Posted on Leave a comment

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best 1

Vivo believes it has a smartphone worthy of being the best in the industry, and the results from its camera system lend some credence to that claim.

Mentioning the name “Vivo” as a phone brand to many in North America will often be met with a blank stare. Availability is still a major factor in this part of the world, whereas it has built a following in markets like China and India. Vivo is part of a wave of innovation in mobile photography coming from Asia, and the X70 Pro+ is one of the key devices looking to lead the way.

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best 2

It’s also the second flagship the company has released in 2021, and the X70 Pro+ comes only about eight months after it launched the X60 Pro+. That phone was the first to highlight Vivo’s partnership with Zeiss, with a focus on the camera system’s hardware as the key driver. This phone is the reverse, where the software is the defining point to shore up what the X70 Pro+ hardware is capable of.

Vivo still emblazons its flagship with the words, “professional photography,” to indicate its lofty intentions. Whether it meets them or not depends on how you utilize the various tools within the X70 Pro+.

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best 3

Design and Build

Vivo went bigger with this phone, stretching the AMOLED screen to a large 6.78-inches, making it both taller and wider than its predecessor. The screen gets a 2K resolution bump to 3,200 x 1,440, addressing a limitation from the X60 Pro+. It doesn’t hurt to have peak brightness of 1500 nits and either 60Hz or 120Hz screen refresh rates, which can be done automatically through the Smart Switch option (it’s on by default, and better for battery life).

Interestingly, the company also went with a matte finish on the back in lieu of the faux vegan leather of the X60 Pro+. Moreover, it includes a thin bumper case — with a textured leather-style back — in the box to add some protection. It’s hardly rugged, but it does at least keep the rear camera bump a little safer from being totally exposed.

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best 4

Finally, Vivo saw to it to add wireless charging to its best phone, something sorely missing from the X60 Pro+. Under the hood, the X70 Pro+ runs on the same Snapdragon 888 processor, and my review unit had the same 12GB of RAM and 256GB of storage. There are variants with 8GB of RAM and 512GB of storage as well. The storage part matters, since there’s no memory card slot. Shoot a lot in RAW, or edit photos in bunches, and it adds up.

The Extended RAM feature from the previous model also comes back, only there’s a little extra this time. It takes 4GB (instead of 3GB) of idle storage as memory when the system needs a boost, particularly with multitasking or memory-intensive tasks. I never had an idea if it ever kicked in while I was testing this phone.

If there’s one thing that holds this phone back in North America, it may be the lack of support for 5G. It doesn’t work with the Sub-6 and mmWave bands operating in this part of the world, so if you’re cool with 4G LTE, then you will have no problem on that front.

Camera Features

Zeiss’s T* Coating only applied to the main camera on the X60 Pro+, but here, it’s on the entire array. The promise is the same, which is to reduce reflections, stray light, ghosting, and other image artifacts. Vivo claims it also upgraded the glass lenses to “ensure extra-low dispersion for improved image quality.”

The X70 Pro+ uses the same rear camera array as its predecessor, except for one particular difference. What is definitely the same is the 50-megapixel main camera (23mm equivalent), which retains the same 1/1.3-inch Ultra-sensing Samsung ISOCELL GN1 sensor with an f/1.57 aperture. It also retains the 100-megapixel High-Resolution mode to maximize the size of the sensor.

The 48-megapixel ultra-wide camera (14mm equivalent) uses the same Sony IMX598 sensor, including a 114-degree field of view. A newer addition is the Gimbal embedded in it, which uses Vivo’s own 360-degree Horizon Leveling Stabilization technology to steady both still images and video as you shoot them.

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best 5

Things start to differ in the two telephoto lenses. Rather than bring back the 32-megapixel telephoto that was for portraits in the X60 Pro+, Vivo opted to go with a 12-megapixel Sony IMX663 sensor. It maintains the 2x optical zoom (50mm equivalent), yet has a much wider aperture at f/1.6 (vs. f/2.1), larger 1.22 Micron pixels (vs. 0.8), and has optical image stabilization (as opposed to not having it at all). The 8-megapixel periscope telephoto with 5x optical zoom (125mm equivalent) is a carryover from the previous model. The same is true of the front-facing camera.

Vivo did add what it believes is a key component to help the whole array in the form of its own Imaging Chip V1. This is essentially the company’s proprietary image signal processor, and one advantage, apart from better power consumption, is the much brighter image preview in low-light and night conditions.

Software Features

As I noted before, Vivo emphasizes its software computation as a means to producing better shots. That’s not just because of the sheer breadth of shooting modes and settings available to start with on the X70 Pro+, it’s also about how Vivo wants its own chipset to render those images after you capture them.

Vivo’s engineers wisely didn’t shackle any improved computation to the camera’s AI Scene Optimization, a mode that frankly does more harm than good in certain situations. Sometimes it saturates colors too much, other times blows out highlights because it thinks I want extra contrast in a daytime sky. It’s not terrible, by any means, but with so many tools to work with, it’s probably best to keep that particular AI off.

If you’re coming from the X60 Pro+, you won’t see much has changed with the interface and the modes you can shoot with. That’s not surprising, given the short launch cycle between the two devices, and it wouldn’t be worth squeezing in more without the underlying software getting better. Even so, unique modes, like Long Exposure, Supermoon, Astro, Pro Sports, and Double Exposure are there when you want them under the “More” section.

Zeiss never really made its presence felt on the software side before, but now contributes four classic bokeh effects to the Portrait mode: Biotar, Sonnar, Planar, and Distagon. Those come on top of the handful Vivo already includes. Previously, Vivo embedded Zeiss’ Biotar style into Portrait, except you now start out with a natural look, which is a better way to begin, given the better sensor on that 12-megapixel telephoto portrait lens.

While the X70 Pro+ runs on Android 11, Vivo’s Funtouch 12 is the overlay, and thankfully, it’s stable and doesn’t interfere with any of the camera functions. I’m not sold on Funtouch as anything special, but I can appreciate a company sticking to limited bloatware (at least with my review unit) and not force-feeding apps, services, or features onto me.

Image Quality

Main Camera

Image quality largely rests on the tone that the main camera sets. Zeiss’s T* Coating was already carried over from its predecessor, so I would expect similar results in reducing lens flare and other unwanted issues, which leaves Vivo’s V1 chip to deliver something new.

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best 6

For the most part, the main camera will capture excellent shots in a variety of conditions. The tonality is nice, though I did grow a bit annoyed at how often I had to dial down the exposure to get more detail from highlights. HDR kicks in when you want it to, but it doesn’t impact an image’s composition quite like, say, a Google Pixel might. One thing is for sure and that’s how bright and detailed the preview will be before even snapping something. The V1 chip helps dial up the exposure compensation to help you see exactly how a shot will turn out before you take it. Even when I wasn’t using Night mode in a dark area, I knew what I was l looking at, making framing a shot so much easier.

If there’s a certain element to a scene that makes the software work harder, the cracks start to show. Higher contrast scenarios force you to choose between the shadows or highlights when you adjust exposure. This is different from what you would do with Night or Pro mode, where software computation is rendering an image without compositing or just leaving it to what you chose as your own manual settings. Vivo’s software is smart, just not working at a genius level yet. You see the rendering happening as the image saves to the phone’s Gallery, and one thing that stood out to me was the way it softened bright highlights, like a fire or the sun. To me, that was an indication of how the processing here differs from the X70 Pro+’s predecessor. It doesn’t oversharpen a lot, either, which was good to see.

When photos are on point, though, they are superb. As before, the main sensor can shoot at 50-megapixels under the High-Resolution mode, but I only sparingly used it, as I liked what I could get in more varied settings with the larger pixels in the binned 12.5-megapixel output of the main sensor.

Ultra-Wide

Vivo’s improved Gimbal Stabilization doesn’t apply to still images, so you don’t get any advantage in that regard. Not that it’s necessary, given that a wider field of view also means less of a chance of ruining a photo through shaky hands, though low-light shots could always use a stable hand.

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best 7
Macro mode is back, but appears unchanged.

On the face of it, the ultra-wide sensor doesn’t really capture images any differently, though rendering is a little better, particularly in higher contrast scenes. Toggle HDR on and it does its best to balance shadows and highlights. The tighter f/2.2 aperture isn’t always great for low-light shots, but results aren’t bad in many instances.

Telephoto and Hybrid Zoom

Not much changed here as far as what you can expect, though again, rendering is slightly different. That means a little less sharpening to try masking imperfections and add some edges to every shot. The brighter the conditions, the more detail — and less processing – you get. I found a pretty big difference in how zoomed daytime shots turned out compared to those without much natural light.

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best 8

That’s easy to understand with an f/3.4 aperture, and despite improved software, zooming farther doesn’t make things look that much better. The 60x hybrid zoom is just as awful as it was before, and even at 10x, I find Samsung’s Galaxy S21 Ultra does a better job maintaining higher levels of detail. I still don’t understand why Vivo doesn’t present other distances in the interface. Pinching to zoom in isn’t precise unless you go all the way to 60x. The company should be promoting lower, not higher, hybrid zooms to deliver more usable images. Vivo’s V1 chip doesn’t impact the telephoto lens as much as the others, especially the more you digitally zoom in.

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best 9

Portrait mode

A totally different sensor, better optics with Zeiss’s T* Coating and a wider aperture, and larger pixels combine to make Portrait mode better than it was in the previous model. The X60 Pro+ used a 32-megapixel sensor with a tighter aperture and no OIS, struggling to produce good shots in more challenging conditions. That’s less of an issue with the setup in the X70 Pro+, where portraits come out looking considerably better, especially in low-light or night shots. Vivo includes a Night mode shortcut at the top of the interface to help out when necessary.

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best 10

The 2x zoom is the default, representing the 50mm focal length, but you can also shoot with the main camera at 1x, or the telephoto at 5x. There’s an abundance of additional features to manipulate the image, my favorite of which is changing the aperture and focus after taking the photo. Your f-stop range sticks to f/0.95 through f/16, with f/2.0 always being the starting point. You can always revisit the image later and change it again, something I found useful when sharing a photo with someone who either wanted more or less bokeh. Zeiss’ bokeh effects aren’t bad, though I wasn’t totally sold on their aesthetics. I would try them in similar settings and couldn’t always tell the difference between them.

The good news is that portraits look good in more varied settings. They’re also easier to shoot in low-light because the V1 chip illuminates the screen to make everything highly visible, even when attempting a portrait in really dark places.

If I had one concern, it would be with the beauty features, which are numerous and kind of creepy. Softening skin is one thing, but whitening, thinning, and reshaping faces, noses, eyes, jaws, and cheekbones is probably not the best way to build confidence. I know these are more common in Asian markets, so may not have the same resonance in North America, but seeing them is an odd juxtaposition compared to the devices we regularly see on this side of the pond.

Pro Mode

There are two things that work with Vivo’s Pro mode. The first, is the way it tries to qualify users by explaining what the different features do, and the second is funneling in a lot of supporting access to the whole mode. You can still shoot with all four lenses, as well as capture images in RAW or SuperRAW, the latter of which is a newer 14-bit mode within Pro. In effect, it brackets up to 10 RAW photos in an attempt to reduce noise and produce better dynamic range. You can also choose to do bracketed shoots with regular RAW when you select Bracketing in the Pro mode’s own settings, letting you choose between three, five, or seven photos at EV intervals between 0.3 and 1 EV.

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best 11
Processed in Lightroom

Why Vivo doesn’t include focus peaking is beyond me. For a company that has tried throwing the kitchen sink into its camera array, I have a hard time understanding why something that basic isn’t available here. A histogram is there in the Pro settings, as is a level meter, but nothing specific to focusing.

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best 12
Processed in Lightroom

In any case, you can get great shots using RAW or SuperRAW, albeit with optimal conditions making a bigger difference. For example, when I tried shooting at night, I had to make a number of adjustments to try limiting how much bright light sources impacted the shot’s dynamic range. It’s nowhere near as bad as what I saw in the iPhone 13 Pro and Pro Max, but still something I wish Vivo would’ve improved further, given how much it hyped its V1 chip.

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best 13
Processed in Lightroom

Night Mode

Speaking of night shots, Night mode was actually a weaker link in the X60 Pro+, and while not a massive shift in the right direction, does perform better in the X70 Pro+. The main reason why is because the dynamic range and detail are better, especially when you manually adjust exposure. Available light still makes a huge difference, but adding SuperRAW gives you a little more leeway to capture the same scene with multiple settings.

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best 14

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best 15

The Style sub-section is also back again, giving you the same color balance filters as before, which are worth using when you want to add something unique to the shot. They’re not exclusively for night shots, but work best after sunset. You can also enable the Long Exposure special mode within the Night mode to capture traffic light trails, fireworks, and star trails, including how long you want the exposure to be. You can also access Supermoon and Astro special modes directly when you want to capture the moon or stars. Even take night or low-light panoramics when you want.

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best 16

That’s all more than pretty much any other phone’s night mode offers. Just exploring its options can take time, which is why I recommend knowing where everything is before going out into the field where evening and night conditions can change quickly.

Special modes

I mentioned some of the special modes already, which you can find under “More” in the interface. Long Exposure was easily my favorite because it was applicable to both day and night conditions. As an example, trying to capture that waterfall in Pro mode was difficult because I could only lower the ISO, not raise the aperture when trying to shoot it at a slower shutter speed. Long Exposure has a setting for water flows, so using that produced a shot that was neither over nor underexposed. Mysterious Mist was another one that could work when capturing moving people or objects, especially in the daytime. The others work best in low-light situations.

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best 17

Vivo didn’t really touch the others all that much, preferring to let the V1 chip help render them better this time around. I didn’t see a significant difference when I tested them, though perhaps we’ll see some progress there moving forward.

Video Features

One thing about the ultra-wide camera is when you enable the Horizontal Line stabilization to take full advantage of the Gimbal, you also max out your footage at 1080p and 24 or 30fps. Not ideal when you want smooth shots at no less than 4K. Vivo put the Gimbal on this lens to accommodate the obvious crop factor to help make video come out looking smoother. And it does look really smooth. Record something steadily while walking and you won’t see it ruined by jittery shake. It’s just not going to be at full resolution, and HDR won’t apply, either.

Unlike its predecessor, the X70 Pro+ lets you record footage with all four lenses, so there’s extra versatility that way. It’s just that with 4K enabled, you can only use standard stabilization, regardless of the lens you choose. You can also shoot in 8K, but not sure how much you’d want to do that if you have no screen to view it on afterward.

One good thing Vivo addressed was making its Movies section (formerly Cinematic Master), which shoots at a 2.35:1 aspect ratio, able to work with a 24fps framerate. If you’re going to be “cinematic” about anything, you should at least offer that framerate as an option.

One of the Best Smartphones for Photography

The Vivo X70 Pro+ doesn’t have a phone camera array, it has an arsenal. I can see it feeling overwhelming to people who aren’t as savvy with photography, but it is worth learning what this phone can do to get the most out of every photo. I noted in my review of the X60 Pro+ that the interface and settings required patience and deliberation because of how layered it was. It’s no different here, and I’d say that also applies to users who know their way around a camera.

The fact that it is a quality phone is obvious to me, and it’s just as clear that its camera is among the best in the industry right now. Showing others photos of light trails or Lightroom-processed SuperRAW photos always came with responses like, “How can I get that on my phone?”

What irked me was the Zeiss connection. Its T* Coating did help reduce artifacts on all the lenses, except its software contribution is harder to read. In that regard, Vivo played up its own V1 chip, while Zeiss’s presence is mostly relegated to four bokeh effects in Portrait mode. If this partnership is to yield more, we need to see more of what Zeiss can bring to the table here.

Vivo X70 Pro+ Review: An Encore Ready to Take on the Best 18

Are There Alternatives?

The X70 Pro doesn’t have every single spec and feature the Pro+ has, but it’s no slouch when it comes to putting out great shots. Apple made some decent strides with the iPhone 13 Pro and Pro Max, save for the issues around bright lights and dynamic range. Still, for photos of people, Apple may have an edge over Vivo’s flagship.

Google looks to make a big camera splash with its Pixel 6 lineup, and that will mean a competitive shakeup for everyone else. The Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra is still kicking around, as is the OnePlus 9 Pro.

Should You Buy It?

Yes, if you can get your hands on one. Not to mention if you’re cool staying connected without 5G in this part of the world. It’s hard to find a phone camera array this versatile, and assuming Vivo continues to improve its software computation with updates to the X70 series, then it will only make one of the best mobile photography options currently available even better.

It’s a pricey proposition, though. Converted to U.S. dollars, you’re looking at between $1,050 and $1,080, which is more than the base variants of other flagships, including those from Apple and Samsung. Keep that in mind before you go reaching for the X70 Pro+.

Source link

Posted on Leave a comment

Vivo Designs Detachable, Double-Sided Pop-Up Smartphone Camera

Vivo Designs Detachable, Double-Sided Pop-Up Smartphone Camera

Vivo Designs Detachable, Double-Sided Pop-Up Smartphone Camera 19

Vivo has designed a detachable pop-up camera system that consists of three total cameras and two flashes and runs on its own built-in battery.

Detachable smartphone cameras are not a new concept, at least in the design phase. For example, Vivo itself explored the idea of a small detachable phone camera with its own touch-display earlier this month, which was built upon a 2020 prototype that showed a smartphone design with a detachable front camera.

This time, Vivo designed a double-sided pop-up camera that may be the most advanced and practical design yet. The patent — as found and illustrated by LetsGoDigital — shows a Vivo smartphone with a full-screen design and a pop-up camera situated in the top right corner.

Vivo Designs Detachable, Double-Sided Pop-Up Smartphone Camera 20

The system can be used for selfies and video calls and has a dual-camera integrated onto the back of the pop-up system. This acts as the main camera, giving users a total of three cameras and two flashes.

The pop-up camera can be fully removed and fixed at different angles thanks to a hinge. Users can make the most of the camera by placing it on a flat surface to take photos from a distance — similar to using a camera with a remote shutter — or by holding it in hand as a selfie stick.

This detachable camera system has a built-in battery which means it can be used independently from the smartphone. If the battery runs low, users can attach it back onto the smartphone to charge it from the main body’s battery. This is done using a sliding rail, with additional magnets to prevent the camera from accidentally detaching.

Vivo Designs Detachable, Double-Sided Pop-Up Smartphone Camera 21

As it’s a double-sided camera, the system detects which side the user is on. This design also gives Vivo the option to add a Dual-View video function in the future.

LetsGoDigital explains that the patent doesn’t mention what type of cameras are to be used with this design but instead it is stated that the camera will have different apertures “for all-round photography possibilities.”

With numerous detachable camera system patents under its belt, it is seemingly increasingly likely that Vivo will at some point manufacture a finished smartphone that tries it, though it’s unclear how successful such a design would be. There are no doubt practical applications that a removable module would certainly make easier, but the increased possibility of losing those critical parts may outweigh the benefits.

Vivo isn’t the only one who is testing the design waters with a removable camera system. Oppo has also patented a detachable camera module design, although it is considerably bulkier in comparison to Vivo’s. Samsung has considered integrating a smartphone camera into its S Pen.

The full patent application can be viewed on LetsGoDigital.

Source link

Posted on Leave a comment

Vivo Launches New X70 Series Smartphones, Continues Zeiss Partnership

Vivo Launches New X70 Series Smartphones, Continues Zeiss Partnership

Vivo Launches New X70 Series Smartphones, Continues Zeiss Partnership 22

Vivo has announced that it will launch three new smartphones under its X70 series in the X70, X70 Pro, and X70 Pro+ as it tries to position itself among the best mobile photography options available.

The company is also sticking to its collaboration with Zeiss in a “joint pursuit of creating the ultimate mobile photography experience.” Vivo is looking to follow up on the solid performance of its X60 series phones, particularly with the image quality it proved capable of producing. The Zeiss effect was most prevalent in the X60 Pro+, though the German optics brand’s logo is present on all three X70 models coming from its Chinese partner.

Pushing Mobile Photography Forward

Vivo outfitted all three phones with 32-megapixel front-facing cameras, whereas their respective rear arrays will differ, especially when it comes to the primary image sensor. The X70 Pro+ will feature Samsung’s 50-megapixel Ultra-Sensing GN1 primary sensor, which may be the very same one the X60 Pro+ was equipped with: a 23mm equivalent lens with an f/1.57 aperture. Vivo has yet to confirm whether there are any unique differences in that regard.

Vivo Launches New X70 Series Smartphones, Continues Zeiss Partnership 23

What may be different this time around is how that sensor works with the 48-megapixel ultra-wide Gimbal Camera with what Vivo calls 360-degree Horizon Leveling Stabilization technology. Vivo claims this will result in “unshakable stability even during extreme action-packed shooting sequences.” Having not seen any sort of demo on how that works, it’s not clear exactly how or when such a feature kicks in.

Vivo had also put its Gimbal Camera in the 48-megapixel ultra-wide sensor on the X60 Pro+, and it is indeed the same Sony IMX598 sensor found in that device. It does look like the telephoto lens may also stick to the same 8-megapixel sensor from before, whereas the fourth lens at 12-megapixel wasn’t specifically identified. Vivo had a 32-megapixel sensor for its Portrait mode in the X60 Pro+, and PetaPixel is waiting to hear if the 12-megapixel sensor is for that same purpose,

The X70 Pro sports a similar lineup in the rear, save for the ultra-wide sensor, which is a 12-megapixel one instead. The X70 uses a different 40-megapixel sensor as its primary shooter, and ditches the telephoto lens to go with a triple array.

To try and offer a similar experience, the primary lens works with Gimbal Stabilization 3.0 technology to better capture action shots. VIS 5-Axis Ultra Stable Video technology also applies for the X70 Pro and X70 “integrating enhanced OIS with EIS to transition the X/Y-axis with Z-axis rotation for well-rounded stability.”

Vivo Launches New X70 Series Smartphones, Continues Zeiss Partnership 24

New Software and Imaging Settings

There is some new hardware under the hood to note as the X70 Pro+ does have the new Imaging Chip V1. This is proprietary silicon that Vivo says uses artificial intelligence (AI) to reduce noise in a photo, while also applying MEMC (motion estimation, motion compensation) effects. It’s not yet clear how effective or efficient these features are, or in what conditions in which they work best.

