Mobile Review – DXOMARK https://www.dxomark.com The leading source of independent audio, display, battery and image quality measurements and ratings for smartphone, camera, lens and wireless speaker since 2008. Tue, 21 Mar 2023 14:27:13 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.6.8 https://www.dxomark.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/logo-o-transparent-150x150.png Mobile Review – DXOMARK https://www.dxomark.com 32 32 Samsung Galaxy A34 5G Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-a34-5g-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-a34-5g-camera-test/#respond Tue, 21 Mar 2023 14:27:14 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=142157&preview=true&preview_id=142157 We put the Samsung Galaxy A34 5G through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results [...]

The post Samsung Galaxy A34 5G Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
We put the Samsung Galaxy A34 5G through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 48MP 1/2″ sensor, 0.8μm pixels, f/1.8 aperture lens, PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 8MP 1/4″ sensor, 1.12μm pixels, f/2.2 aperture lens.
  • Macro : 5MP sensor, f/2.4 aperture lens.

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Samsung Galaxy A34 5G
Samsung Galaxy A34 5G
92
camera
99
photo
96

117

86

119

94

116

74

114

78

116

67

81

45
bokeh
45

80

48
preview
48

91

76
zoom
51

116

80

117

78
video
65

115

77

117

69

117

63

115

97

118

73

86

80

117

Use cases & Conditions

[glossary_exclude]Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.[/glossary_exclude]

BEST 168

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 157

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 127

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 143

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

Pros

  • Good exposure
  • Fast and accurate autofocus in photo and video
  • Effective video stabilization

Cons

  • Limited dynamic range
  • Noise under indoor conditions and in low light
  • Ghosting and fusion artifacts in scenes with motion

The Samsung Galaxy A34 5G was capable of achieving good results in static scenes without too much contrast, making it a good option for landscapes and portraiture. In these kinds of non-demanding conditions, still images offered good exposure and nice detail, but our experts also noticed some image noise in the shadow areas and in blue skies. The autofocus was reactive and accurate in most situations. Video clips recorded with the Galaxy A34 5G were exposed well, with low noise levels. Effective video stabilization ensured smooth footage.

Image quality somewhat dropped in more difficult conditions, such as high-contrast scenes as well as under indoor lighting or in low light. Image detail was reduced while noise became more intrusive. Our testers also noticed some exposure and color instabilities across consecutive shots. Ghosting and fusion artifacts were visible in scenes with moving subjects.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s Camera evaluations take place in laboratories and in real-world situations using a wide variety of subjects. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly by measurement software on our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests in which a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo, Zoom, and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an Overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us  on how to receive a full report.

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy A34 5G Camera Scores vs Advanced[/glossary_exclude]
This graph compares DXOMARK photo, zoom and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

[glossary_exclude]Photo[/glossary_exclude]

99

Samsung Galaxy A34 5G

154

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2,600 test images both in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, family, and landscape photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 1 to 1,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy A34 5G Photo scores vs Advanced[/glossary_exclude]
The photo tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses.
Samsung Galaxy A34 5G – Good exposure in bright light
[glossary_exclude]Autofocus irregularity and speed: 1000Lux Δ0EV Daylight Handheld[/glossary_exclude]
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed and also zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 1000Lux with Daylight illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for tripod and handheld conditions[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
[glossary_exclude]Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

[glossary_exclude]Zoom[/glossary_exclude]

76

Samsung Galaxy A34 5G

156

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Zoom tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate over 400 test images in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor, and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings and pinch zoom at various zoom factors from ultra wide to very long-range zoom. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting the images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements of chart mages captured in the lab under different conditions from 20 to 1000 lux and color temperatures from 2300K to 6500K.

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy A34 5G Zoom Scores vs Advanced[/glossary_exclude]
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length. Zooming-in scores are displayed on the right and Zooming-out scores on the left.

[glossary_exclude]Video[/glossary_exclude]

78

Samsung Galaxy A34 5G

149

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2.5 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 1 to 1000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy A34 5G Video scores vs Advanced[/glossary_exclude]
Video tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.

Samsung Galaxy A34 5G – Good exposure and effective video stabilization
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
[glossary_exclude]Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
[glossary_exclude]Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

The post Samsung Galaxy A34 5G Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-a34-5g-camera-test/feed/ 0 Samsung Galaxy A34 5G CAMERA CAMERA SidetoSideGroup_SamsungGalaxyA345G_05-00
Samsung Galaxy A54 5G Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-a54-5g-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-a54-5g-camera-test/#respond Mon, 20 Mar 2023 15:10:05 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=142488&preview=true&preview_id=142488 We put the Samsung A54 5G through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of [...]

The post Samsung Galaxy A54 5G Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
We put the Samsung A54 5G through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 50MP sensor, f/1.8-aperture lens, PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 12MP sensor, 1.12µm pixels, 123˚ field of view, f/2.2-aperture lens
  • Macro: 5MP sensor, f/2.4-aperture lens
  • Video: 4K at 30fps, 1080p at 30/60fps

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Samsung Galaxy A54
Samsung Galaxy A54 5G
107
camera
106
photo
99

117

82

119

97

116

97

114

70

116

66

81

55
bokeh
55

80

53
preview
53

91

79
zoom
45

116

100

117

115
video
90

115

98

117

81

117

81

115

110

118

75

86

102

117

Use cases & Conditions

[glossary_exclude]Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.[/glossary_exclude]

BEST 168

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 157

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 127

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 143

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

Pros

  • Good exposure and wide dynamic range in bright light and indoors
  • Decent detail in landscape shots
  • Accurate and repeatable autofocus in most conditions

Cons

  • Exposure and white balance instabilities
  • Focus errors in macro mode and scenes with moving elements
  • Unwanted artifacts, including halo effects, ghosting and color quantization in high-contrast scenes and on moving subjects
  • Delay between autofocus lock and capture when shooting hand-held in low light

The Samsung Galaxy A54 5G delivered an average performance for a device in the High-End segment in our DXOMARK Camera tests. Still images were well exposed in good light without too much contrast, making the Samsung a decent option for landscape photography. However, our testers noticed white balance and exposure instabilities across consecutive shots, as well as a range of unwanted image artifacts, including ghosting and halo effects. A slow autofocus in low light was an additional limiting factor, making it difficult to react quickly and capture moving subjects.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s Camera evaluations take place in laboratories and in real-world situations using a wide variety of subjects. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly by measurement software on our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests in which a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo, Zoom, and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an Overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us  on how to receive a full report.

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy A54 5G Camera Scores vs High-End[/glossary_exclude]
This graph compares DXOMARK photo, zoom and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

[glossary_exclude]Photo[/glossary_exclude]

106

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

154

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2,600 test images both in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, family, and landscape photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 1 to 1,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy A54 5G Photo scores[/glossary_exclude]
The photo tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses.

[glossary_exclude]Exposure[/glossary_exclude]

99

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

117

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

[glossary_exclude]Color[/glossary_exclude]

82

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

119

[glossary_exclude]Google Pixel 7 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Exposure and color are the key attributes for technically good pictures. For exposure, the main attribute evaluated is the brightness of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the contrast and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.
For color, the image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors but we respect a manufacturer's choice of color signature.

 Samsung Galaxy A54 5G – Underexposed subjects, slight pink cast, slight background overexposure
 Samsung Galaxy A53 5G – Slight background overexposure but good color
Motorola Moto G62 5G – Well-exposed faces but pink cast, background overexposure

[glossary_exclude]Autofocus[/glossary_exclude]

97

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

116

[glossary_exclude]Huawei Mate 50 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus repeatability, shooting time delay, and depth of field. Shooting delay is the difference between the time the user presses the capture button and the time the image is actually taken. It includes focusing speed and the capability of the device to capture images at the right time, what is called 'zero shutter lag' capability. Even if a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single subject portrait or close-up shot, it can also be a problem in some specific conditions such as group portraits; Both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from infinity to close-up objects and in low light to outdoor conditions.

[glossary_exclude]Autofocus irregularity and speed: 100Lux Δ7EV TL84 Handheld[/glossary_exclude]
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed and also zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 100Lux with TL84 illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. On this scenario, the backlit panels in the scene are set up to simulate a fairly high dynamic range: the luminance ratio between the brightest point and a 18% reflective gray patch is 7, which we denote by a Exposure Value difference of 7. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.

[glossary_exclude]Texture[/glossary_exclude]

97

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

114

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in the bright and dark areas of the image. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC) and the Dead Leaves chart.

[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for tripod and handheld conditions[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

[glossary_exclude]Noise[/glossary_exclude]

70

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

116

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, landscapes, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Noise on moving objects is also evaluated on natural images. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

[glossary_exclude]Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

66

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

81

[glossary_exclude]Google Pixel 6[/glossary_exclude]

The artifacts evaluation looks at lens shading, chromatic aberrations, geometrical distortion, edges ringing, halos, ghosting, quantization, unexpected color hue shifts, among others type of possible unnatural effects on photos. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.

[glossary_exclude]Main photo artifacts penalties[/glossary_exclude]

[glossary_exclude]Preview[/glossary_exclude]

53

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

91

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Preview tests analyze the image quality of the camera app's preview of the image, with particular attention paid to the difference between the capture and the preview, especially regarding dynamic range and the application of the bokeh effect. Also evaluated is the smoothness of the exposure, color and focus adaptation when zooming from the minimal to the maximal zoom factor available. The preview frame rate is measured using the LED Universal Timer.

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G – Preview
Samsung Galaxy A54 5G – Capture – Generally a better exposure than preview

[glossary_exclude]Zoom[/glossary_exclude]

79

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

156

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Zoom tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate over 400 test images in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor, and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings and pinch zoom at various zoom factors from ultra wide to very long-range zoom. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting the images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements of chart mages captured in the lab under different conditions from 20 to 1000 lux and color temperatures from 2300K to 6500K.

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy A54 5G Zoom Scores[/glossary_exclude]
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length. Zooming-in scores are displayed on the right and Zooming-out scores on the left.

[glossary_exclude]Wide[/glossary_exclude]

100

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

117

[glossary_exclude]Huawei Mate 50 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

These tests analyze the performance of the ultra-wide camera at several focal lengths from 12 mm to 20 mm. All image quality attributes are evaluated, with particular attention paid to such artifacts as chromatic aberrations, lens softness, and distortion. Pictures below are an extract of tested scenes.

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G – Strong anamorphosis on the lateral edges, noise
Samsung Galaxy A53 5G – Moderate anamorphosis, noise
Motorola Moto G62 5G – Strong noise

[glossary_exclude]Tele[/glossary_exclude]

45

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

116

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic4 Ultimate[/glossary_exclude]

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 40 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and detail. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

[glossary_exclude]Video[/glossary_exclude]

115

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

149

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2.5 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 1 to 1000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy A54 5G Video scores[/glossary_exclude]
Video tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.

[glossary_exclude]Exposure[/glossary_exclude]

90

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

115

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

[glossary_exclude]Color[/glossary_exclude]

98

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

117

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness of the main subject and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.
Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

Samsung Galaxy A53 5G

Motorola Moto G62 5G

[glossary_exclude]Texture[/glossary_exclude]

81

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

115

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra[/glossary_exclude]

Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural videos recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of details in the bright and areas as well as in the dark. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

[glossary_exclude]Noise[/glossary_exclude]

110

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

118

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy A23 5G[/glossary_exclude]

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise in the dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

[glossary_exclude]Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
[glossary_exclude]Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

[glossary_exclude]Stabilization[/glossary_exclude]

102

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

117

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jellow artifacts and residual motion blur on walk and run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

Samsung Galaxy A53 5G

Motorola Moto G62 5G

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

75

Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

86

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi 12S Ultra[/glossary_exclude]

Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as aliasing, quantization, blocking, and hue shift, among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below.

[glossary_exclude]Main video artifacts penalties[/glossary_exclude]

The post Samsung Galaxy A54 5G Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-a54-5g-camera-test/feed/ 0 Samsung Galaxy A54 CAMERA CAMERA DuoBacklit_SamsungGalaxyA545G_DxOMark_05-00 DuoBacklit_SamsungGalaxyA535G_DxOMark_05-00 DuoBacklit_MotorolaMotoG62_5G_DxOMark_05-00 ArtOnTabletPreview_SamsungGalaxyA545G_01-00 ArtOnTablet_SamsungGalaxyA545G_05-00 12mm_LaboDuo_SamsungGalaxyA545G_05-00 12mm_LaboDuo_SamsungGalaxyA535G_05-00 12mm_LaboDuo_MotorolaMotoG62_5G_05-00
Xiaomi 13 Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-13-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-13-camera-test/#respond Thu, 09 Mar 2023 15:36:28 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=139298&preview=true&preview_id=139298 We put the Xiaomi 13 through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our [...]

The post Xiaomi 13 Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
We put the Xiaomi 13 through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 50MP 1/1.49″ sensor, 1.0µm pixels, 23mm equivalent f/1.8- aperture lens, PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 12MP 1/3.06″ sensor, 1.12µm pixels, 15mm equivalent f/2.2-aperture lens
  • Tele: 10MP 1/3.75″ sensor, 1.0µm pixels, 75mm equivalent (3.2x)  f/2.0-aperture lens, PDAF, OIS

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Xiaomi 13
Xiaomi 13
130
camera
131
photo
103

117

108

119

91

116

105

114

97

116

71

81

55
bokeh
55

80

68
preview
68

91

131
zoom
99

116

98

117

121
video
95

115

97

117

79

117

112

115

100

118

85

86

112

117

Use cases & Conditions

[glossary_exclude]Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.[/glossary_exclude]

BEST 168

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 157

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 127

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 143

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

Pros

  • Neutral white balance and nice color for photo, even in difficult conditions
  • Good exposure in daylight and indoors for photo and video
  • Good texture and detail in most conditions
  • Good texture-noise tradeoff in most conditions
  • Almost free of unwanted artifacts in video

Cons

  • Limited dynamic range indoors and in low light
  • Some exposure adaptation instabilities indoors and in low light
  • Some video autofocus failures, shallow depth of field
  • Imprecise depth estimation in bokeh mode
  • Artifacts, such as halos and ghosting, in photos, frame shift in panning videos

With a DXOMARK Camera score of 130, the Xiaomi 13 delivered a good performance, thanks to a triple camera configuration that allows for good quality photo and video capture in pretty much all kinds of conditions. While the device wasn’t near the top of our ranking, the Xiaomi 13 camera still performed well within its price segment.

In our testing, the Xiaomi 13’s main strengths in photo mode were its ability to deliver a fairly neutral white balance and nice color across a variety of conditions, including low light. Overall exposure was fairly accurate, but in high-contrast scenes, a lack of dynamic range could result in shadow and/or highlight clipping. The camera also managed to maintain a good tradeoff between image detail and noise reduction, but our testers observed some unwanted artifacts, for example, halo effects and ghosting, especially in scenes where HDR processing kicked in. Autofocus was generally accurate but slow. We also noticed that in group shots the camera did not always focus on the subject closest to the camera.

The Xiaomi 13 did fairly well for both ultra-wide and tele zoom. Zoom images showed good exposure, but compared to the 13 Pro with its more powerful imaging hardware and larger sensors, detail was generally lower and noise levels were higher.

In video mode, our testers found exposure to be accurate and video clips showed good texture rendering in most conditions. In addition, Xiaomi 13 videos were pretty much free of unwanted artifacts. However, we also observed some exposure instabilities, white balance casts, and autofocus instabilities in indoor light conditions and low light. These shortcomings prevented the device from achieving a video score closer to the best in class.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s Camera evaluations take place in laboratories and in real-world situations using a wide variety of subjects. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly by measurement software on our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests in which a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo, Zoom, and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an Overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us  on how to receive a full report.

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi 13 Camera Scores[/glossary_exclude]
This graph compares DXOMARK photo, zoom and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

[glossary_exclude]Photo[/glossary_exclude]

131

Xiaomi 13

154

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2,600 test images both in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, family, and landscape photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 1 to 1,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi 13 Photo scores[/glossary_exclude]
The photo tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses.

[glossary_exclude]Exposure[/glossary_exclude]

103

Xiaomi 13

117

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

[glossary_exclude]Color[/glossary_exclude]

108

Xiaomi 13

119

[glossary_exclude]Google Pixel 7 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Exposure and color are the key attributes for technically good pictures. For exposure, the main attribute evaluated is the brightness of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the contrast and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.
For color, the image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors but we respect a manufacturer's choice of color signature.

Xiaomi 13 – highlight clipping and accurate color rendering
Xiaomi 13 Pro – good exposure and slightly inaccurate color rendering
Vivo X90 Pro+ – good exposure and good color rendering

 

[glossary_exclude]Autofocus[/glossary_exclude]

91

Xiaomi 13

116

[glossary_exclude]Huawei Mate 50 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus repeatability, shooting time delay, and depth of field. Shooting delay is the difference between the time the user presses the capture button and the time the image is actually taken. It includes focusing speed and the capability of the device to capture images at the right time, what is called 'zero shutter lag' capability. Even if a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single subject portrait or close-up shot, it can also be a problem in some specific conditions such as group portraits; Both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from infinity to close-up objects and in low light to outdoor conditions.

[glossary_exclude]Autofocus irregularity and speed: 100Lux Δ7EV TL84 Handheld[/glossary_exclude]
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed and also zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 100Lux with TL84 illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. On this scenario, the backlit panels in the scene are set up to simulate a fairly high dynamic range: the luminance ratio between the brightest point and a 18% reflective gray patch is 7, which we denote by a Exposure Value difference of 7. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.

[glossary_exclude]Texture[/glossary_exclude]

105

Xiaomi 13

114

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in the bright and dark areas of the image. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC) and the Dead Leaves chart.

[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for tripod and handheld conditions[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

[glossary_exclude]Noise[/glossary_exclude]

97

Xiaomi 13

116

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, landscapes, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Noise on moving objects is also evaluated on natural images. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

[glossary_exclude]Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

71

Xiaomi 13

81

[glossary_exclude]Google Pixel 6[/glossary_exclude]

The artifacts evaluation looks at lens shading, chromatic aberrations, geometrical distortion, edges ringing, halos, ghosting, quantization, unexpected color hue shifts, among others type of possible unnatural effects on photos. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.

[glossary_exclude]Main photo artifacts penalties[/glossary_exclude]

[glossary_exclude]Preview[/glossary_exclude]

68

Xiaomi 13

91

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Preview tests analyze the image quality of the camera app's preview of the image, with particular attention paid to the difference between the capture and the preview, especially regarding dynamic range and the application of the bokeh effect. Also evaluated is the smoothness of the exposure, color and focus adaptation when zooming from the minimal to the maximal zoom factor available. The preview frame rate is measured using the LED Universal Timer.

Xiaomi 13 – preview – darker exposure and stronger highlight clipping than capture
Xiaomi 13 – capture

[glossary_exclude]Zoom[/glossary_exclude]

131

Xiaomi 13

156

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Zoom tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate over 400 test images in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor, and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings and pinch zoom at various zoom factors from ultra wide to very long-range zoom. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting the images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements of chart mages captured in the lab under different conditions from 20 to 1000 lux and color temperatures from 2300K to 6500K.

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi 13 Zoom Scores[/glossary_exclude]
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length. Zooming-in scores are displayed on the right and Zooming-out scores on the left.

[glossary_exclude]Wide[/glossary_exclude]

98

Xiaomi 13

117

[glossary_exclude]Huawei Mate 50 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

These tests analyze the performance of the ultra-wide camera at several focal lengths from 12 mm to 20 mm. All image quality attributes are evaluated, with particular attention paid to such artifacts as chromatic aberrations, lens softness, and distortion. Pictures below are an extract of tested scenes.

Xiaomi 13 - ultra-wide - good exposure and color rendering
Xiaomi 13 - slight loss of details
Xiaomi 13 Pro - ultra-wide - slightly underexposed
Xiaomi 13 Pro - high level of detail
Vivo X90 Pro+ – ultra-wide - good exposure and color rendering
Vivo X90 Pro+ – good level of detail

[glossary_exclude]Tele[/glossary_exclude]

99

Xiaomi 13

116

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic4 Ultimate[/glossary_exclude]

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 40 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and detail. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

[glossary_exclude]Video[/glossary_exclude]

121

Xiaomi 13

149

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2.5 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 1 to 1000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi 13 Video scores[/glossary_exclude]
Video tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.

[glossary_exclude]Exposure[/glossary_exclude]

95

Xiaomi 13

115

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

[glossary_exclude]Color[/glossary_exclude]

97

Xiaomi 13

117

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness of the main subject and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.
Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Xiaomi 13 – good exposure but slight exposure instabilities and some color cast variation

Xiaomi 13 Pro – good exposure and color rendering, good transitions

Vivo X90 Pro+ – good exposure transition but slightly inaccurate color rendering on faces

[glossary_exclude]Texture[/glossary_exclude]

112

Xiaomi 13

115

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra[/glossary_exclude]

Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural videos recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of details in the bright and areas as well as in the dark. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

[glossary_exclude]Noise[/glossary_exclude]

100

Xiaomi 13

118

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy A23 5G[/glossary_exclude]

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise in the dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

[glossary_exclude]Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
[glossary_exclude]Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

[glossary_exclude]Stabilization[/glossary_exclude]

112

Xiaomi 13

117

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jellow artifacts and residual motion blur on walk and run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

Xiaomi 13 – effective stabilization, slight sharpness differences between frames

Xiaomi 13 Pro – effective stabilization, slight sharpness differences between frames when running

Vivo X90 Pro+ – effective stabilization, slight sharpness differences between frames

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

85

Xiaomi 13

86

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi 12S Ultra[/glossary_exclude]

Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as aliasing, quantization, blocking, and hue shift, among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below.

[glossary_exclude]Main video artifacts penalties[/glossary_exclude]

The post Xiaomi 13 Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-13-camera-test/feed/ 0 Xiaomi 13 CAMERA CAMERA Walk_Xiaomi13_05-00 Walk_Xiaomi13Pro_05-00 Walk_VivoX90ProPlus_05-00 GameRoomPreview_Xiaomi13_01-00 GameRoom_Xiaomi13_05-00
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic5-lite-5g-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic5-lite-5g-camera-test/#respond Thu, 09 Mar 2023 13:00:42 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=136425&preview=true&preview_id=136425 We put the Honor Magic5 Lite 5G through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results [...]

The post Honor Magic5 Lite 5G Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
We put the Honor Magic5 Lite 5G through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 64 MP, f/1.8 aperture lens
  • Ultra-wide: 5 MP, F/2.2
  • Macro: 2 MP, f/2.4

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Honor Magic5 Lite
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G
74
camera
70
photo
90

117

88

119

72

116

73

114

76

116

69

81

45
bokeh
45

80

48
preview
48

91

60
zoom
44

116

48

117

77
video
79

115

79

117

57

117

71

115

101

118

79

86

92

117

Use cases & Conditions

[glossary_exclude]Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.[/glossary_exclude]

BEST 168

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 157

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 127

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 143

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

Pros

  • Extended dynamic range
  • Pleasant and stable indoor white balance
  • Simulated bokeh in portrait mode is pleasant.

Cons

  • Luminance and chromatic noise are often visible in indoor and low-light conditions
  • Occasional focus failures
  • Inefficient video stabilization

The Honor Magic5 Lite 5G is the basic model in the Magic5 series. The Magic5 Lite’s rear camera delivered a decent performance in good lighting conditions in both photos and videos, with good exposure and relatively natural colors.  But the camera lacked good zoom capabilities. It also suffered from occasional focus instabilities. When taking videos, autofocus was fast, but video stabilization was not very efficient.

Overall, the Magic5 Lite’s camera is very capable of taking nice landscape photos that contain good details.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s Camera evaluations take place in laboratories and in real-world situations using a wide variety of subjects. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly by measurement software on our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests in which a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo, Zoom, and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an Overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us  on how to receive a full report.

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Lite 5G Camera Scores vs Advanced[/glossary_exclude]
This graph compares DXOMARK photo, zoom and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

[glossary_exclude]Photo[/glossary_exclude]

70

Honor Magic5 Lite 5G

154

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2,600 test images both in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, family, and landscape photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 1 to 1,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Lite 5G Photo scores[/glossary_exclude]
The photo tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses.
Honor Magic5 Lite 5G – Good exposure, fairly extended dynamic range.
[glossary_exclude]Autofocus irregularity and speed: 1000Lux Δ0EV Daylight Handheld[/glossary_exclude]
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed and also zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 1000Lux with Daylight illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for tripod and handheld conditions[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
[glossary_exclude]Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

[glossary_exclude]Zoom[/glossary_exclude]

60

Honor Magic5 Lite 5G

156

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Zoom tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate over 400 test images in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor, and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings and pinch zoom at various zoom factors from ultra wide to very long-range zoom. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting the images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements of chart mages captured in the lab under different conditions from 20 to 1000 lux and color temperatures from 2300K to 6500K.

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Lite 5G Zoom Scores[/glossary_exclude]
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length. Zooming-in scores are displayed on the right and Zooming-out scores on the left.

[glossary_exclude]Video[/glossary_exclude]

77

Honor Magic5 Lite 5G

149

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2.5 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 1 to 1000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Lite 5G Video scores[/glossary_exclude]
Video tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.

Honor Magic5 Lite 5G – Good exposure, but stabilization is not very efficient.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
[glossary_exclude]Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
[glossary_exclude]Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

The post Honor Magic5 Lite 5G Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic5-lite-5g-camera-test/feed/ 0 Honor Magic5 Lite CAMERA CAMERA BoysBand_HonorMagic5Lite5G_DxOMark_05-00
Xiaomi 13 Pro Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-13-pro-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-13-pro-camera-test/#respond Thu, 09 Mar 2023 12:57:20 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=139229&preview=true&preview_id=139229 We put the Xiaomi 13 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of [...]

