Review from The Verge
If you watch the video, HTC One only has 4mp but claiming it that it has Ultrapixels. What does that mean?
knightrazor said:
Review from The Verge
If you watch the video, HTC One only has 4mp but claiming it that it has Ultrapixels. What does that mean?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It means that the pixel is as huge as dSLR pixel.
This means that the quality of the camera pixel is like dSLR although its lower resolution.
Its like you use 10MP Canon dSLR but crop it in the middle. It is that awesome. Probably the best camera ever in smartfone. Will kill off every competitiors. Nokia Pureview also lose to dSLR camera in HTC ONE.
kkcheong said:
It means that the pixel is as huge as dSLR pixel.
This means that the quality of the camera pixel is like dSLR although its lower resolution.
Its like you use 10MP Canon dSLR but crop it in the middle. It is that awesome. Probably the best camera ever in smartfone. Will kill off every competitiors. Nokia Pureview also lose to dSLR camera in HTC ONE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you even know what a digital SLR is? the HTC phone camera is not a DSLR, nor will it every compare to one, a larger sensor and 14bit colour depth this is what really sets any DSLR from any point and shoot or phone camera.
The 2-micron pixel width in this phone???, my DSLR is over twice this 4.3-micron pixel pitch.
The proof of the quality will obviously come, but prelim reviews state that it is not as good as the Nokia.
HTC already tried this once with the HTC One, with their most stupid marketing. "HTC One Versus DSLR Images, Can You Spot The Difference?". I wrote to them and told them how stupid this marketing was. 364x268 (0.1 megapixel) photos were the comparison, so I sent them sample photo's from my Nokia N70, Blackberry 8900, HTC Desire and my 4Mp Canon G3 point and shoot. Reduced them in size to 364x268 and challenged them to tell the difference between any of them. They very quickly removed this challege from their website about 6 hours afterwards.
Don't get me wrong I am sure this camera is stunning, but it's no DLSR in terms of quality and neither is any point and shoot on the Market. Just the same as ANY cropped DLSR will compete with a full frame DSLR.
danw_oz said:
Do you even know what a digital SLR is? the HTC phone camera is not a DSLR, nor will it every compare to one, a larger sensor and 14bit colour depth this is what really sets any DSLR from any point and shoot or phone camera.
The 2-micron pixel width in this phone???, my DSLR is over twice this 4.3-micron pixel pitch.
The proof of the quality will obviously come, but prelim reviews state that it is not as good as the Nokia.
HTC already tried this once with the HTC One, with their most stupid marketing. "HTC One Versus DSLR Images, Can You Spot The Difference?". I wrote to them and told them how stupid this marketing was. 364x268 (0.1 megapixel) photos were the comparison, so I sent them sample photo's from my Nokia N70, Blackberry 8900, HTC Desire and my 4Mp Canon G3 point and shoot. Reduced them in size to 364x268 and challenged them to tell the difference between any of them. They very quickly removed this challege from their website about 6 hours afterwards.
Don't get me wrong I am sure this camera is stunning, but it's no DLSR in terms of quality and neither is any point and shoot on the Market. Just the same as ANY cropped DLSR will compete with a full frame DSLR.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry for the exaggeration. I just trying to get the point across about megapixel Vs photosites.
UltraPixel ?
kkcheong said:
Sorry for the exaggeration. I just trying to get the point across about megapixel Vs photosites.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Another marketing Gimmick .Make fools of intelligent .
As Said in India " It's easy to make fool of intelligent rather an idiot "
knightrazor said:
Review from The Verge
If you watch the video, HTC One only has 4mp but claiming it that it has Ultrapixels. What does that mean?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In answer to your question, HTC are trying to be different (Marketing move to gain lots of interest).
The pixels that gather the light are larger (Ultra), allowing more light to be captured. Meaning the camera should be amazing in low light compared to most other phone cameras.
http://www.techradar.com/news/phone...in-htc-one-explained-1132205?src=rss&attr=all.
