Related
I find every picture I take with the diamond sub par and not even 3 megapixel standard. my resolution is def set to highest. even my missus's iphone produces sharper more defined pics. diamond pics are soft, cloudy and blotchy when zoomedl auto white balance is useless, always gets things wrong and I have to always fiddle around with manual settings. what are your experiences?
Original files are in zip.. When you hold the td perfectly still the photo's are ok.. when te conditions are worse, i.e. your walking/moving, in darker places, the quality runs back quickly.
I found the camera amazing (except for in the dark, while contra-light doesn't seem to matter that match). Good quality, high-res pictures if you allow it to focus correctly and hold still. Some good modes too.
Prety much the same. Only way to get a reasonable pic is to remove the back when I need as good a quality as possible, and when I do so they're passable. Find auto WB is ok outdoors, but rubbish indoors (badly washed out), and needs a bit of fiddling to get the best out of it.
Bit of a nause, but I'm not a prolific snapper, so it's not the end of the world for me.
camera is amazing on light.
but in the dark it is really ****.
studz said:
Prety much the same. Only way to get a reasonable pic is to remove the back when I need as good a quality as possible,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is exactly what has been said before, i completely agree and I did some tests on it to. Both my images showed that with the cover on, cloudy, misty pictures and with the cover off, good quality, reasonably sharp pictures.
intel286 said:
camera is amazing on light.
but in the dark it is really ****.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do also agree that indoors and in low light the quality isn't that great but outdoors especially in good light the pictures are pretty good. Would be great if there was some sort of software tweak or software upgrade that would improve the quality of the pictures produced.
But at the end of the day we all know it all goes down to the quality of the camera that the manufacturer has used in the device. Im reasonably happy with the 3.2 megapixel that was used but with things like the Samsung i900 Omnia coming out / recently out with a pretty good 5 mega pixel hopefully HTC will take note and upgrade the cameras in future devices.
Im happy with mine, taking the back cover off can be a pain, but it works for me! (For now, hehe!)
Compared to what I just came from (a terrible VGA cam in a Motorola V3), I think the camera is amazing. It's not up to proper camera levels, but if I was after a camera for more than the occasional picture, I'd buy a proper digital cam or one of these phone/camera hybrids.
It does require a steady hand though, and it very low light it's not good, but even in relatively poor light it still did better than I was expecting.
Its just 'OK' in the light and useless in dark.
okay. tried with the cover off and theres definately an improvement, although still not perfect. however, its going to be a major pain in the arse to take the back cover off everytime I want to take an improv picture.
darthbane2k said:
okay. tried with the cover off and theres definately an improvement, although still not perfect. however, its going to be a major pain in the arse to take the back cover off everytime I want to take an improv picture.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
push the lense cover out....worked for me
but then you have the problems or crap getting in the back of the phone
Pretty good during the day, but at night it turns to ****, my guess is that it tries to prolong the shutter speed instead of increase the gain / ISO sensitivity.
HTC need to learn 2 program.
liamhere said:
push the lense cover out....worked for me
but then you have the problems or crap getting in the back of the phone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what if we cover the hole with clear screen protector film?
it would warp the image, short of proper optics you cant just cover a hole an take a picture through it, what we need it some sort of shutter on the back panel, quite easy to manufacture if someone could be bothered
Tendou said:
Pretty good during the day, but at night it turns to ****, my guess is that it tries to prolong the shutter speed instead of increase the gain / ISO sensitivity.
HTC need to learn 2 program.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you have any idea what does it take in terms of sensor circuitry to increase ISO sensitivity?
you have any idea how expensive a good camera sensor is (not the crap you see in consumer cameras, which are also **** in the dark)?
guys, I think you're just being unrealistic about what a phone camera should do.
I cleaned up my cover lens and I pushed it more that I wanted and ups it is out so now Im glad with clean photos and once a time I clean up hole back under cover...
...but about steady hand and good not blurry pictures...does anybody worked sports or burst mode with resolution higher than size "L"
kultus said:
I cleaned up my cover lens and I pushed it more that I wanted and ups it is out so now Im glad with clean photos and once a time I clean up hole back under cover...
...but about steady hand and good not blurry pictures...does anybody worked sports or burst mode with resolution higher than size "L"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
can popping out the lens cover really damage the phone?
well
you'll get dust inside, this shall be most notably when wearing it in pocket...
i managed it by putting a plastic seal around it:
i took one of those cable holders which came with the diamond (e.g. holding the headset together) cut it in the middle (so it was half as high as before) and placed it around the lense
now its closed again (teste with very fine sand) and i got much better photos....
