-
After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.
Your Opinions: DX Camera Quality
- Thread starter stevez444
- Start date
-
- Tags
- motorola droid x
Napalm
Android Expert
I would say that the pics and the video taken with the X is pretty damn good for a Computer/phone. I mean compared to a dedicated camera like my panasonic point and shoot. (both of which are wide format and around 8mp) its not as good but its pretty damn close. Agan its a mini-tablet PC (my own term I think), its not a dedicated camera.
I'll give it an 8 for what it is. Will I do away with my panasonic, no.
As above, i think the moto software holds it back. Hell maybe there is a application that would do better. The LED lights, worlds above any other phone camera I have used.
I'll give it an 8 for what it is. Will I do away with my panasonic, no.
As above, i think the moto software holds it back. Hell maybe there is a application that would do better. The LED lights, worlds above any other phone camera I have used.
I think the moto software needs a lot of improvement.
Should have features like touch to focus, spot metering, etc. that are on other phones but lacking on the X.
Yeah, it's a phone but the Nokia N8 coming up has a Carl Zeiss lens and is supposed to truly rival point and shoots in quality. The X is large enough it could have had a better/bigger lens and optics.
Should have features like touch to focus, spot metering, etc. that are on other phones but lacking on the X.
Yeah, it's a phone but the Nokia N8 coming up has a Carl Zeiss lens and is supposed to truly rival point and shoots in quality. The X is large enough it could have had a better/bigger lens and optics.
The camera is decent. So far the best I've used for a camera phone. The so called 720p HD recording is pathetic though. Watching recorded video on the the phone looks ok but when hooked up to a HDTV via hdmi cable it's horrible.
The picture is more pixelated than an 8 bit videogame. I hope it's just a software issue or I would consider the the hdmi functionality a waste
The picture is more pixelated than an 8 bit videogame. I hope it's just a software issue or I would consider the the hdmi functionality a waste
It does have touch to focus (that is, it will focus where you want it to by touching on the screen where you want it to focus), but I could be simply misunderstanding what you mean by that.
FourAndFive
Newbie
I don't think Phones will ever really do away with Cameras. All they'll do is attach numbers that people are familiar with "8MP Camera" Doesn't mean anything if the lens is crap. "720p Video" again doesn't mean anything if the lens is crap.
But for a Camera (which is that really saying anything?) It is pretty nice, from the pictures I've seen.
But for a Camera (which is that really saying anything?) It is pretty nice, from the pictures I've seen.
Phones won't do away with high-end point and shoots or dslrs anytime soon, but low end to mid range compact cameras will slowly begin to disappear (IMO). The same thing will happen to the low end digital video cameras. If you compare the quality of earlier smartphones to now, it's like night and day. It's only a matter of time. And really, the convenience of having an all-in-one device is too much for the market to ignore.
Is this a hidden enable, because mine won't do that. Touching the screen just turns on and off the sidebar.
I agree, but I also think (let me qualify by saying most) phones are a long way away from the quality of low end point and shoots.
The optics in low end point and shoots are simply a lot better, and that's important. I don't think there's any reason manufacturers can't start putting really good optics in a phone, Samsung and Nokia are already headed in that direction. Samsung has a mission of making their phone cameras equal or better to point and shoots.
The Samsung point and shoot I just bought a few months back for $100 takes far better pictures than the $500 Sony I bought years back, and it's (the Samsung) pictures are light years better than my Droid takes. The biggest downfall of most of these camera phones is the light sensitivity. They take nice looking pictures outdoors in bright light, but then every camera does. It's indoors under artificial light they need a lot of work.
Well here is a bad shot from my 1.3 MP 1999 camera. Remember, this is 11 years ago. Certainly the X could do better than this shot, but point is, my 1999 claim isn't far off:
Again, I love the X, but the quality of the camera needs to be heavily tempered when compared to CURRENT point and shoots. Realistically, I think the sensor is more closer in quality to a bad 3MP point and shoot.
phobic
Android Enthusiast
It's fairly good for a phone and probably the best one I've owned. With some patience and finesse, the X can take some decent pictures. I'm not a photo enthusiast but I also own a Canon SD4000IS and well, no phone camera can compare to that really.
At the end of the day, a dedicated device will always be better than a multifunction device. A camera ONLY takes pictures (and sometimes video). A modern smartphone does that and way more.
At the end of the day, a dedicated device will always be better than a multifunction device. A camera ONLY takes pictures (and sometimes video). A modern smartphone does that and way more.
Umm. Yeah. The CCD was from 11 years ago. Color reproduction was pretty bad. Already said the X could do better now...barely.
Don S
Android Enthusiast
I don't know why it's so hard for owners to praise one of their phones features without going overboard.
I don't think anyone would argue if the OP just said "this is a great phone for a camera and I would give it a 9/10 for camera phones", right?
But when we mix in hyperbole "compared to point-and-shoot cameras ..." it starts to lose credibility a bit. I'm not sure what the real argument is here. It seems to be a very good camera phone, but you just can't compare it to a dedicated camera obviously, so why try?
I don't think anyone would argue if the OP just said "this is a great phone for a camera and I would give it a 9/10 for camera phones", right?
But when we mix in hyperbole "compared to point-and-shoot cameras ..." it starts to lose credibility a bit. I'm not sure what the real argument is here. It seems to be a very good camera phone, but you just can't compare it to a dedicated camera obviously, so why try?
I just can't take people comparing it to a stand alone camera. The quality isn't even close. I've taken probably 500 pictures with the X so far and its just a camera phone. I accept what it is, but don't accept people claiming it is more than it is.
Eleven years ago I saw much better pics than that from other cameras. You can't use your camera as a benchmark for quality as they differed as much between models back then as they do today.
Ok well why don't you post a few shots you've taken with your X? I'm sure many of us would love to see them. Or just take a few random pics and post them?
Don S
Android Enthusiast
<sigh> Really? Still more about this? It's a camera phone everyone .. holy .
Relax, I heard you the first time. This wasn't even addressed to you.
I've found myself replacing my point and shoot camera with the phone camera. It's as much a convenience factor as it is the fact that the quality is good enough for what I need. But then again, I am not blowing up my pictures to poster size to hang or displaying them in museums.
Only thing I want from this camera is the on screen shutter button like the D2 which I hope comes with the froyo update. I know Vignette, which I have, has this ability but I still like the stock camera app.
Only thing I want from this camera is the on screen shutter button like the D2 which I hope comes with the froyo update. I know Vignette, which I have, has this ability but I still like the stock camera app.