Still Image Performance

Now that we’ve covered the user experience associated with the camera, we can start to go over the output that the Galaxy S7 is capable of producing. In order to do this we continue to carry over the same sorts of benchmarks that we’ve used in 2015, which is to say that we use a combination of standardized test charts with semi-controlled lighting along with real world testing to try and see how the device actually performs outside of rather simplistic tests.

Starting with the ISO chart we can see quite clearly that the Galaxy S7 has lost noticeable ground in resolution relative to the Galaxy S6 when you look at the center of the photo, but at the edges of the photo the Galaxy S7 actually appears to have the lead against the Galaxy S6. The same sort of story plays out with the HTC 10 as it clearly has more detail than the Galaxy S7 at the center of the photo but the edges of the HTC 10’s test chart shot shows clear defocus that gets pretty terrible at the corners.

Daytime Photography

In our daytime landscape test we can see the sorts of effects that the smaller pixel size has had on the Galaxy S7. Relative to the Galaxy S6, there’s almost no delta in the detail resolved, but right away it’s obvious that the sharpening halos have become even more obvious than before which is concerning. These observations also apply to the Galaxy Note5, although the Note5 is a bit sharper due to some changes in image processing relative to the Galaxy S6. However I wouldn’t say that there’s an appreciable difference one way or another here.

Relative to the iPhone 6s, the Galaxy S7 is basically identical in detail as well, but the iPhone 6s tends a bit warmer and has much, much less obvious post-processing that is extremely obvious on the distant trees that contrast against the sky. This is actually kind of surprising for me given that the Galaxy S7 has a larger sensor, but I suspect the dual pixel AF, wider aperture, and slightly wider field of view are eliminating whatever advantages increased sensor size might bring.

Compared to the HTC 10, the Galaxy S7 has better edge contrast, but generally it looks like textures have better detail on the HTC 10. I haven’t been able to do extensive RAW comparisons yet but it looks like HTC is just blurring luminance noise out too aggressively here for whatever reason. I’m not sure what causes this in image processing, but given how other OEMs like LG and Apple are fully capable of mostly eliminating color noise from their photos while retaining most of the detail that their cameras are capturing HTC would do well to do the same.

The final point of comparison I want to make here is the LG G4/G5. 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.

Low Light Photography

While daytime quality is critical, I suspect most people are going to be interested in low light performance as this is usually the hardest test for any OEM to get through. It’s taken years for OEMs to start shipping acceptable image processing in low light that wasn’t just a smeary and oversharpened mess, so getting this right is pretty important to say the least.

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.

The Galaxy S7 also has this strange streaking light flare with bright sources that I just couldn’t get rid of despite wiping the lens multiple times with a clean cotton cloth, which was done for every phone in this test before taking the picture. In fairness, the Galaxy S7 is still the fastest camera out of everything in this test, but it comes at the cost of rather disappointing output for me. The Galaxy Note5 looks like it might even be slightly better than the Galaxy S7, which is a weird regression when the general idea of going to a larger pixel size is to get better low light performance. As alluded to earlier, the cost of the dual pixel AF system may be sensitivity due to the dual photodiodes and light barrier to generate a phase detection pixel. While this is just one test example I’ve spent a lot of time playing with the camera on the Galaxy S7 and in general its low light performance is fairly similar to what you see above. The only time where I really see the Galaxy S7 lead is in extreme low light conditions where everything is reaching ISO and shutter speed limits.

Overall, while the user experience of the Galaxy S7's camera is industry-leading, the Galaxy S7 represents a somewhat unfortunate sidegrade in camera quality at best. I would argue that Samsung has gone in the wrong direction with their camera processing as they seem to be relying on strong noise reduction and sharpening more than ever before. The Galaxy S7 also retains the oversaturated color rendering of the Galaxy S6. While I'm sure most people are happy with these results, Apple and LG tend to have more accurate color rendition with their cameras. While HTC doesn't quite nail color rendition, they are arguably closer to reality than Samsung is. Hopefully with their next device they manage to maintain their class-leading speed, but with better post-processing and overall image quality.