The post Xiaomi 13 Pro Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
We put the Xiaomi 13 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 50MP 1.0″ sensor, 23mm equivalent f/1.9-aperture lens, Dual Pixel PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 50 MP, 14 mm equivalent f/2.2-aperture lens, AF
  • Tele: 50 MP, 75 mm equivalent f/2.0-aperture lens, PDAF

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Xiaomi 13 Pro
Xiaomi 13 Pro
136
camera
136
photo
105

117

104

119

92

116

105

114

103

116

71

81

60
bokeh
60

80

70
preview
70

91

143
zoom
106

116

106

117

129
video
99

115

107

117

87

117

107

115

109

118

84

86

112

117

Use cases & Conditions

[glossary_exclude]Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.[/glossary_exclude]

BEST 168

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 157

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 127

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 143

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

Pros

  • Good exposure and detail in photo and video
  • Wide dynamic range down to very low light in photo
  • Neutral white balance in bright light, generally nice color
  • Good-quality zoom at close and medium range tele settings

Cons

  • Some exposure instabilities and tone compression in high-contrast scenes
  • Halo artifacts in photo
  • Frequent delays between triggering the shutter button and image capture, especially in high-contrast conditions
  • Some autofocus failures

With a DXOMARK Camera score of 136, the Xiaomi 13 Pro performed well in our tests, offering bright exposure, nice colors and good detail capture in both photo and video modes. In addition, the camera was capable of producing high image quality at close and medium range tele settings and recorded still images with a wide dynamic range, even in low light.

The 13 Pro camera has some similar hardware to the Xiaomi 12S Ultra, but there are a few differences to note.  The primary module uses the same large 1″ 50MP sensor, but the 13 Pro’s tele setup is different.  The 13 Pro’s tele lens doesn’t use the 12S Ultra’s periscope design but comes with a shorter focal length that has better light-gathering capabilities. Another difference is that the 13 Pro is powered by Qualcomm’s latest Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 chipset instead of the 1st generation variant in the 12S Ultra. Both models have Leica-branded lens and the Leica color modes. We performed all DXOMARK Camera testing with the Vibrant setting, just like we did with the 12S Ultra.

Overall camera performance was very similar between the two devices, with differences in some sub-attributes. Notably, the 13 Pro’s shorter tele resulted in lower image quality at long-range tele settings. However, it has improved over the 12S Ultra at close and medium-range settings, especially when shooting in low light.

Xiaomi 13 Pro – Good exposure, vivid colors

When compared to the current No. 1 smartphone camera in the DXOMARK Camera ranking, the Honor Magic5 Pro, the Xiaomi 13 Pro lagged slightly behind in several areas, despite its larger image sensor. In terms of exposure, the Xiaomi displayed unnatural contrast in backlighting conditions which was much less noticeable on the Honor. Our experts also observed a better texture/noise trade-off on the Honor, even in low light. Given the Magic5 Pro’s smaller sensor, this was an unexpected result. In video mode, both exposure and focus were much less stable on the Xiaomi 13 Pro than on the Honor.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s Camera evaluations take place in laboratories and in real-world situations using a wide variety of subjects. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly by measurement software on our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests in which a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo, Zoom, and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an Overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us  on how to receive a full report.

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi 13 Pro Camera Scores vs Ultra-Premium[/glossary_exclude]
This graph compares DXOMARK photo, zoom and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

[glossary_exclude]Photo[/glossary_exclude]

136

Xiaomi 13 Pro

154

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2,600 test images both in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, family, and landscape photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 1 to 1,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Still images captured with the Xiaomi 13 Pro offered a wide dynamic range, but our testers observed some contrast issues on faces and a halo effect around subjects that would appear when HDR processing kicked in. Overall, the 13 Pro’s exposure performance was quite similar to the 12S Ultra we tested previously. The same was true for color, but the Xiaomi 13 Pro delivered a slightly more neutral white balance in daylight shooting. The 13 Pro also managed to capture a high level of details and to keep noise levels low. This said, they were not quite as low as on the 12S Ultra. Unlike some previous Xiaomi models, the 13 Pro does not feature zero shutter lag, and in some scenes, our testers observed a noticeable delay between pressing the shutter button on the display and the image actually being captured.

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi 13 Pro Photo scores vs Ultra-Premium[/glossary_exclude]
The photo tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses.

The Xiaomi 13 Pro comes with a 50MP capture mode. However, for our testing, the 12MP default mode was used.

[glossary_exclude]Exposure[/glossary_exclude]

105

Xiaomi 13 Pro

117

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the contrast and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.

Xiaomi 13 Pro – Wide dynamic range, contrast issues on faces and background
Xiaomi 12S Ultra – Wide dynamic range, contrast issues on faces and background
Vivo x90 Pro+ – Wide dynamic range, fewer contrast issues

The Xiaomi 13 Pro delivered a bright exposure and wide dynamic range on most occasions. However, our testers observed some tone mapping and contrast issues that were particularly visible in backlit portrait shots. The Honor Magic5 Pro also offered a wide dynamic range but with fewer contrast issues.

Xiaomi 13 Pro – Wide dynamic range, contrast issues on faces and background impacting color of faces
Honor Magic5 Pro – Wide dynamic range but good contrast and color on faces.

[glossary_exclude]Color[/glossary_exclude]

104

Xiaomi 13 Pro

119

[glossary_exclude]Google Pixel 7 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Color is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors but we respect a manufacturer's choice of color signature.

For our testing, we used the Leica Vibrant image mode. Authentic mode applies slightly lower levels of saturation, but the difference would not have had any impact on our score. The choice of mode comes down to personal taste.

Like we had previously seen on the Xiaomi 12S Ultra, colors were usually saturated and nice on the 13 Pro. However, but we noticed some skin tone issues, especially in backlit scenes like the one above. Our testers found white balance to be more accurate than on the 12S Ultra in various conditions.

Xiaomi 13 Pro – Pleasant warm cast
Xiaomi 12S Ultra – Slight cold cast
Vivo x90 Pro+ – Too warm cast

[glossary_exclude]Autofocus[/glossary_exclude]

92

Xiaomi 13 Pro

116

[glossary_exclude]Huawei Mate 50 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus repeatability, shooting time delay, and depth of field. Shooting delay is the difference between the time the user presses the capture button and the time the image is actually taken. It includes focusing speed and the capability of the device to capture images at the right time, what is called 'zero shutter lag' capability. Even if a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single subject portrait or close-up shot, it can also be a problem in some specific conditions such as group portraits; Both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from infinity to close-up objects and in low light to outdoor conditions.

[glossary_exclude]Autofocus irregularity and speed: 20Lux Δ7EV Tungsten Handheld[/glossary_exclude]
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed and also zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 20Lux with Tungsten illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. On this scenario, the backlit panels in the scene are set up to simulate a fairly high dynamic range: the luminance ratio between the brightest point and a 18% reflective gray patch is 7, which we denote by a Exposure Value difference of 7. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.

Like we had previously seen on the 12S Ultra, the Xiaomi 13 Pro frequently failed to capture the image at the exact moment the shutter was pressed, making it difficult to capture the decisive moment.

Xiaomi 13 Pro – The photographer tried to capture the image right before the model kicked the ball but missed the moment because of the time lag.
Honor Magic5 Pro – Image captured when the user presses the trigger. The color and texture level are also significantly better.

[glossary_exclude]Texture[/glossary_exclude]

105

Xiaomi 13 Pro

114

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in the bright and dark areas of the image. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC) and the Dead Leaves chart.

[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for tripod and handheld conditions[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.
Xiaomi 13 Pro - Low light detail
Xiaomi 13 Pro - Loss of fine detail
Honor Magic5 Pro - Low light texture
Honor Magic5 Pro - High level of detail

[glossary_exclude]Noise[/glossary_exclude]

103

Xiaomi 13 Pro

116

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, landscapes, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Noise on moving objects is also evaluated on natural images. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

[glossary_exclude]Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

71

Xiaomi 13 Pro

81

[glossary_exclude]Google Pixel 6[/glossary_exclude]

The artifacts evaluation looks at lens shading, chromatic aberrations, geometrical distortion, edges ringing, halos, ghosting, quantization, unexpected color hue shifts, among others type of possible unnatural effects on photos. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.

[glossary_exclude]Main photo artifacts penalties[/glossary_exclude]

[glossary_exclude]Bokeh[/glossary_exclude]

60

Xiaomi 13 Pro

80

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Bokeh is tested in one dedicated mode, usually portrait or aperture mode, and analyzed by visually inspecting all the images captured in the lab and in natural conditions. The goal is to reproduce portrait photography comparable to one taken with a DLSR and a wide aperture. The main image quality attributes paid attention to are depth estimation, artifacts, blur gradient, and the shape of the bokeh blur spotlights. Portrait image quality attributes (exposure, color, texture) are also taken into account.

Xiaomi 13 Pro – Unnatural blur gradient on the tree, segmentation errors between the face and hair of the model
Honor Magic5 Pro – Natural blur gradient on the tree, accurate segmentation of the subject

[glossary_exclude]Preview[/glossary_exclude]

70

Xiaomi 13 Pro

91

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Preview tests analyze the image quality of the camera app's preview of the image, with particular attention paid to the difference between the capture and the preview, especially regarding dynamic range and the application of the bokeh effect. Also evaluated is the smoothness of the exposure, color and focus adaptation when zooming from the minimal to the maximal zoom factor available. The preview frame rate is measured using the LED Universal Timer.

Xiaomi 13 Pro – Capture – Wide dynamic range
Xiaomi 13 Pro – Preview – No HDR rendering applied to preview image, limited dynamic range

[glossary_exclude]Zoom[/glossary_exclude]

143

Xiaomi 13 Pro

156

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Zoom tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate over 400 test images in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor, and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings and pinch zoom at various zoom factors from ultra wide to very long-range zoom. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting the images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements of chart mages captured in the lab under different conditions from 20 to 1000 lux and color temperatures from 2300K to 6500K.

The Xiaomi 13 Pro comes with a three-camera configuration that has almost become a standard for higher-end smartphones: an ultra-wide camera, a 50MP primary module and a dedicated tele. The focal length of the tele is slightly shorter than on the 12S Ultra, which in our tests predictably resulted in lower image quality at long-range tele settings. However, the 13 Pro did better at close and medium-range settings, especially when shooting in low light.

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi 13 Pro Zoom Scores vs Ultra-Premium[/glossary_exclude]
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length. Zooming-in scores are displayed on the right and Zooming-out scores on the left.

[glossary_exclude]Wide[/glossary_exclude]

106

Xiaomi 13 Pro

117

[glossary_exclude]Huawei Mate 50 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

These tests analyze the performance of the ultra-wide camera at several focal lengths from 12 mm to 20 mm. All image quality attributes are evaluated, with particular attention paid to such artifacts as chromatic aberrations, lens softness, and distortion. Pictures below are an extract of tested scenes.

Xiaomi 13 Pro – Slight underexposure
Xiaomi 12S Ultra – Good exposure
Vivo x90 Pro+ – Good but slightly brighter exposure

[glossary_exclude]Tele[/glossary_exclude]

106

Xiaomi 13 Pro

116

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic4 Ultimate[/glossary_exclude]

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 40 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and detail. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

For a smartphone camera with a medium range tele lens, the Xiaomi 13 Pro offered a very good tele performance, but it was outperformed by the current leader of the ranking, the Honor Magic5 Pro, at most tele zoom settings, as can be seen in the samples and graphs below.

Xiaomi 13 Pro - Medium range tele
Xiaomi 13 Pro - Fine details are lost
Honor Magic5 Pro - Medium range tele
Honor Magic5 Pro - Fine details visible
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

Compared to the predecessor 12S Ultra, the Xiaomi 13 Pro performed better at close and medium range tele, particularly in low light.

Xiaomi 13 Pro - Medium range tele
Xiaomi 13 Pro - Slight loss of detail
Xiaomi 12S Ultra - Medium range tele
Xiaomi 12S Ultra - Strong loss of detail
Vivo x90 Pro+ - Medium range tele
Vivo x90 Pro+ - Slight loss of detail

[glossary_exclude]Video[/glossary_exclude]

129

Xiaomi 13 Pro

149

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2.5 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 1 to 1000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

The Xiaomi 13 Pro’s video mode was tested at 4K resolution and a 60fps variable frame rate. With those settings, it did pretty well when compared with the competition in its segment, delivering pretty good exposure, a wide dynamic range, and nice colors when recording in daylight or under indoor conditions. In addition, it managed to maintain a good balance between detail preservation and noise reduction across all light conditions. Compared to the 12S Ultra, it delivered nicer colors and had a more stable exposure. We observed more instabilities in terms of autofocus, however.

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi 13 Pro Video scores vs Ultra-Premium[/glossary_exclude]
Video tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.

[glossary_exclude]Exposure[/glossary_exclude]

99

Xiaomi 13 Pro

115

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness of the main subject and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.

Xiaomi 13 Pro – Smooth exposure transition

Xiaomi 12S Ultra – Exposure instabilities towards the end of the transition

Vivo x90 Pro+ – Smooth exposure transition but slightly late

[glossary_exclude]Color[/glossary_exclude]

107

Xiaomi 13 Pro

117

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Xiaomi 13 Pro – Accurate color rendering and skin tones
Xiaomi 12S Ultra – Cold cast affects skin tones

[glossary_exclude]Autofocus[/glossary_exclude]

87

Xiaomi 13 Pro

117

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Xiaomi 13 Pro – Focus breathing at the start of the clip

Xiaomi 12S Ultra – No focus breathing

Vivo x90 Pro+ – No focus breathing

Xiaomi 13 Pro – Frequent refocusing

Honor Magic5 Pro – No focus issues

[glossary_exclude]Texture[/glossary_exclude]

107

Xiaomi 13 Pro

115

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra[/glossary_exclude]

Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural videos recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of details in the bright and areas as well as in the dark. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

This graph shows the evolution of texture acutance with the level of lux.
The texture acutance is measured on the deadleaves chart in the video deadleaves setup.

[glossary_exclude]Noise[/glossary_exclude]

109

Xiaomi 13 Pro

118

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy A23 5G[/glossary_exclude]

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise in the dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

[glossary_exclude]Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
[glossary_exclude]Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.
Xiaomi 13 Pro - Low light frame
Xiaomi 13 Pro - High level of noise
Honor Magic5 Pro - Low light Frame
Honor Magic5 Pro - Low level of noise with better texture and details

[glossary_exclude]Stabilization[/glossary_exclude]

112

Xiaomi 13 Pro

117

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jello artifacts and residual motion blur on walk and run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

Xiaomi 13 Pro – No frame shift

Xiaomi 12S Ultra – Frame shift

Vivo x90 Pro+ – No frame shift

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

84

Xiaomi 13 Pro

86

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi 12S Ultra[/glossary_exclude]

Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as aliasing, quantization, blocking, and hue shift, among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below.

[glossary_exclude]Main video artifacts penalties[/glossary_exclude]

The post Xiaomi 13 Pro Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/xiaomi-13-pro-camera-test/feed/ 0 Xiaomi 13 Pro CAMERA CAMERA Xiaomi13Pro (25) BacklitGroup_Xiaomi13Pro_DxOMark_05-00 BacklitGroup_Xiaomi12SUltra_DxOMark_05-00 BacklitGroup_VivoX90ProPlus_DxOMark_05-00 Xiaomi13Pro (16) HonorMagic5Pro (16) GameRoom_Xiaomi13Pro_DxOMark_05-00 GameRoom_Xiaomi12SUltra_DxOMark_05-00 GameRoom_VivoX90ProPlus_DxOMark_05-00 7 (1) 7 (4) Xiaomi13Pro (98) HonorMagic5Pro (89) 130 (2)_ref 131 (1) WideDefault_WellWestPortrait_Xiaomi13Pro_DxOMark_05-00 WideDefault_WellWestPortrait_Xiaomi12SUltra_DxOMark_05-00 WideDefault_WellWestPortrait_VivoX90ProPlus_DxOMark_05-00 Xiaomi13Pro_color Xiaomi12SUltra_color VideoTex
Honor Magic5 Pro Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic5-pro-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic5-pro-camera-test/#respond Mon, 27 Feb 2023 13:08:38 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=140751&preview=true&preview_id=140751 We put the Honor Magic5 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of [...]

The post Honor Magic5 Pro Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
We put the Honor Magic5 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 50MP 1/1.12″ sensor, f/1.6-aperture lens, AF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 50MP sensor, f/2.0-aperture lens, 122° field of view
  • Tele: 50MP sensor, f/3.0-aperture lens, 3.5x tele, OIS
  • Video: up to 4K resolution at 60fps

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Honor Magic5 Pro
Honor Magic5 Pro
152
camera
154
photo
117

Best

117

119

110

116

114

Best

116

Best

77

81

80
bokeh
80

Best

74
preview
74

91

156
zoom
115

116

116

117

144
video
106

115

116

117

113

117

112

115

114

118

77

86

108

117

Use cases & Conditions

[glossary_exclude]Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.[/glossary_exclude]

Top score Best

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

Top score Best

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

Top score Best

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

Top score Best

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

Pros

  • Excellent zoom performances
  • Wide dynamic range
  • Good detail and low noise
  • Fast and accurate autofocus
  • Accurate colors, and good exposure in night shots
  • Very good subject isolation in bokeh mode

Cons

  • Limited depth of field for group shots and complex scenes
  • Occasionally unpleasant texture rendering on faces
  • Focus instabilities in bokeh mode
  • Occasionally unnatural skin tones
  • Limited dynamic range in preview image compared to capture

With a DXOMARK Camera score of 152, the Honor Magic5 Pro is the new leader in our ranking. It also takes the No. 1 spot in the photo ranking, thanks to outstanding photo results across all light levels. In our tests, the Magic5 Pro shone particularly in our Friends and Family use case, using fast shutter speeds to freeze subjects in motion while capturing excellent detail and keeping noise levels low.

With excellent image quality across all ranges, the zoom performances were outstanding as well, with improvements over the previous model, which was already the best device we tested for this aspect.

The Magic5 Pro also did very well for video and is currently the best Android device for recording moving images. Video clips offered accurate exposure and low noise, but while stabilization was generally effective, frame shift was noticeable when panning or moving with the camera.

The Magic5 Pro’s camera hardware specifications are, apart from the chipset (Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 vs Gen 1 on the Magic4 Ultimate), very similar to those of last year’s Honor flagship, which were already very impressive. The improvements on the new model are therefore a great demonstration of what’s possible with a new chipset, better software, and optimized tuning. It’s also worth mentioning that, unlike some flagship competitors, the Magic5 Pro does not feature a large 1″ sensor in the primary camera. However, thanks to a very fast aperture its light collection capacity is still impressive.

Given the Honor’s outstanding results in our testing, it makes sense to compare it more closely to some of the other currently best flagship phones: When pitched against the Google Pixel 7 Pro, both cameras delivered excellent results and were more or less on par in terms of photo and video quality in bright light as well as close and medium range zoom. However, the Magic5 Pro has an advantage in terms of ultra-wide and tele zoom in low light. It also comes with the slightly better video mode and delivers a more consistent still image performance under indoor light conditions and in low light, with faster shutter speeds, excellent HDR processing, and an outstanding texture/noise compromise. On the other hand, the Google Pixel 7 Pro has the edge in terms of color, across all camera modules and light conditions.

For many test attributes, the iPhone 14 Pro and Honor Magic5 Pro were on a very similar level but when shooting in low light or under indoor conditions, including with the ultra-wide camera, the Honor was the better choice. It also offered a much better tele zoom, especially at medium and long range. For dedicated smartphone videographers, the iPhone remains the undisputed number one option, though.

Honor Magic5 Pro – wide dynamic range, good detail, low noise
Apple iPhone 14 Pro – highlight clipping, visible noise

The Huawei Mate 50 Pro and Honor Magic5 Pro cameras were very close overall. In bright outdoor conditions, exposure, color and contrast were balanced in a very similar way. In these conditions, the Huawei’s variable aperture allowed for a wider depth of field in group shots and kept more subjects in focus. Under indoor lighting and in low light, the Mate 50 Pro’s more limited light collection capacity meant it needed slower shutter speeds than the Honor and was therefore less capable of freezing motion. Its texture/noise tradeoff was not quite as good as on the Honor either. However, the difference between the two devices was most noticeable in video mode. The Mate 50 Pro was the first Huawei device to come with HDR video. In our testing, this caused some issues, for example, exposure instabilities and higher levels of noise, that had a fairly significant impact on its video score.

Top score Best
[glossary_exclude]Friends & Family[/glossary_exclude]

For our Friends and Family use case, we assess both photo and video performance. In our tests, the Honor Magic5 Pro achieved the best result to date for photo and got close to the best for video. In terms of still images, our testers noticed several improvements over last year’s Magic4 Ultimate. The new model provided better contrast and skin color rendering. In addition, it was better at freezing motion, thanks to faster shutter speeds in daylight and indoor conditions. This made it easier to capture images with motion, for example, kids running around, pets or sports. The Honor Magic5 Pro also features an excellent bokeh mode with very good subject isolation.

In video mode, we noticed a significantly improved autofocus in all light conditions. Face exposure, contrast, and texture/noise tradeoff were all improved, too, resulting in overall better video quality when recording clips of friends or family.

 Honor Magic 5Pro – Very good subject isolation in bokeh mode
Top score Best
[glossary_exclude]Lowlight[/glossary_exclude]

The Honor Magic5 Pro set a new benchmark for low-light performance, delivering great results for photo, zoom, and video. Both low-light still images and video clips offered high levels of detail, good exposure and nice colors. In addition, the autofocus performed well in photo mode and the auto exposure system did well at retaining some of the low-light atmosphere while rendering the scene bright enough to not miss any detail.

When zooming in low light, the Honor came close to the very best devices we have seen. Zoom images offered a good tradeoff between exposure, detail and noise,  but some texture artifacts could be noticeable. The Apple iPhone 14 Pro remains the device to beat for low-light video, but the Magic5 Pro proved to be a real challenger, providing good contrast, nice face exposure and effective stabilization.

Honor Magic5 Pro – Low-light images offered good exposure and color, low noise, and high levels of detail. Some unnatural detail could sometimes be visible (on the subject’s right hand in this image, for example)

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s Camera evaluations take place in laboratories and in real-world situations using a wide variety of subjects. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly by measurement software on our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests in which a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo, Zoom, and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an Overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us  on how to receive a full report.

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro Camera Scores vs Ultra-Premium[/glossary_exclude]
This graph compares DXOMARK photo, zoom and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

[glossary_exclude]Photo[/glossary_exclude]

154

Honor Magic5 Pro

Best

[glossary_exclude][/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2,600 test images both in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, family, and landscape photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 1 to 1,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Still imaging on the Honor Magic5 Pro was significantly improved over the last generation of Honor devices, with better results for exposure, color, texture/noise and night shots. This includes portrait shots, which in our tests showed well-controlled contrast across all types of skin tones and light conditions, as well as generally nice skin colors. Some slight white balance and saturation issues were still noticeable but well within acceptable limits.

Zero shutter lag kicked in most of the time, allowing for pretty much immediate image capture when pressing the shutter button. Only in some high-contrast scenes was the feature not available, resulting in slower capture times. In terms of balancing texture preservation and noise reduction, the Honor was one of the best devices tested to date, and image noise levels were generally very low across all light conditions. Detail levels were high, but we also observed some instances of unnatural rendering of textures. The excellent texture/noise tradeoff extended to night scenes, which also showed very good exposure and contrast.

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro Photo scores vs Ultra-Premium[/glossary_exclude]
The photo tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses.
Close-Up

Close-up image quality was overall very similar to the Magic4 Ultimate, with only some minor differences in terms of corner softness. Overall, macro results were acceptable.

Honor Magic5 Pro close up shot. Nice detail in the center but visible loss of sharpness in the field.

[glossary_exclude]Exposure[/glossary_exclude]

117

Honor Magic5 Pro

Best

[glossary_exclude][/glossary_exclude]

Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the contrast and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.

Exposure was one of the Honor’s strengths, thanks to excellent face exposure in portraits, target exposure in low light and very good highlight preservation in high-contrast scenes. Target exposure on faces was pretty well balanced across all skin tones and contrast was noticeably improved over the Honor Magic4 Ultimate.

Honor Magic5 Pro – Good contrast and excellent HDR rendering
Apple iPhone 14 Pro – Very good contrast but at the cost of slight highlight clipping
Huawei Mate 50 Pro – Very similar to Honor Magic5 Pro
Honor Magic5 Pro – Good contrast, excellent dynamic range
Apple iPhone 14 Pro – Well-balanced face exposure and contrast, but highlight clipping in sky
Huawei Mate 50 Pro – Very similar to Magic5 Pro, but slightly more highlight clipping

In scenes with very strong contrast, the Honor protected highlights very well, even though tone compression was visible, but competitors such as the Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max or Huawei Mate 50 Pro delivered a better tradeoff between contrast and highlight preservation.

Honor Magic5 Pro – Very good highlight protection, but at the cost of low contrast
Apple iPhone 14 Pro – Highlight and shadow clipping, but punchy contrast
Huawei Mate 50 Pro – Good highlight protection and high contrast

Lab measurements were in line with what we saw in the perceptual evaluation of real-life scenes, with very good results all around. Contrast (Local Contrast Quality indicator) was improved over the Magic4 Ultimate. Entropy (measured on the backlit panel of our AF HDR and portrait HDR lab setup) was very good for all lighting conditions.

Highlight contrast preservation, measured as an entropy on a contrast target. Higher value is better. Above 7 bits, the highlights are rendered with a very good contrast. On the other hand, below 2 bits highlights are not preserved.
Local contrast indicator score (higher value is better) – Honor Magic5 Pro’s results were better than the Magic4 Ultimate and close to iPhone 14 Pro. DXOMARK local contrast quality indicator gives a benchmark of local tones compression.

[glossary_exclude]Color[/glossary_exclude]

117

Honor Magic5 Pro

119

[glossary_exclude]Google Pixel 7 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Color is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors but we respect a manufacturer's choice of color signature.

Color rendering was also very good, and again a noticeable improvement over the Magic4 Ultimate. Skin tone rendering was better across all types of skin tones. White balance was also very stable and accurate but occasionally slight casts could be visible.

Honor Magic5 Pro – Very good skin tone rendering, neutral white balance. Best trade-off between skin representation and overall color fidelity
Apple iPhone 14 Pro – Very good color rendering, slightly different white balance

Huawei Mate 50 Pro – Good color rendering

Under indoor lighting and in low light, colors remained accurate and well-saturated. Thanks to improved contrast over the Magic4 Ultimate, saturation and overall color rendering were better as well.

Honor Magic5 Pro – Nice skin tones, slight highlight clipping
Apple iPhone 14 Pro – Good skin tones and contrast.
Huawei Mate 50 Pro – Nice skin tones and background rendering

In a small number of test scenes, our testers observed some white balance and color rendering issues, such as the lack of saturation in this image, which also had a negative impact on skin tones. This is why the Honor’s color score was not quite on the same level as the best in class for this attribute, such as the Google Pixel 7 Pro and Apple iPhone 14 Pro.

