Don't count on it. My ancient tbolt takes better pics than my hd maxx
-
After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.
The (maybe) "Epic" Motorola X Pre-Release Thread
- Thread starter The_Chief
- Start date
-
- Tags
- motorola moto x
- Status
Don't count on it. My ancient tbolt takes better pics than my hd maxx
Sandroidfan
Android Expert
The biggest issue in Moto camera seems to be inconsistent shot to shot results. Quite often focus, color/exposure is bad out of 3~4 shots from 10 despite my effort to hold it steady with touch focus. Hopefully Moto X camera is better in getting consistent photo results.
Would either of you be willing to try -
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.moblynx.camerajbplus
- on your Moto phones and report back?
It's 2 bucks and the dev claims a no-problem refund policy.
It's a different app from Camera Zoom, FX and the rest of them.
And it features the ability to avoid most jpeg compression during the file save.
The X will have different hardware from yours but one good trial could help lay to rest if Moto is consistently bad at hardware or just software.
FWIW - the sensor specs in the X are very good and I'm doubtful it's hardware, beyond low light limits common to this sort of lens/sensor geometry.
Thanks!
Sandroidfan
Android Expert
OK. I will give it try on my Razr HD and see how it works.
mush10
Well-Known Member
In my opinion, Moto nailed the size of this phone. I want this more with every video I see.
Old Member
Android Expert
Everyone has been trying to get their new Maxx at $100 discount through Wirefly and Sams Club but we keep running into the same roadblock; namely if you want to keep your unlimited data you need to transfer your upgrade to another line but they won't let you transfer that phone back to your line until after 181 days without a financial penalty ($400).
If you currently OWN a Motorola phone that is eligible you can safe $100, or rather get $100 off of your new Droid Maxx, Droid Ultra or Droid Mini and yes also your Motorola X. All you have to do is complete the process and 6-8 weeks later you will receive a $100 Visa Gift card.
Unfortunaetly the ONLY Motorola phone we have is the Droid 2. It doesn't qualify.
Check out the link below and see if you can qualify.
https://www.mototradeup.com/?q=start
(Source)
If you currently OWN a Motorola phone that is eligible you can safe $100, or rather get $100 off of your new Droid Maxx, Droid Ultra or Droid Mini and yes also your Motorola X. All you have to do is complete the process and 6-8 weeks later you will receive a $100 Visa Gift card.
Unfortunaetly the ONLY Motorola phone we have is the Droid 2. It doesn't qualify.
Check out the link below and see if you can qualify.
https://www.mototradeup.com/?q=start
(Source)
Crewville96
Member
Allow me to throw my 2 cents in...
I've been saying for a while now over on the Maxx HD forum that everyone should download the stock Google camera app and disable the stock Moto cam app. The stock Moto cam app adds a lot of grain to the pics the phone takes. After doing side by side comparisons of the Google vs Moto cam apps, I've come to the conclusion that the Moto cam software is to blame. Taking the same pic in the same light/conditions/everything results in different images. The main difference being that the Moto cam software over-processes the pics. I'd say that the Google cam produces slightly sharper pics, but it's not so much so that it's mind boggling, I do see a difference though. Both still have grain, but the Google cam images are MUCH clearer.
All that being said, I tried Camera JB+ last night. Doing side by side comparisons of the stock Google cam app and Camera JB+, it seems that the pics are pretty much equal. However, the JB+ cam offers burst mode and pics to be taken in 6MP (16:9 aspect ratio). The stock Google cam doesn't offer burst mode and only takes 16:9 pics at 2MP. JB+ also offers more filters and whatnot.
Just for the burst mode and 6MP 16:9 pics, I think $2 for JB+ is worth it. If you don't wanna spend $2 and are ok with no burst mode and non-widescreen pics, just download the stock Google cam off Droid Life (google search for it).
The problem with Moto cams isn't the hardware IMO, it's the software. I asked the Droid Life team to throw the stock Google cam on the Moto X and see if it produced better results, but haven't heard back. I'd be very interested to see if JB+ would make the Moto X's cam good. If it does, I would be much more inclined to get an X. I know the stock Google cam/JB+ has made my Maxx HD's camera usable. It's not great, but at least it's ok now.
