The Samsung Galaxy S7 and S7 edge Review: Part 2
by Joshua Ho on July 5, 2016 8:00 AM ESTCamera Architecture and UX
In general, camera has become probably the single biggest point of differentiation between smartphones at this point. As smartphones are often the only camera that most people carry on a day to day basis, the rear camera on a smartphone really cannot be a disappointment relative to the competition. While we can talk about how much a front-facing camera matters in terms of quality, it’s pretty safe to say that for photos and videos that are worth saving will be taken with the rear-facing camera.
While post-processing and a number of other factors are going to have a huge impact on the overall camera experience, the foundation that makes it possible to deliver a great camera is always going to start at the hardware.
| Samsung Galaxy S Cameras | ||||
| Galaxy S6 Galaxy Note5 |
Galaxy S7 | |||
| Front Camera | 5.0MP | 5.0MP | ||
| Front Camera - Sensor | Samsung S5K4E6 (1.34 µm, 1/4.1") |
Samsung S5K4E6 (1.34 µm, 1/4.1") |
||
| Front Camera - Focal Length | 2.2mm (22mm eff) | 2.1mm (21mm eff) | ||
| Front Camera - Max Aperture | F/1.9 | F/1.7 | ||
| Rear Camera | 16MP | 12MP | ||
| Rear Camera - Sensor | Sony IMX240 Samsung S5K2P2 (1.12 µm, 1/2.6") |
Sony IMX260 Samsung S5K2L1 (1.4 µm, 1/2.6") |
||
| Rear Camera - Focal Length | 4.3mm (28mm eff) | 4.2mm (26mm eff) | ||
| Rear Camera - Max Aperture | F/1.9 | F/1.7 | ||
In the case of the Galaxy S7, Samsung has done something that I thought they’d never do, which is move backwards in resolution in order to improve pixel sensitivity. In the case of the Galaxy S7, Samsung has moved from the Sony IMX240/Samsung S5K2P2 to the Sony IMX260/Samsung S5K2L1 sensor, with a 1.4 micron pixel size relative to a 1.12 micron pixel pitch in the previous generation. This means that there’s a 56% increase in sensitivity per pixel. Assuming the same process technology, this does improve low light performance significantly. While to some extent it’s true that improved CIS (CMOS image sensor) technology can alleviate the downsides of smaller pixels, on the same technology you have to reduce your fill factor/active sensor area. The other problem is that while read noise on the sensor does reduce per pixel as you reduce pixel size, the overall sensor read noise trends upwards. This means that the region in which the CIS noise is primarily limited by shot noise is going to be smaller as you reduce pixel size. Shot noise is an unavoidable reality of existence, to the extent that even our eyes can see this “visual snow” if ambient light is sufficiently dim.
However, in the case of the Galaxy S7 I suspect that there’s more to the story, because the dual pixel AF system means that for each 1.4 micron pixel each pixel needs two photodetectors. In order to make phase detection work, there has to be sufficient spatial separation to make this system work properly, so some of the benefit of these larger pixels will inevitably be eaten up in order to enable PDAF that works in basically all lighting conditions.
The other notable change here is that the Galaxy S7 uses an even wider f/1.7 aperture. Unfortunately, in Samsung's efforts to try and make the module thinner they've made the focal length slightly shorter than before which results in an effective focal length of 26mm. This and the wider aperture could lead to compromises as light is entering the optics at a more extreme angle than before.
With these basics covered, we can move on to a discussion of the user experience. While in the past it was easy enough to just take some still shots on a tripod, a holistic view of camera quality really needs to take into account far more than just the end result. A poorly designed camera application with low resolution, low frame rate preview, improper preview aspect ratio, poor control layout, and other issues can easily make it difficult, if not impossible to get the photo that you want. These issues are thankfully getting less common, but these problems can make it almost impossible to recommend a phone for its camera, no matter how good the results are.
In the case of the Galaxy S7, the camera application is a nice upgrade over the Galaxy S6 at launch, but for the most part nothing is really different this go around. I’m not going to spend too much time here, but the short story is that I don’t think that Samsung is doing anything wrong here, and things are pretty much as good as they’re going to get.
