Dying for an Android phone with a REALLY good camera (think 808...)

[Silenus]

I find myself looking at new phones that come out in much the way I (and many others) look at new laptops. Oh shinny new laptop! Ivy bridge CPU goodness? Check. Plenty of ram? Check. SSD storgae options? Check. High res, high quality IPS display? ....AH no, same old crappy 1366 TN garbage. Sigh.

But with phones it's the camera. New fancy CPU, Fast GPU's, high res displays..... but the same old super crappy, slow cameras. Granted some have a bit better software and faster response, burst modes ect. But none of that makes up for the image quality which is never impressive to me.

That was until I saw what Nokia did with he 808 Pure View. THAT is what I want...but I need an Android phone. I hear Nokia may bring their Pure View goodness over to new WP7/8 phones...and thats great. But I use lots of google apps and really just need the integration I get with Android phones.

Anyone else hoping the manufactures start pushing for better camera quality/optics in phones?

 

[Red Storm]

Camera is pretty low on the list of things I look at on phones. As long as it has an acceptable one I'm good.

Honestly if it matters that much too you, wouldn't you be better off buying a dedicated camera?

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Honestly, no. I don't really care about having a super camera in my phone. If I was interested in digital photography, I'd want a real digital camera with the option of various lens sizes and physical zoom. A camera on a mobile phone is fine for taking a quick snapshot for a Facebook status update, but it shouldn't be your principal reason for selecting a phone when a dedicated digital camera will do it better for a fraction of the cost.

 

[Silenus]

Yes...it does matter to me. But it's because I DO already camera...a dedicated (DSLR) camera and lenses. I use it often...but not always. Like many photographers with a DSLR there are often casual moments where we want to use a small compact camera instead of taking out your DSLR...but we still want decent performance/quality from the camera. So instead of having a DSLR + compact camera + crappy phone camera...I'd much prefer having a at least a competent cell camera, to replace the need for compact, and then the DSLR when I want to use that. I'd rather have TWO cameras, then THREE.

There is also the argument of "the best camera is the one you have with you." In other if I wasn't carrying any other dedicated camera I am left with the phone in my pocket. Having it at least as good as the 808 would make me feels worlds better about using it when my DSLR isn't around. Any camera can be used creatively and I'd use my phone for more than just quick and dirty low res web use if the camera hardware/software was competent.

 

[xSauronx]

I've got to say, the camera and software on the HTC desire I used to have was fantastic for a mobile phone. The auto-flash, exposure and focus worked surprisingly well, even in low light situations.

I wish sometimes that the motorola electrify I have had such a good camera. This one is just ok....but that htc one was excellent.

I'd look at what phones your provider offers and then find reviews for them all. Decent reviews should give you a camera overview and some snapshots to look at.

 

[zerogear]

One X, SGS2, SGS3... there is a couple of others that are pretty good

 

[soccerballtux]

Take a look at HTC, anand's review of them loves the camera IIRC. They have some super-special chip DSP'ing the camera images that makes it better or something.

 

[Silenus]

Take a look at HTC, anand's review of them loves the camera IIRC. They have some super-special chip DSP'ing the camera images that makes it better or something.

Yes, I have been noticing there are definite improvements being made in some phones, whether it's on the software/processing side or the hardware side. I guess it's just not progressing as fast as I'd like. That is also why the Nokia phone is such a big jump in comparison. Granted they spent a lot on that and it certainly is a primary focus of the phone..but everyone has certain things that are important to them. For me it's the camera/imaging side of things.

That said there is huge room for improvement and innovation in mobile device cameras. It's a huge market and it is still growing, unlike most compact camera and DSLR markets which are either flat or shrinking (with the exception of the newer small mirrorless camera market which is growing...but at the expense of compact below, and low end DSLR above). I think we will see big jumps in phone/tablet camera tech in the coming years.

 

[zerocool84]

One X, SGS2, SGS3... there is a couple of others that are pretty good

Yup on the Android side, these are the cream of the crop.

 

[Deeko]

Honestly if it matters that much too you, wouldn't you be better off buying a dedicated camera?

This opinion is oft expressed when this issue is raised, but it doesn't make sense to me. We don't accept compromises on the other things a smartphone can do - why the camera? It is expected to replace your PMP - we don't accept a sub par experience there. It is your new mobile PDA - that needs to be better than any dedicated device used to be. So why is when it comes to the camera, people say "well, if you care about the camera, get a standalone camera"?

Smartphones are supposed to be the end-all, be-all portable all-in-one device. So why accept such sub-standard quality when it comes to the camera? I, for one, commend companies like Nokia, and to a lesser extent Apple and HTC, for attempting to push the envelope here.

