think it's a really bad decision for that, but that's how it appears to me.
See the screenshots attached. Darker image is 'point and shoot'. Brighter image is raw of the same shot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think that's the case, the 5 cameras are always used.

kaiseryeahhh said:
I don't think that's the case, the 5 cameras are always used.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think they're supposed to always be used, but based on low light performance, I strongly doubt that they are.

I was only interested in this phone for the camera. To see a 2 Lens iOS device beat this one is atrocious. A lumia 1020 till this day gives you thrills for the photos it takes.
Look at this picture of a cat taken in a lit room, the one with a warmer tone (first pic) is the one with the XS and is closer to how the room looks in real life. Both pics taken with flash.
This is going back. What a waste. Will wait for the Xperia 1.
Nokia, step up your game.

alinefx said:
I was only interested in this phone for the camera. To see a 2 Lens iOS device beat this one is atrocious. A lumia 1020 till this day gives you thrills for the photos it takes.
Look at this picture of a cat taken in a lit room, the one with a warmer tone (first pic) is the one with the XS and is closer to how the room looks in real life. Both pics taken with flash.
This is going back. What a waste. Will wait for the Xperia 1.
Nokia, step up your game.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
as some review have said, N9 is not really flattering for PnS without retouching, have you tried lightroom to get to the same color mood? Then try to compare, because the details in the cat's fur is good, but it needs to be retouched

alinefx said:
I was only interested in this phone for the camera. To see a 2 Lens iOS device beat this one is atrocious. A lumia 1020 till this day gives you thrills for the photos it takes.
Look at this picture of a cat taken in a lit room, the one with a warmer tone (first pic) is the one with the XS and is closer to how the room looks in real life. Both pics taken with flash.
This is going back. What a waste. Will wait for the Xperia 1.
Nokia, step up your game.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First , your shooting with flash. Since it are 2 different phones your shooting with 2 different flashes, so your actually comparing the flash here. Shooting with different lighting (flash) makes it difficult to compare the images.
From what i can see in the cat pictures : the Nokia's flash is much brighter : look at the reflection on the rear wall, and the cat is brighter illuminated, on the XS photo the backlights are to bright and close to the cat for my taste , they give me a "get that light out of my face" feeling .
In this case it destroys the mood a bit , in other cases it wil be usefull if the subject is a bit farther away.
Also if you have auto whitebalance set to on then it should compensate for the yellow lights in the room and return a picture more adjusted to white light , so +1 for the nokia if that was the case.

Here's a sample comparison without flash.
I understand that with lightroom, and time spent, that one can probably get truly great photos out of this camera. But on the other hand, unlike the 1020, the pics out of the box are just meh. So in this case, its a good thing they made this a limited run, because most people will not go for this phone anyway. Also, they should have made it at least a 6.5 inch phone. The display is too small to truly appreciate the photos this thing can eventually take. The lag time for processing is excessive as one cannot edit a photo with a depth map unless one waits atleast 5-10 seconds.
Needless to say, the one that's darker is the Nokia.

alinefx said:
Here's a sample comparison without flash.
I understand that with lightroom, and time spent, that one can probably get truly great photos out of this camera. But on the other hand, unlike the 1020, the pics out of the box are just meh. So in this case, its a good thing they made this a limited run, because most people will not go for this phone anyway. Also, they should have made it at least a 6.5 inch phone. The display is too small to truly appreciate the photos this thing can eventually take. The lag time for processing is excessive as one cannot edit a photo with a depth map unless one waits atleast 5-10 seconds.
Needless to say, the one that's darker is the Nokia.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
to my eye, the iPhone one is more pleasing to the eye at first sight, due to the warm color balance and slightly upped saturation.
but if you look at the N9 one, the details and color of the cat fur is better preserved, as are the sharpness of the background, but maybe that's due to wrong focus.
So, if you want photos that looks good at first sight, go for iphone, but if you prefer details and dont mind doing post processing, keep the N9
Personally i post process everything i post anyway, so i prefer the N9

alinefx said:
Here's a sample comparison without flash.
I understand that with lightroom, and time spent, that one can probably get truly great photos out of this camera. But on the other hand, unlike the 1020, the pics out of the box are just meh. So in this case, its a good thing they made this a limited run, because most people will not go for this phone anyway. Also, they should have made it at least a 6.5 inch phone. The display is too small to truly appreciate the photos this thing can eventually take. The lag time for processing is excessive as one cannot edit a photo with a depth map unless one waits atleast 5-10 seconds.
Needless to say, the one that's darker is the Nokia.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you might have a point there.
The multiple lenses and the ability to do post related work like blurring ect ... probably indicate that this is not really the best value for your money if your only going to do "point click and send" type of stuff.

alinefx said:
Here's a sample comparison without flash.
I understand that with lightroom, and time spent, that one can probably get truly great photos out of this camera. But on the other hand, unlike the 1020, the pics out of the box are just meh. So in this case, its a good thing they made this a limited run, because most people will not go for this phone anyway. Also, they should have made it at least a 6.5 inch phone. The display is too small to truly appreciate the photos this thing can eventually take. The lag time for processing is excessive as one cannot edit a photo with a depth map unless one waits atleast 5-10 seconds.
Needless to say, the one that's darker is the Nokia.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you try to say that yellow photo is better ? - it is clearly worse one.

