Develop Bugs

The HTC One X can replace your point and shooter camera...

In my opinion, some might not agree, but the HTC One X can and does a great job as a point and shoot camera. So far I am impressed how well pictures turn out.
http://hggadgets.blogspot.com/2012/05/can-htc-one-x-replace-your-point-and.html
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using xda premium

ElCamino said:
In my opinion, some might not agree, but the HTC One X can and does a great job as a point and shoot camera. So far I am impressed how well pictures turn out.
http://hggadgets.blogspot.com/2012/05/can-htc-one-x-replace-your-point-and.html
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Me too only thing stopping me from returning mine right now lol. Taken some stunning pictures and the quality allows some forgiveness when using image editing apps.

ElCamino said:
In my opinion, some might not agree, but the HTC One X can and does a great job as a point and shoot camera. So far I am impressed how well pictures turn out.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I still think the iPhone 4S takes better pictures. I have both and have compared extensively. It's very noticeable in the HDR mode, where the 4S easily beats the One X

Just tested "Camera ICS" from the market - seems better.
Here's what I got with it:
Bitrate: 7k to 20k, mostly in 10-12k range
Frame rate: 24.53
Resolution: 1920x1088
Audio: AAC, 32KHz
I think our camera hardware is capable of decoding a higher bitrate on the fly, but I wonder why did HTC limit it so much?
And just as a thought... I wonder if it'd be possible to let main CPU handle the on the fly decoding, essentially allowing easy high-bitrate capture..

DarkDvr said:
Just tested "Camera ICS" from the market - seems better.
Here's what I got with it:
Bitrate: 7k to 20k, mostly in 10-12k range
Frame rate: 24.53
Resolution: 1920x1088
Audio: AAC, 32KHz
I think our camera hardware is capable of decoding a higher bitrate on the fly, but I wonder why did HTC limit it so much?
And just as a thought... I wonder if it'd be possible to let main CPU handle the on the fly decoding, essentially allowing easy high-bitrate capture..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm thinking it's because of the limited storage capacity.

DarkDvr said:
Just tested "Camera ICS" from the market - seems better.
Here's what I got with it:
Bitrate: 7k to 20k, mostly in 10-12k range
Frame rate: 24.53
Resolution: 1920x1088
Audio: AAC, 32KHz
I think our camera hardware is capable of decoding a higher bitrate on the fly, but I wonder why did HTC limit it so much?
And just as a thought... I wonder if it'd be possible to let main CPU handle the on the fly decoding, essentially allowing easy high-bitrate capture..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nokia did the same with a lot of their phones. I remember having the Nokia N86 8MP which produced photo's that were smaller than 3mb in size. I thought then that phone manufacturers weren't serious about cameras in their phones, even when they advertise them as replacements. I now think it's a balance between what's possible in the phone and speed of use. Consumers want a picture taken with zero lag, fast save times and excellent quality from a phone chipset. While phones have very good silicon, I don't know how they stack up against a highend compact like the Panasonic LX or Canon S for example. I think these phones could produce better pictures but there will probably be an increased processing time. But if the manufacturers were serious about making a replacement camera phone, then why not have two camera apps. One stock one with current setup and one which gives full control over exposure, ISO, shutter speed, F-stop (if it's variable which I doubt) etc.

It's not an SLR... you're asking too much and clearly have no idea how cameras work so the options would be lost on you even if they were possible.

HTC One X can replace my piont and shoot camera look at these:
this is captured using 14 megapixels cheap benq camera with CCD by Sony
{
"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"
}
this is HTC One X

Raider0001 said:
HTC One X can replace my piont and shoot camera look at these:
this is captured using 14 megapixels cheap benq camera with CCD by Sony
this is HTC One X
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LoL are you taking the piss?

Hi,
here is my comparison from one x camera.
left picture in hdr mode, and right is automatically.
cheers
starbase64

Raider0001 said:
HTC One X can replace my piont and shoot camera look at these:
this is captured using 14 megapixels cheap benq camera with CCD by Sony
this is HTC One X
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I prefer the quality of your 14mp Benq...
This won't replace my camera's - currently a Zoom Q3HD for audio/video and Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5.
I photograph and film a friends rock band and solo act (I'm not professional, I just use Auto settings) The last solo gig I went to my wife took better photo's with her GSII than the One X took! I put it away I was so embarrased. Even my HTC Desire managed to get ok pictures at a gig on auto.

BenPope said:
It's not an SLR... you're asking too much and clearly have no idea how cameras work so the options would be lost on you even if they were possible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure if you mean this for me but I never said anything about an SLR and I don't think I'm asking too much. I reread my post and I didn't mean for it to sound like the phones could beat a high end point and shoot but they should be able to produce better pictures with more detail, tones and dynamic range THAN THEY DO NOW.
Also, please don't jump to conclusions. I do know a thing or two about photography and these options would not be lost on me.
Regarding the original post, I use a Panasonic Lx5 and Pentax Dslr so I wouldn't expect a phone camera to replace these but I would expect a camera phone advertised and supposedly designed to replace a lesser camera to be better than what's currently on offer from phone manufacturers. I'm not sure how they'd better the cameras but I'm sure the trend for thinner devices doesn't help as it's sure to limit what they can achieve. Always a tradeoff.
Sent from my HTC Vision using XDA

I hadn't tried any of the camera modes, only auto...
But...
These look pretty good to me.
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

matt_not_andrew said:
Not sure if you mean this for me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, it was. I should have quoted, but it's a pain from XDA app. You said "one which gives full control over exposure, ISO, shutter speed, F-stop", exposure is related to both shutter speed and F-Stops, the latter is clearly not adjustable on a fixed aperture lens (28mm, F2.0). Even ISO is technically not adjustable on a digital camera. You want to be able to do two things; shutter speed and exposure tweak (let's call it ISO, everyone else does, and the results are pretty much equivalent). That will adjust your blur and how bright the image is. Manual focus would be cool, too.
And I wouldn't have two apps, just basic point and shoot mode and advanced mode, with either fixed ISO or fixed shutter both with auto exposure, or full manual control.
Oh, and my apologies, I was a tad harsh.
Edit: I concur that the images are underwhelming; too much compression odd white balance, and, considering it was advertised as a good low light camera, too much noise in low light. I'm hoping these will be improved though.