While leaving it at that would be enough, I want to recognize some of the improvements that Samsung has implemented here. The major improvement here is that Pro mode is finally useful, as this mode now allows for adjusting auto-exposure and AF targets, in addition to EV, shutter speed, ISO, white balance with 100K granularity, and manual focus. The one notable shortfall here is that Samsung only allows 800 ISO max in manual ISO mode when the true maximum is 1250. For better or worse though, that’s the only notable problem I encountered with the camera app itself. It’s easy to think that Samsung hasn’t done anything notable here, but this is more a testament to the execution of design more than anything else.
However, before we move on to image quality testing, we can take a look at our focus and capture latency tests. For those that are unfamiliar, this is a fairly simple test designed to see how long it takes for a phone to focus and capture a scene on our standard ISO test chart in good lighting conditions, which can give a fairly good idea for best case latencies.
It’s probably not a surprise, but the Galaxy S7 is really, absurdly quick to take photos and focus. There is nothing out there that can realistically match the dual pixel AF system in the Galaxy S7, especially once you get into low light scenarios where traditional PDAF systems are overwhelmed by noise that can’t be easily canceled out. Samsung’s sheer prowess in semiconductor design and manufacture is really showing here, even in the best case.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
266 Comments
View All Comments
ray_cheeno - Sunday, July 10, 2016 - link
Dear Joshua, it's very fine that you point out that the Samsung S7 too expensive compared to One plus 3 and Xaomi Mi5. I have not seen a comment to your favored Apple IPhone 6 and 6S. Therefore I would like to see a Part 3 and more objectivity. Thank you.Lau_Tech - Sunday, July 10, 2016 - link
I feel that going forward Josh should do the Iphone reviews and Andrei should do the Android phone ones.I don't doubt the objectivity of either writer, but Josh's tendency to downplay and undersell android phones and features, as well as to produce late reviews, has undoubtedly contributed to Anandtech's reputation as an pro Apple site.
Splitting up the phones (perhaps android phones require 2 writers, given their volume) will allow for faster and greater variety in reviews.
Ranger1065 - Tuesday, July 12, 2016 - link
Now taking bets on whether Anandtech will have a proper Geforce 1080 review within 6 months of release...My bet is NOT.
Even if they do who will care?
As the clicks decrease....
Bye Bye Anandtech.
_Aaron_ - Tuesday, July 12, 2016 - link
--- Anandtech Galaxy S7 Review: "Although the G5 seems to have started an AF run in the middle of the capture, the areas where the photo is actually focused are arguably better than what the Galaxy S7 can put out. Even next to the G4, the Galaxy S7 falls short. I’m honestly not sure why LG doesn’t get more credit here, because next to Apple they seem to have the best image processing algorithms in the industry.Unfortunately, the Galaxy S7 is just a bit disappointing here. The LG G5 is just clearly better here as noise reduction is better in pretty much every way and it looks a lot more natural due to less obvious sharpening halos. I would also argue that the HTC 10 is also better here due to its better texture detail and better handling of shadow detail, even if edges are softer.
However, with that said the output of the Galaxy S7 and S7 edge’s camera is not that impressive. I would argue that while it’s not worse than the iPhone 6s Plus, it is basically comparable. The real competition in this space comes from the HTC 10 and LG G5, the two of which manage to deliver arguably better still image output ".
--- Anandtech LG G5 review: " When it comes to noise in bright outdoor conditions, the G5 sits about in the middle of this pack the G5 sits about mid pack, with the iPhone 6s Plus, Huawei P9, and Galaxy S7 edge all performing just a little better.
In both scenes, the Galaxy S7 edge takes the brightest picture despite using the fastest shutter speed. The G5’s images are a little darker than the G4’s because it favors a shorter exposure, but it still produces brighter images than the Moto X and Nexus 6P.
The Galaxy S7 edge shows no vignetting, while the Nexus 6P suffers from this issue to a mild degree. All of the other phones, including both of the G5’s cameras, show negligible vignetting.
In bright daylight, the G5 equals the Galaxy S7 edge, producing excellent looking photos. When there’s less light available, like on cloudy days or when moving indoors, the G5 starts to struggle. It still does pretty well setting white balance and exposure, although the iPhone 6s Plus consistently does better. Image noise, however, is a serious problem for the G5. Its images show significantly more noise grain than other flagship devices, degrading image quality ".
