The advantages and disadvantages of lens covers on cameraphones is a hotly debated topic. Recent Nseries devices have seen a mix: N79, N95 8GB and N96 (no lens cover) versus N79, N85 and N95 classic (with lens cover). In the first in a series of article on camera issues Steve looks at the question of whether scratches on the camera's protective glass really make a difference.
Read on in the full article.
It is always better to have a phone with a protection lens cover..
but there is always a solution to that, buy a leather case, and wear them always..
i've had my N95 8gb with the original nokia leather case since i bought it, november 2007, and there has been no scratch at all on the lens..
again..i guess it just depends on the usage of the person as well..
Nice one Steve. Thank goodness someone has finally proven that light scratching on these phone lenses makes hardly any difference.
What next? The mega pixel myth? The fact the most people view their photos on 1.3 mega pixel LCD screens but still get upset when there camera phones aren't 8 mega pixels!. Give me colour depth over pixel resolution any day of the week! I would rather Nokia gave us a 3 mega pixel phone with 3x optical zoom than a 5mp without.
There are about 5 or 6 of these myths that could do with your detective work Steve.
Cheers,
James @ Nokia Creative
Mmmm not really sure about your conclusion that 99.9% of normal shots will not be affected by scratched lenses.
Shots into the sun or where the sun is behind the subject will have increased flaring and that is quite a common circumstance! Bearing in mind that only the n82 has a reasonable flash one could argue that the majority of photos taken by the Nokia camera phones are taken outside! That would mean that alot of photos could be affected by flaring.
Put it another way - why do ALL cameras come with a lens cap / lens protection? If scratches only affected 0.01% of pictures then I doubt camera manufacturers would bother.
Having a lens cover is clearly (sorry for the pun) a better idea. It seems this article is more about justifying a particular design than actually comparing the benifits of different phone designs.
The point about having your phone in a case is all well and good but cameras have lens caps and are kept in camera bags.... There is a reason for this!
Here's my story: I accidentally cracked the lens cover on my N95 8GB. Pictures taken by night, especiall with opposite light sources, were totally awful. Even in daylight, when the Sun was only a bit in front of me, the image got partially blurred.
So I decided to remove the particles and voil� - no more bad pictures. The objective, being so tiny and deep in the phone, doesn't get dirty.
@unregistered: well, all I can say is that I've taken over 500 photos over the summer, outside and mainly in sunshine - with this 'scarred' N95 8GB - and I haven't noticed a single incidence of unwanted flare caused by the scratches.
Scratches on the camera glass only really affect the picture when you're shooting INTO light. And, as your mum probably taught you, you should usually have the light behind you when taking photos, so as to light your subject optimally.
Very interesting reading indeed. Thanks Steve. 😊
Unregistered wrote:Put it another way - why do ALL cameras come with a lens cap / lens protection? If scratches only affected 0.01% of pictures then I doubt camera manufacturers would bother.Having a lens cover is clearly (sorry for the pun) a better idea. It seems this article is more about justifying a particular design than actually comparing the benifits of different phone designs.
I think Steve was trying to point out the lack of a lens cover may not confer as many disadvantages as people think rather than justifying the design.
I think a lot of it is about perception - i.e. people think its better to have a lens cover... and to be fair it probably is.. just not as much as people might think.
Personally I like lens cover not for any protective reason, but because of the way they can be made to start the camera application. This sort of physical switch interaction is easier than starting an application via the UI. e.g. same with key lock switches / sliders.
On the other hand lens covers can take up a lot of volume (e.g. Nokia N73) and will generally always make the phone thicker than it could be. There's a definite trade-off.
Fantastic story. This is the kind of stuff that makes me come back to AAS every day.
The story should be mandatory reading to anyone running or thinking of starting a phone blog.. getting a little sick of all the off the cuff, unsubstantiated comments on how this or that "does not make any sense" or "it would have been easy for [Nokia] to put in a better [insert your spec of choise, including huge batteries]".
In fact, a basic primer on marketing, product differentiation and industrial design (and its constraints) would be a good start before starting a blog. That OR simply thinking things through a bit more and not just trying to make as many posts as possible.
Sorry for the rant. 😃
For argument's sake, regardless of whether or not evidence of scratches shows up in photos, one still should have a shutter present just to avoid smudges and/or dust build-up imo. For the money one spends on these phones, why should we be bothered w/ the chore of checking the clarity of the lens before every use? Point being, Nokia regards of scratches or not, should include shutters(on all high end phones especially), and stop being cheap.
Btw, I did in fact enjoy the editoral, although it comes across as Steve(once again) advocating on Nokia's part agian.
Im a photographer by trade I agree that one should light you subject from behind...
That said most people using a cameraphone to take pictures are just casual photographers and just want to take photos as and when. Bearing in mind that the majority of decent snaps taken with a cameraphone will be from outside it is fair to say that a decent number of these pics will be taken into the light where scratches may well affect picture quality. When you pay a premium for a phone and the manufacturers push for higher mega pixels and quality glass a decent lens protection system is important. Scratches will also become more of a problem as pixel densities increase.
Camera phone are increasingly being marketed as camera replacements and in that end they should come with lens protection. The N82 is not overly thick and offers decent lens protection and a nice method of launching the camera function - a win, win situation. Of course there is always a compromise but in the end of the day quality glass needs quality protection - I don't really see how you can say that it doesn't?
I think editorial like this is counterproductive. I would hate to see more and more cameraphones being offered with no lens protection infact I would like to see more and more cameraphones with lens covers! It will help the average user take better photos.
"and stop being cheap."
There we go.
"The N82 is not overly thick"
You should see the number of people in various phone fora saying that N82 is too bulky. Yeah, I don't agree either, but Nokia has to listen to those folks too.
"I think editorial like this is counterproductive. "
I think de-mystifying misconceptions can never be, in the long run, counterproductive. AND Steve never said it makes no difference. People need to read the text, not between the lines. 😊
One thing this article fails to deal with is the issue that my N95 8GB suffers from, and I know other N95 8GBs have suffered from and that is the outer lens coating peeling off. This happened after a relatively short time with mine & has adversely affected the camera performance of the phone ever since by causing a mist effect across the phone. That's why I am very unhappy that such an expensive phone has no lens cover.
Excellent article!! Thanks Steve.
I am planning to buy a Nokia N95-8GB and the lack of lens protector was one of my concerns. Now I am a bit relieved that the photo quality will not be severely effected even if the lens gets some scratches. But still a scratchy lens would look unpleasing esthetically.
Has anyone used a lens protector? I have ordered a martin fileds screen protector pack for N95-8GB which comes with a lens protector as well. I am not sure whether that would decrease the quality of the photographs.
Anyone having some experience with lens protectors?
Some simple observations from a pure physics viewpoint:
1) Looking at the N95 8GB picture. The N82 and the N95 classic with their shutter seem to have their lens deeper inside the body. Effectively functioning as a sunhood. This will mean the lens and sensor are better shaded against incoming light and light on the edge of a photo will less likely cause lensflares.
2) Scratched lenses will reflect or diffuse incoming light instead of project it on the proper spot on sensor where it is supposed to be. Diffused light will definitely will cause hazing. Reflected light can cause unwanted sensor areas to get less light or even more. It can even be reflected against the (black) wall lenscasing and cause hazing by being difusely reflected on the sensor.
To get a good idea of what scratches do on a lens, take a photo through a fence with the camera close up, making the fence wires nearly invisible and hazy. compare that to a shot without a fence in the way and you get a good idea of the issue. The effects are subtle. Scratches have distinct negative effect on the contrast and sharpness of the photo/lens.
