Camera Nitty Gritty - Part 8 - The Ultimate Video Smartphone
In part 1 of this series, Steve Litchfield looked at exposed camera glass on some phone models and investigated whether scratches really make a difference. In part 2, he investigated the pros and cons of LED/dual-LED/Xenon flashes in camera phones - does Xenon or dual LED flash make that much difference? In part 3, he investigated the fabled 'Megapixel myth' with an objective eye. In part 4, he focussed on the difference between good and poor optics (at the same camera resolution) and in part 5, he pitched all the top smartphone cameras head to head, in detail. In part 6, AAS guest writer Dirk Snoyt took up the theme of camera phone flash research and got all technical on the theme of colours... In part 7, I returned with a look at the difference optical zoom makes and ask the question "Is it better to have optical zoom or just much higher resolution?"
Now, in the final part, number eight, I look at some of the top smartphone cameras again, but this time looking at their video capture potential.
So far in this series, I've been concerned primarily with still photo capture, but all of these phone cameras have another party trick, of course - capturing video. I don't claim that the phones in the example clip and ratings below are a definitive hardware set in any way - they simply represent the hardware I had to hand. What I want to do is demonstrate the huge, and I mean huge gulf between good and bad video recording.
It has to be said that Nokia's Nseries phones have led the way in the mobile world in terms of video capture. The unique N93, with its stereo microphones, was the first to capture video at VGA resolution at up to 30 frames per second, and the N95 carried on the VGA flag with much more conventional form factor. The N82 then came along, packaging the N95's camera into a robust candybar form factor, a long way from the twisting, bending N93. Newer phones like the N85 and N96 have yet to prove their video recording mettle, I suspect firmware improvements are needed for each.
Also in the test below are the Nokia E90, a experiment to put a VGA-capturing camera in a business device, plus the new Samsung INNOV8, unique for an initial focus in video mode, the screen-tilting HTC Kaiser and the candybar Sony Ericsson K850i, with the latter two included more for general comparison really.
Here's my compiled test clip, with samples taken in identical lighting conditions. YouTube or similar would mess up the quality and introduce its own artefacts, so I encourage you to download the MP4 file and view it on your PC or Mac.
| Download extvideocomp.mp4 - 46MB |
Sorry for me squinting - we're talking (rare) winter sun and it was low in the sky - but sunlight is the best way to try and bring out true colours, and to stress test phone cameras in terms of handling of contrast.
In detail, let's look at the quality from each. All scores are out of 10. Maximum mark is thus 20.
Nokia N82 (representative of N95 as well)
Picture: Despite the lack of video focus (note the leaves in the background are sharper), still a good picture. Not over-exposed in the direct sun. Loses two marks for the colours being washed out. 8/10. Sound: Good, but let down by being mono in nature - all extraneous noise is channelled, with the source you want, through the same mike - which isn't facing towards your subject. There's good gain control, balanced about right to cope with situations like this AND loud pubs/concerts. 8/10.
Nokia N93
Picture: The start of the depth of field seems further back than on the N95 and N82, with the result being that my face is slightly more blurry. There's also overexposure of bright areas in the sun, but on the other hand the colours have come out true to life. 7/10. Sound: Top quality sound from the two forward-facing stereo microphones. The separation isn't that great, but the fact that there are two mikes does seem to help separate source from background noise. And the fact that the mikes are forward facing means that you'll get more of your source captured in the first place. About as good as phone-recorded audio gets. 10/10
Nokia E90
Picture: Good colours, good video picture quality without being quite as crisp as that from the N82. Slight overexposures in the sun, too. 6/10. Sound: Similar to that on the N82, with perhaps a little more hiss. Again you're hit by the microphone being mono and not really pointing in the right direction. 7/10.
Samsung INNOV8
Picture: By far the most lifelike and crisp video quality from the devices on test here. The initial focus in video mode makes all the difference and the colours and handling of sunlight are super, too. 10/10. Sound: A dedicated camera microphone pointed in the same direction as the lens helps keep your subject's voice nice and distinct, although there was a degree of muffling, strangely, plus a horrible audio/video lipsync bug - hopefully Samsung will fix this soon. Score as-is, though, 5/10. If the lip sync bug gets fixed, this would rise to perhaps 9/10.
Sony Ericsson K850i
Picture: As good video as many 'feature' phones get. This footage looks crisp on the K850i's screen but suffers when you examine it in detail on the desktop and sample it up to VGA. 3/10. Sound: Surprisingly good, with a good frequency range. Let down a little by having to use the main phone mike and so there wasn't enough sound focus on the source. 7/10.
HTC Kaiser / Tilt / TyTN II
Picture: Overall effect is similar to that of the footage from the K850i - shooting at QVGA resolution or even 352 by 288 pixels just doesn't cut it anymore - the VGA-capturing N93 was available two and a half years ago, for goodness sake! 3/10. Sound: Very tinny and noisy. Par for the course for an average feature phone or smartphone that doesn't run S60, it seems. 2/10.
Totals
Adding it all up, as-is, we have:
- Nokia N93: 17/20
- Nokia N82/N95: 16/20
- Samsung INNOV8/i8510: 15/20
- Nokia E90: 13/20
- Sony Ericsson K850i: 10/20
- HTC Kaiser/TyTN II: 5/20
Rather tellingly though, if Samsung manage to sort out the lip-sync audio problems in the INNOV8/i8510 then the device is going to walk it as not only the best imaging smartphone but also the best for video too. With the sync problem solved, the INNOV8 would score a whopping 19/20.
Note that even though I've panned the video capture of the Kaiser and K850i, these are actually better than the industry average for phone video. Amazing. And all of which puts the results from the N82/N95 and N93 (and potentially the INNOV8) into further positive relief.
What does the future hold for video capture on phones? I'm sure HD video is going to be possible one day on a phone but I think we're a year or two away from that. As we can see above, there's room for improvement even at VGA resolution - increasing the resolution dramatically will also place extra demands on electronics, battery and storage - all problems to be solved in time.
Comments welcome if you can add comparisons or testimony of your own.
Steve Litchfield, 13 Nov 2008
PS. Don't forget that some of these devices also have TV out and you can quickly see the results of your captures at full resolution via any domestic TV set.
Published by Steve Litchfield at 9:07 UTC, November 12th 2008
Categories: Comment, Hardware
Platforms: General, S60 3rd Edition
Feature Discussion
Here's where I nearly killed off my N93, in the first week of ownership no less!!
[url]http://blip.tv/file/79177/[/url]
Of course, sadly this review also confirms just how far down the list video quality is to Nokia and most other manufacturers. I suppose it's a case of 'good enough'. Have you seen the quality of video from the 5800? It's shockingly bad...
HD will be seen in a Nokia before the end of 2009, I'm sure of it.
this makes me realize how good N95 is!
but i wonder why u didn't include the new Nokia's flagship the N96..
i wanna see how bad it is compare to the others..
can u also test out the HTC Touch pro and Xperia X1?
i know this is only for symbian phones, smartphones, or feature phones..but i'm curious, since u tested the Kaiser..
The N96 wasn't included because its current video capture is horrible. It's almost certainly a software problem though. We're waiting on Nokia to fix it!
The Touch Pro's video capture isn't brilliant. About the same level as the K850i here. I haven't tried the X1, but I suspect it's similar again.
Re: super slow-mos. It's a gimmick, really, you can't (obviously) do these at full resolution. And I'd rather have VGA footage at 30fps than QVGA at 120fps.....
-Samsung Pixon has WVGA (720X480)video recording at 30fps (!)
-Sony Ericsson Xperia X1 has VGA video recording & quasi WVGA (640x400) at 30fps
-Nokia Tube has VGA video recording & quasi WVGA (640x352) at 30fps
The Pixon video samples that I've seen are nothing short of amazing!
The 6620 Classic is a far more significant device than any of the NSeries - why? Because it does not advertise itself as a smartphone, and is far cheaper than an NSeries, thus making it far more appealing to far more ordinary folk who would be put off by a smartphone tag and the price of a high end device. I am willing to bet the whole AAS team a pint each that the 6220 Classic will go on to sell far more eventually than the N95 does (if it has not already).
Yet for all but the odd arguably unnecessary feature (wifi), it is an N95 in a smaller case, and yet small enough and different enough that it warrants a separate analysis, as you have with other smartphones.
AAS always lets itself down with this elitist attitude, harping on about old out of date devices that comparatively few people have (N93) and ignoring the TRUE "ultimate video smartphone" that many more consumers will actually have in their pockets - the 6220 Classic. At the very least this is reviewer bias coming out and it's unprofessional.
It wouldn't kill you to do update this article and your other recent comparisons, with a 6220 Classic section. At the moment I can't take these articles seriously.
"The n93i was the first to have focussing while shooting video, wasn't it? Would have been good if that was available to test too.."
Well, the early protos had it. Nokia removed it, in a crazy decision, removing the device's main USP 8-(
I have tested the 6220 Classic in the past and its video output was clearer than the E90's, but had some software fudges to help it achieve the resolution. The output from the N95, N82 and N93 are superior.
And, regarding the N93, the reason I keep banging on about it is because it's one of the best devices Nokia ever did and there are hundreds of thousands of N93 owners STILL waiting for a firmware upgrade to bring this device into 2008, let alone 2009. Subconsciously, I think that if I keep on mentioning it, Nokia will remember it and think 'Yeah, let's do something with the N93'. Wistful thinking?
The 6620 Classic is a far more significant device than any of the NSeries - why? Because it does not advertise itself as a smartphone, and is far cheaper than an NSeries, thus making it far more appealing to far more ordinary folk who would be put off by a smartphone tag and the price of a high end device. I am willing to bet the whole AAS team a pint each that the 6220 Classic will go on to sell far more eventually than the N95 does (if it has not already).
Yet for all but the odd arguably unnecessary feature (wifi), it is an N95 in a smaller case, and yet small enough and different enough that it warrants a separate analysis, as you have with other smartphones.
AAS always lets itself down with this elitist attitude, harping on about old out of date devices that comparatively few people have (N93) and ignoring the TRUE "ultimate video smartphone" that many more consumers will actually have in their pockets - the 6220 Classic. At the very least this is reviewer bias coming out and it's unprofessional.
It wouldn't kill you to do update this article and your other recent comparisons, with a 6220 Classic section. At the moment I can't take these articles seriously.[/quote]
I seriously doubt your assertion that the 6220 Classic will sell more than the N95. I see N95s everywhere, and i'm not sure I have ever seen a 6220.
I think that you have a point, it is a phone in a different market segment and deserving of some comparison, but your rant is a bit too much.
The thing is, cameraphones almost by definition aren't used by those who want the highest quality images or video. People who buy devices primarily for photo or video would get a standalone camera or camcorder.
Most people buying cameraphones would be buying them primarily as phones, with the camera/camcorder quality at best next on the list.
If you make a phone built around camera/camcorder quality, which the N93 clearly was, it seems to fall between two stools: not phone-ish enough for cameraphone fans, not camera-ish enough for camera fans.
[url]http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html?uc_full_date=20081114[/url]
(you don't need to know who the characters are, it's just the last two frames and the punchline that are relevant)
I recently got a 6220 Classic and have to admit it's a pretty nifty device for such a small package. Whether or not it will sell as well as an N95 I don't know. In the UK at least it does seem to be offered by quite a few operators as a "free" phone which is always a good sign.
Oddly, the things that seem to hold it back most are lack of support from Nokia: There's no N-Gage support (though the fact that they support the 6210 Navigator now is promising since I suspect that's quite similar under the hood), no Internet Radio app (I tried downloading a version for one of the other Nokia models and it installed but wouldn't start), no (official) Mac OS X iSync plug-in etc.
I'm pretty sure these things will come eventually, but the phone's been around for a few months now, so they do seem to be dagging their heals a little bit.
Sorry about being a little off-topic there. So, to get back [i]on[/i]-topic: I haven't thoroughly tested the camera yet but it does seem to do the VGA@30fps video well enough. Probably not as crisp as an N95, but at least it's smooth! :-)
Again, the Innov8 does seem to have more vivid colours (unrealistic even) - a bit like those early colour movies of the 50's. The stills images are the same and it is one of the reasons I eventually didn't go for this model. Yes a s/w fix would be good, but it's been a while already.
BTW, further to your comment about the n96 video being really bad, I don't seem to have the same problems as you Steve. I seem to remember showing you some video shot on the 96 at the recent pub meet (we even compared sample shots of the pub crowd with the 93 and there wasn't a huge difference) - it is certainly comparable with my n95. Yes, a few tweaks here and there may be required, but actually it's really not that bad. Maybe you have a duff unit.
ILG
One of the points I want to mention in the video recording is that despite all the specifications that manufacturers put on their phones, it fails to produce any real figures of video/audio capture BITRATES.
Yes, BITRATES is something that is extremely important in movies. If there are any of you here that has ever done any conversions from DVD to MP4, DIVX or XVID, you will know what I mean.
Bitrates should be mentioned and compared when looking at movies simply because two phones can have the same "specs" doing 640x480x30fps can produce different results - especially for fast moving scenes (where low bitrate like the current set of phones) will produce really blocky output.
Video compression works in the way that it will take alternating stills and then through its codec algorithms produce the in-between frames to get the desired effect of moving pictures. If the capture rate is too low and that the main reference frames are too far in between, it will mean the video be either very choppy or very blocky with little to no detail on the image quality.
For fair comparisons of video recording on mobile phones, the bitrate really needs to be taken into consideration .. hence why Nokia can never claim the current set of phones to be "DVD quality" (even though it is pretty much Interlaced NTSC rates) - but rather "DVD-Like-quality". DVDs have video bitrates of up to 10Mbit/sec..
Main Navigation
|
» Home (1) » News (2) » Reviews (3) |
» Features (4) » Media (5) » Forums M | Full (6) » Top (9) |
Advert
no links availablemobile.allaboutsymbian.com