-
After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.
Low Light Pics Suck
- Thread starter Jore
- Start date
ahjengmool
Member
There is low light controls
Click on camera
Click on menu
Click on edit quick setting
Click on icon at far right that is a hand with star and crescent moon.
Now your in nightsetting
Click on camera
Click on menu
Click on edit quick setting
Click on icon at far right that is a hand with star and crescent moon.
Now your in nightsetting
ahjengmool
Member
The note 3 manual page 126 also has this
D
Deleted User
Guest
Cant speak for the S5 but low light shots with the Galaxy phones are notoriously poor, my GN3 included. It's a shame really as in good light outside the photos are second to none, but as soon as light levels drop photos take on a muddy appearance and lose detail. I guess you could increase exposure to try and compensate. You could try other apps but no amount of software will improve the performance of the hardware regardless of what anyone says.
Jore
Android Enthusiast
I'll try this and see if it changes anything.....
clitrenta
Android Enthusiast
I haven't tried yet but I can tell you the best phone for low light pics is the Lumia series hands down. I know people don't care for Windows Phone but aside from app availability, it is an excellent phone and absolutely #1 in picture taking under all conditions. I had the Lumia 1020 and loved it but in the end, I just kept running into to many instances where I couldn't get an app I needed. I loved the OS though. All that said, I still love my Note 3 more.
SkyJackpot
Android Enthusiast
I would have to agree. Here's a picture of someone taking a selfie holding an iPhone in the day time and the quality is grainy and lacks detail.
If you want pixel perfect pictures tthat you can zoom in forever with not much loss of quality at night or in the day time then the Nokia Lumia phone would be your choice.
I like the customization and accuracy of the S Pen when clicking buttons in certain websites so would choose the Samsung Galaxy Note 3 every time, given that I usually take pictures in the day time, which come out very nice.
drexappeal
Extreme Android User
First thing we actually don't agree on. My pics have come out much better on the Note 3 as compared to my Note 2. I find the settings easier to get to on the Note 3, in a quicker timeframe, so I'm constantly switching up modes (depending on the scenario). On the Note 2, I found myself sticking with Auto, just because it seemed to be the fastest way to get pics taken.
AnonGuy
Android Enthusiast
The Note 2 doesn't take better pics in day light, and it doesn't take better pictures in low light.
The only way to get a usable picture in low light on the Note 2 was to use Low Light mode, which the Note 3 has. It's called Smart Stabilization (a lot of people don't know that it's basically the same as Auto Night Mode on the S4... cause they don't read the pop-up that comes up everytime you enable it and it's enabled by default on these phones).
They work similarly, but the Note 3 camera does let in more light than the Note 2 and the image stacking algorithms are faster and better than on the Note 2. It also doesn't shoot out pictures with the same terrible color tint as the Note 2/S3 (they're still tinted, but in a much more attractive way).
One thing I did notice was that the Note 3 seems a bit more susceptible to camera shake than the S3 I had before it, but the low light pictures are almost universally better.
Typically for low light I don't crop, like ever, because smartphones irregardless of which one you use always fair poorer in low light photography. Instead, I prefer to resize down to a lower size to muscle some of the noise out of the image instead.
Reviewers have done camera tests comparing the Note 2 to the Note 3 and the Note 3 wins easily in both Video and Photography across literally all categories. All claims that it's worse than the Note 2 are largely placebo.
Samsung's cameras have never been great low light performers, but the S4/Note 3 are clearly better across the spectrum than the S3/Note 2 devices that preceeded them. The S5 is the first Samsung device that is somewhat decent in low light. The Note 4 should perform similarly if not better than that phone, and if the device stays at 5.7" (or at least about the same overall device size) and comes with a camera that good I'll be upgrading to it on launch day.
The only way to get a usable picture in low light on the Note 2 was to use Low Light mode, which the Note 3 has. It's called Smart Stabilization (a lot of people don't know that it's basically the same as Auto Night Mode on the S4... cause they don't read the pop-up that comes up everytime you enable it and it's enabled by default on these phones).