High-Transmittance Glass Lens — which has Zeiss all over it — is upgraded glass designed to lower dispersion for improved image quality. Neither Vivo nor Zeiss provided additional context in the announcement as to how that works.

Vivo also hasn’t confirmed if all the software features and modes from the X60 Pro+ made the cut over to the X70 Pro+, but did mention multi-modal photo and video features, like Real-Time Extreme Night Vision, Super Night Video, Pure Night View, and Pro Cinematic Mode, among others.

Zeiss’s imprint on the software side looks like it will come through with bokeh effects. The Biotar Portrait Style will give all three X70 models three lenses to shoot with: Distagon, Planar, and Sonnar. Distagon is more anamorphic with a dynamic perspective, while Planar is more classic in how it applies bokeh to an image. Sonnar is more creamy, where it works best when capturing people in a frame, whether posed or candid.

Vivo Launches New X70 Series Smartphones, Continues Zeiss Partnership 25

Design and Components

The X70 Pro+ has a 6.783-inch WQHD display with up to 2K resolution and a pixel density of 517ppi. Vivo mentions a 120Hz refresh rate for the X70 Pro and X70, but not its flagship among the three, and PetaPixel will confirm what the deal is with that.

Under the hood, the X70 Pro+ runs on a Snapdragon 888 chipset with a 5G modem. Details like internal storage and RAM weren’t specified, but they will likely mirror those of the X60 series. The X70 Pro+ will also be the first Vivo phone to offer water and dust resistance, courtesy of an IP68 rating. It also supports wireless charging — another first.

In contrast, the X70 Pro and X70 won’t have that kind of protection, nor support wireless charging. They each sport 6.56-inch displays — though Vivo didn’t note the top resolution — and they also run on the same MediaTek Dimensity 1200-Vivo processor.

All three phones in the X70 lineup have ZEISS T* Coating, much like their successor X60 phones did, to reduce reflections, ghosting, stray light, and other image artifacts.

Vivo is also making the X70 Pro+ available only in enigma black, whereas the X70 Pro and X70 will come in cosmic black and aurora dawn colors. It appears the back plate will retain the textured faux leather from the previous generation as well.

Vivo Launches New X70 Series Smartphones, Continues Zeiss Partnership 26

Vivo will launch all three phones in the X70 series on September 30. Pricing was not provided at the time of publication.

Source link

Posted on Leave a comment

Vivo Y72 5G Camera review: Strong in autofocus

Vivo Y72 5G Camera review: Strong in autofocus

The Vivo Y72 5G is one of the more affordable models in the Vivo smartphone lineup and priced to be included in our Advanced segment ($200 to $399). The phone features a 6.58-inch IPS display with FHD+ resolution and is powered by an MTK Dimensity 700 chipset and 8 GB of RAM; 128 GB of internal memory and a large 5000 mAh battery are on board as well.

The rear camera combines a primary module with a 64 MP sensor with an 8 MP ultra-wide and a 2 MP macro camera. Let’s see how this setup does in the DXOMARK Camera test.

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 64 MP sensor, f/1.79-aperture lens, AF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 8 MP sensor, f/2.2-aperture lens
  • Macro: 2 MP sensor, f/2.4-aperture lens
  • LED flash
  • Video: 2160p/30 fps, 1080p/30 fps

About DXOMARK Camera tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone camera reviews, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate over 3000 test images and more than 2.5 hours of video both in controlled lab environments and in natural indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. This article is designed to highlight the most important results of our testing. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera test protocol, click here. More details on how we score smartphone cameras are available here.

Test summary

Pros

  • Good photo target exposure and low noise in indoor conditions
  • Generally fast and accurate photo autofocus
  • Nice color rendering and white balance in outdoor and indoor videos
  • Low noise in bright-light videos

Cons

  • Strong exposure variation in bright light, tone compression in HDR scenes
  • Inaccurate color rendering and skin tones
  • Lack of detail on primary camera and at all tele settings
  • Strong underexposure and chroma noise in night shots with flash off
  • Low levels of detail and texture artifacts in videos
  • Slow and unstable video autofocus
  • Shadow clipping, underexposure, and noise in low-light videos

A DXOMARK Camera overall score of 94 puts the Vivo Y72 5G in the bottom half of the Advanced segment, and the Photo score of 101 also means it probably should not be your first option for still image capture.

Vivo Y72 5G Camera review: Strong in autofocus 27

Target exposure tends to be accurate and noise is low in indoor images.

Photo image quality overall is not up there with the best competitors in the same price bracket. On the bright side, the autofocus tends to be accurate and exposure is good under typical indoor conditions. Noise is well under control indoors, too. However, exposure is pretty inconsistent between shots in bright light, color rendering can be inaccurate, and detail rendering is generally low.

Vivo Y72 5G Camera review: Strong in autofocus 28
Night (flash-auto mode): Strongly underexposed background, inaccurate skin tones, loss of detail, visible noise, red eyes
Vivo Y72 5G Camera review: Strong in autofocus 29
Bokeh mode: fairly accurate depth estimation

The Vivo comes with a dedicated ultra-wide camera but no tele, so all tele-zooming is done digitally on the primary cam. Overall it’s best to stick to the primary module, though. Shots taken with the ultra-wide camera lack detail and suffer from fairly intrusive anamorphosis (perspective distortion close to the edge of the frame). When zooming into the distance using digital zoom on the primary camera, a strong loss of detail becomes noticeable.

Vivo Y72 5G Camera review: Strong in autofocus 31

Vivo Y72 5G, crop: low level of detail, anamorphosis

Vivo Y72 5G, medium-range tele

Vivo Y72 5G Camera review: Strong in autofocus 33

Vivo Y72 5G, crop: strong loss of detail

 

With a Video score of 84, the Vivo Y72 5G isn’t among the best in the moving images category either. Video white balance and color rendering are accurate in most recording conditions. Noise is well controlled in bright light but becomes quite intrusive in low light. The Vivo’s video clips also lack detail, and the autofocus is slow and often displays focus instabilities when recording video. The Y72 5G comes with optical image stabilization, but videos still show some residual motion. Sharpness differences between frames and a frame shift effect are visible, too.

The video autofocus can be slow to react and shows instabilities.

Source link

Posted on Leave a comment

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts

Good photos outdoors and indoors

In 2020, Vivo released the X60 Pro, driven by an Exynos chip, in China. In April of this year, the X60 Pro went global, but this time, it was equipped with the Snapdragon 870 5G chipset. The X60 Pro is one of the brand’s flagships, just downstream from the X60 Pro Plus, with features like a 6.56 inch AMOLED display with a 120Hz refresh rate, a four-camera array, and a fast-charging 4200 mAh (TYP) battery. Vivo’s website does not mention the X60 Pro’s audio specifications, but it has one speaker that is bottom right-side firing.

Audio specifications include:

  • One speaker (bottom right-side firing)
  • No headphone jack

About DXOMARK Audio tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone audio reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective tests and undertake more than 20 hours of perceptual evaluation under controlled lab conditions. This article highlights the most important results of our testing. Note that we evaluate both Playback and Recording using only the device’s built-in hardware and default apps. (For more details about our Playback protocol, click here; for more details about our Recording protocol, click here.)

Test summary

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 34
Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 35

47

audio

Playback

Pros

  • Our engineers noted few artifacts overall
  • At low volume, attack is accurate
  • Considering there’s only one speaker, volume is good.
  • The minimum volume is adequate

Cons

  • Low- and high-end extension are sorely lacking
  • Timbre is tinny and midrange-focused
  • Because it’s a mono device, it doesn’t do well in the spatial attribute

Recording

Cons

  • Dark and muffled tonal balances in all use cases
  • Strong noise reduction algorithm stifles signals in selfie video
  • Noticeable artifacts in all use cases, especially in selfie video
  • Wideness is very narrow for recordings with rear cameras.

With an overall score of 47, the Vivo X60 Pro earned six points less than its similarly priced brand sibling, the Vivo X51 5G, another one-speaker device, which scored a 53. These are among the lowest scores in our database ranking for smartphone audio performance.

In Playback testing, the X60 Pro was below average in most attributes, but shined in at least one. The one-speaker design was a hindrance for the most part. In timbre, the X60 Pro was very midrange focused with little low- or high-end extension.  Its dynamics performance was somewhat better, with adequate attack except at low volume. The spatial attribute was a particular low point, in part because of the one-speaker design. Volume and artifacts gave the overall score a boost, with decent and excellent scores respectively.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 37

The Vivo X60 Pro had high marks for artifacts in playback, and a decent score for volume in recording.

As a recording device, the Vivo X60 Pro did not fare much better. On the plus side the X60 Pro scored well in the volume attribute, with good loudness. In other regards, it rarely was on target, with its noise reduction algorithm, on by default, driving down scores across several attributes, including timbre and dynamics. Artifacts were observable in all use cases, and again, that overly aggressive noise reduction algorithm was largely the culprit.

Sub-scores explained

The DXOMARK Audio overall score of 47 for the Vivo X60 Pro is derived from its Playback and Recording scores and their respective sub-scores. In this section, we’ll take a closer look at these audio quality sub-scores and explain what they mean for the user.

Playback

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 38

Timbre

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

47

82

Black Shark 4 Pro

Best: Black Shark 4 Pro (82)

Timbre tests measure how well a phone reproduces sound across the audible tonal range and takes into account bass, midrange, treble, tonal balance, and volume dependency.

The Vivo X60 Pro is well below average in the key attribute of timbre. Very midrange focused, the performance of the device severely lacks high-end extension. Tonal balance sounds tinny; the single speaker design is a handicap when trying to produce a full and rich timbre. In the chart below, you can see the nose dive taken by the Vivo devices at the high-end, while all three comparison devices are missing low-end.

As for the midrange, it’s not consistent. With high mids missing, it sounds muffled. It’s not surprising that bass is not a strong suit for the X60 Pro because the low-end is almost non existent.  All these shortcomings are exaggerated at soft volume as the pronounced absence of clarity impairs the tonal balance.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 39

Dynamics

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

53

81

Black Shark 4 Pro

Best: Black Shark 4 Pro (81)

DXOMARK’s dynamics tests measure how well a device reproduces the energy level of a sound source, and how precisely it reproduces bass frequencies.

The Vivo X60 Pro delivers an adequate dynamics performance considering its one-speaker design. Attack is on the mark, except at soft volume, when the rendering of transients is very limited. The absence of bass and low-end undermines the bass precision.
Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 40
Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 41

Bass attack is on target, but sustain is nonexistent. Punch is weak, especially at soft volume. At maximum volume, the performance is impaired by compression.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 42

Spatial

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

23

82

Black Shark 4 Pro

Best: Black Shark 4 Pro (82)

The sub-attributes for perceptual spatial tests include localizability, balance, distance, and wideness.

As of this writing, the 23 earned by the X60 Pro for the spatial attribute is a new low in our database rankings. As expected with a one-speaker device, the score for wideness was zero, because by its nature it’s a mono device. The blurry tonal balance muddles localizability. The human ear relies on the higher frequences to locate sounds. Here, with little high end to work with, that becomes problematic.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 43

The Vivo X60 Pro has only one speaker, which meant its score for wideness was zero.