(sry for the bad english ;D - I hope you can get what i mean)
Im wearing it in my pocket and its not that horible than I expected so its your choice...no damage btw glue is still there so its the matter of 2 sec to stick it up...
If you don't want to remove the lens cover, then clean the cover. Have a look at your cover and you should see why the picture comes out the way it does.
I.ve been watching this forum for more on this issue. The camera is crap. I upgraded to the htc rom because it said it made camera improvements. Bull***t. It’s still the same. I take loads of photos and almost all with the diamond have some sort of blurriness. If you have some sort of movement when the photo is taken then it blurs’. Examples below. Because of what another member posted about the same problem. I will be contacting htc support.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=412397
My old 2.0 mp Artemis and 3.0 mp Tytn II never had this problem.
Photos with the diamond
http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/j.../IMAGE_041.jpg
http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/j.../IMAGE_022.jpg
http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/j.../IMAGE_014.jpg
i.ve tried without back cover and it makes no diference
This is my first post here, so first of all, hello everyone and greetings from Finland!
I bought the IS about two weeks ago. Today I took my first outdoor pics and noticed a strange phenomenon. If I focus on a distant object (typical for outdoor shots), the extreme right-hand side of the photo is quite mushy and blurred. The affected area is only about 200 pixels wide (starting from the edge) and goes all the way from top to bottom. Everything else, including the left side, is tack sharp (well, as sharp as it can be with this camera anyway). This happens with every photo, if the focusing distance is relatively long. Close-range shots (indoor pics, for example) are just fine, also the right-hand sides of the photos turn out sharp. This is very strange.
I'm a very experienced photographer, so it's not my technique. Something is wrong with the optics alignment, sensor or it could be a software issue. With optical problems the close-range shots are usually more problematic because of short depth-of-field, which makes the alignment errors much more visible.
Anyone else having similar experiences? Take an outdoor shot using a focusing distance of, let's say, 20-50 meters (or yards) and see if the right side of the image is as sharp as the left side. Make sure there's something with lots of detail near the edges of the image. I would be much less worried, if both sides of the photos were softish. After all, that would be quite typical for less-than-stellar optics found in camera phones. It's the asymmetry that bothers me.
This is actually my only gripe with this phone. Apart from this unpleasant surprise I really like the IS.
Pete
P.S. No fingerprints on the lens, it's clean!
There's an ongoing thread about the camera quality issue.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1021940
chobie said:
There's an ongoing thread about the camera quality issue.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1021940
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the tip!
I did a bit more controlled experimenting and sadly it seems that also close-distance shots suffer from the same right-hand side blurriness. If I take a photo of a completely flat surface, focusing on the center part of the viewing area, the extreme right-hand side of the photo is soft. There's nothing wrong with the left-hand side. Also, the affected area is almost 400 pixels wide (wide angle setting, no zooming). I also rotated the phone 180 degrees and took comparison shots. And...the left-hand side was blurry.
Maybe I have a bad sample. I can't exchange it for a new one, so I guess I have to live with it or have the local HTC service take a look at it. I'm not too keen on doing that.
Pete
Nothing like this in mine. Photos are good. No blur at the right.
cooljais said:
Nothing like this in mine. Photos are good. No blur at the right.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for your comment, good to know your camera is working fine!
I'm suspecting there's dirt inside the lens assembly or on the sensor. My IS is now being serviced at the local HTC service center. I'll let you know how this turns out.
Guess caused by auto focusing
Anyone notice that optical image stabilization is missing in the specifications? I just did a quick search and found several sources saying its digital stabilization. A little bummed about that. Thoughts anyone? :crying:
From the videos, its pretty stable with digital stabilization compared to other smartphones no?
Sent from my One using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
expertzero1 said:
From the videos, its pretty stable with digital stabilization compared to other smartphones no?
Sent from my One using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, can't wait for a couple full blown reviews. If anything, hopefully they will bundle the qx10 for preorders in the US too. I hear the qx10 has the optical stabilization. I'm just worried about the low light blurriness. I had the 1020 and it was fantastic.
Smartphone makers try to close the image quality gap between their phones and actual camera.
However, to be honest, I do not rely to much to phone camera.
Their lens can't and sensors can't compare to actual camera even point and shot one, not saying SLR cameras.