Any company that proudly writes Carl Zeiss lens on its mobile should protect them with a lenscover. I would expect Carl Zeiss to turn himself in his grave about that!
@STEVE:
1) The Zeiss lens of your N95 8 GB is not damaged. The protective plastic cover. Replacing the cover or removing it will improve your image quality. You might also be able to remove the scratches. There are liquids to repair scratches on laserdisks and cd's. Another option is to use a metal polish like Brasso. It's grain should be fine enough and I have seen people use it to remove a (anti-reflective) lenscoating after they damaged it (actually blew it up) . Still how well it works, no clue and no I am not trying it out on my N95.
2) Buy a new camera protective cover. There are several internet shops selling them. I.e:
http://www.telecomtelecom.nl/?p=5&id=9656&tid=1423
Never ordered at them. So don't complain if they are unreliable.
We were taught at school that if an obstruction is on or extremely near the lens it won't appear in the picture, it will merely reduce the overall level of light getting through. The smaller the obstruction, the less effect it has on the picture.
If that's all true, then scratches on the lens itself may have no practical effect on image quality as they would be so small that they would barely block any light at all. They'd also be so near the lens (actually on it!) that they couldn't possibly appear in the picture either.
> why do ALL cameras come with a lens cap / lens protection?
Because camera manufacturers (and stores) are ninnies... Every pro photographer I know tosses the lens cap in the trash immediately. Who wants to miss a payday because you got a black frame by accident.
To protect them, you add on a "sacrifical lens." The same is done by the military for night vision devices. In cameras, you use a filter, like a UV-B or something pretty or completely innocuous. If scratched or chipped, or broken, toss it and buy another.
The problem with point and shoots and camera phones is that none of the protectors are worth a crap. That I have seen. They tend to be cheap plastic, and not attached well so I fear can induce additional distortion just from that. Oh, and poor attachment means dust can get under them, making cleaning just as hard as always. Now you need to clean the real lens again.
P.S. If scratches bug you, stop wiping lenses with your shirt. Use cleaning fluid, air, etc.
BUT! He forgot to talk about the bigger benefit of a lens cover.
The convenience in starting the camera. Faster and less prone to accident. :P
Tzer2 wrote:We were taught at school that if an obstruction is on or extremely near the lens it won't appear in the picture, it will merely reduce the overall level of light getting through. The smaller the obstruction, the less effect it has on the picture.
A scratch is not an obstruction.
len's cover or no len's cover, let's give Nokia sometimes to think about. In the meantime, I'm buying the INOV8 - with len's cover, of course.
i've been using my n82 since may. the cover is great for launching the camera, but it still doesn't stop dust getting onto the lens. as a phone, it's kept in my pockets which, by their nature, are going to harbour dust and fluff. cameras on the other hand are kept in clean cases.
the problem is getting the dust off the lens. sharp blowing doesn't do the job well, resorting to clumsily wiping the lens with a cloth. my previous phone was the n80 with no lens cover, which you simply wiped clean with your finger prior to taking the shot.
that's my tuppence ha'penny...
At the end of the day, we can only go on our own experience. Mine is definately not a good one, the picutre quality degraded significantly over 4 months, until i bought a new cover and then it was as good as new again, and has remained that way since, as now i always keep it covered.
I only hope a whole bunch of people dont take Steve's words as gospel, because the article heavily implies that not having a cover wont affect picture quality for the majority of cases, when in my experience this simply isn't true. Yes, there are proviso's in this artical, but the language used is heavily biased. Use of emotive and non scientific figures such as 99.9%, and bold-font phrases such as 'simply wont notice any difference', make the tone clear.
The best thing a prospective buyer of an n95 8g can do is talk to someone who has one, and see what they reckon. I have pointed several of my friends back to the classic simply because of my own dissapointing experience. I love the 8g for the screen, for the memory, for the battery, but if you are using the camera and aren't prepared to case it up like i do, then it gets scratched, and contrary to what this artical proposes, they certainly can affect the majority of 'normal' pictures, as they did in my case. Just go talk to an owner you know, there's enough of them out there!
