
Huawei P30 Pro camera review - luu
https://www.dxomark.com/huawei-p30-pro-camera-review/
======
cs702
_> If you still needed a reason to spend money on a compact camera, it would
have been for zoom reach, as even the best smartphone cameras could not
provide usable zoom image quality beyond a 5x factor. This has now changed
with the Huawei P30 Pro and its innovative zoom system that uses folded optics
and a super-resolution algorithm, which finally makes usable 10x zoom on
smartphones a reality. The zoom on its own will make the new Huawei an
extremely tempting option for many mobile photographers, but the camera
performs very well in almost all other areas as well._

To enable up to 10x _usable_ (!) zoom, this phone has _three_ lenses, the
longest of which is positioned vertically along the body of the phone, with a
mirror reflecting light to a sensor that is positioned perpendicular to the
screen, at the bottom of the phone:

    
    
        ___
       /   \ 
      |   / |
      |  /<----- light
      | /|  |
      |  |  |
      |  |  |
      |  |  |
      |  |  |  ^
      |  |  |  |
      |  |  | lens focal length
      |  |  |  |
      |  |  |  v
      |  |  |
      |  |  |
      |  |  |
      |  v  |
      |=====| sensor
       \___/
    
    

The advantages of this phone's camera are rooted in physics, not software.

\--

EDITS: (1) adjusted the diagram to make it a bit nicer-looking; (2) replaced
the word "optical" with "usable" in the second paragraph (in my mind, the two
words have been interchangeable for describing zoom lenses, until very
recently).

~~~
rickdeckard
The Tele-Lens in the device actually has 3x zoom only. 10x Zoom is achieved by
using software algorithms combining data from a cropped main-camera image and
the zoom camera. Such periscope camera-modules are quite popular among chinese
device-vendors these days, you can find the same on a few devices from there
this year (i.e. Oppo Reno, Vivo).

~~~
cs702
Mr. Deckard, you're right. I edited my comment.

For what it's worth, I hope that one day we will have super-resolution photo
zoom as good as the one you use every day as a Blade Runner.

------
mosselman
It is crazy how much the quality of the camera's has changed. I haven't looked
into DSLR camera's for a few years, since I have one and am not really in the
market for one now, but have there been similar advances in that tech? As in,
ground breaking higher quality, more compact form factors, etc? You'd imagine
if you can get this type of quality from a phone's camera, you'd be able to
make truly amazing things happen with dedicated camera's.

~~~
alkonaut
The leap in recent years isn't really in sensor tech so much as in phone
manufacturers racing to get the best cameras by increasing the sensor size.
E.g. the iPhone5/6 had an image sensor around 15sq mm, and the iPhone XS has a
25sq mm one. This one is over 40sq mm (1/1.7"). The nokia 1020 has a 2/3"
sensor (same as the larger compact cameras) which is 58sq mm(!).

So while there is are _small_ incremental improvements in sensor tech (quantum
efficiency, etc), the big development in quality is pure physics. The phones
takes as good pictures as compact digitals, because they are now using the
same size tech.

Also the _picture quality_ isn't just dependent on the sensor. Better
processors can help with autofocus, noise reduction etc, and that obviously
helps the end result.

This however will lead to a problem with physics: you can't grow much beyond
where it is now, without making the phone much thicker to accomodate a bigger
lens, at least not without using exotic thech such as diffractive optics etc.
So don't expect the massive gains in image quality over the next 3 years, as
in the past 3.

~~~
usrusr
But building optics that can properly illuminate those larger sensors within
the confines of current smartphone designs already is impressive progress.

As you said, those physics are hard. I'm no expert but I suspect that the
physics would even be strictly impossible for a "proper" lens and they only
get away with it because they can now apply corrections computationally which
would require lot's of glass/space when done to light pre-sensor instead of to
data post-sensor.

This, I think, is the actual innovation: when you don't have to care for
distortion or uneven brightness because you can fix that digitally, basic
sharpness becomes much easier to achieve. A truly raw sensor readout from
those modules would probably look like worse than a Holga picture.

