Samsung galaxy avant

I have an Avant but I don't use the camera very much. What pictures I have taken with it I've thought were pretty good. The better the lighting the better the pics of course and it must be held pretty steady or it blurs... but I think thats with most camera's.

I actually think the camera works pretty good on my Galaxy Avant.. Better than the silly Windows phone I recently had that's for sure!!

I like the the camera works great just took this to show how good it works

The Fierce 2 and avant both have the same 5 MP camera but never let that fool you. The Avant takes far better quality pictures than the Fierce. Hell it takes better pictures than the Zmax and the Zmax has an 8 MP camera.

I didn't get to play with the camera on my Avant very much during the short time I was using it.
One reason why it may not appear that good is the display, which is rather flat with color resolution. To really see the full quality of the pictures taken with this phone it's best to view them on a PC or other device with a better display.
Also as I recall the default settings result in a significant delay between tapping the button and the picture being taken so you have to be very aware of that or mess with the settings to fix it.

Ninjew said:

The Fierce 2 and avant both have the same 5 MP camera but never let that fool you. The Avant takes far better quality pictures than the Fierce. Hell it takes better pictures than the Zmax and the Zmax has an 8 MP camera.

Click to expand...

What do you base that claim on?

PHP87 said:

What do you base that claim on?

Click to expand...

Do not let the MP fool you, at the end of the day the quality of the photo lenses wins the match. I have seen comparisons of all 3 phones cameras and by far the best one was the Avant. The problem with the Zmax camera is that often times things outside of the focus area appear blurry.

Ninjew said:

Do not let the MP fool you, at the end of the day the quality of the photo lenses wins the match. I have seen comparisons of all 3 phones cameras and by far the best one was the Avant. The problem with the Zmax camera is that often times things outside of the focus area appear blurry.

Click to expand...

Not on mine.

And any of the online sites that do cell phone reviews will downgrade the Avant mainly for the camera.

"By far the best one was the Avant?"
Seriously?

MPCS stores can't keep the ZMax in stock, yet they have plenty of Avant's.
Same online.

And if the Avant and the Fierce have the same camera, how is the camera on the Avant better?

PHP87 said:

Not on mine.

And any of the online sites that do cell phone reviews will downgrade the Avant mainly for the camera.

"By far the best one was the Avant?"
Seriously?

MPCS stores can't keep the ZMax in stock, yet they have plenty of Avant's.
Same online.

And if the Avant and the Fierce have the same camera, how is the camera on the Avant better?

Click to expand...

I think he meant although they are the same MP on the cameras, the sensors and/or lens are different. That means a lot more than MP. I haven't looked up the specs to confirm though

confed said:

I think he meant although they are the same MP on the cameras, the sensors and/or lens are different. That means a lot more than MP. I haven't looked up the specs to confirm though

Click to expand...

Exactly, people are too busy looking at the MP over quality of of the lens and sensor. But he proved my point though, The fierce and avant have the same MP yet the avant takes far better pictures than the fierce.

It's a very easy test to do especially since I work at Metro PCS, I take pics with the phones, upload them to the computer and compare what happens when you zoom in. Not only that, the blurriness when outside the focus box.. To each their own I suppose.

Ninjew said:

Exactly, people are too busy looking at the MP over quality of of the lens and sensor. But he proved my point though, The fierce and avant have the same MP yet the avant takes far better pictures than the fierce.

It's a very easy test to do especially since I work at Metro PCS, I take pics with the phones, upload them to the computer and compare what happens when you zoom in. Not only that, the blurriness when outside the focus box.. To each their own I suppose.

Click to expand...

How does the F60 camera quality compare to the Avant? Personally I think the F60 takes a somewhat decent picture but it sometimes seems like the old LG Motion took better pictures even though it also had a 5MP camera, maybe it was because it could take pictures using HDR mode which the F60 cannot do.

Ninjew said:

Exactly, people are too busy looking at the MP over quality of of the lens and sensor. But he proved my point though, The fierce and avant have the same MP yet the avant takes far better pictures than the fierce.

It's a very easy test to do especially since I work at Metro PCS, I take pics with the phones, upload them to the computer and compare what happens when you zoom in. Not only that, the blurriness when outside the focus box.. To each their own I suppose.

Click to expand...

