• weew@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      no, it’s pretty terrible. The 200MP number is basically a marketing gimmick. Each individual pixel is so tiny and receives so little light it’s a useless noisy mess. It needs to combine 16 pixels into 1 just to make a decent 12.5MP photo.

      • Double_A
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not gonna matter anyway since it’s 200M shitty tiny pixels. At best they could be used for pixel-binning, but you wouldn’t need that if you just had less, but bigger, pixels.

        • BassTurd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Most phone cameras exceed the needs of most people, and the better phones take really good pictures. They aren’t DSLR quality, but they do plenty well. No need for 20 lens that take up the entire back of the phone. When I travel, I use my Pixel to take my pictures because it does well, uploads them to the cloud, automatically stitches pictures into panoramas, and I always have it on me. I’m not trying to win any awards and to my untrained eye, the pictures look great. They are at the very least good enough for me to look at and revisit my experiences, which at the end of the day is all that matters to me.

          • Double_A
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, I feel like one decent 16MP chip with OIS would be the best option.