I fully agree with your assessment that this is a one-time free lunch. Looking
forward to a computational compact that scales the same lens simplifications
to a full frame sensor!

~~~
alkonaut
Yes (more) computantional imaging is probably the next frontier. We already
see the double and triple cameras (some times for depth info, some times for
different FOV's) but I'm guessing N modules in some grid pattern + computation
can emulate a much larger camera without making it much thicker like a single
large sensor). I think I saw such a prototype if I remember correctly. If it
works, it's also quite similar to that black hole imaging tech which is funny.

I'd also be happy to get a phone with a detatchable camera module you could
bring when you need it. So long as it's much smaller and cheaper than a
camera, it would still be better than carrying a compact camera and a phone
(which was the problem these good cameras solved in the first place).

~~~
usrusr
Multiple sensors, stuff like Google "night sight" and all that fake bokeh are
impressive. But compared to the benefits from liberating the optical path from
the burden of minimizing distortion and vignetting they are little more than
lipstick one a pig. Simplified optics improve the source signal, some hard
trade-offs that defined camera design for more than a century have been blown
wide open by a simple 2D convolution.

Admittedly, multiple sensors also create more/better source signal to work
with and unlike optical path simplification it's an improvement that can be
repeated over and over again (just add more), but currently it's main
importance is that it is something for buyers to _see_ , without diving into
the subjectivity-infested depths of image quality comparisons. I have no
doubts that a bad multi-sensor would sell better than a good single-sensor.

------
londons_explore
Great... Except you won't be able to buy one soon... And there won't be any
updates.

~~~
odiroot
As long as you can root it and put LineageOS on it we're good.

~~~
rickdeckard
Without platform-level support from HiSilicon for the Kirin CPU you won't get
that far with community-OS either. And as a wholly owned Huawei subsidiary,
HiSilicon is also on that sanction list.

~~~
londons_explore
I could imagine they might suddenly become way more open source friendly...

------
dkobia
Politics aside, I have Huawei phones and tablets and they're probably the best
bang for your buck you'll get.

~~~
rchaud
Huawei's higher-end tablets restored my faith in Android as an alternative to
iOS. Nice deisgn, thin bezels, 2560 x 1600 screens (absent on all but the most
expensive Samsung tablets) and most importantly, long-lasting battery life.

I have the M3 8.4" tablet with those specs, and it's been running great. The
10.8" versions have pen support.

------
stevehiehn
Wonder how the P30 mic is? I own the P20 and the thing I never noticed on any
phone but completely hate on this phone is the mic. I'll go to concert and my
girlfriend will take the same footage on her S8 and it sound great. The P20
totally melts down. Maybe a lack of dynamic gain? Not sure.

~~~
atomical
How is the mic for talking on the phone? I guess it might not matter since
everyone is torturing everyone else with speaker phone and ear buds.

~~~
stevehiehn
It's fine for any low volume stuff like conversation. My guess is that it has
a fixed mic gain that does not adjust for loud environments. Not sure though.

------
rchaud
Can anyone suggest a point-and-shoot camera for taking pictures at concerts? I
don't think the venues would allow DSLRs, but a small P&S would be OK. I'm
thinking that would require good night-time photo capability and a certain
level of optical zoom.

The camera on my Galaxy S7 was great, but I upgraded to a Nokia X6 and the
camera there is significantly worse (phone was $500 cheaper though).

For my needs, I'd rather have a single high-quality dedicated compact camera,
and not have it be tied to my phone, which I change every couple of years.

~~~
dr_zoidberg
I have used the beautiful Olympus OMD E-10 Mk.III -- can't really say if it's
going to be allowed in a concert[0], but it has a great advantage: it looks
like a retro camera, and many people actually think it's an analog (ie,
physical film) camera. I absolutely loved it's low light performance, though
I've seen review compare it to the Sony A7 family and it'd seem those surpass
it.

Before getting it, I owned two compact Canons, the G12 and G16 and both were a
joy to use: fast stabilized lenses, """large""" sensors (at least for a
compact camera) and lots of integrated features. The newer lineup has sort of
derailed and there are tons of very-similar-with-tiny-differences models, but
you'd be looking at either the G1X Mk2 or the G7x Mk2 (those are the ones that
look more like compacts rather than "pro" cameras).

[0] since it's a mirrorless, so some would say a pro camera, hence not allowed
without a permit.

------
kkarakk
I wouldn't buy a Huawei phone, horrible service

~~~
tlamponi
How so?

