Related
Is there any way that contrast,saturation,sharpness and brightness settings can be adjusted in 0.1, 0.2,1.5, 1.9 etc. Instead of just +1, 2,3 etc.
If this can be achieved in thinking the camera would take care better pics.
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA App
doinbox said:
Is there any way that contrast,saturation,sharpness and brightness settings can be adjusted in 0.1, 0.2,1.5, 1.9 etc. Instead of just +1, 2,3 etc.
If this can be achieved in thinking the camera would take care better pics.
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, as well as brightness there is contrast, sharpness, saturation. Also you have white balance settings, (usual choices), ISO 100 to 800 ( I've not tried low light situations yet with different iso's), not tried them all yet. from small up to 5mp 2592x1552 in quality settings + Normal fine and high (which I always keep it on) Metering modes, spot , centre and Average. self timer, geo tag, auto focus choice face detection,.
So there is plenty of manual options to experiment with. Remember it doesn't really matter how many megapixels you have or top of the range phone, at the end of the day it is still JUST a mobile phone. Pics will only be as good quality wise as the lens will allow and some photos obviously not as good as a proper camera.
Also found that it its worth having something like picsay pro installed. Can adjust pictures exposure, brightness, contrast etc to the Nth degree.
The pictures on my desire tend to be under exposed and washed out colors regardless of camera settings. Picsay pro is fantastic at fixing them. Has some good fun features too.
Give the lite version a go. Not sue what its limitations are though.
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA App
auldreekie said:
Yes, as well as brightness there is contrast, sharpness, saturation. Also you have white balance settings, (usual choices), ISO 100 to 800 ( I've not tried low light situations yet with different iso's), not tried them all yet. from small up to 5mp 2592x1552 in quality settings + Normal fine and high (which I always keep it on) Metering modes, spot , centre and Average. self timer, geo tag, auto focus choice face detection.
So there is plenty of manual options to experiment with. Remember it doesn't really matter how many megapixels you have or top of the range phone, at the end of the day it is still JUST a mobile phone. Pics will only be as good quality wise as the lens will allow and some photos obviously not as good as a proper camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think you understand my question mate.
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA App
auldreekie said:
Remember it doesn't really matter how many megapixels you have or top of the range phone, at the end of the day it is still JUST a mobile phone. Pics will only be as good quality wise as the lens will allow and some photos obviously not as good as a proper camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree about the mega pixels. 5 is plenty unless you want to do large prints/posters. I don't agree that you say it's JUST a mobile phone. I see people use this a lot as an excuse for a deficient camera on a phone. Nokia and Sony seem to manage to put decent camera's and lenses in their top end phones, so there is no excuse IMO.
Personally like Photoshop .com Mobile...Free on Marketplace. Maybe I favour it because I use full Photoshop CS3 on the PC to touch up photos from my dslr etc.
Mobile version has crop, straighten, change exposure values and quite a bit more. Dead easy to use too.
spen2 said:
I agree about the mega pixels. 5 is plenty unless you want to do large prints/posters. I don't agree that you say it's JUST a mobile phone. I see people use this a lot as an excuse for a deficient camera on a phone. Nokia and Sony seem to manage to put decent camera's and lenses in their top end phones, so there is no excuse IMO.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe I could have worded it a little better, I don't mean to say it's a crap phone, I chose this one myself and I love it. It's great in all dep'ts even the camera is reasonable but in quality terms (not composing) it's never going to beat my £1000.00 lens on my slr is it.
On my Touch HD , it was advised to use normal mode as opposed to wide screen mode.
The reason was you have tegh same number of pixels but in wide mode they are stretched out.
Is this true on the Desire??
Hey guys/gals,
Just wondering on how the quality of the pictures are with this phone. I've seen pics taken by reviewers, but it's always better to look at it from a user's perspective. Has anybody tried playing around with the camera?
Also, can someone be kind enough to upload some sample pictures of random shots, like daylight shots, night time, and macro shots? I know the camera is supposedly very good, but it'll be nice to actually see a few real samples, especially the night time shots.
bump, anybody? hehe
Actual pics to come, but from my own experience as both a previous user of the Nexus One AND a hobby digital photographer are;
All of this is using the default Camera, default settings (except for turning OFF the shutter sound).
1. The Nitro does a rather good job in low light situations. Opting to raise the ISO more than use Flash. On more than a few occasions where I expected to see flash, it didn't. When blown-up you certainly can see the picture is grainier without the flash, but for web/facebook viewing the results are quite good and a LOT LESS harsh from not using flash.
2. LONG shot-to-shot time! I wonder what the buffer size with the camera is, IF there's even a buffer that comes with it! Because it takes me about 6 seconds between taking one picture before I'm able to take the next. Even when I try using a 3rd party app (Camera Zoom FX) I only got the time down to 3 seconds. Do NOT plan on using this phone's camera for any kid's birthday parties!!
That's all I've got for the moment, will add more when I've done more playing/testing.
Guess I can upload a bunch I took.
A note, some are taken with HDR + and others with Camera Zoom FX.
http://thewisedumbass.tumblr.com/post/14540968432 (Had to make it a post on Tumblr, pics kept messing up here)
The photos looks decent for a phone, nothing spectacular, at low light is more like "meh" - an average or slightly above, but when it comes to movies at low light I'd prefer have grain (Atrix 4G / Nitro) rather then ghosting (any other phones). On Nitro and Atrix 4G regardless of the light the picture is smooth 30fps, as opposite to Skyrocket or ANY HTC phone with 5fps and all smugged.
Here are some shots to compare:
Nitro with flash (left), no flash (right):
Atrix 4G with flash (left), no flash (right):
Also note Nitro has much lower lens focal length, which makes it capture wider surroundings. The photos were taking from 4 feet away and Nitro's photos captured much more surroundings then Atrix. Even when you hold both phones side by side the image at Nitro looks at pretty much correct distance, rather then on Atrix it looks like zoomed in. Yet, in low light Atrix's ISO captures much more light.
This is first phone camera that beat Atrix's (IMO). /me very happy with it.
Nice!! thanks guys for the details comparisons. I am liking wat i see with the Nitro. Do any of u guys find the auto focus annoying, or is there an option to do manual focus, like the atrix??
Not sure what manual focus you are talking about, but the camera does allow you to touch to pick the area to focus. Still auto-focus to the region, but better than the normal.
aquariuz23 said:
Nice!! thanks guys for the details comparisons. I am liking wat i see with the Nitro. Do any of u guys find the auto focus annoying, or is there an option to do manual focus, like the atrix??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Neither stock nor MIUI camera has manual focus on Atrix...In fact Atrix doesn't allow you pick which part on the picture you want it focus to, it's always at the center.
I made a thread the other day saying how 4.0.3 seemed to fix the focus issues. Well that's great, now maybe an update needs to fix the actual quality? I mean, this is TERRIBLE. Look how dull/dark the picture is on a perfectly sunny day.
After seeing this I took a look at the exif data and it shows a shutter speed of 1/3000? SERIOUSLY?????????? It needs to be around 1/600 to look bright and not so damn dull.
We seriously need manual controls on this camera phone. I'm usually one of the first ones to say, "it's just a phone, get a real camera if you want good pictures," but this is just damn ridiculous now. Pictures look like they came from a flip phone.
What's funny is it looks bright and excellent on the phone. When I first saw it on the phone, I thought, "wow that's a nice picture." Until I looked at it on the computer...
http://i.imgur.com/HiYS6.jpg
What's wrong with the EV controls? Or even the scene settings? I feel I have pretty much control over my pictures from my GN by trying different settings or even another camera app.
I tend to take mobile shots not to seriously as I use a DSLR on a daily basis.
Mobile cameras aren't "there" yet. Period. The older nokias took great mobile pictures, but somehow the necessity for high en cameras got lost in the transitions to smartphones. I've heard the (the name we won't speak) 4S camera is one of the better ones on the market? Tried that?
brian85 said:
I made a thread the other day saying how 4.0.3 seemed to fix the focus issues. Well that's great, now maybe an update needs to fix the actual quality? I mean, this is TERRIBLE. Look how dull/dark the picture is on a perfectly sunny day.
After seeing this I took a look at the exif data and it shows a shutter speed of 1/3000? SERIOUSLY?????????? It needs to be around 1/600 to look bright and not so damn dull.
We seriously need manual controls on this camera phone. I'm usually one of the first ones to say, "it's just a phone, get a real camera if you want good pictures," but this is just damn ridiculous now. Pictures look like they came from a flip phone.
What's funny is it looks bright and excellent on the phone. When I first saw it on the phone, I thought, "wow that's a nice picture." Until I looked at it on the computer...
http://i.imgur.com/HiYS6.jpg
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe your monitor isn't set correctly. There's nothing terrible about that picture for a camera phone. It's underexposed by about 1/2 to 1 EV, but not terribly. Automatic metering is often off by that much; you can easily add an EV or 2 of compensation if you're not pleased with the results. Or just run it through Auto-Fix in the built-in editor, the results are actually very good in my experience.