Thanks Crewville! 
Really comprehensive evaluation and I really appreciate it. I experienced the same thing with my unmodified HTC camera app - these makers seem to over-process and lose clarity.
Do you use the JB+ option to save in high quality?
It's been a few months since I've tried the stock Google camera but my memory is that feature was missing from it.
Based on your feedback, I'm even more interested in hearing or seeing JB+ results for the RGBC camera on the X.
Really comprehensive evaluation and I really appreciate it. I experienced the same thing with my unmodified HTC camera app - these makers seem to over-process and lose clarity.
Do you use the JB+ option to save in high quality?
It's been a few months since I've tried the stock Google camera but my memory is that feature was missing from it.
Based on your feedback, I'm even more interested in hearing or seeing JB+ results for the RGBC camera on the X.
Sandroidfan
Android Expert
So I bought, tried out JB+ camera on my RHD indoors last night. It's not very impressive but seems worth 2 bucks so far. It seems better in getting consistent color and exposure at least.
The Moto stock camera app is doing very poor job in white balance when lighting is less than ideal. And it's very unpredictable. Sometimes it's casting blue tone or orange tone and I have no idea how the color will turn out. Metering seems unstable at times too, as some shots are too dark or too bright. But compared to stock camera app, JB+ seems more accurate and stable in white balance, exposure. This is good improvement.
But in terms of focus/sharpness, I see very little to no benefit from JB+. Compared to lucky, sharp images from stock app, JB+ maybe slightly sharper. And it takes quite longer to get first focus lock after opening the camera app. After that touch focus seems ok though. I feel like getting focused image consistently is better but this needs more tests to confirm. I will do more testing outdoors and update my review if I feel like.
Overall I agree with Crewville's review. It doesn't turn poor Moto camera to great camera suddenly. But it made camera more useable now. Probably Moto X camera is better, but if you are unhappy with camera I guess Camera JB+ is worth trying.
The Moto stock camera app is doing very poor job in white balance when lighting is less than ideal. And it's very unpredictable. Sometimes it's casting blue tone or orange tone and I have no idea how the color will turn out. Metering seems unstable at times too, as some shots are too dark or too bright. But compared to stock camera app, JB+ seems more accurate and stable in white balance, exposure. This is good improvement.
But in terms of focus/sharpness, I see very little to no benefit from JB+. Compared to lucky, sharp images from stock app, JB+ maybe slightly sharper. And it takes quite longer to get first focus lock after opening the camera app. After that touch focus seems ok though. I feel like getting focused image consistently is better but this needs more tests to confirm. I will do more testing outdoors and update my review if I feel like.
Overall I agree with Crewville's review. It doesn't turn poor Moto camera to great camera suddenly. But it made camera more useable now. Probably Moto X camera is better, but if you are unhappy with camera I guess Camera JB+ is worth trying.
Thanks Sandroidfan!
Same question on the high-quality jpeg save option please, thanks in advance.
Same question on the high-quality jpeg save option please, thanks in advance.
Sandroidfan
Android Expert
Thanks Sandroidfan!
Same question on the high-quality jpeg save option please, thanks in advance.
I didn't play with anything from default setting yet.
I just checked it and JPEG quality is set to "high" and there is even higher "ultra". I also see FX option which is set to 1:4 (others are 1:1, 1:8). Not sure what it does.
Jpeg quality ultra = as little post processing for storage compression as possible.
A lot of the grain and lack of details in phone photos comes from jpeg compression.
Compression artifacts
Here's a nice series of the same picture with varying levels of compression to illustrate -
Sample photos
Most of what reviewers prattle on about pretending to be experts in digital photography, discussing megapixels and the ever sacred sample and comparison photographs they publish is total nonsense.
Most of their nonsense is reviewing the software - and you can change the software.
Here's the deal - cell phone cameras have lenses that are about 2 mm or so or less in diameter. With a plastic lens, not glass.
That ladies and gentlemen is a nearly a pinhole camera - perhaps you made one out of a shoebox and shirt cardboard as a kid.
In order for this to work, we want and need a high quality sensor and good image processing to extract the image from the sensor.
