yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Galaxy S 4 General] BoneXDA:
Here are two interesting video observations I want to talk about. One is the One strangely losing focus every here and there even during the day, when the phone inevitably moves and optical image stabilization kicks it. There's always a little loss of focus, again check this downloadable sample, also this one, especially in HDR mode. The S4's focus seem to be very solid during the day, download this sample or watch this.

The 2nd observation is that according to this Engadget video, the HTC One cuts down FPS to 20 during the night, dunno if that's always the case, while the S4 seem to stay on 30FPS. Both have some focusing problems in the dark environment, the S4 on panning, the One on panning and when the user starts to move forward with the thing.

If there is a video quality issue with the S4, I don't see it. These samples look fine to me, good level of detail, quick adaptation, cool night visibility and refocusing kept on low. My guess is that some samples were done with software image stabilization turned on, a useless feature that cuts off the sides off the screen and results in some unnecessary stuttering, it needs to be kept OFF, the video quality is perfectly fine without it.
[Galaxy S 4 General] aliveon2legs:
Neither one is definitively better than the other. Both are better in different areas. The One takes better photos in low light, and by low light, I mean much darker than the overcast photo above. Night shots, where you're taking distance photos where the flash won't do much, the One clearly takes very well lit photos, where the GS4 does not. On the other hand, the GS4 clearly takes far superior images during daylight, and distance photos during the day the difference is even greater.

This is an internal battle that I've been fighting for a couple of weeks now. Yesterday I took all of the photos that I have taken in the last 2 years and separated them into 3 categories; those that would have come out better on the One, those that would have come out better on the GS4 and those that it really wouldn't matter.

I was surprised that it came out pretty even. The ones that would have been better on the One were mostly night time social photos; at the pub, camping with friends, etc. The ones that were better on the GS4 were mostly sporting events and vacation photos. I have some pics from high up at Lucus Oil Stadium, the Indy 500 and Assembly Hall (Indiana basketball). The extra detail in those photos would be priceless. Ultimately though, I came to the conclusion that for those photos, I really should have a real camera, anyway. I'm not a guy is going to lug around a real camera all the time, but for sporting events and vacation photos, it would seem like a good idea, regardless. Since I can get the One for $20-30 (Wirefly/Newegg deal plus HTC trade-in), I decided that I would pre-order it and apply the savings towards a new camera. I will have 14 days to change my mind, though, and I'm sure that I will torture myself sufficiently during that time. :)
[Galaxy S 4 General] Unrivalled:
Something to add in the Argument. It is versus Lumia 920 though.

http://www.technobuffalo.com/2013/04/08/htc-one-vs-nokia-lumia-920-camera-comparison/
[Galaxy S 4 General] BarryH_GEG:
Here's a fun one to play with. What if the situation were reversed? Suppose Samsung went with bigger photosites and 4MP and called it S Pixels. And HTC went with an updated 13MP sensor. Would everyone's choice of phone remain the same or would it cause people to reconsider?

Using myself as an example, I'm drawn to the SGS4 because of its larger display, larger removable battery, expandable storage, and all the extra s/w features. My first choice between the cameras would be the 13MP for the detail even though the 4MP does better in certain situations. If the SGS4 had S Pixels I'd still choose it because even though the 4MP camera wouldn't be my first choice I'd rather live with it than give up the other stuff which, to me, is more important.
[Galaxy S 4 General] BoneXDA:
That's exactly what happens to the S4. If low light matters (and I mean VERY LOW LIGHT), the Lumia is still the king.
[Galaxy S 4 General] NZtechfreak:
Similar viewpoint here really, the micro SD expansion is extremely important to me and my use (granted I have solutions, like my SeaGate Wireless plus, but nothing really beats local storage), in a similar vein there are a number of other marginal advantages for the S4 that make it my likely choice either way.

I carry two phones with me nearly all the time, one of which is the Pureview 808, so I can choose to ignore the camera aspect virtually completely should I choose.
[Galaxy S 4 General] gtg465x:
When set to night mode, the One outperforms the Lumia. They probably had it in auto mode. Plus those 920 shots just look blown out and unnatural.

