Related
Ive noticed that the Galaxy Nexus can only record video at a choppy 24fps. I was wondering if there is a way to increase it to 30fps. This phones has more than enough power to do so and I'm not quite understanding why it is so low.
from what I had read of the specs on GSMArena, the camera is supposed to be capable of 30fps.
of course, GSMArena have been wrong before...
Supraman21 said:
This phones has more than enough power to do so and I'm not quite understanding why it is so low.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Film runs at 24fps. Bluray also runs at 24fps to match the film so that you don't get any nasty 3:2 pull down or audio speed up due to frame rate conversion.
That's no reason why the Nexus should default to 24fps, but it does explain why the frame rate is present.
Just out of interest - when you go to the movie theatre do you complain that it's "choppy" because of the 24fps shutter?
People upgraded the Droid 3's video fps from 20 to 30 so it shouldn't be too hard to do for the Nexus.
im sure we'll see something when the dev community kicks in as the phone is released
HooloovooUK said:
Just out of interest - when you go to the movie theatre do you complain that it's "choppy" because of the 24fps shutter?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's because film is recorded on proper 'film' which allows soft blurrs to occur. On a digital camera that has been converted into video duty, low frame rates makes things look like claymation (simply because the camera is taking 'photos').
CanaganD said:
It's because film is recorded on proper 'film' which allows soft blurrs to occur. On a digital camera that has been converted into video duty, low frame rates makes things look like claymation (simply because the camera is taking 'photos').
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Makes no difference. Those "photos" still contain motion blur. What do you think the individual frames of film are?
Also many modern "films" are shot digitally at 24fps.
Even though 24fps is good enough for film, wanting to record at 30fps is not an unreasonable request. 30fps, or more specifically 29.976 fps is a VERY common framerate, in fact this has been the color NTSC video standard since 1953.
It definitely should be supported, as it gives recordings a certain "feel" just like the 24fps rate gives a certain "feel".
My guess is that someone will figure it out if they haven't already for this device like they have on other devices.
cbutters said:
Even though 24fps is good enough for film, wanting to record at 30fps is not an unreasonable request. 30fps, or more specifically 29.976 fps is a VERY common framerate, in fact this has been the color NTSC video standard since 1953.
It definitely should be supported, as it gives recordings a certain "feel" just like the 24fps rate gives a certain "feel".
My guess is that someone will figure it out if they haven't already for this device like they have on other devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh, I agree, as I said in my post I was explaining why that "odd" frame rate was present, not arguing against 30fps being available.
I would expect to find 24, 25, and 30fps options. Not having my Nexus yet I wouldn't know.
It would also be nice if it supported 60fps at 720, but I haven't seen anything to confirm this.
I thought the specs listed 30fps @ 720p, 24fps @ 1080p. Not sure where I saw that, have to go look.
HooloovooUK said:
Film runs at 24fps. Bluray also runs at 24fps to match the film so that you don't get any nasty 3:2 pull down or audio speed up due to frame rate conversion.
That's no reason why the Nexus should default to 24fps, but it does explain why the frame rate is present.
Just out of interest - when you go to the movie theatre do you complain that it's "choppy" because of the 24fps shutter?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Movies are filmed with $100,000 cameras. They are always following a subject and use a lot of motion blur. With all of this, you cant see choppiness. You shouldn't give Samsung/Google excuses for poor performance. This is a $650 device coming out at the end of 2011, I expect top quality. Luckily this is a Nexus device so im assuming work could be done to fix this.
Dmw017 said:
People upgraded the Droid 3's video fps from 20 to 30 so it shouldn't be too hard to do for the Nexus.
im sure we'll see something when the dev community kicks in as the phone is released
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't have a Galaxy Nexus as im waiting for the Verizon version. I'm just trying to get this problem noticed so when I do get the phone I can fix it.
HooloovooUK said:
Oh, I agree, as I said in my post I was explaining why that "odd" frame rate was present, not arguing against 30fps being available.
I would expect to find 24, 25, and 30fps options. Not having my Nexus yet I wouldn't know.
