Camera - Still

I guess it shouldn’t come as any surprise at this point that the RAZR, you guessed it, uses the same OmniVision OV8820 8 MP CMOS sensor as the Bionic. That means 1.4µm square backside illuminated pixels. However, as we’ve discussed in the past there really are four parts to the whole smartphone imaging chain: the sensor (CMOS), optical system, Image Signal Processing (ISP), and finally software on the OS talking to the ISP. What’s different on the RAZR versus the Bionic is optical system and software.

The Bionic included F/2.8 optics with a 4.6mm focal length. The RAZR keeps that 4.6mm focal length and includes F/2.4 optics according to EXIF. It’s entirely likely that the focal length field hasn’t changed, but given that from what I can find commercially available OV8820 F/2.4 packages have a focal length around 4.95mm. However, it’s reasonably close. Both of these designs are likely 4P (4 plastic elements) as well.

We’ve done the usual thing and taken photos with the phone under test in our smartphone test locations (which are a bit difficult to control and might have slightly different than usual lighting due to seasons changing) and in our controlled indoor tests.

As a reminder, in the smartphone bench samples only locations 3-7 remain available for testing.

The RAZR does decently well in our controlled testing. Distortion is minimal, the lightbox with light on sample is sharp and looks accurate, and colors look similar to the Bionic. Despite being a half stop wider on the ISO12233 chart we see no more spatial frequencies in the horizontal or vertical (meaning performance is clearly not diffraction limited, which isn’t a surprise). In the lights off test, the RAZR still doesn’t illuminate the scene in the dark, and instead defaults to focusing to infinity which produces a blurry image in our box.

I guess while we’re on the subject of focus, this is a continual problem in the bench test. Focus is soft or missed focus entirely in locations 3 and 4, and in our sample bench video as we’ll show later. I’m not sure what the problem is here, but I’m confident I allowed the AF routine to run properly before capturing - this is just the position the software decided was best focus.

I mentioned software because the RAZR’s camera software subjectively seems less stable than the Bionic’s. I experienced a crash or two in the course of taking bench samples and normal test photos, and like other Motorola camera apps had UI elements disappear sometimes. Obviously not having a physical shutter button makes having a working UI even more important, and the RAZR just needs a bugfix update to address the camera app stability.

Camera - Video

I also shot video at the test location, and here if you look at 1:1 zoom you can see that the RAZR does appear to miss focus despite running its continuous auto focus routine a few times. I shot this video a number of times after a reboot expecting different results but never got a completely sharp video.

The positive part of video recording on the RAZR is that it still uses the same bitrate and H.264 features as the Bionic - 15 Mbps high profile for 1080p30, and 10 Mbps high profile for 720p30. Audio is two-channel stereo AAC at 128 Kbps. You can again pull all of these out of build.prop just as shown below.

ro.media.camcorder.1080p=mp4,h264,30,15000000,aac,128000,44100,2 ro.media.camcorder.720p=mp4,h264,30,10000000,aac,128000,44100,2 ro.media.camcorder.d1NTSC=mp4,h264,30,6000000,aac,128000,44100,2

So that’s a good thing, and again thanks in part to OMAP4’s excellent video encoder, though we see most of the high end smartphones shooting 1080p based on OMAP4 and Exynos using high profile.

Rear Facing 1080p30 Video Sample

Front Facing 720p30 Video Sample

In addition we’ve uploaded the raw rear facing camera video sample without YouTube’s transcoding which you can grab from us in a big zip here. Again the encode quality of the videos is above average, but sharpness would be much better were it not for these focus issues.

Cellular Connectivity - MDM6600 + Wrigley LTE Performance - 1.2 GHz OMAP4430
POST A COMMENT

75 Comments

View All Comments

  • Devo2007 - Friday, December 16, 2011 - link

    Anyhow, Android 2.3.5 on the RAZR is almost identical to the software and Blur skin we saw running on the Droid Bionic. That is to say, both come with Motorola’s not-Blur motoblur skin replete with resizable widgets....../quote]

    Can we all just agree that the software skin Motorola uses is called Blur, and stop with this "not-Blur" nonsense? I know Motorola wants to claim it's not Blur, but obviously by the version number info, it is. Several tech sites are doing it, and it's getting ridiculous now.
    Reply
  • Brian Klug - Friday, December 16, 2011 - link

    Motorola a few times made specific note that their skin isn't called Blur, even though in build.prop and relevant places, it's called "Blur." I guess it all just boils down to semantics. :)

    -Brian
    Reply
  • yas69 - Friday, December 16, 2011 - link

    S2 benchmark values are different with November/December stock firmware.
    I get 1130 on vellamo with recent S2 firmware. Sunspide/Browsermark values are better than also higher than Razr.
    Reply
  • Brian Klug - Saturday, December 17, 2011 - link

    What ROM and browser are you tesing in? I can't get any higher than what's in the article on our UK SGS2 with the latest ROM from Kies.

    -Brian
    Reply
  • yas69 - Sunday, December 18, 2011 - link

    I9100XWKK2 / I9100XWKL1 both perform better than previous versions. Reply
  • yas69 - Monday, December 19, 2011 - link

    sorry.

    I9100XWKK2 (2.3.6)
    Vellamo = 1161
    sunspider = 1980
    browsermark = 78014
    Reply
  • lemmo - Friday, December 16, 2011 - link

    Thanks for the review, but do you have any more info on audio quality in terms of music playback? You are saying that it is an improvement over the Bionic but how does it compare to other phones like SGS2 and iPhone?

    Your detailed review of audio quality on the SGS2 was really helpful and I thought you were going to include this testing methodology on all smartphone reviews from now on...?
    Reply
  • kishorshack - Friday, December 16, 2011 - link

    Even i expect the same thing brian klug it would be awesome if you update this review someday :) Reply
  • Brian Klug - Saturday, December 17, 2011 - link

    We're definitely going to do some more in-depth audio testing, it's something new to me but we've finally got the hardware and methodology, just have to interpret results. I did link to the RMAA runs from here for your own perusal, which we're going to talk a bit more about in the Galaxy Nexus piece.

    -Brian
    Reply
  • lemmo - Saturday, December 17, 2011 - link

    Thanks Brian that's great news :)

    As I asked in my comment below, will you do a comparative audio test with other phones when you do the Nexus review? The test results for just the phone you're testing don't mean much unless we know how they compare. Cheers
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now