Anonymous, 17 Jul 2017I'm slightly surprised to see the results here .. IMO; Great Dynamic Range and Extremely Low N... moreumm no, detail is more important. you can tweak whatever you want after taking the shot, as well as noise reduction
I'm slightly surprised to see the results here .. IMO; Great Dynamic Range and Extremely Low Noise Levels are utmost important factors for a Great Photo (considering all light conditions - Harsh Light/Good Light/Low Light/Almost No Light etc.) ..
After this, I consider importance of Details and slightly over-saturated colors (but not Punchy or Non-Realistic colors) based on Realistic Color Reproduction characteristics ..
In my opinion, dynamic range and deep contrast (dark shadows, bright highlights without loss of detail in either), coupled with a little over-saturated colors (personal preference) is far more important in landscape and architecture photography than realistic colors and level of detail + level of noise. Detail is very important if you do a lot of zooming into final picture and a ton of cropping, but if you don't do either, you'll be fine with mediocre levels of detail. Realistic colors are often way too dull and washed out, making pictures quite boring (unless you're taking a classic portrait in a studio). Noise levels are important mostly when you're zooming and cropping a lot (grain noise) or do a lot of night-time photos or photos in very bad lighting conditions, under these conditions noise easily becomes visible even without zooming. If most of your images are taken during daytime, it doesn't matter much.
I reached these conclusions after using two cameraphone flagships for the last 4 years. A high contrast, wide dynamic range image with punchy colors (not toxic punchy, just slightly more saturated) - combination of these factors will give a more interesting picture on average than a dull and boring overly detailed realistically colored image with low noise. In my personal opinion.
And I would love to see disqus instead of this comment system.
anonymous 3, 17 Jul 2017but if you are ugly how are you going to get a nice picture!!!!You mean you need the AR or beauty effects? Man, records is a moment that for memories, it is good bad ugly handsome or not, that isn't the full meaning for life.
i had the opportunity to get in my hands the P10 Plus 6GB of Ram 128GB storage... and i own an XZ, i compared front cameras VS rear cameras , and to be honest without any biasing... XZ has better and sharper details.. the image quality is true to life more as well... i don't know why but the P10 Plus both cameras F & R seemed so yellowish and it doesn't really looks as good as it supposed to be in such flagship, so the color accuracy in pictures is not well calibrated... but what impressed me the most is how blazing fast the fingerprint scanner when unlocking the phone... it feels like there is no lock set on the homescreen... it's crazily FAST.... and leaves the XZ fingerprint scanner speed way behind....
build quality is good. not that bad, and not the best, and not the finest...
but it has a lot of features that i didn't have the time to continue exploring it....
so i think huawei are doing pretty well and they'are a good rivals to the other companies in the smartphones market.
Details is most important, following by noise reduction and image reality. Some noise reduction already wipe all the reality and also increase the contract to hide the failure.
Huawei p10 might be the overall package along with htc u11, true colors, good dynamic range, low noise, good low light pics and with good saturation.
Details and low noise are both very important, because a high-res camera capturing a ton of noise is just useless
Seamus22, 16 Jul 2017For me, The low noise, true to life colours and wide dynamic range are crucial to make the pho... moreSo... You will never like Samsung rear cam or iphone front cam.
Both have warmer yellowish colors..
I7+ selfies make people look tanned..
There is a HUGE niche of people who want a good phone with a large sensor. I am emphasizing good, because pretty much all large sensor camera phones that came out over the years were sacrificing on the other things. Now, imagine a flagship Android smartphone with a sensor not as large, but approaching that of the 1020, so it can still remain relatively small with a slight camera bump, all a larger battery, and with all the other progresses in camera processing that happened over the years. I would cherish it for years, knowing I can take much better photos than other flagship phones will for years to come, just like was the case with the 808 or 1020. The 808 came out when phone cameras were still taking potato photos, yet even today after all those years it is respectable in so many ways, the magic of a larger sensor.
Large sensor is also the only thing that can easily solve the problem of low noise + high details.
Seamus22, 16 Jul 2017For me, The low noise, true to life colours and wide dynamic range are crucial to make the pho... moreI agree, though i prefer detail since detail can be cram in downscale image(making images look sharper) , for noise, it will be faded away when the image is downscaled
For me, The low noise, true to life colours and wide dynamic range are crucial to make the photos excellent when it comes to smartphone department. I think the great detail is not that important since camera phone is mostly used in social media. Also, processing is quite important because it will make the photos look balanced eventhough the details is not enough. My opinions only.
Sony has found a way to keep high res while making pixels much bigger..
No giant sensor required..
But you have to wait IFA 2018. Sensor only for Xperia phones...
And imx400 will probably be used for XA next year...
I own and have used the Nokia N8, which in my opinion still holds certain advantages in the camera department even when compared to contemporary cameraphones such as the galaxy s7.
I don't use the N8 anymore because it sucks in everything else except the camera but I wish I could somehow "transplant" its camera module and camera software to the galaxy s7 and just replace its f2.8 lens by something more modern around f1.8.
There is no denying that the larger sensor area allows for a more organic look, higher dynamic range and less noise, as long as all other technological aspects are kept constant.
Interestingly, I find that the 1/1.7" sensor of Nokia N8 still produces better images than the much smaller 1/2.5" sensor of the s7, despite its sensor tech is relatively outdated.
While modern smartphones can partially make up fir their tiny sensors by combining multiple exposures or even images from two camera modules, they still cannot overcome the physical limitations of small sensor size.
Results aren't surprising. It shows that visitors of gsmarena are mixed; some are enthusiasts and others just regular public.
Enthusiasts: want a low-noise camera with realistic colour reproduction and wide dynamic range. They take photos carefully by using various settings, angles, lighting and setting up a shot... but they will use the Auto function for a quick snap. They're free to add filters to alter photos afterwards, and know that social media formats compresses the photos anyway. They might use alternative sites to host their photos, and would probably resort to a DSLR and desktop Imaging Programs for important photographs.
Public: want a high-detail camera with great contrast and punchy colours. They just want bragging rights on internet forums about their purchase decisions. They use niche circumstances to prove their camera's superiority, despite the fact they rarely take advantage of those specifications. They don't take much time to plan their shots, so taking multiple photos and picking out the best ones are their key to success. Heavy compression is their friend, as it doesn't detract much quality from their shots compared to enthusiasts, and helps level the field; further reinforcing of their purchase decision even if it was a bad one.