[OnePlus 3 Questions & Answers] AcmE85:
Adaway on OP3 and uBlock Origin on my PC running Chrome Beta 52.

ABP is slowing down Chrome compared to uBlock.

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-vs.-ABP:-efficiency-compared

/off-topic

Camera comparison

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/w3q0it8lgu6hsvl/AABAuFOsk6MKGs7Nn6uMpFXOa?dl=0

For best quality, download the whole package and watch on your PC.

Keep in mind that the Windows 10 standard photos app is a blurry mess and they still did not fix this issue!!!!

http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/...fea-889b-48e4-8368-1a2d2922dd0c?page=1&auth=1

Use the old picture viewer for example

OxygenOS Camera vs. Google Camera vs. Open Camera (camera2api enabled)

Running on OxygenOS 3.2.2

All pictures were taken handheld on auto-mode, no HQ or HDR or any additional modes enabled.

All with autofocus. All pictures were the first and only shots I did in this situations. I did not have to correct focal points or anything, just aim, snap & done.

What I can say so far is that in daylight (Photos 1, 2 and 5) there is almost no difference when comparing them on the OP3 screen.

Only noticeably difference are plain colored objects. There is still some minimal noise left with Open Camera and Google Camera.

The OOS Camera filters most of it without losing any details.

I have included one photo taken with Open Camera with camera2api disabled and it looks like there is no denoise filter enabled at all.

The exception to the rule is the photo showing Yoda (Photo 3).

At first glance there is no difference. When comparing at 100% crop you can see that the OOS Camera loses some slight details due to postprocessing.

On photo 4 I tried to darken the room. There is one photo which shows the proper lighting in that scene, by manually decreasing the exposure with OOS camera.

The improved postprocessing by the OOS Camera clearly wins here hands down. What can be observed is that all apps increase the exposure.

Weirdly, all have the same shutter-speed (1/17s), but although having the by far least amount of noise, the OOS camera uses a 6400 ISO, the other two a 3200 ISO!

I am pretty sure there is something wrong with exif data on the OOS Camera.

Photo 6 shows the Dark Tower^^

OOS Camera wins again. Once again 6400 vs 3200 ISO.

Photo 7 shows the same results as the first daylight shots.

Photo 8 was taken with artificial lighting. The results are equal to photo 4.

Basically the pictures and processing are identical on the Google Camera and Open Camera.

I had more apps installed, but earlier shots were showing the same results, so I did not include them into this comparison.

The OOS Camera basically wins every time in lowlight.

Daylight pictures are hard to judge as it tends to make them quite clean with its denoising (see Yoda!)

Google and Open Camera show a slightly more noise, but one could argue that they are preserving more detail.

As I already mentioned earlier, the OOS Camera sometimes goes way too far when there is slight movement involved in the scene:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbn9Lj6F6EM

that includes peoples faces in perfect lighting. I will continue shooting with Google Camera in these occasions to compare

the behaviour to the OOS Camera.

In terms of focus speed and accuracy, all apps performed the same.

I was using CM13 for a day, the day before it got official nightlies, and can say that camera quality

is identical to what you get with Google Camera on Oxygen OS.

Unfortunately this means that when you are going to do lowlight shots, you will get worse results.

I really hope we will get a fully working OOS camera port in the future.

Until then I am forced to stay on OxygenOS.

edit: Before I get any of these posts to just use manual mode or raw, or... this is not the goal of this comparison ok :)