It would also be nice if it supported 60fps at 720, but I haven't seen anything to confirm this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ahhh, understood... 60fps @ 720 would be pretty sweet as well.
All video settings (480P, 720P and 1080P) are set to 25fps and are not changeable from within the settings menu.
Im sure that it can be hacked to give more options but for now thats all you get out of the box.
1080P does look outstanding though with no choppyness at all.
Mark.
mskip said:
All video settings (480P, 720P and 1080P) are set to 25fps and are not changeable from within the settings menu.
Im sure that it can be hacked to give more options but for now thats all you get out of the box.
1080P does look outstanding though with no choppyness at all.
Mark.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you seen the Galaxy S2 and iPhone 4S videos? Now thats outstanding and smooth. I dont know why Samsung chose not to put the GS2 sensor in the Galaxy Nexus.
That can hopefully be changed in media_profiles.xml later.
mskip said:
All video settings (480P, 720P and 1080P) are set to 25fps and are not changeable from within the settings menu.
Im sure that it can be hacked to give more options but for now thats all you get out of the box.
1080P does look outstanding though with no choppyness at all.
Mark.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So the OP is talking rubbish then when saying only 24fps setting is available?
I did suspect that. I wouldn't have expected 24fps to have been available at all, so for me I would have considered it a bonus feature not something to be complained about.
It's interesting that there is not a 576p option, given that 480p at 25fps doesn't make any sense since it doesn't match any standard - I'm not sure any TVs would even support that. It should be 480p30 or 576p25.
Is it easy to access the media_profiles.xml? Im surprised no one has created any quality enhancements for video like what was done for the Galaxy S2. This camera is crap
anyone gotten anywhere w/ this yet?
Who cares? The GNex is awesome and if ANYTHING is possible on it, then the dev community will crack it and find it
HooloovooUK said:
Just out of interest - when you go to the movie theatre do you complain that it's "choppy" because of the 24fps shutter?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do, and so does James Cameron.
Right now the 1080p video bitrate is bordering max 10mbps, which is quite low and shows artifacts / blur in fast moving scenes. The 720p video is even worse @ around 5-6mbps.
A workaround now is to use the ICS Camera+ application and tick 2x bitrate. However watch the auto whitebalance settings since they give a purple hue. Set it manually.
This is a hopeful request to the OneX devs & modders to do their magic and squeeze more mbps as well as maybe lock a minimum FPS value so it doesn't drop to hell in low light and the expense of exposure.
i'd be happy with 720p @ 15mbps and [email protected], both at solid 30FPS
thanks in advance and vote for the feature!
zerozoneice said:
Right now the 1080p video bitrate is bordering max 10mbps, which is quite low and shows artifacts / blur in fast moving scenes. The 720p video is even worse @ around 5-6mbps.
A workaround now is to use the ICS Camera+ application and tick 2x bitrate. However watch the auto whitebalance settings since they give a purple hue. Set it manually.
This is a hopeful request to the OneX devs & modders (lee, baad, paul, monx & others) to do their magic and squeeze more mbps as well as maybe lock a minimum FPS value so it doesn't drop to hell in low light and the expense of exposure.
i'd be happy with 720p @ 15mbps and [email protected], both at solid 30FPS
thanks in advance and vote for the feature!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
media_profiles.xml and Camera.apk are the place to look for improvements.
mike1986. said:
media_profiles.xml and Camera.apk are the place to look for improvements.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
community would be grateful if you can help work this out!
Camera ICS + features like background and face effects don't work for me shame too, they look like fun!
they should also tweak the camera in order for it not to compress the pictures so much! HTC's stock camera app produces pictures that are twice smaller than pictures taken with other camera apps (or with a common 8mp camera) with no effects nor anything
mike1986. said:
media_profiles.xml and Camera.apk are the place to look for improvements.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i tried playing around with the XML to no avail...they key is in the APK.
bumping this hopefully someone can take some time to figure it out....
zerozoneice said:
i tried playing around with the XML to no avail...they key is in the APK.
bumping this hopefully someone can take some time to figure it out....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hox has a image processor so I'm guessing that will need to be flashed, or bypassed.
Sent from my HTC One X using xda premium
zerozoneice said:
Right now the 1080p video bitrate is bordering max 10mbps, which is quite low and shows artifacts / blur in fast moving scenes. The 720p video is even worse @ around 5-6mbps.
A workaround now is to use the ICS Camera+ application and tick 2x bitrate. However watch the auto whitebalance settings since they give a purple hue. Set it manually.
This is a hopeful request to the OneX devs & modders to do their magic and squeeze more mbps as well as maybe lock a minimum FPS value so it doesn't drop to hell in low light and the expense of exposure.
i'd be happy with 720p @ 15mbps and [email protected], both at solid 30FPS
thanks in advance and vote for the feature!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not only video, but still quality too.
In order of priority:
* Fix the frame rate issues first (dropped frames are VERY distracting; currently video stutters badly)
* Provide adjustable image compression levels including a very high quality mode. (Raw would be even better, but I doubt they'd consider that.)
* Provide adjustable video compression levels including a very high quality mode.
treebill said:
Hox has a image processor so I'm guessing that will need to be flashed, or bypassed.
Sent from my HTC One X using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
don't think that's the case because we have seen 2 alternatives that increase bitrate just with a modified APK:
- ICS Camera - still some quality (purple hues) issues in resulting videos + cannot select 1080p
- NoDo-GT's beta which is currently frozen with no download available
seems the limitation is in the recording profile used: [email protected] / 10mbps
the SGS3 (and the SGS2 for that matter) uses [email protected] / 17mbps.
Source:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=25693754&postcount=108
[8] Video: SGS3 is clear winner here. HOX does not record in High profile. It records at mere 10 Mbps Baseline whereas SGS3 does High Profile recording at 17 Mbps.
Maybe now with the kernel source released someone can work out some magic.....fingers crossed.
While compression is too high and bitrate is too low, there also one very important issue - fps. I tested again and again and again, the stock camera can only take video up to 23-24 fps, while using camera ics I can do 29-30 fps. This proves that the low fps of the stock camera is not limited by hardware. An update to the camera is needed...
Albert Poon said:
While compression is too high and bitrate is too low, there also one very important issue - fps. I tested again and again and again, the stock camera can only take video up to 23-24 fps, while using camera ics I can do 29-30 fps. This proves that the low fps of the stock camera is not limited by hardware. An update to the camera is needed...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Far more important than the maximum FPS is that it's steady. If there are no frames dropped, your eyes very quickly get used to a lower frame rate. If it keeps spiking up and down between high frame rate and loads of dropped frames, though, that's impossible to get used to.
Check my vedio
The quality is very bad!!!
Recorded by htc one x firmware 1.28
Not only the fram rate and image quality also the sound is very aweful.
You can notice the camera are always re focus and blur.
Watch this you will get my point
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Yst4ImxjRzI
knoxploration said:
Far more important than the maximum FPS is that it's steady. If there are no frames dropped, your eyes very quickly get used to a lower frame rate. If it keeps spiking up and down between high frame rate and loads of dropped frames, though, that's impossible to get used to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But when you do an comparasion between 24 and 30 using the SAME H1X, you can see the different...
Sent from my HTC One X using XDA
I didn't say you couldn't see the difference between at all, just that it wasn't as damaging to frame rate perception as all the dropped frames, which are a far more important issue.
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using XDA
zer151 said:
Check my vedio
The quality is very bad!!!
Recorded by htc one x firmware 1.28
Not only the fram rate and image quality also the sound is very aweful.
You can notice the camera are always re focus and blur.
Watch this you will get my point
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Yst4ImxjRzI
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The mixture of low light and alternating colours would tax any camera let alone a phone camera. Used in decent lighting the quality is decent enough and doesn't lose focus like that
knoxploration said:
I didn't say you couldn't see the difference between at all, just that it wasn't as damaging to frame rate perception as all the dropped frames, which are a far more important issue.
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, let me rephrase... I would expect such hardware to be able to do 30fps constantly
Sent from my HTC One X using XDA
I am working on something here..
