FP6 camera "worse" than Pixel 4a camera

ItsOK · April 27, 2026, 4:22am

I’ve had my Pixel 4a for over 5 years, and I would keep using it, but the screen has a vertical line, the battery is bulging, and the OS is aging. I chose the FP6 for its repairability and SD card slot.

My issue is with the FP6 camera. It’s a mystery to me how this is possible, but: the pictures taken with the FP6 just don’t look as good as the ones taken with my old Pixel 4a. My primary complaints are:

Lower detail resolution. It has more Pixels, but actual details (i.e. when you zoom in) are resolved less accurately than on the Pixel 4a. At 50MP things are just blurry. At 12MP, details are outright less resolved.
Too much noise reduction, resulting in everything looking like clay.
Oversaturation, overall unnatural look

The Pixel 4a has a Sony IMX 363 sensor, 12MP, 1/2.55" in size, 1.4µm pixel size, f/1.7
The FP6 has a Sony LYT-700C, 50MP, 1/1.56" in size, 1.0µm pixel size, f/1.56

By these numbers alone, the FP6 should take better pictures. It has a larger sensor and higher pixel density. Yet, in all my testing, both in daylight and low-light conditions, the actual resolution of details is lower on the FP6. I’ve got many samples to show.

I don’t know if the forum adds any compression, but I don’t think compression is the issue on either device. I believe the FP6 uses way too aggressive noise reduction, and maybe the lense is bad. Also, I think the forum scales the pictures, but it’s really not important, as the included crops illustrate the lower detail in FP6 pictures compared to the Pixel 4a.

First up, a yellow bush.

FP6 50MP:

FP6 12MP:

FP6 GCam, nicer sky, overall better contrast:

Pixel 4a:

Here’s a crop of the top left corner. The 4a is sharp and true to life. The tree bark looks like tree bark. The FP6 is washed out, blurry, and oversaturated. But you can download and zoom into any part of the picture and while the FP6 looks fine from a distance, details are just worse all over.

FP6 50MP:

FP6 12MP:

FP6 GCam:

Pixel 4a - sharp, realistic bark. The flowers also look better. Also, the thin branches in the background are much better resolved.

Next up, some cherry (?) trees. Both the FP6 samples have a completely washed out sky.

FP6 60MP:

FP6 12 MP:

FP6 GCam:

Pixel 4a:

Here’s a crop of the blue sign.

FP6 50MP - not bad but kinda blurry:

FP6 12MP - by far the worst out of the bunch. It somehow butchered the second line of text.

FP6 GCam - at least the colors are better. The FP6 camera app makes it seem like the metal frame of the sign and the cherry blossoms have the same white color. GCam at least captures that the blossoms are white, but the frame is grey:

Pixel 4a - the text is much more legible, and even the second sign below in the distance is resolved more accurately. The FP6 camera overexposes it to nearly wash out. Also, the post and the dark grit on it simply look better, more realistic, while with the FP6 camera, everything looks like clay.

Here’s a shot at night:

FP6 50MP (I forgot to take one at 12MP). The FP6 camera oversaturated the yellow lights and the green bushes look artificial.

FP6 GCam:

Pixel 4a - the glare is obviously worse and there is more noise, but again, this is much more representative of what the real world actually looked like. More accurate colors and a more natural look.

Cropping the license plate of the Mercedes clearly shows how much worse the FP6 is:

FP6 50MP - You can’t even make out the first two numbers at all.

FP6 GCam - the license plate can barely be read, but the grille (diagonal stripes) around the emblem is completely washed out:

Pixel 4a - the plate can be read clearly. Also this is the only picture where the blue marking on the ground is actually blue. The FP6 camera doesn’t even capture this, just a light greyish blue. Also, every detail looks better in the Pixel 4a picture, including the headlamps and emblem. In the FP6 pictures above, the emblem is a complete blurry mess.

So yeah. Sure, the Pixel 4a has more noise. But in my opinion, a bit of noise doesn’t hurt at all, compared to making every picture look like a clay diorama and losing detail. The 50MP pictures from the FP6 are just kinda blurry and not worth the extra storage. GCam on FP6 generally has better colors, but the resolution of details is just as bad.

So the questions are:

Why is this? How come a sensor that is better on paper and 5 years newer performs worse, or at best comparably to an older, worse sensor? I tried many different camera apps on the FP6, including Open Camera, Libre Camera, FreeDCam and various GCams, but they all suffer from a lack of resolution compared to the old Pixel 4a. My only guess is that the FP6 lense is worse that the one on the Pixel 4a. Detail is especially bad in the corners, so this may also point to a bad lense.
What can be done to improve the situation? Most importantly: how can I get rid of the excessive noise reduction and smoothing? Is this in firmware? I tried to find the firmware but it doesn’t seem to be open source. I’d much prefer more noise.

This is a real bummer.

Oh and HDR mode is of course completely useless, but I expected nothing else. Check out this picture of some flowers.

FP6:

Pixel 4a:

FP6 crop - just horrible:

Pixel 4a crop (no HDR), pleasant to look at, and much, much better detail.

mike_1312 · April 27, 2026, 7:14am

Thank you for your efforts for taking and sharing the pictures for comparison.
Your findings are exactly the same issues that bothered me and what I also don’t like about the camera (software?) of the FP6.
Fine natural structures (grass, leaves,…) are really bad, like you have shown here:
https://forum.fairphone.com/uploads/default/original/3X/c/f/cf26314bcd2b6c65d4ecc737e3f7bcd15faa65c1.jpeg

Pfriemler · April 28, 2026, 1:41pm

Coming from a Poco X4 Pro (which miss an OIS), the FP6 cam is way better. Compared to my 8 years old Samsung S8, it s…s*. The “horrible” details are really bad an seen here, too. 10 years before I started flying with a toy drone (no gps, no gyro, this is how you learn to fly :-)) and its cam pics were as bad as this. Honestly, I did not buy the FP6 for its camera. The FP6 is a good daily, but not more, in no way.

I just figured out that my FP6 cam is ok, compared to the pics here. The GCam pics are dark to my, no probs to get a fine sky with a bad green on the bottom. I am impressed of the pixel’s cam. And the HDR pics are generally low and miss bandwith and details. I just run IrfanView’s automatic enhancer on them and get way better results. I agree, the cam app is the worst I’ve ever seen.

*) really? I am not allowed to post this word? OMG…

ItsOK · May 1, 2026, 9:22am

I did some digging. I downloaded the fp6 source tree and blobs (a stunning 817Gb by the way) and started poking around. But it seems that:

The Fairphone 6 Camera (com.fps.camera) is closed source
All the noise reduction and smudging probably happens somewhere in the Qualcomm or TCT (TCL Alcatel) binary blobs anyway.

I’m guessing Fairphone, the company, didn’t even implement any of it, anyway, and just partnered with the companies above.

So all in all, I think there’s very little us users/open-source devs can even do about this situation. I’m trying to find an android camera app that allows setting NOISE_REDUCTION_MODE somewhere explicitly, just to see if it makes any difference - if the binary blobs even support the option.

Other than that, one can only use an app like GCam which at least has better colors. I managed to take some of the best photos so far (at least with regard to colors, not resolution) using FreeDCam, but it just requires way too much fiddling around.

I think this is just a trend in the industry. I didn’t mention it before, but I also compared the Pixel 4a to the Pixel 9a, and in my opinion, the Pixel 4a takes better pictures than the 9a. In fact, the photos taken on 9a vs. FP6 are extremely similar. Lower detail resolution with oversaturated colors. And if you start googling, it seems like iPhone and Android users have the same complaints: that older smartphones take better pictures. Probably a combination of Instagrammification (“popping colors”, read: oversaturation), megapixel-craze (higher pixel-density isn’t always good, and 50MP on a phone is ridiculous anyway - the FP6’s blurry pictures shows it), and overall over-reliance on software.

It’s just sad.

ItsOK · May 14, 2026, 12:37pm

I don’t usually follow MKBHD, but he did a neat comparison of smartphone cameras over the years, here. Interesting bits start at around 1:25, and then again from 4:20 to the end. I also recommend watching the shorts (), particularly the one for the pixel series - good job.

