• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

incredible 2 camera sucks

R

robertj298

Member
Maybe someone can tell me what I'm doing wrong but my incredible 2s camera sucks compared to my original incredible. On my original incredible I could set the iso to 200 to avoid image noise and the flash would compensate if I were in a dark room. If I set the 2s iso to 200 I can't even see anything in a slightly dim room on your screen and the pictures are terrible. I can use auto iso and the pictures are ok but show a lot of noise due to the camera selecting a very high iso. The 2 has no selectable metering mode like the original did. You can touch the screen to focus on the 2 but if you hold it there it won't take a photo like the original did. I am very disappointed in the camera on my new incredible 2
 
I don't understand why people seem to complain about cell phone cameras. If you are looking for amazing picture quality then go buy a nice camera and not a cell phone. You are using a tool that will do the job but isn't specifically meant to do that job. It's like using a flat head screw driver on a phillips head screw. It may work, but it's not the proper tool for the job.
 
F4L5EH0P3 said:
I don't understand why people seem to complain about cell phone cameras. If you are looking for amazing picture quality then go buy a nice camera and not a cell phone. You are using a tool that will do the job but isn't specifically meant to do that job. It's like using a flat head screw driver on a phillips head screw. It may work, but it's not the proper tool for the job.
Click to expand...

+1

I take the occasional picture with my cell phone but always bring my camera if I want good quality pictures. Remember, even though the cell phones not have an 8MP camera the lens's suck in them. The image stabilization is no where near what a real camera can do. You will never get a flash to fully compensate in a cell phone like you can with a real camera. Cell phone camera's will also never be able to take fast action photos the way a camera can. A good quality digital camera will not cost you much. It's worth purchasing.
 
I think all cameras on phones need a dedicated physical button for focus/capture. It sucks super f'n bad trying to touch a screen to take a picture of yourself and a friend when the screen isn't facing you.
 
DFA1 said:
I think all cameras on phones need a dedicated physical button for focus/capture. It sucks super f'n bad trying to touch a screen to take a picture of yourself and a friend when the screen isn't facing you.
Click to expand...

I agree. This is one of the things I miss from my BlackBerry.
 
valorian said:
+1

I take the occasional picture with my cell phone but always bring my camera if I want good quality pictures. Remember, even though the cell phones not have an 8MP camera the lens's suck in them. The image stabilization is no where near what a real camera can do. You will never get a flash to fully compensate in a cell phone like you can with a real camera. Cell phone camera's will also never be able to take fast action photos the way a camera can. A good quality digital camera will not cost you much. It's worth purchasing.
Click to expand...

I realize this as I have compact digitals and a digital slr. I am just comparing the dinc 2 to the original dinc and I found the original much easier to use and the quality of the photos better. Your pictures may look great on your phones screen but try blowing them up to full size on your computer
 
I have to slightly agree with your camera comparison with the inc and inc2 but I would not say the inc2 camera sucks. Night time shots are way better with the inc2 but the image quality if you blow up the pic is slightly (I mean slightly) better on the inc1. I think the inc and inc2 have the best cameras on a smartphone. Of course, this entire post is strictly my opinion.
 
As has been mentioned, if you are looking for great pictures and a camera that's versatile in a number of situations, a cell phone's camera is probably not the best bet.

These are just some basic settings for those looking for some info:

White Balance: I'd usually leave this at auto. Having to manually change it each time you take a shot in a different setting can be a pain. Furthermore, if you happen to come across one of those photo opportunities where a second take isn't possible, it helps to save time by having it on auto. Besides, auto does a decent enough job.

Resolution: My default resolution when I bought the phone was under the 8MP number. Make sure you set it up for the highest resolution. While MPs usually don't mean much unless someone is printing, it is better to have it at the higher settings. Low resolution images on cell phone cameras suck.

ISO: ISO refers to the light sensitivity. Like white balance, it's ok to have it on auto for quick pictures. If you do have time to shoot then manually adjusting it is the way to go. The lower the ISO, the less 'noise' the picture will have. However, the lowest setting only performs best under good light. If it were dark and you had the setting at 100 for example, your camera's shutter speed would compensate by lengthening the time the shutter is open. This causes blur. In darker settings, the higher the number, the better. Since image stabilization is almost non-existent or sucks in these cameras, use higher numbers. Unless you are using a tripod of course.

Grid: I have it set to off, but if you are wondering what the function of this setting is, read about the 'rule of thirds'.

Auto focus: Again, depends on what you are shooting. Manual, touch focus is great for macro type shots and certain other applications, but seeing how the shutter button is on screen, errors can be made, thus changing the focus point. Auto works decently, but manually just ensures the subject you are capturing is in focus.

Photography is a culmination of a number of settings. (In-Camera) However, users need to always take into account their environment.