Edit: Yup. They had the One in auto mode.
[Galaxy S 4 General] GTRagnarok:
It's the same distance. The HTC One's photos look further away because it is only 4MP. Its photos are smaller so a 100% zoom will look smaller.
[Galaxy S 4 General] BoneXDA:
It does absolutely NOT, let's not mislead people. It's not possible as the Lumia has a more advanced sensor, larger and wider lens and uses slower shutter speeds cause of the superior OIS, so it captures much more light and processes results better.

Okay, let's see middle of the screen.
[Galaxy S 4 General] gtg465x:
Wrong. Read the low light camera performance section of the HTC One review at Anandtech. When set to night mode, the One can take shots with the same 1/3 s exposure time as the 920 and the results are equal or better. When in auto mode, the One limits exposure time to 1/7 s, so of course its shots won't be as bright as the 920 in that mode.

Quotes from Anandtech for the lazy:

From Phone Arena, which of these shots would you rather take home?

HTC One:

Lumia 920:

And that's with the One in auto mode, not even in night mode. All of the Ones night shots Phone Arena took look better than the 920 to me. The 920 has a strong tendency to overexpose night shots and then everything is blown out and unnatural looking.
[Galaxy S 4 General] barondebxl:
True indeed, folks would have called it another gimmicky feature and say that it only performs well low light.
[Galaxy S 4 General] hung2900:
Nothing to complain about One's photos here. Better than on many other websites.

A little bit out of topic. When I saw the comments of this article, they're so laughable. I have seen something similar to this on other websites.

Nokia fanboys are quite brainwashed. With these toooooo oversaturated photos, they said these're more realistic:laugh:
[Galaxy S 4 General] BoneXDA:
Thx for bringing the Phonearena test up, choosing the worst photo resizing it so we can't judge details.

Of course the Lumia 920 outscores the HTC One 4:1 in votes in the site's blind indoors/low-light test, so does the Galaxy S4, so that should settle this. :good:
[Galaxy S 4 General] gtg465x:
I just pulled the photos at the size they appear on the site. As bad as those 920 images are from an exposure and color balance standpoint, more pixels aren't going to help anyways.

I can't find the test you're referring to, but it's probably irrelevant because Phone Arena never even tested the One in night mode. They left it in auto mode. Regardless, Phone Arena, Anandtech, and Myriam at Engadget all seem to prefer photos taken by the One in low light compared to the 920. That's enough to settle it for me.
[Galaxy S 4 General] BoneXDA:
cool

The Galaxy SIII does as good as the One in that test BTW. Would you say the S3's low-light performance is as good the the One's?
[Galaxy S 4 General] gtg465x:
Here's a better comparison for the Phone Arena images.

HTC One:

Lumia 920 (Overexposed):

Galaxy S III (Way more noise and softness than the One and 920 and poorer color accuracy):

HTC One:

Lumia 920 (Again overexposed, and check the blurriness of the tree in the bottom left, despite having more pixels):
[Galaxy S 4 General] gtg465x:
No it doesn't. In my above post you can see a higher res comparison of the three phones. The S3 does NOT do as well as the One and 920. In my higher res comparison, you can clearly see a lot more noise and softness in the S3 photo, and the color balance is the worst as well.

Look at the reviewers ranking right above the night shot comparisons:
[Galaxy S 4 General] BoneXDA:
As always, the devil lies in the details. The high noise of the One in ANY condition will always be a downside. Look how sharper the Lumia is.

However let's keep this on the Galaxy S4 vs. HTC One level. I just simply pointed out what's evident in the Technobuffalo comparison, that like the One, the S4 also has it's low-light limitations cause of the smaller lens and tighter aperture. All things considered however, night (Lumia 920), low but sufficient lights (tie), average lights (S4) and good light conditions (S4) the Samsung just comes out as the all-around better performer. In the end you must ask how many shots do you do during the night, and how many when at least indoor lights are possible or better. I do 95% of my shots in the latter category. That ugly blurriness even in good One conditions I cannot get over. Otherwise it's mostly good stuff from HTC.

Which one would you rather bring home?
[Galaxy S 4 General] gtg465x:
Of course the 920 produces sharper images in many cases. It's an 8MP camera vs. a 4MP camera. But sharpness is not the only factor in image quality. An extremely sharp photo with poor exposure and poor color balance is still crap. The One may not be as sharp as the 920, but it usually provides better exposure and color balance. How often do most people look at 100% crops anyways? Most people want to see a whole photo, not a tiny, ultra zoomed in portion of it.

And that comparison with the S4 is bogus. The S4 definitely takes way better pictures in decent light, but the One clearly wasn't focused properly in that shot, or that's a cropped portion of an image. I've seen plenty of pictures from the One and it's rare to see one that blurry unless it wasn't focused.
[Galaxy S 4 General] hung2900:
Yes, about the exposure, my Note 2's photos sometimes are so crappy over-exposed (Look OK on phone and crap on PC).

Afraid of the same thing with S4.

Here is one comparison on a Vietnamese website. S4 (I9500 Exynos variant)'s photo is over-exposed
[Galaxy S 4 General] BoneXDA:
There is no focus issue, see some of the branches on the full image on the previous page, they are sharp. The problem is the high noise level the sensor produces which requires high level of noise reduction blurring 99.9% similar color pixels into a pool of mess. The One always suffers from this when details are mostly similar, plus look at the color noise on the clouds. There is no night performance that can compensate the 80% of my usage which is not night.
[Galaxy S 4 General] CLARiiON:
For any photo quality comparison, I would love to have a reference photo. It's weird talking about temperature and white balance when we don't have a proper reference point.

And, IMO both 920 and HO over exposes 'night' images leading to loss of detail.

Will be interesting to check the DxoMark report for HO. They didn't like the 920 much.
[Galaxy S 4 General] BarryH_GEG:
This thread's gotten a bit nuts with everyone going from review site to review site looking for specific pictures and comments that show one phone doing better than another. No one here is going to use their phone to capture pictures in any one setting; it'll be a combination of different scenarios. It could be biased toward more day time pics or night time pics but no one's only going to shoot one or the other. Anandtech's review made a couple of us question its objectivity based on Brian's adoration for the One's camera and dismissal of his own summary of its issues. Did you guys look at the sample's gallery he provided? Some of the pics are really not that good.

http://www.anandtech.com/Gallery/Album/2710

The bottom line is HTC's forsaken detail, 50% less than last year's standard and 69% more than this year's, in the name of improved low light performance and "better pictures." Those two things are far from a slam dunk based on the aggregate of reviews. So the One's camera is certainly decent and actually good for people not concerned about detail. But the SGS4's camera is good too and better in some areas without forsaking detail. So individual reviews aside there's no clear winner and HTC's had more to prove since they are the one that started the whole debate when they went their own way and hyped "UltraPixels" to death. Does anyone here after pages of discussion think this is an entirely true statement?

Richer images in low light. Reduced motion blur. Uncompressed or minimally compressed photos. It turns out you don't need all those megapixels when you have more refined light sensors and smarter technology. HTC is proud to offer customers advanced technology that allows for the most stunning pictures available on today's smartphones.​

If the camera's core to your purchase decision buy what makes you happy. And I hope your camera choice is attached to the phone you really wanted to buy in the first place. I'd still buy the SGS4 for other reasons if it had the One's camera but I wouldn't be happy about it based on the way I typically take pics. I would be happy to have its video performance though. ;)
[Galaxy S 4 General] gtg465x:
Good points. Agreed. I am buying a One despite its mediocre camera performance in decent lighting, not because of it. Having the best, or close to the best, low light performance will be nice, but if I could slap the GS4 camera on the One I would.
[Galaxy S 4 General] jj03:
Is the s4's software final? Just asking..i have read gsm arena's review but couldn't remember if they said it were final or unfinished. Regardless, i will be buying the s4 over the htc one.. the daylight pics the htc one takes, from what i have seen, are quite lacking in detail..
[Galaxy S 4 General] NZtechfreak:
Even if final retail I would expect some reasonably swift updates as there is clearly a video processing issue - I noted in the S4/S3 comparison piece that GSMArena did that the S4 can have video detail as good as the S3 with stabilisation on (although it narrows the FOV even further). I wouldn't expect a great deal of further improvement to the stills camera.
[Galaxy S 4 General] duykhang524:
Even though the One's camera is better at low light the S4 is sure not bad. I would choose the best camera overall with the most features.
[Galaxy S 4 General] Basil3:
Some people are claiming that the new base on the One improves the camera, so will be interesting to see.
[Galaxy S 4 General] BoneXDA:
All pictures are taken with pre-release devices. Both S4 variants feature the Sony IMX135 = Exmor RS sensor, but these fresh Chinese and Russian tests show slightly more detail on the Exynos 5 variant also with very detailed videos, so it's safe to assume it has the fresher camera firmware with the Snapdragon performing very close, but with some noticeable noise reduction (with no noise to reduct heh).

Exynos 5, look at small building details

Snapdragon 600. Of course conditions are not the same, but small details are not as sharp
[Galaxy S 4 General] Canard caché:
whaaaaaaat. Thereare two different captors???:eek:

It begins to suck really!
[Galaxy S 4 General] Mithrandir007:
Hmm, no, both phones are supposed to have the same sensor : Sony IMX135, just read the previous post again :)

The difference in those tests is that the firmware (=> software, NOT hardware) is probably more recent in the Exynos version.

But once the phone is released, both will use the final firmware and have similar results since it's the same sensor.
[Galaxy S 4 General] NZtechfreak:
Regarding "more video detail" mentioned above - they probably had stabilisation on, it dramatically improves detail in video and also narrows the FOV further.
[Galaxy S 4 General] BoneXDA:
Quite the contrary. The narrower FOV suggests GSMA had the useless SW stabilization on resulting in the worse result. This is the raw capture from the I9500 and the One, no issues or the refocusing you see on the HTC. The following is the video FOV comparison. The left one is the S4, also the smaller inside the One frame:

I just wish ppl. watched the two original samples. Everything else is youtube re-coded. The S4's video abilities are fine.
[Galaxy S 4 General] NZtechfreak:
Really? In the S4 Vs S3 comparison piece they show comparisons of stabilisation on Vs off and the "on" sample captures a great deal more detail.
[Galaxy S 4 General] BoneXDA:
Which is why I said download the non-stablized sample in the post above and judge the raw capture yourself. It's excellent.
[Galaxy S 4 General] NZtechfreak:
Not sure I'm following you here.

So you are saying the non-stabilised one is also excellent?

I'm only talking stabilisation on Vs off for the S4 here, not comparing to other phones.
[Galaxy S 4 General] yahyoh:
its probably software bug :rolleyes:

---------- Post added at 03:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:28 PM ----------

its not only about sensors . Exynos ISP probably will do better job the Snapdragon ISP :D
[Galaxy S 4 General] Dannehkins:
For all their worth, you'd think Sony would come out fighting with all their camera experience.
[Galaxy S 4 General] BoneXDA:
What do you not follow? There's the original uncoded sample to download in post #351, just download and write down your impressions, there's the One sample next to it to compare.
[Galaxy S 4 General] Baldilocks:
http://www.phonearena.com/reviews/C...one-5-Nokia-Lumia-920-and-Galaxy-S-III_id3285

Not sure how 'scientific' this is because it's a PhoneArena article, but it seems the GS4 comes out on top.
[Galaxy S 4 General] Baldilocks:
Look up one post. I already posted it.
[Galaxy S 4 General] BoneXDA:
Thx. Point is, the samples are there so everyone can ignore the scores and compare them for their own. The test further proves that the GS4 is the best all-around shooter after the 808, although I still prefer the Lumia in indoors low lights simply because of the bigger lens, but I'm pleasantly surprised how accurate the GS4 is compared to the Panasonic during city nights, and how the One and the Lumia overexposes results. Can't lie to the DSLR.
[Galaxy S 4 General] sohebq:
Alright, you deserve thanks for that, hehe

sent from: The New S-Pen :)
[Galaxy S 4 General] BarryH_GEG:
That's interesting. We've all been reacting to what we've "liked" best rather than what was most accurate. At least in what you posted the SGS4 seems more accurate. The color's a bit off in the white/blue building shot but there's also a large bus in the foreground which may have thrown the camera off.

I'm kind of lost on the debate over image stabilization being off or on. If it's better on (than either "off" or the One) are we saying we don't like it because of the narrower FOV?
[Galaxy S 4 General] BoneXDA:
There's so much SW stabilization can do. I don't like it messing with the FOV and often you get slow movement recognized as "shake" resulting "anti-shake stutter" as it tries to stabilize your panning. I guess there's an extra point for the Lumia there, it works how it's supposed to. I'm curious if this latest HTC SW update got rid of the OIS focus issues. Stabilization is a problem with such small camera units and handheld use, the only way to get rid of it is to have a bigger device with bigger optical stabilization.
[Galaxy S 4 General] BarryH_GEG:
Here's the FOV for five camera's PhoneArena tested. Is it my imagination or does the iP5 have the narrowest FOV? I guess the need for a larger FOV depends on what you're trying to capture. If there were a parade coming down that street toward the shooter I'm guessing s/he'd probably zoom in on the the Lumix and One to capture more detail. What types of video scenes do you guys see having a wider FOV most appropriate for?