/spectrometer-calibrated monitor here
copkay said:
Maybe your monitor isn't set correctly. There's nothing terrible about that picture for a camera phone. It's underexposed by about 1/2 to 1 EV, but not terribly. Automatic metering is often off by that much; you can easily add an EV or 2 of compensation if you're not pleased with the results. Or just run it through Auto-Fix in the built-in editor, the results are actually very good in my experience.
/spectrometer-calibrated monitor here
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My monitor is fine. It's not like this is the only picture I've ever seen on my computer.
fregor said:
What's wrong with the EV controls? Or even the scene settings? I feel I have pretty much control over my pictures from my GN by trying different settings or even another camera app.
I tend to take mobile shots not to seriously as I use a DSLR on a daily basis.
Mobile cameras aren't "there" yet. Period. The older nokias took great mobile pictures, but somehow the necessity for high en cameras got lost in the transitions to smartphones. I've heard the (the name we won't speak) 4S camera is one of the better ones on the market? Tried that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No more excuses. Yes, mobile cameras are "there" now. Look at the galaxy s2. That phone takes excellent pictures, even better than the iphone 4s.
I don't usually take mobile shots seriously either unless they look absolutely terrible.
If this thing can shoot 1080p widescreen it should be able to take widescreen photos.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
brian85 said:
My monitor is fine. It's not like this is the only picture I've ever seen on my computer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Doesn't mean you've seen them correctly.
Explain what you think is wrong with this photo, because I'm not seeing it.
EDIT: Histogram of your image attached. As I said, 1/2 to 1 EV underexposed, but there's no clipping in the shadows or highlights.
Just use another camera...I'm using miui v17 and it shoots widescreen and takes decent pictures with control over autofocus
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
Looks fine to me, but then again it is a phone
So many excuses.
I love my nexus, but it takes terrible photos. Simple as that.
brian85 said:
I made a thread the other day saying how 4.0.3 seemed to fix the focus issues. Well that's great, now maybe an update needs to fix the actual quality? I mean, this is TERRIBLE. Look how dull/dark the picture is on a perfectly sunny day.
After seeing this I took a look at the exif data and it shows a shutter speed of 1/3000? SERIOUSLY?????????? It needs to be around 1/600 to look bright and not so damn dull.
We seriously need manual controls on this camera phone. I'm usually one of the first ones to say, "it's just a phone, get a real camera if you want good pictures," but this is just damn ridiculous now. Pictures look like they came from a flip phone.
What's funny is it looks bright and excellent on the phone. When I first saw it on the phone, I thought, "wow that's a nice picture." Until I looked at it on the computer...
http://i.imgur.com/HiYS6.jpg
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude, that's not a bad pic at all. Yes, the GSII takes better pics, but that one isn't bad. If you need the best quality pics grab a DSLR or something.
You keep saying everyone is making excuses but you aren't answering any questions. I have taken great pictures with my camera. Would love to post some but I'm at work right now.
What questions?
If you guys don't think that picture looks bad, then you aren't someone who is really into photography.
Dull colors, dark, noisy as hell, grainy, etc.
Just did VERY QUICK adjustment for you. Is this more of what you're looking for??
Much better.
I think the issue here was the shutter speed. I have NO IDEA why it used a shutter speed of around 1/3000. That is WAY too fast to gather any decent amount of light on a cell phone camera.
I've been looking at other pictures I've taken with slower shutter speeds, and they look fine.
Sorry for freaking out guys. I think my issue here was I took a picture in an area with plenty of light, where the nexus camera is supposed to shine, and I was shocked when I actually saw the picture on the computer. Just wish we had manual controls on this thing (shutter speed, iso, etc).
brian85 said:
What questions?
If you guys don't think that picture looks bad, then you aren't someone who is really into photography.
Dull colors, dark, noisy as hell, grainy, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah your right, this is a phone forum not a camera forum...plus people who are really into photography dont do it on their phones...trust me I am married to a photographer...while she snaps pictures of the kids all day on her phone she would NEVER take it out to do a wedding or photo shoot.
madisonjar said:
yeah your right, this is a phone forum not a camera forum...plus people who are really into photography dont do it on their phones...trust me I am married to a photographer...while she snaps pictures of the kids all day on her phone she would NEVER take it out to do a wedding or photo shoot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats not what I mean.
I'm saying if people are happy with flip phone quality photos on a smartphone in 2012, then they don't really know photography at all.
Anyways, see my post above. I'm a little calmer now lol.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA App
I'm no expert but it looks pretty good to me. Maybe the abundant lighter colored walls reflect too much light and require a faster shutter speed?
Interesting house. I assume the garage doors are hidden in the back.
Electronic rolling shutter vs mechanical shutter
brian85 said:
Much better.
I think the issue here was the shutter speed. I have NO IDEA why it used a shutter speed of around 1/3000. That is WAY too fast to gather any decent amount of light on a cell phone camera.
I've been looking at other pictures I've taken with slower shutter speeds, and they look fine.
Sorry for freaking out guys. I think my issue here was I took a picture in an area with plenty of light, where the nexus camera is supposed to shine, and I was shocked when I actually saw the picture on the computer. Just wish we had manual controls on this thing (shutter speed, iso, etc).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Camera phones have shutters? This is news to me. They have electronic rolling shutters, but no mechanical shutter. It seems like the shutter speed you're relating to DSLRs is mechanical shutter speed. In this sense, 1/3000 doesn't really mean a whole lot.
In my opinion the camera takes great photos! I have taken a number of photos that are all brilliant quality. I have had the photos printed out on photo paper in a number of sizes and recently had a photo printed on a 16x16 canvas and it looks stunning! There has been no loss in quality with the photo on the canvas and I know that there will be no loss in quality if I have 46x46 canvases made!
I've been taking some very acceptable photos with my Galaxy Nexus, so I thought I would compare it with a Canon S95.
The Canon S95 was taken in Program mode so I can set the focus to be in the center.
The top is Galaxy Nexus
The bottom is Canon S95
dude, i must say that the picture with the nexus looks comparable to the canon. nice job. i guess the nexus camera isn't all that bad!
Are you kidding me, this comparison is misleading, the sensor sizes are vastly different and so will the image quality when zoomed in to a 100% crop.
My friend has the s95 so I can sadly say that the galaxy nexus camera is no were near the quality .
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
The canon looks better at focusing on a very specific spot, the image does seem blurry though. The Nexus image looks fantastic too, which makes me think.
If you used the S95 in manual mode, then you could get even greater differences in the favour of the Canon.
The photo on the S95 has been taken with a very shallow depth of field (wide aperture setting), look at the blurring in the background. As a result, much of the orange is out of focus on the S95 shot, which actually makes the picture look worse and flatters the Nexus picture with its longer depth of field.
Take the same photo with the S95 with the aperture set a couple of stops smaller (larger f/ number) and tell me the Nexus is almost as good as the S95
lol i actually didn't get the S95 to use the manual mode. Its always on automatic mode.
I am probably wasting the potential of the Canon
Its good enough for my work in real estate for sure.
I came from the iPhone 4 and that camera is not good.
Galaxy Nexus as a point and shoot is awesome for work and play facebook shot
any apps to do depth of field?
I have both - and there's no comparrison. sorry.
During the day in optimal lighting (think cloud cover on a bright day) you'll get decent pictures from the nexus.. s95 is still a worlds sharper..
In low-light. no comparrison.
-m
Again, you cannot compare a TRUE camera to a camera in a phone. As I've said before, the Nexus is perfectly capable of taking very good shots, as is the 4S and the GS2, but they DO NOT COME CLOSE to a real camera!
story said:
lol i actually didn't get the S95 to use the manual mode. Its always on automatic mode.
I am probably wasting the potential of the Canon
Its good enough for my work in real estate for sure.
I came from the iPhone 4 and that camera is not good.
Galaxy Nexus as a point and shoot is awesome for work and play facebook shot
any apps to do depth of field?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 here.
Any apps to make the depth of field shorter or longer?
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
I have a feeling that the depth of focus really has to do with the physical characteristics of the lens itself. I don't think software can do much to ameliorate a physical hardware limitation.
Samcobra said:
I have a feeling that the depth of focus really has to do with the physical characteristics of the lens itself. I don't think software can do much to ameliorate a physical hardware limitation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I have the feeling that you are right here, I just want to ask yet another question here. Like you've got HDR app that takes two or three pictures with low and high contrast and then combines them into one best result, I was thinking of the same for depth of field, that is: taking one picture focused on foreground, one on the background and combining into one perfect picture.
Is it possible at all?
Sorry for a longish sentence and a dumb question
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
The depth of field is determined by the combination of the lenses focal length and the lens aperture as well as the distance from the subject.
On a phone camera, the focal length is certainly fixed and I would guess that the aperture is also almost certainly fixed, therefore the only control you have over depth of field will be your distance to the subject and you don't need a app to control that
juniorbattle said:
While I have the feeling that you are right here, I just want to ask yet another question here. Like you've got HDR app that takes two or three pictures with low and high contrast and then combines them into one best result, I was thinking of the same for depth of field, that is: taking one picture focused on foreground, one on the background and combining into one perfect picture.
Is it possible at all?