Honor Magic5 Pro – lack of saturation on a small number of test samples

[glossary_exclude]Autofocus[/glossary_exclude]

110

Honor Magic5 Pro

116

[glossary_exclude]Huawei Mate 50 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus repeatability, shooting time delay, and depth of field. Shooting delay is the difference between the time the user presses the capture button and the time the image is actually taken. It includes focusing speed and the capability of the device to capture images at the right time, what is called 'zero shutter lag' capability. Even if a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single-subject portrait or close-up shot, it can also be a problem in some specific conditions such as group portraits; Both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from infinity to close-up objects and in low light to outdoor conditions.

In our tests, the Magic5 Pro autofocus did a good job but, like on many other top-end devices with large image sensors and fast apertures, depth of field was limited. In group shots and other complex scenes, this means that objects behind or in front of the main subject can be rendered soft. We also noticed that zero shutter lag did not kick in in scenes with strong contrast.

[glossary_exclude]Autofocus irregularity and speed: 20Lux Δ7EV Tungsten Handheld[/glossary_exclude]
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed and also zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 20Lux with Tungsten illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. On this scenario, the backlit panels in the scene are set up to simulate a fairly high dynamic range: the luminance ratio between the brightest point and a 18% reflective gray patch is 7, which we denote by a Exposure Value difference of 7. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.

In this scene, the two subjects were not in the same focus plane. In this kind of situation, the Honor’s limited depth of field resulted in the background subject being out of focus. The Huawei Mate 50 Pro, which comes with a variable aperture, was capable of creating a wider depth of field and rendering both subjects in focus.

Honor Magic5 Pro - Depth of Field
Honor Magic5 Pro - Good sharpness on subject in focus plane but softness on subject in the background
Apple iPhone 14 Pro - Depth of Field
Apple iPhone 14 Pro - Good sharpness on subject in focus plane but softness on subject in the background
Huawei Mate 50 Pro - Depth of Field
Huawei Mate 50 Pro - Both subjects are sharp

[glossary_exclude]Texture[/glossary_exclude]

114

Honor Magic5 Pro

Best

[glossary_exclude][/glossary_exclude]

Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in the bright and dark areas of the image. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC) and the Dead Leaves chart.

[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for tripod and handheld conditions[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

Honor Magic5 Pro images showed high levels of detail in all light conditions. This was particularly true for landscape and architecture shots. This said, our testers observed some slightly unnatural rendering of textures in a small number of samples, especially backlit portrait shots.

Honor Magic5 Pro - Detail
Honor Magic5 Pro - Great detail with well depiction of hair and beard, and skin well modeled.
Apple iPhone 14 Pro - Detail
Apple iPhone 14 Pro - Skin is well modeled but hair lacks detail.
Huawei Mate 50 Pro - Detail
Huawei Mate 50 Pro - Good detail, hair is well defined but the skin depiction is less natural

Motion blur was fairly well under control, thanks to pretty fast shutter speeds in daylight and indoor conditions. As a result, the Honor was capable of freezing subjects in motion, as long as the autofocus worked well and zero shutter lag kicked in.

Exposure time (ms) measured was very low for indoor and outdoor conditions (lower is better).

[glossary_exclude]Noise[/glossary_exclude]

116

Honor Magic5 Pro

Best

[glossary_exclude][/glossary_exclude]

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, landscapes, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Noise on moving objects is also evaluated on natural images. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

[glossary_exclude]Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

Image noise was very well under control across pretty much all our test scenes, including daylight, high-contrast and night scenes, and overall the Honor Magic5 Pro was one of the best devices we have tested for this attribute. It was also one of the best in terms of texture/noise tradeoff. Considering the fast shutters speeds in daylight and indoors, this achievement was even more impressive.

Honor Magic5 Pro - Low light noise
Honor Magic5 Pro - Very low noise, even in low light
Apple iPhone 14 Pro - Low light noise
Apple iPhone 14 Pro - Visible noise
Huawei Mate 50 Pro - Low light noise
Huawei Mate 50 Pro - Very low noise

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

77

Honor Magic5 Pro

81

[glossary_exclude]Google Pixel 6[/glossary_exclude]

The artifacts evaluation looks at lens shading, chromatic aberrations, geometrical distortion, edges ringing, halos, ghosting, quantization, unexpected color hue shifts, among others type of possible unnatural effects on photos. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.

[glossary_exclude]Main photo artifacts penalties[/glossary_exclude]

Unwanted image artifacts were pretty well controlled on the Magic5 Pro. Color quantization and some fusion artifacts were the most noticeable effects. We also observed some hue shift, at acceptable levels, in scenes with very strong contrast.

Honor Magic5 Pro, slight hue shift in the sky

[glossary_exclude]Bokeh[/glossary_exclude]

80

Honor Magic5 Pro

Best

[glossary_exclude][/glossary_exclude]

Bokeh is tested in one dedicated mode, usually portrait or aperture mode, and analyzed by visually inspecting all the images captured in the lab and in natural conditions. The goal is to reproduce portrait photography comparable to one taken with a DLSR and a wide aperture. The main image quality attributes paid attention to are depth estimation, artifacts, blur gradient, and the shape of the bokeh blur spotlights. Portrait image quality attributes (exposure, color, texture) are also taken into account.

The Honor’s bokeh mode was again among the best tested to date and on the same level as the Apple iPhone 14 Pro and the Huawei Mate 50 Pro, thanks to very precise depth estimation, good detail and colors. Bokeh image quality remained high in low light. For some distances, the blur applied on the background was stronger than iPhone 14 Pro’s blur,  but this had no impact our evaluation because both levels of blur were acceptable.

Honor Magic5 Pro – Very good bokeh mode with accurate depth estimation
Apple iPhone 14 Pro – Very good bokeh mode with accurate depth estimation
Huawei Mate 50 Pro – Very good bokeh mode with accurate depth estimation

[glossary_exclude]Preview[/glossary_exclude]

74

Honor Magic5 Pro

91

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Preview tests analyze the image quality of the camera app's preview of the image, with particular attention paid to the difference between the capture and the preview, especially regarding dynamic range and the application of the bokeh effect. Also evaluated is the smoothness of the exposure, color and focus adaptation when zooming from the minimal to the maximal zoom factor available. The preview frame rate is measured using the LED Universal Timer.

Preview was good but not on par with the latest iPhone devices. When capturing high-contrast scenes, the iPhone preview image was much closer to the final capture in terms of dynamic range, but the Honor was on the same level as other top-end Snapdragon-powered devices. The Honor also applied a bokeh effect to its preview image when shooting in bokeh mode, but the differences to the capture were quite noticeable.

Honor Magic5 Pro – capture – wide dynamic range
Honor Magic5 Pro – preview – noticeably reduced dynamic range, darker exposure
Apple iPhone 14 Pro – capture – good target exposure, slight highlight clipping
Apple iPhone 14 Pro – preview – very similar to capture

[glossary_exclude]Zoom[/glossary_exclude]

156

Honor Magic5 Pro

Best

[glossary_exclude][/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Zoom tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate over 400 test images in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor, and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings and pinch zoom at various zoom factors from ultra wide to very long-range zoom. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting the images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements of chart mages captured in the lab under different conditions from 20 to 1000 lux and color temperatures from 2300K to 6500K.

The Honor Magic5 Pro provided a noticeably improved zooming experience, from ultra-wide to long range tele, over the Magic4 Ultimate, making it one of the best devices for zooming in the market. With very similar camera hardware on the two models, these improvements are mostly down to software and tuning optimizations.

The Honor uses smaller image sensors than some of its competitors but compensates for some of this disadvantage in terms of light collection capacity with faster apertures. The ultra-wide camera performed very well, providing a wide field of view and very good image quality across all light conditions. Fine detail was rendered nicely at the center of the frame and remained well controlled across the frame, even though some loss of sharpness was noticeable towards the edges at the widest settings. HDR rendering and dynamic range were on par with the primary camera and noise levels were low. Overall this makes the Magic5 Pro’s ultra-wide camera the best we have tested to date.

The tele was also very good across all tele zoom settings, especially when shooting in bright light or indoors. In low light our testers noticed some unnatural rendering of detail but overall the Magic5 Pro came very close to the best in class for tele zoom (Honor Magic 4 Ultimate and Vivo X90 Pro+). The slight difference to the predecessor is mainly explained by the unnatural detail rendering in low light. Taking into account the Magic5 Pro’s improved video zoom capabilities, the device offered the overall most consistent zoom performance we have seen to date.

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro Zoom Scores vs Ultra-Premium[/glossary_exclude]
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length. Zooming-in scores are displayed on the right and Zooming-out scores on the left.
Video Zoom

Video zoom results were decent and also an improvement over the previous model. The level of captured detail was high across all tested zoom settings but noise could also be quite noticeable. We also observed some issues with zoom smoothness.

[glossary_exclude]Wide[/glossary_exclude]

116

Honor Magic5 Pro

117

[glossary_exclude]Huawei Mate 50 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

These tests analyze the performance of the ultra-wide camera at several focal lengths from 12 mm to 20 mm. All image quality attributes are evaluated, with particular attention paid to such artifacts as chromatic aberrations, lens softness, and distortion. Pictures below are an extract of tested scenes.

The camera provided very good results at the ultra-wide’s native focal length (measured at 13mm) and when slightly zooming in. Image quality was great in all light conditions, especially in bright light and indoors. In low light, noise levels remained low but we observed some unnatural rendering of detail. A wide dynamic range ensured good detail in both highlight and shadow areas of the frame, and only a few contrast issues were observed.

Ultra-wide – Very wide field of view, great detail at the center of the frame

In low light the ultra-wide camera captures very good detail in architecture and landscape shots. The slight loss of sharpness we observed is in line with the best competitors in the Ultra Premium segment.

Honor Magic5 Pro - Ultra wide
Honor Magic5 Pro - Good detail, low noise, neutral white balance. Contrast is bit low.
Apple iPhone 14 Pro - Ultra Wide
Apple iPhone 14 Pro - Loss of fine detail, noise
Huawei Mate 50 Pro - Ultra Wide
Huawei Mate 50 Pro - Good detail, low noise, visible white balance cast

[glossary_exclude]Tele[/glossary_exclude]

115

Honor Magic5 Pro

116

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic4 Ultimate[/glossary_exclude]

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 40 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and detail. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

Tele image results were great as well, with good detail, low noise and a wide dynamic range. Landscape and architecture shots had very good image quality across all tele settings. In the lab indoor and low light samples measured very high for detail and showed low noise levels, but the overall score was impacted by some slight artifacts. Please note the samples below are only a small selection, we test a camera’s tele capabilities at more than 10 different focal lengths, from short tele to very long.

Honor Magic5 Pro - Medium range tele
Honor Magic5 Pro - Fine detail and low noise
Vivo X90 Pro+ - Medium range tele (3.5x)
Vivo X90 Pro+ - Good detail
Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra - Medium range tele
Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra - Loss of detail

[glossary_exclude]Video[/glossary_exclude]

144

Honor Magic5 Pro

149

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2.5 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 1 to 1000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

The Honor Magic5 Pro’s video mode was tested at 4K resolution and 30 frames per second. Our testing found the Honor to be the best Android smartphone for video, and the best device in SDR video format. However, it could not quite match the class leader, the iPhone 14 Pro.

Video was improved over the Magic4 Ultimate across all test attributes. Video noise was generally low in most light conditions, with accurate target exposure. Stabilization was an area with potential for improvement, with frame shift noticeable when panning or moving with the camera.

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro Video scores vs Ultra-Premium[/glossary_exclude]
Video tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.

[glossary_exclude]Exposure[/glossary_exclude]

106

Honor Magic5 Pro

115

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness of the main subject and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.

The Honor Magic5 Pro delivered good video exposure in most conditions. Dynamic range was wide in daylight and indoors, capturing good detail in both highlight and shadow areas of the frame. However, it wasn’t quite as wide as on the Apple iPhone 14 Pro, which is the current benchmark for video dynamic range, thanks to its outstanding HDR processing capabilities. Exposure transitions on the Honor were generally smooth but some stepping was often noticeable.

Honor Magic 5 Pro – Slight exposure instability

Apple iPhone 14 Pro – No exposure instability

Google Pixel 7 Pro – No exposure instability

[glossary_exclude]Color[/glossary_exclude]

116

Honor Magic5 Pro

117

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Color was generally accurate in indoor conditions and low light, but our testers sometimes observed a slightly cool color cast when recording in daylight and bad weather conditions. Other than that, color rendering was accurate and skin tones looked nice in most conditions. White balance transitions in changing light were generally smooth but slight instabilities could occur.

Honor Magic5 Pro – Accurate white balance and pleasant color rendering

[glossary_exclude]Autofocus[/glossary_exclude]

113

Honor Magic5 Pro

117

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Video autofocus was smooth and did a good job at tracking subjects. In addition, it reacted quickly and accurately to changes in the scene.

Honor Magic5 Pro – Accurate tracking capabilities

Apple iPhone 14 Pro – Accurate tracking capabilities

Google Pixel 7 Pro – Accurate tracking capabilities

[glossary_exclude]Texture[/glossary_exclude]

112

Honor Magic5 Pro

115

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra[/glossary_exclude]

Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural videos recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of details in the bright and areas as well as in the dark. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

In static scenes, the Honor’s video clips showed good detail, but some loss of fine detail was noticeable on moving subjects, particularly when recording in low light.

