Can anyone take a good picture with the XV6800?

rsohne · #1 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 10:17 AM

Someone had started a thread on PDAPhoneHome about the poor quality pictures taken with the XV6800. No matter what settings I use the pictures are blurry (not double exposure) or have these like white highlights to edges. I have tried the last hack to take out the brown tint but thats all it fixes on my camera. Is anyone taking good pictures with the XV6800 or is this thing broke out of the box?
If you can take a good picture can you share your settings or techniques?

**bedoig** · #2 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 10:45 AM

I've gotten some decent pics with my Mogul. Original settings. Here are a few shots I took at the Texas capital building in Austin:

watson540 · #3 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 05:07 PM

I fully agree with OP. the camera on my phone is so shitty that its insulting. why would htc do us like this? how can they claim its a 2mp camera?!

very insulting to pay 500 for a phone only to have it wasted on junk that no one bothered to test before releasing it upon a trusting public.

and yes..im quite sure that my 1 year old daughter could draw a better picture than the mogul takes. I've taken hundreds of would be photos on this phone and maybe 5 turned out legible. and if you don't have good lighting then forget about.

built in flash? I call bullshit. its good for a flashlight and that's it. I feel very annoyed at being suckered by falsified claims that the mogul has a camera

I would explain the so called camera as 'a cool gadget no one wants to pay for on a phone. this gadget captures various arrays of light and puts them in a speciall random blurry pattern that scarcely resembles what you were pointing the gadget at'

who takes a camera under 3.8 MP seriously anyway? not me..but I would expect to at least get a legible 320x240 picture. suitable for a postage stamp....

meh.I could ramble all day

watson540 · #4 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 05:08 PM

I fully agree with OP. the camera on my phone is so shitty that its insulting. why would htc do us like this? how can they claim its a 2mp camera?!

very insulting to pay 500 for a phone only to have it wasted on junk that no one bothered to test before releasing it upon a trusting public.

and yes..im quite sure that my 1 year old daughter could draw a better picture than the mogul takes. I've taken hundreds of would be photos on this phone and maybe 5 turned out legible. and if you don't have good lighting then forget about.

built in flash? I call bullshit. its good for a flashlight and that's it. I feel very annoyed at being suckered by falsified claims that the mogul has a camera

I would explain the so called camera as 'a cool gadget no one wants to pay for on a phone. this gadget captures various arrays of light and puts them in a speciall random blurry pattern that scarcely resembles what you were pointing the gadget at'

who takes a camera under 3.8 MP seriously anyway? not me..but I would expect to at least get a legible 320x240 picture. suitable for a postage stamp....

meh.I could ramble all day

jfolliard · #5 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by watson540

I fully agree with OP. the camera on my phone is so shitty that its insulting. why would htc do us like this? how can they claim its a 2mp camera?!

very insulting to pay 500 for a phone only to have it wasted on junk that no one bothered to test before releasing it upon a trusting public.

and yes..im quite sure that my 1 year old daughter could draw a better picture than the mogul takes. I've taken hundreds of would be photos on this phone and maybe 5 turned out legible. and if you don't have good lighting then forget about.

built in flash? I call bullshit. its good for a flashlight and that's it. I feel very annoyed at being suckered by falsified claims that the mogul has a camera

I would explain the so called camera as 'a cool gadget no one wants to pay for on a phone. this gadget captures various arrays of light and puts them in a speciall random blurry pattern that scarcely resembles what you were pointing the gadget at'

who takes a camera under 3.8 MP seriously anyway? not me..but I would expect to at least get a legible 320x240 picture. suitable for a postage stamp....

meh.I could ramble all day

I'm disappointed as well but certainly not "insulted" and I don't appreciate your cursing on this board - have some class!

neodorian · #6 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 08:38 PM

I dunno. I never expect a phone camera to compete with a stand-alone camera but at least they are getting closer to the quality of basic point-and-shoot digis. I know that cameras are getting cheaper but when your device already sells for $500-600 without any subsidizing, I can see why you would be hesitant to raise the cost and size too much with a better camera addon. I'd much rather have a separate camera that is dedicated to picture taking and a passable phone cam for spontaneous photos.

rsohne · #7 (**permalink**) 01-17-2008, 12:47 AM

I agree..I never expect a camera on a phone to be very good, but for HTC to advertise a 2mp camera you would at least expect to be able to take what I would call a usable picture. You should see the pics coming out of a little Blackberry Pearl (pretty amazing).Every thing I transfer to my PC is horrible. My old Epson 640x480 10 year old camera took better pictures. I only started this thread to try to figure out how many of these xv6800 that Verizon sold can actually take a somewhat decent picture.

Is it the Camera or is it me? Is it possible the camera is better quality on the Sprint Mogul over the Verizon XV6800?

mecreyes · #8 (**permalink**) 01-17-2008, 01:24 AM

Definitely the camera...

I have the Mogul and was incredibly pissed after the first several shots didn't pan out. Its only benefit is that it takes amazing low light pictures (no flash). Indoor shots work best for me, outdoor shots should avoid any broad depth or high contrast (shitty histogram) to limit blurriness between subject and background.

Its a 2mp sensor b/c it has the pixel range...but man is it ever the cheapest CMOS sensor on the planet.

Check the pdf for a closeup of the sensor itself

aughsum · #9 (**permalink**) 01-17-2008, 09:58 AM

id rather they put a real camera with a real flash in the phone (while keeping the LED for flashlight use) and raise the price of the next phone. I hate redundant gadgets, my phone has a "camera" therefore i shouldnt need to own a standalone camera.the nokia n90 or whatever did it, didnt it?

ejbleendreeble · #10 (**permalink**) 01-17-2008, 10:21 AM

I agree that the camera's disappointing in an otherwise pretty spectacular device. On the other hand, it does fulfill a basic need for me -- to be able to get "casual" pictures of events etc. that I would never have the opportunity to obtain if I weren't carrying an integrated device.

I also use IrfanView (free) on my laptop to post-process the pics. In respect of the blurriness that the camera often seems to generate (or is it my ageing, shaky hands?), the Sharpen feature in IrfanView certainly seems to help. Not much can be done about the over-exposure which the camera seems to suffer from in default mode.

YMMV ....