Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the Samsung Galaxy A71 5G come out. A higher rating indicates that photos offer rich color (without over-saturating), sharp detail (with all subjects in-focus), and appropriate exposure (with even lighting).
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
Much better than I thought, and with the recent update giving the A71 5G the upscale camera options, you'd be hard pressed to find much fault. I'm loving the pictures I'm getting out of it on auto, and the manual controls are awesome. I've been able to pick out details in 64mpixels that have really surprised me when zooming in.
Seems good overall, but I'm a person who uses DSLR cameras.
Phones can never really capture what a DSLR can accomplish, especially if
you're using modern DSLR's.
If you can do everything a Canon EOS 50D and EOS 5D Mark IV can do with your phone,
then you've advanced a decade or more into what DSLRs are capable of.
Having said the above, here's my takeaway:
Image quality is overall excellent after pixel-peeping on my desktop's 4K monitors, which surprised me. Color accuracy, saturation and intensity seems to capture well. Contrast also appears accurately recorded.
Sharpness doesn't seem lacking, while noise also is impressively lacking under good lighting.
I've yet to try low-light conditions, so can't comment on that.
The ultrawide lens is actually very good. No doubt using software that's not visible, it produces an extremely good rectilinear image without a fisheye effect. I'd say it's wider than a 14mm lens on my full-frame Canon EOS 5D DSLR.
All in all, it's a higher-resolution output than my Canon S-series p&s camera, yet with similar picture detail and overall image quality.
Related
Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the Samsung Galaxy S9 come out. A higher rating indicates that photos offer rich color (without over-saturating), sharp detail (with all subjects in-focus), and appropriate exposure (with even lighting).
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
We have early Camera Test from PC World:
Samsung Galaxy S9 1.5 vs 2.4 Aperture: https://www.pcworld.com/article/3257675/mobile/galaxy-s9-camera-test.html
Go to post : Samsung Galaxy S9 Dual Aperture - f/1.5 vs f/2.4 | What's the Difference ?
Hasn't anyone got the S9 yet?
XDA_RealLifeReview said:
Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the Samsung Galaxy S9 come out. A higher rating indicates that photos offer rich color (without over-saturating), sharp detail (with all subjects in-focus), and appropriate exposure (with even lighting).
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hasn't anyone got the S9 yet?
Dx0mark the new king os smartphones, s9 plus scoring 99 points
This post has user-made pics sample as well https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/81z7hx/a_review_of_galaxy_s9/
I notice the F1.5 does improve quality significantly in low light, though I'm not sure if that's enough for people to be convinced. you only see the difference if you zoom in and pixel peep.
I just started an youtube channel focused on camera test and reviews, and my first upload is a low light test between my 2 phones: Galaxy S9 and Mate 10 Pro. I will sell one of the phones to keep new ones comming for new reviews. So wich one would you choose? (daylight review comming soon)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6QlGoBpCzI&t=16s
Just one economy bulb 15W (equivalent to a 40-60w regular bulb) bulb above my desk. The other light is coming from the monitor with an YouTube video opened in full screen. The picture was made in auto mode, and has no additional editing. I mention that the picture was taken in the ultra wide mode 18.5:9 f/1.5 .
Good quality :good::good:
I have not had a chance to try the Camera because I just got the phone a few days ago .
The phone camera that I thought was sharpest was Note 4 and those sensors with 16 megapixels as far as trying to use it like a Camera ....everyone seems obsessed with the low light thing but I think despite the larger pixels ...not quite as sharp for landscape or Architectural shots...
What do you think ?
I noticed it averages 4 here...
Audio quality is 5 , best I have heard on a phone and I have been waiting for speakers like this since early cells.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/with/42546070934/
Some amateur shots from me
RAW photo quality doesn't seem as good quality as my S7, taken quite a few to compare and they seem to lose their detail much sooner than the S7
IMHO I think the detail in the photos is amazing.
The camera "Auto" setting and what it does to some of the colors and/or lighting is atrocious. Medium light or mixed light sources are just horrible. The camera does not know what to do and the white balance is really bad. It is worse with LED lighting. I think it may be due to the different temperatures of LED lights. I use "Pro" indoors and I typically set my white balance with the "Kelvin" slider vs the generic lightbulb settings.
S9's camera is AWESOME ! ?
Compared to my LG G4, I think the S9 has a tendency to slightly overexpose normal photos, even with HDR enabled. I find I constantly adjust the EV compensation (dragging the slider after tapping to focus).
As a point-and-shoot camera, it's surprisingly versatile and copes fairly well. The "Pro" mode UI has absolutely tiny buttons though for fairly important things (like toggling the apertures, autofocus or white balance modes) which I wish were bigger.
Here's a bunch of photos I've taken as representative samples. A handful were taken in pro mode (notably the latter London shots) and there's a RAW and JPEG for comparison. The S9's JPEG output is massively smoothed compare to the RAW original (and has some issues with dark areas of moderate contrast, like clouds in the city skyline turning into a blocky mess). Bizarrely, the DNG is almost half the file size of the JPEG version yet looks much better, even with sensor noise.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/FiSH7Hjj6bVgwmLq6
Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the Moto E6 come out. A higher rating indicates that photos offer rich color (without over-saturating), sharp detail (with all subjects in-focus), and appropriate exposure (with even lighting).
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
Took some photos with the rear shooter under an indoor lighting that I've gotten very used to after using a different mobile camera unit. With the Moto E6, going from ISO 200 to 400 in manual mode makes too big of a jump from "a little too dark" to "way too bright", every time, regardless of making adjustments in the other settings. The ISO isn't a problem with the other, lesser camera. Also with the other camera, taking photos of text is no problem, as is autofocus. With the Moto E6, the auto focus is disappointing, and taking pictures of small amounts of text is almost impossible, no matter the angle and adjustment with lighting, ISO, focus, zoom, etc.; moving farther away from the subject gives the impression that the text portion looks sharper, but I doubt the actual quality of the result (which I did not check because I wanted to move on).
Wasn't expecting much, but very disappointed by the Moto E6's camera, particularly with auto focus and image stabilization.
Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the LG V60 ThinQ come out. A higher rating indicates that photos offer rich color (without over-saturating), sharp detail (with all subjects in-focus), and appropriate exposure (with even lighting).
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
I'm not a great photographer but the photos I've taken have been ok. The main complaint I have is how badly the lens skews the image on the edges. It's pretty bad.
I wish the world was in a better state and I wasn't sick so I could take more pic samples.
Wish this had spot metering. But LG as usual has had software that takes away from a good camera.
I love the results when using in the manual mode. The histogram is a big plus.
My main complaint is even upright my photos seem to end up being rotated.
LG Software still struggling "mosaic" post-production below average light condition, but night mode is quite good! Not app, just effects. Right now I'm testing some Gcam distros, from yesterday - UltraCVM prepared for Mi 9T (both of them works with 64mpx sensors).
Is there anyway to use 3d photos like on Facebook?
The main reason for the V60 is awesome manual photo/video controls. The phone does well for auto modes in good lighting, but they are still over aggressive with noise reduction that causes the water color effect (also apparent in the V20 I had prior, so this just how LG wants it). HDR works well, but doesn't always get the white balance right and wish I could use it while also having some manual control. I also wish they would've went with a straight up 16MP main sensor. Shooting at 64MP is no better than the binned 16MP option, and often worse.
I did "stress test" the camera the other day. I prefer long exposure photos and these were from a couple nights ago. I was limited on time and location, so pardon the motion blur in the light painting photos. But still... Let's see Gcam do this!
Couldn't you tell what sensor V60 camera is based on? Thnx
64 MP shots in bright outdoor settings are amazing on this phone. Definitely an underrated camera by most reviewers imo.
Random shots + Basic Snapseed correction.
Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the Realme 6 Pro come out. A higher rating indicates that photos offer rich color (without over-saturating), sharp detail (with all subjects in-focus), and appropriate exposure (with even lighting).
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
Photos are over sharpened. The loss of details are very noticeable. The front camera has this wierd effect where it makes the skin smooth even with the option turned off. A bit of over saturation too in some cases. Things improve a bit in the pro mode. HDR sometimes messes up the pictures. Didn't notice lag in camera interface. Installed the first OTA.
I will waiting live review to i am get overall about this phone camera
Hi
In my opinion photos are good but depending of chosen camera.
The standard pics are good, the telephoto ones are excellent, the wide angle acceptable, the 64Mpx are "you must see them by distance"...
Night pics with integrated app are acceptable, but even with tripod mode are dark in the very night; but with a more specialized camera (camera FV5 lite) i did 30 secs exposures and got acceptable pics of fireflies.
And there's also a wordking Gcam which can usa telephoto and wide angle cameras.
Personally i'm quite satisfied for the price range.
P.S. i had a OTA in middle may.
On a stock camera, the raw format is of poor quality. Strong vignette and strong pink tint all over the frame. The red channel is swamped. This is difficult to correct in raw converters. For example, on Moto G9 Plus (same basic module), raw is of better quality. The tech support sends it to the service center. Does this mean I have to take every device to a service center?
I propose to add to the "Expert" mode, as well as saving in raw and for telephoto lens.
Also in the "Expert" I propose to add a 64 megapixel mode with manual settings.
About noise modulation in the video, already all who care to write. But nothing changes. On the test RUI2.0 noise modulation is not fixed.
Realme 6 Pro for Russia.
Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the Samsung Galaxy S21 / S21+ / S21 Ultra come out. A higher rating indicates that photos offer rich color (without over-saturating), sharp detail (with all subjects in-focus), and appropriate exposure (with even lighting).
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
I would say the photography quality is very "meh." Pictures are quite grainy/noisy in all light settings when zoomed in. The front camera is especially noisy.
Loercase said:
I would say the photography quality is very "meh." Pictures are quite grainy/noisy in all light settings when zoomed in. The front camera is especially noisy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree that photo quality from rear cameras are below my expectations - dirt cheap Pixel 4 makes much better photos in all regards. But I quite satisfied with selfie camera quality though. My concusion - don't buy this phone for camera quality only.
Same here. Very disappointing camera quality. But, it is OK anyway. Overall phone quality can compensate.
WarVic said:
I agree that photo quality from rear cameras are below my expectations - dirt cheap Pixel 4 makes much better photos in all regards. But I quite satisfied with selfie camera quality though. My concusion - don't buy this phone for camera quality only.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course sir.
Source: https://www.gsmarena.com/piccmp.php3?idType=5&idPhone1=10625&idCamera2=300639
install another camera app. the "open camera" app is add-free and you can adjust the quality of both pictures and video(4k30fps) way beyond the standard.