The Samsung Galaxy S6 and S6 edge Review
by Joshua Ho on April 17, 2015 9:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Smartphones
- Samsung
- Mobile
- Galaxy S6
- Galaxy S6 Edge
Camera Architecture
Another major area of focus for Samsung for the S6 was refining the camera. Both share the same Sony IMX240 camera sensor, which seems to be quite similar in spec compared to the Samsung ISOCELL sensor that was used in the Galaxy S5. As far as I can tell, the two sensors are mostly similar, but the IMX240 seems to have better high-ISO performance when comparing the GS5 and GS5 LTE-A.
Meanwhile Samsung has improved the optics to have a maximum aperture size of f/1.9 compared to the f/2.2 that we saw with the Galaxy S5 as well as the addition of an IR sensor in order to improve white balance detection. OIS is also introduced to the Galaxy S lineup for this generation, and in practice the stabilization is as effective as the Galaxy Note 4.
Samsung also strongly prioritized shooting speed and general camera speed with this generation, as they introduced object tracking AF, a double tap camera gesture, and further refinement of the PDAF system in order to make the camera experience much better than before. The object tracking AF is similar to what we've seen on phones like the Huawei Ascend Mate 7 before, but double-tapping the home button to wake up the camera was almost instant compared to pretty much any other method I've seen before. The long start-up time that I saw with the Galaxy S5's camera application has also disappeared for the most part, and in general places like the gallery and camera application are much faster than before.
In the interest of readability, the spec table below should help to provide some perspective on the changes that have occurred from the Galaxy S5 to the Galaxy S6. I won't discuss the front-facing camera outside of the spec table, other than to say that the minimum shutter speed is far too low for a camera that solely relies on EIS at 1/7 seconds.
| Samsung Galaxy S Cameras | ||||
| Samsung Galaxy S5 | Samsung Galaxy S6 | |||
| Front Camera | 2MP | 5.0MP | ||
| Front Camera - Sensor | S5K8B1YX (1.12µm, 1/7.3") |
Samsung S5K4E6 (1.34 µm, 1/4.1") |
||
| Front Camera - Focal Length | 1.2mm | 2.2mm (22mm eff) | ||
| Front Camera - Max Aperture | F/2.4 | F/1.9 | ||
| Rear Camera | 16MP | 16MP | ||
| Rear Camera - Sensor | Samsung S5K2P2XX (1.12 µm, 1/2.6") |
Sony IMX240 (1.12 µm, 1/2.6") |
||
| Rear Camera - Focal Length | 4.8mm (31mm eff) | 4.3mm (28mm eff) | ||
| Rear Camera - Max Aperture | F/2.2 | F/1.9 | ||
As shown in the table above, the sensor is mostly similar when comparing the Galaxy S5 to the Galaxy S6 which also means that the somewhat annoying 16:9 aspect ratio is retained, but there are some major changes in everything else around the CMOS image sensor. The optics stack clearly has had a dramatic change as the focal length goes from 4.8mm to 4.3mm. Converting this to 35mm equivalent focal lengths, this means that the effective focal length goes from 31mm on the Galaxy S5 to 28mm on the S6, which ends up increasing field of view by a fair bit.
It’s likely that this was necessary to keep the camera hump from becoming ridiculous in size as it already protrudes around 1-2mm from the back cover of the phone. Some may not have any problem with this change as this means the person using the Galaxy S6 won’t have to stand as far away from a subject as with the Galaxy S5, but this wider field of view does have a cost. Fundamentally, if the optical system is already limited by the resolution of the image sensor then increasing the field of view decreases the effective resolution of the camera, as the same number of pixels has to cover a wider field of view. The other issue is that distortions worsen the further away from the center of the FOV, which means that the increase in field of view is also more distorted than before if not properly compensated for in the design of the optics.
Outside of this change in focal length, the move from an f/2.2 to f/1.9 aperture can also carry some risk as widening the aperture of an optical stack also increases aberration if not properly compensated for. However, this does improve the amount of light collected, which means that it’s possible to take a photo without setting ISO as high and/or shutter speed as low as it would be with a smaller aperture size. This helps to compensate for the relative lack of light sensitivity that comes with a 1.1 micron pixel size.
The final difference is the addition of OIS, which helps to compensate for the effects of hand-shake. A good OIS system can make a massive difference in low light, as the effects of hand shake limit most smartphone cameras to about 1/15 seconds in low light without OIS. With good OIS, it’s possible to push shutter speeds as long as a third or half a second, which represents a 5-7x increase in total light collected. However, OIS is only effective at doing this if the scene doesn’t contain enough movement to cause motion blur regardless of hand shake. Ultimately, to capture good photos of things that often won’t stay still there’s still a need to have good light sensitivity in the camera without relying on long shutter speeds.
Camera UX
Of course, theoretical discussions of all of this doesn’t really help much if the camera doesn’t perform well in practice. However, before we get to testing image quality I wanted to discuss the experience of using the Galaxy S6 as a camera, because this is often an area that can make or break a camera even if the pictures it takes are quite good. There are a lot of elements that go into making a good camera user experience, which starts with a good control layout in the camera application, a quick and easy method of launching the camera, high frame rate and resolution preview, and low focus/shot to shot latency. If there’s anything wrong with these elements of the experience, the amount of frustration involved in getting a good photo rises pretty quickly in my experience. It also becomes difficult to take a good photo as more time is spent fighting the camera.
In the case of the Galaxy S6, the camera UI itself is largely similar to the Galaxy S5 at a high level. Out of the box, the auto mode UI deletes things like metering settings, ISO settings, and a whole host of other settings that ultimately made things more confusing than helpful. The quick controls that are available include the flash settings, timer settings, HDR settings, and filters. Other than this, Samsung includes the mode, front/rear camera toggle, shutter button, and video recording button. It also goes without saying that the UI includes quick access to the gallery. This auto mode is painless, and I never felt like I was missing necessary controls. It would be nice to have the settings menu not completely obscure the camera viewfinder, but I otherwise have nothing else to complain about here.
The mode that I do have a problem with is the Pro mode. Although it is nice to see that Samsung didn’t drop features like adjustable metering, the Pro mode is missing a lot of the things that actually justify the “Pro” label. There is the ability to change exposure compensation, ISO, white balance, focus, and metering, but this really isn’t enough to call this a “Pro” mode. The ISO settings are clearly limited to less than what the auto mode will use as the minimum ISO is 100 in manual mode while auto mode can go to 40 for less noise. Manual white balance is also almost unusable if auto fails as the presets don’t allow precise adjustment, which is concerning as both HTC and Apple provide this functionality either in third party applications or in the stock camera application.
There’s also no shutter speed control, so there’s no way to manually force long exposures if the phone is on a tripod or otherwise well-stabilized. To Samsung’s credit through, the manual focus feature is great for any case where auto focus fails. It would be nice to have an option to enable automatic 4-8x zoom when adjusting manual focus, but this is definitely a step up from the Galaxy S5 where the phone could fail to focus in low light and extreme macro shots.
Finally, the lack of any kind of detailed EXIF data in the standard gallery really drives this point home as it isn't possible to see ISO, exposure, or any other information without downloading a third party application.
Overall, the camera UI is decent, but it’s disappointing that the Pro mode falls short. This is a minor detail for average consumers that will only use the camera on auto mode, but I suspect anyone that wants to control the camera more deeply will be left wanting a bit more if they’ve ever had access to proper manual camera controls on a phone.
Leaving the camera UI, auto-focus and capture latency is something that does matter to everyone. To test these two parameters, we focus on the ideal case of a high contrast target with strong lighting (our ISO chart) to try and make this the purest test of capture latency possible, and to get an idea for what the upper bound of focus latency is. Other cases can definitely produce different results, and low light will definitely have worse results but is much harder to control for.
Tthe Galaxy S6 is incredibly quick here and is comparable to the Note 4 and iPhone 6. It seems that Samsung has tuned the auto-focus mechanism further here because it’s significantly faster than the Galaxy S5 in practice even though both have phase-detect auto focus/“focus pixels”. In low light, both the Galaxy S5 and Note 4 are incredibly slow in comparison to the Galaxy S6 when it comes to capture latency as the low light mode easily adds a quarter to half a second of shutter lag on the Note 4, and multiple seconds on the Galaxy S5. The launch speed of the camera application is also significantly faster than the Galaxy Note 4 or Galaxy S5, and the gallery application is definitely faster as well by a long shot which is now basically unusable on the Galaxy S5.