TremF said:
I prefer the quality of your 14mp Benq...
This won't replace my camera's - currently a Zoom Q3HD for audio/video and Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5.
I photograph and film a friends rock band and solo act (I'm not professional, I just use Auto settings) The last solo gig I went to my wife took better photo's with her GSII than the One X took! I put it away I was so embarrased. Even my HTC Desire managed to get ok pictures at a gig on auto.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I couldn't tell the difference on his pics, myself, they both seemed bad. I don't know anything about the Zoom, but I know the Panasonic Lumix are great cameras. I also don't think we can expect phones to replace full lensed cameras, but it can certainly replace those crappy cheap point and shoot. The lumix definitely isn't a cheap point and shoot (I see a number of $50 point and shoots that people buy). I will have to say that this is the first phone where I've been fine with not carrying my point & shoot camera though. In fact, I brought it on this last vacation and never brought it out with me. The advantages of the auto dropbox syncing and uploading to social networks, etc. make up for the photo differences in most situations.
The 'auto' mode on the one x camera app sucks though, I almost always set it to HDR mode. If anyone knows of a way to make it default to HDR, that would be kinda handy. I hate that it always resets to auto.
---------- Post added at 01:09 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:57 AM ----------
BenPope said:
Edit: I concur that the images are underwhelming; too much compression odd white balance, and, considering it was advertised as a good low light camera, too much noise in low light. I'm hoping these will be improved though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I must have missed that they advertised it being a good low light camera, it definitely is not. I noticed the noise in low light and low light mode really didn't do anything. I assumed low light would slow the shutter speed and I'd get a low noise, lighter (but likely blurry because I was on a moving boat) photo. From what I can tell, the low light mode only increased the contrast, which is pointless.... I can do that from a photo app (similar to the equally useless digital zoom option).

I think the hox takes ok pictures but the dynamic range is low and the images are quite noisy at times. However that said I always have my phone with me and your best camera is always the one you have with you.

Camera

So I took some test shots between the ZL and my iPhone 5, wow is all I can say.
And NOT a good wow either.
The ZL is pretty bad compared to the iP5.
The pic's look very washed out on the ZL, I tested the shots in Auto mode and normal mode as well as HDR.
In all cases the iP5 in just normal shooting mode blew the ZL out of the water.
Now looking at the pic's on the ZL screen they look better because of that Bravia color thing, but on my iMac side by side the iP5 kill it.
Weird.
Is there any setting's to help this??

Noticed that too... Weird. with 13 mega and so called camera wow factor in their adds, it just cant beat ip5 and note 1.
Sent from my C6502 using xda app-developers app

safuan7822 said:
Noticed that too... Weird. with 13 mega and so called camera wow factor in their adds, it just cant beat ip5 and note 1.
Sent from my C6502 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What's also strange is to use the 13MP you have to take a picture in 4X3 mode, all normal auto mode pic's are a 9MP shot.
I also tested the dif between a 13mp shot and a 9mp and saw no difference except that the iPhone 5 was still better in both still and video.

Meh, you guys should know camera is not the strong point of this phone and megapixel don't tell the whole story. If you wanted a phone for camera it's better to buy Nokia N8, it's cheap and still way better than most cameraphones of today. I still kept Nokia N8 as second phone so when I going places I got good camera to take pictures and videos

I think one of the main reasons to look at camera phones is the fact that you don't need to carry a second device and that you always carry it with you.
I am surprised that the ZL has such a lousy camera - thought Sony's expertise with cameras should have helped. I hope it's not a sensor issue and that maybe a firmware/software update would help with the images.

bothfly said:
So I took some test shots between the ZL and my iPhone 5, wow is all I can say.
And NOT a good wow either.
The ZL is pretty bad compared to the iP5.
The pic's look very washed out on the ZL, I tested the shots in Auto mode and normal mode as well as HDR.
In all cases the iP5 in just normal shooting mode blew the ZL out of the water.
Now looking at the pic's on the ZL screen they look better because of that Bravia color thing, but on my iMac side by side the iP5 kill it.
Weird.
Is there any setting's to help this??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No settings at all may be some firmware or software
upgrade might help

Didn't buy because of camera
I am travelling in Chicago, went to the Sony store, had the ZL in my hand and was going to buy it and took a picture.
I have a Galaxy SII now, a bit handicapped I think by the CM10.1 camera software, and took the same picture with it.
There was a HUGE difference. The ZL was brighter, but the detail was awful on the ZL -- there are what appear to be JPG compression artifacts or sharpening artifacts everywhere. Text in the image had pixel artifacts extending out from corners so that everything was jagged and looked like it was done with a 1-2mpx camera instead (and yes I had it set at max).
I'm a photographer, and I am not buying a phone to replace real cameras, but I also don't want to buy the latest and greatest phone and take a step 3 years back in cameras.
This all looks like software (in a very "gut reaction to a few images"). It looks and feels like poor image processing from the raw data, either over-compression or bad sharpening.
I've done a bit of searching and found a few "bad camera" comments, but has there been any reaction from Sony, any indication of improved settings coming? Are any of the mods available capable of addressing this sort of thing, or is that lost in proprietary code space?
I left without a phone, sadly. My GS2 with CM10.1 does almost everything I need, I was just looking for a fresh face. And I LOVED the form factor and feel. But the camera was a deal killer. Will lurk around here in case there may be forthcoming software fixes (as I am almost certain it is a software issue).

Nice, a thread about the camera and comparisons without pics

CLB-NL said:
Nice, a thread about the camera and comparisons without pics
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, my bad in this case; I had assumed they would have it mail enabled and I could send myself a photo when I tested it, but they didn't have it set up. I may go back (it's not far) and take a microSD card with me, and see if it's set up so I can write to it and take the photo away. I'd love to have one where I could compare the two on a computer screen.
The image it rendered had good color (better than my SII) and was nicely focused. Just badly processed. I was hoping someone would say "you forgot to set the 'good image or small image'" option to "good".
I REALLY liked the feel of the back cover, they did a nice job there. Easy to hold, didn't feel like it was continually going to slide out of my hand.

CLB-NL said:
Nice, a thread about the camera and comparisons without pics
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice one,btw I jus saw a thread about this camera comparison and I didn't see that the camera to be that bad like u guys say it is
Sent from my C6506 using xda app-developers app

Linwood.Ferguson said:
The image it rendered had good color (better than my SII) and was nicely focused. Just badly processed. I was hoping someone would say "you forgot to set the 'good image or small image'" option to "good".
I REALLY liked the feel of the back cover, they did a nice job there. Easy to hold, didn't feel like it was continually going to slide out of my hand.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
See this. There is a lot of discussion going on (at xda & sony support forums) about the sony's image "post processing" used in the XZ/ZL. I've read somewhere that this matter has been acknowledged by sony support. You may have a look at the XZ general section for threads (like this) regarding camera (same camera hardware used in ZL). Btw, I think that camera on ZL is not bad at all (it bests my previous note2 camera in almost all aspects)! Some software updates might fix the existing issues (noise blur) especially in the auto mode. Do try the normal mode (13mp size) with hdr & flash off, in case you revisit the store.

Dpk1 said:
See this Do try the normal mode (13mp size) with hdr & flash off, in case you revisit the store.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you, will look at the other links, and I did call the store and they sold the demo and no new ones in. I'm here for a couple weeks so I may get another chance.

to look at pics on the phone it works fine (probably coz of bravia engine) .. but on a larger screen u can see the problem .. hopefully we see a fix :fingers-crossed:
does the camera mod in the apps & themes work any better than the stock one ? cybershot ....

Does this mod help?
I ran across this. It sounds like it got mixed results, so I suspect it is only touching around the edges of the camera processing and not changing how the engine does the jpg compression. But maybe it is. I offer it for reference; discussion may be better in that thread.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2221351&page=11
---------- Post added at 02:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:54 PM ----------
demonicjas said:
does the camera mod in the apps & themes work any better than the stock one ? cybershot ....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My apologies, I didn't see this note until I posted my last one. Thank you.

With pictures
CLB-NL said:
Nice, a thread about the camera and comparisons without pics
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK, I decided I could live with a less poor camera and bought one because I liked everything else. So here are some comparisons. These are done from the perspective of looking at fine detail, not overall appearance at a small size. I.e. I think a lot of what Sony has done is aimed at highly compressed JPG's suitable for facebook-like postings. I don't do that, I use it in lieu of a real camera and so would actually prefer raw images, but as a substitute I hope for good detail and suitable dynamic range despite the JPG conversion. Anyway.
So while I've seen a lot of just full images and "see how pretty" I thought i would try to see the fine detail, not how it did as a snapshot (while admitting that it's a cell phone and a "snapshot" is exactly what it's intended for, it is not a DSLR).
attached is a composite image taken with the Galaxy S2 running CM10.1, and a ZL running stock with three different modes as indicated. all were at max resolution. All were interior shots with good light (large windows beside the scene), at the same distance from a jar of jelly beans. I then extracted two components, one for fine detail (a bar code) and one for some color and detail (an edge of the plastic jar). These were all taken from about 4' away, handheld but shooting several shots and picking the best to reduce the impact of any motion blur.
First, I must say the ZL did not have the artifacts I noticed in the store; I must have had a different setting there.
The images are over-processed, whether for noise or (my theory) compression not sure, but there are a LOT of JPG artifacts in them.
But there are better than I expected. They are not better in a processing sense than the S2, but what you get is better resolution then poorer processing (look at the smoothness around high contrast borers, e.g. the top of the 9 -- there's a lot more pixel raggedness in the S2 from less resolution, but the ZL is just ragged despite having more pixels -- kind of a random jaggedness from compression artifacts). But the net result of added resolution and poor processing is a better image.
But not nearly as "better" as it should be with a lot more resolution!
Sony really owes a "leave the darn image alone" setting.
The burst mode is interesting -- I'm not sure what they are doing there, but it looks like yet even more aggressive sharpening and processing. The bar code at first looks like it is a much clearer shot -- but it is not. It's excessively sharpened and detail is lost even though it fools the eye with more contrast on edge transitions. Look especially at the colors in the jelly beans through the glare, how poor and splotchy they became).
Surprisingly the Superior vs. Normal, despite all I've read, did not have a lot of difference. Not sure if the conditions were such the difference didn't kick in, or... ?
Anyway, to the original point -- here are pictures.
On a related note, been playing with it for low light, and tried in store a HTC one, and there is a marked difference there, with the bigger pixels doing a much better job at low light, but they just didn't add QUITE enough of them for me. The ZL is much better than the older GS2 at low light, but even with the relatively faster lens and newer sensor, it's only OK. Oh... for an F1.4 lens one day. :fingers-crossed:
{
"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"
}

Linwood.Ferguson said:
OK, I decided I could live with a less poor camera and bought one because I liked everything else. So here are some comparisons. These are done from the perspective of looking at fine detail, not overall appearance at a small size. I.e. I think a lot of what Sony has done is aimed at highly compressed JPG's suitable for facebook-like postings. I don't do that, I use it in lieu of a real camera and so would actually prefer raw images, but as a substitute I hope for good detail and suitable dynamic range despite the JPG conversion. Anyway.
So while I've seen a lot of just full images and "see how pretty" I thought i would try to see the fine detail, not how it did as a snapshot (while admitting that it's a cell phone and a "snapshot" is exactly what it's intended for, it is not a DSLR).
attached is a composite image taken with the Galaxy S2 running CM10.1, and a ZL running stock with three different modes as indicated. all were at max resolution. All were interior shots with good light (large windows beside the scene), at the same distance from a jar of jelly beans. I then extracted two components, one for fine detail (a bar code) and one for some color and detail (an edge of the plastic jar). These were all taken from about 4' away, handheld but shooting several shots and picking the best to reduce the impact of any motion blur.
First, I must say the ZL did not have the artifacts I noticed in the store; I must have had a different setting there.
The images are over-processed, whether for noise or (my theory) compression not sure, but there are a LOT of JPG artifacts in them.
But there are better than I expected. They are not better in a processing sense than the S2, but what you get is better resolution then poorer processing (look at the smoothness around high contrast borers, e.g. the top of the 9 -- there's a lot more pixel raggedness in the S2 from less resolution, but the ZL is just ragged despite having more pixels -- kind of a random jaggedness from compression artifacts). But the net result of added resolution and poor processing is a better image.
But not nearly as "better" as it should be with a lot more resolution!
Sony really owes a "leave the darn image alone" setting.
The burst mode is interesting -- I'm not sure what they are doing there, but it looks like yet even more aggressive sharpening and processing. The bar code at first looks like it is a much clearer shot -- but it is not. It's excessively sharpened and detail is lost even though it fools the eye with more contrast on edge transitions. Look especially at the colors in the jelly beans through the glare, how poor and splotchy they became).
Surprisingly the Superior vs. Normal, despite all I've read, did not have a lot of difference. Not sure if the conditions were such the difference didn't kick in, or... ?
Anyway, to the original point -- here are pictures.
On a related note, been playing with it for low light, and tried in store a HTC one, and there is a marked difference there, with the bigger pixels doing a much better job at low light, but they just didn't add QUITE enough of them for me. The ZL is much better than the older GS2 at low light, but even with the relatively faster lens and newer sensor, it's only OK. Oh... for an F1.4 lens one day. :fingers-crossed:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi there! Congrats on your new device n welcome aboard! I appreciate your feedback regarding the camera performance on the ZL. I tend to agree with most of what you've said! I only hope sony gives us a patch for camera software soon!

Terrible camera quality occasionally

Hi all,
I've a new Nexus 5x but am having an odd issue with the camera. [I also got this camera for a family member and their unit from a separate supplier has the same issue]
I wanted to test out the hdr/+/auto function so took two pictures within seconds against a car of a scene. On the computer I cannot remember which was which (hdr on or off or auto) but which the photo focused and nothing seemed to change the quality of the first image is much worse:
{
"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"
}
The second 5x I've check out also has these smeary photos dotted through the camera album - as though the camera opened it and went to render the fine detail but didn't.
This isn't camera shake (shutter speed high) nor a mis-focus, it's ike being back on my old Samsung occasionally!
Has anyone else experienced this or know what could be wrong?

I've never seen HDR+ whether auto or manually set to on make a photo blurry like the one on the left. You sure it wasn't an accidental "lens blur" photo taken? Although it looks like nothing is even focused at all with that left pic.
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Definitely no lens blur applied. It's not not focussed, everything in find pic is mushy and focus was on wall/fence join. I've seen this on other pics from another 5x and cannot work out why.

Bingley said:
Definitely no lens blur applied. It's not not focussed, everything in find pic is mushy and focus was on wall/fence join. I've seen this on other pics from another 5x and cannot work out why.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now was the preview in the camera app actually in focus when taken and you're saying it's being saved out of focus?
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

It focussed yep and both acreen previews looked the same while taking the pics. It's not just oit of focus as I know what that looks like and I'm getting it testing it occasionally, same with anothers unit in every day use

Bingley said:
It focussed yep and both acreen previews looked the same while taking the pics. It's not just oit of focus as I know what that looks like and I'm getting it testing it occasionally, same with anothers unit in every day use
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very interesting. I take photos pretty often and never had resulting out of focus when the preview was in focus.
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Hand shake maybe? Just looks out of focus or shakey to me. BTW I've not had any issues with the camera, I would suggest setting HDR+ on unless the subject is a moving target and then to use HDR+ off. Auto never seemed to work properly though that might have changed in the most recently released Camera update.
Also don't forget you can tap to focus to get the best shots, then just try and keep you hand as still as possible while HDR+ takes its multiple exposure shots and stitches them together.

Both taken around 1/1600 of a second held against something sturdy. It's *not* camera shake. I know how hdr/+ works, and I've occasionally had this my with slr shooting at 1/4000/sec. It's across two devices and I cannot understand why.
Also, if anyone knows how to tell via metadata etc which hdr on/off/auto setting was used I'd love to know!

I've attached a pic straight from cam.
Exif looks fine, it focused seeminly ok, but basically looks crappy at 100%. Am I expecting too much? Look at the trees in the distance/gravel/path, it's all pretty poor imo.
Program name is bullhead user - is that correct?
Running 7.1.1. using Google camera all on auto.
Any help would be so gratefully received!
Full size image at: https://postimg.org/image/otugcb3ub/

Ok, I think I've worked it out.
After testing three 5X's it seem to be that HDR+ Auto produces these crappy pics. It's like it's been over compressed, shrunk then stretched, over sharpened, and artefacts are abundant.
HDR On is fine. So, either Google Camera Auto hdr sucks or three cameras are crappy.

Bingley said:
Ok, I think I've worked it out.
After testing three 5X's it seem to be that HDR+ Auto produces these crappy pics. It's like it's been over compressed, shrunk then stretched, over sharpened, and artefacts are abundant.
HDR On is fine. So, either Google Camera Auto hdr sucks or three cameras are crappy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I always shoot HDR+ on just because it's more pleasing to the eye and for this comparison as well:
https://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=70109469
I've never taken enough HDR+ auto pics to see what you have though.
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Yeah its definitely The HDR Auto thats making the quality worse, heres the comparision and i am using the Camera NX aswell which is pixel camera basically, u can see the quality is bad on Auto by looking at the tree branches or the ground which is more blurry on auto.
HDR+ On
HDR+ Auto

Yeah there was a Reddit thread too about the difference when the Pixel came out:
https://amp.reddit.com/r/GooglePixe...aware_hdr_auto_hdr_on_are_two_very_different/
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

