The Galaxy Note 2 is very much an enlarged, slightly tweaked Galaxy S 3, and nowhere is this more evident than the camera system. In fact, after lots of digging I’ve determined that almost all of this is exactly the same as the Galaxy S 3, which isn’t a surprise at all. Samsung has tweaked the camera UI and added features, and compared to the Note there’s definitely a marked improvements, but for Galaxy S 3 users the experience is entirely the same.

To start, the Galaxy Note 2 uses the same 8 MP S5C73M3 CMOS as Galaxy S 3 on the rear facing camera, which is a CMOS which on paper has specs up to par with the competition. There's no official disclosure about this part, but people still know about the specs. Optical format is 1/3.2" which is very common right now, 1.4µm square pixels, and of course the sensor is backside illuminated. From what I can tell the optical system on top of that is exactly the same as well, F/2.6 with a focal length of 3.7 mm. From what I’ve seen of the Galaxy Note 2 camera, performance is as expected basically the same as Galaxy S 3.

Likewise the front facing CMOS is a S5K6A3, also same as Galaxy S 3, which is 1/6" format with 1.75µm BSI pixels and a total size of 1412 x 1412 pixels. Captured images end up being 1280 x 960, F/2.8 with focal length of 2.5 mm.


Milbeaut ISP Roadmap

In addition, Samsung continues to use a discrete Fujitsu Milbeaut 5th generation ISP (Image Signal Processor) for their cameras, you see references to this as M5MO throughout. This is the same setup as I saw on the Galaxy S 2, and though I didn’t dig into the original Note I bet it’s there too since that camera was analogous. There wasn’t much of a jump in camera performance between the Galaxy S 2 and 3, it seems as though Samsung is largely content keeping things the way they are this generation, perhaps waiting for the next generation of the Milbeaut ISP or a dramatically different CMOS to come around from Samsung Semiconductor before they mix things up. Meanwhile F/2.6 isn’t the most aggressive target for a fast optical system, considering other players are at F/2.0. I think Samsung expects those interested in a smartphone with emphasis on camera to go after the Galaxy Camera or something.

This sign just comes off sounding so sarcastic (sample Galaxy Note 2 Photo)

To evaluate still image quality we turned to our standard set of tests which seems to keep growing. That consists of a scene in a lightbox with constant controlled illumination of 1000 lux taken using the front and rear cameras with as close to the same field of view as possible, images of a distortion grid, GretagMacbeth ColorChecker card for white balance checking, and an ISO12233 test chart for gauging spatial resolution in an even more controlled manner. Because I’ve moved houses and lighting will never ever be exactly the same, I have decided to move the three test charts into my lightbox as opposed to putting them on a wall and illuminating them with studio lights. This warrants a completely new set of comparison images, hence the smartphone 2012 camera bench for the three charts and front facing camera.

There’s a lot to go through here, but the test charts tell the most objective story. To me, flipping back an forth between Galaxy S 3 and the Samsung Galaxy Note 2 confirms what I already know, that performance is very similar between the two because they’re basically the same system. Locations 3–7 remain in the bench photo locations, and unfortunately due to time constraints I could only get photos on the one day I was in town with some overcast skies and not the usual lighting I like.

Honestly probably the biggest improvement over the original Note is that the center purple colored spot is completely gone as you can see with the following toggle.


Samsung’s camera UI continues to be very comprehensive and offer a wealth of options and shooting modes. I spent a lot of time playing around with HDR, which now has a Normal and Strong mode that adds even more dynamic range with exposures bracketed even further from the center. There are a couple of those in the MISC gallery of camera shots.

S Pen and Samsung's Take on Android 4.1 Camera Analysis - Video
POST A COMMENT

131 Comments

View All Comments

  • leo jacsion - Tuesday, December 18, 2012 - link

    Preservance a professional <a href=" http://preservancetech.com/our-services/web-design... Designing</a> company based in the capital city of India that offers various services for website designing from a static website to CMS driven website to any open source website development to complete e-commerce site to travel portal. Reply
  • leo jacsion - Friday, December 21, 2012 - link

    Preservance a professional <a href=" http://preservancetech.com/our-services/web-design... Designing</a> company based in the capital city of India that offers various services for website designing from a static website to CMS driven website to any open source website development to complete e-commerce site to travel portal. Reply
  • darwinosx - Wednesday, January 30, 2013 - link

    It is much more than that. Anyone who paid any attention to the trial knows that Samsung had pages and pages showing the iPhone interface and the S 2 interface which it clearly said to copy as closely as possible. But the Android kids want to be ignorant and trot out the Samsung line that is just about being a rectangle. Reply
  • cmdrdredd - Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - link

    The GS2 is ugly as hell next to the GS3. Reply
  • Samus - Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - link

    Yeah its amazing how much my wife's GSII is mistaken for an iPhone in the line at ****bucks.

    I know what you mean, though, and its sad Samsung is basically banned from making "attractive" looking phones. Because appearantly, Apple invented attractive looking phones?
    Reply
  • Wardrop - Thursday, October 25, 2012 - link

    Dejavu? Reply
  • Spunjji - Thursday, October 25, 2012 - link

    Good to see I'm not the only one who got whacked by the comments system yesterday. Reply
  • n13L5 - Wednesday, November 07, 2012 - link

    The way I got my home screen set up, nobody has ever asked if it is an iPhone, as there's no rows of icons to see, and given the Samoled's black values, you can't even see where the screen ends if your background is set to black. Reply
  • Sabresiberian - Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - link

    I guess Samsung didn't consider what would be aesthetically pleasing to someone who would choose a screen name like "jigglywiggly". :D

    Seriously though, just like I'd never be caught using a screen name for a site like yours, there is nothing wrong with your choice, and there is nothing wrong with the looks of the Note II here. You just don't like it. That's fine, but please try not to talk as though you are the arbiter of beauty; you're not.

    ;)
    Reply
  • kenyee - Monday, November 05, 2012 - link

    Smooth, round, light, sleek. Not a brick like the iPhone :-)
    The SGS2 wasn't bad, but the pebble design aesthetic isn't bad IMHO...
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now