Mp do matter though. The biggest misconception is megapixels don't matter. The only time people say megapixels don't matter is if when they have a low grade camera. For image detail you need megapixels. If they didn't matter everyone would be putting VGA cameras on there phone. Yes lens and sensor quality matter but to be real neither are gonna be top of the line on any budget handset. I've had the avant and am currently using the zmax. The zmax has the better camera. It captures far more detail than the avant. Mainly due to the higher megapixel count. The zmax also is capable of 1080p video whereas the avant isn't. HTC tried to convince everyone for 2 years megapixel count didn't matter it was lens and sensor quality. Shockingly there now using a 20mp sensor on the HTC one m9. Obviously megapixels matter more than they thought.

timmyh318 said:

Mp do matter though. The biggest misconception is megapixels don't matter. The only time people say megapixels don't matter is if when they have a low grade camera. For image detail you need megapixels. If they didn't matter everyone would be putting VGA cameras on there phone. Yes lens and sensor quality matter but to be real neither are gonna be top of the line on any budget handset. I've had the avant and am currently using the zmax. The zmax has the better camera. It captures far more detail than the avant. Mainly due to the higher megapixel count. The zmax also is capable of 1080p video whereas the avant isn't. HTC tried to convince everyone for 2 years megapixel count didn't matter it was lens and sensor quality. Shockingly there now using a 20mp sensor on the HTC one m9. Obviously megapixels matter more than they thought.

Click to expand...

Nonsense.

Most of any megapixel advantage is given away by jpeg compression.

An uncompressed 4 MP picture results in a 24 MB file. 48 MB for 8 MP and so forth.

Next time you think megapixels matter, look at your picture files that are 1 or 2 MB in size and ask yourself, where did the rest of the picture quality information go?

Remember - jpeg compression is lossy - it's nothing like a lossless zip file on a pc.

HTC gave in to marketing pressure.

Marketing does not dictate light physics even though some people in sales have convinced themselves that they do.

The first limiter to picture quality is the lens.

The second is sensor size.

The third is sensor noise.

The fourth is sensor processing and jpeg compression.

Color processing - where your eyes get far more information than dots per inch, are all affected by the above.

Coming in, dead last place, are megapixels.

And with the level of jpeg compression in the mobile world, only click-bait phone reviewers and marketing departments actually believe that megapixels matter.

Hope this helps.

To each his own. Everyone will have their own opinion on which phone/camera is better.

I noticed that installing "Open Camera" from the Play Store improved the pic and vid quality on my ZMax.

Free app worth checking out. There are other camera apps that may improve your camera's performance as well, but so far, Open Camera seems to be the best of a few I tried.

And no offense, but the dude that worked at the Metro store I bought my ZMax from didn't even know about the $99 Promo price and I had to show him the Metro site as well as the MPCS Facebook site.

Finally after 5 minutes of going round and round with him, I messaged the guy on the MPCS facebook site that helped me find a store that had the ZMax in stock and he verified the price, which I showed to the sales rep and he still tried to sell me the ZMax for $199 until I went to his Manager and got it for $99 plus tax and activation.

MPCS gave me a $40 credit since the Metro sales rep gave me so much static, so again, no offense, but I don't always put a lot of trust into what someone says because they sell these phones. I don't get any blurriness with my device with the stock camera app or with the Open Camera app.

I think the ZMax gives more bang for the buck at $99 + Tax and Activation (About $122 out the door for me in California.)

My only issue with the device is that it's almost too big although it carries easily in the front pocket of my jeans, even with a sturdy case installed on the phone.

I booted up my old LG Spirit with the 4.5" screen and it seemed miniscule. For me, I don't think I can ever go back to a screen that size. But again, to each his own.

EarlyMon said:

Nonsense.

Most of any megapixel advantage is given away by jpeg compression.

An uncompressed 4 MP picture results in a 24 MB file. 48 MB for 8 MP and so forth.

Next time you think megapixels matter, look at your picture files that are 1 or 2 MB in size and ask yourself, where did the rest of the picture quality information go?

Remember - jpeg compression is lossy - it's nothing like a lossless zip file on a pc.

HTC gave in to marketing pressure.

Marketing does not dictate light physics even though some people in sales have convinced themselves that they do.

The first limiter to picture quality is the lens.

The second is sensor size.

The third is sensor noise.

The fourth is sensor processing and jpeg compression.

Color processing - where your eyes get far more information than dots per inch, are all affected by the above.

Coming in, dead last place, are megapixels.

And with the level of jpeg compression in the mobile world, only click-bait phone reviewers and marketing departments actually believe that megapixels matter.

