Omg !!! Sony really improved motion eye camera for low light
Sony is back
Guys check out
Go to tool and find camera compare
AnonD-538833, 10 Mar 2018The most mediocre flagship device released by samsung ever. The lack of enthusiasm in all the ... moreThe same they said when they found out that S8 had worse battery endurance than s7E. They won't care.
In the primary 3 (endurance, performance, ergonomy) S7E is Samsung's peak (in S series at least). Best battery, most apps in ram, easy to use fingerprint, 16:9 screen. That says a lot. 2 year old phone wins over any other...
battery life = lol
Benchmark = Xperia XZ2 is better than S9 and IPhone X
Still crappy selfies...
How can it overexpose background if it has HDR?
My 2015 phone does better..
kakouille, 10 Mar 2018You need help. "When the light goes down, the S9 imaging skills become even more exceptional.... moreWait, 1/4 shutter speed? I think other flagships smartphone not really need 1/4 shutter speed to great low light photography.
AnonD-501073, 10 Mar 2018Do you guys took the low light shots at f/2.4? cuz there's no way they should be worse than s8.All shots of photo tool are on auto. If they are f2.4 or f1.5 , choice made by the phone...
Funny how some people argue for a phone. It's not a special phone and it ain't that nice or that distinctive from the rest. It's just a phone, another phone.
Do you guys took the low light shots at f/2.4? cuz there's no way they should be worse than s8.
kakouille, 10 Mar 2018You need help.
"When the light goes down, the S9 imaging skills become even more exceptional.... moreHi @Kakouille
What he is saying is true... The low light samples of S9 available to compare have ISO 250 e SS 1/14s.
The samples of XZ2 show ISO 200 and SS 1/8s.
I have now idea how it is possible, because Sony trades off OIS for high ISO to prevent blur. All Xperia were supposed to shoot at 600+ in this situation.
Samples of XZ1 have ISO 700 or 800..
"F/1.5 will allow for low ISO shooting, which will translate into less noise"
In most cases noise doesn't depend much on the Iso. In fact a higher Iso decreases(!) the captured noise, if shutter speed and aperture are the same. Yes, at Iso 6400 f/1.8 1/10s a sensor captures less noise than at Iso 100 f/1.8 1/10s. The higher Iso only makes more noise visible(!) due to the brighter image, but it doesn't increase the actual captured noise. A higher Iso even leads to slightly less captured noise.
Panino Manino, 10 Mar 2018"1) the XZ2 has much better quality than the S9 in the low light scene."
This XZ2 impressed m... moreYou need help.
"When the light goes down, the S9 imaging skills become even more exceptional. The OIS, the bright F/1.5 lens, the large 1.4um pixels, and the Multi-Frame Image Processing all combine to produce unmatched low-light shots.
Where most of the current flagships with F/1.7-F/1.8 and OIS shoot at ISO 400 and, say, 1/4s shutter speed, the Galaxy S9 chooses and ISO between 250 and 320, and a shutter speed of 1/10s. The result - great low-light images with lots of detail, little noise, and no blurry spots."
Gsmarena writes about the camera:
"But then there is also the shallow depth of field, which can lead to corner softness and overall softer images with less intricate detail."
Sorry, but this is not true. It's softer at f/1.5, yes, but this has nothing to do with depth of field. It just means that Samsung wasn't able to make the lens perform well at f/1.5. That's not unusual for camera lenses. For example you can buy an f/1.4 lens that is very bad until you stop down to f/2.8. Therefore I think that Samsung's decision is not very useful at all. A sharp f/1.7 lens is better than a soft f/1.5 lens. Furthermore the 28% light advantage of f/1.5 over f/1.7 isn't much. A significant improvement is 100% or 200%. Most photographers wouldn't really care whether it's f/1.7 or f/1.5. On the other hand f/2.4 captures 50% less light than f/1.7. So you capture less light whenever the phone chooses f/2.4, in this case you either get a slower shutter speed or more noise.
The most mediocre flagship device released by samsung ever. The lack of enthusiasm in all the reviewers about this phone is so apparent. Battery life of S9 is utterly pathetic. I know some die hard Samsung boys complained about Phonearean's low battery rating about S9, I wonder what they will say now that gsmarena also rated it lower than S8.
Xiaomi has taken over samsung in India. Nokia is back with some really strong phone. Is this the beginning of End of Samsung dominance in Android market? I sure hope so.
Anonymous, 10 Mar 2018Beginning of the fall for Samsung.And apple has been "falling" for nearly 2 decades now :/
AnonD-3124, 10 Mar 2018S8/S8+ are still good choices, S9/Note8 for better choices, and S9+ for the bestNope S7E is the best.
Apart from the camera in everything else is the best.
Far better battery endurance than this one
Front facing fingerprint sensor
4gb of ram still
Similar performance if you buy the Exynos version.
16:9 screen meaning much better support in most apps.
Almost indistinguishable screen quality.
In other words people are once again duped with S9
Thankfully S8 sold abysmally, the worst than any S phone (only 38 mil)
Sadly Samsung and her fans learnt nothing. They created the same phones and some fans still find it praiseworthy.
Samsung increasingly becomes like HTC/Sony. Stuck in her ways, offering nothing new or important , yet having hardcore fans praising it through it all.
Another such release (like this one) and Samsung becomes part of my "hitlist" (companies I want removed from the mobile market for the sake of us all), along with Sony, HTC and Blackberry (Fake Nokia is close in entering, but I'll give it another year or so, but they don't seem to learn either).