Overall, other than some small issues the user experience of the camera is solid and Samsung has managed to do a great job on improving the camera experience here. Compared to the HTC One M9, the Galaxy S6 has a much higher resolution preview with no visible frame rate issues and much better focus latency. The camera UI is decent, but doesn’t quite compare with the best available in the market. Now that we have a good idea of the user experience when using the camera, it’s time to get into image quality.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
306 Comments
View All Comments
twtech - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link
There's nothing compelling about the S6 that makes me want it over the S5. Sure, it's a bit faster, but there is a loss of functionality, and it's easier to break.Realistically, we are at a point where speed doesn't matter that much anymore unless you play games on your phone, and frankly if I wanted an iPhone, I'd get an iPhone.
gnx - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link
The promise of Samsung was always the best hardware performance coupled with the most functions. Design was secondary. It just needed to not be a deal-breaker.It really took off with the S2 because it's exynos and graphics performance was the markedly above others (when Android was still behind), it had the most vibrant screesn (Super AMOLED was central to it's marketing), and added some software tricks (like toggles on the notification screen). SD-card and removable batteries were just one part of the appeal (other manufacturers offered it too).
S3 largely delivered, but S4 and S5 failed cause there wasn't enough differentiation on those fronts. They used the same Snapdragon as others, or their Exynos was no better, their screen were being parlayed as too saturated, and software additions were criticized as gimmicky. SD cards and removable batteries became the only lasting meaningful difference. Design started to become stale and a hinderance.
Looks like S6 returns to the original promise: blazing hardware performance with the new Exynos, amazing screen with the maturation of AMOLED, and software that at least doesn't get in the way. Plus additional features that really make a difference: arguably the best camera (Sammy cameras were never bad, not just ever the best) which appeals to the masses and the Gear VR which appeals to the geeks. And a design that is not a deal-breaker. (S6 does not fall behind, and S6 Edge might even have an advantage design-wise)
I'm not getting one for sure. I'm too wed to the Nexus-line. But this time round, I'd be happy to recommend it to tech-minded friends and tech-ignorant family.
generalako - Saturday, April 18, 2015 - link
The S5 wasn't "too saturated", it was the best display of any smartphone during its release, and still holds that title for any non-Samsung smartphone display -- 1 year after its release.akdj - Sunday, April 26, 2015 - link
"S3 largely delivered, but S4 and S5 failed cause there wasn't enough differentiation on those fronts. They used the same Snapdragon as others, or their Exynos was no better, their screen were being parlayed as too saturated, and software additions were criticized as gimmicky. SD cards and removable batteries became the only lasting meaningful difference. Design started to become stale and a hinderance."
General beat me to part of your comment but it's almost like you own an S3, is that correct? Have you managed to 'stay away' from the Internet for three years when it came to technology too? If so, good on ya bro! Wish I could!