Hope this helps.

Click to expand...

This is all true and is good info but saying megapixels don't matter is just not true. HTC didn't give in marketing pressure they gave into consumer pressure because the camera on the one was downright lousy. For high quality image detail you need a higher megapixel count. Megapixels affect the resolution of the picture your taking. If you crop or print out pictures at all a higher megapixel camera is essential for quality shots. So saying they don't matter is a flat out lie. With lens hardware being equal or close to equal you are more capable of taking a better shot with an 8mp camera than a 5mp camera. The 8 mp camera is capable of catching more detail because it takes the picture at a higher resolution. In effect just like a higher resolution screen will show more detail than a lower one. You may list megapixels last on your list of importance and that's fine to you they may be last. But the fact that you even put them on your list means they matter.

Thanks for pointing out my typo - I meant to say, market pressure - which is the exact same thing as consumer pressure.

That was brought on by the myth - not my lie - that megapixels matter.

You are entitled to your opinion, it's clear that there's no changing your mind.

Have you honestly ever seen the results of raw image photography?

I own an HTC M8. I also have with it a root raw camera mod - no compression.

The difference is night and day.

Even without it and just using a camera that lets you at least dial down jpeg compression, that's a big difference too.

An uncompressed, raw image picture off of the Avant is being compressed somewhere around 30:1 or more.

Trying to meaningfully compare pictures between different cell phones suffering from compression artifacts and lost information to the tune of a 30 to 1 or 50 to 1 degradation - and then saying that you're prepared to make quantitative judgements based on megapixel differences is borderline silly.

But that's just my opinion.

Meanwhile, check out Camera 360, it's not terrible at all and you can use it to dial back compression a little bit.

Again - hope this helps.

But its not the straight dope lol yes the raw image is better. But the fact remains no matter how much processing or compression is involved if you have to do any kind of cropping or any kind of print quality picture taking its gonna lack the detail a picture taken at a higher resolution would have. Now take the same raw image with a 16 mp shooter. Which picture would show more detail? We both know the answer and that's a fact that can't be changed.

Both are raw images.

Only the compression and color balance changed.

Proving my point entirely. You can't judge pixels when larger effects are in the way, you only think you can and you're running on assumptions.

When you get an Android with a 16 MP shooter taking raw photos, congratulations.

Go for 20 MP while you're at it, I recommend the Panasonic Lumix CM1.

Have a nice day!

EarlyMon said:

Both are raw images.

Only the compression and color balance changed.

Proving my point entirely. You can't judge pixels when larger effects are in the way, you only think you can and you're running on assumptions.

When you get an Android with a 16 MP shooter taking raw photos, congratulations.

Go for 20 MP while you're at it, I recommend the Panasonic Lumix CM1.

Have a nice day!

Click to expand...

But why would I need a 20mp camera if pixels don't matter? clearly I can get the same quality with a 4mp sensor lol. You have a good day to

timmyh318 said:

But why would I need a 20mp camera if pixels don't matter? clearly I can get the same quality with a 4mp sensor lol. You have a good day to

Click to expand...

They make engines for large semi tractors too, but just because you could put one in a Volkswagen doesn't mean that you just built a drag racer with one or that it's a good idea.

MP matter only AFTER the other factors are tackled first - and I listed them in order. Obviously you don't know what a CM1 is. I have a digital camera with less than 4 MP that stomps every cell phone out right now - because pixels come in last place for picture quality.

In the general cell phone class, and for most digital photography, more megapixels equating to better picture quality is a myth.

I suspect that your days are going to be filled with bliss on this for some time to come.

With that, I'm out of here.

True they do make larger engines....and if you want more performance out of your car then putting in a larger engine is the way to go good analogy i do know what a cm1 is...it has a 20 mp sensor....that's really not helping your cause....lol I don't believe your less than 4mp camera stomps a lot because again....it would lack the detail that a higher mp camera can take. Just like a higher resolution screen shows more detail a higher resolution picture does the same. The only people who claim megapixels and resolution don't matter are ones with lower resolution cameras trying to talk up there purchase. I'm not claiming those other things aren't important. Sure they are. I also didn't make the claim megapixels don't matter and its a lie that megapixels matter. Show me a professional photographer that doesn't use a high resolution camera for there job and I'll show you a photographer that is unemployed. Thinking picture resolution doesn't affect picture quality is insanity. But whatever makes you happy with your purchases see ya later

The Avant camera is not very good, I'll attest to that.