EeZeEpEe said:
Yeah there was a Reddit thread too about the difference when the Pixel came out:
https://amp.reddit.com/r/GooglePixe...aware_hdr_auto_hdr_on_are_two_very_different/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That post states that the HDR+ Auto doesn't have quite the dynamic range, but produces less noise. Then it says that HDR+ On has really good dynamic range, but has a lot of noise in low-light situations.
The rest of this thread is operating on a different premise, that HDR+ Auto produces blurry details, which is present in that reddit post, but not the main point. Take a look at Pic 3-1 (HDR+ Auto) and Pic 3-2 (HDR+ On). The most obvious thing is the sun/clouds are significantly better in the HDR+ On, but look at the detail in the sidewalk as well. HDR+ Auto is kinda fuzzy/blurry on the details.
Weirdly enough, HDR+ Auto producing blurry details and HDR+ On having low light detail are actually the same thing.
Quote from TheVerge (emphasis added):
The traditional way to produce an HDR image is to bracket: you take the same image multiple times while exposing different parts of the scene, which lets you merge the shots together to create a final photograph where nothing is too blown-out or noisy. Google's method is very different — HDR+ also takes multiple images at once, but they're all underexposed. This preserves highlights, but what about the noise in the shadows? Just leave it to math.
"Mathematically speaking, take a picture of a shadowed area — it's got the right color, it's just very noisy because not many photons landed in those pixels," says Levoy. "But the way the mathematics works, if I take nine shots, the noise will go down by a factor of three — by the square root of the number of shots that I take. And so just taking more shots will make that shot look fine. Maybe it's still dark, maybe I want to boost it with tone mapping, but it won't be noisy." Why take this approach? It makes it easier to align the shots without leaving artifacts of the merge, according to Levoy. "One of the design principles we wanted to adhere to was no. ghosts. ever." he says, pausing between each word for emphasis. "Every shot looks the same except for object motion. Nothing is blown out in one shot and not in the other, nothing is noisier in one shot and not in the other. That makes alignment really robust."
Google also claims that, counterintuitively, underexposing each HDR shot actually frees the camera up to produce better low-light results. "Because we can denoise very well by taking multiple images and aligning them, we can afford to keep the colors saturated in low light," says Levoy. "Most other manufacturers don't trust their colors in low light, and so they desaturate, and you'll see that very clearly on a lot of phones — the colors will be muted in low light, and our colors will not be as muted." But the aim isn't to get rid of noise entirely at the expense of detail; Levoy says "we like preserving texture, and we're willing to accept a little bit of noise in order to preserve texture."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Google's HDR+ Auto isn't true HDR; it's taking multiple underexposed images and blending them all together, intentionally blurring them together to reduce noise. This method is also gonna make any texture that's naturally irregular and blur it together. It's also not going to respond well to small detail shots when there's any amount of movement in the shots. This is why the rock wall in the OP, the tree branches and asphalt in LeftIron's pics right above me, and the sidewalk in that Reddit post are always gonna be blurry. It's Google's algorithm to try to reduce noise in low-light photos, which seeing as they're "HDR"-ing multiple underexposed photos, is always gonna be the case.
It's my impression that tone-mapping deals with these very differently, so this is why this isn't an issue in the HDR+ On photos.
TL;DR Use "HDR+ Auto" for low-light situations, and "HDR+ On" for everything else.

crazyates said:
-snip-
TL;DR Use "HDR+ Auto" for low-light situations, and "HDR+ On" for everything else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This (fullsize here) is what I'm talking about. As labelled, left is HDR+ Auto, right is HDR+ On.
Aside from the On looking slightly less sharp - fine - the Auto's quality is simply terrible. The grass, the tree thing, all the detail is smudged away and way over processed, with garish edges and artifacting almost as a standard. It looks painterly, like a bad PS filter. [Focus was on branches in sky in full pic hence focus great on grass on either pic]
Anyone else got a comparison between auto and on they could share? I can't believe it's just the three I've tried it on but perhaps it is.
Leson: HDR+ On > HDR+ Auto in image quality by far.

Bingley said:
This (fullsize here) is what I'm talking about. As labelled, left is HDR+ Auto, right is HDR+ On.
Aside from the On looking slightly less sharp - fine - the Auto's quality is simply terrible. The grass, the tree thing, all the detail is smudged away and way over processed, with garish edges and artifacting almost as a standard. It looks painterly, like a bad PS filter. [Focus was on branches in sky in full pic hence focus great on grass on either pic]
Anyone else got a comparison between auto and on they could share? I can't believe it's just the three I've tried it on but perhaps it is.
Leson: HDR+ On > HDR+ Auto in image quality by far.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a great example of what I was talking about. HDR+ Auto takes multiple photos and just blurs them together, making a lot of smudge and fuzz. The HDR+ On is an actual HDR, so it's going to have better quality almost unilaterally.
I say almost, because there seems to be one exception: low-light situations, which your photos weren't. If it were night time or something, the HDR+ On would probably have a lot of noise, while the HDR+ Auto would blur out the noise at the cost of detail. Hense, why I made my recommendation earlier.

crazyates said:
That's a great example of what I was talking about. HDR+ Auto takes multiple photos and just blurs them together, making a lot of smudge and fuzz. The HDR+ On is an actual HDR, so it's going to have better quality almost unilaterally.
I say almost, because there seems to be one exception: low-light situations, which your photos weren't. If it were night time or something, the HDR+ On would probably have a lot of noise, while the HDR+ Auto would blur out the noise at the cost of detail. Hense, why I made my recommendation earlier.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great, thanks. I've yet to test low light hdr auto v on but if you're right I'll go with that. I'm surprised Auto is so cruddy, but then I've been looking at 6P/Pixel/Iphone 7 comparisons here https://www.reddit.com/r/GooglePixel/comments/5dlm0l/google_pixel_low_light_photography_nexus_6p_and/ and the 7 does surprisingly badly. Sometimes the 6p is better, others Pixel does. Great cam either way!

My iPhone X - Pixel 2 XL - LG V30 Camera Comparison

Here is an album with photos shot is FULL AUTO mode. No tweaking settings, focusing or anything. Just letting the camera shoot a photo from the same spot. I know this is not great for the pros out there but it is the way most of us shoot pics. Anyway, I did not take a ton of photos but here are the ones I did take. With the LG i did not do "portrait mode" but did include shots from both the regular and wide angle lenses in the comparison.
I was overall impressed by all cameras. Just click "info" icon at top right to see photo details which list the camera model.
For me results were
Color - iPhone X - yes, oversaturated like Samsung, but I like that.
Detail - Pixel 2 - even though colors did not pop as much the detail in textures and such were better in most of the photos for me
low light - Pixel 2 - just grabbed better detail in the photos (The one with the helicopter was VERY low light, just a crack in the door letting a little light in)
Anyway, I know everyone has different opinions so thought I'd put an album up so people could see and compare the original untouched photos.
I give the win to Pixel 2 because I can always fix colors and make the photo more vibrant. I can't add detail.
https://photos.google.com/share/AF1...?key=ZUlCXzFZZm05WXpKbzNNd0JDdU95SElRNzZEM0pn