The S4 was a Grand Slam. Hence the 'letdown' with S5 sales figures. That said, the two of them are significant improvements on their predecessor. ESPECIALLY AMOLED's technology, and now we're seeing the fruits of Sammys work on Exynos, the internal 'speed' of the storage and memory as well as camera, incredibly quick wifi and LTE speeds and the display, man the display. As an owner of both the iPhone 6+ & Note 4 (biz/personal), I've seen the improvements first hand. In all facets of smartphone usage. Speed, software, displays and cameras and their abilities, the fluency of the OS (I'm weird as I like TouchWiz and iOS, stock Android and OS X, even Win 8....1. Hated '8';)
Point being, the difference between the three you compared is night and day. My Note 1's subsidy couldn't end quick enough. Impulse purchase at the time and I hated it. It would time out before an app could present the dialog box to accept permission, gingerbread w/TW was a mess, as the SoC couldn't cut through the peanut butter (code). Android wasn't perfect yet, but the difference between my Note 1 (same guts as the S3) & original Xoom was unreal. TW killed that phone. The S3 was much better as the stylus software wasn't killing it, but the Note 2/S4 update was HUGE! From the SoC to the camera, the display (AMOLED has matured EVERY year. So much so DisplayMate pre iPhone 6+, could be the same I've not looked ...has the Note 4 as one of, if not THE best display on the market ...and most reviews pegged the Note 4 as the Android phone to beat as an all rounder, IF you can handle the size (it feels much smaller than it is, I've owned 1, 3 and 4 my wife the 1, 2 and 4). The S5 was a 'lot' of half baked but cool ideas. It was a killer display. Phenomenal processing and memory, decent camera in most situations (forget low light), and an extraordinary amount of 'features' added by the OEM. Fingerprint reading and All the Galaxy apps that brought the engines power to it's knees. From S Voice to S Note, S Finder to Smart Stay added to AT& T's plethora of crap, it never really had a chance to 'spread its wings'. All other phones using the SD 800-805 are beasts, including the Note 4, an even further improvement to a near perfect display (consumer) calibration, with Samsung dropping many of the heavy code or worthless crap found on the S5. Also an extra GB of RAM, quick internal storage and a healthy quick MicroSD, fast as hell radios both wifi and cellular provided an enjoyable experience and with the LP 5.01 update I received a week ago, it's the first Android phone over a ½ year later that not only hasn't slowed, but has become MUCH faster, more responsive.
Design wasn't EVER a hindrance. Quite the opposite. As an iPhone owner and two phone daily carrier, the design allowed for fast, safe access to battery and external storage. That's not a hindrance. Now I'd agree it didn't 'help' Sammy that metals and other plastics well formed and nicely crafted by other OEMs started to become the norm. I've always enjoyed the craftsmanship and 'design' from both Samsung and Apple and they've been extremely different.
While reviews would talk about the faux stitching, mock leather, plastic flimsy backs...I don't recall ever reading about the necessity of that typed of manufacture. I've never had a Sammy back 'break' precisely because of its flexibility. Made it easy to access internals and not break it after a few open and closes and the stitching or rather textured plastic exterior made the type of material used easy to grip, tough to slip. I like aluminum too. Both have benefits. Both have drawbacks. But I wouldn't call battery replacement a detriment. We've got several extra Note batteries around the house and other than backpacking (GPS only, airplane. No cell service allowed, it's good to shut it down!) and I can easily get a couple days of use from the Note or iPhone these days. Need more juice there's many hundreds of car chargers, 'power packs' and now like the Note 4, USB 2 Quick Adaptive Charging (I owned the Note 3 and USB 3 while present wouldn't work at USB 3 speeds for transfer and ultimately no benefit to speed of transfers between computer and phone. It was picky on which computers it would even 'tell' it was '3' and showed as '2'). The QC cable and adaptor need to be used but 30 minutes 0-50% and about 90 to get to 100% is phenomenal. As with most OEMs not sporting the Nexus badge, it's lame relying on the OEM to push the latest version of Android 'out' OTA (another reason USB 3 isn't necessary! Who's plugging in anymore? MicroSD can be easily plugged in for faster media transfer from the computers but who needs the cord? Other than charging, either with Android or iOS? Neither require computers not have they since, huh, ironically enough, the S3 era;). And Kies sucks! iTunes is the Mona Lisa of software in comparison.
As far as your SoC comments, just to add...Apple's the onIy OEM to successfully design their own chip and it's low level programming and architecture. They've got a single phone to worry about typically (different this year after the 5s/c test run) and they're able to control the Eco system relatively easily with onIy their 'own' to worry about) and a tablet they've used the same chip with certain upgrades or bulking up the SoC or increasing RAM. Samsung indeed has used the same Snapdragon processors as others but they used only the very best, top shelf parts in their flagships. They've never been shy about RAM, more cores or bigger, better and brighter displays.
They're efforts have paid off with Exynos. A company doesn't build a billion or two transistor piece of silicon on a die the size of your thumbnail overnight. They've done a damn fine job 'keeping up' with Qualcomm IMHO ...to th extent when the 810 exhibited bizarre heat/throttling issues, they were able to immediately slide their own 64bit SoC in for ALL markets (it's been in the S3, 4, & 5 ...too lazy to research but I don't think Sammy used nVidia's Tegra at any point) quite nimbly for such a massive release.
