Thanks @Antoine! The camera improvement seem negligable and I think I can live without the 3db increase in speaker volume 
I do like the transparent case of FP3 so that might be the phone for me. I do like my plastics recycled though 
2 Likes
I must admit I really feel upset about this, especially for the price of the new modules 
I’m still waiting for them, but I hesitate with sending them back within the 14 days cool-off period… Unless the Fairphone team would release a much better camera software to magnify these modules with good contrasts in HDR, a good night mode and use the 48Mpx to their full potential?
I’m really expecting a better zoom up to 4x with no pixellisation in good lighting conditions (as technically possible with this sensor which contains 4x more pixels, right?) and as implicitly advertised on social medias, as you can see in this Twitter post, also here, and even there.
EDIT: Added the links for proof 
Could maybe @formerFP.Com.Manager enlighten us about all this emphasis in marketing on zooming with good quality where it seems not to be really available 
… only for now, I hope?
Would it be possible to ask to Wayne Huang for the tech part and/or someone in the marketing department?
8 Likes
I just cancelled my order since the feedback regarding the new modules is not too good here and I’d rather use a digicam if I wanted a real improvement in picture quality.
By now I feel that FP wasted potential here…
2 Likes
Hello,
does anyone else have some photos that were taken with the new camera module?
I have seen other photos from decibyte and uodalricus.
Thank you!
Greetings,
chb
At first, I was sure to buy the modules when they are released, but I have decided to wait and see what the community says. I have to say, I am glad about the decision.
The pictures that I saw made a positive decision for the new modules very questionable and it is disappointing to say the least. If FP feels pressured to release other models to “adapt to the marked and its rules” the outcome is key. Bad or simply unimpressed news about the FP 3+ (or the modules) that sound like “there is not a noticeable difference to the FP3” are very counterproductive for the whole idea of FP. The current marked and their rules are what in the end, brought a lot of us to FP because they made it differently. If the goal was to be noticed in social media and the news, the only thing that is achieved, was the belief of people that FP is still not a device for them. On top of that, they disappointed their current customer base.
Why adapt to a marked that is wrong in many aspects and if you do, you should make a huge difference so the modular idea actually benefits the choice of a FP. It was mentioned before and I have to agree, this feels like a waste of time with a bad outcome for FP and its current customers. A hype was created with a negative outcome, like so many other hypes that have been created before. FP simply cannot do such a thing if they actually want to make a difference as a small company. The margin for error is small. People that own a FP should say to their friends and colleagues: “Just upgraded the camera of my 2 year old phone, look at those pictures.” and it should make them say “wow”. That’s how you get new customers.
Just my two cents.
8 Likes
If someone with the new camera module could post a test photo using four times zoom and raw (dng) file format would be great. See the screenshot. This way, by comparing the raw (not computed) sensor data we could separate software from hardware quality. Software can get fixed via updates much easier but hardware has its certain limitations.
5 Likes
My order has already shipped but I might return it too…
1 Like
Can anyone tell me if theres any difference between the old and the new camera on social platforms? For example on Snapchat, where the camera quality currently is so bad, that the replies I get usually are towards the crappiness of the camera rather than what I’m actually taking a picture of. It’s really hard to recommend the phone to anyone before such easy, but essential bugs are fixed! And I don’t need the new camera unless it actually is improving this, as it is what I’m actually buying it for.
1 Like
This is an excellent question. I have started a habit of taking a picture first and then sharing it from Google Photos, rather than taking the picture through the app I want to use for sharing. It would be great if I can take good pictures in WhatsApp again!
1 Like
Thank you, for the fast reply. Can you upload the DNG File one more time? Somehow I can just see a 5 MP JPEG version of it.
I see no difference. The photos I take from within WhatsApp are usually still pretty blurry, as if image stabilization was turned off. I always take photos with gCam and then share them from the gallery. If you care about photo quality, the FP3 is definitely not the right phone. Maybe get a used iPhone SE, that’s an idea I’ve toyed with…
2 Likes
When I click the full frame image, there are three dots in the upper right corner. When I click on them, I get a “Download” option which downloads the DNG (even in incognito mode, so I’m not logged in to Amazon Photos). Does this not work for you?
Thing is I’m not that bothered about camera quality, I just don’t want it to be utterly useless. Iphone 6 quality ish would be fine, for instance. To me it looks like its the software that isn’t capable of utilizing the camera at all - everything is overly sharpened, contrasts maxxed etc - I took a video of a colleague on snapchat for instance, and her relatively small spots looked like holes in her cheek! I simply couldn’t send the video because people would’ve been absolutely terrified seeing that video
Sounds to me like you care about camera quality… 
But I know what you mean. It’s obvious that the problem is the software (see my gCam photos above which I find passable).
Actually, I haven’t seen anything this bad on my phone, not with the old camera or the new. This sounds more like some Snapchat filter not playing nice with the camera/driver. I don’t use Snapchat though. I only see blurriness in WhatsApp photos.
Sorry, my fault. You are right. Too bad that the RAW/DNG Version is not saving as zoomed in and also not saving the full 48MP resolution eather, this is realy a handycap for the RAW option. My only hope is that they can fix this with some kind of driver update…
Snapchat is known for terrorizing Android phones’ camera quality tho. Originally made for Apple, which might explain it. But I’m not going back to Apple for now - the whole point of buying the FP3 for me was to give the finger to the way those companies operate - and supporting someone trying to do good.
Repairing a broken glass backscreen on Iphone Xs Max costs 450€. Like every other repair cost on those phones. Adding to that you are even forced to change the backscreen (if broken) if you are repairing the front screen - they have designed the backscreen to fall apart if you open it while broken = replacement needed. So a repair of back+front then costs 900€ if you haven’t got insurance. Which is ludicrous, and roughly the same price of a relatively new one.
So I’m fine with my FP3, I love the concept and its repairability. Also the battery and front screen is great. It’s a shame tho, that the comprimise for going ethical must be so big although the FP3 is a fair improvement from FP2. And even more annoying that the software doesn’t help.
3 Likes
As you wrote, being relatively uncompromising on the ethics/fairness side means other compromises, I’m fine with that. I’m also fine with the fact that FP don’t seem to have the resources to get their software game up to speed. What I’m definitely not fine with is that they decided to sell a new camera module as a quack remedy for the bad software. It does nothing for photo quality (almost) because the software is still just as bad. That’s just wasteful (resources, customer’s money, …) and contrary to what I thought FP stands for. And I’m very doubtful that even with ideal software support for the old and new modules the new one would be an improvement.
2 Likes