[PhilipDZ]

The op needs some help lol

Posted via CB10

[Asmooh]

Has anyone taken the same shots, under the same conditions, with iPhone5 and Z10 for comparison? I would be interested in seeing that.

Yes and also xperia z


Z10 is better

Posted via CB10

[diogoteixeira87]

HDR is NOT for moving objects.

And it doesn't work how you think it does either; it's not necessarily ISO-sensitive (although it can be.)

HDR is a compensation for the fact that digital image sensors have less dynamic range than film did. So what the camera does is take successive exposures bracketed around what it measures to be "correct", intentionally overexposing some and underexposing others.

This allows the capture of both highlights that are "blown" at the "correct" exposure and also capture of shadows that are black ("dead") at the correct exposure. The camera then takes those images and replaces the highlights that are blown with the properly-exposed ones along with the shadows from the other exposures, rendering one image with highlights, central tones and shadows.

The problem is that it has to capture multiple frames to do this in succession, and if the subject is moving you get blurred motion -- not because the shutter speed is too low but because the subject(s) moved between successive exposures. There's nothing you can do to prevent that from happening in a HDR exposure.

I create manual HDR exposures all the time with my dSLR; I take a bracketed set of shots that intentionally over and underexpose, and then combine them in post-processing. Same problem applies although my Canon 7d can shoot the bracketed set of shots at 8fps -- if the subject moves during that period I'm screwed.

The Z10's HDR mode is surprisingly good for a cameraphone. The biggest issue that it, like all current phone cameras have, is that by not giving the option for raw capture you're stuck with the loss of information that JPEG compression imposes. In addition cellphone cameras have very poor depth-of-field control because the sensor is so small -- there is nothing that can be done about that as it's a function of the size of the sensor itself (and is the reason that "full frame" cameras can produce superior depth-of-field effects over crop-sensor ones.)

Finally the "burst" mode on the Z10 is simply out-of-this-world for a cellphone. The included image coprocessor is likely responsible for that; I've not found a buffer depth limit on it yet, and that surprised me.

Excelente post! You seem like a pro. My girlfriend is a photographer and she is always talking about the size of the sensor, etc. Even the midia going in a different position and putting z10 camera down in some reviews, she says that the camera is good for a phone. In my opinion, the problem is that cameras are such complexes devices that people use to put on megapixels the resume of its all quality. I see no problem with z10 camera HDR too. It works fine for me.

Posted via CB10

[almyty]

HDR is NOT for moving objects.

And it doesn't work how you think it does either; it's not necessarily ISO-sensitive (although it can be.)

HDR is a compensation for the fact that digital image sensors have less dynamic range than film did. So what the camera does is take successive exposures bracketed around what it measures to be "correct", intentionally overexposing some and underexposing others.

This allows the capture of both highlights that are "blown" at the "correct" exposure and also capture of shadows that are black ("dead") at the correct exposure. The camera then takes those images and replaces the highlights that are blown with the properly-exposed ones along with the shadows from the other exposures, rendering one image with highlights, central tones and shadows.

The problem is that it has to capture multiple frames to do this in succession, and if the subject is moving you get blurred motion -- not because the shutter speed is too low but because the subject(s) moved between successive exposures. There's nothing you can do to prevent that from happening in a HDR exposure.

I create manual HDR exposures all the time with my dSLR; I take a bracketed set of shots that intentionally over and underexpose, and then combine them in post-processing. Same problem applies although my Canon 7d can shoot the bracketed set of shots at 8fps -- if the subject moves during that period I'm screwed.

The Z10's HDR mode is surprisingly good for a cameraphone. The biggest issue that it, like all current phone cameras have, is that by not giving the option for raw capture you're stuck with the loss of information that JPEG compression imposes. In addition cellphone cameras have very poor depth-of-field control because the sensor is so small -- there is nothing that can be done about that as it's a function of the size of the sensor itself (and is the reason that "full frame" cameras can produce superior depth-of-field effects over crop-sensor ones.)

Finally the "burst" mode on the Z10 is simply out-of-this-world for a cellphone. The included image coprocessor is likely responsible for that; I've not found a buffer depth limit on it yet, and that surprised me.

This, +1

Posted via CB10

[quadcells]

No sure what the op is doing but the first time I used the HDR the pictures were fantastic!

[RECOOL]

There's a lot of smartphones being sold.But not a lot of smart users.These are the same types wanting features yet they dont understand them.

[BruvvaPete]

Seems to me the op just got outed as a troll. Nothing like being called out with no retort. This is a great example of why people like me like to lambaste trolls.

[app_Developer]

Yes and also xperia z


Z10 is better

Posted via CB10

Would you mind posting the unedited pictures? I'd like to see the differences (low light and outdoor light if you have it). Thanks!

[tickerguy]

Excelente post! You seem like a pro. My girlfriend is a photographer and she is always talking about the size of the sensor, etc. Even the midia going in a different position and putting z10 camera down in some reviews, she says that the camera is good for a phone. In my opinion, the problem is that cameras are such complexes devices that people use to put on megapixels the resume of its all quality. I see no problem with z10 camera HDR too. It works fine for me.

Posted via CB10

Semi-pro. Call me a "serious amateur" who used to shoot for money in the day of film, but now shoots for fun after a many-year hiatus (digital imaging took quite a while to get where it was both reasonably-affordable AND decent enough to satisfy me.)

There are many people who think they can shoot "up there" with a dSLR using a cell camera, and there's a specsmanship game going on in the space as well. Most of it is marketing BS.

Sensor size controls both the amount of light you can collect (and thus the sensitivity you can achieve) and the depth-of-field separation you can achieve. It also inversely is correlated to the cost of the lens in front of the sensor. Good lenses cost lots of money and large, good lenses cost ridiculous amounts of money. I own a few lenses that cost more than my camera bodies did. On the other hand a good lens doesn't deteriorate and the better ones hold their value reasonably well -- bodies, not so much.

The camera in a cellphone is a $20 device -- maybe. It'll never produce what a dSLR can, even a cheap one, simply because it lacks the sensor size of even an inexpensive dSLR. It also will never manage to lock focus on quickly-moving objects and similar challenging conditions as the processing capacity to do so doesn't exist either. It can't, because not only is there no market for putting a $500 camera module in a cellphone but there's no market for a cellphone the SIZE of a dSLR either!

My Z10 will never produce what my Canon 7d will, but for a cellphone camera it does a really nice job. Many of the capabilities, such as HDR and burst mode, are exemplary for a cell camera. BlackBerry spent a couple of extra bucks on a dedicated coprocessor for images in their devices and it shows. (10.2's "lock focus" feature is also EXTREMELY useful and I've sideloaded that version for this reason.)

BTW if you're getting blurry results on the Z10 work on holding the camera steady, use image-stabilization mode (which helps) and use the volume buttons to trigger the shutter, which helps you keep the phone STEADY when you shoot. Camera shake is an image-killer, even with IS.

[sgt_snacks-64]

Also, make sure your lens is CLEAN!

Posted via CB10

[Fred98TJ]

Yes, correct with your original post also.
I am a photography and have been for over 40 years.
Cell phone camera's are simply for snapshots anyway.
With the tiny little sensors and super small pixels, there is simple no DR and way too much noise.
Good SW, yes.
Use a dSLR if you really want more that nice snapsnots, and if you want the best, use large format film.I do


Fred

Semi-pro. Call me a "serious amateur" who used to shoot for money in the day of film, but now shoots for fun after a many-year hiatus (digital imaging took quite a while to get where it was both reasonably-affordable AND decent enough to satisfy me.)

There are many people who think they can shoot "up there" with a dSLR using a cell camera, and there's a specsmanship game going on in the space as well. Most of it is marketing BS.

