How Good Is The Pixel 3a Camera

Please note: In September 2019, we updated the DXOMARK Mobile test protocol to coverultra-broad-angle performance and renamed the protocolDXOMARK Camera. We also expanded our depression-calorie-free testing and created the newNight sub-score, which incorporates the previous Wink score. We accept retested this device using the new Wide and Night exam protocols and updated the scores in this review, but we accept not inverse the text from the original review. For more information, please meet the articles about our new Wide and Dark examination protocols.

101

camera

Google Pixel 3a camera review (originally published July nineteen, 2019)

Launched in May 2019, the Pixel 3a is the budget-oriented version of Google'due south flagship Pixel 3 smartphone, available with a 5.half dozen-inch display on the standard version, or with a larger 6.0-inch screen on the 40 model.

The key difference is the chipset, with the less expensive Pixel 3a devices running the more mid-range Snapdragon 670 processor, compared to the top-cease Snapdragon 845 scrap in the Google Pixel 3. There's also a slight difference in screen technology, with the Pixel 3a featuring an OLED brandish, compared to Pixel 3's newer P-OLED LCD. Moreover, the Pixel 3a isn't IP68 rated for dust and water resistance like its more expensive stablemate.

Google has stuck with broadly the aforementioned camera module for all of its Pixel iii and 3a models, nevertheless, which includes a single 12.2Mp sensor coupled to a 28mm-equivalent f/1.eight-aperture lens with optical image stabilization (OIS). Changes to the chipset and image processing tin can touch the overall photography functioning, though, so let's see how the Google Pixel 3a fares under the rigors of a total DxOMark exam.

Cardinal photographic camera specifications:

• Single-photographic camera setup
• 12.2Mp ane/2.55-inch sensor with one.4µm pixels
• 28mm (equivalent) f/one.eight lens with OIS
• Dual-pixel PDAF autofocus
• Dual-LED flash
• 2160@30fps (4K) video or 1080@30fps (default)

About DxOMark Mobile tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone camera reviews, DxOMark engineers capture and evaluate over 1500 examination images and more than than 2 hours of video both in controlled lab environments and in natural indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera's default settings. This commodity is designed to highlight the most of import results of our testing. For more than data almost the DxOMark Mobile examination protocol, click here. More details on how we score smartphone cameras are available here.

Test summary

Achieving an overall DxOMark mobile score of 100 points, the Google Pixel 3a lands in the 2nd tier of our database of smartphone image quality. Although positioned behind many of the contempo dual- and triple-camera flagship devices we've tested, the Google Pixel 3a is merely a signal backside such other single-camera devices as the more expensive Google Pixel 3, equally well as Apple'south budget-oriented iPhone XR (both with 101 points overall). The Google Pixel 3a achieves the aforementioned score of 103 points for all the same photos equally the Pixel 3 and iPhone XR, nevertheless, and all iii devices offering broadly similar image quality, although there are some pocket-sized differences in the strengths and weaknesses amid them.

The Google Pixel 3a's slightly lower overall score is attributable to its score of 95 points for video, compared to 98 for the Google Pixel 3 and 96 for the iPhone XR.

The Google Pixel 3a achieves accurate target exposures with good highlight and detail preservation.

The Google Pixel 3a is capable of adept target exposure in about tested weather, with authentic measurements in our lab analysis under lighting conditions betwixt 10 and chiliad lux. We recorded slight underexposure in depression low-cal (5 lux), but images remain adequate. In our perceptual analysis of exposure when shooting natural scenes, the Pixel 3a by and large delivered accurate target exposures; farther, its HDR processing ensures that detail is reasonably well-preserved in the bright highlight regions, as you lot can see in the heaven in the image below.

The Pixel 3a has a tendency to slightly underexpose in challenging high-dissimilarity scenes, nonetheless, and although this produces images with good contrast, information technology ends up recording less detail in the shadows compared to devices such as the iPhone XR, which provides a stronger HDR effect. This is less problematic in well-balanced lighting conditions, though, and the Pixel 3a generally produces nicely exposed indoor images, too.

Google Pixel 3a, high-contrast scene

Google Pixel 3, high-contrast scene

Apple iPhone XR, high-contrast scene

The Pixel 3a achieves a good score for color, with rendering and white balance very similar to the Pixel 3's. In natural scenes, the Pixel 3a leans towards a slightly cooler/bluer white residual in outdoor shots, with an orange/pink cast indoors and in low-light, only the difference is marginal and overall the colors look good. Our engineers observed some over-saturation of cerise colors, merely as this isn't uncommon with smartphone images, it's non too concerning.

Google Pixel 3a, outdoor colour rendering

Google Pixel three, outdoor color rendering

The Pixel 3a did manage to attain a slightly higher score for color over the Pixel 3 every bit a outcome of better measurements for color response in our lab analysis. As you can see from the charts, the Pixel 3a captures more neutral white balance compared to the Pixel 3 when tested under a range of lighting atmospheric condition.

Google Pixel 3a, color measurement analysis

Google Pixel 3, colour measurement assay

Well-controlled noise is a cardinal strength for the Pixel 3a, and Google has managed to slightly improve results over the Pixel 3 in this regard. The Pixel 3a displays no evidence of any problematic chromatic racket; and levels of luminance racket in flat areas of outdoor images, such as the heaven, as well as indoors and in low-light shots, are generally very acceptable.

Particular preservation is also good, with high levels of acutance over seventy% recorded in static scenes in lighting conditions between 5 to 1000 lux, so it'south just in extreme depression-light atmospheric condition that a lack of item becomes really noticeable. It's not a drastic improvement over the Pixel 3 or the iPhone XR, both of which are good devices for detail preservation, but you can await intricate areas effectually the eye of the frame to be well-divers in most images.

Google Pixel 3a, detail and noise

Google Pixel iii, detail and noise

Apple iPhone XR, detail and noise

Equipped with simply a single photographic camera, the Google Pixel 3a can't quite compete with dual-camera tele-lens devices for close-range zoom shots, but Google'due south avant-garde computational photography processing does a improve-than-average chore for zoom shots. Results are comparable between the Google Pixel 3a and Pixel three, and at close range (~2x magnification), both preserve more fine detail than the iPhone XR. Some dead pixels are visible in low-light zoom shots at close range, also every bit color fringing in outdoor weather condition, only these are really noticeable only when displaying images at large scale. Generally speaking, the Pixel 3a does a good job with a small-scale amount of pinch zoom.

At medium range (~4x), detail is noticeably affected, just you'll get away with it in brilliant light weather condition, specially if you're merely viewing the images on the device's display. Unlike the iPhone XR, the Pixel 3a doesn't limit the zoom range to 4x magnification, so it is possible to capture shots at long-range zoom distances of approximately 8x magnification. Item preservation is low on long-range zoom shots in all lighting atmospheric condition and colour rendering can expect unnatural, but information technology's helpful to have the extra zoom capability when needed.

Google Pixel 3a, close-range zoom

Google Pixel 3, close-range zoom

Apple iPhone XR, close-range zoom

In Portrait mode, the Pixel 3a isn't quite equally strong equally the Pixel 3 for bokeh shots. Although the overall effect betwixt the two devices is similar when effectively applied, the Pixel 3a isn't quite every bit consequent, with differing levels of blur intensity oft applied across consecutive shots. With no dedicated depth-sensing sensor, Google relies on computational imaging to apply a bokeh effect, and although it does an admirable job, it's not every bit effective as the best multi-camera devices. Subject isolation on both devices could be improved, with artifacts or blurring around the edges of the subject oftentimes visible. The blur gradient isn't very well-controlled on the Pixel 3a either, with noticeable steps in the gradient equally the groundwork drops away.

Google Pixel 3a, bokeh simulation

Google Pixel 3, bokeh simulation

Wink shots are another strength for the Pixel 3a, cheers to minimal wink autumn-off towards the corners and well-preserved details. Exposures are pretty good more often than not in both flash-only besides as mixed-lighting shots, although very slight variations in exposure occasionally lead to slightly underexposed shots. Luminance noise is well-managed both on faces and in the flat areas towards the corners (where it's oftentimes more noticeable). A slight pink color cast is visible when using wink under additional tungsten light sources, and the ruby-eye effect is often axiomatic, but skin tones hold up pretty well overall, and wink portraits are more than acceptable.

Google Pixel 3a, flash shot at 0 lux

Google Pixel 3a, flash shot at five lux

We deduct points for noticeable artifacts that touch image quality, and the main business concern with the Pixel 3a is a loss of sharpness in the outer field. Although item towards the eye of the image is pretty good, acutance drops off significantly in the corners—and this is noticeable not simply at big calibration, but fifty-fifty when examining images on the device'south brandish. Other issues such equally ghosting, colour fringing, and ringing are as well evident at close inspection, equally well as some flare in backlit shots, but these issues are less common or non as detrimental to overall image quality.