Ok, now, I'm confused: should I follow Anandtech's words, or Anandtech's words?
isik - Tuesday, July 12, 2016 - link
www.egemenweb.com thankspeterApinto - Tuesday, July 12, 2016 - link
The whole review spells "NOT BIASED!" in every part.Why? Because the author is actually able to document his allegations, transforming them into arguments.
In fact, this review is really close to being an actual analysis, where the author breaks down all the relevant parts of the S7 and its functions, in order to produce a solid evaluation. And he does this by using solid test tools and techniques, so the results can be recreated by others. This is as close to science as I imagine any tech site is able to get.
So - you can disagree on his conclusion, but calling this review biased just shows that it is you who is biased. Really.
KoolAidMan1 - Thursday, July 14, 2016 - link
Reality is biased for emotional ideologues who worship Android as their god.IDGI
StimulatedBoy - Wednesday, July 13, 2016 - link
Thx, Joshua. This kind of analyses, eye for details and objectivity is what has drawn me to Anandtech for the last 10-15 years. Keep up the good work!Aaight - Thursday, July 14, 2016 - link
Lol, er du her og grupperunker også :D Synd du bommet på 3 av 3, hehe!pukemon1976 - Wednesday, July 13, 2016 - link
I see the comments mention bias a lot. Me? I think the author is trying to get a job at apple like Klug and Shimpi. Geez. Can you not make it anymore obvious? I think some of us that are fanboys of android pretty much know that apple makes a good all around overpriced phone. Cpu? Winner by efficiency and architecture. GPU? Not necessarily winner but powerVR uses different method of drawing graphics and that is drawing what is only shown. Nonetheless, powerVR makes a damn good efficient GPU. A lot of things are just details. Like battery life? Author gets away with mentioning but x phone has a bigger battery. What about iPhone uses less lines of resolution in both their models so battery life comparison is just details. Cameras? I can't comment really on quality of s7/s7 edge but do know they focus really fast and process fast. Especially exynos version. Iphone camera? I've seen some really.bad pictures from my friends as of late. And some admittedly know their camera isn't all it's cracked up to be. If I'm taking pictures with my note4 at some memorable event usually my friends and family want copies of my pictures, no matter what phones they have. And work just issued us iPhone 6+ a few months ago. Geez. Impressed with sunny day shots. But I work in dark environments often. I'm pulling out my note4 camera or somebody is asking me to take an important picture if only iphones around most of the time. And I wish author and company would take a better approach to wifi and lte battery tests. My note4 with the first modem to use power enveloping for LTE is noticeablyore efficient than WiFi. I've proven it over and over and over. Even my geek friends are befuddled by it. And how come author never mentions iPhone dropping frames or lagging? I do admit though iPhone does have great memory management, not to mention noticeably faster internal storage. My micro SD though... oh wait... have to pay super premium for extra storage. Really wish author and friends were less biased. I'm fine with opinions. Anand wrote great articles and his iPhone bias didn't ruin it for me. Methinks, the reviews take so long because anandtech isn't anandtech anymore. Me also thinks author and friends so jealous they meticulously spend a ridiculous amount of time making apple proud of their review so they too can go work in Cupertino one day. Unbelievable how shoddy this review was. Really? When you couldn't say apple was the best bar none in a certain department you digressed to other Android phones, probably meaning apple isn't even close to the top, since you have to resort to that. And some of you apple fanboys need to lay off the apple look aid. It has been so obvious as of late. I know apple does a lot of things well. And some they don't. And then there's so much customization in amdroid, especially with root, even moreso with unlocked bootloader. I think some of you guys never read Klug's and shimpi's reviews. Even though they showed their apple bias, they did some really good reviews. Reviews I would come back for. Even read the iphone reviews. I know why I've hardly been coming to anandtech lately but this review I know I'll be coming even less. No more bookmarks or waiting g for the other stuff l liked to read about like Intel, nvidia, and, ssd tech. Until next time, might be awhile, and hopefully better reviewers, peace out.