They work similarly, but the Note 3 camera does let in more light than the Note 2 and the image stacking algorithms are faster and better than on the Note 2. It also doesn't shoot out pictures with the same terrible color tint as the Note 2/S3 (they're still tinted, but in a much more attractive way).
One thing I did notice was that the Note 3 seems a bit more susceptible to camera shake than the S3 I had before it, but the low light pictures are almost universally better.
Typically for low light I don't crop, like ever, because smartphones irregardless of which one you use always fair poorer in low light photography. Instead, I prefer to resize down to a lower size to muscle some of the noise out of the image instead.
Reviewers have done camera tests comparing the Note 2 to the Note 3 and the Note 3 wins easily in both Video and Photography across literally all categories. All claims that it's worse than the Note 2 are largely placebo.
Samsung's cameras have never been great low light performers, but the S4/Note 3 are clearly better across the spectrum than the S3/Note 2 devices that preceeded them. The S5 is the first Samsung device that is somewhat decent in low light. The Note 4 should perform similarly if not better than that phone, and if the device stays at 5.7" (or at least about the same overall device size) and comes with a camera that good I'll be upgrading to it on launch day.
I went through about 10 different camera apps last night, some of which claimed better low light performance.
In the end (a Homer Simpson moment) it seemed to me that stock app with flash on worked best in my limited research.
I really want to nail the low light photos though as the daytime ones are fantastic.
In the end (a Homer Simpson moment) it seemed to me that stock app with flash on worked best in my limited research.
I really want to nail the low light photos though as the daytime ones are fantastic.
drexappeal
Extreme Android User
I guess it is a matter of perspective because the Note 2 and 3 have blown any of my previous phones out of the water with little to no light scenarios
AnonGuy
Android Enthusiast
Yea. I tried Google Camera. The pictures are identical in auto mode.
how do I get rid of the .. "processing" after each pic?
when I take a pic.. i hear the snapshot sound.. then it acts like it taken the shot.
is i move or the subject moves.. but then it starts the process and the pic is blurry.
it is about half a sec after the snap.
and the processing may take almost a sec or 2. to complete.
i have NOTE3 on ATT on Kitkat. and is mostly default setting.. but i changed the size to 2.4m 2048x1152.
this really bothers me
when I take a pic.. i hear the snapshot sound.. then it acts like it taken the shot.
is i move or the subject moves.. but then it starts the process and the pic is blurry.
it is about half a sec after the snap.
and the processing may take almost a sec or 2. to complete.
i have NOTE3 on ATT on Kitkat. and is mostly default setting.. but i changed the size to 2.4m 2048x1152.
this really bothers me
SkyJackpot
Android Enthusiast
Low light pictures on any phones of this caliber including the iPhone will suffer as they're such thin phones they don't have sensors the size of cameras which have taking pictures as their main priority.
You can read all about a similar phone which details the same characteristics in a review of another thin phone, the iPhone 5 below. You can find the phrases used such as "in the right light" and the reasons for some blurry images due to no image stabilisation and shaky hands in other threads about the Samsung Galaxy Note 3 inside this iPhone 5 review too.
"The images
The crucial part, just how good are the iPhone 5’s images?
The 1/3.2-inch sensor is smaller than you’ll find in any given compact camera and that doesn’t bode so well, at least on paper, for image quality. But this Sony-made, back-side illuminated sensor is, in reality, really rather capable.
In the right light the iPhone 5’s images are just as good as those from many compact cameras. That’s easy to tell from how the images look on the device’s screen, but take the shots off the camera - something that’s probably not done as often as it ought to be - and various blemishes are clear to see.
But we’re not talking great globs of image processing artefacts or stacks of image noise. Nope, it’s really very well processed. Just look at this, ahem, corking snap of some wine corks. Inspect closer and detailed edges are a little “fuzzy”, but this is all normal stuff and exactly what most compact cameras would exhibit.
But, as we say, that’s in good light. The camera does otherwise “hide” in wide-aperture, low ISO, low shutter speed territory which, while fine for some conditions, will often render low-light or night pictures blurry through exposure means rather than on account of the sensor.
