The dedicated back button helps too. If Android were designed like iOS, the large screen would be nearly impossible to use.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Android, iOS, WP8 phone debate thread
- Thread starter Scuba Steve
- Start date
- Status
The dedicated back button helps too. If Android were designed like iOS, the large screen would be nearly impossible to use.
It's not about who wins, no one doubts that the Lumia is the best. It's just sort of dumb comparison if you're not showing each phone at it's best. I'm not sure why they chose to do it auto when clearly that's not the best way to shoot at night.
The Faceless Master
Member
Dreams-Visions
Member
Why? I don't follow. Are their phones underperforming in battery life? What I've read suggests they're offering battery life at least equivalent to most of their current competitors and almost 1/2 the capacity.
indeed.
Nicktendo86
Member
Wow, the lumina looks amazing.
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
And that's with the Lumia set at ISO 800.
Bonkers.
Nokia really needs to do the smart thing and start licensing that shit to GoPro and the like.
Souldriver
Member
I found the SGS3 ridiculously big when I got to play around with it. And the fact that the 920 is even bigger (specifically: thicker) is a huge no-no in my book.
I know that the industry is moving towards bigger screens, and most of phone-gaf is okay with it, but I'm not. If you think about how the iPhone 4 is two years old, I'm sure they could make a phone with the same screen size and some better tech, that's still thinner, shorter and smaller than iPhone 4. That's what I want.... but Nokia's take on it... with Windows phone.
And I'll never see it realized I'm affraid. 
95% of most people will shoot at auto
The Faceless Master
Member
by that logic, why even test the Lumia at all instead of the One S or some LG phone 95% of people are more likely to take a photo with one of them than the 920.
the people who actually care about the low light photos would use night mode on a device that has it.
They will more than likely use their flash when it's dark also.
Not really. Battery life on both the Xperia T and iPhone 5 is only average. It could and should have been closer to class leading. Fact that Apple used a similar capacity battery is just cheap imo. As consumers we should expect more. 2000mAh in an iPhone 5 could have blown the competition away, or at least competed with the best of them.
The Faceless Master
Member
"Smoked by Lumia Camera"
isn't the battery in the 5 better than the 4S?
by 0.7%
Anton Sugar
Member
That's...not a bad idea.
Really speaks more to the fact that other phones need modes like this because auto does not do its job well enough. Cameras really should be "smarter" like the 920.
flash can burn your pic and only works for close ups
Dreams-Visions
Member
You really, really dislike everything not running Android, don't you?
I've rarely seen you do anything but shit on WP and iPhones. Not a problem...I just dislike having to disregard whole sections of otherwise good posters commentaries because they flip on "asshole fanboy" mode. You seem to do it... a lot. Today is no exception. It turns people off. If you can't be even remotely objective, that's fine...but people notice and the shit is pretty lame.
I'm really floored by the fact that the Android phones in question don't automatically engage night mode when the sensor detects darkness beyond a given threshold.
Logically, if the article was using night mode, would that not inform the readers of the article of the existence or merits of said night mode?
Yeap. Apple are just too generous to it's consumers. A whole 10mAh extra! Wow!
Dreams-Visions
Member
how does the battery life ont eh Xperia T and i5 compare to the SGS3 and similar Android phones with large batteries?
I'm curious now. Are those phones with such larger batteries seeing hours more battery life? If not, what's the fucking point of this side-conversation? If the smaller battery is allowing the Xperia and iPhone to hit their battery life targets and keep them competitive with other flagship phones...what's the problem? If the Xperia and iPhone 5 can provide equivalent battery life while making their devices thinner and lighter, it sounds like they hit the goals they prioritized no? So who are you to say that's not good enough?
It doesn't say anything about the camera quality, though. It seems like the only reason the iPhone 5 could come anywhere close to the Lumias quality is by jacking up the ISO to 3,200. Now you cannot compare the iPhone's camera to the one of the GS3 because the ISO is set to 800 on that device.
The only information you get out of this test is that Samsung locks the ISO to 800 and shutter speed 1/17th sec. even if the cell phone notices that it's a low light situation, that Lumia takes very good pics at an 1/3rd of a second shutter speed and ISO800, and that the iPhone jacks up the ISO all the way.
Samsung should definitely update their camera app because it appears as though their camera is worse than the one in the iPhone when Apple actually only works with ridiculously high ISO values. Nokia is its own league entirely and I hope everyone follows their lead.
The 4S didn't have LTE.
The Faceless Master
Member
i've said great things about WP and iOS, it's just that people who like them a lot only seem to remember the things i disagree with them on, and i also say a bad things about Android devices and the OS itself too.
Dreams-Visions
Member
It doesn't say anything about the camera quality, though. It seems like the only reason the iPhone 5 could come anywhere close to the Lumias quality is by jacking up the ISO to 3,200. Now you cannot compare the iPhone's camera to the one of the GS3 because the ISO is set to 800 on that device.
The only information you get out of this test is that Samsung locks the ISO to 800 and shutter speed 1/17th sec. even if the cell phone notices that it's a low light situation, that Lumia takes very good pics at an 1/3rd of a second shutter speed and ISO800, and that the iPhone jacks up the ISO all the way.
Samsung should definitely update their camera app because it appears as though their camera is worse than the one in the iPhone when Apple actually only works with ridiculously high ISO values. Nokia is its own league entirely and I hope everyone follows their lead.
honestly, in some ways that makes it seem like even more of a fair comparison. "with all settings at their default, this is what these cameras do under xyz lighting conditions."
It's Samsung's fault if their software isn't smart enough to automatically switch the ISO in an automatic shooting situation. They don't get a pass for, "well if you go into the menu you might be able to get better." Maybe. And maybe your average user won't know that or think to do that when trying to capture a fast picture.
I don't understand why enabling better night pictures needs to be a feature that has to be enabled separately on a modern smartphone.
Now with that said, I would like to see shots from all of these cameras at their varying ISO levels...but with the iPhone and Lumina auto-adjusting, I presume that won't be easy to do.
sheeeeeeeyit.
it's not the disagreeing, it's the way you go about doing it. the smartass, unwarranted snipes at WP's market share in an attempt to discredit its photo quality results, for example. that was fucking bullshit. Why you'd think you can offer up comments like that unsolicited, on a daily basis, and expect people to simply not notice or not remember is...I think you should respect your fellow posters a bit more than that. We're not dumb, though you may think we are.
Yes they are seeing a few hours more. Even talk time is better. Apple are just being stingey as per usual. Maximum profits and all. I'm still shocked they didn't up the battery capacity by a good margin, especially given the increased screen size and LTE. I get that their battery optimisation is very good, but that's no excuse to hold back on battery capacity itself either, especially not when everyone else is providing more bang for buck in that respect.
This is surprising as well. They would look like the iPhone 5 pics at that point, lots of noise, more likelihood of blur, etc.
yeah check the full pic of the boat. From the thumbnail it seems that the iphone one is close to the one of the lumia. But full size you see that its full of noise that its awful and for me personally unusable.
Why is having it automatically set the ISO inherently better? The camera has modes for a variety of use cases like action or party or other stuff I can't remember. I don't think it's asking too much for the user to decide what kind of shot they want to take beforehand. Without using the appropriate mode, this comparison is pretty bad at scrutinizing how the cameras stack up to each other.
All that happens (with the Android counterpart, eg the S3) is that the pictures are darker. But on the plus side they are less noisy and more detailed than the high iso (iPhone 5) counterpart. Personally I prefer the option to choose a low light mode, but even better than that, imo all these phones should offer full manual controls, including aperture and shutter.
Dreams-Visions
Member
Either way, I would liked to have seen it now that we know they don't automatically bump up the ISO. Scary part is, they already looked horrible at whatever ISO these:
were shot at. if those shots from the One X and SGS3 are at 800 ISO...well...the fact that those phones can do a higher ISO really doesn't even matter because they'll look too horrible to even matter. I tried to download the photos to inspect them for myself but the download link doesn't work anymore.
If anyone else can post the ISO and shutter speeds of the above photo series, we'd appreciate it.
The Faceless Master
Member
the justification for using auto mode was based on what percentage of people would use auto mode. my reply used the same logic.
But what percentage of people reading unreleased phone camera reviews on a tech site would keep auto mode on and scratch their heads at the dark pictures?
Which doesn't really matter to most people. If you're going to justify a comparison on the basis of "what 95% of people do" when they take a picture at night, the flash should be on. Because that's what people do.
No one's saying that'd be any better of a comparison, though. Just that it doesn't really wash as justification.
raises hand
I just want to press the camera button and get a good picture, I don't want to mess with any settings.
We know about it but I bet most of us still use auto mode for most things.... I know I do. I don't want to constantly be switching back and forth between modes just to take good pictures.... the phone should do that for me.
Camera phones are all about convenience and swapping modes takes away from that convenience.
Again: It says absolutely nothing at all about the camera's quality.
If you do a comparison between the quality then you should be able to have them all set to the same ISO value and the same shutter speed. If you don't do that or cannot reproduce that then you cannot compare the quality of the sensor.
There are ways and situations where you camera will be tricked into the wrong settings. One example: Take your cell phone camera or your DSLR, point it at the sun and have a friend stand between you and the sun, Take a photo and the face should be completely underexposed. Try it 100 times and you'll not be recommended to use the flash even though it'd be the right decision at that moment.
That's the main reason why I'll always prefer manual shooting to automatic.
Nokia's image stabilisation allows them to set the shutter speed to 1/3rd of a second, which would be problematic with the other devices if you have shaky hands. That's why I find that big about how she "held each device perfectly still" pretty funny as the only device that could benefit from that is Nokia's phone. The other phones had shutter speeds of 1/15th and 1/17th of a second.
I agree with you that Samsung should do something about that but I'll still insist that this test says very little about the camera quality of the three other phones.
nhlducks35
Member
Wouldn't the battery have to become bigger on the iPhone, thus making the phone bigger?
The Faceless Master
Member
some people just don't want a real comparison, even if they're sure they'll still win. all they want is "Smoked by Lumia Camera" and nothing more. nothing substantial. nothing real. they would rather an artificial blowout win than a real win that's closer and legit.
Correct, it just shows that image stabilization is a very nice thing to have.
Whoa, 1/3, 1/15, and 1/17 is a heck of a long time for an exposure by a hand held device. Was that what the picture data said they were shot at? Anything slower than 1/125 and my shake affects it without IS, and I think 1/3 would even be affected with IS.
Damon Bennet
Member
sorry for being a grammar nazi, but "rather-as-a-verb" is as bad as "could care less" or "their/there/they're"
Anton Sugar
Member
If they put a disclaimer of "these were shot without modifying any phone settings", would that be better?
According to some here, even if all phones utilized "Night Mode", it wouldn't be the same, because each phone's Night Mode could still use a different shutter speed or ISO. What, exactly, is a "real comparison"?
Well I think if they had come to it with the idea of "how am I going to use this camera to take the best representative photo" and gone with that, it would make sense. To me, I know what the S3 camera can do. In this comparison it would have been the baseline to which I can compare it's results with the cameras I do not have. Now if that baseline is flawed and makes no sense compared to how I or anyone with brains would use it, then this whole comparison kind of falls apart. I mean I have no doubt that the 920 is far superior to the S3 camera, but this comparison doesn't tell me at all how much better it truly is.
Dreams-Visions
Member
IMO, there are 2 real comparisons:
1.) What we've been given. All cameras shooting at low light with no settings changed. So we see how the camera behaves if you don't try to find extra menu settings or some shit.
2.) A photo shoot in the same low-levels of light with all night-modes engaged if necessary.
3.) A set with flashes engaged.
That's really all you can do or ask for. You can't directly control the ISO or shutter speed in any of these devices...the software just takes a best guess. As such, it's silly to try to compare ISO for ISO, as was my original thought.
yes, it does.
according to earlier posts,
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=42571793&postcount=1344
both the 920 and SGS3 shot at the same ISO, yet the 920 shot is worlds better. all a night mode would do is raise the ISO level, increasing the brightness but introducing even more noise than is already present.
The Faceless Master
Member
not even in the same sport.
i also don't capitalize.
well, if you can directly control the ISO, take the best shot that allows for, if not, use the most appropriate mode.
They do have that disclaimer, don't they?
Well, they could have tried the night mode on all phones. They could also have explained that their “we held all the devices still” doesn't mean jack for three of the four devices used, they could have gone into details as to why the pictures are better and what you have to give up for those improvements (mainly iPhone 5's high ISO that destroys all the details), they could have tried not holding the device still to see if Nokia's image stabilization works as well as we hope it does (and thus allows us shutter speeds of 1/3rd of a second without blurring the image) and so on.
I'd have apprechiated something along the lines of this regardless of how they tested their devices:
How does the iPhone achieve this picture?
High ISO coupled with 1/15th of a second shutter. Shaky hands can still take a photo like that. The iPhone will automatically change the ISO values based on what it thinks is necessary. The shutter speed isn't changed at all. (I don't know about night mode so whatever).
How does the GS3 achieve this picture?
Low ISO and 1/17th of a second shutter. Shaky hands can still take a photo. When using automatic mode, the camera will be locked to ISO 800 even if that's not enough to get a good picture. Using night mode... bla bla
Why are the Lumia pictures so good?
Lumia's camera chose ISO800, which is enough due to there being image stabilization, which allows the shutter to be open for much longer compared to the other phones (even if you have slightly shaky hands). The low(er) iso value means little grain, lots of details, though leaving the shutter open for a longer time also means that, unless the stabilization is absolutely amazing, the pictures can turn out blurry.
Shutter speed is different. 1/17th of a sec vs 1/3rd of a sec. Huge difference. Night mode changes the shutter speed on the GS3 as well..
No it doesn't. I would never have shot something in those conditions without night mode on. So that's still pretty useless.
Look the verge already did this comparison and included both non night mode shots and night mode shots. It wasn't that hard and is the most helpful. I don't see why it couldn't or shouldn't have been done the same way here.
FallingEdge
Member
920 AT&T exclusive for now?
I really want it for T-Mobile....
I really want it for T-Mobile....
Souless_PJ
Banned
Is this phone comparison thread or camera wars?
Yes, the 920 can take a good picture.
When you're friends are asking you to play the latest game or showing you how to extend the functionally of their phone with a cool app you'll be able to take a nice picture in the dark.
Yes, the 920 can take a good picture.
When you're friends are asking you to play the latest game or showing you how to extend the functionally of their phone with a cool app you'll be able to take a nice picture in the dark.
- Status