Survey: Fairphone 4 Camera

I suppose you do. Fairphone brings out updates about once a month. So for sure you should have the first batch of updates that improve the camera.

1 Like

If they overcame that, they would be magical or able to transcend the laws of physics.

Perhaps it would be better to agree that they compensate for the shortcomings in sufficient lighting with sophisticated calculations in the camera software?

Because then we get to the heart of the matter: the software, like you said. And Google/Apple have completely different options at their disposal than Fairphone. Fairphone will never be able to accomplish the engineering work that goes into the camera software of bigger companies. And it would also be rather unrealistic to expect Fairphone to do so.

I mean, if you look at OpenCamera: there are a lot of gimmicks, but at least on my FP3 no better quality than the standard app. Better quality comes with the Gcam port. So from those with the development power: Google.


Cheaper phones, like some Chinese ones can also “break the laws of physics” :wink: Fairphone will do that as well, in time. They already have a software defined camera, it’s just not at the same level as other mid range devices. Is it really that offensive to point out that this software exists when people say it’s impossible to improve the current camera? I don’t get these reactions… If we want Fairphone to succeed in their mission, they need a better camera. Not a half baked closed-source port from Google, but one that’s shipped with the phone. Otherwise people won’t be able to be happy with their device for the period Fairphone supports it. This was also pointed out by the Dutch consumers association a few years ago.


Could you please stop to destroy some peoples dream? And how motivated shall the fp developers be, when they are reading this?

It‘s funny to see how discussions about FP’s pictures always take the same turn: it‘s the camera, it depends on the light, the laws of physics, Pixel, the software, engineering resources, end?


They also have more manpower and are bigger and to what price are they cheaper? If you want to compare Fairphone than compare reslistic, e.g. with Shift, but not with Samsung, Apple, Pixel and so on. Then you will notice the flag ship Shift 6mq also still struggels after more than 1 year with Camera Software.
No one says the Fairphone cannot improve, however expectations have to be realistic. they already improved a lot with each device. Everyone used to high quality Software from other phones, either has to accept that Fairphone does not offer the same or will most likely never be happy with a Fairphone. There are so many people happily using the FP2 and FP3 to take pictures and who can accept that they are not as good as I phones ,Pixels…

1 Like

But some people do say this cannot be improved due to e.g. physics. That’s when I bring up the extreme high-end examples of what’s possible. I do note that you still don’t buy a Fairphone for its camera. I agree that Fairphone excells at other things. But when people say that it cannot get better due to physics is just mehh.

Anyway, I start to repeat this same argument over and over. I don’t get why people don’t want or can believe what phones can do for at least 6 years already. Anyway, I hope FP will catch up. I’m done. :nerd_face:


I’ve already noticed that you acknowledge that people don’t buy a Fairphone because of the camera. And, that you said you’re out.

But still, I’m afraid I have to disagree here again, then I’m out too :wink:

No one would get the idea to say: Google builds mega-awesome cameras into the Pixels, but they absolutely have to work on the mining conditions and on the payment of the factory workers if they want to be successful.

You obviously get the idea that a comparatively bad camera prevents success when your priorities are different from mine (for example) or those of many other people, e.g. here in the forum.

In your opinion, FP can’t be successful if they don’t improve the camera. I’ll put my observation against that and say: I wouldn’t be sure about that. And that is precisely because the camera is not the top priority of all buyers. In every review (really every review I’ve read), the camera comes off badly. Still, (OK, I’m probably living in a bit of a bubble, I won’t deny that) three out of five acquaintances who have bought a phone recently have bought a Fairphone knowing that it doesn’t have a Pixel camera.
So, that was my anecdotal knowledge.

I don’t claim to know whether Fairphone will be successful. Still, my very limited empiricism is enough to say: a bad camera (in comparison) does not keep people from buying it per se.
Some do, of course, and while I find that a pitty, I don’t condemn it either.

(That is not to say that I would not welcome a better camera, but it is not a must for many people.)