Lumix

One

SGS3

SGS4

iP5
[Galaxy S 4 General] BoneXDA:
The GS4 has a well-balanced FOV in full frame, but widescreen already narrows it and software stabilization even more. Not a biggie, I just don't like SIS.
[Galaxy S 4 General] Puzzlegal:
A lot of the photos taken with the One look over-exposed to me, even some of the extreme low-light shots. I find that very disappointing.

But the camera is a minor consideration in my cell-phone decision.
[Galaxy S 4 General] yahyoh:
One seems over-exposing low light images like Lumia 920 , but Lumia look even worse Nokia seems add too much noise reduction which make the images look suck + the WB look too bluish
[Galaxy S 4 General] gavinfabl:
All the photos above look fairly similar. I wouldnt say there is a clear winner. But with all these new phones, software updates will make the camera more awesome. Just look at the S3 as an example.
[Galaxy S 4 General] Brendo:
Id really like to see the photos compared to a dedicated camera
[Galaxy S 4 General] NZtechfreak:
That's what the GH2 is in the Phonearena comparison.

Mind you, they don't actually say what level of zoom and therefore what the effective FOV is that the GH2 is using, since the kit lens for that model is the 14-140mm zoom lens (for micro four thirds, being effectively 28mm-280mm FOV on a full frame) I guess they used it at 28mm equivalent? From memory that lens has an aperture starting at f/4.0, and also isn't the best glass around being a kit lens, so much less well suited to low light photography which shows in its low light shots really. Is it just me or should they have used something more point and shoot-ish for the standalone camera in the comparison? Using the GH2 on all-auto settings just doesn't reflect how an actual user of a camera of that quality usually behaves, and for the stated purpose of their comparison a lesser standalone may have been a better choice. I guess the GH2 may just have been what they happen to have on them though, probably chosen for its ability to shoot broadcast quality video for YouTube purposes (the reason I got the GH3, although it shoots much better still images than the GH2).
[Galaxy S 4 General] aliveon2legs:
If you guys haven't yet seen some of the photos that have started showing up since HTC's firmware update, they are really impressing me, and starting to get me excited for this camera:

More from the Android Police review:

http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/0...nt-smartphone-this-year-may-also-be-the-best/
[Galaxy S 4 General] Baldilocks:
^ Is that supposed to be impressive??
[Galaxy S 4 General] aliveon2legs:
I thought it was. I'm not exactly a professional photographer, though.
[Galaxy S 4 General] Hunt3r.j2:
FYI, the One's images are clearly screwed up. Those nasty light streaks coming from the bright lights are clearly indicative of a dirty lens that needs wiping.
[Galaxy S 4 General] NZtechfreak:
Oh come now, those are pretty nice close-focus shots from a phone. They're just about the only kind of shot the One takes where the promised per-pixel detail really seems to come through (in good light at any rate). Of course the subjects pop more with the shallower DOF thanks to the F/2.0 aperture (although the quality of the bokeh isn't always great, for example in the shot with the bee the bokeh is a little busy and the highlights are rather harshly fringed which distracts a little from the subject, but for a phone its pretty good). The Android police review was absolutely littered with close-focus shots though, looking through it about half the illustrative shots were macro, which absolutely flatters the camera a bit.

Oh, and do people really need to include ALL the pictures in every post with quotes?
[Galaxy S 4 General] -]Megacharge[-:
Please don't quote all the pics when quoting someone's post in a thread. It's common thread etiquette, it's the second time I've had to ask someone not to do this, it bulks up the thread, makes it take far longer to go through and is completely unnecessary.
[Galaxy S 4 General] JustinL01:
Is this supposed to be rude as it sounds!!??
[Galaxy S 4 General] Baldilocks:
Not at all. Just saying for a macro pic, it looks very noisy.
[Galaxy S 4 General] hung2900:
For those seeing them on a phone (even tablet), it's not obvious.

But on my 18.5 inch screen, noise is notably visible.
[Galaxy S 4 General] BoneXDA:
Those are impressive macros, would make a good print.