For Those Of You With Concerns About The DNA's Camera I Offer This...

[PsychDoc]

...This was posted in another forum regarding changes to the settings that seem to make a positive difference. I tried it and provisionally I can say there really does seem to be a considerable improvement.

>>>Change the resolution from widescreen to 4.3 and most of the problems are solved. Turn auto iso off [and I assume he meant use the lowest iso setting you can which would normally be 100] and use landscape scene and I get outstanding shots with my DNA.<<<

 

[jreed2560]

What smart guy said this

 

[PsychDoc]

What smart guy said this

I don't know. It may forever be a mystery!

 

[WuBoy]

Here are some random pics I took with the two sets of settings.

Original settings (First) Settings suggested in this topic (Second)

I can't say I see a real big difference in quality. Then again, the cam quality isn't all that important to me so maybe my eye just isn't as distinguishing.

 

[hilmar2k]

Wow, those kind of suck. Seems like I get much better quality pics out of my Inc4G. Maybe it's just the photographer.

 

[WuBoy]

Wow, those kind of suck. Seems like I get much better quality pics out of my Inc4G. Maybe it's just the photographer.

Eh, maybe. Like I said, I don't really care about the cam. I'm not trying to take professional level pics with a phone, so what it does is fine with me. That notwithstanding, there still doesn't seem to be much of a difference in pic quality with the new settings.

 

[PsychDoc]

Here are some random pics I took with the two sets of settings.

Original settings (First) Settings suggested in this topic (Second)

I can't say I see a real big difference in quality. Then again, the cam quality isn't all that important to me so maybe my eye just isn't as distinguishing.

Interesting. It seems that there's a pretty dramatic improvement in white balance (with the "new" settings) but a very clear loss of clarity. and resolution. Weird.

 

[WiL11o6]

The quality of the pictures have a lot to do with user control. In low light situations, you need to be very, very steady with the camera and combined with the long shutter speed, it's difficult to take a clear picture indoors. That, combined with poor noise control at 1600 ISO, you get grainy, noisy, and out of focus/blurry pictures.

To fully take advantage of the camera on the DNA, outdoors in the daylight is the best scenario to use the camera. The sunlight will allow the camera to shoot at fast shutter speeds, and low ISO settings meaning pictures will come out noise free and sharp because you're able to hand hold with faster shutter speed.

I don't know how other phones compare, but there's no real way around a small camera lens in terms of picture quality in low light settings. It's just impossible to get a DSLR image quality from a tiny lens.

 

[hilmar2k]

What's the aperture rating of the lens on the DNA? The Inc4G has an f2.2 lens and it takes very good indoor pics without the flash. I thought the One series had an f2.0 lens, which would be even better. If this has an f2.0 lens, it should take very good indoor pics, even with a small sensor and lens.

EDIT: Seems like the DNA does have the f2.0 lens, and a BSI sensor. It should take as good, or better, indoor pics sans flash as any other phone out there. D-SLR quality it isn't, but very good nonetheless.

 

[WuBoy]

Just for kicks, I decided to take a few pics with my DNA and my wife's Note 2. Both were taken with default settings and by the same person, so the differences can't be attributed to either of those.

DNA (First) Note2 (Second)

It's pretty clear the Note 2 cam is better. Well, no phone can be the best at everything right?

 

[jreed2560]

Dude CLEAN YOUR LENS on the DNA. Its very obvious thats what is causing the images to be blurry. Every time my pictures come out like that it's because my lens is dirty

 

[zenman]

The lens may be dirty, or maybe he never took the little plastic film off? Also, the DNA pics all looked zoomed in a bit. That can cause some serious blur.

 

[WuBoy]

Damn, I feel dumb. The guy put the case on my phone when I bought it. I never even thought to check to see if he took the plastic off the cam before he put the case on. Of course he didn't. So every pic I've taken so far was with that on. I guess that really goes to show you how much I care about pic quality. Anyway, for the earlier comparison purposes, here are better versions of the pics.

DNA (First) Note2 (Second)

I think the Note 2 cam might be a lil better, but it's not that big a difference IMO. Well, the color seems much better, but the DNA cam clearly takes more detailed pics. Also, just to clarify, I'm not zooming in with the DNA. I just naturally seems to capture things looking closer. I sat in the same place when I took all the pics. The DNA seemed to capture more. For instance look, at the ceiling in both of the fireplace pics. You can see the rough surface of the ceiling way better in the DNA pics than the Note 2. I'm sure you could zoom in with the Note 2 and see more detail, but like I said, the DNA gets that without zooming.

 

[hilmar2k]

The flash is on for the Note 2 pics, and off for the DNA pics. Not a good comparison.

 

[today]

Should take a few pics with note using the lens film from the date, just to be fair. Maybe try a few with finger over lens. Lol.

 

[WuBoy]

Ok, last set. These were taken with absolutely everything the same for both phones and back to back.

DNA (first) Note 2 (second)

Conclusions are still the same though. Note 2 has better color, but DNA may arguably have better detail.

 

[stkorn97]

i think the dna looks better in first pics. its a complete toss up between the 2 in the end i think. both look very similar.

 

[hilmar2k]

i think the dna looks better in first pics. its a complete toss up between the 2 in the end i think. both look very similar.

I concur. Lighting and color look much more natural with the DNA in the first set. I'm a little more torn in the second set, with both being decent.

 

[WuBoy]

i think the dna looks better in first pics. its a complete toss up between the 2 in the end i think. both look very similar.

All of the pics are fine in my opinion, but the coloring is definitely truer to reality in the Note 2 pics. The DNA's pics are good, but everything seems slightly discolored in them.

 

[Wolfedude88]

WuBoy you had me cracking up in this thread with the plastic still on, lol.

 

[zenman]

"The guy put the case on my phone when I bought it. I never even thought to check to see if he took the plastic off the cam before he put the case on."

Yep, the same thing happened to me, that's why I suggested it as a possible reason your pics looked so bad. I remember being relieved when I realized the film was what was ruining my pics.

 

[WuBoy]

WuBoy you had me cracking up in this thread with the plastic still on, lol.

lol The worst part is I've taken a ton of pics and videos of my baby daughter for my parents who live about 8 hours away. All that time and it never occurred to me that the graininess was because of a plastic cover over the lens.

 

[HenryKrinkle]

With regard to the 2nd pics (the indoor ones), I'm not sure the comparison is entirely accurate. If you look at the natural light from the window, there is considerably more in the second pic (look at the chair on the right). Without taking an opinion on which one is better, I think that would definitely introduce a variable.

 

[WuBoy]

With regard to the 2nd pics (the indoor ones), I'm not sure the comparison is entirely accurate. If you look at the natural light from the window, there is considerably more in the second pic (look at the chair on the right). Without taking an opinion on which one is better, I think that would definitely introduce a variable.

I see what you're talking about, but it's not a variable. I literally took the pics from the same spot one after the other. Whatever you see in the pics is a reflection of how they operate and not extra variables. It's not like I took the pics at different times of day or with the blinds closed for one and not the other.

 

[HenryKrinkle]

I see what you're talking about, but it's not a variable. I literally took the pics from the same spot one after the other. Whatever you see in the pics is a reflection of how they operate and not extra variables. It's not like I took the pics at different times of day or with the blinds closed for one and not the other.

I was wondering about that. If that's the case the difference really is quite striking. That said, I think they both take great pics. Thanks for posting them.