The HTC One will have about the same sharpness when it comes to comparing to other cameras, but the big difference is sensitivity and dynamic range.
No, it won't.
In good light, it will have a significantly lower resolution than its rivals. That's because for every two pixels in any given row or column that it can place on a subject, a 13-megapixel rival will place three. (A 13 megapixel phone has 1.54 times the linear resolution, all other things being equal.)
And when you consider that your subject will be three dimensional, not two dimensional, for every 100 pixels the HTC One places on a subject, the 13-megapixel phone will place 237 pixels on the same subject.
So it's utter nonsense to say it will have the same sharpness, unless you believe the 13-megapixel phones cannot resolve more than four megapixels due to their lenses or processing, which clearly isn't true. (They're limited, but nowhere near that limited, in good light.)
The point isn't that it is just as sharp; it isn't, and never could be. The point is that it doesn't NEED to be as sharp, because what we have in current camera phones is way beyond overkill.
You could take a photo from an Xperia Z and print it at 13.76 x 10.32 inches, and you'd STILL have 300 ppi resolution. Based on 20/20 vision, you would need to be closer than twelve inches to be able to distinguish individual pixels. Even with 20/10 vision (that's twice as good as nominal), you *still* couldn't distinguish individual pixels from more than 23 inches away.
How many people do you know who are making prints that big from their camera phones, and viewing them from that close by? And how many do you know who are heavily cropping their camera phone images on a regular basis? Very few, I'd wager.
Which means that the resolution of 13 megapixels that we're at today is completely and utterly insane. We don't need anywhere *near* that much. The HTC One camera has plenty of resolution unless you're a keen photographer, and if you are, you probably shouldn't be taking photos with a phone in the first place.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6777/understanding-camera-optics-smartphone-camera-trends/3
Physics says that we can't resolve pixels that small with the optical system in a smartphone.
No they aren't. They're bigger.Their megapixels are just the same as anybody else's megapixels.
That's not a very fair comparison.Rubbish. There are limits to what you can achieve with a smartphone lens, but they are nowhere near as low as four megapixels.
Want proof? Download this typical eight megapixel smartphone image:
http://connect.dpreview.com/reviews...ii/comparision/daylightstudio_samsungsiii.jpg
Now make a duplicate of that image, and downsample to the 1,520 pixel frame height of the Zoe camera in the HTC One. Now upsample back up to 2,448 pixels. Then compare the image you shrank with the original image.
Assuming that there was no more than four megapixels of data in the original image, there will be no noticeable difference between the two. But in actual fact, there's a pretty significant difference.
That's not a very fair comparison.
It's hardly surprising that if you downscale an image, then scale it back up again, you'll lose detail; but the camera in the HTC One doesn't start with an 8MP image taken from a Galaxy S3 and downscale it, it generates its own 4MP image from scratch, which will have a different dynamic range, different (likely lower) noise, possibly less camera shake (because of the OIS), a different colour balance, different compression artefacts, and so on. It might be slightly fairer if you started with a very high-quality, very high-res photo (taken with a good digital SLR, perhaps) and downscaled it to 8MP in one case and 4MP in the other, remembering to add more simulated noise to the 8MP image...
...but then you have to ask: what level of zoom are you viewing the final image at? The monitor I'm looking at right now has a resolution of 1600x900, for example: to get a sensible view of both pictures, I'll have to downscale both of them to 1600x900. Once you do that (and bear in mind that this means the step of upscaling from 4MP to 8MP is no longer relevant) I think you'll find the difference between the two images is a lot more subtle.
Yes, there have been other phones that have larger pixels, but not very many of them. Someone mentioned the Nokia N900, which I can't at the moment find a pixel size for online; but with the obvious exception of the Nokia 808, I'm not aware of any current phone that has. (Even the highly regarded Nokia N8 was smaller).
That's not a very fair comparison.
It's hardly surprising that if you downscale an image, then scale it back up again, you'll lose detail; but the camera in the HTC One doesn't start with an 8MP image taken from a Galaxy S3 and downscale it, it generates its own 4MP image from scratch, which will have a different dynamic range, different (likely lower) noise, possibly less camera shake (because of the OIS), a different colour balance, different compression artefacts, and so on. It might be slightly fairer if you started with a very high-quality, very high-res photo (taken with a good digital SLR, perhaps) and downscaled it to 8MP in one case and 4MP in the other, remembering to add more simulated noise to the 8MP image...
...but then you have to ask: what level of zoom are you viewing the final image at? The monitor I'm looking at right now has a resolution of 1600x900, for example: to get a sensible view of both pictures, I'll have to downscale both of them to 1600x900. Once you do that (and bear in mind that this means the step of upscaling from 4MP to 8MP is no longer relevant) I think you'll find the difference between the two images is a lot more subtle.