Honor Magic5 Pro - Details
Honor Magic5 Pro - High level of details but some fine details are lost
Apple iPhone 14 Pro - Details
Apple iPhone 14 Pro - Very high level of details
Google Pixel 7 Pro - Details
Google Pixel 7 Pro - Lower level of details

[glossary_exclude]Noise[/glossary_exclude]

114

Honor Magic5 Pro

118

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy A23 5G[/glossary_exclude]

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise in the dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

[glossary_exclude]Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
[glossary_exclude]Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

Video noise was pretty well under control in all light conditions. Noise mostly became noticeable in moving scenes or close to the edges of the frame. Overall, noise management was one of the Honor’s strengths in video mode, but it did not quite match the best-in-class iPhone 14 Pro.

[glossary_exclude]Stabilization[/glossary_exclude]

108

Honor Magic5 Pro

117

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any other means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jello artifacts and residual motion blur on walk-and-run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

Video stabilization was generally effective at counteracting camera motion, even walking while recording. However, running or panning resulted in noticeable frame shift in most light conditions.

Honor Magic5 Pro – Efficient stabilization but frameshift is visible

Apple iPhone 14 Pro – Efficient and smooth stabilization

Google Pixel 7 Pro – Efficient stabilization

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

77

Honor Magic5 Pro

86

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi 12S Ultra[/glossary_exclude]

Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as aliasing, quantization, blocking, and hue shift, among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below.

[glossary_exclude]Main video artifacts penalties[/glossary_exclude]

Video artifacts were generally well under control but maze/moiré could often be noticeable on fine patterns, and the glass in front of the lens had a tendency to generate flare, which was sometimes visible on the faces of portrait subjects.

The post Honor Magic5 Pro Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/honor-magic5-pro-camera-test/feed/ 0 Honor Magic5 Pro Best Best Best Best Best Best Best Best CAMERA CAMERA 12mm_DeskLamp_HonorMagic5Pro_DxOMark 12mm_DeskLamp_AppleiPhone14Pro_DxOMark_05-00 Best 061 (2)_Honor_Magic_5_Pro Best 156 (6)_Honor_Magic_5_Pro Best FlowerMacro_HonorMagic5Pro_DxOMark Best 082 (2)_Honor_Magic_5_Pro 082 (3)_AppleiPhone14Pro 089_Honor_Magic_5_Pro 089 (2)_AppleiPhone14Pro 021 (2)_Honor_Magic_5_Pro 021 (2)_AppleiPhone14Pro Entropy LCIQ 062 (3)_Honor_Magic_5_Pro 062 (9)_AppleiPhone14Pro 0103 (2)_Honor_Magic_5_Pro 0103 (2)_AppleiPhone14Pro PeopleTouristColor_HonorMagic5Pro_DxOMark_P05_05-00 Best ExposureTime Best 089_Honor_Magic_5_Pro Best 057_HonorMagic5Pro 057_AppleiPhone14Pro ArtOnTablet_HonorMagic5Pro_DxOMark ArtOnTabletPreview_HonorMagic5Pro_DxOMark_P05_01-00 ArtOnTablet_AppleiPhone14Pro_DxOMark_05-00 ArtOnTabletPreview_AppleiPhone14Pro_DxOMark_01-00 Best 031 (2)_Honor_Magic_5_Pro
Samsung Galaxy S23+ Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s23-camera-test-results/ https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s23-camera-test-results/#respond Thu, 23 Feb 2023 14:23:59 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=140991&preview=true&preview_id=140991 The Samsung Galaxy S23+ and Samsung Galaxy S23 share the same rear camera specs, as well the same chipset, so as expected, the results of the Samsung Galaxy S23+ camera were exactly the same as those of the Samsung Galaxy S23. We’ve included a few examples from our testing to show the similarities between these [...]

The post Samsung Galaxy S23+ Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
The Samsung Galaxy S23+ and Samsung Galaxy S23 share the same rear camera specs, as well the same chipset, so as expected, the results of the Samsung Galaxy S23+ camera were exactly the same as those of the Samsung Galaxy S23.

We’ve included a few examples from our testing to show the similarities between these two models. But for a more in-depth look at the Samsung Galaxy S23+ rear camera photo and video performance, we direct you to the full test results of the Samsung Galaxy S23 camera.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 50MP 1/1.56″ sensor, 1.0 μm pixels, f/1.8 aperture lens, PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 12MP 1/2.55″ sensor, 1.4µm pixels, f/2.2 aperture lens, Super Steady Video
  • Tele: 10MP 1/3.94″ sensor, 1.0µm pixels, f/2.4 aperture lens, PDAF, OIS

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Samsung Galaxy S23+
Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)
133
camera
129
photo
106

117

111

119

105

116

108

114

85

116

66

81

70
bokeh
70

80

72
preview
72

91

126
zoom
89

116

102

117

137
video
103

115

105

117

114

117

105

115

106

118

79

86

114

117

Use cases & Conditions

[glossary_exclude]Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.[/glossary_exclude]

BEST 168

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 157

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 127

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 143

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

Pros

  • Fairly wide dynamic range
  • Accurate color rendering in most conditions
  • Fine details preservation in all conditions
  • Good detail preservation at close and medium range in outdoor and indoor conditions
  • High focus-tracking capabilities in video

Cons

  • Some autofocus failures in low light and indoor conditions
  • Local loss of texture in outdoor conditions
  • Noise often visible in all conditions
  • Artifacts like fusion or face rendering artifacts in all conditions
  • Low target exposure in challenging low-light conditions in videos

 

Samsung Galaxy S23+
Samsung Galaxy S23

 

 

The post Samsung Galaxy S23+ Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s23-camera-test-results/feed/ 0 Samsung Galaxy S23+ CAMERA CAMERA SidetoSideGroup_SamsungGalaxyS23Plus_DxOMark_05-00 SidetoSideGroup_SamsungGalaxyS23_DxOMark_05-00
Samsung Galaxy S23 Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s23-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s23-camera-test/#respond Thu, 23 Feb 2023 14:22:12 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=140045&preview=true&preview_id=140045 We put the Samsung Galaxy S23 through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of [...]

The post Samsung Galaxy S23 Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
We put the Samsung Galaxy S23 through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 50MP 1/1.56″ sensor, 1.0 μm pixels, f/1.8-aperture lens, PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 12MP 1/2.55″ sensor, 1.4µm pixels, f/2.2-aperture lens, Super Steady Video
  • Tele: 10MP 1/3.94″ sensor, 1.0µm pixels, f/2.4-aperture lens, PDAF, OIS

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Samsung Galaxy S23
Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)
133
camera
129
photo
106

117

111

119

105

116

108

114

85

116

66

81

70
bokeh
70

80

72
preview
72

91

126
zoom
89

116

102

117

137
video
103

115

105

117

114

117

105

115

106

118

79

86

114

117

Use cases & Conditions

[glossary_exclude]Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.[/glossary_exclude]

BEST 168

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 157

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 127

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 143

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

Pros

  • Fairly wide dynamic range
  • Accurate color rendering in most conditions
  • Good fine detail in all conditions
  • Good detail at close and medium range tele in daylight and indoors
  • Good focus tracking in video

Cons

  • Autofocus failures in low light and indoor conditions
  • Local loss of texture in daylight
  • Image noise
  • Artifacts, including fusion or face rendering artifacts
  • Underexposed video in challenging low light

With a DXOMARK Camera score of 133, the Samsung Galaxy S23 delivered a good result in our tests, thanks to a very well-balanced performance, which makes it a good option for a wide variety of users. It was capable of capturing high quality images in most light conditions and scenes, including nightscapes.

The camera’s 50MP image sensor was capable of capturing high levels of detail and images showed bright and natural colors. However, our testers also noticed a local loss of detail in some situations, especially when shooting under daylight, where the Samsung also slightly struggled with skin tone rendering. In video mode stabilization was effective and the S23’s autofocus system allowed for smooth focus transitions and good detail, making the device a great option for mobile video creators as well.

Compared to the flagship S23 Ultra, the S23 uses a smaller image sensor and overall different camera hardware. However, in many situations the S23 came very close to the Ultra model in terms of image quality, making it a viable alternative to the top-of-the-line model.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s Camera evaluations take place in laboratories and in real-world situations using a wide variety of subjects. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly by measurement software on our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests in which a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo, Zoom, and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an Overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us  on how to receive a full report.

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy S23 Camera Scores[/glossary_exclude]
This graph compares DXOMARK photo, zoom and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

[glossary_exclude]Photo[/glossary_exclude]

129

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

154

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2,600 test images both in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, family, and landscape photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 1 to 1,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy S23 Photo scores[/glossary_exclude]
The photo tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses.

[glossary_exclude]Exposure[/glossary_exclude]

106

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

117

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

[glossary_exclude]Color[/glossary_exclude]

111

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

119

[glossary_exclude]Google Pixel 7 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Exposure and color are the key attributes for technically good pictures. For exposure, the main attribute evaluated is the brightness of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the contrast and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.
For color, the image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors but we respect a manufacturer's choice of color signature.

Dynamic range and target exposure were very similar to the Galaxy S23 Ultra, but the S23 maintained slightly better contrast on faces than the Ultra in backlit scenes. HDR rendering tended to be slightly aggressive in the highlights for both devices. Color was very similar, too, but some slight differences were sometimes noticeable in terms of white balance.

Samsung Galaxy S23 – Green cast
Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra – Cold white balance
Apple iPhone 14 Pro – Neutral white balance

[glossary_exclude]Autofocus[/glossary_exclude]

105

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

116

[glossary_exclude]Huawei Mate 50 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus repeatability, shooting time delay, and depth of field. Shooting delay is the difference between the time the user presses the capture button and the time the image is actually taken. It includes focusing speed and the capability of the device to capture images at the right time, what is called 'zero shutter lag' capability. Even if a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single subject portrait or close-up shot, it can also be a problem in some specific conditions such as group portraits; Both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from infinity to close-up objects and in low light to outdoor conditions.

The Samsung Galaxy S23 captures quite swiftly in good light. However, in more difficult light, the subject is occasionally missed, resulting in focus failures.

[glossary_exclude]Autofocus irregularity and speed: 1000Lux Δ2EV Daylight Tripod[/glossary_exclude]
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed and also zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 1000Lux with Daylight illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. On this scenario, the backlit panels in the scene are set up to simulate a fairly high dynamic range: the luminance ratio between the brightest point and a 18% reflective gray patch is 2, which we denote by a Exposure Value difference of 2. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.
[glossary_exclude]Autofocus irregularity and speed: 100Lux Δ0EV TL84 Tripod[/glossary_exclude]
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed and also zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 100Lux with TL84 illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.

[glossary_exclude]Texture[/glossary_exclude]

108

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

114

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in the bright and dark areas of the image. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC) and the Dead Leaves chart.

[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for tripod and handheld conditions[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

[glossary_exclude]Noise[/glossary_exclude]

85

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

116

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, landscapes, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Noise on moving objects is also evaluated on natural images. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

[glossary_exclude]Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

66

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

81

[glossary_exclude]Google Pixel 6[/glossary_exclude]

The artifacts evaluation looks at lens shading, chromatic aberrations, geometrical distortion, edges ringing, halos, ghosting, quantization, unexpected color hue shifts, among others type of possible unnatural effects on photos. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.

[glossary_exclude]Main photo artifacts penalties[/glossary_exclude]

[glossary_exclude]Bokeh[/glossary_exclude]

70

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

80

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Bokeh is tested in one dedicated mode, usually portrait or aperture mode, and analyzed by visually inspecting all the images captured in the lab and in natural conditions. The goal is to reproduce portrait photography comparable to one taken with a DLSR and a wide aperture. The main image quality attributes paid attention to are depth estimation, artifacts, blur gradient, and the shape of the bokeh blur spotlights. Portrait image quality attributes (exposure, color, texture) are also taken into account.

Samsung Galaxy S23 – Accurate depth estimation but some noticeable errors on filigrane objects

[glossary_exclude]Preview[/glossary_exclude]

72

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

91

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Preview tests analyze the image quality of the camera app's preview of the image, with particular attention paid to the difference between the capture and the preview, especially regarding dynamic range and the application of the bokeh effect. Also evaluated is the smoothness of the exposure, color and focus adaptation when zooming from the minimal to the maximal zoom factor available. The preview frame rate is measured using the LED Universal Timer.

Samsung Galaxy S23 – Preview
Samsung Galaxy S23 – Capture – Noticeable wider dynamic range than preview

[glossary_exclude]Zoom[/glossary_exclude]

126

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

156

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Zoom tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate over 400 test images in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor, and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings and pinch zoom at various zoom factors from ultra wide to very long-range zoom. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting the images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements of chart mages captured in the lab under different conditions from 20 to 1000 lux and color temperatures from 2300K to 6500K.

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy S23 Zoom Scores[/glossary_exclude]
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length. Zooming-in scores are displayed on the right and Zooming-out scores on the left.

[glossary_exclude]Wide[/glossary_exclude]

102

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

117

[glossary_exclude]Huawei Mate 50 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

These tests analyze the performance of the ultra-wide camera at several focal lengths from 12 mm to 20 mm. All image quality attributes are evaluated, with particular attention paid to such artifacts as chromatic aberrations, lens softness, and distortion. Pictures below are an extract of tested scenes.

Samsung Galaxy S23 – Wide dynamic range, slight noise, slight loss of detail
Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra – Wide dynamic range, slight noise, slight loss of detail
Apple iPhone 14 Pro  – Slight clipping in the highlights, noise, loss of detail

[glossary_exclude]Tele[/glossary_exclude]

89

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

116

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic4 Ultimate[/glossary_exclude]

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 40 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and detail. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

[glossary_exclude]Video[/glossary_exclude]

137

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

149

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2.5 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 1 to 1000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy S23 Video scores[/glossary_exclude]
Video tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.

[glossary_exclude]Exposure[/glossary_exclude]

103

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

115

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

[glossary_exclude]Color[/glossary_exclude]

105

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

117

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness of the main subject and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.
Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Samsung Galaxy S23 – Good exposure, nice skin tones

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra – Good exposure, nice skin tones

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra – Good exposure, nice skin tones

[glossary_exclude]Texture[/glossary_exclude]

105

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

115

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra[/glossary_exclude]

Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural videos recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of details in the bright and areas as well as in the dark. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

[glossary_exclude]Noise[/glossary_exclude]

106

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

118

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy A23 5G[/glossary_exclude]

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise in the dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

[glossary_exclude]Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
[glossary_exclude]Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

[glossary_exclude]Stabilization[/glossary_exclude]

114

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

117

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jello artifacts and residual motion blur on walk and run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

Samsung Galaxy S23 – Effective stabilization

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra – Effective stabilization

Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra – Effective stabilization, sharpness difference between frames

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

79

Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

86

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi 12S Ultra[/glossary_exclude]

Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as aliasing, quantization, blocking, and hue shift, among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below.

[glossary_exclude]Main video artifacts penalties[/glossary_exclude]

The post Samsung Galaxy S23 Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/samsung-galaxy-s23-camera-test/feed/ 0 Samsung Galaxy S23 CAMERA CAMERA HelloMotion_SamsungGalaxyS23_05-00 HelloMotion_SamsungGalaxyS23Ultra_05-00 HelloMotion_AppleiPhone14Pro_05-00 Bokeh_1000Lux_SME_D65_portrait_fd_SamsungGalaxyS23 DuoBacklitPreview_SamsungGalaxyS23_01-00 DuoBacklit_SamsungGalaxyS23_05-00 18mm_SofaPortrait_SamsungGalaxyS23_05-00 18mm_SofaPortrait_SamsungGalaxyS23Ultra_DxOMark_05-00 18mm_SofaPortrait_AppleiPhone14Pro_05-00
Sony Xperia 1 IV Camera test https://www.dxomark.com/sony-xperia-1-iv-camera-test/ https://www.dxomark.com/sony-xperia-1-iv-camera-test/#respond Mon, 20 Feb 2023 14:22:18 +0000 https://www.dxomark.com/?p=137978&preview=true&preview_id=137978 We put the Sony Xperia 1 IV through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results [...]

The post Sony Xperia 1 IV Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
We put the Sony Xperia 1 IV through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 12MP 1/1.7-inch sensor, 1.8 μm pixels, f/1.7-aperture lens with 24mm equivalent focal length, PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 12MP 1/2.5-inch sensor, f/2.2-aperture lens with 16mm equivalent focal length
  • Tele: 12MP 1/3.5-inch sensor, variable focal length from 85-125mm equivalent, f/2.3-f/2.8 aperture, OIS
  • Video: 4K video at 24, 25, 30, 60 and 120fps, HDR

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Sony Xperia 1 IV
Sony Xperia 1 IV
118
camera
118
photo
91

117

108

119

95

116

97

114

91

116

67

81

55
bokeh
55

80

59
preview
59

91

116
zoom
83

116

102

117

112
video
73

115

83

117

110

117

83

115

113

118

82

86

105

117

Use cases & Conditions

[glossary_exclude]Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.[/glossary_exclude]

BEST 168

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 157

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 127

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 143

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

Pros

  • Good exposure and decent detail in most conditions
  • Effective video stabilization
  • Good texture rendering in video
  • Mostly accurate depth estimation and natural spotlight effect in bokeh mode

Cons

  • Limited dynamic range
  • Ringing artifacts
  • Unnatural skin tones in daylight
  • Exposure and white balance instabilities in video
  • Strong underexposure in some night portraits
  • Low contrast at long-range tele, lack of detail at all zoom settings

With a DXOMARK Camera score of 118, the Sony Xperia 1 IV delivered a fairly balanced performance in our tests, achieving decent results in photo, zoom and video when the light conditions were not too difficult. However, it could not quite match the best rivals in the Ultra-Premium price segment.

In photo mode, the camera generally captured nice pictures, with good exposure and natural texture rendering. The device’s tele lens with a variable focal length from 85-125mm (35mm-equivalent) is a stand-out feature and delivered good results in our tests, making tele zoom capture the Sony’s strong point. In video mode, our testers liked the accurate and smooth autofocus, as well as the decent video stabilization.

Apart from the more sophisticated tele zoom setup, the Xperia 1 IV’s camera hardware is mostly identical to its in-house rival Xperia 5 IV. This said, despite the similar camera specifications, overall image quality and camera performance were not quite the same and the Xperia 1 IV’s overall score is one point lower than the Xperia 5 IV. Differences were mainly noticeable in color and autofocus where the Xperia 5 IV delivered better results. On the other hand, the flagship Xperia 1 IV was better in the zoom category.

BEST 143
[glossary_exclude]Friends & Family[/glossary_exclude]

Portrait shots captured with the Sony showed good exposure in all conditions and the camera recorded sharp detail in bright light. A wide depth of field ensured good sharpness on subjects in different focus planes in group shots. Skin tones could look a little unnatural, though, especially in daylight shooting, and our testers also observed slight motion blur and fusion artifacts on moving subjects.

Sony Xperia 1 IV – Accurate target exposure, good detail, slightly unnatural color rendering, fusion artifact on subject’s hand
BEST 127
[glossary_exclude]Lowlight[/glossary_exclude]

The Sony Xperia 1 IV camera did a good job in low-light scenes, capturing fairly good detail and good exposure. However, a limited dynamic range resulted in shadow and highlight clipping, and image noise was often noticeable. The camera did struggle slightly more in video mode where the dynamic range was slightly more limited than for photos, and luminance noise crept into the frame. Color was pleasant and warm both in photo and video, but white balance instabilities were sometimes noticeable when recording video.

Sony Xperia 1 IV – Good exposure, slight shadow clipping

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s Camera evaluations take place in laboratories and in real-world situations using a wide variety of subjects. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly by measurement software on our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests in which a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo, Zoom, and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an Overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us  on how to receive a full report.

[glossary_exclude]Sony Xperia 1 IV Camera Scores[/glossary_exclude]
This graph compares DXOMARK photo, zoom and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

[glossary_exclude]Photo[/glossary_exclude]

118

Sony Xperia 1 IV

154

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2,600 test images both in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, family, and landscape photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 1 to 1,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

The Sony Xperia 1 IV is a decent smartphone option for still image capture, but it did not match the best in class in our tests. It produced good exposure and captured good detail in most conditions, but dynamic range was limited, resulting in highlight and/or shadow clipping in difficult high-contrast scenes. Our testers also observed some instabilities and found the preview image to not always be reliable. Overall, image quality was quite close to the Xperia 5 IV which is not a surprise given that, apart from the tele module, both devices use the same camera hardware. Differences between the two cameras were mainly visible in terms of exposure and color.

[glossary_exclude]Sony Xperia 1 IV Photo scores[/glossary_exclude]
The photo tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses.
Close-Up

Close-up shots taken with the Sony 1 IV showed strong corner softness. Images were also out of focus and not really sharp at the center of the frame either. Therefore, the Sony Xperia 1 IV did not qualify for our full macro image quality analysis.

Sony Xperia 1 IV – Soft corners, slightly out of focus
Sony Xperia 5 IV – Good detail
Google Pixel 7 – Corner softness

[glossary_exclude]Exposure[/glossary_exclude]

91

Sony Xperia 1 IV

117

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the contrast and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.

In our tests, the Xperia 1 IV produced acceptable exposure in all shooting conditions, but a lack of dynamic range meant that we saw some clipping that was usually more noticeable in the highlight portions of the frame than in the shadows. Compared with the Xperia 5 IV, exposure was quite similar, but the dynamic range limitations were slightly more noticeable.

Sony Xperia 1 IV – Good exposure, clipping in sky
Sony Xperia 5 IV – Good exposure, slight clipping
Google Pixel 7 – Good exposure, slight clipping

In high-contrast scenes, such as the one below, the Xperia 1 IV changed exposure behavior slightly. In this kind of condition, clipping was more noticeable in the shadow areas than in the highlights, resulting in underexposed foreground subjects. In comparison, the Xperia 5 IV maintained better subject exposure while producing more clipped highlights in the brighter background.

Sony Xperia 1 IV – Underexposed subjects, slight highlight clipping
Sony Xperia 5 IV – Strong highlight clipping, good subject exposure
Google Pixel 7 – Highlight clipping, good subject exsposure

[glossary_exclude]Color[/glossary_exclude]

108

Sony Xperia 1 IV

119

[glossary_exclude]Google Pixel 7 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Color is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors but we respect a manufacturer's choice of color signature.

Color performance on the Xperia 1 IV was decent but left some room for improvement. When shooting in daylight conditions, a pinkish color cast was often noticeable. Under other types of lighting, the color response tended to be slightly warm but pleasant.

Sony Xperia 1 IV – Slight pink cast is visible
Sony Xperia 5 IV – Pink cast less noticeable
Google Pixel 7 – Neutral white balance

In addition to the pinkish cast mentioned above, in some daylight portrait shots skin-tone rendering was unnatural.

Sony Xperia 1 IV – Inaccurate skin tones
Sony Xperia 5 IV – Slightly inaccurate skin tones
Google Pixel 7 – Accurate skin tones

[glossary_exclude]Autofocus[/glossary_exclude]

95

Sony Xperia 1 IV

116

[glossary_exclude]Huawei Mate 50 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus repeatability, shooting time delay, and depth of field. Shooting delay is the difference between the time the user presses the capture button and the time the image is actually taken. It includes focusing speed and the capability of the device to capture images at the right time, what is called 'zero shutter lag' capability. Even if a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single subject portrait or close-up shot, it can also be a problem in some specific conditions such as group portraits; Both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from infinity to close-up objects and in low light to outdoor conditions.

In our testing, the Sony Xperia 1 IV autofocus was a little slower and less consistent than on some rivals. Our testers measured quite a long delay between pressing the shutter and the actual capture. While focus locked on precisely most of the time, a variation in focus time was quite noticeable in low light and under indoor conditions. We also noticed slight focus inaccuracies in some high-contrast shots.

[glossary_exclude]Autofocus irregularity and speed: 100Lux Δ7EV TL84 Handheld[/glossary_exclude]
This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed and also zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 100Lux with TL84 illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. On this scenario, the backlit panels in the scene are set up to simulate a fairly high dynamic range: the luminance ratio between the brightest point and a 18% reflective gray patch is 7, which we denote by a Exposure Value difference of 7. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.

Depth of field was wider on the Sony Xperia 1 IV than on the Google Pixel 7, allowing for better sharpness on subjects that were located further back in the scene. This can be an advantage in group portraits.

Sony Xperia 1 IV
Background subject in focus
Google Pixel 7
Background subject slightly out of focus

[glossary_exclude]Texture[/glossary_exclude]

97

Sony Xperia 1 IV

114

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in the bright and dark areas of the image. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC) and the Dead Leaves chart.

[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for tripod and handheld conditions[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

Photos captured in bright daylight showed good texture, but compared to the Xperia 5 IV and Pixel 7 some loss of detail was noticeable. Our testers also observed a loss of detail in high-contrast scenes and in low light, but texture rendering remained natural across all light conditions.

Sony Xperia 1 IV - Outdoor texture
Sony Xperia 1 IV - Loss of detail
Sony Xperia 5 IV - Outdoor texture
Sony Xperia 5 IV - Slight loss of detail
Google Pixel 7 - Outdoor texture
Google Pixel 7 - Good detail

[glossary_exclude]Noise[/glossary_exclude]

91

Sony Xperia 1 IV

116

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, landscapes, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Noise on moving objects is also evaluated on natural images. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

[glossary_exclude]Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

Image noise was somewhat more noticeable on the Xperia 1 IV than on some rivals. Luminance noise was usually visible in all conditions, especially in areas of plain color. We also observed some of the more intrusive chromatic noise when shooting under indoor conditions or in low light. Overall, the Xperia 1 IV behaved the same as the Xperia 5 IV in terms of noise control.

Sony Xperia 1 IV - Outdoor noise
Sony Xperia 1 IV - Noise
Sony Xperia 5 IV - Outdoor noise
Sony Xperia 5 IV - Noise
Google Pixel 7 - Outdoor noise
Google Pixel 7 - Noise well under control

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

67

Sony Xperia 1 IV

81

[glossary_exclude]Google Pixel 6[/glossary_exclude]

The artifacts evaluation looks at lens shading, chromatic aberrations, geometrical distortion, edges ringing, halos, ghosting, quantization, unexpected color hue shifts, among others type of possible unnatural effects on photos. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.

[glossary_exclude]Main photo artifacts penalties[/glossary_exclude]

Ringing and color quantization were the most noticeable image artifacts on the Xperia 1 IV. Ringing was often visible on high-contrast edges, for example around objects in front of a brighter background, especially when shooting indoors or in low light. Our testers also reported some ghosting and fusion artifacts when shooting moving subjects. In some images, we also saw a slight lack of sharpness around the edges of the frame.

Sony Xperia 1 IV - Artifacts
Sony Xperia 1 IV - Loss of acutance in the field

 

Sony Xperia 1 IV - Artifacts
Sony Xperia 1 IV - Ringing on edges

[glossary_exclude]Bokeh[/glossary_exclude]

55

Sony Xperia 1 IV

80

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

Bokeh is tested in one dedicated mode, usually portrait or aperture mode, and analyzed by visually inspecting all the images captured in the lab and in natural conditions. The goal is to reproduce portrait photography comparable to one taken with a DLSR and a wide aperture. The main image quality attributes paid attention to are depth estimation, artifacts, blur gradient, and the shape of the bokeh blur spotlights. Portrait image quality attributes (exposure, color, texture) are also taken into account.

The Sony’s bokeh mode is overall very similar to the Sony Xperia 5 IV’s mode. It produced nice images with a natural blur gradient. In addition, spotlights in the background were rendered in a natural way. However, our testers observed some unwanted artifacts at the transition from blurred to sharp areas of the image. These artifacts occurred unexpectedly and did not follow a specific pattern, reducing the overall quality of the blur effect. Moreover, colors were not always true to reality, especially in indoor light conditions.

Sony Xperia 1 IV - Bokeh mode
Sony Xperia 1 IV - Depth estimation failure, visible green cast
Sony Xperia 5 IV - Bokeh mode
Sony Xperia 5 IV - Depth estimation failure, slight green cast
Google Pixel 7 - Bokeh mode
Google Pixel 7 - Slight depth estimation failure, neutral white balance

The Xperia 1 IV blurs the parts of the scene between camera and main subject, not just the background. While this is a good thing, the foreground blur gradient was not always smooth and natural.

Sony Xperia 1 IV – Highlight clipping in background, slightly unnatural blur gradient, depth artifact
Sony Xperia 5 IV – Highlight clipping in background, slightly unnatural blur gradient, slight depth artifact
Google Pixel 7 – Wide dynamic range, unnatural blur gradient, slight depth artifact

Dynamic range was quite drastically reduced in bokeh mode compared to standard photo mode. In this backlit scene, the bright background was noticeably more clipped in the bokeh mode image.

Sony Xperia 1 IV – Bokeh mode – strong highlight clipping
Sony Xperia 1 IV – standard mode – slight highlight clipping

[glossary_exclude]Preview[/glossary_exclude]

59

Sony Xperia 1 IV

91

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Preview tests analyze the image quality of the camera app's preview of the image, with particular attention paid to the difference between the capture and the preview, especially regarding dynamic range and the application of the bokeh effect. Also evaluated is the smoothness of the exposure, color, and focus adaptation when zooming from the minimal to the maximal zoom factor available. The preview frame rate is measured using the LED Universal Timer.

The preview image showed several differences to the final capture, the main one being exposure. In high-contrast scenes, highlight clipping was noticeably stronger in the preview image.

Sony Xperia 1 IV – Capture – Clipping in the sky
Sony Xperia 1 IV – Preview – Strong clipping in the sky
Google Pixel 7 – Capture – Bokeh mode
Google Pixel 7 – Preview – Same dynamic range, some noise on subject

[glossary_exclude]Zoom[/glossary_exclude]

116

Sony Xperia 1 IV

156

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic5 Pro[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Zoom tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate over 400 test images in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor, and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings and pinch zoom at various zoom factors from ultra wide to very long-range zoom. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting the images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements of chart mages captured in the lab under different conditions from 20 to 1000 lux and color temperatures from 2300K to 6500K.

The Sony Xperia 1 IV comes with a 16mm ultra-wide camera. In our tests, the Sony’s ultra-wide images showed a slight loss of detail and, like the primary camera, a limited dynamic range. Noise was noticeable in most shots but overall fairly well under control – higher than the Xperia 5 IV in daylight, but lower in low light.

At tele zoom settings, the Sony Xperia 1 IV did a good job at preserving detail, scoring better than both the Xperia 5 IV and the Google Pixel 7. The device’s longer tele allows it to preserve more detail than the Xperia 5 IV at medium and long range. On the other hand, at close range, texture looks less natural and most detail is lost.

[glossary_exclude]Sony Xperia 1 IV Zoom Scores[/glossary_exclude]
This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length. Zooming-in scores are displayed on the right and Zooming-out scores on the left.
Video Zoom

The Xperia 1 IV does not support the pinch zoom gesture for switching between the ultra-wide primary and tele camera modules, offering zoom buttons only. This makes changing zoom levels slightly uncomfortable. In video mode, the jumps between cameras were quite noticeable, with a change in texture and color between camera modules.

[glossary_exclude]Wide[/glossary_exclude]

102

Sony Xperia 1 IV

117

[glossary_exclude]Huawei Mate 50 Pro[/glossary_exclude]

These tests analyze the performance of the ultra-wide camera at several focal lengths from 12 mm to 20 mm. All image quality attributes are evaluated, with particular attention paid to such artifacts as chromatic aberrations, lens softness, and distortion. Pictures below are an extract of tested scenes.

When shooting with the ultra-wide camera, slight noise was often visible but detail was overall rendered fairly nicely.

Sony Xperia 1 IV - Ultra-wide
Sony Xperia 1 IV -Slight loss of detail, noise
Sony Xperia 5 IV - Ultra-wide
Sony Xperia 5 IV - Slight loss of detail, noise
Google Pixel 7 - Ultra - wide
Google Pixel 7 - Visible loss of detail, slight noise

[glossary_exclude]Tele[/glossary_exclude]

83

Sony Xperia 1 IV

116

[glossary_exclude]Honor Magic4 Ultimate[/glossary_exclude]

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 40 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and detail. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.
[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

At close range, the Xperia 1 IV images showed a considerable loss of detail compared to its rivals in this test. This is because in close range, the Xperia 1 IV is still using its primary camera and performs a digital zoom into the frame, whereas the Xperia 5 IV already switched to its tele module.

Sony Xperia 1 IV - Close range tele
Sony Xperia 1 IV - Strong loss of detail
Sony Xperia 5 IV - Close range tele
Sony Xperia 5 IV - Loss of detail
Google Pixel 7 - Close range tele
Google Pixel 7 - Loss of detail

However, when shooting at a long range, images showed better detail than the Xperia 5 IV and the Google Pixel 7. A lack of contrast was noticeable, though.

Sony Xperia 1 IV - Long range tele
Sony Xperia 1 IV - Soft detail, low contrast
Sony Xperia 5 IV - Long range tele
Sony Xperia 5 IV - Lack of detail, better contrast
Google Pixel 7 - Long range tele
Google Pixel 7 - Lack of detail, better contrast

[glossary_exclude]Video[/glossary_exclude]

112

Sony Xperia 1 IV

149

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]
About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2.5 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 1 to 1000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

The Xperia 1 IV’s video mode offered a smooth and accurate autofocus as well as effective video stabilization. Our testers also found detail to be quite sharp when recording in bright light but, like for still images, dynamic range was limited, resulting in highlight and shadow clipping. We also saw some exposure and white balance instabilities.

[glossary_exclude]Sony Xperia 1 IV Video scores[/glossary_exclude]
Video tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.

[glossary_exclude]Exposure[/glossary_exclude]

73

Sony Xperia 1 IV

115

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness of the main subject and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.

Like in photo mode, the camera’s dynamic range was quite limited when shooting video. Subject exposure was accurate but the exposure often oscillated in daylight and under consistent indoor lighting. These instabilities resulted in highlight clipping in the sky, as can be seen in the sample below.

Sony Xperia 1 IV – Exposure instabilities, good target exposure

Sony Xperia 5 IV – Slight exposure instabilities, subject slightly underexposed

Google Pixel 7 – Very slight exposure instabilities, accurate target exposure

[glossary_exclude]Color[/glossary_exclude]

83

Sony Xperia 1 IV

117

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

The Sony Xperia 1 IV captured quite pleasant color in video mode, despite the occasional appearance of a slight pink or blue cast in bright light.  A warm white balance was noticeable in low light and under indoor conditions. The effect was mostly pleasant but could be too strong in very low light.

Sony Xperia 1 IV – Warm white balance, stable color

Sony Xperia 5 IV – Neutral white balance, slight instabilities

Google Pixel 7 – Neutral white balance, stable color

[glossary_exclude]Autofocus[/glossary_exclude]

110

Sony Xperia 1 IV

117

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

The Xperia 1 IV’s video autofocus performance was quite consistent, usually without any instabilities. In addition, focus transitions were generally quite smooth.

Sony Xperia 1 IV – Smooth and stable autofocus

Sony Xperia 5 IV – Smooth and stable autofocus

Google Pixel 7 – Smooth and stable autofocus

[glossary_exclude]Texture[/glossary_exclude]

83

Sony Xperia 1 IV

115

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra[/glossary_exclude]

Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural videos recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of details in the bright and areas as well as in the dark. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

[glossary_exclude]DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

In our texture tests, the Xperia 1 IV tended to provide better detail than the Xperia 5 IV in perceptual real-life scenes but that was not always the case for objective lab measurements, depending on the test setup used. In this sample scene, the Xperia 1 IV captured better subject detail. This said, despite the sharper edge detail, the texture was not as detailed as on the Google Pixel 7.

Sony Xperia 1 IV - Video detail
Sony Xperia 1 IV - Sharp edges, slight loss of detail
Sony Xperia 5 IV - Video detail
Sony Xperia 5 IV - Loss of detail
Google Pixel 7 - Video detail
Google Pixel 7 - Good detail

[glossary_exclude]Noise[/glossary_exclude]

113

Sony Xperia 1 IV

118

[glossary_exclude]Samsung Galaxy A23 5G[/glossary_exclude]

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise in the dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

[glossary_exclude]Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.
[glossary_exclude]Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level[/glossary_exclude]
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

Luminance noise was generally well controlled in videos but became more intrusive as the lights were dimmed. In indoor and low light conditions, the Xperia 1 IV’s target exposure was also lower than with the Google Pixel 7, which explains the Sony’s lower noise levels and the Pixel 7’s lower noise score.

Sony Xperia 1 IV - Video noise
Sony Xperia 1 IV - Noise
Sony Xperia 5 IV - Video noise
Sony Xperia 5 IV - Noise
Google Pixel 7 - Video noise
Google Pixel 7 - Slight noise

[glossary_exclude]Stabilization[/glossary_exclude]

105

Sony Xperia 1 IV

117

[glossary_exclude]Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max[/glossary_exclude]

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jello artifacts and residual motion blur on walk and run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

Video stabilization was very effective, resulting in smooth frame motion when walking or running while recording. However, some sharpness differences between frames were noticeable. When hand-holding the device in a static position, hand movements were counteracted effectively.

Sony Xperia 1 IV – Some camera shake, very slight sharpness differences between frames

Sony Xperia 5 IV – Some camera shake, slight sharpness differences between frames

Gooel Pixel 7 – Less camera shake, slight sharpness differences between frames

[glossary_exclude]Artifacts[/glossary_exclude]

82

Sony Xperia 1 IV

86

[glossary_exclude]Xiaomi 12S Ultra[/glossary_exclude]

Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as aliasing, quantization, blocking, and hue shift, among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below.

[glossary_exclude]Main video artifacts penalties[/glossary_exclude]

The Xperia 1 IV did a good job at managing video artifacts. Our testers noticed a judder effect that was mostly visible during panning movements, quite frequent ringing, and aliasing on fine detail in pretty much all conditions.

Sony Xperia 1 IV – Judder effect

Sony Xperia 5 IV – Judder effect

Google Pixel 7 – Judder effect

 

The post Sony Xperia 1 IV Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

]]>
https://www.dxomark.com/sony-xperia-1-iv-camera-test/feed/ 0 Sony Xperia 1 IV CAMERA CAMERA HelloMotion_SonyXperia1IV_05-00 ArtOnTablet_SonyXperia1IV_05-00 01_DocScan_SonyXperia1IV_DxOMark 01_DocScan_SonyPDX224_DxOMark 01_DocScan_GooglePixel7_DxOMark RainbowUmbrella_SonyXperia1IV_05-00 RainbowUmbrella_SonyPDX224_05-00 RainbowUmbrella_GooglePixel7_05-00 BacklitGroup_SonyXperia1IV_05-00 BacklitGroup_SonyPDX224_05-00 BacklitGroup_GooglePixel7_05-00 Amadeus_SonyXperia1IV_05-00 Amadeus_SonyPDX224_05-00 Amadeus_GooglePixel7_05-00 FaceToFace_SonyXperia1IV_05-00 FaceToFace_SonyPDX224_05-00 FaceToFace_GooglePixel7_05-00 StreetSit_SonyXperia1IV_05-00 StreetSit_SonyPDX224_06-00 StreetSit_GooglePixel7_06-00 HelloStill_SonyXperia1IV_05-00 HelloStill_SonyXperia1IV_05-00_nb PoleHDR_SonyXperia1IV_05-00 PoleHDRPreview_SonyXperia1IV_01-00 PoleHDR_GooglePixel7_05-00 PoleHDRPreview_GooglePixel7_DxOMark_01-00