Re: 48 MP
As an avid photographer, I’m going to say that mostly it wouldn’t make sense so there is no need to be disappointed. There was an interview lately with Mark Levoy, the lead engineer behind google pixel’s camera app where he was talking about this - the gains from increased resolution in these sensors are balanced by higher noise and lower dynamic range of the small pixels. There is zero benefit in such small sensors by going for a higher resolution.
What does make sense is the technique used here called pixel binning. It combines four pixels into 1 big pixel that has more information, and with clever processing a better image can be created (more dynamic range and less noise). But the real difference between this kind of sensor and a 12-egapixel sensor of the same size is not going to be spectacular anyway.
In today’s flagship smartphones the final image quality is 90% processing and 10% gear (sensor, lens etc). This is why apps like the GCAM and its ports are so great.
BTW, the same guy- Mark Levoy is currently working with Adobe on a universal app for all smartphones that would utilize the newest computational techniques. It will be compatibe with android devices and legal to download through the google play store so that’s something to look forward to.
Hi
First of all, I didn’t catch up on all the 100 posts above mine, I just read the first 30, so sorry if my question was already answered.
What I’m interested in is how the sensor on the old camera module was built.
Every digital camera has a bayer filter in it that composes each pixel of four different subpixels, two green ones and one red and blue respectively. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/37/Bayer_pattern_on_sensor.svg/1200px-Bayer_pattern_on_sensor.svg.png
Since the old camera also had 12MP, its built-in bayer filter must have had 48 “Mega-Subpixels” as well.
So apart from the 13% sensor size enlargement (which is one of the most important factors of image quality. Just a reminder: FullHD has a resution of 2MP and 4K has 8MP, so everything above that is completely unnecessary on a phone anyways), the number of subpixels on the bayer filter apparently hasn’t changed at all.
The only thing that has changed is that FP now shouts out the number of subpixels in a confusing way so that people think that they’re actually getting 48MP photos (which again, the resolution would be rediculously unnecessary for a phone camera, but explain that to your average “bigger is better” customer).
I thought the camera modules were a disappointment and just marketing from the minute I saw the introduction video (back then I didn’t even know that the 48MP weren’t real. It’s just that nobody who uses a phone camera would ever need a 48MP photo).
This is just one of a couple of examples I’ve noticed in the past year or two of FP being less responsible and transparent and more stupidly marketing oriented. I’m sad to see that.
It was mentioned in an image processing class at my university. The slide is not very helpful, but I remember the professor explaining it in more detail, also mentioning why 50% of the filter is green and only 25% red and blue respectively (our human eyes are evolutionally trained to distinguish green tones better, so more sensor space is used to get a more accurate colour).
Wikipedia also says that “its particular arrangement of color filters is used in most single-chip digital image sensors used in digital cameras, camcorders, and scanners to create a color image.”
What I’m trying to say is that apart from the bigger sensor the camera is probably very much the same. And as @maciekpruski already mentioned,
So unless FP improves the camera app the pictures will probably not be that amazing. I’m just disappointed that they went with the intransparent “fake specs” instead of just saying “the new camera also has 12MP, but it has a bigger sensor so the image quality should be a little better”.
My understanding of bayer vs. quad bayer, is that per part of the filter (the colourful squares on top of the grey squares [light sensors]), there are one (bayer) or four (quad bayer) individual sensors. If you’re averaging (or something similar) four readings in quad bayer to a single value, there will be less noise. There is more noise in low light, so the improvements should be at that end.
In the case of the single bayer data and the combined quad bayer data (if values are combined before interpolation) you still have to interpolate the readings to get a full frame for each colour. On a 12 MP sensor you’ll have 6 MP of actual green data, and 3 MP of each of red and blue. The other values are estimated. Interpolation of colour values on full data from a quad bayer sensor gives you a lot less accuracy than you’d have on a 48 MP single bayer device. It could be that it doesn’t add much (if anything) compared to downsampling (before or after interpolation) to 12 MP.
Still, it appears that some devices do offer 48 MP output (but the reviews I read mentioned the 12 MP output was as good or better), so it would be interesting for experimentation if the firmware does offer the possibility.
That is true, the upgrade seems very minor. It definitely works from marketing perspective- they had a lot of praise in reviews for offering modular upgrades instead of forcing users to buy new phones.
An upgrade to the camera app would be much better though… The problem is that such upgrade is costly and difficult to make, releasing a new sensor module is much easier.
I’m currently deciding between the FP3 and FP3+ and honestly I think I’ll just get the FP3 and wait to see the app update.