My Canon G3 point and shoot camera was only 4Mp, the photo's from this camera are stunning, great lens and sensor, 4Mp is the optimal balance (quality/noise) for this image sensor size.
more megapixels really only gives you benifit from printing larger prints, or allowing a high quality crop of a shot. How many people print about A3 type size? not many and certainly from a phone.
TheMask007 said:
Another marketing Gimmick .Make fools of intelligent .
As Said in India " It's easy to make fool of intelligent rather an idiot "
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not true. Higher megapixel is gimmick. Reducing megapixel and increase photosites is not gimmick. Its science.
Thanks for that in depth explanation.
danw_oz said:
The pixels that gather the light are larger (Ultra), allowing more light to be captured. Meaning the camera should be amazing in low light compared to most other phone cameras.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And I thought that the only way to gather more light is to have a lower aperture. Well with this, it's a good move to capture low light images with more details (less depth of field). This makes it perfect for concerts.
danw_oz said:
more megapixels really only gives you benifit from printing larger prints, or allowing a high quality crop of a shot. How many people print about A3 type size? not many and certainly from a phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup, it also reduces files sizes. This is good for phones with non expandable memory. I always choose the option to have a smaller MP as these pics are only to be viewed on a laptop. If I wanted to do prints, I'd take my dSLR to shoot pics.
Here is another explanation on the ultrapixel
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2013/02/htc-zoe-camera/
I agree with what HTC says
More megapixels crammed into a sensor of the same size, ie 8, 13 mp in a sensor of the same size, will make the pixels themselves smaller. Less light is captured, more noise produced.
Reduce the amount of pixels and suddenly there are bigger pixels and more light can be captured. I think it will be good for the camera, as a cropped 2mp picture from a DSLR is waaaaay better than a 8mp picture from my incredible s or a one x.
Think of a wire grid fence, if you have more wires there will be more holes, but less light will be able to come through
Dunno how they will market it though. Makes it seem like the old nokias with 2mp cam are the best lol
knightrazor said:
Review from The Verge
If you watch the video, HTC One only has 4mp but claiming it that it has Ultrapixels. What does that mean?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nothing. It's meaningless guff.
The HTC One has a slightly (VERY slightly) larger image sensor, and halves the number of pixels to roughly double photodiode area. That (should) mean much better low-light sensitivity and noise, but much worse resolution. (Still plenty for a typical consumer print, though.)
It simply trades off resolution for low light / noise performance. And the "Ultrapixel" doesn't exist. There have been numerous cameras in the past with the exact same pixel size as the HTC One, including camera phones. Few of them have been available for a few years, or made with current tech, but that's beside the point.
"Ultrapixel" is just a marketing brandname meant to give you the warm fuzzies and make you forget about megapixels.
kkcheong said:
It means that the pixel is as huge as dSLR pixel.
This means that the quality of the camera pixel is like dSLR although its lower resolution.
Its like you use 10MP Canon dSLR but crop it in the middle. It is that awesome. Probably the best camera ever in smartfone. Will kill off every competitiors. Nokia Pureview also lose to dSLR camera in HTC ONE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Complete and utter rubbish. The smallest pixel of any SLR belong to, if I'm not mistaken, the Nikon D3200. It has nearly double the pixel size of the HTC One's camera. And even a cheap consumer DSLR lens is in a different league to a smartphone lens, especially at the center of the image frame.
It is utterly unrealistic to expect even remotely similar per-pixel image quality from a DSLR and the HTC One, even for the central four megapixel crop.
Well the 4mp nothing at all
Even got 41mp also useless if don't have good camera lens
MP just the image resolution only
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
XeactorZ said:
Well the 4mp nothing at all
Even got 41mp also useless if don't have good camera lens
MP just the image resolution only
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://s1297.beta.photobucket.com/user/ivicask/media/HTC_ONE_NEXUS_4_COMPARE_zps973ef748.jpg.html
I made compare HTC ONE 4.3M cam and Nexus 8M,
as you can see in this zoomed in picture in Nexus does have more pixels, but HTC ONE has more details and colors.
Here is full original image taken from ONE S
http://mobilesyrup.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/IMAG0031.jpg
Also Camera sample
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ez_HaOhtxnA
So in short, best phone camera so far if you ask me!
HTC marketing is getting ridiculously stupid, and HTC fanboys are following suit. The megapixel race is not a LIE. In bold, because HTc marketing material likes to make it bold. Megapixels is not the only factor in determining image quality, but it is an important one. But HTC wants you to believe it doesn't matter, AT ALL. So damn stupid. If it doesn't matter, then go reduce an image to a 32x32 icon. Beautiful isn't it! Looks exactly the same as the original! So stupid. HTC is just making a compromise between larger pixel sizes and resolution. The images will be worse in outdoor shots since it doesn't have as good a resolution, but indoor and low light shots will look better since it can gather more light. The question is, how much better? So far from what I can tell, the video and picture samples at the HTC event, which is indoors in low light, are not that impressive. It's definitely gonna be worse in bright outdoor use.
danw_oz said:
Do you even know what a digital SLR is? the HTC phone camera is not a DSLR, nor will it every compare to one, a larger sensor and 14bit colour depth this is what really sets any DSLR from any point and shoot or phone camera.
The 2-micron pixel width in this phone???, my DSLR is over twice this 4.3-micron pixel pitch.
The proof of the quality will obviously come, but prelim reviews state that it is not as good as the Nokia.
HTC already tried this once with the HTC One, with their most stupid marketing. "HTC One Versus DSLR Images, Can You Spot The Difference?". I wrote to them and told them how stupid this marketing was. 364x268 (0.1 megapixel) photos were the comparison, so I sent them sample photo's from my Nokia N70, Blackberry 8900, HTC Desire and my 4Mp Canon G3 point and shoot. Reduced them in size to 364x268 and challenged them to tell the difference between any of them. They very quickly removed this challege from their website about 6 hours afterwards.
Don't get me wrong I am sure this camera is stunning, but it's no DLSR in terms of quality and neither is any point and shoot on the Market. Just the same as ANY cropped DLSR will compete with a full frame DSLR.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I accidentally thanked you.oops. I don't know what DSLR is, but I'm quite sure that htcs new image sense will be quite beyond par for pretty everyone except your absolute perfect photographic self. Also, since you're such a good photog, such an unimpeachable artist,...please share where this work cod be viewed critically. I know artists would love to see it.
Thanks
From my Evo LTE, yup.
katamari201 said:
HTC marketing is getting ridiculously stupid, and HTC fanboys are following suit. The megapixel race is not a LIE. In bold, because HTc marketing material likes to make it bold. Megapixels is not the only factor in determining image quality, but it is an important one. But HTC wants you to believe it doesn't matter, AT ALL. So damn stupid. If it doesn't matter, then go reduce an image to a 32x32 icon. Beautiful isn't it! Looks exactly the same as the original! So stupid. HTC is just making a compromise between larger pixel sizes and resolution. The images will be worse in outdoor shots since it doesn't have as good a resolution, but indoor and low light shots will look better since it can gather more light. The question is, how much better? So far from what I can tell, the video and picture samples at the HTC event, which is indoors in low light, are not that impressive. It's definitely gonna be worse in bright outdoor use.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, how many megapixels do you think you need?
To answer that question, think about what you're viewing the picture on. A PC monitor? What's the resolution of that? Unlikely to be much higher than 2560x1440; that's 3.6MP - any more than that and the extra detail is wasted.
Or maybe you're thinking of printing the photo? 300 dots per inch is plenty of resolution for a colour photo. So, to produce a 7" by 5" print, you only need about 3MP in the image. Even if you want to print out a picture filling an A4 page, you still only need around 8 or 9MP. Are you really going to be printing out your photos larger than an A4 page? And if you are, are you going to be viewing them from less than 12 inches away? (If the viewing distance is greater than that, you don't need 300dpi).
What's more, adding additional MP isn't free. The smaller the pixels get, the more the detector suffers from noise (and removing the noise from the image means you effectively lose the extra resolution), and the more the low-light performance suffers.