Balance is slightly shifted to the top right where the only speaker is firing. Distance is unnatural because of inconsistent midrange; voices seem to be coming from behind a thick veil.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 44

Volume

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

68

79

Black Shark 4 Pro

Best: Black Shark 4 Pro (79)

Volume tests measure both the overall loudness a device is able to reproduce and how smoothly volume increases and decreases based on user input.

Here the X60 Pro earned some positive marks, with a solid performance in the volume attribute. The maximum volume achieved by the X60 Pro is on the mark, and the minimum volume is comprehensible, although it might be difficult to listen to high dynamic content, such as classical music, at this level.

Here are the results of the objective measurements we carried out in our laboratories, using recordings of both hip-hop and classical music played at the maximum user volume step:

Hip-HopClassical
Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)74.5 dBA70.9 dBA
Vivo X51 5G71.3 dBA70.4 dBA
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G72 dBA68.3 dBA
Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 45

Artifacts

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

93

96

Samsung Galaxy A52 5G

Best: Samsung Galaxy A52 5G (96)

Artifacts tests measure how much source audio is distorted when played back through a device’s speakers. Distortion can occur both because of sound processing in the device and because of the quality of the speakers.

Here is the one attribute where the Vivo X60 Pro truly shines, coming just three points shy of the top score to date among all smartphones, the 96 achieved by the Samsung Galaxy A52 5G. Our engineers observed few artifacts overall, although they noted some compression at maximum volume. There was some bass distortion when the device was playing synthetic signals (not something that would affect the average consumer). Gamers take note: The X60 Pro is easy to occlude due to single speaker design.

Recording

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 38

Timbre

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

54

88

Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders

Best: Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders (88)

As a recording device, the Vivo X60 Pro captures below average timbre. In daily life recordings, the tonal balance produced by the device is dark and muffled with a strong lack of treble and high midrange, especially with loud background noise, as in the urban scenario. Performance is even worse in selfie video where the intrusive noise reduction setting is enabled by default.  Overly oppressive, this algorithm strongly impairs overall sound quality.

In our home use case, a quieter environment, the device’s recordings are less altered by that noise cancelling algorithm and sound slightly more natural. For recordings at high SPL, the electronic music concert use case, timbre shows the same shortcomings: dark tonal balance, lack of clarity, and an absence of high-end extension. Bass presence is good but quite boomy, especially with strong low-end content like electronic music.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 39

Dynamics

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

48

78

OnePlus 8

Best: OnePlus 8 (78)

The Vivo X60 Pro earned one of the lowest scores in our database rankings for recording dynamics. When using the rear cameras to record video, the Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) is correct overall, but the envelope is not accurate because of compression and dark tonal balance, which throws off the sharpness of plosives and the intelligibility of voices.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 48
Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 49

In selfie video, overly strong noise canceling destroys the envelope. Noise reduction crushes the entire signal, including useful information. Background is heavily attenuated, but voices are not very intelligible, impairing the SNR. SNR performance is better in the home use case because the application of noise reduction is less extreme and voices are more intelligible.

string(3) “277”
array(3)
[“Samsung Galaxy A52 5G”]=>
string(61) “resources/Vivo/X60Pro/SamsungGalaxyA525G_MicrophoneTimbre.m4a”
[“Vivo X51 5G”]=>
string(52) “resources/Vivo/X60Pro/VivoX515G_MicrophoneTimbre.m4a”
[“Vivo X60 Pro”]=>
string(53) “resources/Vivo/X60Pro/VivoX60Pro_MicrophoneTimbre.m4a”

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 50

The dynamics performance of the Vivo X60 Pro improves slightly when using the memo app.

When using the memo app to record, the envelope performance is slightly better, but dynamics performance is still below average. For recordings at high-SPL, the envelope is correct, but it’s impaired by compression, especially on loud bass hits.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 42

Spatial

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

33

78

Black Shark 4 Pro

Best: Black Shark 4 Pro (78)

As with the spatial performance in playback, the Vivo X60 Pro struggles mightily. When recording video with the rear cameras, wideness is very limited, and localizability is not precise; that’s because of a narrow audio scene and a strong absence of clarity.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 52

Wideness is limited when recording video with the rear cameras.

With the overall sound being very dark and muffled, distance perception is not realistic. In selfie video, wideness is even more narrow, almost mono. Excessive noise reduction, a consistent bugaboo with this device, strongly hinders distance and localizability. In the meeting use case, the device does a better job of capturing the wideness of the audio scene, elevating the spatial performance.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 44

Volume

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

67

89

Xiaomi Mi 10S

Best: Xiaomi Mi 10S (89)

Volume performance in recording is a bright spot for the Vivo device. It achieves good loudness overall, though it’s slightly better in selfie video than with the rear cameras. Recording at the maximum level without distortion is correct.

Here are our test results, measured in LUFS (Loudness Unit Full Scale). As a reference, we expect loudness levels to be above -24 LUFS for recorded content:

MeetingLife VideoSelfie VideoMemo
Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)-25.5 LUFS-19.1 LUFS-19.7 LUFS-20.3 LUFS
Vivo X51 5G-29.2 LUFS-24.1 LUFS-20.5 LUFS-23.7 LUFS
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G-26.1 LUFS-22.3 LUFS-20.8 LUFS-21.5 LUFS
Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 45

Artifacts

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

57

90

Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders

Best: Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders (90)

The X60 Pro hits an average score for the recording artifacts attributes. On daily life recordings with loud background noise, some distortion is noticeable on loud sounds like shouting voices. In selfie video, heavy noise reduction (again an issue) induces temporal and spectral artifacts like gating, compression, strange resonances, and hissing.

Our engineers observed fewer artifacts in use cases where the background is quieter. For recordings at high SPL, some compression and bass distortion are noticeable as well as some distortion on sharp loud sounds. The noise reduction algorithm also affects the performance in selfie video. You can check for artifacts yourself in this sample recording:

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Audio review: Strong on artifacts 55

Background

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

14

58

Apple iPhone XS Max

Best: Apple iPhone XS Max (58)

The background attribute is another weak point for the Vivo device. In all use cases, the tonal balance of the background is very dark and unnatural. In selfie video, noise reduction strongly impairs the performance — background is barely audible.

Conclusion

The Vivo X60 Pro starts off with a distinct disadvantage because of its one-speaker design, and many of its shortcomings stem from that starting point. Overly aggressive noise cancellation in recording is also problematic. One bright spot is its stellar showing in the playback artifacts attribute, which ranks among the best among the devices we’ve tested.

Source link

Posted on Leave a comment

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound

Vivo X60 Pro+ Display review: Solid performance

Unveiled in early 2021, Vivo’s smartphone X60 Pro+ 5G sits at the top of the Chinese manufacturer’s X60 flagship line. The device is co-engineered with German optics expert Zeiss and features a four-camera array on the rear, including a 50 MP main camera, a 48 MP ultra-wide, and two tele-lens modules. On the classy side of things still, the phone is encased in vegan leather, a subtle but meaningful touch extended as a token of effort towards the environment and the animals. Other specifications include a 6.56-inch FHD+ AMOLED display with a 120 Hz refresh rate, the latest Snapdragon 888 chipset with 12 GB + 3 GB virtual RAM, and a 4200 mAh battery with fast 55W wired charging.

On the other hand, the V60 Pro+ lacks some features you might expect nowadays from a flagship device — such as an ultra-high-resolution display, Qi wireless charging, and IP-certified dust and water resistance. As for audio, the Chinese manufacturer merely mentions the phone’s CS43131 Hi-Fi chip and Hi-Res audio certification, for “phenomenal audio performance.” Let’s have a listen!

Audio specifications include:

  • One bottom-right, side-firing speaker
  • No headphone jack
  • USB-C earphones included

About DXOMARK Audio tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone audio reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective tests and undertake more than 20 hours of perceptual evaluation under controlled lab conditions. This article highlights the most important results of our testing. Note that we evaluate both Playback and Recording using only the device’s built-in hardware and default apps. (For more details about our Playback protocol, click here; for more details about our Recording protocol, click here.)

Test summary

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 56
Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 57

51

audio

Playback

Cons

  • Frequency response is unbalanced, lacking low- and high-end extension.
  • Strong compression at maximum volume induces noticeable volume variations.
  • Poor spatial performance (since the device is mono).

Recording

Pros

  • Decent bass presence for recordings made in loud environments
  • Correct sound-to-noise ratio in life videos
  • Decent envelope rendering with the memo app (Recorder)
  • Correct wideness in meeting use case

Cons

  • High-midrange prominence in all use cases
  • Poor performance in selfie videos, as a strong noise reduction algorithm crushes the signal.
  • Recordings made with the Camera app exhibit narrow wideness.
  • Noticeable artifacts in all use cases, especially in selfie videos

With an overall Audio Score of 51, Vivo’s latest top-of-the-line smartphone ranks among the lowest-scoring phones we have tested to date. Despite featuring cutting-edge technology in the optics domain, when it comes to audio, the X60 Pro+ 5G is equipped only with a single speaker. All spatial attributes are hamstrung by the monophonic playback and/or by the particularly unbalanced, midrange-focused, and inconsistent frequency response. If it hadn’t been for the excessive compression hindering both categories, dynamics and volume could have kept their heads out of the water thanks to decent attack and punch at nominal volume, correct maximum volume, intelligible minimum volume, and fairly natural volume steps. Artifacts is the only area in which the phone truly shines, with very few sonic artifacts perceivable regardless of the listening volume, and thus a sub-score only 4 points away from the class-leading Samsung Galaxy A52 5G. However, in landscape mode, the phone’s speaker is fairly easy to occlude.

All in all, due to its particularly poor performance in the spatial and timbre areas, the Vive X60 Pro+ 5G does not make an interesting on-the-go alternative for listening to music, watching movies, or playing games.

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 59

Listening to music on the Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G

As a recording device, the Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G fares even worse, largely because of an extremely aggressive noise-reduction algorithm, although the other tested categories don’t help: high-midrange is prominent in all use cases; wideness is very narrow in videos made with the camera app; and this time around, artifacts are acutely noticeable. Of all our use cases, selfie videos are the least fortunate, with particularly poor wideness and a distinctively harsher noise cancellation. That all said, recordings made in quieter environments exhibit fewer artifacts, and recordings made in loud environments (such as a concert) offer good bass presence.

Sub-scores explained

The DXOMARK Audio overall score of 51 for the Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G is derived from its Playback and Recording scores and their respective sub-scores. In this section, we’ll take a closer look at these audio quality sub-scores and explain what they mean for the user.

Playback

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 60

Timbre

Black Shark 4 Pro

Best: Black Shark 4 Pro (82)

Timbre tests measure how well a phone reproduces sound across the audible tonal range and takes into account bass, midrange, treble, tonal balance, and volume dependency.

Although the Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G’s playback is very midrange-focused, midrange itself isn’t consistent, and sounds are muffled because of a distinct lack of high mids. Bass and low-end extension are also critically lacking, but less so than with the X51 5G, per the graph below.

While the amount of treble is honorable, it is still insufficient to produce a clear tonal balance. These timbre shortcomings add up to a below-average timbre performance, with particularly low sub-scores across all our use cases.

