[Moved] Nokia 3's camera needs immediate improvement

We know it's not a flagship. We do know that it's not expensive as we bought it, but this camera is terrible, more on the software side.

[Moved] Nokia 3's camera needs immediate improvement

user868 user868
 /  edited April 2020
We know it's not a flagship. We do know that it's not expensive as we bought it, but this camera is terrible, more on the software side. I started using Nokia from the 3315 and my last phone before I bought the Nokia 3 was a Nokia Lumia 730.

But this has to be the most disappointing camera experience, it does not focus well, it changes exposure stupidly and low lights make it cry. Also the software is a big let down after the smooth 730 experience. And I being a photographer ( a professional one who owns multiple DSLRs, bridge cameras and plain old leicas ) find it dissatisfying.

I am rooting for Nokia, but I am not sure I'll buy the 8 if this camera experience continues.

Also bothies!?? Fire that guy


  • user248 user248
    ✭✭  /  edited April 2018

    My guess is that the problems stem from the sensor used, not the software.

    If a sensor is a low-cost 8MP CMOS, even the f2.0 will not save it from taking grainy/blurry pictures indoors or at evening.

    Getting technical, the pixel size of 1.12 μm in Nokia 3 is not too promising either.

    F-values don't matter much on phones with lenses the size of small beads.

    This is a value phone with value specs and a value camera.

    Software tweaking would in all likelihood improve performance only marginally.

  • Yes, your points ring true.
    Still software processing makes not a marginal but a distinctive impact on the final image. The sensor size does make the job tougher, but a value phone is not in any way meant to take ' value ' photographs. For the same money we are seeing better performance.
    Nokia has the capability in it's software, something very evident in the Lumia 630. The camera, in the right hand of course, takes remarkable images. Something they must implement again. I have seen the sensor as I tore down my first Nokia 3 as I bought it, it still has potential.

    Also at Indian 9000+ bucks, it's the cheapest Nokia, not a value offering for many people. And some of these people I know, who didn't even read the box or specifications before buying one. People who could have had a better camera in their phone, but chose to put their trust in here. I know it's quite early, but I hope it won't be too late.
  • You guyz are right ....i mean i just switched from a 4 year old grand prime (samsung) to nokia ....and first i was disappoint in autofocus then the picture quality which i dint expected much but .......com on nokia, are u even reading this.藍藍
  • I kind of found the reason. Its not just an old cheap sensor. Its a **** Samsung camera unit designed for front cameras put on the back. If I wanted a cheapo samsung sensor I would have bought a cheapo samsung phone. It does not focus because it cannot. Feeling cheated and going to switch asap. Probably the honor 6x with an actual Sony Sensor. This was a heartbreak.

  • redhajelah redhajelah
    ✭✭  /  edited September 2018
    There was no problem with the camera. It's what covers it. Both front and rear camera are the same. However, the front camera is much clearer than the rear as it is protected by the Corning Gorilla Glass 3 while the rear camera is covered by a cheap vulnerable plastic that's scratchable thus causing blurry pictures.
Sign In or Register to comment.