And finally, with the kind of aperture sizes and the quality of the lenses you're dealing with, you're unlikely to be able to resolve anywhere near 8MP worth of real detail anyway.
The camera on the HTC One isn't exactly revolutionary, but I think HTC should be congratulated for a move in the right direction: away from a design whose sole purpose is to include a big number for marketing purposes, and towards actually producing a better quality image.
i agree with shasarak, i used to work as photographer, and with our 5mp it was enough for pictured used in public advertising (5 meters * 3 meters)
Yeah pretty much what shasarak said. Thank god HTC had some bloody sense to not load it with more needless MPs as a marketing gimmick.
scottspa74 said:
I accidentally thanked you.oops. I don't know what DSLR is, but I'm quite sure that htcs new image sense will be quite beyond par for pretty everyone except your absolute perfect photographic self. Also, since you're such a good photog, such an unimpeachable artist,...please share where this work cod be viewed critically. I know artists would love to see it.
Thanks
From my Evo LTE, yup.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
DSLR stands for Digital Single Lens Reflex http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_single-lens_reflex_camera, if you are up to it you can read the section 2.6 Larger sensor sizes and better image quality
I don't really understand what you are asking or in fact even trying to say, but if I have it right http://www.flickr.com/photos/dan-wilson/ Is my photography site, Thanks.
Nokia's pure view ends up producing a 5mp picture only thing is that it puts the quality of a 41mp(resolution) in to a smaller frame so when u zoom in u don't loose picture quality.....HTC one does sumthing similar but zooming in will reduce quality [email protected] the end pictures are clear enough to see every detail in the full frame no need to zoom in, its a good tech for those who understand....as for the iPhone's wonderful camera(like it or not) its just a perfect cocktail of very good lenses(which in a way let in lots of light, main reason y it looks bluish and not purplish) plus good apature and good sensors......megapixels =size , good lens+apature+sensore = great picture quality.
Sent from my Desire Z using xda premium
Thx for explanation.
Finally someone with knowledge and sound reasoning. People really need to cool down while in discussion. At the end of the day, it will be just another phone and it will not wake up next day and go to work for you. :good:
Shasarak said:
Well, how many megapixels do you think you need?
To answer that question, think about what you're viewing the picture on. A PC monitor? What's the resolution of that? Unlikely to be much higher than 2560x1440; that's 3.6MP - any more than that and the extra detail is wasted.
Or maybe you're thinking of printing the photo? 300 dots per inch is plenty of resolution for a colour photo. So, to produce a 7" by 5" print, you only need about 3MP in the image. Even if you want to print out a picture filling an A4 page, you still only need around 8 or 9MP. Are you really going to be printing out your photos larger than an A4 page? And if you are, are you going to be viewing them from less than 12 inches away? (If the viewing distance is greater than that, you don't need 300dpi).
What's more, adding additional MP isn't free. The smaller the pixels get, the more the detector suffers from noise (and removing the noise from the image means you effectively lose the extra resolution), and the more the low-light performance suffers.
And finally, with the kind of aperture sizes and the quality of the lenses you're dealing with, you're unlikely to be able to resolve anywhere near 8MP worth of real detail anyway.
The camera on the HTC One isn't exactly revolutionary, but I think HTC should be congratulated for a move in the right direction: away from a design whose sole purpose is to include a big number for marketing purposes, and towards actually producing a better quality image.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have noticed my main phone camera stretches the pictures in a weird way.
Faces are stretched vertically.
Anyone with the same problem?
Did you hit the full veiw button? Top second icon?
It was said in a review that it effects the pictures.
xile6 said:
Did you hit the full veiw button? Top second icon?
