Samsung Galaxy A9's four camera setup just like four pieces of nightmarish christmas gift. It lacks of advanced image processing that produce some unnatural photos. Yes, it has purple-is ( even blue-ish ) cast colours. When i compared with my own Redmi Note 3 that tweaked with Google Pixel 2 Camera algorithm, Redmi Note 3 perform well in accuracy of colour cast--which have some natural colour but lacks of sharpness. Other hand, A9 lacks of color accuracy but sharp and crisp.
The panoramic photo was a disaster. A9 can't perform well to detect any light changes in Panoramic Mode. At the end, it produces horrendously dark panoramic indoor photo, which just like visiting a mall in midnight with all store closed in.
The conclusion, A9 such a joke, even with great resolution and appeture size, they--Samsung--didn't competent with A9 image processing with that price point. If this phone was about 250, then I can accept it. But for nearly 700 bucks ? You better buy a second-hand Google Pixel 2 XL just about 400 to 600 bucks.
Low light sample is the best on this phone, nothing else. but it's still inferior compared to the current flagship.
What happened to Samsung's A series lineup?
I guess the last lineup of this series with great camera quality is the 2016 lineup that comes with OIS,
How about remove that unnecessary depth sensor, trade half the resolution of the main camera in favor of larger pixels, add OIS on main and telephoto, increase the sensor size of the ultra wide and telephoto (as much as how much space is conserved for removing the depth sensor) and streamline the software?
I'd expect such image quality on super cheap Chinese phones from Xiaomi, Oppo, Vivo, Huawei, Lenovo, etc, but Samsung? I thought they would somehow have good cameras despite the overpricing and mediocre overall specs.
Disappointing really, what have they done? If I just don't need the ultra wide lens, I could've just saved some cash and get the S7 Edge for under $400 nowadays.
The worst nightmare of Samsung is probably starting now.
Actually I bought this phone for the camera. But totally disappointed with the camera. very very bad quality both the front and rear cameras. four cameras are at rear, but total quality is very very bad. Nokia 8.1 is better than this. and the price is also very much high for this phone. display shoud be atleast 2k for this price. Guys don't buy this phone for camera usage.
Lol, what a fraud of a phone by Samsung, I thought Phonearena was too harsh with their review.
Genza, 04 Jan 2019Stop defending your beloved company even Phonearena review has the same purple color cast, jus... moreSorry to break it down to you, but I have seen other samples in various reviews and they don't have that purplish tinge. It's probably a software issue easily fixed. But I agree in one thing: the samples I've seen are good, but not good enough for the asking price.
only they increase the numbers of cameras but quality is similar as a7, better you can but similar to this price oneplus 6 or huawei p20 pr
Anonymous, 04 Jan 2019Am very sure it is a defect. Most online reviews show sample photos that do not have that purp... moreAnd even without the purple color cast the quality of the camera is still garbage for this price range because they use crappy samsung image sensor and crappy lens.
Anonymous, 04 Jan 2019Am very sure it is a defect. Most online reviews show sample photos that do not have that purp... moreStop defending your beloved company even Phonearena review has the same purple color cast, just accept the reality that the camera on this phone is garbage.
If you can't win with camera quality
Win with camera quantity
If you can't get higher specs
Atleast you can get higher prices
Nice phone.. Just kidding..
It was expected to be an overpriced average phone. But to have half baked camera setup and software when boasting about the 4 cameras... seriously? It just reminds me of Asus's "We
cruizer, 04 Jan 2019wow that's disappointingly awful output (purplish!) for a phone with four camera lenses. I won... moreAm very sure it is a defect. Most online reviews show sample photos that do not have that purplish tinge.
I miss the old days where Samsung's A lineup was actually decent, cheaper alternative of S series. Does anyone remember the original Galaxy A8? It was such an amazing midrange smartphone, in some countries it had the same chipset as Note 4! Now in 2019 they're trying to sell us underpowered crap for flagship price..
I just used my friend's A9, saw none of that purplish tinge. True, the photos were not up to the mark anyway, but atleast colours were normal. Maybe GSMA got a faulty version?
Anonymous, 04 Jan 2019Pros -Excellent display all around. (Super AMOLED) -Very good battery life. -Powerful chips... moreLOL WTF are you smoking? The battery is extremely mediocre and dual sim can be found in anything other than iPhones. All the "Pros" are meaningless compared to the competition in this price range, INCLUDING older Samsung models.
Anonymous, 04 Jan 2019Pros -Excellent display all around. (Super AMOLED) -Very good battery life. -Powerful chips... moreThose pros don't really matter anyway if high end phones from Samsung/other companies are priced similarly to and do everything better than this. A9 is simply way too overpriced for what it's capable of, end of discussion.
-Excellent display all around. (Super AMOLED)
-Very good battery life.
-Powerful chipset, a ton of RAM, boatloads of storage and a dedicated microSD slot - it's hard to beat the A9 when it comes to the essentials. Looking at you, Galaxy A8s WITHOUT the 3.5mm jack as STANDARD!!
-3.5mm jack as STANDARD
-DEDICATED microsSD slot as STANDARD
-Rear mounted FPS
Okay, done :D