Camera Architecture and UX Video Performance
Comments Locked

266 Comments

View All Comments

  • OscarK - Tuesday, July 5, 2016 - link

    This is a great article Joshua. It's strange that people would complain, thinking that it is bias simply because you stated the truth and didn't blindly praise it's camera like other reviewers whom somehow have become the embodiment of the likes of Steve McCurry. They might as well say it's bias towards the g5 which you stated is a better still camera (maybe they have some enmity with apple. I don't know). I for one like properly exposed natural photos. I will be getting the one plus 3 though. Loved the review on it.
  • barn25 - Tuesday, July 5, 2016 - link

    I don't know how you all wasnt able to test the 8890 version when pretty much all variants of it support almost all US LTE bands.
  • Andrei Frumusanu - Wednesday, July 6, 2016 - link

    Because I have that unit and I'm on a different continent and I can't achieve good signal conditions to be able to do a apples to apples comparison to other devices. I'll do 820 vs 8890 comparisons under my network but the values will not be representative to other devices.
  • SunnyNW - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Just a question...but could you guys realistically not ship it back and forth within the four months or so that it took for this review?
  • Jodiuh - Tuesday, July 5, 2016 - link

    I usually never post about this and I OWN an iPhone, but FOUR MONTHS for a review when you guys only took one week for the last iPhone?

    I don't know what has happened to this site, but it seems to take forever to get reviews out now if we even get them.

    And it's not just cell phones, there's still no 1080/1070/480 reviews either.

    :-(
  • DCide - Tuesday, July 5, 2016 - link

    "... as soon as I start looking closer at everything I start to see cases where Samsung just doesn’t seem to care enough. Everything about the phone seems to be targeted towards being a great experience for the first week or two of ownership ..."

    Spot on! This is exactly how I've seen Samsung mobile devices for a number of years now - I've just never seen it in print before!

    This is exactly why I ultimately exclude Samsung from consideration whenever shopping for an Android device.
  • TheITS - Tuesday, July 5, 2016 - link

    This review managed to find only metrics in which the S7 can be directly compared to every other phone and then tells us that the phone as a whole is average. Where is the testing of the unique features it brings to the table like VR and water resistance? The camera is so fast why isn't there a comparison to see if it can capture lifes more transient moments than the rest of the phone market? People want to know whether it's a phone worth buying and living so please next time explore everything the phone can do and not just where it overlaps.

    I can see that there is a lot of content in the review but it's a shame that the reviewer doesn't seem to have identified what Samsung were trying to do as a whole with the total experience and whether they hit the mark.
  • theduckofdeath - Tuesday, July 5, 2016 - link

    That is unfortunately what Anandtech has been about for about a decade.
  • raptormissle - Tuesday, July 5, 2016 - link

    Takes 3 months to review an Android phone yet iPhones get the red carpet treatment around here at anandtech. The old boss must be still calling the shots. Even mechanical keyboards have a higher priority around here.
  • watzupken - Tuesday, July 5, 2016 - link

    "The Galaxy S7 is clearly packed with features and ticks all the right boxes, but as soon as I start looking closer at everything I start to see cases where Samsung just doesn’t seem to care enough. Everything about the phone seems to be targeted towards being a great experience for the first week or two of ownership"

    Despite the review turning up very late, i.e. at least 4 months late, I still appreciate the objective reviews from the site. I have to agree what is mentioned in the conclusion based on my experience with Samsung products over the years. I was actually contemplating to try out the S7 to see if anything changed, but I think I will skip it.

    One honest feedback to folks at Anandtech: Objective reviews are highly appreciated, but they need to be fast as well. Using this article as example, 4 months into the product launch means most people have purchased the product, which greatly diminishes the value of the review.

    Thank you folks.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now