Shoobe1, I have worked in photography for the past 16 years (fashion mainly but some sports) and I never come across a photographer who throws their lens caps in the rubbish. I can only imagine you know photo journalists for whom capturing 'the shot' that tells the moment is there main goal but i would still be interested in how they transport and store their gear. 77mm uv filters are not free. Camera phones are very slow to start up and react so I don't think they are best suited to capturing 'that moment'. But your post backs up that having a scratched lens or uv filter is not a good thing for you say that when the uv filter becomes scratched that they throw it away and replace it with a fresh one.
More generally, the point has been raised that the lens covers do allow dust in and then make the lens hard to clean. That is a valid point but I do not feel the best solution is to remove the cover! But rather to make a cover that is more dust proof or allows easier cleaning.
I love having a camera phone and would only like to see them get better, I am not hung up about mega pixels but I do feel strongly about clean, clear, undamaged lenses and I think that some form of lens protection is a good thing. The lens protection on my n82 stops finger prints and scratches but not dust whereas no protection at all stops nothing.
Discuss whether the extra width is worth it, discuss whether the current lens protection systems are hard to clean dust traps but arguing that no lens protection is an ok thing seems wrong.
There is an error in the post. You posted N79 instead of N78 in the no lens category.
I've had a similar experience, albeit with a dedicated video camera rather than a smartphone. Both my camera and my E90 suffered water-damage, after a water-bottle leaked in my sports-bag. Luckily both recovered, after drying out for a week.
However, what I did notice was that the lens of my Sony video camera had a "stain" on it, which you could see under certain light conditions. While this has had no obvious effect on the picture/video quality, I did take it back to the shop where my wife bought it; the guy there said it would cost at least �100 just to get it looked at, and that he was not surprised that the mark on the lens did not have a negative effect on the image quality.
If you were to buy a camera of the same quality and sophistication as the one found in an N95, you would expect to pay about �20 to �25. These are not good cameras, they do not prodcue quality image detail, scratched or otherwise.
I think lens covers are a must for a phone. look at the N85, that looks solid enough, doesnt protrude badly and protects the lens. I do echo the post about '99.9%'. I think its going to make much more of a difference than that, even if most people dont notice it.
Whats the point putting incresingly better cameras into phones otherwise? Lets all stick with 3.2mp and a normal LED flash.
...that being said....
I have to strongly DISAGREE with your conclusion. I will say that a single large scratch would be better than having that "purplish anti-reflective coating" rubbed off after 6 months. Here's why: There is a horrible HAZE that is added to pictures with Nokia N-Series cameras with exposed lens. Its not that the overall QUALITY, per se, is affected.... its the HAZE thats added. Even DUST won't do a thing to the quality (so long as that anti-reflective coating isn't rubbed off. The coating is what makes the camera "work".
I have quite a few before and after shots of my N95-3's camera. I now use an N82 and haven't had a single problem yet. I would attest that to the fact that its NEVER been touched with an oily human finger. Its got dust and debris in there but nothing has gone in there that would rub off the coating. I just take compressed air and blow it in there every month or so, works great.
DONT LET PEOPLE TELL YOU EXPOSED LENSES ARE OKAY!! LA RESISTANCE!!
😊
@all: Thanks for all the feedback. Maybe my '99.9%' stat was a bit over-enthusiastic. Would you accept 90%?
As stated in the article, I wasn't advising that phones should come unprotected, but rather that those with exposed camera glass shouldn't panic too much....
Steve, I don't agree with your accessment.
I absolutely see a difference in my shots... Scratches degrade the picture quality by adding sun flares, blurring macro shots and generally adding a haze to the pictures!
I have successfully polished the lens to remove the scratches on my Nokia N95-3.
Nokia should really put lens covers on all its high-end camera phones. Period.