Develop Bugs

Camera

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Nice, a thread about the camera and comparisons without pics

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Q] Problem camera - pictures with noise / low quality compared to G3

Hi ..
I bought the device from LG G4 H815 from CLOVE website and for some reason the camera quality is poor daylight compared to my previous device G3.
After I took a picture I made zoom in to check the quality , and here I find that image noise / blurred G3 compared to a photo in G3 ...
How is it possible, it happens to you too?
Another thing I did not have the option of adjusting 8-megapixel, 13 megapixel (as there is in LG G3)
I'd love to know if there is such a thing ...
The quality is really bad ..
I'm with:
5.1
Build Number: LMY47D
Software Version: V10b-EUR-XX
regards,
Tomer.

Info
TOMER628 said:
Hi ..
I bought the device from LG G4 H815 from CLOVE website and for some reason the camera quality is poor daylight compared to my previous device G3.
After I took a picture I made zoom in to check the quality , and here I find that image noise / blurred G3 compared to a photo in G3 ...
How is it possible, it happens to you too?
Another thing I did not have the option of adjusting 8-megapixel, 13 megapixel (as there is in LG G3)
I'd love to know if there is such a thing ...
The quality is really bad ..
I'm with:
5.1
Build Number: LMY47D
Software Version: V10b-EUR-XX
regards,
Tomer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just check If there is same modification in Camera Settings
there is different pic ratio in auto mode for instance.
:good:

thank you for your reply
same ratio, but still picture not good...:crying:
can you add a photo for me (from your G4) ?
in Basic Mode ...

Ive checked up on this and from what I have read:
16:9 = 16MPx / 4:3 = 12 MPx / 1:1 = 8.5MPx (ill try and find the link)
With camera quality.. I know it sounds crazy, but I found cleaning my IR Laser focus and camera lens with Glass or lens cleaner worked for me (remember do not spray cleaner on the lens, apply it to a cloth, then polish the lens with the cloth) and wipe it VERY VERY Gently with a micro fibre cloth or an optical Glasses cloth ,
next Goto > Settings > Display > scroll down to More > Motion sensior calibration (lay it on a very flat surface).. and set it.. (try it a few times)
Motion sensor calibration sets the OIS and all the camera and focus sensors up.
Hope this helps..

Heres the thread here, but its an Android Central forum post, so Im not sure how reliable it is..
http://forums.androidcentral.com/lg-g4/533774-lg-g4-camera-settings-megapixel.html
Cheers

NightOrchid said:
Heres the thread here, but its an Android Central forum post, so Im not sure how reliable it is..
http://forums.androidcentral.com/lg-g4/533774-lg-g4-camera-settings-megapixel.html
Cheers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for that..
i tried to clean and calibrate the G4, but still the quality of camera not good (even like G3)...
i attached also some pictures to give you taste from my problem with this camera..
I think the quality here is worse, the trees Smeared -not sharp (capture with 16: 9) ...
http://imageshack.com/a/img538/4183/NIRGSF.jpg
http://imageshack.com/a/img673/7079/dNHvrV.jpg
http://imageshack.com/a/img673/8522/yncySQ.jpg
http://imageshack.com/a/img901/2442/D6Jpo8.jpg

TOMER628 said:
Thanks for that..
i tried to clean and calibrate the G4, but still the quality of camera not good (even like G3)...
i attached also some pictures to give you taste from my problem with this camera..
I think the quality here is worse, the trees Smeared -not sharp (capture with 16: 9) ...
http://imageshack.com/a/img538/4183/NIRGSF.jpg
http://imageshack.com/a/img673/7079/dNHvrV.jpg
http://imageshack.com/a/img673/8522/yncySQ.jpg
http://imageshack.com/a/img901/2442/D6Jpo8.jpg
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those pictures look fine to me. Show us the supposedly better pictures of the same thing taken with the G3.
Sent from my LG-H815 using XDA Forums Pro.

Please compare your photos to mine https://imgur.com/a/tqbEJ
If your quality is worse, i think u might have a bad camera sensor, try to replace the unit.

Derpling said:
Please compare your photos to mine https://imgur.com/a/tqbEJ
If your quality is worse, i think u might have a bad camera sensor, try to replace the unit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wish i had good quality like your photos..
i think you right i will try to replace with new unit..

gtg465x said:
Those pictures look fine to me. Show us the supposedly better pictures of the same thing taken with the G3.
Sent from my LG-H815 using XDA Forums Pro.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im inclined to agree with others here.. they look fine to me. Can I ask you to take some images of smaller objects with close up detail, such as flowers, kids toys, pets, food./. etc.. also, can you post the same pics taken with your G3. Take all pics in 16:9 ratio on both devices, full auto mode without flash.
If you have an issue, it may be the OIS.
They are beautiful pics. look in the bottom left hand corner of the ones youve taken or zoom in places.. theres lovely detail in the brick work.

I've actually noticed the same sort of thing with mine. I think the phone's postprocessing is too strong. Pictures of things like animals and trees almost look like an oil painting filter has been applied if you zoom in on them. Check out the fur on the picture I attached- LG's algorithm doesn't know what to do with images that have a lot of small, complex elements like leaves or fur. Thankfully that's something that could be patched, but I haven't heard many other people noticing it so I doubt it will be.

1. You never ever look at photos of this size. When looked at in a reasonable size, the pictures look awesome. When you downsize the pictures to a reasonable picturesize you would print, look at them again. You won't see those flaws.
2. Postprocessing of the jpegs is really to heavy and when you take a look at the DNGs, you see a real improvement over the jpegs. And I prefer the DNGs, since I can handle all of the parameters myself in Lightroom.
I think we will see some patches to the camera and postprocessing in the future, since LG is aware of the issue with the jpegs.

tripex2k said:
1. You never ever look at photos of this size. When looked at in a reasonable size, the pictures look awesome. When you downsize the pictures to a reasonable picturesize you would print, look at them again. You won't see those flaws.
2. Postprocessing of the jpegs is really to heavy and when you take a look at the DNGs, you see a real improvement over the jpegs. And I prefer the DNGs, since I can handle all of the parameters myself in Lightroom.
I think we will see some patches to the camera and postprocessing in the future, since LG is aware of the issue with the jpegs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed here. That photo is briliant, however, yes I agree, LGs processing is very aggressive as is the OIS, so you get over-sharpening, One of the pit falls In photography is to digitally zoom into your images on your PC to check the sharpness, but this is a very bad habit to start and very hard to break.. try to avoid doing this.
In truth... no-body looks at an image 20 or 30x digitally zoomed.. Pictures are to be enjoyed and the camera is only as good as the photographer, so get the light right, frame your subject as big as you can in the view finder, by walking upto your subject and framing it.. not digitally zooming and get creative ... Its so easy to get caught up in the technology that we forget why we take photographs.. which is to either save our memories or create our art. To me, youtube reviewers started this crazy trend of digitally zooming everywhere, so some folk think that a good photograph is one that after a digital zoom you can read the text on a road sign 500 yards away and missing all the image round about.. this is not photography, its zooming.
If your just taking pictures for the technically sharp image, then.. go and buy a DSLR, because no phone camera will ever do it.
Hand on heart, some of the best images Ive ever taken were with an HTC One M8s 4UPX camera.. zoomed n they look like my nephews cra*py MineCraft game, but the image itself.. looks stunning.
Bottom Line, Enjoy your images and the love of photography.. the G4 is one of the best cameras on a phone Ive ever used..
However, if your not happy with the G4s camera.. either return it or buy a nice compact or bridge camera..
Enjoy Photo fans..

but the my quality camera (what i captured here before) is good ?
i mean this not bad sensor or something, right ?

I thought they looked ok, personally. Can you post comparison pics from the G3 (the same pics taken on each, preferably), to demonstrate the issue you are referring to?

