I'm impressed. I didn't expect Sony's camera to be that good. Was going to buy it anyway.
Shanti Dope, 04 Apr 2018Not just that it has more details. The S9+ also got some noise, which proves other people's po... morebut Sony's noise is terrible, way too much. aggresive sharpening make the noise getting detailed more (in this case, Sony's image processing), so how can you say sharpened pic is more natural??
HuLk, 03 Apr 2018Hahahaha.........are you trying to tell yourself, Samy Fanboy? Please read the conclusion aga... moreso you need to read the conclusion again carefully.
Sony's low light only produced better image quality if you use a tripod. bold the 'SUPPORT IT PROPERLY' sentence in that conclusion. in a practical way, Samsung did better on that scene.
daylight scene, I prefer Samsung's (Sony's dynamic range sucks), but if you really into that conclusion, it's a TIE, bold the 'THE SUPER-CLEAN GALAXY VERSUS THE NOISIER BUT MORE DETAILED XPERIA' sentence.
slow-mo vid, CLEARLY Samsung.
4K vid, a TIE based on that conclusion.
Btw, I'm a Nokia Banana user. LOL
Panino Manino, 03 Apr 2018Good point, but there's no arguing with these Xperia fans. If you want to consider all that t... moreThe Xperia fans just proceeded to do what you said they should not be doing. They need to chill and stop being so provocative and argumentative. As if they have been successful in convincing the rest of Sony's merits. Just waiting their time and forum space. Geez...
Samsung won this guys. They know full well who's the main target audience for their phones's camera.
People who takes selfie, post to fb/instagram/twitter. People who's hand are shaky and needs OIS assistance. People who care more about the main subject then the tiny details.
All of these are mainly done on the software end.. Samsung examine what people DO with their camera and tweak the pictures for those purpose. Sony try to keep as actual as possible.. thats their weakness.
People who go for Sony's edge.. will ultimately prefer a dedicated camera. Or their camera line alpha or even just get a go pro.
Shanti Dope, 04 Apr 2018https://drive.google.com/file/d/10vu0Lch0hyaf1b4DxHA3h_zr61TcCETS/view
https://drive.google... moreLike others have pointed, the S9 is compromised by the high ISO.
S9 ISO 1250 - https://cdn.gsmarena.com/imgroot/reviews/18/galaxy-s9-vs-xperia-xz2/camera/gsmarena_316.jpg
Image is clear but "bad", it lost too much details. The high ISO "eat" some of the details and the rest gets cleaned but the noise reduction.
S9 ISO 640 - https://cdn.gsmarena.com/imgroot/reviews/18/galaxy-s9-vs-xperia-xz2/camera/gsmarena_312.jpg
Now with half the ISO it gets a little better. Still to much noise reduction, but in my opinion is that Samsung didn't made the best decisions on auto. ISO could be lower, after all you already have that 1/1.5 aperture and OIS, there's no need to try so hard. And that aperture makes image softer, especially the corners.
XZ2 ISO 800 - https://cdn.gsmarena.com/imgroot/reviews/18/galaxy-s9-vs-xperia-xz2/camera/gsmarena_212.jpg
Sony really improved a lot, this one is excellent with it's high ISO and moderate shutter time. It's a good balance of ISO and shutter speed.
XZ2 ISO 160 - https://cdn.gsmarena.com/imgroot/reviews/18/galaxy-s9-vs-xperia-xz2/camera/gsmarena_216.jpg
That's what I don't understand. Why this photo with much lower ISO looks dirtier than the last one? Maybe because the ISO is so low the phone don't see the necessity to apply noise reduction, but it let's the artifacts runs wild, those you can see at shadow areas on daylight photos. Notice how you can see "blobs" forming around people of the streets and some other areas.
If you want to consider the best case scenarios for the XZ2 don't forget to also to think about the best cases for the S9.
S9 ISO 320 - https://cdn.gsmarena.com/imgroot/reviews/18/samsung-galaxy-s9/camera/gsmarena_021.jpg
I've been thinking about this and it seems that S9 camera have "moods", I feel that certain combinations of ISO and shutter speed activates some extra noise reduction, because in some cases there's clearly a lot less reduction acting.
I'm not exactly "arguing", just sharing my cents.
So no one's gonna talk about portrait mode on the rear?
Better background separation and edge detection, better detail preservation, better colors, the XZ2 is another proof of not needing an extra camera for portrait shots.
If the phones are talking, they'd be like:
Google Pixel 2 XL: Son, I'm proud of you
Sony Xperia XZ2: Thanks, dad! Let's prove to others that single camera is more than enough for great photos!
Anonymous, 03 Apr 2018do you really think every movie is made for 1:30h ?
a single scene can take as long as 10hour... moreExcept we won't be using smartphone cameras for filming Hollywood Movies yet.