We don't want any compression destroying what little we can get - and by we, I mean those of us caring about our pictures.
No sour grapes but I know many won't believe that until a blog writer says so, more of my credentials under the button if anyone cares (I wouldn't).
The FX thing I'd have to go look up, I'm drawing a blank.
PS - here's a cropped image I took, it's 30% of the full frame, and was saved without compression.
Available light, zero photoshopping or filtering - this was extracted from a burst of shots while he flew one of my airplanes (a Spitfire actually).
Here - all you're seeing is 481x640.
That means that it's web compressed by a factor of 7.3 (a LOT) to give a hint of how it really looked printed.
The print is far better.
The image here (after cropping) is 1304 x 1734 - enough for a little smaller than this at 300 dpi on paper.
Pretty fair for a cell phone and just walking by and touching glass, nothing set up or planned.
That's what I expect in a cell phone.
Not DSLR - but not sucking. Wish I could have shown the print of this.
Anyway - that's MY personal requirement for the X when all is said and done.
To be able to capture the moments and have acceptable imperfections - because the best camera is the one you're carrying when the moment happens.
PS, Filters are also fun -
But I think most people like good snaps.
A lot of the grain and lack of details in phone photos comes from jpeg compression.
Compression artifacts
Here's a nice series of the same picture with varying levels of compression to illustrate -
Sample photos
Most of what reviewers prattle on about pretending to be experts in digital photography, discussing megapixels and the ever sacred sample and comparison photographs they publish is total nonsense.
Most of their nonsense is reviewing the software - and you can change the software.
Here's the deal - cell phone cameras have lenses that are about 2 mm or so or less in diameter. With a plastic lens, not glass.
That ladies and gentlemen is a nearly a pinhole camera - perhaps you made one out of a shoebox and shirt cardboard as a kid.
In order for this to work, we want and need a high quality sensor and good image processing to extract the image from the sensor.
We don't want any compression destroying what little we can get - and by we, I mean those of us caring about our pictures.
No sour grapes but I know many won't believe that until a blog writer says so, more of my credentials under the button if anyone cares (I wouldn't).
I've done film photography and developed my own work starting over 40 years ago, stopped doing my own development about 20 years ago, and I've done digital image processing from space platforms for about a decade in my career.
Jpegs are compressed by definition. Trust me, you want that to be as little as possible.
Jpegs are compressed by definition. Trust me, you want that to be as little as possible.
The FX thing I'd have to go look up, I'm drawing a blank.
PS - here's a cropped image I took, it's 30% of the full frame, and was saved without compression.
Available light, zero photoshopping or filtering - this was extracted from a burst of shots while he flew one of my airplanes (a Spitfire actually).
Here - all you're seeing is 481x640.
That means that it's web compressed by a factor of 7.3 (a LOT) to give a hint of how it really looked printed.
The print is far better.
The image here (after cropping) is 1304 x 1734 - enough for a little smaller than this at 300 dpi on paper.
Pretty fair for a cell phone and just walking by and touching glass, nothing set up or planned.
That's what I expect in a cell phone.
Not DSLR - but not sucking. Wish I could have shown the print of this.
Anyway - that's MY personal requirement for the X when all is said and done.
To be able to capture the moments and have acceptable imperfections - because the best camera is the one you're carrying when the moment happens.
PS, Filters are also fun -
But I think most people like good snaps.
Crewville96
Member
Im gonna do more comparisons this weekend. Indoor and outdoor. I'll compare the moto cam, google cam, and jb+. I'll also compare the 4 jpeg qualities. I'll look at the pics on my laptop and tv as well to really be critical. Right now I've only looked at results on my Maxx HD.
I will say that i feel like the shutter is faster on jb+ but its a bit premature to say that for sure.
I will say that i feel like the shutter is faster on jb+ but its a bit premature to say that for sure.
brandonhutch
Well-Known Member
PS - here's a cropped image I took, it's 30% of the full frame, and was saved without compression.
Available light, zero photoshopping or filtering - this was extracted from a burst of shots while he flew one of my airplanes (a Spitfire actually).
Here - all you're seeing is 481x640.
That means that it's web compressed by a factor of 7.3 (a LOT) to give a hint of how it really looked printed.