Anyway, a phone without a camera is also something should be in history.
It doesn't have optical image stabilization. That's why the night shots aren't so good. OIS allows for slower shutter speed and more exposure. The digital image stabilization is only used for video. All phones have this already. The Lumia 920/925, Lumia 1020, Note 3, HTC One, and LG G2 have OIS, but Sony chickened out and wanted a FLAT camera with no bump because it ruins their sense of aesthetic. They could probably make it even thinner and flatter if they removed the camera and battery completely. How about removing all the internals? A beautiful sliver thin paperweight that looks nice as long as you don't touch it and smudge it up with your filthy plebeian fingers. I'm sure there are many buyers among the Sony loyalists for this sort of product.
katamari201 said:
It doesn't have optical image stabilization. That's why the night shots aren't so good. OIS allows for slower shutter speed and more exposure. The digital image stabilization is only used for video. All phones have this already. The Lumia 920/925, Lumia 1020, Note 3, HTC One, and LG G2 have OIS, but Sony chickened out and wanted a FLAT camera with no bump because it ruins their sense of aesthetic. They could probably make it even thinner and flatter if they removed the camera and battery completely. How about removing all the internals? A beautiful sliver thin paperweight that looks nice as long as you don't touch it and smudge it up with your filthy plebeian fingers. I'm sure there are many buyers among the Sony loyalists for this sort of product.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude, what is your problem? It's only a phone with camera that can rival with the best currently available when it comes to pure picture quality. It bests S4 in low light shots and rivals 1020, in daylight photos you can clearly see more details compared to S4 (which by many is considered to have the best camera on android). What is true is that Sony still needs to improve their algorithm but even as it is now it can produce exceptional photos even in full 20mpix resolution.
Stop acting like a baby!!
Wishmaster89 said:
Dude, what is your problem? It's only a phone with camera that can rival with the best currently available when it comes to pure picture quality. It bests S4 in low light shots and rivals 1020, in daylight photos you can clearly see more details compared to S4 (which by many is considered to have the best camera on android). What is true is that Sony still needs to improve their algorithm but even as it is now it can produce exceptional photos even in full 20mpix resolution.
Stop acting like a baby!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think that we all just wanted them to do it right you know? They went out to make a great camera phone and it feels like they stopped 5% away from the finish line. Still, will probably be a great phone and a great camera.
systoxity said:
I think that we all just wanted them to do it right you know? They went out to make a great camera phone and it feels like they stopped 5% away from the finish line. Still, will probably be a great phone and a great camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There'a a difference between disappointment and senseless bashing and that is what I was criticizing.
I agree that it is a shame that they weren't able to include OIS or sensor shift but I think that it could have been currently impossible with such a big sensor and bigger lens than other manufacturers. It is a shame but it's not something that automatically makes it worse than G2 or note 3/S4, on the contrary I still think that it'll end up doing better pictures than both of them.
Sony SteadyShot
It's not all down hill guys, the Z1 has Sony's SteadyShot technology in it, it just appears to only work in video mode which imo is best place, I suppose there will be more clarification once it's out......http://www.sonymobile.com/global-en/products/phones/xperia-z1/features/#camera
katamari201 said:
It doesn't have optical image stabilization. That's why the night shots aren't so good. OIS allows for slower shutter speed and more exposure. The digital image stabilization is only used for video. All phones have this already. The Lumia 920/925, Lumia 1020, Note 3, HTC One, and LG G2 have OIS, but Sony chickened out and wanted a FLAT camera with no bump because it ruins their sense of aesthetic. They could probably make it even thinner and flatter if they removed the camera and battery completely. How about removing all the internals? A beautiful sliver thin paperweight that looks nice as long as you don't touch it and smudge it up with your filthy plebeian fingers. I'm sure there are many buyers among the Sony loyalists for this sort of product.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You sound completely mental.
