Well that's interesting. I was just shooting in the dark about the open source alternative camera UI being different in this regard (though it intuitively makes sense because often times any 'clever' hackish 'features' like weird permissions handling can go unnoticed in open source recodes of closed source stuff). I'm glad to hear it turned out to be a correct guess.

My argument would be to just continue using the alternative camera-ui. It's essentially a feature-complete recode (I think there were some obscure bugs some people found, but those may well have all been fixed by now), and by nature of it being open source, it's either better in every way or has the potential to be better in any way that it's not better in yet, so yeah.

Frankly, I have no idea what caused the stable CSSU to not feature it, seeing as how one of the initial ideas behind the CSSU as I recall was that it would replace the closed source bits with open source ones.

It is, at the core, held back only by the various closed source parts that keep the rest of the software locked to this hardware and to old versions of itself. Of course various bugs in the Nokia bug tracker are closed and dismissed by Nokia as not fitting its limited feature set, but that's the nature of companies making phones - they made a phone, with a given supported set of features. It has the potential to be way more and we were fortunate that they didn't artificially limit that potential, but they can't be bothered to spend the resources to fix bugs that don't affect their particular official feature set.