Yes, I agree with the subsequent comments. Many years ago I ran motorized Nikons, and did my own color processing and printing, and I like to think I still have an eye for a decent print. I looked at two of the pictures, and while I might have suggested one click higher on the ISO (and that's just personal preference, really) I don't see anything wrong with the pictures.
Enzo

TOMER628 said:
but the my quality camera (what i captured here before) is good ?
i mean this not bad sensor or something, right ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Speaking personnally, I think your pictures look great and their really nice, I know youve mentioned this in your OP, but take another look at them and can you tell us what is it about your images that you think is wrong?
RedOCtobyr said:
I thought they looked ok, personally. Can you post comparison pics from the G3 (the same pics taken on each, preferably), to demonstrate the issue you are referring to?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, Post some G3 pics,,, a good thing to do here is take exactly the same images with the G3 and G4 then compare them and post them here.
enzo ferraro said:
Yes, I agree with the subsequent comments. Many years ago I ran motorized Nikons, and did my own color processing and printing, and I like to think I still have an eye for a decent print. I looked at two of the pictures, and while I might have suggested one click higher on the ISO (and that's just personal preference, really) I don't see anything wrong with the pictures.
Enzo
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My dad used tr be a wedding photographer before he retired, but he still owns one of the original Rolliflex cameras. These days though I own a Canon SX700. Do you still have any of your Nikons
Another aspect of photography is that whenever you change your camera, youll always get differences thats why Photographers have multiple cameras... such as My canon has a minimum focal distance of 1cm and a 30x Optical zoom, so Ide use it for Macro ( small close up), yet my Olympus stylus 1 has quite nice sharpening and a wide angle Aperture of f3.2 so ide use it for landscapes.
Again, I have to say Tomer, I think your images are great, Heres an experiment you can try which might help.. take your camera out.. and take a few images of things that make you happy and what you want... completely forget about images that show off the camera tech, maybe your kids or friends or something like that,... download them to your PC and look at them.. dont zoom.. then see how you feel about your G4.
Heres the Image I took with a 4 Mpx HTC M8..
Its not technically brilliant, but it was a fun day and thats all that matters.

No, the Nikons and a trillion dollars worth of glass went long ago. I very much miss the film, but just wearied of carrying around a backbreaking load of gear. The digital image is not as good as film, and I don't care what anybody claims to the contrary on that, but I do agree completely that the best camera is the one you have at hand when the picture opportunity arises, and clearly the phone camera wins by a mile on that score.
Enzo

OP, I think a very easy test here would be to take the same photo using JPG, and again using RAW. Then, look at each zoomed in. You should see that the JPG has compression artifacts, but the RAW does not. Then, you will see the camera quality capabilities in the RAW to verify the camera is fine, and perhaps you are just seeing software compression artifacts in JPG.
In fact, it would be interesting to see those two pictures if you could post them here. Choose a subject that has a pattern that will give the JPG compression algorithm trouble, like the cat fur or many leaves/blades of grass at a distance, to make the difference more pronounced.

here couple of pictures ftom today...
this the result :
http://imageshack.com/a/img673/2597/P4I5q9.jpg
http://imageshack.com/a/img537/7629/n4t0aA.jpg
http://imageshack.com/a/img538/9131/AySMqD.jpg
http://imageshack.com/a/img908/1512/3YRk1w.jpg

HTC 10 Camera Thread

The reviews are a mixed bag so far. Here are some that are helpful. The comparison photos would give you some ideas of the capability.
DxOMark Rating 88 (same as S7 scores; but look at the individual scores). Full review now available - thanks @fernando sor)
HTC 10 photos by PRO photographers on grryo, part of power of 10 campaign
Tech Insider HTC 10 vs S7 Camera uh-oh, some issues with the 10
Android Headline Low Light Shootout: Galaxy S7 vs HTC 10 vs LG G5 vs Nexus 6p (thanks @ZooMas)
(direct link to photos from Android Headlines: flickr album with exif)
Engadget Taiwan HTC 10 vs S7 samples (thanks @One Twelve, post), HTC 10 Samples
Ars technica comparison photos from HTC 10, S7, Nexus 5X and iPhone 6S
SlashGear HTC 10 Camera Review and Samples
Techno Buffalo full resolution JPG samples
Android Central Initial HTC 10 Photo & Video Samples from this article
Android Authority First Impression album from this article
Engadget 25 sample photos
I would take these reviews with a grain of salt. For example, the ars technica impression of the photos is a bit misleading IMO. The best photo of a dark scene isn't necessarily the brightest and most colorful (the most faithful capture, not adding light or color that wasn't there, yet retaining details in the shadow, is the best for me -- in addition to noise control).
I asked HTC about the camera issues mentioned on the tech insider review such as this glare and this sharpness issues. The exposure control issues can be addressed with software later, but the glare issue may indicate that the physical lens is more glare prone (compared to the S7 in that photo). This Android Central's photo of an easy outdoor scene shows a lack of sharpness and micro contrast, which may be a combined result of the glare-prone lens and the sharpness issue identified by the tech insider review. That glare issue, however, is NOT a problem on this photo from SlashGear.
Anyway, those are a very small sampling of photos. Post your HTC 10 pics here when you have them so we can all see them!

Low light comparison between S7, 10, G5 and 6P I want to see some raw file comparisons between all of these

Definitely still issues with over exposure. Blowing up backgrounds with light. Had this issue since the M8
Sent from my SM-G935T using XDA-Developers mobile app

The camera looks gorgeous compared to my M9....

If only the ''testers'' people who have the 10 can posts photos here it would be nice :good:

Jooosty said:
Definitely still issues with over exposure. Blowing up backgrounds with light. Had this issue since the M8
Sent from my SM-G935T using XDA-Developers mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
on the M8 it was using touch focus instead of auto focus
on the 10 its auto HDR messing up sometimes its on by default but cant be turned off
---------- Post added at 10:44 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:40 AM ----------
we were begging HTC to reduce sharpness and processing for years so now when they finally did it we bash them?
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
if i am not mistake sharpness and contrast can be controlled in settings > cam options
i would take the image on top any day, it's more natural and real
but it clearly needs a slight +0.5 sharpness +0.5 contrast

lost_ said:
The reviews are a mixed bag so far. Here are some that are helpful. The comparison photos would give you some ideas of the capability.
DxOMark Rating 88 (same as S7; but look at the individual scores. No photos from the 10 shown yet)
HTC 10 photos by PRO photographers on grryo, part of power of 10 campaign
Tech Insider HTC 10 vs S7 Camera uh-oh, some issues with the 10
Android Headline Low Light Shootout: Galaxy S7 vs HTC 10 vs LG G5 vs Nexus 6p (thanks Zoomas)
(direct link to photos from Android Headlines: flickr album with exif)
Ars technica comparison photos from HTC 10, S7, Nexus 5X and iPhone 6S
SlashGear HTC 10 Camera Review and Samples
Techno Buffalo full resolution JPG samples
Android Central Initial HTC 10 Photo & Video Samples from this article
Engadget 25 sample photos
I would take these reviews with a grain of salt. For example, the ars technica impression of the photos is a bit misleading IMO. The best photo of a dark scene isn't necessarily the brightest and most colorful (the most faithful capture, not adding light or color that wasn't there, yet retaining details in the shadow, is the best for me -- in addition to noise control).
I asked HTC about the camera issues mentioned on the tech insider review such as this glare and this sharpness issues. The exposure control issues can be addressed with software later, but the glare issue may indicate that the physical lens is more glare prone (compared to the S7 in that photo). This Android Central's photo of an easy outdoor scene shows a lack of sharpness and micro contrast, which may be a combined result of the glare-prone lens and the sharpness issue identified by the tech insider review. That glare issue, however, is NOT a problem on this photo from SlashGear.
Anyway, those are a very small sampling of photos. Post your HTC 10 pics here when you have them so we can all see them!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dxomark has the full review up

hamdir said:
we were begging HTC to reduce sharpness and processing for years so now when they finally did it we bash them?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't see anyone on this thread bashing them (the "we" in your question). Reviewers can say what they want, many warranted, many are off-target. But it's a discussion forum, so it's fine to have a discussion about image qualities without being accused of complaining or whining or bashing. The NYC wall lacks sharpness - it is what it is. It could be that reviewer got a bad unit, or it could be other things.