Sorry for a longish sentence and a dumb question
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would be possible, especially with a phone like the Nexus which is capable of taking zero-lag pictures. Now only an App-Dev has to make such an App.
Btw, as told a ton of times before, you CANNOT compare a semi-professional camera to one built into a phone having a way smaller sensor.
The Nexus takes great pictures for its purpose being a smartphone.
juniorbattle said:
While I have the feeling that you are right here, I just want to ask yet another question here. Like you've got HDR app that takes two or three pictures with low and high contrast and then combines them into one best result, I was thinking of the same for depth of field, that is: taking one picture focused on foreground, one on the background and combining into one perfect picture.
Is it possible at all?
Sorry for a longish sentence and a dumb question
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The technique is called focus stacking, although its of more use with cameras that are capable of very short depth of field. For the Nexus, the DoF is relatively deep, so its usefulness is limited as most subjects would always be completely in focus within the DoF anyway.
I'm not sure if the focus can be manually controlled with software, but if so, it should be possible to develop a focus stacking app, but for best results, you need to keep the camera/phone on a tripod to ensure you get the same position.
If you want to get a narrower depth of field, then the best bet is to take the photo as is, then use photoshop to blur out the background a bit more!
Have a read of this for more info on Focus Stacking!
http://www.digital-photography-school.com/an-introduction-to-focus-stacking
My biggest complaint with the phone is it crashing. Happens to often. I reboot the phone and got the same damn thing - crash.
Went to the zoo with the family yesterday and only able to take one picture. POS!
Had my first day out with the V30 yesterday and just imported the photos and videos from it to my laptop for a closer look to make some initial evaluations. With some very interesting things to note and a lot to dig into further. There's definitely some realities that need to be addressed to better manage expectations.
1) I have no f'n clue what the HDR setting is doing other than making crappy photos. Which is about the same as it was on the V20. It's completely the opposite of what it was on the Nexus 6. On the Nexus 6, if you wanted the best photos out of the Google Camera you could get, you turned on HDR and forgot about it. With LG's Camera app, it's the exact opposite. Turn it off and forget it was ever there.
I still need to figure out the mess that the Google Camera app port has become and DL a copy and see how it does with this sensor.
2) If you shoot manual, there's a noise reduction on/off switch now. Unless you have some decent NR software though or know what you want to do with grainy photos (and I think it will have its uses, I just have to find the right subject), leave it on in very low light conditions. Not only does it tame grainy noise, it also tames a bit of purple fringe that will show up in high gain (high ISO) photos once the electronics start heating up around it.
3) As to that last part of #2: We have to be realistic here. This is a tiny cellphone camera packed in with A LOT of other electronics. If you're shooting several shots in a row or long exposures, either in dark conditions at high ISO, you will see amp glow or purple fringing. It's just a reality. Even DSLRs see it.
4) Digital zoom is digital zoom. If you aren't using just the standard view of each sensor, then you are going to see the limitations of a small sensor. I don't care what cellphone you're using. None of my larger/dedicated cameras have it for many good reasons. You shouldn't expect miracles from a smaller camera.
5) The wide angle sensor actually takes pretty good shots now in most conditions! The wide angle camera on the V20 was full of so many compromises that I avoided it at all costs. If I wanted a wider view than the standard lens, I would use the pano setting on the standard lens. Which is still a great option if everything in the frame is going to sit still but it takes time and patience. It still has distortion though, just not as much as before. You can't focus the wide angle in manual mode but you can in auto. Weird. It doesn't like to focus pointing directly overhead. That was hit or miss. Same rules about the NR and HDR apply here.
6) Video AF in low low light does miss sometimes. Again, just remember this phone doesn't have all the high end AF sensors that some DSLRs have to make sure focus is nailed every single time. Somewhere there's an article about the useful range of all the AF systems on the V20, I assume it still applies to the V30. I'll dig it up if I can to help manage expectations. If I remember right, laser AF is short range, maybe 7 feet.
7) During my import of files from my phone to my laptop, some of my videos lost their audio tracks. Not sure what that's about. I don't remember which ones were auto and which ones were manual but I suspect that's the problem. All videos have sound on my phone though.
8) I suck at video. Kinda hoping to kick myself in the rear with this phone and learn more about it. There's a lot more to manage and I probably won't be happy until I figure out the whole color grading thing and get the look I want. So the log file option ought to be a nice addition.
9) I remember telling someone that I swear I saw a video somewhere of a pre-unit that had the directional mics settings in manual video. Well, I can tell you that I must have imagined that because the unit I have does not have that setting. Just sliders and windcut.
10) And I don't know where LG is hiding it but I don't see 240 fps in any settings anywhere. The fastest video setting I see is 120fps. (Remember, only at 720p) I'm guessing 240 fps is reserved for the slo-mo mode and not available in manual or auto video modes.
11) Selfie camera. Yeah, I've seen the complaints. Are you sure your ugly mugs aren't breaking the camera? I posted this in the first impressions thread and I'll post it here. First thing I suggest doing is turning down the "skin toning" and skin lighting settings. Whoever renamed skin smoothing to skin toning should be shot as that's not what I thought that setting was at all. My first thought is that it adjusted the white balance of the skin to give you a rosier glow. Nope. Skin toning will butter face the heck out of you even on basics settings. Set it to zero. After that, the image held up well to some post processing and consistently gave me selfies I actually like. They actually remind me of something that might come from..... film.
I'm going to do some more shooting today and I'll try to figure out how to post examples without making you all click through to some other site. I also need to figure out how to get the videos over sound and all so I can give them honest assessments.
Ah, I just remembered something else to look out for.
12) If you shoot in manual and have the RAW option turned on, it isn't like on a real camera where you get the RAW file and a processed version of the RAW file. It shoots two photos. This does two things. One, it means you will see lag as it is shooting two photos for each press. This gets worse with longer shutter speeds. Two, this means unless you're shooting a still life that the RAW and JPG will not match. If you're shooting action like I was last night, you will get two completely different photos.
Interesting. Thanks for you observations.
I'm a pixel owner and I love the camera. It's ace. I really want to like the v30, but so far the real world observations and initial reviews haven't sung the praises of the camera. Are you happy with the camera or is it not worth the hype?
The camera is better than the V20 and I liked that a lot. Here's the issue in a nut shell. This phone is for those that aren't happy to just let the device to everything for you like an Apple product would. If that's what you want, that's what Pixels are about. Pixel is Google's iPhone. If you want control over the creative process, that's why the V's exist. The V series is more akin to using a DSLR and Pixels are more like a point and shoot. The Pixel series they're kinda hoping you're ok with whatever the phone spits out. The V series you tweak the initial settings and decide what the phone is even going to shoot so you can tweak it more to your liking later. The V30 gives us even more control than the V20 does.
CHH2 said:
The camera is better than the V20 and I liked that a lot. Here's the issue in a nut shell. This phone is for those that aren't happy to just let the device to everything for you like an Apple product would. If that's what you want, that's what Pixels are about. Pixel is Google's iPhone. If you want control over the creative process, that's why the V's exist. The V series is more akin to using a DSLR and Pixels are more like a point and shoot. The Pixel series they're kinda hoping you're ok with whatever the phone spits out. The V series you tweak the initial settings and decide what the phone is even going to shoot so you can tweak it more to your liking later. The V30 gives us even more control than the V20 does.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting. Thanks for the summary
I would like to but V30, all because camera. But I don't know is this camera one of the best in 2017 or it is just average camera. I see many bad comments on internet. And is front face camera really bad?
isko01 said:
I would like to but V30, all because camera. But I don't know is this camera one of the best in 2017 or it is just average camera. I see many bad comments on internet. And is front face camera really bad?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I probably still have a few more days of testing but just based off of what I've seen in my standardized shooting at the museum, LG has pulled off a miracle with this tiny little sensor.
Like I said above, you have to have realistic expectations and know what the limits are of your gear. That's what a really good photographer does though. They know how the gear works and how to use what it does but also know when it's time to use something else or accept not getting a shot.
This is a tiny sensor. The largest sensor on this whole phone is only 1/3.09". It's smaller than the main one on the V20 but it looks better. That in itself is amazing but I'm not expecting a sensor that's 1/3 the size of the sensor of my smallest camera to match it. Yet that's what some people seem to expect . Which is asinine.
Really the only "failing" I had yesterday was trying to shoot overhead in extremely dark conditions with the wide angle camera and shooting performers wearing all black on an outdoor stage in the dark with just stage lighting (which was changing colors constantly) while moving around quickly. Neither of those surprised me at all. The second condition really is the realm of DSLRs still. The first one, I'm ok with too. That said, what I did get from the second condition, I'm still surprised with.
I've only had one day with it but I think I'm going to get some surprising images out of this camera. Now to teach myself more about video editing.
And again, about the front camera. Once you set those stupid settings to the bottom, you can get more skin detail out of a photo than most people would like to see. Every crease and furrow in my brow line and forehead ,pock mark in my nose, and hairs on my head and beard. From shooting models, I can tell you a lot of people wouldn't want to see that level of detail on their face. So I have no idea what people are complaining about. It's an f'n vanity camera that most people wouldn't want to use to its full potential.
