- 05-27-2012, 07:24 AM #1
I can talk for hours about my frustrations. I'll be very brief, for the sake of sanity.
I also have a Samsung Focus and it takes great pictures. The Nokia Lumia 900 is another issue. Although I'm loving the phone, the camera is awful.
Was at a wedding yesterday. (during the day) Low light fotos are virtually useless.
Took some pictures inside of my house last night. (with lights on) The pictures were way below average. The colors were not true and the fotos blurry. When the TV screen (on) was part of the picture, it was usually just a big white square, and if anything, the images on the TV were undetectable and with terrible colors. (with the focus, I could take a picture of the TV screen even from a distance, and it was perfect)
This morning I took some more pictures from inside the house. (brightly lit by sunlight) A couple of them were ok. Most were unfocused, and if there was just a little too much light, most of the picture was just white areas.
I've gone as far as trying some suggestions found through this site for taking better pictures with the Lumia. Nothing works.
I know that phones are not made to substitute cameras, but the feature does have a purpose. I make short business trips, and would like the convenience of not carrying my digital cameras and being able to take quick snapshots during travel, at meetings, etc.
Please help. (had the Lumia 900 for 4 days)
- 05-27-2012, 12:51 PM #4
I'm coming from a Inspire 4g, which is known to have a pretty good camera. With the right settings, the Lumia is almost as good as the Inspire for me. The key to low light is to ditch the auto iso. You may even want to bump the exposure up a stop or more.
- 05-27-2012, 01:35 PM #5
Thanks rdef. I'll be reviewing palandri's link and testing your suggestions, later.
In the meantime, through this forum I found a recommendation for "Cool Camera". I interrupted my agenda 15 mins to take some fotos. What a great difference!
- 05-27-2012, 02:05 PM #6
It's been said in other threads but is worth saying again. The camera in the Lumia 900 is fantastic; if you take the time to learn how to use it. I think most people just want a point and shoot. If they don't get it, they complain. I'd gamble Nokia will release a software update to cater to the "Auto-Only" crowd.
-joe-Had 'em all. Every iPhone since day one, Androids out the ****.
DVP, Lumia 900, now a Yellow 920. Windows Phone is elegant, simple. Nuff Said.
- 05-27-2012, 02:20 PM #7
- 05-27-2012, 05:49 PM #8
In 2011 most camera sensors were switched to backside illumination. For some reason, Nokia decided to pass on it and sacrifice a TON of light sensitivity.
I bet people can and will take beautiful pictures with it. But let's not pretend the camera is amazing. It does kinda suck comparatively.
- 05-27-2012, 09:34 PM #9
It may be possible they couldn't get it to fit in the body, because the N9 (which is of similar design to the 900) only had an 8MP sensor, and it was released a year after the N8.
- 05-29-2012, 06:52 AM #14
Those mockups of a Lumia PureView we saw a while ago don't seem too far-fetched to me. If you're after the camera, you'll either be dealing with a module sticking out the back, or you really have to design around the module. The N9 chassis wasn't designed with a PureView or N8 camera module in mind.
- 05-29-2012, 09:45 AM #15
I even had the camera "app" completely lock up and then failed to launch and I had to reboot the phone at a wedding 2 weeks ago. I was glad I had my iPhone in my jacket pocket then as backup.
05-29-2012, 10:26 AM #16
- 280 Posts
The BSI sensor is only a small part of the problem. Even in good light situations the camera is very MEH. Yes you can tinker with the camera a bit to make it better but you shouldn't have to. It should just take good pictures out of the box like almost every modern phone does.
If the next Nokia phone (WP8) doesn't have an AMAZING camera I'll not be buying another Nokia phone again.
I do love my Lumia 900 but the camera is a deal breaker - totally and completely.
- 05-29-2012, 04:37 PM #18
But Nokia will catch up with the Lumia, they are no strangers to mass production and leveraging the economy of scale, in fact it's something that Nokia has been known to be very very good at itself for years.
- 05-30-2012, 12:37 AM #21
The L900 internals are not really great though, it's true. It's not designed to be great. It's a mid-range device with a decent design and attractive price. That's the draw to it.
- 05-30-2012, 12:41 AM #22
Saying Nokia will catch up because they know how to produce tons of cheap feature phones is like saying RIM will catch up cause they know how to produce tons of cheap BB Curve smartphones...
I'm pretty sure even LG is beating Nokia in high end smartphone salves right now. If they want to catch up they have to do it fast, cause the competition is not standing still.
05-30-2012, 09:45 AM #24
- 107 Posts
Smartphones shipped in 2010:
Nokia 100.1 mil
Samsung 23.9 mil
Apple 47.5 mil
edit. Actually Nokia was selling still 12 million more smartphones per quarter than it's nearest competitor Apple when Elop announced the move to WP. That's when the market share started to dropping like a brick last year.
Last edited by DungMasterFang; 05-30-2012 at 10:18 AM.
- 05-30-2012, 10:28 AM #25
The camera on my 900 is def an upgrade from the 3GS i had...but the touch screen focus doesn't seem to work. Is this true for all 900? I feel as though even my old 3GS could get better close up pictures.