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1642777
Albert Poon said:
Ok, let me rephrase... I would expect such hardware to be able to do 30fps constantly
Sent from my HTC One X using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agree completely.
I hope nodo-gt starts working on modded camera for the one x again. I think the camera for the sensation is up to 40mbps now.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Title. Thinking of buying the phone but I was wondering why run 1080p at normal usage when they can do 1440p? Don't they the same aspect ratio? Does any of you think it's possible to sort of change the normal screen resolution to 1440p?
LeParkour012 said:
Title. Thinking of buying the phone but I was wondering why run 1080p at normal usage when they can do 1440p? Don't they the same aspect ratio? Does any of you think it's possible to sort of change the normal screen resolution to 1440p?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My guess would be performance and it may be easier for the upscaler if it's a 2:1 ratio
The Nexus 6p has no problems running 1440p on a s810 snap dragon, bench mark tests beats the Sony Z5P consistently.
Mostly because it makes no difference in the user experience, but makes the SoC constantly process a lot more pixels which would contribute to the heating issues and shorten battery life.
This 4K thing is purely for brag, and Sony knows it. Wait until mobile VR grows bigger and there will be all kinds of resolution mods then, when it matters.
For now, even if you got short hands and the phone screen is ~20cm from your eyes, you cant tell the difference with a 20/20 vision.( tested )
Alright guys, here's the deal. The Note 7 was an awesome phone, i had to give it back, not cool, etc...
But now that I've seen what GearVR is, and more importantly, what it COULD be with a 4k Resolution, (without the screen-door effect), a Non-4k Note is a deal breaker for me.
If Samsung doesn't deliver 4k, I will get the next phone with a 4k Screen, (not the old Sony one but a new one which supports Daydream).
What's your take on this?
It's also got to be able to do VR without going nuclear. It's hot enough in those goggles without the phone feeling like the surface of the sun.
Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
rcobourn said:
It's also got to be able to do VR without going nuclear. It's hot enough in those goggles without the phone feeling like the surface of the sun.
Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I would agree. Actually made me sick.
Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk
considering none of the VR headsets even matched the res of the Note I don't see 4k as being needed, the problem came from the low refresh rate of the screen as it is far more important.
if you want a better VR experience you should be asking for at least a 90hz screen (matching the dedicated headsets) or higher. also the higher the res the lower the frame rate and the lower the refresh rate will be to compensate for the lower frame rates leading to far more tearing and the same horrid lined effect the note had in the gearVR.
so yep had a taste of VR but on phones it is largely hampered by screens designed to save battery life, increasing screen res is just the go to assumption most people make, when the dedicated head sets run at a lower screen res but higher refresh rate giving better quality.
Belimawr said:
considering none of the VR headsets even matched the res of the Note I don't see 4k as being needed, the problem came from the low refresh rate of the screen as it is far more important.
if you want a better VR experience you should be asking for at least a 90hz screen (matching the dedicated headsets) or higher. also the higher the res the lower the frame rate and the lower the refresh rate will be to compensate for the lower frame rates leading to far more tearing and the same horrid lined effect the note had in the gearVR.
so yep had a taste of VR but on phones it is largely hampered by screens designed to save battery life, increasing screen res is just the go to assumption most people make, when the dedicated head sets run at a lower screen res but higher refresh rate giving better quality.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are you talking about? You know the lens on the gear VR is just a lens right? There is no "resolution" to speak of. A 4k screen on a smartphone would definitely improve viewing on the gear vr. 2x in fact.
Oyeve said:
What are you talking about? You know the lens on the gear VR is just a lens right? There is no "resolution" to speak of. A 4k screen on a smartphone would definitely improve viewing on the gear vr. 2x in fact.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Completely agree. 2k is simply not enough. 4k is not enough either, but it would be a bit better. I think we are really going to need about 4k per eye in order for it to become truly fantastic. Maybe 8k per eye. So we are talking something like 7680x4320 or even 15360x4320. I doubt that smartphones are going to be the vehicle to deliver this in future.
