<- beginning belly section -> <- top picture box: image forc & eacute; e agrave;! 300px wide ->
Here is a comparison of the minutes of the two sensors, from images provided by the site SamMobile. . The differences are difficult to distinguish, but the Sony sensor seems to offer a slightly better picture. Nothing to really scream foul, but purists will make a difference
(Enlarge images to see native resolution!)
. <- /> imageVentrale block ->
In flat areas, luminance noise management is largely improved at Sony!. Moreover, in low light, the Sony sensor better emphasizes the details
:
. <- block ventral image forced é ea 640px wide -> The result is very similar. But the colorimetric sensor of the Sony seems more just at the grass
:
. <- block ventral image forced é ea 640px wide -> The Samsung sensor seems to amplify certain colors, even in low light. At Sony, the colors appear duller but more natural, and details a bit sharper (see entries)
. <- block ventral image: image forced dé ea 640px wide ->
At Samsung, the colors look more natural, but the management of digital noise is thinner at Sony, revealing more details
<- block ventral picture.! image forc & eacute; ea 640px wide -> <- /> imageVentrale block ->
In this decision almost macro view results are almost identical
<- ventral image block: forced é!.! ;! ea 640px wide -> <- /> imageVentrale block ->
Here, the image is slightly piqued Sony side, with better treatment of textures and a microwave contrast slightly mastered.
<- block ventral image:! image forced dé ea 640px wide -> <- /> imageVentrale block ->
Again, the picture is more clearly piqued at Sony, without falling into the overemphasis. We therefore obtain a better impression of depth
.
No comments:
Post a Comment