The main problem isn't that the average consumer doesn't want a better camera - its that they don't know any better. They are trained to think high megapixels = better. They think "Oh wow, an 8 MP camera! That's even better than the 4 MP Canon I bought for $400 a few years ago! Awesome!" What they don't realize is that megapixel rating is largely meaningless when paired with a crappy, small sensor/lens.

 

[PhoenixEnigma]

I've been looking for this for ages, too. A cell phone camera, to me, isn't worth existing at all if it's not good enough to replace a compact camera, but very few phone companies seem to share this opinion.

Running a hotspot on my N8 for an Android device has been my stopgap solution, though it's not all that pretty (though tablet+smartphone has upsides, too). I might grab the 808, or a WP version of it - at double the N8's speed, web browsing should be okay, the camera is great, and I'll have my tablet for all the stuff a browser doesn't.

Still, more options would be nice. Why can't, say, Canon make a nice camera with a passable Android phone bolted to it?

 

[Silenus]

This opinion is oft expressed when this issue is raised, but it doesn't make sense to me. We don't accept compromises on the other things a smartphone can do - why the camera? It is expected to replace your PMP - we don't accept a sub par experience there. It is your new mobile PDA - that needs to be better than any dedicated device used to be. So why is when it comes to the camera, people say "well, if you care about the camera, get a standalone camera"?

Smartphones are supposed to be the end-all, be-all portable all-in-one device. So why accept such sub-standard quality when it comes to the camera? I, for one, commend companies like Nokia, and to a lesser extent Apple and HTC, for attempting to push the envelope here.

The main problem isn't that the average consumer doesn't want a better camera - its that they don't know any better. They are trained to think high megapixels = better. They think "Oh wow, an 8 MP camera! That's even better than the 4 MP Canon I bought for $400 a few years ago! Awesome!" What they don't realize is that megapixel rating is largely meaningless when paired with a crappy, small sensor/lens.

This. Exactly.

 

[Anubis]

? It is expected to replace your PMP - we don't accept a sub par experience there. It is .

we sure do on space, no phone has enough space to serve as a proper PMP

 

[arod]

You might wait to see what happens with wp8.... its google integration is pretty good in 7.5 and if they make it better with 8 it might be good enough to work with your google services.

and yes pureview is amazing tech.... my next phone will have one.

 

[Silenus]

I will definitely be looking closely at new WP8 devices. It is something I would certainly consider depending on how they deal with various Google services/apps.

 

[ChAoTiCpInOy]

http://www.marco.org/2012/07/01/the-camera-you-have-with-you

 

[Silenus]

http://www.marco.org/2012/07/01/the-camera-you-have-with-you

Indeed. As with everything it's the end use that really matters. If you will only ever look at your photos as tiny compressed web images on a small screen....there gets to be almost no difference between a decent phone cam and a high end DSLR. But as the above blog writer found out...as soon as you need to look at it bigger and use the resolution most phones (and even many compact cameras) fall flat on there faces. This is a problem I think because although many people may never plan on doing more than instagram with their photos...you just never know when you might want more out of them. Whether that is a high res desktop wallpaper or need for a nice print to give to friends and family...to simply viewing on a TV or computer monitor. The quality difference becomes very apparent at these sizes.

I had this same kind of shock just recently, but actually with a relatively modern compact camera. My D40 just recently broke down and is not worth fixing. However, my wife and I inherited a Panasonic DMC-ZS10 compact for free so I thought.."ok Great, at least I have something to shoot with! It's only a year old so it should be pretty decent." It wasn't.

Now folks....this is a modern compact. Released only a year ago, it is 14MP, shoots 1080 video, has built in GPS, HDMI out...ect. Sounds great. But guess what? It's image quality is abysmal compared to my almost 5 year old, 3 full generations old 6MP Nikon D40!! The D40 is so hugely better it is not even funny. My first look at images on my computer made me think I had set something wrong in the camera and I actually went though checking all the quality settings and making sure I wasn't at high ISO by accident! But nothing was off. Not having used any compacts in quite some time I was simply taken aback at how much better even an old DSLR is.

Honestly...many of the Nokia 808 images I've seen on Flickr look better than the images from ZS10.

 

[Munky]

I'm in the same boat. I don't care how many cores a phone has or how many gigs of RAM, if the camera sux, it's a deal breaker to me. After seeing the kind of images the Nokia N8 or the 808 PV produce, every other phone cam seems like a half-assed effort.

 

[TuxDave]

I liked what I saw from the 808 but the only thing is from the pictures it looks like it required quite a bit of bulge in the phone for the lens. I feel picture quality is a very important spec on a phone but.... this is really pushing the lines of form vs function.

 

[Deeko]

I liked what I saw from the 808 but the only thing is from the pictures it looks like it required quite a bit of bulge in the phone for the lens. I feel picture quality is a very important spec on a phone but.... this is really pushing the lines of form vs function.