If so, then we have the XZ2 that can record 4K HDR videos with cinematic 24fps.
Shootergod, 03 Apr 2018May be because of personal preference I guess, the noise is not little at all. It looks terrib... morehttps://drive.google.com/file/d/10vu0Lch0hyaf1b4DxHA3h_zr61TcCETS/view
Is that blur on the XZ2? Come to tell me with your blind eyes.
melodika, 03 Apr 2018I made this comparison with the photos of the first part of the low-light review (no tripod, X... moreNot just that it has more details. The S9+ also got some noise, which proves other people's point to be invalid, that Samsung phones have no noise in low light, since we're not blind and we can clearly see it.
If you're not joking that this was the XZ2 without a tripod, then I'm seriously impressed. More noise, okay. However, we get more details, too.
And it looks far more natural of an image, too.
Only Samsung fans hate the noise, while most of them clearly don't have an idea about photography.
Even high end DSLRs get very noisy in low light, so what's to hate about Sony's noisy images?
Anonymous, 03 Apr 2018Now another thing. Why is it in the lowlight portion the S9 chose iso 640 in auto... But when ... moreBoth devices have been optimized for more noise to preserve more detail.
The S9+ is noisier than the S7 Edge, but obliterates it in the amount of details resolved. It wil capture something clearly that your S7 Edge would otherwise capture as color painting without enough texture.
Anonymous, 03 Apr 2018No. Sony has 7mp more and used more aggressive sharpeningIt has more noise, but no sharpening.
Now that they're using the same multi-frame stacking method, we can see how much more details the Motion EyeÂ™ camera benefits from it.
Sonyuser85, 03 Apr 2018Well:
1. A sensor it's about these: 7.87 mm (1/2.3") 1.08 microns. Megapixels are just a spec... moreHi...
Imx300 and imx220 used by Z series have 7.87 mm diagonal. The imx400 is a bit smaller, 7.73mm.
This thread has become a pulse to see who is more stubborn with their arguments and has the last word without any technical evidence more than personal appreciation of what you see or believe and four badly spreaded numbers. Congratulations for making it unbearable to read and soporific.
Nick, 03 Apr 20181. Then what is the point of having 19MP sensor? It's not like extra resolution is used for do... moreWell:
1. A sensor it's about these: 7.87 mm (1/2.3") 1.08 microns. Megapixels are just a specific implementation for specific device marketing. (If you were for some time in photography, you would have known that already).
2. Sony always had different processing on zooming, front camera, and manual settings. In this case (Sony smartphone camera processing) reducing resolution, zooming, changing Api2 (for Api2 Sony stock camera does not allow that - at least for now) is very effective and results are better even best compared to samples seen in this review. (If you were a true Xperia user you would know that by now).
3. EIS in Sony's implementation is better than OIS is SOME CASES. Sony implementation for smaller sensors/processors is most important and better than the lens itself.
4. Shots were better took with tripod and manual shutter in XZ2 case. That means that the processor is better in Sony. Its driver might be unstable but Sony will do somethig about it.
5. In my opinion Sony managed well (in a weird way) to avoid using OIS. Best example in this case is XA ultra. It had a very well balanced EIS on the back being same in quality of the OIS of the front at least on shooting pictures.
Sony did it well, reviewers didn't.
I have a S7 that I like a lot.
I dont understand why some ppl here judge based on brand and not the photo/videos skills.
I like Sammy stuff but XZ2 was better in most of situations here.
If you dont like Sony, Samsung or both it os okay. But bias comment do not add anything to the chat.
Anonymous, 03 Apr 2018Now another thing. Why is it in the lowlight portion the S9 chose iso 640 in auto... But when ... moreGood point, but there's no arguing with these Xperia fans.
If you want to consider all that these two phones can do on manual, then with the S9 you can not only force low ISO with longer shutter speed, you can also lower the aperture to have a deeper deep of field to have a noise free (or the contrary you can increase a bit the ISO to make the photo "richer") photo without lost of texture. And with the OIS you can achieve a sharper result with out without a tripod.
The Xperia advantage is the tripod, the S9 advantage is the phone itself.
You can contour the S9's noise reduction but you can't contour the Xperia's limitation and artifacts, it's really so hard to understand this?
I like Sony and the Xperias, and I don't think that insisting that it's all good enough will help the line improve.
Anonymous, 03 Apr 2018Unsurprisingly the S9 did overall objectively better in most ways.
Of course no Sony fan agrees.Hahahaha.........are you trying to tell yourself, Samy Fanboy? Please read the conclusion again. :D
I m not a Sony Fan......I m HTC user. But none can deny (except the usual Samsung fan) that Sony did it this time. It's flagship definitely beat Samsung's flagship this time.
Let's wait for U12 guys.