Uploaded a couple of shots. All shots are my normal workflow with a cellphone camera. Shot with the V30 and the jpegs processed in Snapseed. First one is shot with the main camera overhead in a room not known for being well lit at the museum I used to work at. In fact the only real lighting is from some LEDs in the pearl at center. The LEDs are designed to be very soft so they don't degrade the paint and woodwork. The other two shots are selfies taken with indirect sunlight being the only light source indoors. The one with back background is indirect sun through clear glass. The one with the light background is indirect sunlight through very milky glass.
Main camera: https://www.flickr.com/photos/chimphappyhour/36870848874/
Dark background selfie cam: https://www.flickr.com/photos/chimphappyhour/37322765870/
Light background selfie cam: https://www.flickr.com/photos/chimphappyhour/23728950428/
Seriously, I'm not sure I'd really want more detail than that. I'm actually quite please with how all of these images turned out so far. I'll try to work up some more shots from the main and wides.
Can you post some pics in a room at night with just a lamp on or something in auto mode?
EVOme said:
Can you post some pics in a room at night with just a lamp on or something in auto mode?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll have to see what I can set up. That's not really a normal shot I have set-up or sitting around. I might be able to do something at work tomorrow before everyone else gets in and the whole place is blasted with light. Unfortunately, I no longer work at the museum but I might be able to make something work.
isko01 said:
I would like to but V30, all because camera. But I don't know is this camera one of the best in 2017 or it is just average camera. I see many bad comments on internet.
And is front face camera really bad?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not hijacking this thread, but you asked a specific question. There's another thread where the camera is discussed, along with other features, and @keithleger took all his in "auto" mode, to compare the two V30 back cameras, and he also compared it to the Note 8 camera which he's decided to sell.
Camera
-Excellent camera but not on par with Pixel line or Samsung. Don't get me wrong, it is a great camera and in the sunlight it is fantastic but low light it does not do as well as Note 8. Video or Stills. But it is very adequate for my needs and I prefer having the wide-angle lens over the zoom lens any day.
-The one thing that really bothered me was shutter lag at times. Sometimes when I snapped a photo it was almost instant and others I had to wait a second or so. Long enough to think I might not of pressed the button. Not sure if others have had this issue but it is troublesome. It was not isolated to taking multiple photos fairly quickly either. Sometimes first shot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
However, he's selling the Note 8 to keep the LG V30.
He posted an album of his first weekend pictures, as well as the comparison shots to the Note 8. The V30 outside shots look FANTASTIC, and even though the Note 8seemed to do better indoors the LG V30 won at least one of the indoor shots, in my opinion.
As for selfies, he gives the same advice as @CHH2.. Turn off the enhancemet crap on the selfie camera.
keithleger said:
For selfies, if you set the skin tone and lighting effects to 0 then it is ok.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CHH2 said:
Selfie camera. . First thing I suggest doing is turning down the "skin toning" and skin lighting settings.
Skin toning will butter face the heck out of you even on basics settings. Set it to zero.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
See, they say the same thing. The only reason I'm mentioning the other thread -- and I do not mean to hijack @CHH2 camera thread -- is because @keithleger has direct comparisons to the Note 8 camera was well as the f/1.6 and wide angle cameras on the V30. Plus he only shot in auto, and didn't do any post processing (to my knowledge).
I appreciate all the work @CHH2 has put into this thread!
CHH2 said:
I'll have to see what I can set up. That's not really a normal shot I have set-up or sitting around. I might be able to do something at work tomorrow before everyone else gets in and the whole place is blasted with light. Unfortunately, I no longer work at the museum but I might be able to make something work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks! You don't have to go out of your way. I will have my phone tomorrow.
EVOme said:
Thanks! You don't have to go out of your way. I will have my phone tomorrow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I shot this real quick this morning. It's completely SOOC. Yes, you might notice something rather odd and be asking yourself, "Why didn't he rotate the image?" Well, I didn't rotate it because on my phone the image is upright and correct. Somewhere between the phone and Flickr, it got rotated. I'll be deleting this one at the end of today as it's not really something I'd normally shoot even as a reminder or novelty.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/chimphappyhour/36882784984/
And just because I got lucky this morning, a little close up:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/chimphappyhour/37593620881/
Going to add one more photo. This one shot in probably one of the most challenging places to shoot, a jazz club. This is probably the cleanest shot I've taken in there with a cellphone. I'm impressed.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/chimphappyhour/36883443574/
CHH2 said:
I shot this real quick this morning. It's completely SOOC. Yes, you might notice something rather odd and be asking yourself, "Why didn't he rotate the image?" Well, I didn't rotate it because on my phone the image is upright and correct. Somewhere between the phone and Flickr, it got rotated. I'll be deleting this one at the end of today as it's not really something I'd normally shoot even as a reminder or novelty.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/chimphappyhour/36882784984/
And just because I got lucky this morning, a little close up:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/chimphappyhour/37593620881/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow man! I have restored faith in the camera. That office shot is very sharp. For the grasshopper, are you using one of the installed filters or is a post render?
