6 double camera phone Hengping | Who exactly the closest SLR?

The year 2017 is the year when the two cameras are really popular. During this year, a large number of dual camera phones flooded into the market, and some of the new ones did not have two rear cameras. There seemed to be no release at all. However, After experiencing a large number of dual camera phones, we found that many mobile phone dual camera is simply a gimmick, its bokeh ability not to say 'spike SLR' 'crack my friends circle', shoot full of flaws to the social map Applications even make people joke.Nowadays, we have invited representatives of six brands of dual cameras, take a look at exactly who took the bokeh photos closest SLR.

The parameters of the test equipment are as follows: millet Note 3 (2X focal length and depth of the double photo), OPPO R11s (1X and 1.6X dual focus depth and double photo), vivo X20 (1X focal length and depth of the double photo) , Meizu PRO 7 (1X focal length dual shooting) and glory V10 (1X ~ 2X zoom depth and double shooting).

As we all know, the reason why the depth of field dual camera phone shoot bokeh photos, because the phone's ISP and DSP to determine the edge of the object and the focal plane after the software to take the post-virtualization effect 'PS' up, in simple terms This 'Shallow Depth of View' is all software post-effects, with the physical large-aperture SLR camera shoot true shallow depth of field is not the same thing.Therefore, if the shooting screen composition is too complicated, the object is difficult to identify the edge or Focal plane too much, are likely to result in the failure to determine the blurring, and thus 'rollovers'. The first group of contrast, the first on the phone are not embarrassed, with the simplest composition to solve the problem.

'Click the following proofs to see the uncompressed original'

Millet Note 3 proofs, whether it is the fineness of the object matting or the focal plane of the judgment is not a problem, the edge of the screen railings did not appear Liangbian phenomenon, even the rust burr are sharply presented, indicating that the millet Note 3 object edge judgment and focal plane decision algorithm are more mature, and can be combined with a better. To say that the only fly in the fly, it should be the degree of virtualization is too light, and some not enough .As for the screen white balance is not serious Accurate phenomenon, which belongs to the problem of millet camera software tuning, and our evaluation of the relevance of this dual camera has nothing to do, so follow-up sample comparison is no longer involved.

OPPO R11s 1.6X focal length imaging closer to the usual SLR portrait lens, the scene is more favorable for the filming, which first of all to give a praise. Now R11s can take two focal length of the bokeh photos, we simply put this Two are taken out and have a look.Oppo R11s these two proofs are not on the virtual effect of 'rollover', it seems the basic skills of the green plant is also very solid.As the sensor area and the lens aperture than millet Note 3 freshman Circle, OPPO R11s dual camera imaging tolerance is completely higher than the millet a realm; and in the more aggressive portrait mode metering, R11s out of film brightness is higher, the overall look better.However, OPPO R11s and millet Note 3 has the same weakness, that is, the degree of weakness is too light.

Vivo X20 possesses the function of stepless adjustment of the degree of blurring. After we set it to the highest level, the vehicles on the viaduct on the proofs have been 'milky' into a standard circular spot, and the bottom of the railing actually has a gradient Effect traces, it seems to be trying to imitate the full SLR with a large aperture lens imaging However, vigorous blur also exposed the lack of X20 basic skills of the horse, you can see the left side of the proof railings rust burr ' Careful 'virtual out, the bottom of the picture four railings blur degree varies, the entire picture is not as millet Note 3 and OPPO R11s clean, look at the original picture can be seen flaws.

The virtual degree of vivo X20 is basically the same Jinli S11S even worse, the circular spot on the viaduct 'too careless' done too much too obvious too, has become a small sun, this is too contrived visual effects processing Not true, and the other parts of the picture of the degree of blurring does not match; S11S proofs near the edge of the railing also has a large number of bright edges, be considered digging carefully not pan.In summary, Jin Li S11S and vivo X20 This group of proofs contrast in the situation is similar, are the picture is not clean, drag the slightest problem.

Compared with proofs of this Meizu PRO 7, Jin Li S11S can be regarded as conscience of the industry. Deficiency degree of the same burst of it with great heart of the matting technology, successfully promoted to the first round of comparison of this evaluation revealed true The body of the 'double camera can not be used' point open this proofs, you do not see any clean edge of the railing, red rice Pro successors ah ... ...

Glory V10 dual camera can be any zoom between 1X and 2X focal length, but also has a virtual degree and vivo X20 similar adjustment function, the creation of space than the other 5 participating mobile phones have to be greater.In order not to take up too much Length, we only select 1X focal length and 2X focal length of the two proofs for analysis.Although the glory of V10 proofs most of the matting process are in place, but it will always be unclear rollovers appear, such as 1X focal length proofs The bottom was inexplicable out of the railings, after we repeated imaging test, there is no way to eliminate it, it puzzling.

Just the first round, the object edge and the focal plane are a very simple scene, we can at least measure the phone is divided into three categories, respectively, the highest availability of millet Note 3, OPPO R11s; second-rate but still be able to use Vivo X20 and Jinlian S11S, and the careful use of the Meizu PRO 7 and Glory V 10. Next, let's take a look at the scene of a complex object edge + multi-layer focal plane to see if the classification conclusion is correct.

Millet Note 3 is really hard, it can basically show the near-far three layers of focal plane gradient, the picture between the two Tuo Cong edge of the cutout is basically no flaws; Unfortunately, the upper right corner of the screen to determine the failure of the focal plane So that part of the conifer and the sky 'integrated', and we guess that the algorithm of millet Note 3 to convolute this part of the needle to the turtles that faraway, bring such result. Anyway, millet Note 3 can be so Child abuse scene shot such a photo, it is not easy.

The first set of proofs is not at all virtual OPPO R11s this time suddenly opened the "卍 solution to blur mode", gives a very clear gradient blur impression.But after all, the edge of this scene is too complicated, the picture However, R11s in this set of proofs is still better than the millet Note 3, not only because the latter The proof of tolerance is too low lead to the body of the picture is too dark, but also because the former did not leave more flaws, but magnified in the heavier blemished sense of presence only.

Earlier we said that, vivo X20 and millet Note 3, OPPO R11s than that, is the problem of matting is not clean enough; but when the edge of the object becomes extremely complex, the only drawback is also infinitely enlarged. Photo was placed on Weibo and friends circles, it is estimated that only one harvest of 'no PS traces' of the kind of comments ... ... ... ... then, vivo imaging color processing really please the eye, if the basic function of double camera and then solid A little, shoot shallow depth of field photo is absolutely beautiful to burst.

Forgive me when I saw the photo of Jin Li S11S laughed, the half-empty buildings in the upper right corner of the screen, as well as the left side of the screen sculpture, it is too cattle B, I saw they have sharp knife-sharp Edge and creamy inside ... ... In addition to this serious 'rollover', the ground surface of the lower left corner of the Jin Li S11S proofs also exposed, had wanted to be a gradient, but unfortunately self-defeating, and even the most basic focal plane Judgment is wrong.

Meizu PRO 7 photos and the same as the Jinli S11S, is completely unusable. Picture of the main surface of the bush actually showing half the imaginary half wonders, this tree is afraid to eat; the right corner of the building and the Jinli S11S the same , It is dumbfounding; the rest of the problem is gone, but by these two points, sentenced to death is not enough?

In this group comparison, glory V10 2X zoom proofs and the first group of the same as no problem, but this phone is afraid of the wide-angle end of view, for it, the picture of the less the better (laughs). Prove that this conjecture is correct, glory V10 1X focal length proofs have the same with the Meizu PRO 7 'virtual reality combined with the surface of the tree' proofs decisive scrapped.

After the second round of competition, we have been able to basically rank for these reference mobile phones: OPPO R11s is no doubt in the first place, only the tolerance to the former millet Note 3 followed Second; vivo X20 in the third place, Jin S11S fall from the original second echelon, and Meizu PRO 7, glory tied for V10 fourth. The final third round of testing, we must find ways to the fourth , Fifth and sixth are also discharged.

As the sensor area is too small, coupled with F / 2.6 small aperture lens, millet Note 3 in the dark double-camera imaging is completely unable to see ... ... So, the camera module into the light not only affects the imaging tolerance, Night shot is also the most directly affected part of this campaign millet Note 3 regret 'rollover'.

However, with the F / 1.7 large aperture lens OPPO R11s also can not be spared.To not take the joke 'rollover' photos, R11s very vociferously rejected our shooting requirements, and cast a line prompt on the screen : "Need more light." It seems that OPPO is aware of the low availability of bi-photographic images under dark light. 'You do not want to see me turning the car?

vivo X20 a bit 'King over the bow' means that there is no 'lack of light' related tips, did not refuse to shoot directly take up a steering wheel to pull the unidentified object of the proofs; not only that, we also found Vivo X20's dual camera and did not go through the blue factory powerful noise removal algorithm to enhance the details of the deal, the entire photo appears to be very rough. Is it right? Single and dual camera film so separate treatment? (Manual pull the nose)

Jin Li S11S proofs once again 'big shot', and vivo X20 compared to its blur even more unscrupulous, the picture on the left side of the windshield actually appeared unexplained unknown human science scene, after reading photos, I only think that there's extra alien black technology in my car, and the S11S simply does not prompt you to 'not enough light,' and obviously has confidence in yourself.

Meizu PRO 7 is probably through this proofs anti-Jin Li S11S. Near COSCO three depth of field was successfully restored it, windshield outside the landscape and the steering wheel are imaginary, this is the scene of this However, by the edge of the steering wheel, the windshield still appeared some unclean picture processing, the car dashboard around with the virtual interior parts empathy.

In this group of proofs comparison, glory V10 picture flaws range between vivo X20 and Jin Li S11S, belong to 'flaw obvious, but not to science can not explain' category.In many shooting, we found that the glory of V10 does not and Meizu PRO 7 try to make the same three depth of field effect - that is to say, both layers are over, plus a layer into, for fear that this film into a mosaic.

After comparing the darkness with the double photographic images of the dark scenes, we finally managed to release the full rankings of the 6 mobile phones under test - from high to low, namely OPPO R11s, Xiaomi Note 3, Vivo X20, Meizu PRO 7, Glory V10 and Jin Li S11S.

The reason why the Meizu anti-kill to the fourth, its efforts close to the real scene of the dark double camera made a great contribution; OPPO and millet although unable to shoot in the dark double-camera photos, but their daytime dual camera are The least flaw; given the time we take pictures of girlfriends generally concentrated in the daytime, care about the dual performance of the user choose OPPO R11s and millet Note 3 are good.

With the six popular dual-camera mobile phones have shown their strength, the two-camera showdown in 2017, the basic can come to an end and we sincerely hope that the manufacturers in the number of double camera at the same time, the quality can be put In a more important position, no more double shots, three shots or even four shots were made into a gimmick that could only be used on promotional pages.

The year 2017 is the year when the two cameras are really popular. In this year, a large number of dual camera phones were flooded into the market, and the new ones in the family did not have two rear cameras. There seemed to be no face release at all. However, After experiencing a large number of dual camera phones, we found that many mobile phone dual camera is simply a gimmick, its bokeh ability not to say 'spike SLR' 'crack my friends circle', shoot full of flaws to the social map Applications even make people joke.Nowadays, we have invited representatives of six brands of dual cameras, take a look at exactly who took the bokeh photos closest SLR.

The parameters of the test equipment are as follows: millet Note 3 (2X focal length and depth of the double photo), OPPO R11s (1X and 1.6X dual focus depth and double photo), vivo X20 (1X focal length and depth of the double photo) , Meizu PRO 7 (1X focal length dual shooting) and glory V10 (1X ~ 2X zoom depth and double shooting).

As we all know, the reason why the depth of field dual camera phone shoot bokeh photos, because the phone's ISP and DSP to determine the edge of the object and the focal plane after the software to take the post-virtualization effect 'PS' up, in simple terms This 'Shallow Depth of View' is all software post-effects, with the physical large-aperture SLR camera shoot true shallow depth of field is not the same thing.Therefore, if the shooting screen composition is too complicated, the object is difficult to identify the edge or Focal plane too much, are likely to result in the failure to determine the blurring, and thus 'rollovers'. The first group of contrast, the first on the phone are not embarrassed, with the simplest composition to solve the problem.

'Click the following proofs to see the uncompressed original'

Millet Note 3 proofs, whether it is the fineness of the object matting or the focal plane of the judgment is not a problem, the edge of the screen railings did not appear Liangbian phenomenon, even the rust burr are sharply presented, indicating that the millet Note 3 object edge judgment and focal plane decision algorithm are more mature, and can be combined with a better. To say that the only fly in the fly, it should be the degree of virtualization is too light, and some not enough .As for the screen white balance is not serious Accurate phenomenon, which belongs to the problem of millet camera software tuning, and our evaluation of the relevance of this dual camera has nothing to do, so follow-up sample comparison is no longer involved.

OPPO R11s 1.6X focal length imaging closer to the usual SLR portrait lens, the scene is more favorable for the filming, which first of all to give a praise. Now R11s can take two focal length of the bokeh photos, we simply put this Two are taken out and have a look.Oppo R11s these two proofs are not on the virtual effect of 'rollover', it seems the basic skills of the green plant is also very solid.As the sensor area and the lens aperture than millet Note 3 freshman Circle, OPPO R11s dual camera imaging tolerance is completely higher than the millet a realm; and in the more aggressive portrait mode metering, R11s out of film brightness is higher, the overall look better.However, OPPO R11s and millet Note 3 has the same weakness, that is, the degree of weakness is too light.

Vivo X20 possesses the function of stepless adjustment of the degree of blurring. After we set it to the highest level, the vehicles on the viaduct on the proofs have been 'milky' into a standard circular spot, and the bottom of the railing actually has a gradient Effect traces, it seems to be trying to imitate the full SLR with a large aperture lens imaging However, vigorous blur also exposed the lack of X20 basic skills of the horse, you can see the left side of the proof railings rust burr ' Careful 'virtual out, the bottom of the picture four railings blur degree varies, the entire picture is not as millet Note 3 and OPPO R11s clean, look at the original picture can be seen flaws.

The virtual degree of vivo X20 is basically the same Jinli S11S even worse, the circular spot on the viaduct 'too careless' done too much too obvious too, has become a small sun, this is too contrived visual effects processing Not true, and the other parts of the picture of the degree of blurring does not match; S11S proofs near the edge of the railing also has a large number of bright edges, be considered digging carefully not pan.In summary, Jin Li S11S and vivo X20 This group of proofs contrast in the situation is similar, are the picture is not clean, drag the slightest problem.

Compared with proofs of this Meizu PRO 7, Jin Li S11S can be regarded as conscience of the industry. Deficiency degree of the same burst of it with great heart of the matting technology, successfully promoted to the first round of comparison of this evaluation revealed true The body of the 'double camera can not be used' point open this proofs, you do not see any clean edge of the railing, red rice Pro successor ah ... ...

Glory V10 dual camera can be any zoom between 1X and 2X focal length, but also has a virtual degree and vivo X20 similar adjustment function, the creation of space than the other 5 participating mobile phones have to be greater.In order not to take up too much Length, we only select 1X focal length and 2X focal length of the two proofs for analysis.Although the glory of V10 proofs most of the matting process are in place, but it will always be unclear rollovers appear, such as 1X focal length proofs The bottom was inexplicable out of the railings, after we repeated imaging test, there is no way to eliminate it, it puzzling.

Just the first round, the object edge and the focal plane are a very simple scene, we can at least measure the phone is divided into three categories, respectively, the highest availability of millet Note 3, OPPO R11s; second-rate but still be able to use Vivo X20 and Jinlian S11S, and the careful use of the Meizu PRO 7 and Glory V 10. Next, let's take a look at the scene of a complex object edge + multi-layer focal plane to see if the classification conclusion is correct.

Millet Note 3 is really hard, it can basically show the near-far three layers of focal plane gradient, the picture between the two Tuo Cong edge of the cutout is basically no flaws; Unfortunately, the upper right corner of the screen to determine the failure of the focal plane So that part of the conifer and the sky 'integrated', and we guess the algorithm of millet Note 3 to convolute this part of the needle to the turtles that faraway, brought this result. Anyway, millet Note 3 can be so Child abuse scene shot such a photo, it is not easy.

The first set of proofs is not at all virtual OPPO R11s this time suddenly opened the "卍 solution to blur mode", gives a very clear gradient blur impression.But after all, the edge of this scene is too complicated, the picture However, R11s in this set of proofs is still better than the millet Note 3, not only because the latter The proof of tolerance is too low lead to the body of the picture is too dark, but also because the former did not leave more flaws, but magnified in the heavier blemished sense of presence only.

Earlier we said that, vivo X20 and millet Note 3, OPPO R11s than that, is the problem of matting is not clean enough; but when the edge of the object becomes extremely complex, the only drawback is also infinitely enlarged. Photo was placed on Weibo and friends circles, it is estimated that only one harvest of 'no PS traces' of the kind of comments ... ... ... ... then, vivo imaging color processing really please the eye, if the basic function of double camera and then solid A little, shoot shallow depth of field photo is absolutely beautiful to burst.