Link doesn't work for me. Maybe you have to give permission? Or maybe you're fixing something?
404. That’s an error.
The requested URL was not found on this server. That’s all we know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

I have watched at least a dozen youtube videos on this very subject this morning and they were pretty consistent in their findings. Google and its software ( HDR+ ) is the "high dynamic range" king. Long live the king. And this lead in this respect, over the competitors will get a very large boost when Orea 8.1 turns "on" that mystery, extra ( full soc inside the pixel ) dedicated to video processing. I'm guessing the number crunching will go down from a second to a small fraction of a second. Now LG and its hardware ( f1.6 and glass lens ) is the king of pulling detail. Go figure. The bottom line is that google cannot improve its hardware. That's fixed and static. But new LG software ( or software from other sources ) can very much improve the V30's ability to make a "auto" shot . . . Most all comparison videos did NOT put the 1K wonder at the top of anything.
.
And what do the serious photography nuts have to say ?

yeah, forgot to turn on sharing. Fixed now.

old_fart said:
I have watched at least a dozen youtube videos on this very subject this morning and they were pretty consistent in their findings. Google and its software ( HDR+ ) is the "high dynamic range" king. Long live the king. And this lead in this respect, over the competitors will get a very large boost when Orea 8.1 turns "on" that mystery, extra ( full soc inside the pixel ) dedicated to video processing. I'm guessing the number crunching will go down from a second to a small fraction of a second. Now LG and its hardware ( f1.6 and glass lens ) is the king of pulling detail. Go figure. The bottom line is that google cannot improve its hardware. That's fixed and static. But new LG software ( or software from other sources ) can very much improve the V30's ability to make a "auto" shot . . . Most all videos did NOT put the 1K wonder at the top of anything.
.
And what do the serious photography nuts have to say ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you, but the problem is the track record of LG is not that of fixing it to become the best it could be. The best hardware can suck without the proper software or a company that wants to put it as a priority to make it the best it can be. In most of the shots I took the LG had the least amount of detail (except in one low light shot where it was 2nd to Pixel in detail, look at top of soap dispensor). Now of course this is in full auto mode. I'm guessing that with manual mode the outcome might be different. However, I don't have time to mess with manual mode for 99% of my photos.
I wish LG could get the camera to be on par in auto mode with the Pixel or X because I love the phone so much. The camera and frequency of updates are the only real things lacking (for me) to make it a near perfect phone.

Link not working for me.

ern88 said:
Link not working for me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I edited and pasted it again. should work.

I need more examples..... Would you mind a few dozen more of the beauty in pink?

steve841 said:
I need more examples..... Would you mind a few dozen more of the beauty in pink?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol, I'll get right on that.

wish there was a watermark stating which photo was from which camera.

keithleger said:
Here is an album with photos
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looks like the Detroit Borg house...

20degrees said:
Looks like the Detroit Borg house...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not even sure what that is. But whatever, was not about subject but quality. LOL
---------- Post added at 08:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:31 PM ----------
hachiroku said:
wish there was a watermark stating which photo was from which camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no need. in photos website on PC (which is how you should look at this to really tell quality) you can have it open all the time on the right hand side by clicking info icon and see which photos were taken with which phone. Why waste so much time watermarking and then if you want to be totally unbiased and pick best one before you know just close info box.

keithleger said:
low light - Pixel 2 - just grabbed better detail in the photos (The one with the helicopter was VERY low light, just a crack in the door letting a little light in)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bull****. Why do you do that, mate? Why do you so hate V30? Look at the picture of cat, V30 photo has tons more details than blurry smudgy stuff from P2XL. And helicopter is not relevant @ all, have you looked on what camera was it taken? Oh, yeah you took it on wide angle camera with F/1.9 but telling us that Pixel 2 XL captures more details in the dark, how funny.

Billy Madison said:
Bull****. Why do you do that, mate? Why do you so hate V30? Look at the picture of cat, V30 photo has tons more details than blurry smudgy stuff from P2XL. And helicopter is not relevant @ all, have you looked on what camera was it taken? Oh, yeah you took it on wide angle camera with F/1.9 but telling us that Pixel 2 XL captures more details in the dark, how funny.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice catch. I didn't see that.

Billy Madison said:
Bull****. Why do you do that, mate? Why do you so hate V30? Look at the picture of cat, V30 photo has tons more details than blurry smudgy stuff from P2XL. And helicopter is not relevant @ all, have you looked on what camera was it taken? Oh, yeah you took it on wide angle camera with F/1.9 but telling us that Pixel 2 XL captures more details in the dark, how funny.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are all bent out of shape for nothing. No bias here. I actually use the v30 as my daily phone. Pixel 2 XL sitting on my desk with no sim card in it because I like it more. (I use the Pixel on weekends when I'll be using the camera more). I took both wide angle and normal lens with each photo.(tried to). Now the cat did move in one shot causing blur which is normal and understandable at that shutter speed. I did not notice it until I was done and it was too late to reshoot. The helicopter was an oversight. I must've missed taking with regular lens.
I'm not saying the V30 is bad. All 3 are good. I want the V30 to be as good as the Pixel, I REALLY DO! Because this phone feels awesome in my hand compared to the Pixel and has better features. I'm just telling you from the experience of using both that the Pixel is a better camera and MUCH FASTER shutter. V30 can have shutter lag at times. It did capture more detail in some photos than iPhone as well. So it would be a close tie for second with iPhone. The X and Pixel were just faster snapping (no shutter lag) the photos on a whole. Noticeably.
I'm hoping the Oreo update will improve a few things on the V30 making it my perfect phone. Fingers crossed.
---------- Post added at 11:42 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:40 AM ----------
Billy Madison said:
Bull****. Why do you do that, mate? Why do you so hate V30? Look at the picture of cat, V30 photo has tons more details than blurry smudgy stuff from P2XL. And helicopter is not relevant @ all, have you looked on what camera was it taken? Oh, yeah you took it on wide angle camera with F/1.9 but telling us that Pixel 2 XL captures more details in the dark, how funny.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For more evidence check out this album as well. I'm sorry but the V30 is not on par with Pixel camera, especially in low light. Speaking in auto mode...not manual. Might get more even then but I rarely have time to manually adjust a scene.
https://photos.google.com/share/AF1...?key=eldxSWxuRlF5b2ZvN09hVFZHVDQ3Q3VUU2RxZUxR

bitwiser said:
You are all bent out of shape for nothing. No bias here. I actually use the v30 as my daily phone. Pixel 2 XL sitting on my desk with no sim card in it because I like it more. (I use the Pixel on weekends when I'll be using the camera more). I took both wide angle and normal lens with each photo.(tried to). Now the cat did move in one shot causing blur which is normal and understandable at that shutter speed. I did not notice it until I was done and it was too late to reshoot. The helicopter was an oversight. I must've missed taking with regular lens.
I'm not saying the V30 is bad. All 3 are good. I want the V30 to be as good as the Pixel, I REALLY DO! Because this phone feels awesome in my hand compared to the Pixel and has better features. I'm just telling you from the experience of using both that the Pixel is a better camera and MUCH FASTER shutter. V30 can have shutter lag at times. It did capture more detail in some photos than iPhone as well. So it would be a close tie for second with iPhone. The X and Pixel were just faster snapping (no shutter lag) the photos on a whole. Noticeably.
I'm hoping the Oreo update will improve a few things on the V30 making it my perfect phone. Fingers crossed.
---------- Post added at 11:42 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:40 AM ----------
For more evidence check out this album as well. I'm sorry but the V30 is not on par with Pixel camera, especially in low light. Speaking in auto mode...not manual. Might get more even then but I rarely have time to manually adjust a scene.
https://photos.google.com/share/AF1...?key=eldxSWxuRlF5b2ZvN09hVFZHVDQ3Q3VUU2RxZUxR
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Shutter lag is probably my biggest gripe with this camera. One thing I've noticed with the Pixel is that in dark images, there tends to be a lot more noise (such as in the picture of your round plant) than the V30. I see this also when using the camera port. The GCam will give me very noisy images in low light.

bitwiser said:
I'm not saying the V30 is bad. All 3 are good. I want the V30 to be as good as the Pixel, I REALLY DO!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But it is! People may think that V30 is bad based on the heli photo that's why I corrected and clarified that.
And, about shutter lag, do you use HDR in auto setting in V30 photo settings? It's well known for LG G4, V20, G6, V30 line up that when HDR is auto or ON and indoors scene it'll cause shutter to lag. Turn HDR off, that's all. It would provide even for better low light pix as well
bitwiser said:
MUCH FASTER shutter. V30 can have shutter lag at times. It did capture more detail in some photos than iPhone as well. So it would be a close tie for second with iPhone. The X and Pixel were just faster snapping (no shutter lag) the photos on a whole. Noticeably.
I'm hoping the Oreo update will improve a few things on the V30 making it my perfect phone. Fingers crossed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oreo has nothing to do with shutter lag, it's hardware based so no updates will never improve shutter speed of V30. If shutter lag a top priority issue you may just return V30 to LG and forget it. It's video phone mostly, not point-and-snap. The Pixel 2 XL and probably iPhones have all Zero Shutter Lag based on the fact that it's sensors have
integrated RAM buffer where photos are stacked constantly. And when you press shutter camera simply fetch for already made and stored in RAM picture. It's already there. It's simple as that (of course it's more complicated but the point is that). But LG phones or Samsung phones still don't have such ram buffers hence shutter lags

hachiroku said:
wish there was a watermark stating which photo was from which camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can easily tell which photos were taken with which camera. When I open in Chrome, the information is right there.
Click on the "i" in the upper right hand corner.
{
"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"
}

keithleger said:
album
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Another question, 20171104_154418 size is 2.8 Mb , 20171104_154159 size is 1.66Mb. May I ask what sizes are of them in V30 drive in reality or you just posted them to photos.google.com and deleted originals? Because 16 Mpix matrix can't produce just 2.8Mb under sunlight, it's not possible. Thing is V30 photos have Picasa named in it's programs, so when it was uploaded it simply was compressed by Picasa stripping of any details and fine lines.

Billy Madison said:
Another question, 20171104_154418 size is 2.8 Mb , 20171104_154159 size is 1.66Mb. May I ask what sizes are of them in V30 drive in reality or you just posted them to photos.google.com and deleted originals? Because 16 Mpix matrix can't produce just 2.8Mb under sunlight, it's not possible. Thing is V30 photos have Picasa named in it's programs, so when it was uploaded it simply was compressed by Picasa stripping of any details and fine lines.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've not altered them. That is the size backed up directly to google photos from the V30 (auto backup) unless Google must be doing some sort of compression. Size on the phone is 6.34mb. It would do that to all of them though, wouldn't it? iphone x too.

Question Just tell me why oppo find x3 neo is better on night shots vs Google 6 pro???

pixel 6 pro vs oppo find x3 neo (Night shots)
Explore this photo album by ILIAS KONSTANTINOU on Flickr!
www.flickr.com
Check full analysis photos on Flickr.
No edits

Cant really check a real analysis from random photos where a number of factors kick in including focus and the fact Flickr quality is ass.
I'll just compare the dxomark instead
Oppo Find X3 Neo Camera review: Good in zoom for its segment - DXOMARK
The Oppo Find X3 Neo camera produces accurately exposed photos, with wide dynamic range, and does particularly well in zoom for its category.
www.dxomark.com
Google Pixel 6 Pro Camera review: A big leap in image quality - DXOMARK
The Pixel 6 Pro is the 2021 flagship in Google’s Pixel line of smartphone, featuring a 6.7-inch OLED LTPO display with 120Hz refresh rate and QHD+ resolution, Google’s brand new in-house-developed Tensor chipset and up to 512GB of ROM. It is also the first Pixel phone to feature a triple camera...
www.dxomark.com

Izy said:
Cant really check a real analysis from random photos where a number of factors kick in including focus and the fact Flickr quality is ass.
I'll just compare the dxomark instead
Oppo Find X3 Neo Camera review: Good in zoom for its segment - DXOMARK
The Oppo Find X3 Neo camera produces accurately exposed photos, with wide dynamic range, and does particularly well in zoom for its category.
www.dxomark.com
Google Pixel 6 Pro Camera review: A big leap in image quality - DXOMARK
The Pixel 6 Pro is the 2021 flagship in Google’s Pixel line of smartphone, featuring a 6.7-inch OLED LTPO display with 120Hz refresh rate and QHD+ resolution, Google’s brand new in-house-developed Tensor chipset and up to 512GB of ROM. It is also the first Pixel phone to feature a triple camera...
www.dxomark.com
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do what you want. Photos are οn same scenarios from both phones and oppo doing it far away better with more detail.
Pixel 6 pro seems focusing on subjects but photos are not Clear.
0 new items by Ηλίας Κ.
photos.google.com

Noexcusses said:
Do what you want. Photos are οn same scenarios from both phones and oppo doing it far away better with more detail.
Pixel 6 pro seems focusing on subjects but photos are not Clear.
0 new items by Ηλίας Κ.
photos.google.com
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
https://photos.google.com/share/AF1...?key=d3Y2MDBxS0c5S25FVlFXem9tZEx1ay1vNExFeDl3 Check fotos from pixel 3 xl.

Noexcusses said:
pixel 6 pro vs oppo find x3 neo (Night shots)
Explore this photo album by ILIAS KONSTANTINOU on Flickr!
www.flickr.com
Check full analysis photos on Flickr.
No edit
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hahaha you can't just say it's better without take the same picture with both phones....
Oppo/Oneplus never had the best hardware/software for taking photos

Interesting.

spinoza23 said:
Hahaha you can't just say it's better without take the same picture with both phones....
Oppo/Oneplus never had the best hardware/software for taking photos
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you checked link on Flickr??? They are just same fotos.

Noexcusses said:
Did you checked link on Flickr??? They are just same fotos.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Noexcusses said:
Do what you want. Photos are οn same scenarios from both phones and oppo doing it far away better with more detail.
Pixel 6 pro seems focusing on subjects but photos are not Clear.
0 new items by Ηλίας Κ.
photos.google.com
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i mean they clearly not, this is why I linked dxo its controlled conditions
also more than half the pixels photos areusing night mode since flikr has exif data so its boosting brightness among other things
com.google.android.apps.camera.gallery.specialtype.SpecialType-NIGHT
also even so what you define better quality onpoint
onpoint being you think oversaturated, warm filtered , non colour accurate images.
just look at this for example
left is nightshot pixel right is neo
Just look at the car look how bad it is on the neo
{
"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"
}
look how skewed colours are
also another prime example of the fact the pixels in nightshot mode working it
the bush left has the details brought in the darker areas and the bright lights are overblown on the pixel left the image is overall brighter but aims to be accurate colour wise and not warm filtered etc like the oppo right
im sure the oppo probably has a nightshot mode that can be toggled like the pixel so not a fair comparison
also again colours are way skewed as you can see on the right image and details are lost in distance on oppo (right)

With moon light only

Izy said:
i mean they clearly not, this is why I linked dxo its controlled conditions
also more than half the pixels photos areusing night mode since flikr has exif data so its boosting brightness among other things
com.google.android.apps.camera.gallery.specialtype.SpecialType-NIGHT
also even so what you define better quality onpoint
onpoint being you think oversaturated, warm filtered , non colour accurate images.
just look at this for example
left is nightshot pixel right is neo
Just look at the car look how bad it is on the neo
look how skewed colours are
also another prime example of the fact the pixels in nightshot mode working it
the bush left has the details brought in the darker areas and the bright lights are overblown on the pixel left the image is overall brighter but aims to be accurate colour wise and not warm filtered etc like the oppo right
im sure the oppo probably has a nightshot mode that can be toggled like the pixel so not a fair comparison
also again colours are way skewed as you can see on the right image and details are lost in distance on oppo (right)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Brother they have 600€ on price difference and still oppo is more detailed on most scenarios.... I don't really care for this Little colour diff. Oppo has 60w charge vs 30w on pixel. Oppo has better fingerprint than pixel. Pixel is a Little bit better on display and on mics... Those Little differences cost me 500€ more...
So no thanks....
Also oppo got destroyed on camera after Android 12 update so im w8ing a fix.
https://www.flickr.com/gp/[email protected]/D75S67 here you can see Android 11 night shots

Izy said:
i mean they clearly not, this is why I linked dxo its controlled conditions
also more than half the pixels photos areusing night mode since flikr has exif data so its boosting brightness among other things
com.google.android.apps.camera.gallery.specialtype.SpecialType-NIGHT
also even so what you define better quality onpoint
onpoint being you think oversaturated, warm filtered , non colour accurate images.
just look at this for example
left is nightshot pixel right is neo
Just look at the car look how bad it is on the neo
look how skewed colours are
also another prime example of the fact the pixels in nightshot mode working it
the bush left has the details brought in the darker areas and the bright lights are overblown on the pixel left the image is overall brighter but aims to be accurate colour wise and not warm filtered etc like the oppo right
im sure the oppo probably has a nightshot mode that can be toggled like the pixel so not a fair comparison
also again colours are way skewed as you can see on the right image and details are lost in distance on oppo (right)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Basically every point I'd have made too. Just so oversaturated. That's not to say Pixel is perfect as it's not.

As a photographer (of mainly night stuff, too): most of the Pixel shots are more accurate to true life colours & look better to my eye. I can see why people like the warm/over-saturated colours of the Oppo, but it's factually incorrect to say they're better, they're just different.
Most of the Oppo shots (in your OP) are over-saturated/processed & this objectively makes them worse than the Pixel's images as these they look far more natural to the eye. On the flip-side, another great example of this is using the 6 Pro camera during the day - in my opinion, the 6 Pro just doesn't take great daytime photos: they're over-processed & most of the time you need to edit (reduce black point, increase highlights/white point, reduce clarity etc) them to give them a natural look, and the same looks to be true with Find X3 Neo night shots.
Neither camera is perfect: eg. both the photographs of the Pine(?) tree look really weird - the Pixel has over-processed & pulled the black point so high that it's now purpley-grey & the Oppo has completely over-saturated the colours and the tree also has purpley tones... maybe it’s the ambient lighting?
I think I'll stick to the Canon & Mamiya for anything other than point & shoot.