The print is far better.
The image here (after cropping) is 1304 x 1734 - enough for a little smaller than this at 300 dpi on paper.
No offense to you or the subject, but see ... I think that photo is terrible. Look how grainy that is in, what appears to be, sufficient lighting conditions. I'm assuming that was taken with ample daylight coming in through the windows - it looks like it anyway.
As much as I hate my Gnex, ( slow to open apps, Samsung radios, glitchy software, etc. ) ... it takes unbelievably fantastic photos in a myriad of conditions. Every time I whip it out and start firing, it's always a subject of admiration among my friends. And rightfully so ... it takes great photos.
I really need to get a new phone as my Gnex just sucks these days. I don't really know why that is either, maybe I just got a bad one and it's showing its age more than others. But I use the camera on my phone A LOT and I'm cautious of how the Moto X camera is going to suit my personal needs.
Yeah, I know ... carry a pocket shooter if I want good pics. Why should I have to do that when I know that the camera in my phone is capable of taking pics. Just hoping that a software update or that JB+ ( or really any GP camera app ) will be sufficient for me.
Wolfedude88
Android Expert
The gnex had an okay camera, I've never heard anyone saying it was excellent until now. Lol
No offense taken and it IS grainy.
Explanation (not being defensive) follows, under hide tags for those not into camera stuff.
It's also been compressed down to 1/7 the number of actual pixels by whatever process Flicker uses.
I considered posting the full original - and on a big monitor, 1304 x 1734 looks grainy and ridiculous.
So - I get what I did wrong and I apologize.
I'm talking about the virtues of no compression and showing a compressed photo.
And I knew that - so here's what I didn't say to avoid the long post -
Please look at the color fields.
The black on his shirt has no swirls of dark red and purple from compression artifacts. The T-Rex and the flames (I know lol) - same deal.
Face - good color tones and even gradients as the light changed across his face.
Jpeg compression would not only have grain, as you see there, and the ridiculous edge distortions in places (see his lower thumb with the _white_ edge or the extreme edge distortion along the right side of his shirt and color) - it would have some color artifacting (see the lower forearm being comprised of white, red and green dots).
But - you're not seeing the other gross artifacts typical to jpeg compression that I've had on every stock Android camera I've tried (several HTCs and Sammies and a few other brands) - and the ones you're seeing are coming from the compression I did to web resolution.
Take that down to a 4" x 5.3" print and for each dot you see - add six more.
And it's a very acceptable desktop print.
DSLR quality? No.
More than acceptable in print as a snapshot, or on my phone (4.7" 720p) when sharing a picture of one of my pride and joys? Yep.
BTW and you hit an important point - ample daylight - thank you!
On my other cell phones and those of friends in that same room, same time of day, yadda yadda yadda, including an iPhone - ample daylight?
No.
On my f/2.0 HTC - yes.
The pixels on my camera and the X are the same size - 1.4 um per side, or 1.96 um^2.
The f-stop is the ratio of the lens diameter to the focal length. Given the same size pixels, the slightly larger X sensor accounts for 10 MP vs 8 MP on mine - and so the overall geometry will be roughly the same for the two, a 1.91 mm lens.
The X doesn't have an f/2.0 aperture - it has an f/2.4 lens-to-sensor arrangement. Using fancy f-stop math -
f/2 vs f/2.4 is (2^2/2.4^2) * 100 =
69% as much light will get in to the Moto X as gets into my HTC.
Therefore - I'm really counting on the RGBC array being able to make up for the difference.
~~~~~Last word on grain and my shot ~~~~
By the way - if you don't believe me on the grain thing - take your best color shot with your phone and crop it to 1304 x 1734.
Upload to Flickr.
Select the 481x640 display size.
Compare your artifacts to mine.
See if I'm wrong, you never know and it might be fun.
Cheers, thanks for reading.
I considered posting the full original - and on a big monitor, 1304 x 1734 looks grainy and ridiculous.
So - I get what I did wrong and I apologize.
I'm talking about the virtues of no compression and showing a compressed photo.
And I knew that - so here's what I didn't say to avoid the long post -
Please look at the color fields.
