Is the Droid X camera really this bad?

[Aridon]

The camera isn't the deal breaker for me but it is sad that they obviously didn't learn anything from the original droid.

What bugs me the most is the locked boot loader. That is a huge deal breaker to me and I'm sure many of the developers of the original droid will be hesitant to jump on this or any other motorola device that is locked down. Why screw with it when there are just as nice devices available from other companies that aren't going full retard with locking users out.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Has anybody considered the possibility that Apple might have built in a bunch of secret post-processing when photos are taken and that it's secretly cleaning them up a bunch right after each photo? It's exactly the kind of sneaky, manipulative underhanded thing Apple would do.

I'm not saying they're doing it; just saying, it wouldn't surprise me if they were. Apple does crap like this and it's part of why I refuse to buy any product of theirs.

 

[dadarkside]

i am not a professional when it comes to judging pictures but compared to the iphone4, the droid x pictures did not look that good.

i hope that it is was the settings used and not a mechanical issue.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Anybody find it interesting that the first link's pics (flickr) have virtually all of the EXIF data stripped from the images, and the second link has the Droid X pics taken at ISO 100 whereas the iPhone's pics are taken at ISO 80? Those with camera knowledge know this is suspicious. The higher the ISO, the lower the quality; and stripping the EXIF data off of images...ummmm.....only reason I can think of for that is to hide what settings the pics were taken at. (for those that don't know, EXIF data = the data that images have on their properties that tell you what settings the camera was set to when the photo was taken, the make/model of the photo, etc.)

The 3rd link in this thread has no photos on there right now.

Does anyone have another link for a photo comparison? I'd like to find HONEST comparisons. I'm not saying the Droid X's camera is as good as the iPhone 4's, but thus far the evidence against the X is circumspect at best.

 

[Thevaristy]

Great find on the EXIF! I didnt even think to look. I certainly wouldnt put it past them to fudge the results. I dont think there should be much difference between iso 80, and 100 however.

 

[RolandDeschain]

It's literally a 20% difference on how much light the lens is letting in. Think about if we were talking about the processor; 800MHz compared to 1GHz. I'd say it's considerable. Not "OMG HUGE", but certainly more than a passing footnote, you might say.

 

[Thevaristy]

80 and 100 are standard iso settings. Many cameras start with 80 or 100 being the lowest.

 

[Jaxidian]

384MHz and 512MHz CPUs are standard CPUs. Many phones come with both of those processors.

 

[Thevaristy]

384MHz and 512MHz CPUs are standard CPUs. Many phones come with both of those processors.

Lol. Wut?

 

[Jaxidian]

I was just saying, simply because two things used are standard options, it doesn't make the two equal or even approximately equal.

 

[Thevaristy]

That analogy doesnt quite work in this case.
What I am saying is that if the camera looks that bad at iso 100, then the camera is garbage.

 

[darreno1]

Looks like the Droid X's camera lens need to be cleaned. I've seen tons of pics taken with the Droid with obviously dirty lenses and these look the same way. Could be wrong though. Also, I will take anything these sites post with a grain of salt. We don't know how many times they took each pic to make them look the way they do nor whether they made the necessary adjustments. Only after the 15th will we all really know (imo).

 

[darreno1]

Great find on the EXIF! I didnt even think to look. I certainly wouldnt put it past them to fudge the results. I dont think there should be much difference between iso 80, and 100 however.

Well if they are willing to go so far as to strip the info, what else are they willing to do?

 

[Jaxidian]

That analogy doesnt quite work in this case.
What I am saying is that if the camera looks that bad at iso 100, then the camera is garbage.

All in all, I don't think we can compare the pictures. I agree, if that was the only variable at play here, you're right. However, there are probably 25 other variables, some of which are more significant than the ISO level. BUT, that difference in ISO level is significant and is worth mentioning as an important variable. Unfortunately, it's one of the few ones that we can nail down.

 

[pilot25]

Is this really a shocker considering the camera on the Droid? Let's face it, Motorola leaves a lot to be desired in this area.

+1. What is Moto's deal with not being able to put out a decent camera? Those BGR pics are pretty telling that there is no improvement from the Droid to the X for photo quality.