- 04-10-2012, 10:43 PM #1
Not that I don't dig the phone but the pictures this phone shoots are worse than a store throwaway camera.
Same light conditions. Exhibit B:
Anyone other than me see a difference? If you look at the photos, you can determine which pic came from which camera. Then you see why I'm not happy. I know for data issues the phone is being swapped but what about those of us with a crappy Zeiss lens?
Anyone know of this issue and its resolution?
- 04-11-2012, 12:20 AM #3
The camera is my only grip with the 900. However, I do love the video it takes and I think Macro shot are better than it's low light shots or shots in the conditions of which you took for this picture. These seems to be more noise in the pictures and details aren't sharp...but in macro mode it seems better for some reason (to me at least, I can't speak for everyone). On normal pictures it does seem to be an issue with the ISO or light detection.
- 04-11-2012, 01:08 AM #8
It may be my hopeless optimism with this phone, but the photos are framed differently. I'm wondering if the extra lighting in the top right combined with the bright monitor in the top left and the paper directly behind the phone threw it.
- 04-11-2012, 01:10 AM #9
There's something definately up with how auto mode takes photos. I'm not sure if they did anything to tweak it to make up for the f2.2 apeture. I've been assuming that's what causes this blooming in well lit places, and I've seen it happen on mine a couple times. Sometimes I get really nice photos, other times it's a miss. Over all, it's been a hit-or-miss with the camera for me. Manually controlling it makes it a hit almost all the time, but that defeats the purpose of being able to yank out a Windows Phone to take a quick snap.
- 04-11-2012, 01:39 AM #10
Both are Windows phones. The first shot was taken with the Titan I and the second was taken with the Nokia Lumia 900. I didn't spell out which phone did what to make it more "objective." (I pushed all that stuff into the camera frame to show depth as best I could.) But thanks for the offer. :)
Anyway, tomorrow I take it out for a spin then after work, a visit to the AT&T store. I'll update the thread in case this happens with someone else.
- 04-11-2012, 02:01 AM #13
I have no complaints about the camera. It is better than the camera on my previous smartphone, the BlackBerry 9700.
I am an amateur photographer. When I want extremely high-quality pictures, I use a real camera, not any smartphone.
- 04-11-2012, 03:55 AM #15
I think people are upset because Nokia have made it a point to brag about how great their camera phones are and this one isn't apart of that mold
Oh and to the person that said the HD7 camera was bad, I would not have agreed until I got my MyTouch. My goodness, all my photos from the HD7 were SOOOO washed out in comparison
04-11-2012, 04:45 AM #17
- 39 Posts
04-11-2012, 06:24 AM #20
- 57 Posts
Backside-Illuminated Sensor on the Titan - Regular Sensor on the Lumia 900.
There's your difference.
The BSI Sensor has a higher light sensitivity, thus less noise in bad light conditions as the ISO doesn't have to be cranked up as much. Plus they use really small sensors (bad low-light performance), that's why a BSI sensor comes in handy in a phone with such a small sensor because it compensates it a little.
BSI>Regular - in bad light conditions.
But, the sensor has nothing to do with the lens. And the overall photo quality is not exclusively tied to the sensor, altough a BSI sensor in general tends to take "better looking" pictures than a camera with a regular sensor, it doesn't mean that the pictures of the camera with the BSI will necessarily always be better than that of the camera with the regular sensor. The lens also plays a part, especially when you get out of your dark room and start taking pictures outside in regular and sunny daylight, of buildings and people and scenery etc. Not saying that the Lumia will then necessarily be better, but that your Titan/BSI-Sensored-Camera will not necessarily take better pictures of these things just because its pictures in a dark room are less noisy or better. ;)
Go out and test it, stand at the same place and take pictures of the same things.
- 04-11-2012, 06:34 AM #21
- 04-11-2012, 07:59 AM #22
- 04-11-2012, 08:18 AM #23
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.
- 04-11-2012, 09:08 AM #24
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.