When eventually forced to up the sensitivity - even in a very dark club the 1/15th second exposure time and ISO 800 choice seemed conservative to the point of damaging - quality quickly drops off and lacks detail.
No manual control
Which brings us to the first hiccup. Where’s the manual control? It doesn’t need to be complicated amounts of it, just the usual aperture, shutter and ISO controls to help enable the camera to better suit different environments.
Imagine some on-screen “virtual lens ring” sliders to control those elements – that’d be great. In fact, it’d be above and beyond what most, if not all, entry level compact cameras offer.
Sure, there’s a lot to be said for point and shoot. We don’t want that to go away, but there’s a definite demand for greater picture-taking control direct from Apple’s own camera software.
Exposure and focus lock
It's been around for a couple of software versions now, but the AE/AF lock is an essential feature. Press and hold the point of focus and it’ll fix the focus position and exposure level wherever the camera is then moved. It’s not quite the full manual control that we’d like, but is something not to be ignored.
This isn’t restricted to the iPhone 5 though. Go download iOS 6 via iTunes and - apart from the unavoidable Apple Maps-gate issue that also comes bundled - you, too, can benefit from this feature without spending an extra penny, whichever iPhone you happen to be using.
Stabilisation? What stabilisation
Image stabilisation is likely to be the "next phase" in smartphone cameras. Nokia’s Lumia 920 technology sounds promising, but we’re yet to see how that truly performs, though a quick 4S vs 920 at the Nokia launch returned some interesting results.
With the iPhone 5 there is no image stabilisation. The mid-wide 33mm (equivalent) lens might not sound as if would need assistance from stabilisation, but thanks to Apple’s engineers resting on the low shutter speeds - as outlined above - image blur is a common issue in all kinds of light. Some of our comparison shots we had to take half a dozen times and the difference between each varied.
Why so wobbly? It’s the shape of the iPhone. It’s so thin, and the camera's lens is positioned so close to the corner that nimble fingers need to splay out to support this thin slice of phone, and that doesn’t happen with as much success as you may imagine."
Source
You can read all about a similar phone which details the same characteristics in a review of another thin phone, the iPhone 5 below. You can find the phrases used such as "in the right light" and the reasons for some blurry images due to no image stabilisation and shaky hands in other threads about the Samsung Galaxy Note 3 inside this iPhone 5 review too.
"The images
The crucial part, just how good are the iPhone 5’s images?
The 1/3.2-inch sensor is smaller than you’ll find in any given compact camera and that doesn’t bode so well, at least on paper, for image quality. But this Sony-made, back-side illuminated sensor is, in reality, really rather capable.
In the right light the iPhone 5’s images are just as good as those from many compact cameras. That’s easy to tell from how the images look on the device’s screen, but take the shots off the camera - something that’s probably not done as often as it ought to be - and various blemishes are clear to see.
But we’re not talking great globs of image processing artefacts or stacks of image noise. Nope, it’s really very well processed. Just look at this, ahem, corking snap of some wine corks. Inspect closer and detailed edges are a little “fuzzy”, but this is all normal stuff and exactly what most compact cameras would exhibit.
But, as we say, that’s in good light. The camera does otherwise “hide” in wide-aperture, low ISO, low shutter speed territory which, while fine for some conditions, will often render low-light or night pictures blurry through exposure means rather than on account of the sensor.
When eventually forced to up the sensitivity - even in a very dark club the 1/15th second exposure time and ISO 800 choice seemed conservative to the point of damaging - quality quickly drops off and lacks detail.
No manual control
Which brings us to the first hiccup. Where’s the manual control? It doesn’t need to be complicated amounts of it, just the usual aperture, shutter and ISO controls to help enable the camera to better suit different environments.
Imagine some on-screen “virtual lens ring” sliders to control those elements – that’d be great. In fact, it’d be above and beyond what most, if not all, entry level compact cameras offer.