But for now, 4k would be nice.
the dedicated and phone headsets are identical in principle, they both place OLED screens and the gubbings behind a lense, the only difference is in a dedicated headset you can't remove the screen and other bits.
however the Oculus Rift and Vive both have better picture quality than the phone alternatives, both are only running 2 screens that give a combined screen res similar to a 1080 screen, the difference comes in the refresh rate, the Rift and Vive both run at 90hz+ meaning they can push out smoother images and have less chance of having artifacting and interlacing problems, something the phones have by the bucket load, move fast with a phone and you will see lines miss match all over the image, going to 4K or above wouldn't fix this problem if anything it would be likely to make it worse as there is less chance you would even achieve 60fps leading to even more stutter and artifacting, the 90fps+ of the dedicated headsets still isn't perfect but it's a million times better on smoothness and artifacting, this is because if you want a better picture in VR frame rate and refresh rates are far more important than the screen res as even under a lense the PPI on the likes of the Pixel and Note 7 is still that high it is of little consequence, it's the reason the dedicated headsets went with a lower screen res in favour of refresh rates.
nomailx said:
Alright guys, here's the deal. The Note 7 was an awesome phone, i had to give it back, not cool, etc...
But now that I've seen what GearVR is, and more importantly, what it COULD be with a 4k Resolution, (without the screen-door effect), a Non-4k Note is a deal breaker for me.
If Samsung doesn't deliver 4k, I will get the next phone with a 4k Screen, (not the old Sony one but a new one which supports Daydream).
What's your take on this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I honestly hope it is years before they even think about a 4K screen. Our processors can barely push 2K at this point and battery life is pretty terrible currently compared to 1080p phones such as the iPhone 7. It's not worth it for such a niche feature. I mean, the Rift and Vive are not even at that resolution because desktop PCs can barely push it.
Belimawr said:
the dedicated and phone headsets are identical in principle, they both place OLED screens and the gubbings behind a lense, the only difference is in a dedicated headset you can't remove the screen and other bits.
however the Oculus Rift and Vive both have better picture quality than the phone alternatives, both are only running 2 screens that give a combined screen res similar to a 1080 screen, the difference comes in the refresh rate, the Rift and Vive both run at 90hz+ meaning they can push out smoother images and have less chance of having artifacting and interlacing problems, something the phones have by the bucket load, move fast with a phone and you will see lines miss match all over the image, going to 4K or above wouldn't fix this problem if anything it would be likely to make it worse as there is less chance you would even achieve 60fps leading to even more stutter and artifacting, the 90fps+ of the dedicated headsets still isn't perfect but it's a million times better on smoothness and artifacting, this is because if you want a better picture in VR frame rate and refresh rates are far more important than the screen res as even under a lense the PPI on the likes of the Pixel and Note 7 is still that high it is of little consequence, it's the reason the dedicated headsets went with a lower screen res in favour of refresh rates.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm sure that's all true, but in any event, with a phone with a 2k screen the pixel density is not high enough and it won't be at 4k either. With 2k each eye is getting an image something like 1,000 pixels across (the two VR windows don't use the full screen width, so less than half of 2560 each), which for a virtual image which is bigger than even the very biggest TV screens (100"+) this is not enough pixels and the image is visibly (very badly) pixellated.
I am sure refresh rate matters too, but we really need very high pixel density and fast refresh (and low latency and wide viewing angles) for what in the end will be "perfect" VR.
the HTC Vive has a better picture each eye has a screen at 1080x1200 giving a total resolution of 2160x1200.
the Note 7 has 2560x1440 meaning each eye is getting 1280x1440.
so the Note 7 is a noticeably higher screen res than the dedicated VR headsets, the dedicated headsets however give a better picture, both use OLED screens, the Note 7 has a higher screen res, but the Vive has a refresh rate of 90hz, most phones are lucky if they do 60hz quite often it is considerably lower to save on battery, so by your logic the Note 7 with it's higher screen res would be noticeably better quality than the Vive, however the Vive is noticeably better than the Note on picture quality and that is purely due to the refresh rate difference as it gives a smoother image and also stops nearly all the delacing issues the Note and other phones have despite being considerably higher screen res.