Well, its under 14mm - just slightly thicker than the Droid 4, and still under 2mm thicker than the Lumia 800. If they paired it with a keyboard - say, something like the Nokia E7:

they could have the killer camera in a more natural (albeit still a little chunky) size. Or maybe stick a Razr Maxx-size battery in there. Either way, you're right, the thickness wouldn't be for everyone - but I think it would have a market.

 

[zCypher]

The Galaxy S3 has a really good camera and the shutter speed is awesome. I have the Galaxy Note, and the camera quality is pretty close to the S3 but the shutter speed is despicable, just atrocious. The Gnex does ok with its 5mp and quick shutter speed.

You aren't going to see impressive phone cameras on low-end or even mid-range phones. Look at the handful of high end smartphones and you will start to see respectable quality and performance. A friend has the OneX, I was not really blown away by it (but I had S2 then Note so I'm already kind of spoiled), but it did look great and I see nothing but great reviews about the HTC all over the web.

My recommendation given that you're already a camera guy is the HTC One X or the Samsung Galaxy S3. They will give you a nice Android experience + great camera. Ever since the S2 I had, I never bother with separate camera.

Some example pics:
http://img594.imageshack.us/img594/433/20120425180543.jpg
http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/6650/20120511141636.jpg

I'm not really that steady when taking pics, I've seen much nicer pics taken with these phones. Just gives you an idea...

 

[TuxDave]

Well, its under 14mm - just slightly thicker than the Droid 4, and still under 2mm thicker than the Lumia 800. If they paired it with a keyboard - say, something like the Nokia E7:

they could have the killer camera in a more natural (albeit still a little chunky) size. Or maybe stick a Razr Maxx-size battery in there. Either way, you're right, the thickness wouldn't be for everyone - but I think it would have a market.

At thin side or fat side?

 

[AstroManLuca]

The Galaxy S3 has a really good camera and the shutter speed is awesome. I have the Galaxy Note, and the camera quality is pretty close to the S3 but the shutter speed is despicable, just atrocious. The Gnex does ok with its 5mp and quick shutter speed.

You aren't going to see impressive phone cameras on low-end or even mid-range phones. Look at the handful of high end smartphones and you will start to see respectable quality and performance. A friend has the OneX, I was not really blown away by it (but I had S2 then Note so I'm already kind of spoiled), but it did look great and I see nothing but great reviews about the HTC all over the web.

My recommendation given that you're already a camera guy is the HTC One X or the Samsung Galaxy S3. They will give you a nice Android experience + great camera. Ever since the S2 I had, I never bother with separate camera.

Some example pics:
http://img594.imageshack.us/img594/433/20120425180543.jpg
http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/6650/20120511141636.jpg

I'm not really that steady when taking pics, I've seen much nicer pics taken with these phones. Just gives you an idea...

Those pictures look pretty nice when scaled down to fit a computer screen, but when you view them at native resolution they are all blotchy.

As much as some photography pros lament the image quality of cheap point and shoot digital cameras, even those are worlds better than any cell phone camera. I have a cheap Canon, don't even remember the model number, bought it maybe 3-4 years ago. The pictures it takes are far sharper and look better than anything I can get out of my phone.

That said, I still take most of my pictures with my phone since I always have it with me. I break out the Canon when I know I'm going to be photographing something. I don't take many pictures anyway.

 

[Deeko]

Those pictures look pretty nice when scaled down to fit a computer screen, but when you view them at native resolution they are all blotchy.

As much as some photography pros lament the image quality of cheap point and shoot digital cameras, even those are worlds better than any cell phone camera. I have a cheap Canon, don't even remember the model number, bought it maybe 3-4 years ago. The pictures it takes are far sharper and look better than anything I can get out of my phone.

That said, I still take most of my pictures with my phone since I always have it with me. I break out the Canon when I know I'm going to be photographing something. I don't take many pictures anyway.

Especially in indoor / low light. The combination of a small sensor and a crappy LED flash leads to just horrible low light pictures from a smartphone. I honestly think a $10 disposable camera with a flash will take a better indoor night picture than most high end smartphones.

 

[arod]

Especially in indoor / low light. The combination of a small sensor and a crappy LED flash leads to just horrible low light pictures from a smartphone. I honestly think a $10 disposable camera with a flash will take a picture indoor night picture than most high end smartphones.

Exactly.... low light especially is the fatal flaw of camera phones (and having a digital zoom work nearly as well as optical zoom).

For comparison the pureview.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PrOP6ZXJjg
another (in particular look at the light/shade contrast and how well pureview handles it)... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAwdZ96pQ_M
the digital zoom.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THQK_fbipoc