The Pixel camera team posts more sample photos for us to oogle

Nailed it. Also I imagine you actually LARP as a kitten. And if you don't I don't want to be corrected.

didnt someone said that these pictures were edited?

Yes

they sure look edited. Shot in raw on the phone and manipulated in photoshop likely.

Yeah,sone of the photos in that link were definitely enhanced to the max.
That isn't a bad thing though,being someone who spends alot've time editing,it shows the deeper potential I guess.

It's Google Magic.. http://googlepixeldust.com/

That's pretty fantastic.

wth... lol

Speechless.....

He was an opening act for Diva Plavalaguna one time. It was so stinkn awesome!!!!!

Lol!

LMAO

Can't wait for a real camera comparison.. That last pic looks horrible

Looks horrible? "Horrible"? That's the word you want to use? Exaggerate much? That picture looks good, it's not even on the same level as bad, let alone horrible.

Yup look at the first pic and scroll to the last. The lighting on the berries hurts my eyes and looks artificial

Ahhh. I thought you meant the lion fountain one (last one in the series at the link with them all listed) That one is downright amazing when you look at the details and notice it 's an outdoor shot at 2:30 AM using ISO50 to freeze that moving water. I agree the berries one looks weird. That's why I included it here, because i thought it was the worst of them all.

They were also edited correct? Some of them at least?

With snapseed I believe.

I just saw the other pictures in the link. Yes some look great. I'm excited to see a phone camera comparison. Would also like to see a pixel vs htc 10 phone review. Keep up the great work Jerry

It's really the shutter speed that's allowing for the freeze (1/1120 in that shot); the ISO needed to get a proper exposure at that shutter speed will depend on the lighting conditions. That said, being able to shoot at 1/1000 or even close to that at an ISO of 50 with only a 2.0 aperture is something I'd normally only expect in daylight. If that shot was truly taken at 1:30 am that's seriously impressive. I hope you'll have some articles with a detailed rundown of the camera performance, especially since Google seems to keep omitting OIS which can be very problematic with longer shutter times. However edited they may be though, those are some damn nice photos for a smartphone.

I wouldn't say horrible, but highlights are a little clipped, and the picture of the girl - if it were mine i would've brightened up her face.

I was just talking about the berry pic on this page. The other two look nice and are comparable to shots I have taken in almost exact same situations. They do look retouched though

Personally I think the back is ugly and bezel to big in the front but mostly I am anti exclusive take WP there best was always exclusive. Say what you may but the OS ran good. Exclusive products seldom fare well. I want to see independent testing on the camera. Too bad for Samsung they lost faith replacement no better than the original. But goggle could have dominated if they did not go exclusive to one of the worst carriers state side.

The back is weird. It's done for (supposedly) much better reception than tiny antenna lines and so that the NFC reader can stay in a low power state, But it looks weird. the bezel is big. Google likes big bezels and actually has asked them to be made BIGGER on some past Nexus models. Apple does the same. Either company is certainly capable of having a part or two moved to shrink them down, but they think you'll appreciate a place to hold the phone without touching the screen. Some people hate it. The phone also is "weirder" than you can tell from the photos because it's shaped like a wedge and is top heavy. I wasn't able to go see the launch event, but I got to use one for a bit a couple weeks prior at a Cheap Trick concert in Virginia Beach. I really liked it the things that are weird either didn't bother me (goofy looking back) or made it better (bezels and the wedge shape).

There were rumors floating around in the dark corners of the internets that Robin Zander and Rick Nielsen were secret hardware beta testers. Thank you for the confirmation.

I was worried that nobody knew who Cheap Trick was and I would have to explain, then explain why in the hell I would pay to see them 30 years after they should have stopped making music. And then you came along lol.

Speaking of music , does Pixel have the same or similar HiFi DAC to one in HTC10?

Yes it does have 198khz/24 bit DAC

See Jerry, they have always wanted you...to want...them!!

I wonder why they didn't just use all glass on the back? It would have looked better and they could have thrown wireless charging in there for probably very little cost. I think I paid like $5 retail for the wireless receiver in my wife's note 4.

Am I the only person that likes this phone's design. I seriously don't see what's ugly about it all. In fact, I think it looks gorgeous.

I need to see it in person to know for sure, but I definitely don't hate it. I think it gives an interesting contrast, if nothing else.

It's polarizing. You either love it or you don't.

I really like it, it looks unique, borderline awesome.

I hated it when I first saw the leaks, then it started to grow on me after seeing it in videos. I think it will be even better in person, the quite black version that is. Same scenario as the 6p hated it at first then loved it when I got my hands on it.

I hav eno problem with the bezels, but I do have a problem with the back mounted button given how big the bezel is. Just put it on the front of the damn phone. It's a showstopper for me, personally, as I prefer 5.5" screens, but the size of the phone will make the FP scanner sit in a non ergonomic place for me given my hand size. The back is ugly, but I figured that had something to do with why they did it. I'd still have gathered they put the NFC chip near the top of the phone and put a smaller glass window like some of the older iPhones had. It just looks... really odd. That, or make the entire back glass. I'd also like to see unedited photos out of the camera. There is way too much editing done to these images, probably by professionals that outsell the average consumer by orders of magnitude (not sure if that is the right form for that expression). I need to see what the photos look like, straight out of the camera. Camera, I think, is a showstopper for me with the lack of OIS (for video). EIS crops the video too much, and leaves you with a much smaller view area than OIS. I can use more powerful desktop software to stabilize a bit more later on, where I have greater processing power and a bit more control over the process. The Unlimited Full Quality Photo/Video Backup is, however, very attractive. I wish Google produced more desktop software for their services, though. I do use my Laptop and iMac a lot - probably more than my phone - and I really really dislike being chained to a browser (especially when you're corralled into using Chrome when they implement things in a way which requires it for full functionality).

Hopefully it's as good as s7 camera even without OIS. Too bad it's not water resistant, i would've given it a chance

Stop lying. You would have found another reason not to buy it.