OIS.. will increase quality for low light shot without question...because of ISO..dont know the ISO range.. any one knows?
jos_031 said:
OIS.. will increase quality for low light shot without question...because of ISO..dont know the ISO range.. any one knows?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
6400 it says on the Sony site I linked it 2 posts back.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2
katamari201 said:
It doesn't have optical image stabilization. That's why the night shots aren't so good. OIS allows for slower shutter speed and more exposure. The digital image stabilization is only used for video. All phones have this already. The Lumia 920/925, Lumia 1020, Note 3, HTC One, and LG G2 have OIS, but Sony chickened out and wanted a FLAT camera with no bump because it ruins their sense of aesthetic. They could probably make it even thinner and flatter if they removed the camera and battery completely. How about removing all the internals? A beautiful sliver thin paperweight that looks nice as long as you don't touch it and smudge it up with your filthy plebeian fingers. I'm sure there are many buyers among the Sony loyalists for this sort of product.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're just trolling. I've been checking on the photo samples from the Z1 for the past couple days cause I'm considering getting one. I've been waiting for HTC to announce the One Max, but the lack of doing so at the IFA completely made me give up on them and push me toward getting a Z1 instead. At first I noticed the photos had a lot of noise from the Z1 photo samples, but it seems like the noise was taken cared of via software update. The lack of OIS doesn't exactly affect the quality of the photos so far from what I see. The photo samples from the Z1 look more natural than 1020's which had a yellow tint to it. The photos were so defined when comparing the HTC One under low light condition and HTC One is only a bit behind on 1020 under low light condition.
Really, i think at this point we all just need to get our hands on one and give it a shot. The sample photos floating around on the internet certainly haven't been flattering but that could be due to any number of variables. Any word on US release yet?
Exposure is basically the AMOUNT OF LIGHT (controlled by the aperture) that is captured over a SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF TIME (controlled by the shutter speed).
A HIGH aperture number (fstop) = LESS light being recorded on your digital sensor while a LOW aperture number = MORE light being recorded on your digital sensor. apertures are called fstops
Shutter speed: it is the amount of time your shutter stays open when you click the button
The longer your shutter stays open the more motion it will have time to record. The shorter the time your shutter remains open, the more motion it will freeze. But at low light you need more exposure
ISO rating along with the shutter speed and aperture setting are the three elements that determine the final exposure of the photographic image.
The ISO rating, which ranges in value from 25 to 6400 (or beyond), indicates the specific light sensitivity. The lower the number, the less sensitive to light the film stock or image sensor is. Conversely, a higher number indicates a higher sensitivity to light, thereby allowing that film or image sensor to work better in low light conditions.
the lower ISO rating also meant that the photosensitive grains of salt on the film acetate were very fine, thus producing a smoother, cleaner image. A higher ISO had larger, jagged grains of salt, thus producing “rougher” or grainier images.
Lower ISO ratings produce color-accurate, smooth and aesthetically appealing images… and this requires ideal lighting conditions. However, there are some subjects that you want to photograph in low light conditions. Or, you may want to stop fast-moving objects. In both situations, you need higher ISOs to capture those images with an acceptable exposure.with the higher ISOs, you can use faster shutter speeds to eliminate motion blur and/or camera shake. In the event that you want to use motion blur creatively, then decreasing the ISO is simple, and you can then decrease the shutter speed to achieve the desired motion blur and still have smooth, noise-less images.
The size of the digital camera’s image sensor dictates what ISO setting provides the least amount of digital noise. One must understand that image sensor size is not the same thing as pixel count. Image sensor size is the actual physical dimensions of the sensor, for most of the history of digital photography the image sensor has been smaller than a 35mm film frame. On point and shoot cameras, the sensor was quite small, and on most DSLR cameras, the image sensor has been the size of APC film (23x15mm). Smaller image sensors produce much more digital noise at higher ISOs (like 800) mainly because the high pixel count means that more pixels are being packed into a smaller area, thus producing more grain at all but the lowest ISO.
Whenever you shoot in low light or use a long lens, or if you simply aren't holding a camera steady, you risk introducing camera shake into your images. This manifests itself as a blurring of details, and unlike other image quality issues it's not something that can be fixed in post-processing.
The three main image stabilisation systems on offer:
Manufacturers have different names for lens-based stabilisation, but they all largely work in the same way.
ISO based
All but the cheapest compacts offer image stabilisation, and the easiest solution from the manufacturer's point of view is one based on sensitivity. This adds nothing to the manufacturing of a camera as it's simply the ISO which needs to be adjusted, easily handled by the camera's firmware.
As this is the most basic form of image stabilisation, and as other types are preferable, manufacturers often call it 'digital' image stabilisation in press releases and throughout specification lists.
With this type of image stabilisation, the camera looks at the focal length and shutter speed being used, and decides whether the two will create a sharp enough image. If it deems them to be inadequate the camera's sensitivity will be raised, which in turn increases the shutter speed, but the resulting signal will need to be amplified to a greater extent.