I’ve kept fiddling with the FP6 and it’s just so frustrating. The pictures really aren’t bad (unless you turn on HDR), but it’s such a bummer that the 5 year old Pixel 4a is just so much better. One thing I haven’t mentioned it the selfie cam. I won’t post the pictures, but selifes on the FP6 make people look sickly beyond belief. Just yellow greenish facial skin, the difference to the 4a is staggering.

It’s even more frustrating to read the glamorous article by Fairphone, Let’s talk about cameras on the new Fairphone (Gen. 6). Quote: “We worked with TCL extensively, looking at over a thousand photographs to achieve true-to-life colors and specific tones for various scenes, especially sunsets and low-light shots. We really optimized it for everyday use, with a really balanced approach to color reproduction. Nothing is oversaturated, nothing is washed out either.”

Gosh darn, what a load of marketing. The colors aren’t great, details are definitely washed out. The pictures are terrible by 2021 standards.

I know I’m dragging this along, but I think I’ll probably just sell the FP6 and get a battery and screen for my old Pixel 4a. Main problem is it’s no longer getting security updates. What a shame.

Piotr_Malarz · May 17, 2026, 1:40pm

You all have valid points,

However what you don’t consider is that Google is multi billion dollar company with many employees and almost unlimited resources,

Fairphone as a startup company simply cannot compete with the giants of the tech industry at this point.

Pixel wars are well over as proven that camera modules with less megapixels can produce better quality photos then newest chips. Its all depends how optimised the software is these days and like I said above Fairphone cannot compete with them on that matter.

I personally find the fairphone 6 a nice alternative to phones that cost far more. I’ve owned Motorola’s pixels and other brand phones and find fairphone enough for what I use it for. Which is mostly browsing web, taking some photos for work and personal interests, video chat with friends and family, writing emails and occasional game session on the cloud.

Rapairability is biggest point here. I think as in past I had to splash some cash on costly screen repairs in third party shops that crippled the functionality of a phone afterwards, so having an option that you can do it yourself is a bonus. Plus if fairphone decides to make next iteration of their phone capable of swapping components with different specs the possibilities would be much improved. As long as software end would be optimised as well.

Did anyone of you tried third party camera apps for comparison? Like open camera app from f-droid store?

Zwybelfisch · May 18, 2026, 8:00am

@Itsok did trial different apps (see original post in this thread), but apparently it did not make a difference.

It’s sad really. I went on a hike this weekend, and I won’t be using the FP6 for casual photograpy again. With my Huawei P10 from 2017, I could take pictures wihth the standard settings and later have them printed on A4 paper. With the FP6, the quality was shocking even zooming into the pic on the phone. Grainy elongated pixels, flat colours, getting worse if I used 2x zoom. I did already switch off all automatic “improvement” options before, as they seem to cause problems.

Luckily I have a real camera that isn’t too big.

ItsOK · May 18, 2026, 10:03pm

It is true that Google probably engineers their own picture processing. However, Fairphone outsourced this to TCL which is no dwarf either and has plenty of experience. In this case, Fairphone is TCLs customer. Fairphone’s statement that they “looked at over a thousand photographs to achieve true-to-life colors and specific tones for various scenes” indicates that they specified the camera software to behave as it does. The HDR mode is just ludicrously bad, and Fairphone accepted - maybe even endorsed - this implementation. They wanted the amount of sharpening in HDR, and the excessive smoothing and noise reduction in regular pictures that was implemented by TCL.

As you say yourself, it’s all about software, so I doubt swapping in a hypothetical future upgrade would do anything.

I did try Open Camera, Libre Camera, FreeDCam and various GCams, but they all suffer from the lack of detail, which is coming from the lower-level implementation done by TCL. I got best results using FreeDCam, but it’s way too fiddly.

Don’t get me wrong, I kinda love this phone. Almost everything else about it is great. And it appears that Fairphone is a competent supply-chain company. It’s just sad that the camera is much worse than it should be. And it’s not because of the sensor, but because of choices made by Fairphone and TCL with regard to smoothing, noise reduction, and color grading.

yvmuell · May 19, 2026, 8:36am

While picture composition is always akso very subjective I also think FP6 is not good and it could and should be approved. AI scene detection seems to be too aggressive e.g. when using 2x zoom in certain situations. Its also causing pictures are not saved once animal is detected and you see the AI pictogram.