Composition is very important to creating a good photograph as well. (Rule of thirds will shed some light on this if you plan on looking it up)

As to one of the comments above, the reason cell phone cameras have very poor image quality is down to the lens AS WELL as the size of the sensor.

Hope this helps someone.
 
ISO: ISO refers to the light sensitivity. Like white balance, it's ok to have it on auto for quick pictures. If you do have time to shoot then manually adjusting it is the way to go. The lower the ISO, the less 'noise' the picture will have. However, the lowest setting only performs best under good light. If it were dark and you had the setting at 100 for example, your camera's shutter speed would compensate by lengthening the time the shutter is open. This causes blur. In darker settings, the higher the number, the better. Since image stabilization is almost non-existent or sucks in these cameras, use higher numbers. Unless you are using a tripod of course.



Hope this helps someone.[/QUOTE]

This is probably my biggest beef with the dinc 2 while iso 200 is rather low for low light photos,using a flash should compensate for this. I could shoot very well using my original dinc at iso 200 but with the dinc 2 my screen is almost totally black with low light and I can't even see what I'm shooting and I'm not even talking about really low light I'm talking about average indoor lighting at night
 
Post some of the pictures that you took that you consider to look bad!

While I never owned the original Incredible, I did just try taking a low light photo with flash on and ISO 200. I see what you mean about the picture being dark still. Stepping up to Iso 400 fixed the problem, but in all honesty, the best test shot was when I selected auto ISO.

You have to remember that you are comparing two different cameras. They each will have their strengths and weaknesses. Its really not fair to say that it "sucks". Its a camera phone and you have to learn how to work within its limitations. I have personally been amazed at some of the shots that I took with this camera, especially after some slight post processing, its almost hard to believe that the shots were taken with a cell phone.
 
robertj298 said:
This is probably my biggest beef with the dinc 2 while iso 200 is rather low for low light photos,using a flash should compensate for this. I could shoot very well using my original dinc at iso 200 but with the dinc 2 my screen is almost totally black with low light and I can't even see what I'm shooting and I'm not even talking about really low light I'm talking about average indoor lighting at night
Click to expand...

The flash should compensate for it, but the camera, in low light situations will have trouble getting the focus point spot on in that level of darkness.

I know what you mean though. I've tried shooting low ISOs indoors and it's just not possible. But that's probably down to the sensor. Just doesn't have the ability to gather enough light.
 
The only complaint I have w/ Inc2 camera is the ability to take a pic just by touching the screen. No big deal. I could live with that.

Great phone w/ a great camera.
 
Mine makes a loud clicking sound when auto focus is on. When it focuses every 5 to 7 seconds makes the loud clicking noise. Is this normal, and just the sound of the shutter?
 
My pics with the Inc II are unbelievable. The tap to set point of focus is a great tool, and 98% of the pics i've taken with it are clear, crisp, and timed right for action shots. They even beat out my wife's Canon Digital Camera for action shots (she has an iPhone and hates that the Inc II camera works juuuuust that much better)

Also, that you can disable the auto focus and shutter sound is another huge, gigantic, spectacular, awesome, and mondo-cool thing. </exaggeration>
 
Hey guys,

I am going to be making the transition from a TB to an Inc2 soon which will hopefully be a great choice for at least my 2 year contract. I went to the Verizon store to compare the 2 a couple weeks ago and I noticed that the Inc2 camera had a sort of yellow hue to it. It still had natural colors but there seemed to have been a slight sepia-ish tone to them. I don't know if it was the lighting at the store but I took two pictures, one with the X2 and one with the Inc2 of the metal stand that the phones were on and the Inc2 showed a yellowish metal instead of a silverish one. Anyone else have this problem? or was this just a bad phone that was on display? It didn't seem to show up when I took pictures farther away but up close it did. Thanks in advance!

Edit: Also, what do you guys think about the video quality on the Inc2? I took a couple videos on the TB and they were great. I hope the picture and video quality on the Inc2 is as well (which I am pretty sure, is).
 
I just got my Dinc2 last week and have already amazed myself at some of the pics it's snapped.... so I'm with most of the others and I'd have to disagree. My camera for sure doesn't suck... it's pretty effin amazing for a cell phone camera ;)
 
I used my inc2 as a camera over seas and it was great. The hd video and the pics were all incredible. Its actually pretty decent if you are too lazy like me :) But ofcourse the dinc2 camera will not compare to a 500$ nikon camera. But 8mp is really something incredible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And for gangsterzan, you probably had a bad or beat up incredible 2. Ive had mine since may and it works flawless. But maybe you should wait for the samsung galaxy s 2 coming out soon. That phone is going to out perform almost anything out there. The proccessor will be faster and the screen is 4.3 inch will super amoled. But if you dont have 4g then the inc2 is still really good. Its my first android device and smartphone and it amazes me everyday. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom