[情報] Cnet測試: iPhone6 vs S6 vs M9 相機先決已回收

看板MobileComm作者notmuchmoney (真的不錯....)時間10年前 (2015/04/06 18:34)推噓51(52推 1噓 57→)

留言110則, 47人參與討論串1/1

Samsung Galaxy S6 vs. HTC One M9, Apple iPhone 6 camera shootout http://tinyurl.com/p5mglbz http://tinyurl.com/lq6coyk Cnet網址裡皆有原解析度大圖參數 Samsung S6: 1600萬像素Sony IMX240 CMOS 鏡頭光圈f/1.9 有光學防抖 HTC One M9: Toshiba T4KA7 CMOS 尺寸為1/2.4" 像素2000萬鏡頭光圈f/2.2 iPhone 6: 800萬像素的CMOS 鏡頭光圈為f/2.2 只有兩組相片開啟HDR(以下會提到) 其餘皆設定Auto模式以下照片從上往下順序為S6 M9 iPhone6 1. 陽光充足的戶外 http://tinyurl.com/n3r6lcz http://tinyurl.com/n4cpcs6 http://tinyurl.com/kaazx6e 1. A sunny day on the pier Here, the M9's picture is the brightest, and while that lightened up the grey sidewalk nicely, some areas of the photo were overexposed, especially in the right-hand corner where the sun was shining. I like the deeper blue sky that the iPhone 6 captured, but objects in the background, like the second dock behind the seagull, looks hazy and more muted compared to the ones from the Galaxy S6 and M9. M9的整體亮度最高灰色的人行道因此亮度夠高拍的很漂亮但有些地方有過曝現象 iPhone6的藍天拍的很漂亮旁邊第二個碼頭比起S6 M9 顯得有點朦朧 2.光線充足的室內 http://tinyurl.com/kwalm23 http://tinyurl.com/k82uxc6 http://tinyurl.com/mcc4brm 2. Eying the top shelf In this well-light indoor photo, I'm partial to the darker blacks and red hues captured with the M9. The shadowing in the middle shelves also lend more depth to the image, in contrast to the iPhone's, which looks hazy around that same area. At full resolution, however, the Galaxy S6 captured more details, particularly in the lettering in the bottles' labels, and the details in the bricks. M9對紅色及黑色色調表現比較突出中間櫃子的陰影也比較黑 iPhone6就顯得比較模糊三星全解析度下磚牆酒瓶標籤等細節比較好 3. 近焦自然光源花草 http://tinyurl.com/oepddz3 http://tinyurl.com/lgs9vlg http://tinyurl.com/pnutzgy 3. Up close with a Stargazer Lily In this set, I prefer the Galaxy S6's picture above all three. Colors really pop, especially the fuchsias, greens, and yellows, without looking too overly-saturated and unrealistic. Even the creases in the leaf to the left have more texture. The M9 comes in at a close second, and the iPhone, while it had the most accurate-looking colors, appeared too bluish and cold to be favored. 三星色彩很漂亮尤其是紫紅色綠色黃色但不至於太過艷及不真實左邊的葉子的紋路也表現出來 HTC居中 iPhone顏色表現最準確但顯得冷色調而沒這麼討喜 4. 色彩鮮明的水果攤位 http://tinyurl.com/l8kpwbp http://tinyurl.com/l4xnbyz http://tinyurl.com/kt7dgyo 4. How do you like them apples? Once again, I'd hand it to the Galaxy S6 on this one. The red and yellow hues are vibrant and have a lot more punch. In turn, the apples in the iPhone look washed out and the Golden Delicious' in the middle appear particularly pale. The M9 is a happy medium between the two (though I still like how the Galaxy S6's photo more) -- the apples come off livelier than the iPhone's, but if you're not a fan of the Galaxy S6's saturated tones, the M9 is more true-to-life. 這組的特點和上一組一樣 S6的飽和度較高尤其是黃色和紅色討喜但不夠真實 M9居中比較接近真實 iPhone6很真實中間的蘋果則顯得比較蒼白 5. 低照度室內 http://tinyurl.com/m8rdcm6 http://tinyurl.com/np7rus2 http://tinyurl.com/qb26yxx 5. Your friendly neighborhood Irish bar This picture was taken in a very low-lit environment. While the Galaxy S6's photo is objectively brighter, I prefer the iPhone's image. Objects are still visible and faces are sharp, but it managed to handle the lighting from the hanging bulbs better, without the same haziness or lens flares you see in the other two. The worst of the three was the M9. Not only did the picture remain dim, but objects looked blurry and grainy compared to the others. S6亮度最高 iPhone6物體跟人臉都表現得很好對光線的處理也比較好懸掛著的燈泡沒有模糊及眩光 M9最差太過昏暗物體比起其他兩個顯得模糊及很多噪點 6. 自然光源室內 http://tinyurl.com/m8chr8g http://tinyurl.com/m8chr8g http://tinyurl.com/l2vkapy 6. A dream kitchen Here, the Galaxy S6 and the iPhone 6 are quite equal. Objects are sharp, lighting is even, and colors are accurately captured. At full resolution, however, you can begin to discern a few differences. Notably, the white flowers in the mid-ground are just a hair sharper on the Galaxy S6. Unfortunately, the M9 once again performed the weakest. The lighting on the top right is overexposed and when you zoom in, the flower petals are blotchy. S6和iPhone6表現相當全解析度下S6的花盆處細節更銳利一點點 M9最差右上方過曝花瓣也表現不佳 7. HDR下的強光室外 http://tinyurl.com/l8pcb9o http://tinyurl.com/ksukn6f http://tinyurl.com/kfmrmkg 7. Sunny days in San Francisco With HDR shooting mode on, I snapped a relatively non-challenging image of a partial San Francisco skyline. Though all three handsets performed well, the M9 had an odd light flare at the bottom right-hand corner. And while I liked the way the sky appeared on the iPhone more (the blue is deeper), the Galaxy S6 had the most even-toned colors overall. The iPhone and the M9, in comparison, was more bluish, with the latter being the most blue. 三者都不錯 M9右下角光線處理怪異 iPhone6天空表現最好 S6顏色最均勻其他兩者背景色調偏藍 8. HDR下的明暗大反差室內 http://tinyurl.com/pofe3ja http://tinyurl.com/q3ha9ev http://tinyurl.com/nkuvoom 8. Tricky lighting at the Slanted Door To see how well the smartphones could handle two different exposures with HDR activated, I took a challenging photo inside a busy restaurant that included bright windows. The Galaxy S6's performance was disappointing. Though it was able to capture the outside environment the best (as you can see with the buildings through the window), the area indoors was too dark. Even after I tried to touch-focus some of the objects from the restaurant, the photo remained underexposed. Both the M9 and the iPhone managed to light the restaurant well, though neither of them could capture objects outside the window well enough. All in all, I'd say the winner of this round was the iPhone, since it was able to retain the details inside the restaurant, while capturing at least some details outdoors. S6表現讓人失望窗外的場景有表現出來但主體的室內太過黑暗甚至在多次調整測光點也未能改善這一情況 M9及iPhone6都能表現出室內的亮度足夠讓人看清室內的場景同時也表現出窗外物體最好的是iPhone6 室內暗處的細節和窗外亮處的細節都有保留下來 9. 室外夜景 http://tinyurl.com/qjc8bke http://tinyurl.com/qhgbtya http://tinyurl.com/modw5zs 9. Night time in the City In another low-light environment, this time outdoors at night, the iPhone took the better photo. Again, all handsets were set in Auto mode, and you can see how Apple's handset didn't capture the lens flares emanating from the stop lights like the other two. The cars and buildings are much more in focus as well, and the iPhone managed to capture some stars in the night sky too. 三星及HTC眩光嚴重 iPhone6表現最好眩光控制不錯汽車及建築物都表現最好甚至還拍出了夜空中閃亮的星星 10. 室內日光燈人像 http://tinyurl.com/l7h9ffq http://tinyurl.com/ktys6vr http://tinyurl.com/novl9t5 10. Sitting pretty indoors with fluorescent lights This indoor image was taken with fluorescent lighting from above. All devices took the picture adequately, but I especially like how deep the purple hues came out with the Galaxy S6. However, you can see it lost some details with the darker black colors, like in Sarah's (middle) black pants and Nick's (right) black shirt. The M9 looks the most washed out, but only barely, compared to all three. Lastly, I liked how the skin tones on the iPhone appeared the most. Particularly noticeable at full resolution, the faces on the iPhone were the most evenly lit and accurately toned. 三者都表現不錯 S6牆上的紫色比較濃郁比較討喜但中間女生的黑褲子和右邊男生的黑色T裇黑色的細節比其他兩支較差 M9有點washed out 三者中 iPhone6對人像膚色的表現最好全解析度下 iPhone6光線最平衡色調最正確 11. 室外陽光人像 http://tinyurl.com/m5ee47c http://tinyurl.com/mk3vp9w http://tinyurl.com/nxkjzm8 11. Sitting pretty outdoors with natural sunlight Again, all phones took this photo well enough, but the Galaxy S6 had a slight edge on this round. It managed to portray a lot more depth and shadowing with the bamboo leaves in the background, while on the M9 and the iPhone they look a tad more washed out. All three faces also look more textured on the Samsung handset, and at full resolution, you can see sharper details on Sharon's (left) purple dress. 同樣的三者表現都不錯 S6背景竹子陰影表現比較深沈全尺寸下人臉的紋路細節及左邊紫色洋裝的細節較多 12. 動態流水拍攝 http://tinyurl.com/nxqzh3n http://tinyurl.com/lxo54ow http://tinyurl.com/pk5j5s8 12. Photos over not-so-troubled water When it comes to these fast-moving fountain water shots, I prefer the iPhone's image. The picture is brighter than the other two, without appearing overexposed, and the blueness of the water looks more natural. In addition, the water droplets are crisper and sharper than the Galaxy S6 and the M9. 三者中iPhone6表現最佳亮度比另外兩者高但並未出現過曝水的顏色表現最自然另外 iPhone6對水珠的表現也最銳利明快 13. 棚拍標準版拍攝 http://tinyurl.com/phn44zj http://tinyurl.com/n4rofsl http://tinyurl.com/oyq8mch 13. Still Life 101 In our standard studio shot, all three devices' photos had sharp objects that were nicely in focus. However, the Galaxy S6 had a yellow-tinged white background, particularly in the center, and its black-to-grey color gradient on the right wasn't as distinguished as the M9 and the iPhone. In addition, the iPhone had the truest and purest white hues. 三者銳利度及對焦都不錯 S6白平衡出現偏黃尤其是中心部分背後的黑色到白色的灰階色板上界線也不像另外兩者明顯 iPhone6再次展現了真實精準乾淨的白平衡結語 After analyzing the photos, I found that all in all, both the Galaxy S6 and the iPhone 6's cameras were far superior to the One M9 -- proving that just because your phone has a high megapixel count, doesn't mean it will take the best pictures. With outdoor environments, the M9 blew out and overexposed light sources more often. Dim, indoor environments are even worse; objects are noticeably more blotchy and grainier when compared to the other two. In addition, unlike the Galaxy S6 and the iPhone 6, both of which render HDR images almost instantaneously, the M9 takes a while to process HDR photos. S6和iPhone6的表現明顯高於M9 再次證明高像素不等於最好的照片 M9室外場景出現較多的過曝而室內低光場景則更差很容易注意到較多的斑點及噪點當另外兩者幾乎馬上合成出HDR照片 M9明顯要花費一段時間才合成出照片 As for the iPhone, its biggest strength is with low-light environments. Though it won't have the brightest exposure in the end per se, its photos are sharper and look more natural. It also reduces the amount of lens flare beaming from different light sources. In addition, its white balance captures the purest and cleanest white hues. 至於iPhone6 最大的強處在於低光場景雖然不是亮度最高但照片拍起來叫銳利也較為自然眩光也控制的最好另外其白平衡也最為乾淨精準純粹 Finally, compared to Apple's handset and the M9, the Galaxy S6 takes livelier and punchier photos, especially when it comes to colorful objects like fruit and flowers that have red, green, and yellow hues. I found myself favoring several photos from the Galaxy S6 simply because they packed a lot more punch and vibrancy. (The downside, of course, is that if you're a stickler for accuracy, you may prefer the iPhone. Though its pictures can look a tad more muted or washed out compared to the Galaxy S6, it is, at the end of the day, more true-to-life.) 相比iPhone6和M9 S6照片艷麗有衝擊力在拍攝水果花朵等有大片紅綠黃色調場景更為討喜作者喜歡一些S6拍出來照片單純因為其更有衝擊力更有活力缺點就是如果喜歡正確色調的人會不喜歡這樣的照片而喜歡比較貼近真實的照片 All in all, the M9 proved a disappointment, while the Galaxy S6 and the iPhone 6 were pretty neck-and-neck. Personally, I'd give the Galaxy S6 the slight edge, since I'm partial to its saturated tones that come off bright without looking too unrealistic (a characteristic that plagued Galaxy cameras before). 最終 iPhone6和S6的表現接近但風格差很多 M9表現則相差一截作者比較喜歡S6一些艷利色調但還不至於看起來太不真實 ======================================================== 乎~ 真長 -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 220.129.122.51 ※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/MobileComm/M.1428316475.A.580.html

推

04/06 18:38, , 1^F

04/06 18:38, 1^F

推

04/06 18:38, , 2^F

04/06 18:38, 2^F

→

04/06 18:38, , 3^F

04/06 18:38, 3^F

推

04/06 18:39, , 4^F

04/06 18:39, 4^F

→

04/06 18:39, , 5^F

04/06 18:39, 5^F

推

04/06 18:41, , 6^F

04/06 18:41, 6^F

推

04/06 18:41, , 7^F

04/06 18:41, 7^F

→

04/06 18:41, , 8^F

04/06 18:41, 8^F

推

04/06 18:41, , 9^F

04/06 18:41, 9^F

→

04/06 18:42, , 10^F

04/06 18:42, 10^F

推

04/06 18:42, , 11^F

04/06 18:42, 11^F

→

04/06 18:42, , 12^F

04/06 18:42, 12^F

推

04/06 18:43, , 13^F

04/06 18:43, 13^F

推

04/06 18:44, , 14^F

04/06 18:44, 14^F

→

04/06 18:44, , 15^F

04/06 18:44, 15^F

推

04/06 18:45, , 16^F

04/06 18:45, 16^F

推

04/06 18:46, , 17^F

04/06 18:46, 17^F

→

04/06 18:46, , 18^F

04/06 18:46, 18^F

噓

04/06 18:46, , 19^F

04/06 18:46, 19^F

推

04/06 18:49, , 20^F

04/06 18:49, 20^F

推

04/06 18:51, , 21^F

04/06 18:51, 21^F

→

04/06 18:51, , 22^F

04/06 18:51, 22^F

推

04/06 18:53, , 23^F

04/06 18:53, 23^F

→

04/06 18:53, , 24^F

04/06 18:53, 24^F

→

04/06 18:54, , 25^F

04/06 18:54, 25^F

推

04/06 18:54, , 26^F

04/06 18:54, 26^F

推

04/06 18:55, , 27^F

04/06 18:55, 27^F

→

04/06 18:55, , 28^F

04/06 18:55, 28^F

→

04/06 18:55, , 29^F

04/06 18:55, 29^F

推

04/06 19:04, , 30^F

04/06 19:04, 30^F

→

04/06 19:04, , 31^F

04/06 19:04, 31^F

→

04/06 19:05, , 32^F

04/06 19:05, 32^F

推

04/06 19:05, , 33^F

04/06 19:05, 33^F

推

04/06 19:05, , 34^F

04/06 19:05, 34^F

→

04/06 19:05, , 35^F

04/06 19:05, 35^F

→

04/06 19:05, , 36^F

04/06 19:05, 36^F

→

04/06 19:06, , 37^F

04/06 19:06, 37^F

→

04/06 19:06, , 38^F

04/06 19:06, 38^F

→

04/06 19:06, , 39^F

04/06 19:06, 39^F

還有 31 則推文

還有 1 段內文

→

04/06 20:36, , 71^F

04/06 20:36, 71^F

→

04/06 20:36, , 72^F

04/06 20:36, 72^F

推

04/06 20:39, , 73^F

04/06 20:39, 73^F

推

04/06 20:41, , 74^F

04/06 20:41, 74^F

→

04/06 20:41, , 75^F

04/06 20:41, 75^F

推

04/06 20:51, , 76^F

04/06 20:51, 76^F

→

04/06 20:52, , 77^F

04/06 20:52, 77^F

→

04/06 20:52, , 78^F

04/06 20:52, 78^F

→

04/06 21:03, , 79^F

04/06 21:03, 79^F

推

04/06 21:12, , 80^F

04/06 21:12, 80^F

→

04/06 21:15, , 81^F

04/06 21:15, 81^F

→

04/06 21:23, , 82^F

04/06 21:23, 82^F

→

04/06 21:23, , 83^F

04/06 21:23, 83^F

→

04/06 21:26, , 84^F

04/06 21:26, 84^F

→

04/06 21:27, , 85^F

04/06 21:27, 85^F

推

04/06 21:28, , 86^F

04/06 21:28, 86^F

推

04/06 21:44, , 87^F

04/06 21:44, 87^F

→

04/06 21:44, , 88^F

04/06 21:44, 88^F

推

04/06 21:44, , 89^F

04/06 21:44, 89^F

→

04/06 21:46, , 90^F

04/06 21:46, 90^F

→

04/06 21:46, , 91^F

04/06 21:46, 91^F

推

04/06 21:55, , 92^F

04/06 21:55, 92^F

→

04/06 21:56, , 93^F

04/06 21:56, 93^F

推

04/06 22:03, , 94^F

04/06 22:03, 94^F

推

04/06 22:27, , 95^F

04/06 22:27, 95^F

推

04/06 22:34, , 96^F

04/06 22:34, 96^F

推

04/06 23:02, , 97^F

04/06 23:02, 97^F

推

04/07 01:30, , 98^F

04/07 01:30, 98^F

推

04/07 02:03, , 99^F

04/07 02:03, 99^F

→

04/07 02:04, , 100^F

04/07 02:04, 100^F

→

04/07 02:52, , 101^F

04/07 02:52, 101^F

推

04/07 04:04, , 102^F

04/07 04:04, 102^F

推

04/07 09:19, , 103^F

04/07 09:19, 103^F

推

04/07 14:26, , 104^F

04/07 14:26, 104^F

推

04/07 22:02, , 105^F

04/07 22:02, 105^F

→

04/07 22:03, , 106^F

04/07 22:03, 106^F

推

04/08 01:02, , 107^F

04/08 01:02, 107^F

→

04/08 01:02, , 108^F

04/08 01:02, 108^F

推

04/08 15:53, , 109^F

04/08 15:53, 109^F

→

04/10 03:36, , 110^F

04/10 03:36, 110^F

‣ 返回看板[ MobileComm ] 資訊

‣ 更多 notmuchmoney 的文章

文章代碼(AID): #1L8c4xM0 (MobileComm)