How many cameras are enough? How many are too many? The Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018) came out about three and a half years ago and was the first quad camera phone ever. It promised a lot of versatility, letting you switch between three focal lengths to get the best possible framing for your shot, as it made a shallow depth of field normally only possible with large DSLR sensors.
Let’s take a look at the A9’s camera list. There were three usable cameras on the back and a utility module (we’ll cover the front camera later).
- 24MP main camera, f / 1.7 aperture, 4K video recording at 30fps
- 8MP Ultra Wide Angle (FoV 120 °, 12mm)
- 10MP telephoto lens (2x, 52mm optical magnification)
- 5 MP depth sensor
Why are so many cameras needed? Well, there have been some attempts to use variable focal length cameras, but those never fit a phone under 10mm. And the A9 was 8mm thinner, with a camera almost flush with the rear panel.
With the technology available at the time, the simplest way to offer multiple focal lengths was to use multiple modules. The LG G5 proved the usefulness of having an ultrawide lens in 2016, right after telephoto lenses began adorning the back of smartphones.
It wasn’t until 2018 that the first phones to offer both started appearing. The LG V40 ThinQ was announced on October 3 (a couple of weeks before the A9) and featured an ultra-wide 107 °, 78 ° wide and 45 ° telephoto lens on the back. With two front cameras, 90 ° and 80 °, it was the first phone with five cameras on board. Samsung also had five in total, but in a 4 + 1 configuration.
You may be eager to talk about whether depth sensors are actually useful or just increase the count for marketing purposes. Unfortunately, we have bigger problems to tackle first – the Galaxy A9 (2018) cameras weren’t very good.
Below are some camera examples from the main camera and the first thing that strikes us even now is “Why am I so purple?”. The phone occasionally got the white balance correct, but it was a rarity. And even when he did, the photos were still noisy and soft.
Camera samples, normal camera
The telephoto lens handled colors better, but for some odd reason the output from the 10MP sensor was increased to 24MP. You could turn it off, but it was odd that it was also an option.
Samples of cameras, telephoto
The ultra wide-angle camera had several problems, the images it produced were heavily distorted. The image quality was also not perfect. We kinda liked the exaggerated perspective, but there’s a reason most ultra wide-angle cameras have distortion correction enabled by default.
Camera samples, ultra wide
Here are some night photos, which aren’t even great. The zoomed photos were taken with the main camera, the tele module presumably performed even worse.
Low light samples, normal camera
Overall, we expected more, even from a 2018 midranger. Especially one where the main draw was the cameras, even if that wasn’t the only thing the Galaxy A9 (2018) had in store. We’ll talk about this later, it’s time to focus on the depth sensor.
Surprisingly, the portraits that were taken by the main camera and depth sensor working together were quite beautiful as the phone managed to separate the subject from the background quite accurately.
Samples of portraits
And it worked with non-human subjects too, allowing for some creative photos. All in all, the depth sensor was the only module that did his job well, the other three disappointed.
Samples of portraits
The selfie camera was equipped with a 24 MP sensor, which was the same size as the sensor in the main camera on the back – 1 / 2.8 “, 0.9 µm pixels. Its main problem was the lack of autofocus, which it meant you had to be aware of how you were holding your phone. Too far or too close and your cup would be blurry. Dynamic range wasn’t perfect either, but under the right conditions you could get some really good shots.
Selfie samples
While the cameras were the main feature, the Galaxy A9 (2018) also stood out for its size – its 6.3 “display was one of the largest you can get back then, especially if you wanted a high quality Super AMOLED panel. It was bright, had great color accuracy, and supported sRGB, Adobe RGB, and DCI-P3 color spaces. It was one of the best displays you could have, outside the flagship Galaxy S and Note series.
6.3 “FHD + Super AMOLED display • Dedicated microSD slot • 3,800 mAh battery with 18 W fast charging
The A9 was equipped with the fairly powerful Snapdragon 660, a 14nm chip with four Kryo 260 Gold cores (based on Cortex-A73) and four Silver cores (A53), plus an Adreno 512. It matched the 6GB chipset or 8GB of RAM and 64 / 128GB of storage, plus a dedicated microSD slot.
This has made it one of the performance leaders in the mid-range segment. Unfortunately, it was saddled with an older Android 8.0 Oreo. Even so, the Samsung Experience 9.0 software included split-screen multitasking, so you could make the most of the 6.3-inch and relatively powerful chipset. And, thankfully, the 9.0 Pie update came quickly, with a rollout that began a few months after launch.
The phone was powered by a 3,800mAh battery, which gave it a respectable 88-hour endurance score in our tests. It could have done better if it got something more efficient than a 14nm chipset, but the battery life was still one of the A9’s best suites.
The Samsung Galaxy A9 (2018) was perhaps too expensive for its own good, launched in India at ₹ 39,000, the equivalent of € 470 at the time. It quickly received a price cut to ₹ 37,000, but the price could only drop that much, considering the camera modules and large onboard Super AMOLED display.
In the end, the A9 was a good idea poorly executed. Perhaps Samsung got too ambitious, even the Galaxy S9 + and Note9 couldn’t fit both a telephoto lens and an ultra-wide module, despite working on a higher budget. Still, we appreciate the attempt – ambition is what made the Galaxy A9 (2018) a memorable phone.
Start a new Thread