Forgive me when I saw the photo of Jin Li S11S laughed, the half-empty buildings in the upper right corner of the screen, as well as the left side of the screen sculpture, it is too cattle B, I saw they have sharp knife-sharp Edge and creamy inside ... ... In addition to this serious 'rollover', the ground surface of the lower left corner of the Jin Li S11S proofs also exposed, had wanted to be a gradient, but unfortunately self-defeating, and even the most basic focal plane Judgment is wrong.

Meizu PRO 7 photos and the same as the Jinli S11S, is completely unusable. Picture of the main surface of the bush actually showing half the imaginary half wonders, this tree is afraid to eat; the right corner of the building and the Jinli S11S the same , It is dumbfounding; the rest of the problem is gone, but by these two points, sentenced to death is not enough?

In this group comparison, glory V10 2X zoom proofs and the first group of the same as no problem, but this phone is afraid of the wide-angle end of view, for it, the picture of the less the better (laughs). Prove that this conjecture is correct, glory V10 1X focal length proofs have the same with the Meizu PRO 7 'virtual reality combined with the surface of the tree' proofs decisive scrapped.

After the second round of competition, we have been able to basically rank for these reference mobile phones: OPPO R11s is no doubt in the first place, only the tolerance to the former millet Note 3 followed Second; vivo X20 in the third place, Jin S11S fall from the original second echelon, and Meizu PRO 7, glory tied for V10 fourth. The final third round of testing, we must find ways to the fourth , Fifth and sixth are also discharged.

As the sensor area is too small, coupled with F / 2.6 small aperture lens, millet Note 3 in the dark double-camera imaging is completely unable to see ... ... So, the camera module into the light not only affects the imaging tolerance, Night shot is also the most directly affected part of this campaign millet Note 3 regret 'rollover'.

However, with the F / 1.7 large aperture lens OPPO R11s also can not be spared.To not take the joke 'rollover' photos, R11s very vociferously rejected our shooting requirements, and cast a line prompt on the screen : "Need more light." It seems that OPPO is aware of the low availability of bi-photographic images under dark light. 'You do not want to see me turning the car?

vivo X20 a bit 'King over the bow' means that there is no 'lack of light' related tips, did not refuse to shoot directly take up a steering wheel to pull the unidentified object of the proofs; not only that, we also found Vivo X20's dual camera and did not go through the blue factory powerful noise removal algorithm to enhance the details of the deal, the entire photo appears to be very rough. Is it right? Single and dual camera film so separate treatment? (Manual pull the nose)

Jin Li S11S proofs once again 'big shot', and vivo X20 compared to its blur even more unscrupulous, the picture on the left side of the windshield actually appeared unexplained unknown human science scene, after reading photos, I only think that there's extra alien black technology in my car, and the S11S simply does not prompt you to 'not enough light,' and obviously has confidence in yourself.

Meizu PRO 7 is probably through this proofs anti-Jin Li S11S. Near COSCO three depth of field by it successfully restored, the windshield outside the landscape and the steering wheel are imaginary, this is the scene of this However, by the edge of the steering wheel, the windshield still appeared some unclean picture processing, the car dashboard around with the virtual interior parts empathy.

In this group of proofs comparison, glory V10 picture flaws range between vivo X20 and Jin Li S11S, belong to 'flaw obvious, but not to science can not explain' category.In many shooting, we found that the glory of V10 does not and Meizu PRO 7 try to make the same three depth of field effect - that is to say, both layers are over, plus a layer into, for fear that this film into a mosaic.

After comparing the darkness with the double photographic images of the dark scenes, we finally managed to release the full rankings of the 6 mobile phones under test - from high to low, namely OPPO R11s, Xiaomi Note 3, Vivo X20, Meizu PRO 7, Glory V10 and Jin Li S11S.

The reason why the Meizu anti-kill to the fourth, its efforts close to the real scene of the dark double camera made a great contribution; OPPO and millet although unable to shoot in the dark double-camera photos, but their daytime dual camera are The least flaw; given the time we take pictures of girlfriends generally concentrated in the daytime, care about the dual performance of the user choose OPPO R11s and millet Note 3 are good.

With the six popular dual-camera mobile phones have shown their strength, the two-camera showdown in 2017, the basic can come to an end and we sincerely hope that the manufacturers in the number of double camera at the same time, the quality can be put In a more important position, no more double shots, three shots or even four shots were made into a gimmick that could only be used on promotional pages.