It’s worth to note from time to time that other improvements went into the Fairphone 3+, too. It doesn’t only feature the new camera modules.
The Fairphone 3 might of course be a valid choice nonetheless, as long as it’s still available.
All this results in bad advertising for Fairphone: “The Fairphone 3+ is a product that leaves you a little confused. Sold for € 469, compared to € 419 for the Fairphone 3, it only brings a slight evolution here. Above all, this evolution is not felt - or very little - in use, and does not seem to justify the choice of the new model, except to hope for a longer software follow-up from the manufacturer. Those who would be tempted to purchase the new photo module separately can also save the expense as its photos are similar to those of the previous version. It is therefore difficult to understand the strategy of the manufacturer, especially as this 3+ does not replace the old version, still on the market.”
This seems very unlikely, doesn’t it? Why would they support the FP3+ longer given that it is mostly identical to the FP3, specifically with respect to the SoC?
Fairphone Angels have done a very good job in being honest and trying to feel (show) confident with FP3+.
But it is clear to me that FP3+ release was a very bad idea: problems with android 10, camera not worth the difference, lot of confusion, questions about sustainability…
I urge Fairphone Angels to explain Fairphone that they don’t have to be similar to big players. FP are different and have a different market. 12MP camera on a smartphone is more than enough!
In my opinion the FP3+ was a good idea but it was probably too rushed. In fact, the more sustainable materials are definitely a good idea, and the new modules as well, but waiting another year for this might’ve helped, especially to correct all major bugs before release of another Android version, and maybe they could’ve found an even better new camera module until then.
I think whether it was a good idea or not will depend on what they do next. Will they support both models (FP3 and FP3+) for another 4-5 years with updates?
Will they upgrade camera software, and will the update be for both camera modules or only the new ones?
Also, we have to look at the bigger picture. While the upgrade may be minor for existing FP3 users, they certainly gained a lot of good press in various reviews and websites. They need to gain traction as a company and sell phones, and for existing FP3 users this will be good as well- more money for the company will mean better support.
I just hope they will support the FP3 for a long time, otherwise the whole idea would be a little moot. Definitely wouldn’t want to see a new phone being introduced every 2 years…
Personally, I’d gladly pay for an upgraded camera app, perhaps they could offer a paid upgrade like this so they can devote more resources for this or have an external company design the camera app?
Hello there everybody from the Fairphone community!
I have got my Fairphone 3+ some days ago, and I like it very much. The thing I don’t really like is the camera. It is very disappointing to wait for the improved modules just to end up with something like this. Somehow blursed and sharpened at the same time, black spaces full of colourful fragments. I have tried different apps, different sizes, different settings, but nothing seems to help. May some of you folks give me advice?
Most of my pictures look good when not zoomed in. I can live with this though. This shot here (like many others) doesn’t look good at all. Not even on a small display. I’d feel embarrassed to send this to someone.
I would be happy to get photos like @Arne-Jaeger or @UlM have shown in this thread. Mine are crappy overall.
Another strange thing is, regardless of the chosen camera app, and even when selecting the SD card as storage, all of the pictures go to the phone memory. Which makes the SD card a little bit useless though.
Oh, and I have my phone from e.foundation, in the case that matters.
Still, it’s a great phone. I don’t want to rant, but that camera thing is really annoying. Especially after headily deciding to keep this sustainable phone like forever.
Welcome to the forum!
I moved your post here as the other topic was about the old camera module, this one is about the new one.
Did you try this google camera port, it has been reported to give very good results:
It does. It means you won’t get the improvements FP are planning to release soon (end of the year) for the camera software that should increase photo quality quite a bit, and the future ones they are still working on that should bring a very significant increase.
Even without the latest software updates, an /e/-phone should not provide such poor results. The image shows a lot of noise with a large grain size, which normally suggests that it would’ve been taken with a low resolution or high zoom level in poor lighting.
Is there any protective plastic from the shipment still covering the camera lens, or any visible damage to the glass?
Thanks for the fast answers. And thanks for moving the post. That woud mean the photos from the other thread were taken with the old camera. Which confuses me even more, because I don’t even reach that quality. There are some fairly good ones in this thread though.
I have now, but the app crashes the moment I accept or decline the permission for location.
Well, and I thought all the important improvements should have been done by releasing the new version of the phone.
This sentence gives me hope, but I still have to figure out what the problem may be. The image I posted was highest resolution with no zoom level in acceptable lighting (resized without quality loss on desktop).