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 61

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G during gaming.

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 62

Dynamics

Black Shark 4 Pro

Best: Black Shark 4 Pro (81)

DXOMARK’s dynamics tests measure how well a device reproduces the energy level of a sound source, and how precisely it reproduces bass frequencies.

Surprisingly, despite the speaker’s poor timbre performance, dynamics results are decent. Attack is correct at nominal volume, punch is fairly impactful from soft to loud volumes, bass attack is precise, and volume dependency — the consistency of dynamic attributes across all listening levels — is particularly good.

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 63
Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 64

The recessed low-end impairs sustain and release for lower frequencies, and attack is dulled at soft volumes. At maximum volume, severe compression crushes dynamics and induces perceivable volume variations.

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 65

Spatial

Black Shark 4 Pro

Best: Black Shark 4 Pro (82)

The sub-attributes for perceptual spatial tests include localizability, balance, distance, and wideness.

At 25 in Playback Spatial, the Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G scores merely two points higher than the new low in our database rankings for this category — namely its sibling, the Vivo X60 Pro. This is first and foremost because of the phone’s single speaker design. The X60 Pro+ 5G thus receives a 0 in wideness, which considerably hinders its spatial sub-score.

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 66
Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 67

Along with the playback’s blurry tonal balance, its mono reproduction also jeopardizes the localizability of sound sources in the mix. Unsurprisingly, the balance is shifted towards the top right corner of the device, where the only speaker fires. Finally, the midrange inconsistencies result in an unnatural distance rendering, with voices that seem cast from behind a veil.

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 68

Volume

Black Shark 4 Pro

Best: Black Shark 4 Pro (79)

Volume tests measure both the overall loudness a device is able to reproduce and how smoothly volume increases and decreases based on user input.

Although it is diminished by excessive dynamic compression, maximum volume is correct. Minimum volume is decently tuned, but it might be difficult to fully discern highly dynamic content such as movies or classical music. As for volume steps, they’re rather consistently distributed from softest to loudest, allowing the user to finely adjust the listening volume.

Hip-HopClassical
Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G71.1 dBA69.8 dBA
Vivo X51 5G71.3 dBA70.4 dBA
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G72 dBA68.3 dBA
Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 69

Artifacts

Samsung Galaxy A52 5G

Best: Samsung Galaxy A52 5G (96)

Artifacts tests measure how much source audio is distorted when played back through a device’s speakers. Distortion can occur both because of sound processing in the device and because of the quality of the speakers.

Despite the strong compression previously mentioned, audio played back through the X60 Pro+ 5G’s speaker exhibits very few artifacts overall, including temporal. Bass distortion occurs only on synthetic signals such as a pure sine wave.

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 70
Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 71

No sonic artifacts were perceived at nominal volume across all use cases. Better yet, the gaming use case shows no artifacts at all, whether temporal or spectral, regardless of the volume. But the device’s speaker is very easy to occlude, which is expressly unsuitable for playing games.

Recording

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 60

Timbre

Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders

Best: Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders (88)

As a recording device, too, the X60 Pro+ 5G’s timbre performance is significantly below average. In videos recorded with the rear cameras, midrange still suffers from inconsistencies: while high mids are too prominent, low mids are notably lacking, and high-end extension is limited — just like the X51 5G, as shown in the graph below. This results in a both hollow and slightly nasal sound. The same high-midrange prominence and recessed high-ends are also noticeable in loud environment recordings, such as concerts.

Sound capture is even poorer in selfie videos, where an aggressive noise reduction algorithm (enabled by default) strongly impairs the overall rendering. Finally, bass presence is decent, but subject to the lack of low-end extension.

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 62

Dynamics

OnePlus 8

Best: OnePlus 8 (78)

The phone’s performance for recorded dynamics is also among the lowest we’ve measured to date. In life videos, despite a correct sound-to-noise ratio (SNR), the envelope isn’t accurate: plosives in particular are affected by an ill-suited compression. While it becomes slightly better in memo app recordings, the overall dynamics performance still remains below average. In loud environments, although it is correct, the sound envelope is impaired by heavy compression — especially on loud bass hits.

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 74
Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 75

In selfie videos, the noise-canceling algorithm simply crushes the entire signal, including useful information. If background is certainly attenuated, voices do not gain in intelligibility, thus lowering the SNR. This ratio gets better in quieter scenarios such as our home use case, as noise reduction eases off and voices become more intelligible.

string(3) “279”
array(3)
[“Samsung Galaxy A52 5G”]=>
string(65) “resources/Vivo/X60ProPlus/SamsungGalaxyA525G_MicrophoneTimbre.m4a”
[“Vivo X51 5G”]=>
string(56) “resources/Vivo/X60ProPlus/VivoX515G_MicrophoneTimbre.m4a”
[“Vivo X60 Pro Plus”]=>
string(61) “resources/Vivo/X60ProPlus/VivoX60ProPlus_MicrophoneTimbre.m4a”

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 76

Recording a selfie video with the Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 65

Spatial

Black Shark 4 Pro

Best: Black Shark 4 Pro (78)

As in playback, the Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G’s spatial attributes in recorded audio are subpar. In videos filmed with the rear cameras, despite a wider and more precise stereo scene than with the X60 Pro, wideness is still very narrow and localizability is below average.

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 78
Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 79

The excessive noise reduction impairs both localizability and distance, the latter also affected by the midrange inconsistency. In selfie videos, wideness is so narrow that the stereo field almost feels monophonic. By contrast, in our meeting use case, it is appreciably wider.

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 80

Recording a video with the Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 68

Volume

Xiaomi Mi 10S

Best: Xiaomi Mi 10S (89)

As a recording device, the Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G turns in a middling volume performance. Audio exhibits good nominal loudness overall, especially when recorded with the memo app. However, the maximum level reachable without noticeable distortion is only average. Here are our test results, measured in LUFS (Loudness Unit Full Scale). As a reference, we expect loudness levels to be above -24 LUFS for recorded content:

MeetingLife VideoSelfie VideoMemo
Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G-22.1 LUFS-18.7 LUFS-27.5 LUFS-17.7 LUFS
Vivo X51 5G-29.2 LUFS-24.1 LUFS-20.5 LUFS-23.7 LUFS
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G-26.1 LUFS-22.3 LUFS-20.8 LUFS-21.5 LUFS
Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 69

Artifacts

Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders

Best: Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders (90)

Surprisingly, the Vivo X60 Pro outperforms the X60 Pro+ 5G in this category. While the more affordable version gets an average sub-score, the Pro+ turns in a below-average artifacts performance. In recordings containing background noise, distortion can be perceived on loud sounds such as shouting voices.

In selfie videos, the aggressive noise cancellation induces both temporal and spectral artifacts — such as gating, compression, resonances, distortion, and hissing. You can hear it for yourself in this sample recording:

Recordings made in loud environments also exhibit compression and bass distortion. Whenever background noises get quieter, artifacts become far less noticeable.

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 83
Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 84
Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 85

Background

Apple iPhone XS Max

Best: Apple iPhone XS Max (58)

In view of what precedes, it should come as no surprise that the Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G scores particularly low in this category. Due to the inconsistent frequency response and the excessive noise cancellation, the background sounds unnatural across all use cases and is even rendered barely audible in selfie videos.

Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 86
Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G Audio review: Image over sound 87

Conclusion

Vivo put most of its R&D budget into conceiving the utmost camera system for its ultra-premium smartphone, and it shows, with the Vivo X60 Pro+ 5G making it into the current top ten in our DXOMARK Camera ranking. But it winds up at the bottom of our Audio ranking with playback severely impaired by the phone’s single speaker design — a decision that’s hard to understand, given the Pro+’s top-tier status within the X60 flagship line. It is also hindered by a lack of timbre balance and consistency, and an excessive dynamic compression. As a recording device, it is heavily hamstrung by a particularly ill-adapted noise-canceling algorithm, too many sonic artifacts, a significant lack of wideness, and a high midrange-focused tonal balance.

Source link

Posted on Leave a comment

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option

The Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) is the global release of this device and differs from the China-only Exynos version not only in the chipset but also in the photography specifications, with only a single tele-lens included on the Snapdragon model versus two teles on the model for the Chinese market.

The handset features the Snapdragon 870 chipset with 12 GB RAM and 256 GB storage, runs Android 11, and boasts a 4200 mAh battery with 33W flash charging. The display is a large 6.56-inch FHD+ AMOLED with a 120 Hz refresh rate.

Aside from dropping the second tele-lens, the camera is the same as in the Exynos version. Co-engineered with Zeiss, the primary camera is built around a 48 MP Quad Bayer sensor (12 MP output) with a f/1.48-aperture lens. Both zoom cameras utilize 13 MP sensors, with a f/2.56-aperture lens on the tele and a f/2.2-aperture lens on the ultra-wide.

Let’s see how the device performed in our DXOMARK Camera tests.

Key camera specifications:

  • Primary: 48 MP 1/2.0-inch sensor with 0.8µm pixels, 26 mm-equivalent f/1.5-aperture lens, PDAF, OIS
  • Ultra-wide: 13 MP sensor, 120° field of view, 16 mm-equivalent f/2.2-aperture lens
  • Tele: 13 MP 1/2.8-inch sensor with 0.8µm pixels, 50 mm-equivalent f/2.5 lens (2x optical), PDAF
  • Video: 2160p at 30 fps, 1080p at 30/60 fps (1080p at 30 fps tested)

About DXOMARK Camera tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone camera reviews, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate over 3000 test images and more than 2.5 hours of video both in controlled lab environments and in natural indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. This article is designed to highlight the most important results of our testing. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera test protocol, click here. More details on how we score smartphone cameras are available here.

Test summary

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 88
Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 89

120

camera

Pros

  • Wide dynamic range in all photos
  • Good detail in all photos
  • Generally accurate photo and video autofocus
  • High detail in outdoor ultra-wide photos
  • Accurate target exposure in outdoor and indoor videos
  • Pleasant color in most videos
  • Well-controlled noise in most videos

Cons

  • Exposure instabilities, especially in outdoor photos
  • Inaccurate exposure and color rendering on deep skin tones in photos
  • Visible noise in low-light photos
  • Low detail in most tele photos and all videos
  • Limited dynamic range in videos
  • White balance instabilities in low-light videos
  • Hue shift artifacts visible in many videos

With an overall score of 120, the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) secures a position in the upper ranks of the Premium segment (devices priced between $600 – $799). You you can expect similar global image quality as the Google Pixel 5 and Xiaomi Mi 11 (both at 120), and the Vivo is only a couple of points shy of the top-ranked Premium Apple iPhone 12 and iPhone 12 Mini smartphones at 122.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 91
The Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) captures accurate target exposure with wide dynamic range and pleasant color. Detail is also well preserved while keeping noise to a minimum, and good depth of field ensures both subjects are in sharp focus.

The Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) also manages to improve on the score we recorded for the Exynos version by two points, thanks to slightly enhanced autofocus performance. Otherwise image quality is very similar between the two, and perhaps somewhat surprisingly, the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) is just as good for long-range zoom shots despite not having a 5x tele-lens.

The Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) also beats the score of the Oppo Find X3 Neo by 5 points primarily due to better overall exposure, with wide dynamic range and vivid color rendering. The Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) is close pverall to the performance of Xiaomi’s Mi 11; however, the Xiaomi device offers an improved texture-to-noise tradeoff, rendering more detailed images with less noise compared to the Vivo.

Below you can find a detailed analysis and image samples for all Photo, Zoom, and Video sub-attributes, as well as comparisons with two of the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)’s competitors, the Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos) and the Xiaomi Mi 11.

Photo

The Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) achieves a Photo score of 127. In this section, we take a closer look at each sub-attribute and compare image quality against competitors.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 92

Exposure and Contrast

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

101

111

Huawei P50 Pro

Best: Huawei P50 Pro (111)

In these tests we analyze target exposure, contrast, and dynamic range, including repeatability across a series of images. Tests are undertaken in a wide range of light conditions, including backlit scenes and low light down to 1 lux. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

These samples show the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)’s exposure performance in a high-contrast scene.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 93

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), wide dynamic range with good shadow and highlight detail

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 94
Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos), less dynamic range with some highlight clipping
Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 95

Xiaomi Mi 11, limited dynamic range with significant highlight clipping

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 96

Color

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

100

106

Huawei P50 Pro

Best: Huawei P50 Pro (106)

In these tests we analyze color rendering, skin tones, white balance, and color shading, including repeatability across a series of images. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

These samples show the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)’s color performance in an outdoor setting.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 97

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), accurate white balance and pleasant color rendering

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 98

Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos), accurate white balance with slightly dull color rendering

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 99

Xiaomi Mi 11, accurate white balance and pleasant color rendering

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 100

Autofocus

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

97

109

Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

Best: Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max (109)

In these tests we analyze autofocus accuracy and shooting time, including repeatability, in the lab. We test focus failures, depth of field, and tracking of moving subjects using perceptual analysis of real-life images.

This graph shows the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)’s autofocus performance in the lab, handheld at a light level of 20 lux and a brightness range of 7 EV.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 101
In challenging simulated lighting conditions the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) is often sharper, but levels of acutance (sharpness) are more inconsistent between shots and autofocusing speeds are slower.
Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 102

Texture

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

95

111

Xiaomi Mi 11

Best: Xiaomi Mi 11 (111)

In these tests we analyze texture on faces and objects, including objects in motion, in a range of light conditions, using several lab test setups and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

These samples show the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)’s texture performance in the lab.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), handheld at 300 lux

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 104

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), crop: good detail rendering

Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos), handheld at 300 lux

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 106

Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G, crop: good detail rendering

Xiaomi Mi 11, handheld at 300 lux

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 108

Xiaomi Mi 11, crop: excellent detail

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 109

Noise

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

70

99

Huawei P50 Pro

Best: Huawei P50 Pro (99)

In these tests we analyze noise on faces and objects, including objects in motion, in a range of light conditions, using several lab test setups and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

These samples show the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)’s noise performance in low light.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), low-light scene

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 111

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), crop: visible noise

Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos), low-light scene

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 113

Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos), crop: very visible noise

Xiaomi Mi 11, low-light scene

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 115

Xiaomi Mi 11, crop: well-controlled noise

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 116

Bokeh

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

65

80

Huawei P50 Pro

Best: Huawei P50 Pro (80)

For these tests we switch to the camera’s bokeh or portrait mode and analyze depth estimation, bokeh shape, blur gradient, and repeatability, as well as all other general image quality attributes mentioned above. The score is derived from perceptual analysis of real-life images.

These samples show the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)’s bokeh simulation tested in the lab.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), bokeh mode

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 118

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), crop: nicely contrasted and circular spotlights

Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos), bokeh mode

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 120

Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos), crop: nicely contrasted and circular spotlights

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 122

Xiaomi Mi 11, crop: disappointing spotlights

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 123

Night

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

56

82

Huawei Mate 40 Pro+

Best: Huawei Mate 40 Pro+ (82)

In these tests we shoot a selection of images in pitch-black darkness as well as with city lights in the background providing some illumination. We shoot sample images with the camera at default settings in both flash-auto and flash-off modes. We analyze all image quality attributes but we pay particular attention to exposure, autofocus, and color. We do not test night modes that have to be activated manually.

These samples show the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)’s night performance in flash-off mode.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 124

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), flash-off: good target exposure with wide dynamic range

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 125

Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos), flash-off: good target exposure with limited dynamic range

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 126

Xiaomi Mi 11, flash-off: good target exposure with wide dynamic range

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 127

Artifacts

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

63

75

Google Pixel 4

Best: Google Pixel 4 (75)

In these tests we check images for optical artifacts such as vignetting, flare, lens softness in the corners, distortion, and chromatic aberrations, as well as for processing artifacts such as ghosting and fusion errors, hue shift, and ringing.

This sample shows color fringing artifacts in a high-contrast image.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), artifacts

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 129

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), crop: color fringing, fusion artifacts on the face

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 130

Preview

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

47

77

Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

Best: Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max (77)

In these tests we analyze the image quality of the preview image and the differences between preview images and captured images, particularly in terms of exposure, dynamic range, and bokeh effect. We also check the smoothness of the field-of-view changes in the preview image when zooming with both buttons or when using the pinch-zoom gesture.

These samples show the differences in the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)’s bokeh rendering between the preview and the final image when in portrait mode.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 131

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), preview: bokeh simulation is only partially visible in portrait mode

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 132

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), capture: bokeh simulation is rendered in the final image

Zoom

The Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) achieves a Zoom score of 72. The Zoom score includes the tele and wide sub-scores. In this section, we take a closer look at how these sub-scores were achieved and compare zoom image quality against the competitors.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 133

Wide

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

42

57

Huawei P50 Pro

Best: Huawei P50 Pro (57)

In these tests we analyze the performance of the ultra-wide camera at several focal lengths from 12 to 20 mm. We look at all image quality attributes, but we pay particular attention to such artifacts as chromatic aberrations, lens softness, and distortion.

These samples show the performance of the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)’s ultra-wide camera under low-light conditions.

Vivo X50 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), ultra-wide

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 135

Vivo X50 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), crop: fine details are lost but noise is well-controlled.

Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos), ultra-wide with a greater field of view

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 137

Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos), crop: good detail with a little more noise

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 139

Xiaomi Mi 11, crop: fine details are lost and noise is slightly visible.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 140

Tele

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

92

140

Huawei P50 Pro

Best: Huawei P50 Pro (140)

In these tests we analyze all image quality attributes at focal lengths from approximately 40 to 300 mm, paying particular attention to texture and detail. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

These samples show the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)’s tele performance in the lab at 100 lux using a close-range zoom setting.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), close-range zoom, 100 lux

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 142

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), crop: good detail

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Exynos), close-range zoom, 100 lux

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 144

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Exynos), crop: lower detail

Xiaomi Mi 11, close-range zoom, 100 lux

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 146

Xiaomi Mi 11, crop: lower detail

Video

In our Video tests we analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, and noise, but we also include such temporal aspects as speed, smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.

NOTE: The sample video clips in this section are best viewed at the highest resolution available. 

The Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) achieves a Video score of 100. A device’s overall Video score is derived from its performance and results across a range of attributes in the same way as the Photo score. In this section, we take a closer look at these sub-scores and compare video image quality against competitors.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 92

Exposure and Contrast

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

97

103

Huawei P50 Pro

Best: Huawei P50 Pro (103)

These sample clips show the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)’s video exposure performance in outdoor lighting conditions.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), stable target exposure

Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos), stable target exposure

Xiaomi Mi 11, exposure instabilities in the sky

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 96

Color

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

97

105

Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

Best: Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra (105)

These sample clips show the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)’s video color in low-light conditions.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), white balance instabilities

Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos), more stable white balance

Xiaomi Mi 11, more stable white balance

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 100

Autofocus

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

88

108

Huawei P50 Pro

Best: Huawei P50 Pro (108)

These sample clips show the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)’s video autofocus tracking performance in outdoor conditions.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), autofocus instabilities

Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos), generally accurate autofocus

Xiaomi Mi 11, autofocus instabilities

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 102

Texture

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

53

97

Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

Best: Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra (97)

This graph shows the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)’s video texture measurements in the lab.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 151

The level of video detail is low in all lighting conditions in 1080p mode on the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon). 4K footage from the Xiaomi Mi 11 is generally excellent and a notable improvement on 4K video captured on the Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos). The Vivo X60 Pro (Exynos) captures 4K footage as well.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 109

Noise

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

96

105

Huawei Mate 40 Pro

Best: Huawei Mate 40 Pro (105)

These video stills show the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)’s video noise performance in an indoor scene.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), indoor video still (1080p)

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 154

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), crop: well-controlled noise

Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos), indoor video still (4K)

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 156

Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos), crop: very visible noise

Xiaomi Mi 11, indoor video still (4K)

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 158

Xiaomi Mi 11, crop: well-controlled noise

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 127

Artifacts

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

79

94

Oppo Find X2 Pro

Best: Oppo Find X2 Pro (94)

For video artifacts, we check for the same kinds of artifacts mentioned in the Photo section, along with such video-specific artifacts as frame rate variation in different light conditions, judder effect, and moving artifacts (artifacts such as aliasing, color quantization, and flare can often be more intrusive when moving than in a still image).

This video still shows ringing and hue shift artifacts.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), video artifacts

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 161

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), crop: ringing and hue shifts are visible

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) Camera review: Solid Premium option 162

Stabilization

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

95

102

Huawei P50 Pro

Best: Huawei P50 Pro (102)

In these tests we analyze residual motion when handholding the camera during recording, as well as when walking and running with the camera. We also look for stabilization artifacts such as jello effect, sharpness differences between frames, and frame shift (abrupt changes of framing).

These sample clips shows the Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)’s video stabilization performance under 1000 lux lighting in the lab.

Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon), effective stabilization

Source link

Posted on Leave a comment

Vivo Developing Smartphone with Detachable Drone Selfie Camera

Vivo Developing Smartphone with Detachable Drone Selfie Camera

Vivo Developing Smartphone with Detachable Drone Selfie Camera 163

Vivo is reportedly developing a smartphone that includes a tiny quadcopter drone that slides out from the main body of the device, detaches, and can fly away to allow for better selfie photos.

According to patent information published publicly today and found by LetsGoDigital, the design describes what at first glance looks like a typical smartphone, but hides a small quadcopter drone with an integrated camera and battery that can be removed and flown separately to allow for aerial camera angles.

The patent describes a dual-camera system (one front-facing and one facing downwards) and three infrared proximity sensors that would theoretically allow the tiny drone some ability to keep itself from crashing into objects.

Vivo Developing Smartphone with Detachable Drone Selfie Camera 164

According to the report, the flying camera system can be slid out of the housing, removed entirely, and allow the smartphone owner to take photos from a greater distance. LetsGoDigital says that the patent describes the ability for the drone to change position or maintain position while shooting, and presumably the operation of the mini-drone takes place via the smartphone. While it is possible that the tiny flying camera would support gesture control, that is not mentioned as part of the documentation.

Tiny, portable flying cameras aren’t new. The drone pictured below is called the Air Pix and is about the size of the palm of a hand. However, it is a separate device that is almost the size of a full smartphone. The idea of integrating a mini flying camera directly into a smartphone is wholly original to Vivo, though the disadvantages of such a design may outweigh the benefits.

Vivo Developing Smartphone with Detachable Drone Selfie Camera 165

For starters, the drone would have to be much smaller than even the Air Pix — which already sports abysmal reviews on Amazon — which means the motors that power the propellers are unlikely to be strong enough to withstand much wind. Even a light breeze may shake the camera enough to make any photos it takes blurry. Some kind of stabilization of the lens will likely be necessary to mitigate this.

Additionally, a large flying part like this is prone to damage or loss, which would be expensive to replace. It’s unclear what would be exposed to the elements on the phone itself if the drone were to be lost as well since the port to hold the drone would be sizeable.

Vivo is, at least, thinking outside the box with this patent. While the publication of the patent at best shows the company is only in the very early stages of development, it remains to be seen if such a design is actually commercially viable.


Image credits: Mockup of Vivo smartphone and drone published courtesy of LetsGoDigital per usage guidelines.

Source link

Posted on Leave a comment

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance

Last month, Vivo’s sub-brand iQOO launched two new smartphones in India, the iQOO 7 and the iQOO 7 Legend. The latter, whose audio performance we’ll be reviewing today, is powered by Qualcomm’s Snapdragon 888 processor, and features a 120 Hz AMOLED display, 12 GB LPDDR5 RAM, a 4000 mAh battery, and 66W fast charging. Dubbed “Monster Inside,” the company’s 2021 flagship is designed for an “ultra gaming experience.” As audio is an integral part of immersion, the top-tier phone is also equipped with a “dedicated hi-fi chip” that Vivo says will deliver surround sound, a dynamic range of at least 120 dB, and distortion below 0.0003%. 

We put the Vivo iQOO 7 Legend through our rigorous DXOMARK Audio test suite to measure its performance both at recording sound using its built-in microphones, and at playing audio back through its built-in speakers. In this review, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Audio specifications include:

  • Two speakers (bottom-right side-firing, and top-center front-firing)
  • Surround sound
  • No headphone jack

About DXOMARK Audio tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone audio reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective tests and undertake more than 20 hours of perceptual evaluation under controlled lab conditions. This article highlights the most important results of our testing. Note that we evaluate both Playback and Recording using only the device’s built-in hardware and default apps. (For more details about our Playback protocol, click here; for more details about our Recording protocol, click here.)

Test summary

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 166
Vivo iQOO 7 Legend

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 167

66

audio

Playback

Cons

  • Inconsistent, high midrange-focused timbre
  • Aggressive tonal balance, especially at maximum volume
  • Lack of low midrange and bass
  • Compression tends to squash dynamics, especially at maximum volume.
  • When listening to music in inverted landscape orientation, stereo doesn’t rotate accordingly.

Recording

Pros

  • Good localizability performance in home and meeting scenarios
  • Very good wideness in meeting use cases
  • Correct maximum recording level without distortion

Cons

  • Tonal balance is very bright, with too-prominent high mids and treble and lack of low-midrange
  • Significant compression affects dynamics performance in all use cases.
  • Stereo is inverted in camera app recordings.
  • Recording loudness is too low in all tested use cases.
  • High SPL recordings exhibit harsh distortion and clipping.

With an overall Audio score of 66 that is well below the top-rated BlackShark 4 Pro at 81, the “monster” inside the iQOO 7 Legend isn’t much of a threat — at least not in the audio arena.

The flagship’s playback performance is a mixed bag. In timbre, while the speakers do deliver a satisfactory treble presence, the overall tonal balance is focused on high midrange frequencies, with a lack of low midrange and bass. In dynamics, although attack and bass precision are certainly decent, punch is impaired by excessive compression. That said, minimum volume allows audio contents to remain fully intelligible; maximum volume is satisfactory; and artifacts, both spectral and temporal, are well controlled.

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 169

Recording a life video with the Vivo iQOO 7 Legend.

The recording performance is less equivocal, with a score of 55 that puts the iQOO 7 Legend in the lower half of our Audio protocol database to date. Despite good spatial attributes, the phone turns in poor results in almost every sub-category, from its overly bright tonal balance to its harsh distortion and excessive compression when recording in high SPL scenarios. What is more, loudness is too low across all use cases; dynamics attributes are significantly affected by the aforementioned compression; and stereo is inverted for recordings made using the camera app.

Sub-scores explained

The DXOMARK Audio overall score of 66 for the Vivo iQOO 7 Legend is derived from its Playback and Recording scores and their respective sub-scores. In this section, we’ll take a closer look at these audio quality sub-scores and explain what they mean for the user.

Playback

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 170

Timbre

Black Shark 4 Pro

Best: Black Shark 4 Pro (82)

Timbre tests measure how well a phone reproduces sound across the audible tonal range and takes into account bass, midrange, treble, tonal balance, and volume dependency.

The timbre performance of the iQOO 7 Legend is average, with a score that puts it in the middle of the pack among smartphones we’ve tested to date. Treble presence is adequate, and is particularly well represented in landscape mode while watching movies and when listening to pop rock or classical music.

However, the device inconsistently reproduces midrange frequencies: while high midrange is too prominent — even becoming aggressive at maximum volume or when gaming — low mids are recessed. Low-end is also lacking, especially in portrait mode.

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 171

Dynamics

Black Shark 4 Pro

Best: Black Shark 4 Pro (81)

DXOMark’s dynamics tests measure how well a device reproduces the energy level of a sound source, and how precisely it reproduces bass frequencies.

The iQOO 7 Legend turns in a good dynamics performance, with precise attack and decent bass precision, earning the phone good sub-scores for hip-hop playback and gaming.

That said, at maximum volume, transient sounds are crushed by an ill-suited dynamic compression, resulting in a considerably impaired attack. Bass precision, while honorable considering the lack of low-end, would certainly benefit from a deeper frequency response. Finally, punch is weak overall, hindered both by the lack of low midrange and excessive compression at maximum volume.

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 172

Spatial

Black Shark 4 Pro

Best: Black Shark 4 Pro (82)

Sub-attributes for perceptual spatial tests include localizability, balance, distance, and wideness.

With a 62, the iQOO 7 Legend produces a middle-of-the-road performance for the playback spatial attribute. While the strong upper midrange ensures precise localizability of the sound sources featured in the mix, it makes voices sound unnaturally close. That said, distance (other than voices) is consistently reproduced.

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 173

While the iQOO 7 Legend provides good sound field wideness, the audio does not rotate accordingly when watching a video in inverted landscape mode.

Wideness performance is good; however, its sub-score is impaired by the sound scene not rotating accordingly when listening to music in inverted landscape mode.

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 174

Volume

Black Shark 4 Pro

Best: Black Shark 4 Pro (79)

Volume tests measure both the overall loudness a device is able to reproduce and how smoothly volume increases and decreases based on user input.

Except for the last volume step, the iQOO 7 Legend increases volume very smoothly, as shown in the graph above. Maximum volume is very satisfactory, and minimum volume is well-tuned, thus allowing dynamic content (such as classical music or movies) to remain fully intelligible.

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 175
Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 176

Here are a few sound pressure levels (SPL) measured when playing our sample recordings of hip-hop and classical music at maximum volume:

Hip-HopClassical
Vivo iQOO 7 Legend71.6 dBA70.2 dBA
Apple iPhone 12 mini74.2 dBA70.9 dBA
Vivo X51 5G71.3 dBA70.4 dBA
Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 177

Artifacts

Samsung Galaxy A52 5G

Best: Samsung Galaxy A52 5G (96)

Artifacts tests measure how much source audio is distorted when played back through a device’s speakers. Distortion can occur both because of sound processing in the device and because of the quality of the speakers.

As promised by the manufacturer, the iQOO 7 Legend excels at controlling distortion: spectral artifacts are indeed kept to a minimum.

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 178
Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 179

At maximum volume, temporal artifacts become noticeable, distortion can be perceived (but on synthetic signals only), and noise is accentuated by the prominence of high mids. That all said, at any other listening level, artifacts remain extremely discreet, and speakers are not easily occluded when watching movies or while playing games.

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 180

Speakers are not easily occluded by the user’s hands while gaming or watching videos.

Recording

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 170

Timbre

Black Shark 4 Pro

Best: Black Shark 4 Pro (86)

As a recording device, the iQOO7 does an above-average job of capturing timbre. Tonal balance is particularly bright, with prominent high mids and treble. While midrange reproduction is decent overall, it is impaired by a lack of low mids, resulting in nasal voices (especially in our meeting use case).

The microphones ensure good high-end presence, although slightly unnatural and metallic. In loud environments, such as a concert, the frequency response lacks low mids as well as both high- and low-end extension, which leads to a high midrange-focused, aggressive rendering.

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 171

Dynamics

OnePlus 8

Best: OnePlus 8 (78)

Dynamic attributes in recording are only middling. Both the signal-to-noise ratio and the sound envelope (plosive precision in particular) are affected by an excessively present background through which voices can’t seem to cut.

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 183
Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 184

The sound envelope is also impaired by an ill-adapted compression that is especially noticeable when recording in loud surroundings, where attack is blunted, and release is too slow. Further, bass-heavy tracks are extremely compressed. As a result, nuances are significantly shrunken, and bass precision is severely affected.

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 172

Spatial

Black Shark 4 Pro

Best: Black Shark 4 Pro (78)

In the recording area, the iQOO 7 Legend exhibits average spatial attributes. Audio recorded in urban environments contains a peculiar kind of elevated background noise, one in which voices seem to move inconsequently to the source’s motion. In quieter surroundings, such as in our home or meeting scenarios, the low background noise allows a significantly better performance.

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 186

Stereo is inverted when recording selfies or life videos with the camera app.

While wideness in meeting-type use cases is very satisfactory, note that stereo is inverted when recording selfie or life videos with the camera app. Further, the lack of low midrange induces a lack of fullness in voices which results in unrealistic distance rendering.

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 174

Volume

Xiaomi Mi 10S

Best: Xiaomi Mi 10S (89)

The maximum volume level reachable without distortion is decent in most scenarios, except in our electronic concert setup. However, audio recordings exhibit very limited loudness across every use case, especially when filming selfie videos.

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 188
Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 189

Here are our test results, measured in LUFS (Loudness Unit Full Scale); as a reference, we expect loudness levels to be above -24 LUFS for recorded content:

MeetingLife VideoSelfie VideoMemo
Vivo iQOO 7 Legend-33.9 LUFS-29.3 LUFS-27.2 LUFS-28.8 LUFS
Apple iPhone 12 mini-24.8 LUFS-22.1 LUFS-20.1 LUFS-18.6 LUFS
Vivo X51 5G-29.2 LUFS-24.1 LUFS-20.5 LUFS-23.7 LUFS
Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 177

Artifacts

Asus ROG Phone 5

Best: Asus ROG Phone 5 (88)

In recording, the iQOO 7 Legend is prone to inducing noticeable artifacts. Compression-related artifacts in particular, such as dynamic compression, impair both the background and main signal in every use case, especially when recording videos with the rear cameras. Loud content, whether transient or continuous, is severely affected by distortion, clipping, pumping, and multi-band compression, which makes the iQOO 7 Legend unsuitable for recording in loud surroundings (such as concerts).

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 191
Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 192

That said, note that the audio recording app seems less subject to artifacts than the camera app.