The black on his shirt has no swirls of dark red and purple from compression artifacts. The T-Rex and the flames (I know lol) - same deal.
Face - good color tones and even gradients as the light changed across his face.
Jpeg compression would not only have grain, as you see there, and the ridiculous edge distortions in places (see his lower thumb with the _white_ edge or the extreme edge distortion along the right side of his shirt and color) - it would have some color artifacting (see the lower forearm being comprised of white, red and green dots).
But - you're not seeing the other gross artifacts typical to jpeg compression that I've had on every stock Android camera I've tried (several HTCs and Sammies and a few other brands) - and the ones you're seeing are coming from the compression I did to web resolution.
Take that down to a 4" x 5.3" print and for each dot you see - add six more.
And it's a very acceptable desktop print.
DSLR quality? No.
More than acceptable in print as a snapshot, or on my phone (4.7" 720p) when sharing a picture of one of my pride and joys? Yep.
BTW and you hit an important point - ample daylight - thank you!
On my other cell phones and those of friends in that same room, same time of day, yadda yadda yadda, including an iPhone - ample daylight?
No.
On my f/2.0 HTC - yes.
The pixels on my camera and the X are the same size - 1.4 um per side, or 1.96 um^2.
The f-stop is the ratio of the lens diameter to the focal length. Given the same size pixels, the slightly larger X sensor accounts for 10 MP vs 8 MP on mine - and so the overall geometry will be roughly the same for the two, a 1.91 mm lens.
The X doesn't have an f/2.0 aperture - it has an f/2.4 lens-to-sensor arrangement. Using fancy f-stop math -
f/2 vs f/2.4 is (2^2/2.4^2) * 100 =
69% as much light will get in to the Moto X as gets into my HTC.
Therefore - I'm really counting on the RGBC array being able to make up for the difference.
~~~~~Last word on grain and my shot ~~~~
By the way - if you don't believe me on the grain thing - take your best color shot with your phone and crop it to 1304 x 1734.
Upload to Flickr.
Select the 481x640 display size.
Compare your artifacts to mine.
See if I'm wrong, you never know and it might be fun.
Cheers, thanks for reading.
Sandroidfan
Android Expert
Gnex camera was not so good when it first came with ICS.
But it got tremendously better with JB update. I still have it and it's a lot easier to take focused sharp pictures with fast shutter speed than my RHD. Folks who ditched gnex before getting JB update probably don't know that.
Wolfedude88
Android Expert
Yeah I remember it getting better after the jb update. I had the gsm version and when on ics if I manually focused it took decent shots and I know it was better after.
But it still wasn't that great of a camera. The gs3 and the one x were both better. It wasn't horrible just not great, at least in my opinion.
halon
hakuna matata
All this camera talk today so here ya go.
Motorola Mobility (@Motorola) tweeted at 8:26 PM on Thu, Aug 15, 2013:
Heads up! Tune in Friday at 10 am PT for a Q&A with Moto X camera guru Michelle Gattuso with @GuyKawasaki
http://t.co/UMJcLcTgMO
Motorola Mobility (@Motorola) tweeted at 8:26 PM on Thu, Aug 15, 2013:
Heads up! Tune in Friday at 10 am PT for a Q&A with Moto X camera guru Michelle Gattuso with @GuyKawasaki
http://t.co/UMJcLcTgMO
Wolfedude88
Android Expert
I follow Motorola on twitter hoping they release a date or something and saw that.
I am a very tech or oriented person but when it comes to cameras I'm a total noob. I leave everything on stock settings, I never fully ultilize the camera but u like something that is easy as basic to use and takes nice pics.
The X looks like it is very simple and takes decent pics so I'm sold. Haha
Old Member
Android Expert
I just realized this is a pre-release thread without a mention of P3Droid. (til now)
Old Member
Android Expert
Hahaha That's what I get for not reading each post. I just didn't remember seeing it.
Yeah well, he's definitely not as big a part of this thread as the next thread.
Wolfedude88
Android Expert
The maxx is definitely nice with the battery, I personally am going with the X, I love the size, the form factor, the on screen buttons and the clean front, and I love the look personally on the X.(I must be vain, lol)
- Status