Thank you for taking those.
EVOme said:
Wow man! I have restored faith in the camera. That office shot is very sharp. For the grasshopper, are you using one of the installed filters or is a post render?
Thank you for taking those.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're welcome. For photos, I never use the filters in the camera apps. I always use Snapseed. It has a lot more control and much more power once you learn how to apply the various filters in combination. The grasshopper only had typical post processing that most photographers would apply; a tad sharpening that is only really noticeable when zoomed in, B&W conversion, bump in contrast, and a bump in shadows to make them a tad darker. Oh, and a crop, maybe threw away a little more than half the overall pixels from the frame as I didn't want to scare it off.
And yeah, for being such a tiny sensor, I'm impressed with the low light shooting. I still want to try shooting in the basement of the jazz club. That's usually territory that I need at least my smaller dedicated camera if not my DSLR. I won't get to try that again until this next weekend.
Decided to try something a little different. This isn't final by any means but this shows what playing around for a couple of minutes in Snapseed with just a couple quick shots can get you: https://www.flickr.com/photos/chimphappyhour/37605204891/
Looking forward to showing this to my curator friend and watching him fall off of his barstool when I tell him it was all done on one cellphone in under five minutes. (He's pretty much a film guy as is the guy who is the inspiration for this photo. Bonus points if you can name the photographer I'm copying for this photo.)
Main camera: https://www.flickr.com/photos/chimphappyhour/36870848874/
Dark background selfie cam: https://www.flickr.com/photos/chimphappyhour/37322765870/
Light background selfie cam: https://www.flickr.com/photos/chimphappyhour/23728950428/
.[/QUOTE]
What camera was used for those selfies? I'm not a fan of selfies but love the ones you've taken. I'd like to experiment with it and my fiance would too.thank you. Btw love you test album. Talent for sure
lg3FTW said:
Main camera: https://www.flickr.com/photos/chimphappyhour/36870848874/
Dark background selfie cam: https://www.flickr.com/photos/chimphappyhour/37322765870/
Light background selfie cam: https://www.flickr.com/photos/chimphappyhour/23728950428/
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What camera was used for those selfies? I'm not a fan of selfies but love the ones you've taken. I'd like to experiment with it and my fiance would too.thank you. Btw love you test album. Talent for sure[/QUOTE]
I used the front selfie camera with all of those silly settings at the bottom of the frame turned off, set to zero, whatever their values are. Then I just did some quick processing in Snapseed. That's pretty much it. I don't get too complex. And thank you.
Finally figured out a work around so I can hear the audio on the videos I'm importing from the phone to my laptop and can't believe I didn't think of this before. Pulled the videos from their folder over into an empty Chrome browser window and Voila! they played complete with their soundtrack!
So the following is from shooting in a dark jazz club. (Notes, not footage yet. I'll try uploading something to youtube when I figure out what, when, and how.)
Probably the most important observation I see about video from the V30 (and this actually applied to the V20 too) is that loud music can end up jostling the OIS and introduce more shake than it removes.
Another observation is that recording video while in Auto mode, you better make sure you have plenty of somewhat decent light. Tonight while playing around, the screen would be plenty bright all the way up until I hit that little red record button. Then the screen squeezes down and went dark enough that the footage was unusable. Shooting in manual video mode, I was able to get some footage. It wasn't exactly ideal settings that I was shooting with though so the footage is so-so. (Best settings I could get were ISO 3200 and a shutter speed of 1/25. My understanding is that since I had my frame rate at 24fps, I should have had a shutter speed of 1/50 but that just wasn't happening inside that place.)
In manual video mode, it really doesn't like ISO 3200 for some reason. I'd play with a setting and come back and the ISO would be set to 3150 for some reason. I'd bump it back up to 3200, go do something else, come back to 3150. I would have to make sure that's the last thing I tweaked before hitting the record button.
The audio picks up pretty much all the sounds I'm hearing. I need to sit down with headphones and see if there's extra noise being introduced. I suspect dragging the videos into the Chrome browser is exactly the best quality test. It just lets me know the audio tracks are intact in the file which I was a little worried about at first.
I still have a lot more playing around with the video as most of it is new to me.