Vivo iQOO 7 Legend Audio review: A mixed performance 193

Background

Apple iPhone XS Max

Best: Apple iPhone XS Max (58)

The iQOO 7 Legend turns in a poor background performance, in correlation with the underwhelming timbre and artifacts performance. The result sounds harsh and unnatural due to excessive compression on the one hand, and the strong lack of lower frequencies on the other.

Conclusion

Because of  very noticeable artifacts (both spectral and temporal), elevated background noise, and inconsistent tonal balance, the iQOO 7 Legend is less than ideal to use as a recording device, especially in high SPL scenarios. As a speaker, Vivo’s latest flagship performs somewhat better, thanks to adequate treble presence, overall decent dynamics and spatial attributes, very good volume qualities, and an appreciable ability for keeping sonic artifacts to a minimum. That said, timbre inconsistencies and a mixed performance still keep the iQOO 7 Legend quite a ways down the table from top-scoring devices like the Black Shark 4 Pro.

Source link

Posted on Leave a comment

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming

The Vivo IQOO 7 Legend came out in January 2021, bringing with it a number of high-end components, including a Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 processor and a multi-camera setup that features a main wide camera with 48 MP resolution. Let’s see how the smartphone performed in our comprehensive Display protocol testing.

Key display specifications:

  • AMOLED screen
  • Size: 6.62 inches (86.6% screen-to-body ratio)
  • Dimensions: 162.2 x 75.8 x 8.7 mm (6.39 x 2.98 x 0.34 in)
  • Resolution: 1080 x 2400 pixels
  • Aspect ratio: 20:9, 394 ppi
  • Refresh rate: 120 Hz

About DXOMARK Display tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone and other display reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective and perceptual tests under controlled lab and real-life conditions. This article highlights the most important results of our testing. Note that we evaluate display attributes using only the device’s built-in display hardware and its still image (gallery) and video apps at their default settings. (For in-depth information about how we evaluate smartphone and other displays, check out our articles, “How DXOMARK tests display quality” and “A closer look at DXOMARK Display testing.”)

Test summary

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 194Vivo IQOO 7 Legend

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 195

83

display

Pros

  • Good device for gaming, as its touch is reactive and smooth while playing.
  • Good color accuracy despite a slight blue cast.
  • When playing HDR10 videos, colors are faithful.

Cons

  • Device lacks brightness in both indoor and outdoor conditions.
  • Color artifacts are visible when the device tilts, degrading the overall user experience.
  • Brightness is too low for comfortably watching videos.

The Vivo IQOO 7 Legend garners a mostly middle-of-the-pack overall score of 83, thanks to reasonably good scores for color and artifacts control, along with decent, if somewhat mixed results for motion and touch. It struggled a bit with readability, but its biggest drawback was that it was too dark when watching videos.

Analyses and comparisons

In this section, we’ll take a closer look at the Vivo IQOO 7 Legend’s performance in our six display quality attributes and explain what they mean for the user, and we will show illustrative comparison shots of the Vivo versus three of its principal competitors, the Asus ROG Phone 3, the OnePlus 8T, and the Apple iPhone 12 Pro.

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 197

Readability

Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

Best: Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos) (74)

DXOMARK uses the device’s gallery app to show static (still image) content when measuring the device’s display for brightness, contrast, gamma, and blue light impact, etc.

How easily you can see the content on your display is of paramount importance, and with 66 points, the Vivo IQOO 7 Legend puts in a mixed performance in this category.

Brightness vs Contrast comparison (0 Lux)

Brightness vs Contrast comparison (30 000 Lux)

In a low-light environment, brightness is good, but readability is low in indoor conditions, as the device lacks brightness, making dark details almost disappear:

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 198

Readability indoors, left to right: Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, Asus ROG Phone 3, OnePlus 8T, Apple iPhone 12 Pro

Photo credit: DXOMARK; for illustration only

The same is true when looking at pictures in outdoor conditions, as the lack of brightness again makes details easy to miss, whether in shade…

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 199

Readability in shady outdoor conditions, Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, Asus ROG Phone 3, OnePlus 8T, Apple iPhone 12 Pro

Photo credit: DXOMARK; for illustration only

… or under direct sunlight.

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 200

Readability in sunlight, left to right: Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, Asus ROG Phone 3, OnePlus 8T, Apple iPhone 12 Pro

Photo credit: DXOMARK; for illustration only

The Vivo IQOO 7 Legend shows a few small steps as it adapts to changing ambient brightness, but its performance for this readability sub-attribute is above average.

Although it already starts out on the dark side held on-axis (first array below), the Vivo device very noticeably loses both brightness and contrast when held at a 45° angle (second array).

Brightness vs Angle comparison

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 201

On-axis brightness, left to right: Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, Asus ROG Phone 3, OnePlus 8T, Apple iPhone 12 Pro

Photo credit: DXOMARK; for illustration only

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 202

Brightness at 45° angle, left to right: Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, Asus ROG Phone 3, OnePlus 8T, Apple iPhone 12 Pro

Photo credit: DXOMARK; for illustration only

The device is uniform in brightness; and while the Vivo IQOO 7 Legend loses a little brightness when the blue light filter (BLF) is on, it remains well suited for night conditions.

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 203

Color

TCL 20 Pro 5G

Best: TCL 20 Pro 5G (89)

DXOMARK uses the device’s gallery app to show static (still image) content when measuring the device’s display for white point, gamut, uniformity, color fidelity, and blue light filter impact, etc. 

Like many other smartphones, the Vivo device does not adapt its white point to the ambient lighting. Indoors, while the colors can appear a bit undersaturated and a slight blue cast can be noticeable, color rendering is good overall.

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 204

Color rendering viewed indoors, left to right: Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, Asus ROG Phone 3, OnePlus 8T, Apple iPhone 12 Pro

Photo credit: DXOMARK; for illustration only

Outdoors, a blue cast is noticeable, especially in the shade.

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 205

Color rendering outdoors in shade, left to right: Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, Asus ROG Phone 3, OnePlus 8T, Apple iPhone 12 Pro

Photo credit: DXOMARK; for illustration only

The charts below show the Legend’s color reproduction fidelity when under 1000 lux lighting in both the sRGB (standard) color space (left) and the broader DCI-P3 color space (right). The center of each circle is the target color; anything outside the circle represents a noticeable color difference. The further the tip of the arrow is outside of the circle, the more a user will notice the difference between the color on the display and color of the real object or chart next to it.

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 206

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, color fidelity at 1000 lux in the sRGB color space

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 206

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, color fidelity at 1000 lux in the DCI-P3 color space

In terms of color rendering when held at an angle, the Vivo IQOO 7 Legend’s color cast shifts from pink to blue alternatively with respect to the angle.

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 208

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, white point in the DCI-P3 color space

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 209

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, white point closeup showing scatter

You can see an on-angle pink cast in the illustrative array below:

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 210

Color rendering at 45° angle, left to right: Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, Asus ROG Phone 3, OnePlus 8T, Apple iPhone 12 Pro

Photo credit: DXOMARK; for illustration only

But arguably more important than a simple color cast is that the Vivo shows unusual, alternating color artifacts when the device is being tilted, as demonstrated in the GIF below:

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 211

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, color artifacts when tilting

As for other aspects of our color evaluation, the Vivo IQOO 7 Legend shows excellent color uniformity:

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 212

Color uniformity, left to right: Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, Asus ROG Phone 3, OnePlus 8T, Apple iPhone 12 Pro

Photo credit: DXOMARK; for illustration only

And when the BLF is turned on, the Vivo device turns very slightly yellow, but the resulting color is quite acceptable:

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 213

BLF on, left to right: Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, Asus ROG Phone 3, OnePlus 8T, Apple iPhone 12 Pro

Photo credit: DXOMARK; for illustration only

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 214

Video

Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

Best: Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos) (90)

DXOMARK uses the device’s video (or browser) app to show dynamic content when measuring the device’s display for brightness, contrast, gamma, and color (including skin tones).

The Vivo IQOO 7 Legend turned in something of a disappointing performance in our video tests, with its principal problem being that at its default settings, it is too dim for comfortably watching HDR10 videos. In the illustrative comparison array below, for example, the iPhone on the far right comes the closest to the reference video image:

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 215

Video brightness, left to right: Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, Asus ROG Phone 3, OnePlus 8T, Apple iPhone 12 Pro

Photo credit: DXOMARK; for illustration only

The Vivo device does render midtones quite well; however, dark details in HDR10 videos are hardly visible at all.

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 216

Video contrast, left to right: Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, Asus ROG Phone 3, OnePlus 8T, Apple iPhone 12 Pro

Photo credit: DXOMARK; for illustration only

One important point in the Vivo’s favor is that its video color rendering (including skin tone rendring) is quite accurate, despite an occasional slight blue cast.

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 217

Video color rendering, left to right: Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, Asus ROG Phone 3, OnePlus 8T, Apple iPhone 12 Pro

Photo credit: DXOMARK; for illustration only

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 218

Motion

Huawei P40 Pro

Best: Huawei P40 Pro (87)

The Vivo IQOO 7 Legend shows some frame drops at 24 fps, and just a couple at 60 fps, as shown below. (What we look for in the 24 fps video grab in this case when two light gray or two dark gray squares follow each other, which means that at those points in time, the video is not being displayed as it should.) However, while there are a few sporadic frame drops when playing video games, the device is smooth and provides a pleasant user experience.

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 219

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, frame drops at 24 fps

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 220

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, frame drops at 60 fps

The Legend manages video motion blur well. As for video playback, the Vivo shows a small delay before resuming the video after moving forward or backward on the video timeline.

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 221

Touch

OnePlus 9 Pro

Best: OnePlus 9 Pro (83)

The Vivo IQOO 7 Legend’s zooming capabilities in the gallery app are limited and lack accuracy. Moreover, the device sometimes lacks smoothness when browsing and when in the gallery app using its adaptive frame rate default mode. That said, the Legend is smooth when playing games; however, one potential caveat for gamers is that the device rarely detects touches on the bottom corners.

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 222

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, touch accuracy

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 223

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, touch smoothness

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 224

Artifacts

LG Wing

Best: LG Wing (84)

As for artifacts, the Vivo IQOO 7 Legend’s center notch can hide some content. Its mean reflectance is 5.1%; the graph below shows its reflectance curve over the visible spectrum:

As with two of its rivals, the Asus ROG Phone 3 and the Apple iPhone 12 Pro, flicker can be noticeable on the Vivo IQOO 7 Legend:

On the plus side, the Vivo IQOO 7 Legend responds only rarely to ghost touches; and while judder is noticeable when playing 24 fps videos, no judder is visible at 30 fps and 60 fps. And finally, though its smooth touch is a plus for gamers, its noticeable aliasing is not:

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 225

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, aliasing when gaming

Some closeups:

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 226

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, closeup, aliasing

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 227

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, closeup, aliasing

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend Display review: Good touch for gaming 228

Vivo IQOO 7 Legend, closeup, aliasing

Conclusion

The Vivo IQOO 7 Legend lands just below the half-way mark in our Display database, as it struggles a bit with brightness in both our readability and video testing. That said, it has good overall color management, and it has smooth and reactive touch, which makes it a good device for gaming.

Source link