Sure, there’s a lot to be said for point and shoot. We don’t want that to go away, but there’s a definite demand for greater picture-taking control direct from Apple’s own camera software.
Exposure and focus lock
It's been around for a couple of software versions now, but the AE/AF lock is an essential feature. Press and hold the point of focus and it’ll fix the focus position and exposure level wherever the camera is then moved. It’s not quite the full manual control that we’d like, but is something not to be ignored.
This isn’t restricted to the iPhone 5 though. Go download iOS 6 via iTunes and - apart from the unavoidable Apple Maps-gate issue that also comes bundled - you, too, can benefit from this feature without spending an extra penny, whichever iPhone you happen to be using.
Stabilisation? What stabilisation
Image stabilisation is likely to be the "next phase" in smartphone cameras. Nokia’s Lumia 920 technology sounds promising, but we’re yet to see how that truly performs, though a quick 4S vs 920 at the Nokia launch returned some interesting results.
With the iPhone 5 there is no image stabilisation. The mid-wide 33mm (equivalent) lens might not sound as if would need assistance from stabilisation, but thanks to Apple’s engineers resting on the low shutter speeds - as outlined above - image blur is a common issue in all kinds of light. Some of our comparison shots we had to take half a dozen times and the difference between each varied.
Why so wobbly? It’s the shape of the iPhone. It’s so thin, and the camera's lens is positioned so close to the corner that nimble fingers need to splay out to support this thin slice of phone, and that doesn’t happen with as much success as you may imagine."
Source
drexappeal
Extreme Android User
I can't remember if it is auto focus or auto flash, but if you turn one of those off, that seems to work. I had the same issue.
so.. i have to choose between slow response time... and one of those?
I want auto focus and auto flash!!! damn ..
quiksilver169
Well-Known Member
You sold all your digital cameras to replace it with a phone camera
Sorry, but that's like selling your car and complaining that your bicycle isn't fast enough.
You sold all your digital cameras to replace it with a phone camera
Sorry, but that's like selling your car and complaining that your bicycle isn't fast enough.
hahaha that is funny
several years back: I had digital camera, GPS device, MP3 player, and cell phone.
but now.. I only have the NOTE3.
all the other devices have faded away..
so.. the camera on the Smartphone.. must be usable.
I have reasonable expectations.
and this device does fall a little short because of the "processing" time after each pic taken. and lag it causes.. which in turn causes blur (subject moves because they think the photo has been taken).
SkyJackpot
Android Enthusiast
If your main reasons for buying a phone are for the best quality that you can get on a phone then I would have to say you should get something like a Nokia Pureview 808 or one of the Nokia Lumia's, or if funds aren't limited then you might end up going back & forth between 2 operating systems with very similar quality photos that need a little bit of finesse to get good pictures. If these thin phones with small sensors are used as point and click then you can get mixed results from both operating systems, and it's easy to immediately think one is bad and the other is good, even when an iPhone isn't in a low light situation it can be made to look bad when quickly pointing and shooting as visible from the web link below:
http://androidforums.com/samsung-galaxy-note-3/843386-low-light-pics-suck.html#post6545264
As opposed to a photo taken with a Samsung Galaxy Note 3, visible from the web link below:
http://androidforums.com/samsung-galaxy-note-3/790707-note-3-not-camera-not-focussing.html#post6552840
Ultimately both of those pictures could've come out great, but one photo was blocking the main light source from reaching the tiny sensors on a phone and one wasn't.
I'm not sure what kind of expectations you were expecting from a camera phone picture if you previously owned digital cameras, but I think it is safe to presume you are not a professional photographer who would have never expected anything great with their years of experience, and that great quality that you were expecting from your digital camera photos is what has made you switch from iOS to Android still searching for digital camera quality.
You can also buy a camera attachment such as the Sony DSC-QX10 or QX100 which will give you much better photo quality, but might have a few troubles maintaining a connection with a phone without NFC such as an iPhone, as demonstrated in the video review of it below where it uses Wifi to connect with varying results:
Sony QX100 Hands-on Review - YouTube