And apart from that the photo is littered with Jpeg artefacts .. look at the lettering at the edge of the b/w definition card on the original. If you start downsizing and upsizing jpeg to jpeg you'll end up with artificial pixellation caused by the compression algorithm too. I do enough work in Photoshop to make me totally avoid jpeg unlss there is no viable alternative. Post a raw or at least a tiff and lets start resizing that instead.
Do you know how I know you didn't read my post or pay any real attention to the image?
It wasn't a JPEG. It was a GIF. And I stated why it was a gif. And I provided a link to the original image, to make the comparison yourself if you want. Plus directions on how to do it.
And yes, the original image is a JPEG, but so is every camera phone image on the market. No camera phone offers uncompressed output, be it raw, tiff, or other.
... and it was the original photograph to which I was referring ... It's not a good photo to begin with. Progressive reprocessing will only serve to increase the artefacts.
Your point about resolving > 4 Mpxls is valid ... however, given about 2um pixel size, it would only be possible to resolve about 4 Mpxls on the typical CCD in a phone camera, i.e. a max. size 1/3 inch detector. Of course you can drive up the pixel count by making the pixels smaller ... but then were back to the detector excitation point ...
The main point that both you and I make, and agree upon, is that it's all about compromise. This is the crunch for the entire argument, and you summary of it is very clear for anyone to read. I'd guess that at least 95% of the buying public are not tekkies, or photographers. They whip out their cameras at weddings and parties and snap away. I'm betting that those with an HTC One will actually like the results more than those with an 13+ Mpxl CCD in their phone. They won't be interested in the finer details of the technology, just the fact that they can actually see granny smiling at the other end of the table in the snapshot they took at the poorly lit restaurant last night.
Thanks for taking the time to reply.
... and it was the original photograph to which I was referring ... It's not a good photo to begin with. Progressive reprocessing will only serve to increase the artefacts.
Your point about resolving > 4 Mpxls is valid ... however, given about 2um pixel size, it would only be possible to resolve about 4 Mpxls on the typical CCD in a phone camera, i.e. a max. size 1/3 inch detector. Of course you can drive up the pixel count by making the pixels smaller ... but then were back to the detector excitation point ...
The main point that both you and I make, and agree upon, is that it's all about compromise. This is the crunch for the entire argument, and you summary of it is very clear for anyone to read. I'd guess that at least 95% of the buying public are not tekkies, or photographers. They whip out their cameras at weddings and parties and snap away. I'm betting that those with an HTC One will actually like the results more than those with an 13+ Mpxl CCD in their phone. They won't be interested in the finer details of the technology, just the fact that they can actually see granny smiling at the other end of the table in the snapshot they took at the poorly lit restaurant last night.
Thanks for taking the time to reply.
Not that I disagree with knoxploration it's just radiotrib got the main point of what are the general uses of a phone camera is. And yes he got every point correct. In a real life situation that is indeed most of my main uses of the phone camera. We don't actually use the phone camera to be an artist or whatever photo contest it is. It did get it's name "point and shoot" for a reason. And radiotrib describe it perfectly.
You may look at review at http://asia.cnet.com/htc-one-vs-iphone-5-camera-shootout-62220556.htm
HTC One vs. iPhone 5 camera shootout
IMHO, very good but not outstanding as HTC promised.
Well, how many megapixels do you think you need?HTC marketing is getting ridiculously stupid, and HTC fanboys are following suit. The megapixel race is not a LIE. In bold, because HTc marketing material likes to make it bold. Megapixels is not the only factor in determining image quality, but it is an important one. But HTC wants you to believe it doesn't matter, AT ALL. So damn stupid. If it doesn't matter, then go reduce an image to a 32x32 icon. Beautiful isn't it! Looks exactly the same as the original! So stupid. HTC is just making a compromise between larger pixel sizes and resolution. The images will be worse in outdoor shots since it doesn't have as good a resolution, but indoor and low light shots will look better since it can gather more light. The question is, how much better? So far from what I can tell, the video and picture samples at the HTC event, which is indoors in low light, are not that impressive. It's definitely gonna be worse in bright outdoor use.
It means that the pixel is as huge as dSLR pixel.
This means that the quality of the camera pixel is like dSLR although its lower resolution.
Its like you use 10MP Canon dSLR but crop it in the middle. It is that awesome. Probably the best camera ever in smartfone. Will kill off every competitiors. Nokia Pureview also lose to dSLR camera in HTC ONE.
Well the 4mp nothing at all
Even got 41mp also useless if don't have good camera lens
MP just the image resolution only
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium