More color means better? I guess the hardware is pretty ok, but the software is not. BTW that is good news, because this can be corrected much easier
Well it is one of the main features, apart from being a phone
The quality of the shots is definitely not comparable to Samsung and Apple or Pixel, but if you compare the financial resources of a small company to those it is not surprising.
The FP3+ uses a Samsung Bayer 48MPs chip, as do some Samsungs etc. but yes the ouptup on the Fairphone doesn’t compare.
As for the advertising.
a) I imagine the fairphone team don’t expect tto much and don’t compare to the others.
b) People who have moved over from the previously mentioned, ‘should’ not be surprised that Fairphone can’t do as well.
c) Yes the camera experience is scratchy compared to how I enjoyed my 0.83MPx Olympus camera (1996), and at least had a decent size lens and great software.
There is a thread where the FP4 even fails at being a phone
As for their advertising, they don’t really shy away for praising their camera abilities. There is no star symbol with a disclaimer that says but please don’t compare these claims with other phones.
It’s fair to say that the camera can be better. Yes, it costs money to develop a better camera. And I think they will make this investment. Because they are now under performing, even by standards of 10 years ago.
There are also open-source cameras that tent to perform better as well, such as the OpenCamera. They can open-source it too, if licenses agree with that. Then it’s not just them developing it anymore.
This topic was automatically closed 180 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.