Whereas this may seem true from a relativistic view, given enough resources, as mentioned, improvements can always be made.

It may not be practical for Fairphone or Google to use quantum mechanics in the next 20 years but nothing is beyond the laws of physics as they are constantly evolving.

Physics doesn’t make the laws of our limitations, we create those laws as a sign of our understanding and current limitation.

1 Like

As an engineer, I readily admit that I and the small engineering firm I work for would not be capable of building a fusion reactor. We simply don’t have the manpower, even though we are all extremely brilliant and experienced in our field.



This comment from UPPERCASE is pure gold. Fairphone cant improve if they dont admit that they are losing s bunch of customers because of crappy camera software, which in todays world is a major blocker for generations born 1990+

Honestly, when I told my wife we should get a Fairphone she just commented that camera is bad and she wont have a phone without a usable camera. Also that is currently the only blocker for me not buying it yet, 750€ is not much if the phone can do 2 things all modern phones need to do: social media (facebook, twitter, tiktok, maybe viber and whatsapp) and take a decent picture of my son


Actually this postition that camera is not important for many ppl might be a bit subjective.

For a fact when we ask any Iphone, Samsung, Xiaomi, Sony etc user what are top 3 most important things in mobile phone: 7.5/10 would say camera as more or most important

I actually had to google this one because I thought it would be 9/10 but 7.5 is still pretty high

Fairphone does not have a big battery, nor the best screen, no fast charging or wireless charging, no nfc or face unlock, no speakers on 2 sides of the phone and is heavy with a lot of plastic here and there, no aluminium and isnt water/dust proof and thats all ok because it was not meant to have all these things.

But camera is there and is meant to be used as a camera and therefore my opinion is that such a camera in 2022 should be as good as in a 250$ Xiaomi camera from 2019, no more and certainly not less

Anybody agree?


full agree :+1: But I guess there are also a lot of people, which prefere other things.

What size battery do you consider big. 5Ah ??
What is ‘the best screen’?
QC4 is fast charging. How fast do you want it?
The FP4 has NFC
The main frame is aluminium, the back is plastic ?
Dust and water proof to IP54
Pretty sure it has dual speakers


But then this topic is about the camera, so why all this??
The camera is fine but the software may not be well tuned yet.


99% of all snapshots are never looked at again anyway. Pure emotional and sentimental collecting mania that has never been evolutionarily rationalized away :wink:

1 Like

Camera “may” be fine Ive read its totally ok, but software can be in many stages or already reach capacities of engineers working on it, it all depends on the resources of the team working on it. Do we have any updates on the progress on the software? Any planned updates?

Such question are better asked of official support, but it may be better just to wait.

1 Like

I don’t think that camera isn’t important to many people. I just think that for many people other things are more important.

If the question would have been: “how important are fair mining and working conditions for your decision”, what do you think would be the outcome?

And then, what shall Fairphone learn from such a survey? That it is more important to invest into 15 software engineers that develop a brilliant camera software than to invest into understanding and improving the supply chain and the manufacturing?


Let’s be honest. How many android developers do you think FP has? And how many of them are specialists in camera technology? :wink:
My opinion: if there are two there are many…

So improvement simply takes their time

1 Like

I agree with UPPERCASE and Goran_A. We are politely pointing out that the camera on the FP4 is not good enough. It is inferior to a 9-year old Samsung or Lumia. It is inferior to my 6 year old LG G4. LG don’t even make phones anymore.
Far from threatening the reputation of FP, we are trying to save the organisation from this serious blindspot that it has - that it doesn’t take the value of implementing a good camera seriously enough. FP has had years of dissatisfaction and yet continues to apparently avoid this serious issue.
The famous improvement at the end of last year means they caught up to only about 10 years behind.
We expect to pay an ethical premium when we buy this product, but we also expect it to be a serious product in all the major respects. At the top price point of the FP4, it is not acceptable to say ‘oh, but FP is a small ethical company, so we can’t expect any better’. Yes we can. And at the moment no-one seems to be prepared to hold up their hand and admit it.