The 'saturation' issue very much went the way of the dodo two years ago or so with the S4, the Note 2. The S5/N3 were another HUGE step up and as General and I've echoed, the N-4 was even better and besting most of the flagship LCD panels. With a display setting the user can control you can 'over' saturate things if you'd like but go back and compare how good this transitions actually were objectively. Here and at DisplayMate.
You missed the actual displacement of LCD's dominance by Super AMOLED during the exact time period you specify. Apple is using it in their watch. It's gorgeous and the S5 software additions, we do agree, are/were, and they leaned 'gimmicky'.
The improvement was evident with the Note 4 six months later and even more so with the S6.
I am curious though, has Samsung dropped the lollipop update for the S5 like the Note 4 in America? Or European countries with the Snapdragon 801/5? If so, and you've downloaded it, has Sammy remedied that bloat by a significant margin? I was happy with 4.4.4 on the N4, but 5.0;1 is like lightning (Nova launch 70%/Google Lauch 30%)
I can't imagine there's a beast trapped in there. The Note 4 has the same motor albeit a 50% bump in RAM. Seems like a simple S/W update as the sales stailed would've helped a company and millions of end users. I think they're trying (HARD) to optimize T/W and abide by Google's rules as muc as feasibly possible when you're using the OS with things like SPen, fingerprint scanning genesis, touch to share NFC or '(S)urrond(S)ound' @ the party!
chizow - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link
Nicely written, fair and balanced review.I was disappointed when I heard Samsung went with a unibody design and removed the option for removable storage and replaceable battery, but I understand the decision and ultimately the market has spoken and agreed with this decision. Personally, the changes would've been unremarkable to me as I would throw a Spigen case on the phone anyways, so the least striking changes to the face would've been the only thing I would've noticed over my S4.
At the same time, I realized without these features, there was really much less reason to go with a Samsung/Android device, so along with the option to BYOD for work, I went ahead and got an iPhone 6 Plus. I guess I was ready to go with a phablet and there was a number of annoyances I had with Android (just too bloaty and too many hidden CPU drainers leading to awful battery life). My work iPhone on the other hand would go DAYS without needing to be charged.
Samsung also has an awful track record of supporting their existing products as they are always rushing towards "The Next Big Thing"; this has held true for a number of their products from SSDs, to phones, to Smart TVs. They just don't care once they have your money, they figure bad support is just forced obsolescence and a way to get more of your money in 2-3 years.
My iPhone 6 Plus hasn't been perfect and there are some oddball bugs I am running into (like Pandora burning CPU/battery randomlly), but overall I'm happy with the decision. We'll see where things stand in a few years when I am ready for another phone upgrade.
Drumsticks - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link
The Galaxy S4 just received the lollipop update. That makes for at least 2 years of updates, which is much better than they used to be.chizow - Saturday, April 18, 2015 - link
But that's just another example of Android's disjointed hodgepodge support model. Only more recent hardware supports their latest updates and then it is still up to the OEM and then the carrier's discretion to push the OTA update. End result is late updates that are already borderline irrelevant or no update at all.IOS isn't perfect either and has had some bunk updates but I got the iOS 8.3 just three days after it was covered here.
Ammaross - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link
"...annoyances I had with Android (just too bloaty and too many hidden CPU drainers leading to awful battery life)""..some oddball bugs I am running into (like Pandora burning CPU/battery randomlly)"
Trade one demon for a devil. If I had to deal with the same thing either way, I'd go with the one you can actually have a chance at fixing yourself rather than just having to deal with it. :P
chizow - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link
Well at least with iOS it is a well-documented solution that just involves closing and re-opening Pandora, vs. the solution to bloaty Android CPU suckage the answer is root your phone and become your own 24.7 tech support . :pPeichen - Saturday, April 18, 2015 - link
chizow is right. I tried to use a Note 3 to replace my iPhone 5 before iPhone 6 came out and after spending 2 weeks rooting, loading launchers, mod and so on I decided I don't want to waste any more time tweaking a phone. I had enough of that from high school and college days overclocking my water cooled computer. My time is a lot more valuable now.