Google Pixel 3a, loss of sharpness in the field

Google Pixel 3a, color fringing antiquity

Autofocus is another forcefulness for the Pixel 3a, with its dual-pixel PDAF arrangement ensuring fast, accurate, and repeatable results in all lighting conditions. In our benchmark lab testing where we defocus the device between shots and wait either a brusque (500ms) or long (2000ms) filibuster before requesting focus, the Pixel 3a achieves quick response times and consistently delivers in-focus images in all lighting conditions. Moreover, given that we encountered no focus irregularities during our natural exam scene photography sessions, you can exist assured of kickoff-class autofocus performance from the Pixel 3a.

Google Pixel 3a, autofocus performance in low light (twenty lux)

The Google Pixel 3a isn't equally strong for video performance as its more expensive stablemate, and although autofocus is slightly improved and colour is broadly the same, information technology doesn't score quite likewise for exposure, texture, noise, artifacts, or stabilization. That said, the Pixel 3a is more often than not a capable device for video exposure, with accurate target exposures and slightly better preservation of highlight details in bright-lite weather compared to the Pixel 3.

The main problem for video when compared to the Pixel 3 is noticeable underexposure in low light, which has an bear upon on the Pixel 3a's overall score. You tin can see from the two stills taken from videos captured in the lab under 1 lux lighting weather condition that the Pixel iii is capable of usable video in nearly-dark lighting conditions, merely the comparable Pixel 3a video is far as well underexposed to be viable.

Google Pixel 3a, video exposure at 1 lux

Google Pixel 3, video exposure at 1 lux

Color is a key strength for the Pixel 3a's video performance, and aside from a slightly pink white balance cast visible in outdoor images, colors are mostly bright and vivid, and peculiarly so indoors and in low light.

Google Pixel 3a, video color rendering analysis by lighting status

Video noise is well-managed in all lighting weather condition, too, and although it doesn't quite match the Pixel 3's score for racket, it'south not far off. In very low low-cal, temporal noise is broadly the same between the 2 Google devices, and a modest comeback over the iPhone XR. As light levels increase, however, the Pixel 3a displays fractionally more temporal noise compared to the Pixel three (except in very bright calorie-free conditions of k lux), which explains its slightly lower overall noise score.

Google Pixel 3a, temporal noise analysis past lighting condition versus competitors

The difference between the Google devices is a little more significant for video texture, with a greater loss of fine detail axiomatic in the Pixel 3a's movies compared to the Pixel three'southward, which you can see in the grass in the video stills below.

Google Pixel 3a, video texture

Google Pixel 3, video texture

Overall, the Pixel 3a implements a adequately effective stabilization organization for video, so it avoids whatsoever meaning wobbles and judders in static handheld videos as well as in videos captured with walking movements. Our engineers did notice some distracting frame shifts when capturing panning videos, however, with noticeable jumping and a ghosting effect present as the photographic camera pans. This could be explained by the device's less powerful chipset, which isn't able to crunch through the video data quite as effectively as the chipset in the Pixel iii.

Decision

With a slew of bonny mid-range devices at present available in the competitive smartphone market place, there's pressure on the large players to provide more affordable options. Equally such, Google, Apple, and Samsung all at present have more than budget-oriented versions of their flagship devices available to help proceed customers loyal. In the case of the Google Pixel 3a, the most significant difference is its cheaper chipset, so it's not equally powerful as the flagship Pixel 3.

The photography proposition remains broadly the same, still, and the Pixel 3a's single-camera solution boasts the aforementioned basic specifications every bit the more expensive model. Appropriately, paradigm quality for still images is pretty like for the 2 devices, with some differences in white balance and bokeh rendering the main notable exceptions.

Neither model can quite compete with the all-time dual- and triple-camera devices nosotros've tested, only some excellent computational processing ensures that the Pixel 3a remains a very capable device for photography. The Pixel 3a'south less-powerful chipset has more of an bear upon in video quality, however—and again, while it remains a very capable performer for video, some underexposure in low light, loss of detail, and frame shifts when panning mean that it's not quite up in that location with the best.

Photo pros

• Good highlight item in most lighting conditions
• Authentic target exposures
• Generally squeamish colour rendering
• Fast, accurate and repeatable autofocus
• Good detail and coverage using flash

Video pros

• Low dissonance, even in low light
• Fast, accurate and repeatable autofocus
• Brilliant and vivid color, especially indoors and in low light
• Effective stabilization

Photograph cons

• Loss of sharpness in the field
• Underexposure of darker regions outdoors
• Bluish color cast outdoors
• Unnatural field of study isolation and inconsistent blur effect in bokeh shots

Video cons

• Slight pink colour cast outdoors
• Noticeable underexposure in low light
• Low detail in all conditions
• Strong frame shift noticeable in panning videos

In the Press

Source: https://www.dxomark.com/google-pixel-3a-camera-review/

Posted by: connollyliffold.blogspot.com

Share this post