Camera Video Recording

Video recording on the Pixel 3’s is still limited to 720, 1080 and 4K at 30fps. The resulting video is encoded in H.264 and Google offers a switch to enable EIS, or to leave it disabled and solely rely on the OIS of the camera. The disadvantage of EIS of course is that it’ll result in a narrower field-of-view compared to the native FoV of the camera.

Pixel 3:      Pixel 2: 

Overall, the only big difference in video recording quality between the Pixel 3 and its predecessor, at least in these sample videos, is that the Pixel 3 is seemingly doing a much brighter exposure. This also resulted in some loss of contrast in some scenarios, and also less saturated colours. Oddly enough the new Pixel 3 also limits the digital zoom available when video recording, only going half as far as on the Pixel 2.

Speaker Evaluation

The Pixel 3 comes again with stereo front-facing speakers. This time around Google promises great improvements in the audio quality thanks to improvements in the software audio processing. To test this, we’re using our new speaker measurement methodology, and to do more direct comparisons I also revisited the Pixel 2’s speakers so that the size difference to the Pixel 2 XL doesn’t affect our evaluation.

Speaker Loudness

In terms of speaker loudness at maximum volume, the Pixel 3 is about 0.6dB louder when holding it in one hand, and showcases a 1.1dB advantage when cupping the phone with both hands. There’s some variability here as I prefer to measure the phones in-hand, as to represent the audio response as you would have when listening to the phones in real life.

The small difference between the one-handed and two-handed results showcase the front-firing nature of the speakers, showing that they have good frontal directionality.

Moving on, we’re doing a frequency response measurement sweep from 20Hz to 20KHz. The measurement is done with the phone in landscape mode held in two hands, with the palms again naturally cupped around the phone, as you would hold it when gaming.

The one very weird result about the Pixel 3 that differs from any other phone I’ve measured, is that the speakers go a lot further in the high frequency range than any other phone. Now this should be positive in general, however the Pixel 3 here oscillates significantly in terms of volume at the high frequencies, and this is plainly audible when doing the frequency sweep test, something unique to the Pixel 3.

Applying a psychoacoustic averaging filter to the results and comparing it to the Pixel 2, we see exactly how the speaker improved in terms of its sound output. I calibrate the volume of all phones in this comparison to a level of 75dbA on a pink noise output, so all phones are at the same perceived volume.

The Pixel 3 improves throughout from the bass range up to the low mid-range, showcasing a significant increase in volume in these frequencies, something that should be immediately audible. The Pixel 3 also has an abnormally loud output in the high frequencies above 15KHz – normally where other phone speakers would drastically fall off. The issue here is whether the big dip around 12KHz will adversely impact the phone’s audio.

It’s very hard to accurately convey speaker quality as recording equipment will always change the frequency response. I tried my best in terms of measuring this as best as I can through recording the phone’s output through a binaural microphone setup. The best playback experience for these recordings is achieved through headphones, or better, IEMs.

My calibrated speaker setup is meant to serve as a baseline to which the recording microphones should be compared to.

Comparing the Pixel 3 to the Pixel 2, there an evident increase in bass and depth of the audio, marking a significant improvement over last year’s model. The issue here is I feel there’s too much components in the high frequencies and the sound can seem notably harsh and shrill at maximum volume.

Another issue is that the phone is seemingly suffering from distortions – this something that I’ve also encountered on the G7 and seems to be linked to the fact that the glass back of the phone is allowed to vibrate a lot, instead of the sound pressure going out through the speaker grill. Also, if you happen to partially cover the bottom (bass) grill, the speaker membrane will notably distort. Pressing against the back will also change the frequency response of the audio.

Overall, the Pixel 3’s speaker are still a significantly improvement. I still prefer the iPhone XS and S9+ speakers – but the Pixel 3 is not far behind, especially having very strong mid-ranges.

Camera - Low Light Evaluation - Night Sight Conclusion & End Remarks
Comments Locked

135 Comments

View All Comments

  • s.yu - Sunday, November 11, 2018 - link

    Oh, I don't know what happened to the site but I'm experiencing frequent problems trying to view samples in full size, I see the correct URL when I hover my cursor over the sample but when I shift-click it(any other sample) only the first sample of the group is opened.
  • s.yu - Sunday, November 11, 2018 - link

    Correction...it just gets stuck at the first sample of the group that I clicked, if I click say the XS sample then I only get the XS sample, click on another sample and I wouldn't be able to open the full sized version of that in a new tab, the new tab would load the XS sample instead.
  • Impulses - Friday, November 2, 2018 - link

    As long as you aren't photographing anything moving... The shutter speeds used will lead to more blurring.
  • Badelhas - Sunday, November 4, 2018 - link

    Andrei, didn't Google say that the "Night Shot" feature will eventually come to the Pixel 2? If so, the main advantage is gone, we can just buy a Pixel 2, which is much cheaper...
    Cheers
  • s.yu - Sunday, November 11, 2018 - link

    There's only one minor issue I'd like to bring up, I don't think Pixel3 clipped more highlight in night mode than Mate20P, all the blue areas are in fact not clipped, only, well, in highlight territory. Only pure white is clipped and from my preliminary examination of the sample with the spotlights illuminating the tree in the center, I'd say Pixel clipped a little less highlight.
    So I then downloaded the samples to view them in lightroom(the issue I mentioned seems to have been limited to page 7, I'm not having problems on page 8). When checking for clipping with the inbuilt tool I noticed that the Mate20P shot had unnatural readings, the tool only labeled two jagged streaks across the surface of the nearest spotlight, while a proper clipping of something like that should at least look remotely round, so I determined that to be software artifacts and added a slight 5 to the global highlight slider, which would just label whatever looked like pure white on that spotlight as clipped.
    On the pixel sample I did the same thing only slightly less, adding 2 to the slider already made pixel's clipping area look properly round(and the same size as Mate20P's). Then I went back to examine the clipping on the tree branches, it was too close to call. So I believe that Pixel and Mate20P retain the same amount (within 1/6 of a stop difference) of highlight DR, only Huawei's algorithm favors aggressively suppressing whatever it has available which Pixel does not.
    Adding that to the far superior detail retention I say Pixel's clearly the new night king.
  • chief-worminger - Friday, November 2, 2018 - link

    Hello Andrei,

    Thank you for the thorough review. I wonder when you say in the battery life section that "SoC efficiency can go either way", do you mean that some 845 chips might be more efficient than some 835 chips, and vice versa? If not can you please clarify?
  • Andrei Frumusanu - Friday, November 2, 2018 - link

    In synthetic tests, the S845 was about equally efficient in terms of energy usage as the S835 - so only minor factors such as software scheduling might push the efficiency in one direction or the other.
  • saleri6251 - Friday, November 2, 2018 - link

    Hello Andrei, I remember a few months ago on twitter you mentioned that a lot of people thought the S845 was going to have massive improvements on battery life, but the logic was very flawed. What was the flaw in the logic?

    Also any hopes for next year when everyone will be on the 7nm chips?
  • eurico - Friday, November 2, 2018 - link

    I'd love to see some Sony phones used in comparisons, I understand that Sony's been lagging a bit behind lately, but still they do have some decent references in battery life and camera performance.
  • Samus - Friday, November 2, 2018 - link

    Sony has one of the, if not the best, camera UI. But the phones and sensors leave a lot to be desired.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now