fernando sor said:
dxomark has the full review up
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. Those pics help put the scores in perspective. For example, the cons include "Visible loss of sharpness in the corners compared to the center" BUT they compared the center sharpness of an object that is far out vs the corner sharpness of an object that is near the photographer - NOT on the same plane and, based on the scene distance, most likely not even within the circle of confusion. Why they did that really baffles me!

lost_ said:
Thanks. Those pics help put the scores in perspective. For example, the cons include "Visible loss of sharpness in the corners compared to the center" BUT they compared the center sharpness of an object that is far out vs the corner sharpness of an object that is near the photographer - NOT on the same plane and, based on the scene distance, most likely not even within the circle of confusion. Why they did that really baffles me!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I feel it's warranted to do that, the hyperfocal distance on phone cameras is usually tiny, everything past couple of meters ends up being in infinity zone anyway.

Things to keep in mind auto HDR is on by default which could cause all sorts of issues if you are unaware it's happening (like blurs)

ZooMas said:
I feel it's warranted to do that, the hyperfocal distance on phone cameras is usually tiny, everything past couple of meters ends up being in infinity zone anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know what you mean, except that corner tree that they chose looks much closer to the photographer. Again, if they 're going to do that kind of analysis, then they'd better choose a more suitable scene or do it in a controlled manner. I just don't think that scene is valid choice for a lens center to corner sharpness comparison. Anyway, DxOMark is just one source of sample images and I can now interpret their scoring better for my purpose.

lost_ said:
I know what you mean, except that corner tree that they chose looks much closer to the photographer. Again, if they 're going to do that kind of analysis, then they'd better choose a more suitable scene or do it in a controlled manner. I just don't think that scene is valid choice for a lens center to corner sharpness comparison. Anyway, DxOMark is just one source of sample images and I can now interpret their scoring better for my purpose.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I concur, honestly now that most phones can do RAW, they shouldbe comparing that instead of the proccesed jpg, they don't compare the jpg's for their camera tests

lost_ said:
I asked HTC about the camera issues mentioned on the tech insider review such as this glare and this sharpness issues. The exposure control issues can be addressed with software later, but the glare issue may indicate that the physical lens is more glare prone (compared to the S7 in that photo). This Android Central's photo of an easy outdoor scene shows a lack of sharpness and micro contrast, which may be a combined result of the glare-prone lens and the sharpness issue identified by the tech insider review. That glare issue, however, is NOT a problem on this photo from SlashGear.
Anyway, those are a very small sampling of photos. Post your HTC 10 pics here when you have them so we can all see them!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wouldnt take it too seriously about the glare, 2 things when doing stuff like this you have to do a like for like in comparison. Getting too close so the fruit was at a different focal range yes it will have different lighting and not focus the same and the sun behind the tree in one shot and passed in the other? Like WTF? Or course the lighting would show a glare funny thing is go on the S7/edge and its been mentioned numerous times they are suffering too with the same damn problem!
The comparison wasnt credible in my opinion?
HTC dropped the ball with the camera setup they should have put this lense on a duo lense setup like the M8 it would be a beast! I loved my M8 contributed quite a lot on the forums here with photos from it but my biggest gripe was why 4MP? It was commonly accepted that what the M8 needed to be on top was a larger lense to actually harvest more details in the light being captured.
Frustrating as hell! I just wish they had brought back that Duo lense we would see something that would have sunk the competition hard and fast in performance.

I am using the 10 camera app on my A9 thanks to Leedroid, in Auto you can disable HDR, control exposure but not sharpness unless there is a hidden menu
Sent from my HTC One A9 using XDA Free mobile app

vegetaleb said:
I am using the 10 camera app on my A9 thanks to Leedroid, in Auto you can disable HDR, control exposure but not sharpness unless there is a hidden menu
Sent from my HTC One A9 using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think there's a sharpness menu option. The A9 began the trend of removing the sharpness with the results being images being a bit too flat (nothing wrong with that especially compared to the oversharp gs7/gs6)
However, I think HTC struck a decent balance with the 10. The issues of camera is something I've even seen on my rx1rii so it's not something that can be easily solved

Any low light comparisons with the Huawei P9?
Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

hamdir said:
Things to keep in mind auto HDR is on by default which could cause all sorts of issues if you are unaware it's happening (like blurs)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, this could explain the eye brow raising shots i found on the verge. Now if there was a simple way to identify when hdr is on or not in the exifs, it will become easier. Will spare from the 'not impressed' posts.
Not how a camera, according to dxo, that is as sharp as the nexus and has as good artifacts handling as the 808 should behave.
In the meantime i went digging for better samples and engadget taiwan has done a much better job than engadget headoffice.
https://flic.kr/s/aHsky4WQQP
and a comparison with the S7
https://flic.kr/s/aHsky8MB4Q
Exifs, full rez the lot.
---------- Post added at 11:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:52 PM ----------
hamdir said:
on the M8 it was using touch focus instead of auto focus
on the 10 its auto HDR messing up sometimes its on by default but cant be turned off
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HDR can be turned off. See 2:30 here
we were begging HTC to reduce sharpness and processing for years so now when they finally did it we bash them?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
here is something more subtle. First is s7, second is the 10
s7e2 by bittie kwan, on Flickr
m10b by bittie kwan, on Flickr
htc10vs7e by bittie kwan, on Flickr
It surprises me how high the ISO's have to be on the 10 for the bottle top. The F stop difference is 1/6.Shutter speed difference is negligible. But ISO wise its almost 2.5stops (!)
Clearly these companies are doing iso curves quite differently.The 10 isn't using any image averaging like HDR+.

I would really like to see some people pull some comparison photos from the S7 in auto, then take to raw/pro mode with the HTC 10 and set it up to match the auto settings that the S7 is doing and see if the pictures then are comparable. It would be the best way to see sensor vs. processing, I would think? Also I know very little about imaging, so I also could be completely wrong. Also I would like to just see shots set up in conditions to the same ISO, shutter speed, etc and see then what kind of differences we're looking at.

One Twelve said:
It surprises me how high the ISO's have to be on the 10 for the bottle top. The F stop difference is 1/6.Shutter speed difference is negligible. But ISO wise its almost 2.5stops (!)
Clearly these companies are doing iso curves quite differently.The 10 isn't using any image averaging like HDR+.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the links - they've been added to the first post.
The curtain scene is another telltale about the metering algorithm and exposure. All else equal, the S7 was ISO 200 and the 10 was ISO 500, 1.3 more stop, which ends up lighting up the dark side of the curtain but also clipping the highlights sooner without revealing additional details in the shadow. The same goes with the horse statue scene (ISO 200 vs ISO 320). It seems in dark scenes with strong highlights, the 10 exposure shifts toward higher ISO to light up the shadows, while the S7 is happy in keeping the shadows dark; some of us grow up doing minus exposure compensation in that kind of scene to keep the shadow black instead of gray, and that seems to be what S7 is doing while the 10 wants to make it gray.
The outdoor samples from the 10 are pretty good IMO. They're not overexposed and soft like the NYC samples.

Terrible camera quality occasionally

Hi all,
I've a new Nexus 5x but am having an odd issue with the camera. [I also got this camera for a family member and their unit from a separate supplier has the same issue]
I wanted to test out the hdr/+/auto function so took two pictures within seconds against a car of a scene. On the computer I cannot remember which was which (hdr on or off or auto) but which the photo focused and nothing seemed to change the quality of the first image is much worse:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
The second 5x I've check out also has these smeary photos dotted through the camera album - as though the camera opened it and went to render the fine detail but didn't.
This isn't camera shake (shutter speed high) nor a mis-focus, it's ike being back on my old Samsung occasionally!
Has anyone else experienced this or know what could be wrong?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Initial Camera Observations

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.