General Pixel 6 Pro Photo Showcase

Search This thread

MartinN6

Senior Member
Jul 6, 2015
657
380
Kassel
Google Pixel 6 Pro
I also took another nice picture of Orion
PXL_20220106_190447649.NIGHT_2.jpg
 

MrBelter

Senior Member
Apr 10, 2011
1,488
484
Pretty good for the light pollution circumstances. I can definitely see his belt and the 4 corner stars, and the nebula 👍
I got a better (or maybe worse depending on your point of view) picture of the Nebula using digital zoom. Light pollution and the movement of the stars becomes a major problem then though because i don't suppose Astrophotography is designed to work using digital zoom
 

Attachments

  • PXL_20220105_203726269.NIGHT.jpg
    PXL_20220105_203726269.NIGHT.jpg
    541.4 KB · Views: 98
  • Like
Reactions: Lughnasadh

quark-lepton

Senior Member
Dec 13, 2015
111
41
I got a better (or maybe worse depending on your point of view) picture of the Nebula using digital zoom. Light pollution and the movement of the stars becomes a major problem then though because i don't suppose Astrophotography is designed to work using digital zoom
This one wasn't captured by the main camera. It used the periscope camera (see the exif data). The periscope camera captures more light per time from distant objects than the main camera because focal length / f- number = effective diameter is larger. It also offers more pixels per angle, therefore it can make more stars per angle visible than the main camera. Google still chooses 16s per frame for the periscope camera because a shorter exposure time per frame would require more frames and more frames would lead to more read noise.

In order to cause no star trails with the periscope camera, the exposure time per frame can't be more than 4 seconds. But this would require 4 times as many frames for the same total exposure time. This leads to more read noise. It is theoretically possible to compensate the higher amount of read noise by choosing a longer total exposure time, but this would require a total exposure time of 4 to 16 minutes (it depends on how much read noise the sensor produces). Though, I think it would be still better, if Google chose a shorter exposure time per frame for the periscope camera, it could be also a compromise like 8s per frame and total exposure time of 6 minutes. It would be nice, if Google let us choose the exposure time per frame and the total exposure time and gave us the option to save single frame periscope dng files with 3rd party apps.

Alternatively, one can remove the star trails by downsampling.
 
Last edited:

MrBelter

Senior Member
Apr 10, 2011
1,488
484
This one wasn't captured by the main camera. It used the periscope camera (see the exif data). The periscope camera captures more light per time from distant objects than the main camera because focal length / f- number = effective diameter is larger. It also offers more pixels per angle, therefore it can make more stars per angle visible than the main camera. Google still chooses 16s per frame for the periscope camera because a shorter exposure time per frame would require more frames and more frames would lead to more read noise.

In order to cause no star trails with the periscope camera, the exposure time per frame can't be more than 4 seconds. But this would require 4 times as many frames for the same total exposure time. This leads to more read noise. It is theoretically possible to compensate the higher amount of read noise by choosing a longer total exposure time, but this would require a total exposure time of 4 to 16 minutes (it depends on how much read noise the sensor produces). Though, I think it would be still better, if Google chose a shorter exposure time per frame for the periscope camera, it could be also a compromise like 8s per frame and total exposure time of 6 minutes. It would be nice, if Google let us choose the exposure time per frame and the total exposure time and gave us the option to save single frame periscope dng files with 3rd party apps.

Alternatively, one can remove the star trails by downsampling.
That all sounds great but given the software is set to automatically stack for the focal length and aperture of the main lens the software is going to struggle to do much with anything out of those parameters, to get owt is remarable really from a fully automatic camera. I doubt very much Google will accommodate the zoom (or the wide) lenses at any point or allow any form of manual control in the future.

You're never going to have the flexibility of manual stacking with a DSLR with a fast ultra wide and the help of Photopills on this one.
 

quark-lepton

Senior Member
Dec 13, 2015
111
41
That all sounds great but given the software is set to automatically stack for the focal length and aperture of the main lens the software is going to struggle to do much with anything out of those parameters, to get owt is remarable really from a fully automatic camera. I doubt very much Google will accommodate the zoom (or the wide) lenses at any point or allow any form of manual control in the future.

You're never going to have the flexibility of manual stacking with a DSLR with a fast ultra wide and the help of Photopills on this one.
It would be really no problem for Google to give us astrophotography settings. For example, the Pixel 3a astrophotography mode combines 4s exposures instead of 16s. I also tried a modded Google camera app with the Pixel 3a (camera px), the modded app let me choose the exposure time per frame as well as the total exposure time (though the modded app didn't work so well because it chose a lower analog gain than the stock camera app, this leads to more read noise).
I also tried the Pixel 3a astrophotography mode with a 750mm telescope + 20mm eyepiece. Apart from the 4s star trails, it worked!! Night Sight (1s exposure time per frame, but only 6 frames) worked, too.
 