Yes. If Samsung doesn't announce Note8 soon, I might go with sony xperia new phone, whose name I still keep forgetting. To be anounced at MWC and with 4k screen.
Belimawr said:
the HTC Vive has a better picture each eye has a screen at 1080x1200 giving a total resolution of 2160x1200.
the Note 7 has 2560x1440 meaning each eye is getting 1280x1440.
so the Note 7 is a noticeably higher screen res than the dedicated VR headsets, the dedicated headsets however give a better picture, both use OLED screens, the Note 7 has a higher screen res, but the Vive has a refresh rate of 90hz, most phones are lucky if they do 60hz quite often it is considerably lower to save on battery, so by your logic the Note 7 with it's higher screen res would be noticeably better quality than the Vive, however the Vive is noticeably better than the Note on picture quality and that is purely due to the refresh rate difference as it gives a smoother image and also stops nearly all the delacing issues the Note and other phones have despite being considerably higher screen res.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For gaming, I agree that the Note 8 with a 4k Screen won't be much Help. But I never really enjoyed VR for gaming, it's more like a "side fun activity". But to watch video content, a 4K Display Note with an 10nm processor would be more than enough to remove the screen door effect, and give the ability to watch awesome 180/360 content, and 3D movies on a huge VR theatre.
May I remind you that VR for gaming is failing generally right now. But for some shady reason VR for videos is not... (go figure... xD )
notefreak said:
Yes. If Samsung doesn't announce Note8 soon, I might go with sony xperia new phone, whose name I still keep forgetting. To be anounced at MWC and with 4k screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's the Sony Xperia Yoshino!
Screen setting of 120hz FullHD or 4k 60hz? Which one do you prefer and why?
khoaitaychienvn said:
Screen setting of 120hz FullHD or 4k 60hz? Which one do you prefer and why?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Once you try 90 or 120 you can't go back to 60. You'll notice the 120 over 60 more then the 4k over fullHD in my opinion.
im on 120hz but i cant really see the big difference cvs 60 - the phone is very snappy as it is - esp due to 240 touch rate
will see when we get [email protected] - if ever
240Hz @ 4K please.
Those who can's see a difference, maybe it's the apps you are using! Manny apps just are still stuck on 60Hz even if you S20 is set to a higher refresh rate.
120hz for sure.
This phone does not have 4k resolution but 2k.
4k = 2160× 4096
S20+ = 1440 x 3200 = 2k
tim2london said:
im on 120hz but i cant really see the big difference cvs 60 - the phone is very snappy as it is - esp due to 240 touch rate
will see when we get [email protected] - if ever
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. But then I decided to keep at 120 hz for 3 days for me to get used to it then I'll go back 60 hz and see if I notice the difference. You can't tell if you keep switching.
And I agree.. 240 touch response has more impact on usability than 120 hz display
Sent from my [device_name] using XDA-Developers Legacy app
I rock mine on 120Hz 720P. I can tell the difference between 120Hz and 60Hz especially when swiping in the keyboard and flinging around the OS.
Unless I'm really close, I find it harder to tell the difference between 720P and 1080P.
Krisbo said:
I rock mine on 120Hz 720P. I can tell the difference between 120Hz and 60Hz especially when swiping in the keyboard and flinging around the OS.
Unless I'm really close, I find it harder to tell the difference between 720P and 1080P.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why 720p? You know u can still use 120hz in 1080p right?
sarni84 said:
Why 720p? You know u can still use 120hz in 1080p right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Saves battery life and I can't really tell the difference between 720P and 1080P ?
Krisbo said:
Saves battery life and I can't really tell the difference between 720P and 1080P
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
720p to 1080p is negligible on battery vs 1080 to 2k but 1080 is wayyy better then 720p as far as viewing and reading on screen. U must have really good eyes:cyclops:
sarni84 said:
720p to 1080p is negligible on battery vs 1080 to 2k but 1080 is wayyy better then 720p as far as viewing and reading on screen. U must have really good eyes:cyclops:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Gives me an additional hour of battery life ?