It was said in a review that it effects the pictures.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It doesn't stretch for me when hitting the full view. Full view doesn't just change the view on the screen, it actually changes the picture size for the camera. I didn't know this until looking in the settings. You can toggle then check your camera settings to see that it changes. Full view is 4032x1960, 18.5:9, 7.9m. Full view turned off is 4032x2268, 16:9, 9.1m. I prefer to take pics with full view turned off. 18.5:9 is an odd aspect ratio size.
shouren04 said:
It doesn't stretch for me when hitting the full view. Full view doesn't just change the view on the screen, it actually changes the picture size for the camera. I didn't know this until looking in the settings. You can toggle then check your camera settings to see that it changes. Full view is 4032x1960, 18.5:9, 7.9m. Full view turned off is 4032x2268, 16:9, 9.1m. I prefer to take pics with full view turned off. 18.5:9 is an odd aspect ratio size.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, found out today same but it's good option to have ability to switch between two resolutions
Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk
vadimo said:
I agree, found out today same but it's good option to have ability to switch between two resolutions
Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So what is full view good for if it stretches images?
I just took two pictures one in full view it was 4032x1960 and the other was none full view at 4032x3024 .
Was hoping full view was merely the view finder setting. But it ain't.
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
Limeybastard said:
So what is full view good for if it stretches images?
I just took two pictures one in full view it was 4032x1960 and the other was none full view at 4032x3024 .
Was hoping full view was merely the view finder setting. But it ain't.
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It doesn't actually stretch the photo. All it's doing is taking a photo at a lower resolution. Same width but shorter height. I suppose if you are taking landscape photos it just saves you the trouble of having to crop it if you want a wide view photo.
But really I don't understand it either, full view is lower quality as well if it even matters. My guess is it's just there so the photos you take will fit the Note8 screen in full. Which is useless for use outside of the Note8. Full view has an odd aspect ratio. I found myself always having to crop the photos when sending them or posting somewhere cause they look funny.
I'm using 16:9 now as I was on my Note 5. But I may just change to 4:3. It's odd that to get the highest quality & resolution you have to shoot in 4:3. My Note 5 had a higher resolution than the Note 8.
shouren04 said:
It doesn't actually stretch the photo. All it's doing is taking a photo at a lower resolution. Same width but shorter height. I suppose if you are taking landscape photos it just saves you the trouble of having to crop it if you want a wide view photo.
But really I don't understand it either, full view is lower quality as well if it even matters. My guess is it's just there so the photos you take will fit the Note8 screen in full. Which is useless for use outside of the Note8. Full view has an odd aspect ratio. I found myself always having to crop the photos when sending them or posting somewhere cause they look funny.
I'm using 16:9 now as I was on my Note 5. But I may just change to 4:3. It's odd that to get the highest quality & resolution you have to shoot in 4:3. My Note 5 had a higher resolution than the Note 8.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe full view is to show off the note 8 screen ? LOL just my idea .
That's one thing that annoys me also , 4.3 gives you the highest resolution. 16.9 is more mainstream I thought. Wasn't 4.3 ratio the old square television?
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
Limeybastard said:
Maybe full view is to show off the note 8 screen ? LOL just my idea .
That's one thing that annoys me also , 4.3 gives you the highest resolution. 16.9 is more mainstream I thought. Wasn't 4.3 ratio the old square television?
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, exactly my thought as well. Cause if the photos we took didn't fully fit the screen, you know there will tons of people complaining about it!
shouren04 said:
Yep, exactly my thought as well. Cause if the photos we took didn't fully fit the screen, you know there will tons of people complaining about it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True that !
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
I'm not talking about the full screen view when taking pictures. My problem is, when I shot, people's faces are stretched vertically. I go to my dex to take a look at the pics on a bigger screen and I can see my pics are actually vertically stretched, so... Any problem with Note camera? With my camera?
Ps. Depending on the angle I'm shoot the pic writing the phone, pictures are taken stretched or not.
I'll try to upload some samples.
javier24 said:
I'm not talking about the full screen view when taking pictures. My problem is, when I shot, people's faces are stretched vertically. I go to my dex to take a look at the pics on a bigger screen and I can see my pics are actually vertically stretched, so... Any problem with Note camera? With my camera?
Ps. Depending on the angle I'm shoot the pic writing the phone, pictures are taken stretched or not.
I'll try to upload some samples.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does it only show it like that stretched in Dex?
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
Limeybastard said:
Does it only show it like that stretched in Dex?
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you're onto something.
