Isn't HTC misleading the consumer by using the term 4 Ultrapixel but in fact it 4 Megapixel? or to be more correct shouldn't it be market as 4 Megapixel F2.0?
Frankly speaking, yes, they are. Why they're doing it is understandable, but the decision to use the term pixel is ill-advised.
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk HD
Head of an Android household: HTC One X+ International 64GB, HTC One X International 32GB, two hopelessly unstable Asus Eee Pad Transformers (32GB and 16GB, each with keyboard docks; remember -- friends don't let friends buy Asus), Samsung Galaxy Ace, and a Fuhu Nabi 2.
The proof of the quality will obviously come, but prelim reviews state that it is not as good as the Nokia.
You must have saw a biased review bud, that camera in HDR mode puts nokia to shame, and in low light the camera is even more stunning. Here is a sight I found with some HTC ONE Shots on it, pretty impressive.
Isn't HTC misleading the consumer by using the term 4 Ultrapixel but in fact it 4 Megapixel? or to be more correct shouldn't it be market as 4 Megapixel F2.0?
Well, it's a marketing term, clearly; what they're trying to do is to get across the fact that one of their megapixels isn't the same as one of someone else's megapixels.
It's not just that the aperture is larger (although it is) it's also that the physical pixel on the sensor is larger. Compared to a 13MP sensor, each pixel is more than three times the area, which means it collects more light. Combined with the larger aperture, that means the picture is much less noisy at the same light level - or achieves the same level of noise with much less light.
Well, it's a marketing term, clearly; what they're trying to do is to get across the fact that one of their megapixels isn't the same as one of someone else's megapixels.
Which is a bit disingenuous. Their megapixels are just the same as anybody else's megapixels. They're not making their own sensors and there's no unique tech behind it; they''re just buying an off-the-shelf sensor.
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk HD
Head of an Android household: HTC One X+ International 64GB, HTC One X International 32GB, two hopelessly unstable Asus Eee Pad Transformers (32GB and 16GB, each with keyboard docks; remember -- friends don't let friends buy Asus), Samsung Galaxy Ace, and a Fuhu Nabi 2.
Which is a bit disingenuous. Their megapixels are just the same as anybody else's megapixels. They're not making their own sensors and there's no unique tech behind it; they''re just buying an off-the-shelf sensor.
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk HD
It's not a off the shelf sensor. I agree with them that it is indeed a special sensor they are using. The only issue with the technology they implemented is yes it is unique and is on the right path but is not enough to compete with the 2013 cameras.
Want to put some money on that? What expertise does HTC have in sensor design and fabbing?
They are almost certainly buying it in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riyal
I agree with them that it is indeed a special sensor they are using. The only issue with the technology they implemented is yes it is unique and is on the right path but is not enough to compete with the 2013 cameras.
Please, enlighten us. What is "special" or "unique"?
It's not the first 2um pixel. We've seen those before.
It's not the first 2um pixel in a phone. We've seen those before, too. (And larger.)
It's not a newly-developed technology. (It's a standard backside-illuminated CMOS sensor, just with fewer and larger pixels than are *currently* common.)
It is, essentially, the same technology everybody else is using, but with the pixel sizes and pixel counts everybody was using a few years ago.
That's not unique, or even close to it. Unusual or different, yes. Better, arguably it could be for some important metrics; it will without question be worse for other important metrics. (It's a trade-off, like most things in life.) But it's not unique.
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk HD
Head of an Android household: HTC One X+ International 64GB, HTC One X International 32GB, two hopelessly unstable Asus Eee Pad Transformers (32GB and 16GB, each with keyboard docks; remember -- friends don't let friends buy Asus), Samsung Galaxy Ace, and a Fuhu Nabi 2.
Want to put some money on that? What expertise does HTC have in sensor design and fabbing?
They are almost certainly buying it in.
Please, enlighten us. What is "special" or "unique"?
It's not the first 2um pixel. We've seen those before.
It's not the first 2um pixel in a phone. We've seen those before, too. (And larger.)
It's not a newly-developed technology. (It's a standard backside-illuminated CMOS sensor, just with fewer and larger pixels than are *currently* common.)
It is, essentially, the same technology everybody else is using, but with the pixel sizes and pixel counts everybody was using a few years ago.
That's not unique, or even close to it. Unusual or different, yes. Better, arguably it could be for some important metrics; it will without question be worse for other important metrics. (It's a trade-off, like most things in life.) But it's not unique.
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk HD
Right now I can't prove that I am just basing facts on HTC's statements. And I doubt they would lie we are not living in an age where people are ignorant yet on technology and I am sure HTC would be aware of the ever increasing techy people doing the reviews on blogs. And that is a big let down on their marketing if ever they are telling lies. Hence let's wait for the kernel source to look up what are they really using.
Want to put some money on that? What expertise does HTC have in sensor design and fabbing?
They are almost certainly buying it in.
Please, enlighten us. What is "special" or "unique"?
It's not the first 2um pixel. We've seen those before.
It's not the first 2um pixel in a phone. We've seen those before, too. (And larger.)
It's not a newly-developed technology. (It's a standard backside-illuminated CMOS sensor, just with fewer and larger pixels than are *currently* common.)
It is, essentially, the same technology everybody else is using, but with the pixel sizes and pixel counts everybody was using a few years ago.
That's not unique, or even close to it. Unusual or different, yes. Better, arguably it could be for some important metrics; it will without question be worse for other important metrics. (It's a trade-off, like most things in life.) But it's not unique.
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk HD
I'm not disagreeing but can you give an example of a phone with a similar or larger pixel?
Slithered from my HTC One X+
=========================
AT&T HTC One Running the latest TrickDroid
Help me fill up my thanks meter by hitting thanks
-and for trickdroid too
==================================================
The importance of good and appropriate graphics for your development work is undeniable. Be … more
XDA Developers was founded by developers, for developers. It is now a valuable resource for people who want to make the most of their mobile devices, from customizing the look and feel to adding new functionality. Are you a developer?
Introducing XDA:DevCon – A Conference For Developers By Developers
>
[Q] Ultrapixels
Print
Email
View Profile
View Forum Posts
Re: [Q] Ultrapixels
.gif "United Kingdom - T-Mobile (One2One)")
Follow on Google+
View Facebook page
-and for trickdroid too 
Follow on Twitter
Linear Mode