Sensor size controls both the amount of light you can collect (and thus the sensitivity you can achieve) and the depth-of-field separation you can achieve. It also inversely is correlated to the cost of the lens in front of the sensor. Good lenses cost lots of money and large, good lenses cost ridiculous amounts of money. I own a few lenses that cost more than my camera bodies did. On the other hand a good lens doesn't deteriorate and the better ones hold their value reasonably well -- bodies, not so much.

The camera in a cellphone is a $20 device -- maybe. It'll never produce what a dSLR can, even a cheap one, simply because it lacks the sensor size of even an inexpensive dSLR. It also will never manage to lock focus on quickly-moving objects and similar challenging conditions as the processing capacity to do so doesn't exist either. It can't, because not only is there no market for putting a $500 camera module in a cellphone but there's no market for a cellphone the SIZE of a dSLR either!

My Z10 will never produce what my Canon 7d will, but for a cellphone camera it does a really nice job. Many of the capabilities, such as HDR and burst mode, are exemplary for a cell camera. BlackBerry spent a couple of extra bucks on a dedicated coprocessor for images in their devices and it shows. (10.2's "lock focus" feature is also EXTREMELY useful and I've sideloaded that version for this reason.)

BTW if you're getting blurry results on the Z10 work on holding the camera steady, use image-stabilization mode (which helps) and use the volume buttons to trigger the shutter, which helps you keep the phone STEADY when you shoot. Camera shake is an image-killer, even with IS.

[Asmooh]

Yes, correct with your original post also.
I am a photography and have been for over 40 years.
Cell phone camera's are simply for snapshots anyway.
With the tiny little sensors and super small pixels, there is simple no DR and way too much noise.
Good SW, yes.
Use a dSLR if you really want more that nice snapsnots, and if you want the best, use large format film.I do


Fred

A good photographer can make good looking photos with every device

Posted via CB10

[diogoteixeira87]

Semi-pro. Call me a "serious amateur" who used to shoot for money in the day of film, but now shoots for fun after a many-year hiatus (digital imaging took quite a while to get where it was both reasonably-affordable AND decent enough to satisfy me.)

There are many people who think they can shoot "up there" with a dSLR using a cell camera, and there's a specsmanship game going on in the space as well. Most of it is marketing BS.

Sensor size controls both the amount of light you can collect (and thus the sensitivity you can achieve) and the depth-of-field separation you can achieve. It also inversely is correlated to the cost of the lens in front of the sensor. Good lenses cost lots of money and large, good lenses cost ridiculous amounts of money. I own a few lenses that cost more than my camera bodies did. On the other hand a good lens doesn't deteriorate and the better ones hold their value reasonably well -- bodies, not so much.

The camera in a cellphone is a $20 device -- maybe. It'll never produce what a dSLR can, even a cheap one, simply because it lacks the sensor size of even an inexpensive dSLR. It also will never manage to lock focus on quickly-moving objects and similar challenging conditions as the processing capacity to do so doesn't exist either. It can't, because not only is there no market for putting a $500 camera module in a cellphone but there's no market for a cellphone the SIZE of a dSLR either!

My Z10 will never produce what my Canon 7d will, but for a cellphone camera it does a really nice job. Many of the capabilities, such as HDR and burst mode, are exemplary for a cell camera. BlackBerry spent a couple of extra bucks on a dedicated coprocessor for images in their devices and it shows. (10.2's "lock focus" feature is also EXTREMELY useful and I've sideloaded that version for this reason.)

BTW if you're getting blurry results on the Z10 work on holding the camera steady, use image-stabilization mode (which helps) and use the volume buttons to trigger the shutter, which helps you keep the phone STEADY when you shoot. Camera shake is an image-killer, even with IS.

You're totally right. I'm from Rio, but went to NY few months ago with my girlfriend. She bought a lens of $ 500 and I said "Wow, this thing is really expensive". But, then I saw that it was one good lens, but not the greatest. In fact, some of them were priced in thousands of dollars. Her camera body was cheap comparing to those lens.

