So my Nokia Lumia 900 is here. I'm not happy

[jd914]

If you bought this phone only for the camera then you did yourself a great disservice.

exactly! People don't seem to do thier research before buying their device. Its not news that the Lumia 900 camera is not the brst. We that know, knew this way before we purchased our device. Those who didn't write threads abot this problem and complain as to why the camera isn't that great. I personally wish the camera was better but it's not a deal breaker by any means. To the OP: next time do your homework, you'll be less disappointed.

 

[theefman]

exactly! People don't seem to do thier research before buying their device. Its not news that the Lumia 900 camera is not the brst. We that know, knew this way before we purchased our device. Those who didn't write threads abot this problem and complain as to why the camera isn't that great. I personally wish the camera was better but it's not a deal breaker by any means. To the OP: next time do your homework, you'll be less disappointed.

Sorry, but there is nothing wrong with expecting a company that touts its camera prowess to actually deliver on that promise. One of the main reasons Nokia was so welcomed as a WP device maker was the quality of their cameras, a feature they themselves talk up. This would not turn me away from the device but if the camera is bad, in isolation and more importantly among its peers as well then it's a legitimate issue for some and not something they should accept if they choose not to, prior research or not. And I am interested to know how anyone could know the camera would not be up to par prior to its release as recent as last Friday to preorder customers to use this info in their buying decision.

 

[eastbayrae]

Sorry, but there is nothing wrong with expecting a company that touts its camera prowess to actually deliver on that promise. One of the main reasons Nokia was so welcomed as a WP device maker was the quality of their cameras, a feature they themselves talk up. This would not turn me away from the device but if the camera is bad, in isolation and more importantly among its peers as well then it's a legitimate issue for some and not something they should accept if they choose not to, prior research or not. And I am interested to know how anyone could know the camera would not be up to par prior to its release as recent as last Friday to preorder customers to use this info in their buying decision.

There is numerous pre-release reviews of that camera, err phone, and it's faults. Can you show me where Nokia stated the Lumia series has class beating cameras? If you want a great camera buy the Titan II and deal with the crappy screen or the Nokia PureView. It's all in what you're prepared to bleed for. I would rather have the Nokia quality over the half-assed attempt that is the Titan II. That phone is an incremental upgrade, over the Titan, at best. Add to the fact it is twice the price of the L900. I don't see you're getting twice the value versus the 900.

Judging buy what I see most people posting on facebook, most cell cameras are rubbish anyway. My friend has an iPhone 4s and she posts pics all day long that look like utter garbage shot on an 5 mega-pixel camera.

 

[sting7k]

Yes the camera is pretty weak. Nokia needs to move to the BSI sensors like everyone else is using now. IMO my iPhone 4 takes better photos and videos. However it doesn't bother me as I use my nicer dedicated digicam anyway.

 

[wasonamit]

have you guys seen the lumia 800 post your pictures forum. It takes much better pics with the same hardware ?

 

[tekhna]

You have to look at these smartphone cameras for what they are. I can count on one hand all the pics I have shot with my HD7. The quality in any light is horrid at best.

There are smartphone cameras on many Android phones and the iPhone (and some WP7 phones!) that are fully functionally, high-quality cameras capable of taking excellent photos in good light, and pretty acceptable ones in low light. It's rank apologism to try to suggest that smartphone cameras haven't gotten frankly excellent.

 

[eric12341]

There is numerous pre-release reviews of that camera, err phone, and it's faults. Can you show me where Nokia stated the Lumia series has class beating cameras? If you want a great camera buy the Titan II and deal with the crappy screen or the Nokia PureView. It's all in what you're prepared to bleed for. I would rather have the Nokia quality over the half-assed attempt that is the Titan II. That phone is an incremental upgrade, over the Titan, at best. Add to the fact it is twice the price of the L900. I don't see you're getting twice the value versus the 900.

Judging buy what I see most people posting on facebook, most cell cameras are rubbish anyway. My friend has an iPhone 4s and she posts pics all day long that look like utter garbage shot on an 5 mega-pixel camera.

sorry but the screen on the titan 2 is not crappy ,nor is it half assed. It's a better device than the 900 in my opinion based on the SRS enhancements alone.

 

[Jazmac]

If you bought this phone only for the camera then you did yourself a great disservice.

A couple things here.
First, I think I know a few things about what I'm talking about and whatever it is you're describing has nothing to do with me. In case you are in need of the truth, I bought this phone in particular for a number of reasons, the camera lens being among them.
I'm a hunter. At least I was at one time. The scopes I used on my rifles are made by Carl Zeiss. Some of the best optics for scopes. This phone was sold based on the lens made by Carl Zeiss. How in the blazes was I to expect Nokia to destroy this lens? Now, after this side show, do you have anything that might help me out of this funk I'm in or are you here to promote yourself?

 

[Jazmac]

exactly! People don't seem to do thier research before buying their device. Its not news that the Lumia 900 camera is not the brst. We that know, knew this way before we purchased our device. Those who didn't write threads abot this problem and complain as to why the camera isn't that great. I personally wish the camera was better but it's not a deal breaker by any means. To the OP: next time do your homework, you'll be less disappointed.

Show me articles where this camera did not take great photos. I need dated articles prior to ANY blogger review on the subject of the Nokia 900 Carl Zeiss lens. If you cannot do that, thank you for your OPINION of what homework you assume I did not do.

 

[cba191]

I don't have my 900 yet, but I'm wondering if it's a software issue with the camera. I'm hoping that they will tweak the camera a little bit in the very near future.

 

[davela72]

OK, so 2 posts I see from you *****ing about this phone, take the damn thing back and get something else. We know now you're not happy, no need to hog up the board with multiple threads that go on about the same topics.

 

[oldpueblo]

I've found doing auto-fix actually makes just about all the pictures better. In my opinion anyway, they're already good enough for me.

 

[eastbayrae]

A couple things here.
First, I think I know a few things about what I'm talking about and whatever it is you're describing has nothing to do with me. In case you are in need of the truth, I bought this phone in particular for a number of reasons, the camera lens being among them.
I'm a hunter. At least I was at one time. The scopes I used on my rifles are made by Carl Zeiss. Some of the best optics for scopes. This phone was sold based on the lens made by Carl Zeiss. How in the blazes was I to expect Nokia to destroy this lens? Now, after this side show, do you have anything that might help me out of this funk I'm in or are you here to promote yourself?

Return it and get your money back. Problem solved. There is an massive difference between the optics on a weapon scope that costs hundreds of dollars AND is sold for the optics alone and an $.01 phone. It's best to vote with your wallet. Making complaints here isn't going to fix your camera problems.

 

[ddaniel87]

The camera is about as good as an iphone 3g. it in no way comes close to measuring up to the iphone 4s or the galaxy s2. it is slow, grainy, etc. even the file size is compressed to the hilt resembling at best a 5 MP camera. I feel it unfair to say this is a camera phone so dont expect much better. My iphone 4s is a phone that takes pictures at 8MP, but they are roughly twice as good. I really wanted this nokia to live up to the hype. now i feel its a lemon when you couple the camera issues with the data, with the laggy third party apps, etc. On paper and in most reviews it seems amazing, but now i understand why some gave it poor reviews at release.

 

[eastbayrae]

Regardless of who made the lens if the electronics driving the lens are low grade the image will be as well. If Nokia feels it's enough of a problem they will fix it(see battery issues, camera on the 800, etc.). It's likely fixed with an firmware upgrade. The first SSD I bought was a dog and with one firmware upgrade it was killin' the competition.

 

[JPDVM2014]

Just my $.02, but I have noticed that if there is anything bright in a photo, everything will look washed out. I took a picture of my desk and if I focus on my black keyboard, everything is washed out/yellow. If I focus on the light blue post-it that is just slightly reflecting the lights, the colors are perfect. I would post the two shots if I could, but I can't get to them on my work computer.

 

[mud314]

aside from my desire to clean your desk...

I see the difference, everything looks super illuminated, like the ISO is way off or something...Take it to an AT&T store, I am a big fan of taking things back if they don't work how I want them to.

Our OCD is our own worst enemy, huh? The cleaning of the desk. Been there done that.

 

[Adiliyo]

i also agree that is has to do with the light metering of the sensor as well as ISO settings, as tweaking them will produce great results almost every time.

while a BIS would be really nice, i think the actual hardware for this camera is good, it's just firmware and software tweaking that is necessary on nokia's part that is needed.

 

[joemd60]

That's why they sell digital cameras, I never expect quality pics from a phone.

 

[vantil]

Looking at some sample pictures I've seen, it seems like the default camera settings are poorly set.
Being a borderline professional photographer and a bit of a camera nerd I would say:
For certain it has nothing to do with the lens.
Unlikely it has anything to do with the sensor.
Problems are with the default camera settings and post processing settings.
I would be suprised if Nokia did not improve the settings with a simple patch.

It seems that most common problem is simply over exposure.
Setting -0,5 or 1 EV would help.
Some nights shots that I'ave seen are really noisy (grainy) and very cold (blue) in color.
Setting ISO low helps with the noise. (f 2,2 lens and steady hand and your pictures should be sharp enough most cases)

Poor white balance is the the weak point of most digital cameras. Manual settings or photoshop helps.

OP's picture is poor for judging camera performance.
Lighting that random produces random photos with any camera.

Edit.
Some of pictures are looking really good though, so I'm not exactly sure if there is any real problem.