[Sony Xperia ZL] Linwood.Ferguson:
With pictures

OK, I decided I could live with a less poor camera and bought one because I liked everything else. So here are some comparisons. These are done from the perspective of looking at fine detail, not overall appearance at a small size. I.e. I think a lot of what Sony has done is aimed at highly compressed JPG's suitable for facebook-like postings. I don't do that, I use it in lieu of a real camera and so would actually prefer raw images, but as a substitute I hope for good detail and suitable dynamic range despite the JPG conversion. Anyway.

So while I've seen a lot of just full images and "see how pretty" I thought i would try to see the fine detail, not how it did as a snapshot (while admitting that it's a cell phone and a "snapshot" is exactly what it's intended for, it is not a DSLR).

attached is a composite image taken with the Galaxy S2 running CM10.1, and a ZL running stock with three different modes as indicated. all were at max resolution. All were interior shots with good light (large windows beside the scene), at the same distance from a jar of jelly beans. I then extracted two components, one for fine detail (a bar code) and one for some color and detail (an edge of the plastic jar). These were all taken from about 4' away, handheld but shooting several shots and picking the best to reduce the impact of any motion blur.

First, I must say the ZL did not have the artifacts I noticed in the store; I must have had a different setting there.

The images are over-processed, whether for noise or (my theory) compression not sure, but there are a LOT of JPG artifacts in them.

But there are better than I expected. They are not better in a processing sense than the S2, but what you get is better resolution then poorer processing (look at the smoothness around high contrast borers, e.g. the top of the 9 -- there's a lot more pixel raggedness in the S2 from less resolution, but the ZL is just ragged despite having more pixels -- kind of a random jaggedness from compression artifacts). But the net result of added resolution and poor processing is a better image.

But not nearly as "better" as it should be with a lot more resolution! :(

Sony really owes a "leave the darn image alone" setting.

The burst mode is interesting -- I'm not sure what they are doing there, but it looks like yet even more aggressive sharpening and processing. The bar code at first looks like it is a much clearer shot -- but it is not. It's excessively sharpened and detail is lost even though it fools the eye with more contrast on edge transitions. Look especially at the colors in the jelly beans through the glare, how poor and splotchy they became).

Surprisingly the Superior vs. Normal, despite all I've read, did not have a lot of difference. Not sure if the conditions were such the difference didn't kick in, or... ?

Anyway, to the original point -- here are pictures.

On a related note, been playing with it for low light, and tried in store a HTC one, and there is a marked difference there, with the bigger pixels doing a much better job at low light, but they just didn't add QUITE enough of them for me. The ZL is much better than the older GS2 at low light, but even with the relatively faster lens and newer sensor, it's only OK. Oh... for an F1.4 lens one day. :fingers-crossed: