The HTC 10 Review
by Joshua Ho on September 19, 2016 8:00 AM ESTStill Image Performance
Now that we’ve discussed the basics of the HTC 10’s camera we can discuss the kind of output that it gives. Due to various constraints it’s difficult to make a test that provides a stimulus that is time-invariant, so we’re effectively stuck with testing that attempts to control for this time-invariance by reducing the gap in time in relative comparisons. Just about the only test that can be reliably controlled for is the ISO chart, and even then differences in exposure time will necessarily mean differences in noise. If you can’t tell already, these results are not exactly scientific but will allow for at least some reasonable ability to come to some kind of conclusion about camera performance.
Starting with the ISO test chart we can see that the HTC 10 generally doesn’t have obvious haloing unless you look closely, which is kind of a shock considering just how heavy-handed the image processing was on the One M9 which basically threw away its 20MP sensor as far as detail went due to this heavy-handed image processing. Talking to those in the industry I get the sense that HTC overcame a fairly significant cultural barrier in order to make this happen and it’s good to see that they’re able to do this in order to make a better product.
However, while detail in the center is better than what you might find in the Galaxy S7 or iPhone 6s, the HTC 10’s edge detail is really concerning. There’s a lot of defocus at the edges which I suspect is a function of the 26mm effective focal length and f/1.8 aperture. It’s clear that HTC’s ID team cares a lot about reducing the camera hump here but I think reducing aberration and getting closer to 28 or 30mm equivalent wouldn’t make the camera hump appreciably worse and would allow for better performance here. I think the optics are probably the main weakness here which is a bit disappointing.
| Daytime Photography |
Looking at some landscape photos it's worth noting how the HTC 10 seems to consistently meter the whole scene evenly rather than assigning a strong center weight so in photos like this scene it's obvious that the scene is overexposed. Putting that aside the HTC 10 does generally capture more fine detail than the Galaxy Note7 which is likely at least partially due to the larger sensor. Edge detail isn't as sharp though, which is at least partially because HTC's image processing doesn't have strong sharpening like we've seen in previous launches.
It's worth mentioning here that the HTC 10 was not necessarily the best camera at launch. While I wasn't able to do in-depth characterization, it's clear to me that anyone that reviewed the camera with launch software would have a very different view of how the camera performed than anyone that would be using the camera now.
To try and highlight what I mean we can look at one of the first photos I ever took with the HTC 10, which had some fairly obvious aberrations. If you look at the fuel door and the rear fender there are some obvious bright spots. These sorts of issues were fairly common in the image processing of the camera until a month or so after the device had been released. At the time the HTC 10's camera in rare situations could produce a better photo than the Galaxy S7, but after a few updates to the image processing and other parts of the camera software I would say that detail produced by the camera is fairly consistently better on the HTC 10 in daytime conditions.
What most of the photos won't highlight in this sort of standardized tripod testing is just how good the HTC 10 is for macro photos. The large pixel size and wide aperture allows for some really impressive bokeh if you can get close enough to the subject. The Note7 and 6s are both capable of doing the same sort of thing, but it's not nearly as well-defined as it is on the HTC 10 because of the aperture and pixel size.
| Low Light Photography 1 |
In this scene we can see that the HTC 10 manages to capture more detail and manages to capture the fluorescent lighting a bit more accurately, but it's obvious that the optics of the HTC 10 is leading to more noticeable aberration around things like bright lights. In the shadows HTC's noise reduction is clearly not quite what it needs to be either as there's more color noise.
| Low Light Photography 2 |
In the next scene the HTC 10 manages to get the color of the sodium lamps a bit more accurately than the Note7 but actually isn't as correct as the Galaxy S7. I would say that the detail here is also better as the Note7 really has a fairly strong oil painting effect that obsfucates a lot of the finer detail here.
To provide some perspective on what the scene really looks like I took a photo of this scene with a Nikon D7000 using Adobe Standard color profile and auto white balance which really shows just how orange this scene is.
| Low Light Photography 3 |
In this low light scene again we can see that the HTC 10 produces better detail than the Note7. I've done a lot of side by side tests with the Galaxy S7, Note7, and HTC 10 at this point and it's genuinely surprising how in some situations HTC has clearly better image processing than the Note7. I would say that the output here is significantly better than the 6s and 6s Plus which are strongly constrained by z-height.
Looking at the long exposure RAW processed in Lightroom the HTC 10 clearly shows that the optics are really not quite up to scratch when it comes to handling point light sources though as the street lights on the left edge of the photo show streaking that happens despite wiping down the cover lens with a clean cotton cloth.
| Low Light Photography 4 |
Out of all the scenes I tested so far I think this one really highlights some of the weaknesses still present in the HTC 10's camera. I think a lot of the reason why the HTC 10 is perceived as having dark photos in low light is really more a function of how HTC tends to really compress the brightness curve at near-black shades, Overall the Note7 captures a much better photo even if the fine detail captured is significantly better on the HTC 10. I suspect that this is some kind of gamma curve issue because taking a long exposure and processing the same scene in Lightroom yields a much better photo. I suspect that the background is dark enough that HTC is running out of sensor gain and integration time to really capture the scene which is why the iPhone 6s Plus captures a similarly dark photo. The Galaxy S7 and Note7 will really push the limits as far as gamma and sensor gain go to get detail in situations where I can't even see what I'm really looking at.
| Low Light Photography 5 |
In this final scene I would say that the HTC 10 probably produces the most detailed image out of all of the devices under test here. However there are some issues with vignetting at the edges that aren't present in the other devices tested here which include the G5, Note7, iPhone 6s Plus, and Galaxy S7. Overall though I don't think it's really hard to call it in favor of the HTC 10. The Note7, Galaxy S7, and G5 all have some serious oil painting effects going on here. The iPhone 6s Plus looks a lot more natural than most Android competition but due to Apple's seeming reluctance to participate in sensor size wars that we've been seeing in Android devices it just can't collect enough light to capture a photo as detailed as the HTC 10.
Overall, I think the HTC 10 camera is really a lot better than what I expected from reading most of the discourse around it. As far as still images go, it's really my primary smartphone camera at this point. It's been used for a few liveblogs at this point and a just about any time I want to send a photo to someone or post it on social media. It isn't perfect as things like contrast focus in low light is really quite temperamental and I would say noise reduction still needs some work to better control color noise and avoid losing edge detail, but overall the camera is impressive at how well it can take stills.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
183 Comments
View All Comments
MobiusPizza - Tuesday, September 20, 2016 - link
Gosh that sentence is quite a mouthful
asfletch - Tuesday, September 20, 2016 - link
Agreed. Also re the content - is it surprising to anyone else that UFS solutions don't have a clearer advantage over eMMC? I mean my 2014 Note 4 gets about 19/7 on Random Read/Write with the same Androbench settings. According to these charts, that's better than the current Note 7. Also the HTC 10 here on test beats all of the UFS phones handily for Sequential Write speed.What's up with that? Is it the benchmark?
Guitahero - Tuesday, September 20, 2016 - link
What happened with the deep audio analysis from anandtech?JKJK - Tuesday, September 20, 2016 - link
Indeed! I miss them too!winjay - Tuesday, September 20, 2016 - link
"for its size I don’t believe there’s another Snapdragon 820 device with better battery life."Sony usually does wonders with battery life. Have you checked Xperia XA battery life?
Vagabondjonez - Tuesday, September 20, 2016 - link
with a 2k display he probably meantwinjay - Tuesday, September 20, 2016 - link
Also this phone is said to have an amazing DAC. How is the audio output?Ro_Ja - Tuesday, September 20, 2016 - link
The front looks like a Samsung Galaxy.amosbatto - Wednesday, September 21, 2016 - link
This review (and every other review I have ever read) doesn't cover the most important issue, which is the longevity of the phone. Here are the issues which I suggest that a review should cover:1. We all know that the battery will die after 2 years. Every phone which has a replaceable battery should automatically get a higher rating, just because it will probably last longer than one which doesn't. If a phone has a sealed case, the reviewer should try to open the case and give readers an idea how hard it will be to replace the battery. If the case is glued together, if the battery is glued to the case or if it is impossible to buy replacement batteries on the internet, then the review should let us know.
2. Reviews should emphasize the amount of storage space a phone has and how expandable the phone is, because this has a big impact on how long the phone will last. If a phone is limited to 32 gigabytes of storage, then the phone will probably not last more than 2 years, because people tend to buy new phones once they run out of space. Trying to decide what apps to uninstall, what music to remove, what photos to delete, etc. is such a painful process, that many people simply buy a new phone. Reviews should really knock phones which don't have a MicroSD slot to expand storage and I would love to see some benchmarking on the difference in speed between the internal NAND and a normal MicroSD.
Frankly, I wish that smartphone manufacturers would offer us phones with two MicroSD slots, where one is used to expand the storage for apps on the phone and the second is the memory that we can remove to transfer files to our PC.
Another thing that reviews should cover is how hard is it insert and extract a MicroSD card. On my HTC Sensation from 2011, it was very easy to pop the MicroSD card in and out of the computer, but it can't be done without a special tool on my Moto X Pure Edition. Not a single review ever covers how hard it is to insert and extract the MicroSD card, but this is essential information for people like me who intend to keep their phones for many years.
3. Every review should mention how good the manufacturer is about offering security updates and OS upgrades to its phones, which are essential for extending the life of the phone. HTC has an excellent track record of offering fast updates when a new version of Android is released, whereas Samsung does not. Every review comparing an HTC phone to a Samsung phone should mention this difference, because it will influence the buying decisions of people who care about the longevity of their phones.
4. Another way to extend the life of a phone is to install an OS that doesn't come from the manufacturer. If the manufacturer stops offering upgrades, then we have the freedom to install CyanogenMod or another mod to get the new features in the latest version of Android. No review ever covers how hard it is to unlock the bootloader and install a mod in the phone, but this is essential information for a phone buyer who wants to be able to keep upgrading the phone. Does the manufacturer offer for free the code to unlock the bootloader and does it have a policy of voiding the warranty if a mod is installed? Five years ago when I bought my Sensation, HTC had the best mod policies in the industry, but I have no idea who is best today and this review didn't mention it.
Another piece of essential information is how standard the hardware is and how likely mods will be developed for the phone. For example, the SoC on the HTC 10 is a standard Qualcomm Snapdragon 820, so it is highly likely that mods will be made for this phone, whereas it is highly unlikely that mods will ever be created for a custom SoC made by Huawei, Samsung or Apple. Yes, that custom SoC probably processes a couple milliseconds faster, but frankly most people will never notice the difference.
5. Another way to extend the life of a phone is to turn it into a PC. I frankly don't see the point of buying a flagship phone like the HTC 10 which costs $600, but I might consider it if I know that it can be used as a low cost PC. Kudos to this review for at least mentioning that the HTC 10 supports Slimline and Android 7, but it doesn't explain why that is important. The phone has the necessary hardware and software to be hooked up to a monitor and bluetooth keyboard and mouse, so it can be used as a PC with multiple windows and a mouse pointer. I would have loved to read a review about how well this works with the HTC 10.
Reviewers spend an inordinate amount of time covering differences in processing speed and other minutiae which most people will never notice when using a phone, but they don't provide the most essential information to help people choose phones with long lifespans. Part of the reason is that reviewers are the type of people who get a new phone every year, so they don't worry about the battery wearing out. However, I think a more important factor is that fact that sites like AnandTech rely on advertising from the same manufacturers who they are reviewing. Manufacturers of smartphones and other electronic devices promote planned obsolescence as a way to increase their sales. A reviewer who dwells too much on the fact that a phone is designed to be thrown away after two years probably won't get much advertising and is unlikely to get free samples to review.
Apple has always had some of the worst policies in the industry in terms of planned obsolescence, but within the last 5 years the entire phone industry has started to copy Apple in designing sealed black boxes which are difficult to open and even harder to fix. Yet, I have not seen a single review of the iPhone 7 or any of the other recent smartphones which even mentions how hard it is to fix the phone or even replace the battery. If the reviewers don't mention it, then consumers won't think to check and the phone industry will conclude that consumers don't want fixable and modifiable phones, so they will offer more and more Apple-like devices.
Extending the life of smartphones is not just a way to save consumers money. One of the biggest ecological problems on the planet is the fact that 1.5 billion smartphones will be manufactured this year and most of them will be junked within 2 years. More smartphones are manufactured today than all the other ICT devices combined (servers, routers, desktop and notebook PCs, tablets, gaming consoles, cameras, televisions and advanced wearables). The amount of energy, metals and other vital resources which are wasted every year in making throwaway devices is astounding. If we estimate that the average smartphone and its charger weighs 150 grams, that means we are generating 225,000 metric tons of eventual e-waste every year, which is toxic and needs special treatment.
Even more alarming is the amount of greenhouse gas emissions being generated to manufacture all these smartphones. Apple estimates that 83.6 kg of CO2-equivalent were emitted to manufacture and transport its iPhone 6 to point of sale, whereas using an iPhone for a year emits 3.5 kg CO2-e and recycling it at the end of its life emits 1.0 kg CO2-e. Of course, Apple didn't include all the energy to operate the cell towers, internet servers and routers, etc. that are used by an iPhone, but manufacturing a smartphone clearly has far more environmental impact than using it, so the best way to lower the environmental impact is to make the phone last as long as possible in order to avoid manufacturing a new phone.
Apple does not explain how it calculates its emissions, but it is highly likely that Apple did not include the SF6 which was emitted in manufacturing its screens or all the other types of greenhouse gases which often get overlooked. It also probably doesn't include in its emissions all the advanced processing to make the ultrapure chemicals, water and gases which are used in silicon and flat screen fabs. Today's crop of smartphones probably have an even higher environmental impact, considering that they are using larger screens, more memory and more processing cores than the iPhone 6, which had a 4.7in screen, 1 GB of RAM and 2 processing cores. Now-a-days, 5-6in screens, 2-4GB of RAM and 4-8 processing cores are the norm, so we can conservatively estimate that manufacturing today's smartphone will emit 100 kg CO2-e. For the 1.5 billion smartphones produced in 2016, that means 150,000 metric tons of CO2-e.
Allan_Hundeboll - Wednesday, September 21, 2016 - link
You def. have a point