I would say the OP try transferring a photo to your computer & view in a browser or photo editor. Or post a photo online somewhere or here directly from your phone. See if the pic actually looks stretched as described.
shouren04 said:
I think you're onto something.
I would say the OP try transferring a photo to your computer & view in a browser or photo editor. Or post a photo online somewhere or here directly from your phone. See if the pic actually looks stretched as described.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or sending it via email or something to someone else.
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
It looks stretched on my dex, my pc, my work pc, etc.
So, faces look stretched vertically. Weird.
I have had trouble taking photos from close angles. Anthony closer than 6 inches is blurry and gives me a "move back to improve focus" message. I tried open camera as an alternative, but have the same blurry quality photo. I'm not looking for macro photos, but I do like taking closeup shots. Just wondered if anyone had noticed the same issue, and if you've found a work around for it.
I tried the same distance with my Galaxy S10+ as well as a Note 8, and they both handled the shots well. The second picture was taken by the Pixel, the 1st and 3rd taken by the S10+.
condor97 said:
I have had trouble taking photos from close angles. Anthony closer than 6 inches is blurry and gives me a "move back to improve focus" message. I tried open camera as an alternative, but have the same blurry quality photo. I'm not looking for macro photos, but I do like taking closeup shots. Just wondered if anyone had noticed the same issue, and if you've found a work around for it.
I tried the same distance with my Galaxy S10+ as well as a Note 8, and they both handled the shots well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's no workaround. It's a common thing with new smartphone cameras. Step further, take a photo and then crop into your desired space.
SharifOthman said:
There's no workaround. It's a common thing with new smartphone cameras. Step further, take a photo and then crop into your desired space.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks man. I guess I am going to have to wait and get a macro option in my next upgrade. Progress
condor97 said:
Thanks man. I guess I am going to have to wait and get a macro option in my next upgrade. Progress
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you really care about macro photography then you should get a phone with an autofocus macro lens, none of these useless 2 megapixel cameras that are being thrown in every phone these days. I'd rather use the main sensor than to use these awful sensors.
SharifOthman said:
If you really care about macro photography then you should get a phone with an autofocus macro lens, none of these useless 2 megapixel cameras that are being thrown in every phone these days. I'd rather use the main sensor than to use these awful sensors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well you are right. I would pay for the exra feature if it didn't involve exra large phones with curved screens. But that is another topic....
I guess I don't look at closeup photos and macro photography as the same thing. The S10+ I took the above photo with has a 16mp and two 12mp cameras. They seem to perform fairly well in this range, but I know that I am not going to pick up the detail on the eyes of a bee with them (which is what I consider macro to be).
condor97 said:
Well you are right. I would pay for the exra feature if it didn't involve exra large phones with curved screens. But that is another topic....
I guess I don't look at closeup photos and macro photography as the same thing. The S10+ I took the above photo with has a 16mp and two 12mp cameras. They seem to perform fairly well in this range, but I know that I am not going to pick up the detail on the eyes of a bee with them (which is what I consider macro to be).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I fully understand what you mean. As for big phones, that's the exact reason why I chose the smaller Pixel 7, even if I'm missing the telephoto and the macro.
condor97 said:
Well you are right. I would pay for the exra feature if it didn't involve exra large phones with curved screens. But that is another topic....
I guess I don't look at closeup photos and macro photography as the same thing. The S10+ I took the above photo with has a 16mp and two 12mp cameras. They seem to perform fairly well in this range, but I know that I am not going to pick up the detail on the eyes of a bee with them (which is what I consider macro to be).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I noticed also that the minimun focus distance is quite far away. Althought, I've been happy with the results of the 2x crop (before taking the picture). Just get the minimun focus distance, then hit the 2x and take the picture. That big sensor and Super Res Zoom does the rest. Results are quite ok IMO.
Finneri said:
I noticed also that the minimun focus distance is quite far away. Althought, I've been happy with the results of the 2x crop (before taking the picture). Just get the minimun focus distance, then hit the 2x and take the picture. That big sensor and Super Res Zoom does the rest. Results are quite ok IMO.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a good tip! Thanks!