So, a camera could choose to raise an image that would be otherwise captured at 1/20sec to 1/80sec, but it would need to raise the sensitivity twofold. So, from ISO 100 this would rise to ISO 400, from ISO 200 to ISO 800 and so on.
The image is still captured sharply as a more appropriate shutter speed has been used, but this process gives rise to noise which is typical with images captured at higher sensitivities. For this reason other systems are preferable in more expensive cameras and lenses. In many compacts, this method is often complemented by sensor-based stabilisation.
Sensor based
Sensor-based stabilisation also uses information such as focal length and shutter speed on which to base its calculations, but instead of adjusting the sensitivity the camera physically moves the sensor.
The sensor will typically be mounted on a platform, which will move to compensate for any movement when the camera senses it is necessary.
Minolta first introduced the feature in its DiMAGE A1 camera back in 2003, and, after merging with Konica, incorporated it into the 7D DSLR.
Sony continued the feature when it took over Konica Minolta's imaging business, and was soon joined by Pentax, Olympus and others. All three companies continue to use the system today, and it has since been adopted by other manufacturers for their own hybrid systems and compacts.
In the case of DSLRs and hybrids, this type of image stabilisation brings the significant advantage of allowing lenses to be made smaller, lighter and cheaper (as they do not need to incorporate any form of image stabilisation themselves), and is effective with virtually any mounted lens. This is particularly handy in the case of older lenses which predate image stabilisation technology, although it may be necessary to first input the focal length of the lens into the camera, depending on the lens, camera and the nature of communication between the two.
Lens based
Lens-based image stabilisation came just before digital cameras were made accessible, but the two have more or less evolved over a similar space of time.
Today, the technology is found in a range of optics manufactured by Canon and Nikon (particularly those targeted towards the professional), as well throughout the ranges from independent lens manufacturers Sigma and Tamron. Panasonic also uses the system in its lenses designed for the Micro Four Thirds system, as well as those found in its Lumix range of compacts.
Lens-based stabilisation systems typically work by shifting a lens group towards the rear of the lens on a plane perpendicular to the optical axis.
This is done with the help of two gyro sensors inside the lens, one for yaw and one for pitch. These notice the angle and speed of any movement, and this information is fed to a microprocessor which computes the necessary adjustments needed to be made by the lens group. By doing so, the light's angle of refraction is changed so that it hits the sensor in the right place.
Manufacturers of these systems claim that this type of stabilisation is the most effective as it can be tailored specifically to the objective in which it us used. And, as stabilisation takes place in the lens, the photographer is able to view the effect through the viewfinder.
Typically this activates once the shutter release has been half-depressed, although it is possible on different camera/lens combinations to set when the stabilisation begins, such as only at the moment of capture, for example. This has the additional benefit of conserving power, as, left on all the time, lens-based image stabilisation systems can eat up battery power fairly quickly.
One recent development in this area is Canon's Hybrid IS system, which offers two types of correction.
The first is via an angular velocity sensor which notices rotational shake, which is found in existing image-stabilised lenses.
Canon 100mmThe second - and what makes the Hybrid IS system different - is a separate sensor for noticing camera shift (linear) movements, such as when a camera moves up, down, left or right while remaining parallel to the subject. Canon claims that by incorporating both sensors camera shake is better corrected.
Now i guess everyone got importance of OIS feature..
And i tried the camera of xperia Z1.. the picture was blurry at full zoom. but noise was absent..I feel low noise is more important than full zoom blur...because the photo is excellent for normal usage
wow, thank you that was a great read.
I was at a birthday party at a friend's house tonight and played with an iPhone 6. I was amazed at how shockingly fast and sharp the photos were in low light (night time, couple of lamps on, no flash), taking pics of the kids running around playing with each other. There was noise, of course, but the pics were taken instantly as I touched the shutter button and they came out sharp.
By comparison, my OG Moto X took an eternity to focus and take the shot, and most of them came out either blurry or very grainy.
So how does the Z3C perform in this situation? How long does it take to focus and take the shot, especially in low light with moving subjects? Anyone here have direct comparison experience with iPhone 6?
Thanks!
pchoi94 said:
I was at a birthday party at a friend's house tonight and played with an iPhone 6. I was amazed at how shockingly fast and sharp the photos were in low light (night time, couple of lamps on, no flash), taking pics of the kids running around playing with each other. There was noise, of course, but the pics were taken instantly as I touched the shutter button and they came out sharp.
By comparison, my OG Moto X took an eternity to focus and take the shot, and most of them came out either blurry or very grainy.
So how does the Z3C perform in this situation? How long does it take to focus and take the shot, especially in low light with moving subjects? Anyone here have direct comparison experience with iPhone 6?
Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I really also need this informatin
feels pretty slow to me. a 1-2 seconds depending on low light or pitch black. can't actually see anything in the latter scenario though.
my real world usage with this thing has left me very unimpressed with low light performance. i can't imagine it being even worse when BL unlocked
Take a look here. I don't have a Iphone 6, but I do have an GS5. After having the GS5, I feel that my Z3C camera is underwhelming. Not as sharp, fast, or vivid as that GS5's camera. I do like that the Z3C is able to capture reasonable night shots where as other phones can't.
I was playing around in the settings last but indoors. I changed the auto focus to "single" rather than tap. It seemed to pick out the subject more consistently. I also reduced to 8mp 4:3. Happier than I was in the weekend. Will play around more on Saturday. iPhone 6 does take great photo's, but it's another £150 on top.
Hi,
I noticed that Pixel 4 XL doesnt have equal sharpness in the frontcam pictures. If subject aka me are in the centre of frame (phone in portrait orientation), the photo comes halfway blurred. I mean my beard looks sharp, but in eyes level and above everything is a blurry mess. The hair looks so bad compared to my beard.. If I out stretch my arm, then its not so visible but anything from 30-50 cm shooting distances and you can definetely see that the picture looks weird because of that hair/eye level blurriness. I can fix the blurry eyes by re centering myself to lower of the frame. Its insane but it works always.
I want to know if this is normal software processing (distortion correction) or do I have a bad lens/camera sensor? And please dont remind me that its a fixed focus lens I already know that and i have described the problem which isnt purely focus issue.
E; I attached screenshot from one of my photos, where you can see the problem. (look at hair vs. eyebrown focus and scene wasnt windy!) I wasnt centered in viewfinder, little bit lower than centre of the frame trying to show that non equal sharpness (without sharing myself to whole internet)
Sadly, Pixel 4 FFC doesn't have autofocus. It is fixed focus, to get it in focus you have to move the camera at arms lenght (focus point is around 55cm)
It is a pity but that is how it is. Pixel 3 narrow FFC had autofocus and I got the best selfies that way. Pixel 3 wide FFC was fixed focus.
"The Pixel 4 comes with a fixed-focus lens that offers a wide depth of field but has a slightly limited focus range. The latter means that in selfie shots captured at close distance (30 cm), images are slightly soft. However, sharpness is good at a typical arm’s-length shooting distance of 55cm and remains good at selfie-stick shooting distance (120cm), where many other devices struggle."
https://www.dxomark.com/google-pixel-4-front-camera-review/
Google reasoning is:
P4 FFC is wide, so you want to have the back frame and other people focused (not possible with autofocus)
Maybe no space to add a autofocus FFC because of soli?
Because Google and FFC with autofocus will come back with the P5
.
This really doesn't answer your question of whether your phone has a problem or not... but the image sensor is a flat object, while the lens is a hemisphere. The different parts of the hemisphere are different lengths from the image sensor; IE the center is a different length than any outer edge. The P4 in particular has aggressive perspective correction to cover up this fact and make things (usually) look flat when they should. But it can't correct the different focal lengths that change from center to outer edge. Maybe this is what you're seeing. I don't know a lot about cameras... I could be completely wrong.
jljtgr said:
This really doesn't answer your question of whether your phone has a problem or not... but the image sensor is a flat object, while the lens is a hemisphere. The different parts of the hemisphere are different lengths from the image sensor; IE the center is a different length than any outer edge. The P4 in particular has aggressive perspective correction to cover up this fact and make things (usually) look flat when they should. But it can't correct the different focal lengths that change from center to outer edge. Maybe this is what you're seeing. I don't know a lot about cameras... I could be completely wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Otherwise good opinion, but how every else major flagship doesnt suffer this? iPhone, Oneplus for example (have had both). Can someone test this? For testing, you need to take it outdoors and in bright conditions and take a punch of selfies from center and litle lower of frame and see how it affects to focus. (usually if you have beard its sharper than your eyebrowns and it makes the photo horrible looking when cropped in) I showed to my friend examples who doesnt know anything about smartphone cameras and he was sure that this much be broken, cause it was so baad looking and the in the other it was so good, as expected. (same distance, differennt in frame positioning)