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
Related
Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the Samsung Galaxy Note 8 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!
Close up photo and also a close up screenshot taken with my Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note 8.
jimmylips75 said:
Close up photo and also a close up screenshot taken with my Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note 8.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good lord I hope that's with the telephoto lens
Quite impressed with low light performance. Took this at the weekend at the back on a dark cinema whilst waiting for the trailers to start. Auto mode, no flash, no editing.
wnp_79 said:
Quite impressed with low light performance. Took this at the weekend at the back on a dark cinema whilst waiting for the trailers to start. Auto mode, no flash, no editing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, that looks amazing. I just got the Note 8 too but I haven't had a chance to do low-light yet.
By far, the best camera I've ever owned.
Just need to find a big-ass spider so I can post some examples.
jimmylips75 said:
Close up photo and also a close up screenshot taken with my Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note 8.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please tell me you set fire to that nope...
jimmylips75 said:
Close up photo and also a close up screenshot taken with my Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note 8.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just a little TOO CLOSE for me!
jimmylips75 said:
Close up photo and also a close up screenshot taken with my Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note 8.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that's an awesome background/screensaver.
I'm aware that during low light the images will appear grainy or noisy, but I can see the grain even in medium light condition. Image is set at 4.3 ratio highest bit rate for pics.
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
How about wide color
So, what is the use of a wide color gamut capable display if the camera still shoots sRGB jpg?! I have not found any info on the color space profile of Note 8 jpegs and videos, can anyone chime in?
XDA_RealLifeReview said:
Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the Samsung Galaxy Note 8 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
It was very dark at that hour and taken with telephoto camera not wide angle one.
ksekhar said:
It was very dark at that hour and taken with telephoto camera not wide angle one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
have you edited this photo in some app or this is original unedited pic? looks not natural tho
meryguadelupe said:
have you edited this photo in some app or this is original unedited pic? looks not natural tho
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Google photos auto
Now, this is by far not the best *quality* photos, but it does show off the functionality quite well. I took this photo of a room in my apartment with absolutely no lights on other than some light leaking into the hallway behind me from a neighboring room, and a pure red heat lamp for a tank (pictured). I went full manual, mounted the camera with some objects on a table, and set it to a 10 second shutter, thinking that I wouldn't be able to pull off holding it by hand. Then I held it by hand. These are the two photos I got (one braced on a table, one by hand) with a 10 second shutter in a DARK room (the braced one is zoomed in).
Here's a shot of that same room from out in the hallway where there's a little light (so you can see about how dark it is).
What happened to the scalable function between 0-100% when using photo filters like Vignette and Stardust etfc? Gone?
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
I love the camera, works great for me
same
Limeybastard said:
I'm aware that during low light the images will appear grainy or noisy, but I can see the grain even in medium light condition. Image is set at 4.3 ratio highest bit rate for pics.
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mine to even in really good lighting, using highest resolution.
Few observations after a month of use:
Picture quality overall is great, however the stock app tends to overblow the highlights in high contrast scenes. This is the effect of the small sensor size and it's prominent on all cellphones, however both Pixel 2 and iPhone X I've tested don't have that issue. However, installing and using the Google camera port helps the issue dramatically, so it's the HDR algorithm employed in the stock app, not the actual sensor.
Stock camera app is, however, both faster and more reliable in terms of snapping every day photos. Furthermore stock app has marginally less noise than Google Camera, but it also captures marginally less details. Stock camera also has less saturation and sharper gradients than Google Camera, likely a product of the algorithm as well.
The telephoto camera is decidedly worse than the wide angle one, even in bright light. You're trading off the dynamic range for zoom, and it's not just the difference in the lenses.
Lightroom HDR raw files (40mb 3.2MP image that contains 10 bit of colour) are mind-blowing. As an owner of full-frame Canon 6D I was blown away by the colour retention in Lightroom Camera app. On a DSLR you'd absolutely have to use bracketing to get those colours (although you'd get a 20 MP image), it's very impressive that a cellphone can do that. If only it shot out a 12 MP raw file.
Overall Note 8 has a very versatile camera with awesome picture quality, but certain scenes require he use of Google Camera for HDR+ algorithm to get the best results.
Say "cheese", then rate this thread to express how photos taken with the Google Pixel 3 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!
So I don't have the phone yet (obviously), but I noticed in-store that the new camera app seems to use (or at least has the option to use) a "sweep" panorama now. In my rudimentary time at Verizon, it seemed to work well! I think they still have the traditional panorama shot options through a photosphere menu, but quite like before.
Had anyone exciting this yet, or see any reviews that cover it?!
If anyone cam post some jpeg & rae files taken together that would be awesome.
Even more awesomer would be the same shot taken with both p2 & p3
(Delete, wrong thread)
Heres a a few photos of my Father-in-law's koi pond at night. With a small spotlight on. Pretty good if you ask me
Hmm Tapatalk is working better for pictures I think. Here are a few others
Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
2 pics: 1 low light (cropped from 4:3), 1 portrait
Is it just me or does it feel like the camera on the Pixel 3 lags a bit when you take a photo compared to the Pixel 2? Same scene, taking with the 3 has a slight pause before the circle shows up and shows the picture taking animation. The Pixel 2 is able to take 3 shots in the same duration...
I'm not as impressed as I am when I went from 5x to pixel first gen . I just went from pixel one to pixel 3 and I'm not getting what all the hype is about. The photos are slightly better, the performance is not noticeable, the sot is a half an hour more with the same usage. I should have gone to Huawei mate 20 or something else.
This is the best quality camera I've ever seen on a phone. Its too bad I'm going to have to return it, because the phone quality is garbage. The camera is what is making the decision really painful (I don't think any other phone will compare), but I need a working phone.
Hello, I just bought the p3xl but I'm not really happy whith photos in low light , especially on Moving subjects (my daughter)... Indeed it's not possible to adjust manually aperture or Time... Do you have solutions, or maybe do you think I would be more satisfied by p30 pro or p20 pro... ? Thanks
matiew48 said:
Hello, I just bought the p3xl but I'm not really happy whith photos in low light , especially on Moving subjects (my daughter)... Indeed it's not possible to adjust manually aperture or Time... Do you have solutions, or maybe do you think I would be more satisfied by p30 pro or p20 pro... ? Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not sure you can take low light photos of moving subjects with any phone at the moment.
The pixel 3 is amazing in taking low light photos, but you do need some light, too
This is a nice upgrade over the pixel 1
Super rez zoomed in all the way
I have the p30 pro
BBobby said:
I am not sure you can take low light photos of moving subjects with any phone at the moment.
The pixel 3 is amazing in taking low light photos, but you do need some light, too
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's no comparison for taking shots of kids in low light
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 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.