Last edited:

Dragon Kumera

Senior Member
Mar 14, 2019
323
105
Here are some pictures I took with my pixel 6 pro. Clarity is pretty good.
 

Attachments

  • PXL_20220113_162826491.jpg
    PXL_20220113_162826491.jpg
    2.8 MB · Views: 41
  • PXL_20220111_184652711.jpg
    PXL_20220111_184652711.jpg
    1.9 MB · Views: 43
  • PXL_20220111_233836145.jpg
    PXL_20220111_233836145.jpg
    2.4 MB · Views: 41
  • PXL_20220103_203717924.jpg
    PXL_20220103_203717924.jpg
    1.8 MB · Views: 40
  • PXL_20211226_171439129.jpg
    PXL_20211226_171439129.jpg
    1.5 MB · Views: 40
  • Like
Reactions: MrBelter

Shipoftheline

Senior Member
Oct 6, 2015
857
346
Salford
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Uppermill on cloudy day
 

Attachments

  • PXL_20220123_110830667~2.jpg
    PXL_20220123_110830667~2.jpg
    4.5 MB · Views: 28
  • PXL_20220123_111348766.jpg
    PXL_20220123_111348766.jpg
    1.9 MB · Views: 29
  • PXL_20220123_105819229.jpg
    PXL_20220123_105819229.jpg
    4.6 MB · Views: 27
  • PXL_20220123_110153282.jpg
    PXL_20220123_110153282.jpg
    1.6 MB · Views: 26
  • PXL_20220123_110445502.jpg
    PXL_20220123_110445502.jpg
    4 MB · Views: 23
  • PXL_20220123_110539220.jpg
    PXL_20220123_110539220.jpg
    3.6 MB · Views: 23
  • PXL_20220123_110723227.jpg
    PXL_20220123_110723227.jpg
    2.8 MB · Views: 22
  • PXL_20220123_111511242.MOTION-01.COVER.jpg
    PXL_20220123_111511242.MOTION-01.COVER.jpg
    2.5 MB · Views: 20
  • PXL_20220123_111054985.jpg
    PXL_20220123_111054985.jpg
    4.5 MB · Views: 20
  • PXL_20220123_113426064.jpg
    PXL_20220123_113426064.jpg
    4.4 MB · Views: 19
  • PXL_20220123_124608971.MOTION-01.COVER.jpg
    PXL_20220123_124608971.MOTION-01.COVER.jpg
    3.5 MB · Views: 20
  • PXL_20220123_111755167.jpg
    PXL_20220123_111755167.jpg
    3.2 MB · Views: 19
  • PXL_20220123_111823081.jpg
    PXL_20220123_111823081.jpg
    3 MB · Views: 19
  • PXL_20220123_112012234.jpg
    PXL_20220123_112012234.jpg
    3.3 MB · Views: 20
  • PXL_20220123_112714335.jpg
    PXL_20220123_112714335.jpg
    4.5 MB · Views: 19
  • PXL_20220123_114040273.jpg
    PXL_20220123_114040273.jpg
    4.4 MB · Views: 22
Last edited:

MrBelter

Senior Member
Apr 10, 2011
1,488
484
Very light polluted where i live but even so Astophotography mode picked out that many stars you can hardly make out Orion, you can clearly see the Orion Nebula though.
Turns out you can be stumbling through a mates garden drunk, see Orion and just take a photo and it comes out better than using a tripod and astrophotography mode :LOL:
 

Attachments

  • PXL_20220129_235612144.NIGHT.jpg
    PXL_20220129_235612144.NIGHT.jpg
    644 KB · Views: 37
D

Deleted member 739586

Guest
Taken with the P6P main lens during the golden hour before sunset. Background bokeh is real, no post processing was done other than raising shadows in the second pic by 10 with Google Photos.

This camera is nothing short of fantastic! The contrast of detail-rich motive and blurred background blows me away.
 

Attachments

  • PXL_20220205_154739053.MOTION-02.ORIGINAL.jpg
    PXL_20220205_154739053.MOTION-02.ORIGINAL.jpg
    2.2 MB · Views: 40
  • PXL_20220205_154808285.MOTION-02.ORIGINAL.jpg
    PXL_20220205_154808285.MOTION-02.ORIGINAL.jpg
    2.7 MB · Views: 39
Last edited by a moderator:

Top Liked Posts