KurtF · May 19, 2026, 11:32am

To put things in perspective, most cameras are worse than a Pixel camera (except iPhones of course, which are the top).

That been said Fairphone’s cameras have never been very good, it’s a problem people already discussed back in FP4 times. When I see the flowers crop picture in the initial post, I’m reminded of very similar FP4 pictures I had posted about 3 years ago: Exact same over-processing.

On the FP4 Fairphone eventually mitigated the problem by releasing an update to the camera software which made it usable. Still not something to make art photos with, but at least now you can take the occasional snapshot.

ItsOK · May 19, 2026, 1:03pm

Yes, the Pixel 4A was a great budget shooter six years ago when it came out. But 6 years should be a long time to catch up. Fairphone and TCL just botched the software.

Case in point, have a look at the pictures taken in this review of the Sony Xperia VII, which came out September 2025, and is of comparable caliber to the FP6 (sans repairability but it also has an SD card slot and even a headphone jack! ): Sony Xperia 10 VII review: Camera, photo and video quality (PS: I chose this for comparison because it supports LineageOS or another mainstream degoogled rom, like e/os for the FP6, which is a hard requirement for me - not many phones do)

In particular, consider this picture: PS: please look at the original as the forum has noticably reduced the quality of this picture. The collage below is only slightly worse compared to the original.

We don’t have an FP6 for comparison, but I bet you my right arm you couldn’t even read the STOP sign in the back. I made a collage of what I think detail should look like on a modern mid-range phone:

Look at the guy watering his plants looking like a real person even through the green glass, rather than a clay figure. The plants and workout machine down below, too. The bracing on the left, even the tree needles look sufficiently sharp and natural. And the construction in the back is just full of detail. You can make out every single rod of concrete reinforcement steel in the top floor!

Highlights are a bit blown out. And Yes, there’s a little bit more noise, but it’s just the right amount. Noise is normal. Ever taken a film photograph? Ever seen a movie shot on film? Maybe I’m just too old. Maybe young people thing the FP6 look (minimal noise, just clay and smudging) is normal.

I am old man yelling at clouds. But look at those Sony pictures! That’s what I want in the FP6 and I know it’s possible. If we could just get rid of the excessive noise reduction at the very least.

Note that the Sony has a sensor that is comparable to FP6’s sensor, but with worse f/ and the FP6’s LYT-700C is even supposed to be “pantone validated”:

FP6: Sony LYT-700C, 50MP, 1/1.56" in size, 1.0µm pixel size, f/1.56
Sony Xperia 10 VII: Sony IMX766 (Exmor RS?), 50MP, 1/1.56" in size, 1.0µm pixel size, f/1.9

And yes, the Sony’s ultrawide is terrible, but I wouldn’t need one except in rare cases. I just wish for a good main shooter… The Sony’s selfie cam looks OK.

If I get a chance to try this Sony in a showroom I shall take some comparison shots with the FP6.

KurtF · May 19, 2026, 4:26pm

Yes, I’m of the elderly persuasion too (mugshot not very recent), not only have I taken hundreds of chemical photographs, in my youth I even used to develop my films myself and make my paper prints myself. But I don’t think it compares. Back then you tried to make the picture (if only because of cost), nowadays photos are just a cheap and handy means to show stuff to other people.

But we’re going OT and will be chastised…

The point is, that 1. a phone, any phone, is not a good photographic camera (too many optical shortcuts), and 2. Fairphone didn’t invest much in their cameras (marketing gush notwithstanding). Horses for courses, people who want to make good pictures will still have to invest in a (digital) single-lens reflex camera.

Zwybelfisch · May 20, 2026, 6:15am

We can only hope.

As it is, the camera is good only for visual notes (photo of a placard, product), copy and print of pages, etc. And I am not even a good hobby photographer, just someone who likes to take a photo every now and then, and sometimes make a postcard or a small poster from it.