You can't shoot photos on phones like you do on professional or semi-professional cameras and you right about that. There is no comparison. That's why for me a 41 megapixels camera on a phone (Lumia 1020) is pure marketing. I bet my girlfriend 18 MP canon do much better photos than this 41 MP phone. By the way, unless you work with print, I see no reason to have this number of MP.

Posted via CB10

[Fred98TJ]

Good composing, yes, for sure, however you can dress a pig in a tux, however it's still a pig
The whole idea of pixel count is a marketing ploy.
Anyone who works with digital knows that.
The place that I work for is developing some HD cameras right now for the aircraft industry.
The problems that we are seeing, was all discovered and worked out already with film a 100 years ago.
:P

Fred

A good photographer can make good looking photos with every device

Posted via CB10

[u4ria]

I have. Compared to an iPhone 4, the Z10 HDR was much better.

Setup: several books on a bookshelf, under halogen light. Wasn't dark, but wasn't bright either.

Results: The iPhone picture looked a bit washed out (colours washed out), with no depth. Z10 was more pleasing the darks were a bit darker and the lights weren't over blown. It just looked more pleasing. I found that the results from the iPhone looked like a picture that was over exposed, leading everything to look washed out.

I've found the best looking HDR for the Z10 tend to be when there is a little bit of cloud cover. The HDR makes the clouds look an ominous grey like they're about to unleash madness. When it's sunny and bright, I find the colours too over saturated.

[Gnomesane]

This guy is the same one that posted several times that the iPhone keyboard was much better than the Z10 keyboard.

....that is all...

Thank you. All I need to know.

[Gnomesane]

This guy is the same one that posted several times that the iPhone keyboard was much better than the Z10 keyboard.

....that is all...

Sooman54, thanks for the heads up. Here's a thought.

Writers Of Negative Online Reviews Revealed - ABC News

[frfghtr]

Quality is reasonable for a smart phone, but the best way to do any kind of HDR/bracket photography is by the 3 words DLSR users swear by.

Tripod, tripod, tripod.

Posted via CB10

[gordo51]

Sunset in my backyard. First photo is normal exposure. Notice how dark the dock is.
Second photo is HDR. More detail in the dark areas. Got to hold the camera steady for sure.

[aboldcurve]

This guy is the same one that posted several times that the iPhone keyboard was much better than the Z10 keyboard.

....that is all...

Hahahaha

@chrisjaam

[PowderJockey]

HDR takes 3 shots - over exposed, under exposed and at normal exposure to combine, with the camera on the z10 it isn't meant to take moving objects.

that's what DSLR cameras and post editing software is for

As you stated, it meant for a DSLR and "TRIPOD". Is is used to remove the shadows that might seen in a normal image.

I've used it on the Z10 with great success. As stated, just have to have steady hands. No good for the morning after!!!!

[SK122387]

I have a Z10 but today I was on my Q10 and took this picture at work. Oh, and for all you instagram lovers, "#NoFilter."



If you're viewing this on your Q10 or Z10, tell me again how the HDR is "garbage"??





Posted via CB10

[Young Z]

Why does it look blurry?

When you upload an image to this site, it downgrades the image to save space. If you want to show the original image, you have to upload it to a third party site that does not downgrade the image to save space and then post the link here.

Check out my "Facepalm" channel: C0001F676

[Blacklatino]

If you don't already know HDR stands for high dynamic range, it takes 6 pictures at different ISO and puts it into one to make the image look better. I was taking pictures of trees as they blowing in the wind, the pictures look ask if they were being thrown around at 500 mph. You cannot compare the iPhone and the BlackBerry's HDR. It's simply garbage. At 50% crop the images look like it's our of an 8-bit computer screen lol... I hope this will all change with the 10.1 MR and or the 10.2
Cheers.


Posted via CB10

Try it a few time on different types of photo scenarios before posting that it's garbage. Works fine for me.

[Gearheadaddy]

OP, HDR is excellent. It works very well for me.

Posted via CB10