What's new
DroidForums.net | Android Forum & News

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Droid camera review - WIN

I agree, I think the photos from my Droid are fine for a cell phone camera. I don't expect the same exposure as I would get from one of my Canons. But they are prefectly fine.
 
For a camera of 5 freaking mega pixels compared to the other 3.** mega pixel cameras, the droid should stand out a bit more. I think the droid takes OK cell phone pictures, but I hope they actually give us some better camera software. It's OK though. It is just a cell phone camera, but ours has a moving lens! WTF!!!!!
 
For a camera of 5 freaking mega pixels compared to the other 3.** mega pixel cameras, the droid should stand out a bit more. I think the droid takes OK cell phone pictures, but I hope they actually give us some better camera software. It's OK though. It is just a cell phone camera, but ours has a moving lens! WTF!!!!!

Mega pixels have nothing to do with picture quality, only resolution.
 
I agree, I think the photos from my Droid are fine for a cell phone camera. I don't expect the same exposure as I would get from one of my Canons. But they are prefectly fine.

Agreed. However, many of the complaints about the camera can be fixed with better software as evidenced by people using some of the 3rd party camera apps. That's part of what I like about Android, if you don't like the stock app, there's a good possibility someone else has written something better.
 
For a camera of 5 freaking mega pixels compared to the other 3.** mega pixel cameras, the droid should stand out a bit more. I think the droid takes OK cell phone pictures, but I hope they actually give us some better camera software. It's OK though. It is just a cell phone camera, but ours has a moving lens! WTF!!!!!

Mega pixels have nothing to do with picture quality, only resolution.
Brilliant Sherlock, but that DOES tie into picture resolution, which has a DIRECT effect on quality. Are you real? J/K
 
i dont even know if its the best on some of those shots... :(
Good honest eye, the droid advantage is that it can post larger pictures because of the 5.0 mega pixels "2560 by 1920" or "8 by 10". The droid wins on that alone, something that article doesn't explain. A 3.0 mega pixel camera is capable of "2048 by 1536" or a "5 by 7" picture. If all the pictures were blown up to the native resolution of the droid, the winner would be the droid by a mile. But people sometimes forget we consumers are more aware than they give us credit.
 
For a camera of 5 freaking mega pixels compared to the other 3.** mega pixel cameras, the droid should stand out a bit more. I think the droid takes OK cell phone pictures, but I hope they actually give us some better camera software. It's OK though. It is just a cell phone camera, but ours has a moving lens! WTF!!!!!

Mega pixels have nothing to do with picture quality, only resolution.
Brilliant Sherlock, but that DOES tie into picture resolution, which has a DIRECT effect on quality. Are you real? J/K
I don't understand why you felt like it should "stand out more" if it was so obvious that MP have little to do with picture quality.
 
i don't necessarily agree with this review. in comparison to some of the other photos, the droid's colors look pale and a little washed out. in the review, they seem to like this and believe the other photos' contrast isn't as good. that's strange to me. one thing they got right was the droid does usually have better sharpness. the color and contrast usually needs editing, though.

don't get me wrong, it's a good review for the simple fact for the attention of detail they gave with all of the photos. their selection of the 'best' photo however, is a little off in in some of the tests. i'm looking at some of the other photos and thinking, "they liked the droid's better?" maybe i just like my pictures to look a little different.
 
Mega pixels have nothing to do with picture quality, only resolution.
Brilliant Sherlock, but that DOES tie into picture resolution, which has a DIRECT effect on quality. Are you real? J/K
I don't understand why you felt like it should "stand out more" if it was so obvious that MP have little to do with picture quality.

Pixels are the little individual squares that make up a digital photo--each with its own color and brightness. A megapixel is equal to one million pixels. The more pixels there are in a square inch, the higher the resolution of the photo. A 1 MP camera is capable of a maximum of one million pixels per square inch. A 2MP camera can capture two million pixels per square inch... and so on.

The size of the photo you can print is most closely related to the MP setting on your camera. (Some cameras refer to the megapixel setting as "resolution.") The more megapixels you capture when you shoot a picture, the bigger the print you can make without getting that "blocky" look.
s.gif

It's a good idea to have your camera set at a much higher MP setting than you think you need. For instance, even if you are a person who always prints 4" x 6" photos, you might shoot a picture with a detail you especially love. If your camera is set for more than the minimum number of megapixels necessary for a 4" x 6", you can crop and enlarge the photo to make a new photo of the detail without noticing any loss of quality in your print.
s.gif

Does that teach you a little bit buddy?

Understanding picture quality settings
Pixel is shorthand for "picture element." It is the smallest part of a digital camera's sensor. The word "mega" means "million." So megapixel means the picture is made up of one million pixels, or picture elements.

The size of a digital camera's sensor, the part that records the image, is expressed in megapixels. The greater the number of megapixels, the more information this sensor can capture and the more an image can be enlarged.

Bottom line, The more MP's the more information the camera can capture. That directly affects quality. If you are the type that thinks a thumbnail and a movie theater screen sized picture are the same quality, then that explains the naivety.

Do some research before hand, then making statements like "mega-pixels have nothing do do with quality" won't slip out he he....j/k But do research the subject...I got the information that I posted from Kodak and HP.






:icon_ banana:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top