alinefx said:
Here's a sample comparison without flash.
I understand that with lightroom, and time spent, that one can probably get truly great photos out of this camera. But on the other hand, unlike the 1020, the pics out of the box are just meh. So in this case, its a good thing they made this a limited run, because most people will not go for this phone anyway. Also, they should have made it at least a 6.5 inch phone. The display is too small to truly appreciate the photos this thing can eventually take. The lag time for processing is excessive as one cannot edit a photo with a depth map unless one waits atleast 5-10 seconds.
Needless to say, the one that's darker is the Nokia.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The iphone image is objectively much worse. Much less detail, much more noise, much lower dynamic range. Colour balance can be changed easily in LR (which is on the phone).
However, something definitely does appear to be amiss with low light images. They should be far, far better than they are if they're really stacking images / data from all 5 sensors. The XS Max is far worse than Samsung or Huawei's latest offerings, or the product of GCam in low light.

mudnightoil said:
The iphone image is objectively much worse. Much less detail, much more noise, much lower dynamic range. Colour balance can be changed easily in LR (which is on the phone).
However, something definitely does appear to be amiss with low light images. They should be far, far better than they are if they're really stacking images / data from all 5 sensors. The XS Max is far worse than Samsung or Huawei's latest offerings, or the product of GCam in low light.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm pleased with most of the pictures posted in this discussion because of the amount of information captured and the balanced exposure. I agree that they aren't always as immediately appealing as other phones which step in to tinker with the images. But at the same time I appreciate the potential gains from having your images available in this format.
Having the option of automated processing would be nice for when you don't have time to play around in Lightroom. And they may do this through software. But seeing as they have already stated that their target audience is camera enthusiasts then they might leave it alone.

XDA_RealLifeReview said:
At the club, at the bar, or just in your mom's basement, nighttime is when you come out to play. Rate this thread to express how the Nokia 9 PureView's camera performs when no or low light is present. A higher rating indicates that the camera sensor "sees" lots of light in dim conditions, and that the resulting photos have minimal noise. A higher rating also indicates that when the flash fires, the resulting photo is evenly-lit without any bright spots.
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I own a P20 Pro , and while the night mode is a nice gimmick it's nothing more than that.
I much rather have the quality of the images under normal light that this nokia produces. And not the over processed jpg's and the unusable raw files that i get from my P20 Pro. Nightmode or not.

Very good when using Raw.

About the camera

I watched so many reviews on this device, I bought a 64GB variant. Camera is so average even on daylight, Front camera is straight rubbish in medium - low light conditions. G cam don't fix this either. Is it me or every device has this problem?

Maheshzx said:
I watched so many reviews on this device, I bought a 64GB variant. Camera is so average even on daylight, Front camera is straight rubbish in medium - low light conditions. G cam don't fix this either. Is it me or every device has this problem?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Probably u , mine camera is pretty good and at night gcam pics are so good and much better idk what's wrong with ur phone.

farhan20 said:
Probably u , mine camera is pretty good and at night gcam pics are so good and much better idk what's wrong with ur phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, camera is bad in low light conditions, take a closer look at details on picture taken at night.

I don't really know about you guys, but mine is just straight up awesome. I was on a 7 day trip in Vienna with a friend of mine, made a bunch of photos, in maximum sun light conditions, medium light conditions, low light conditions, and the photos weren't bad at all. My friend actually picked a photo from my phone to upload on his instagram. (gotta add that he currently owns an iPhone XS Max)

The main camera is top notch, the wide and tele have terrible color depth, lens flares, purple fringing, noise.
GCam fixes those pretty well though.

Maheshzx said:
I watched so many reviews on this device, I bought a 64GB variant. Camera is so average even on daylight, Front camera is straight rubbish in medium - low light conditions. G cam don't fix this either. Is it me or every device has this problem?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The main camera has a competent sensor on paper, but in real life, even with gcam improvements, the results are far from stellar as the image lacks a little bit on fine detail, maybe due not good quality optics.
Of course, the front camera has difficulties in medium - low light but I think not more or less than many other devices.
This gcam version is specifically suited for low light conditions.
https://www.celsoazevedo.com/files/android/google-camera/f/changelog374/
And for a more general purpose I would try this one:
https://www.celsoazevedo.com/files/android/google-camera/f/changelog661/

piccolo2k2 said:
The main camera has a competent sensor on paper, but in real life, even with gcam improvements, the results are far from stellar as the image lacks a little bit on fine detail, maybe due not good quality optics.
Of course, the front camera has difficulties in medium - low light but I think not more or less than many other devices.
This gcam version is specifically suited for low light conditions.
https://www.celsoazevedo.com/files/android/google-camera/f/changelog374/
And for a more general purpose I would try this one:
https://www.celsoazevedo.com/files/android/google-camera/f/changelog661/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks a lot man. You really saved my day. :fingers-crossed: