We subjected the Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos) to our rigorous SBMARK Selfie test suite to measure its performance in photos and videos from an end-user perspective. This article explains how the device performed in a variety of tests and different common use cases and aims to highlight the most important results of our tests with an extract of the acquired data.
Overview
Main specifications of the front camera:
- 40 MP 1 / 2.82 ″ sensor
- aperture f / 2.2
- Focal length equivalent to 26 mm
- PDAF
- 4K at 30/60 fps, 1080p at 30 fps
Pros
- Good exposure and wide dynamic range in photos and videos
- Accurate white balance and beautiful color
- Fast and repeatable autofocus
- Nice bokeh effect with an accurate estimate of the depth
- Nice color and skin tone in the video
- High levels of detail in the video
versus
- High levels of image noise
- Slightly limited depth of field
- Ghost, halo and ring artifacts
- Occasional autofocus instability in the video
- Camera shake while walking while recording video
The Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos) is among the best phones we’ve tested for taking selfies and improves slightly over its predecessor S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos). The improvements are most noticeable in terms of depth of field, texture and video. The downside is that the noise levels are higher than the previous model and the video stabilization is less effective.
This outdoor selfie displays accurate white balance and exposure, as well as a good level of detail.
When shooting still images, the camera handles exposure well, capturing good target exposure on portraits and a wide dynamic range in high-contrast scenes. Colors are beautiful, with neutral white balance and natural skin tones. However, noise levels are high in all conditions, especially in brighter outdoor light, where we can see luminance noise in the background and in the shadows. Autofocus is fast enough and repeatable enough, but depth of field is somewhat limited, which can result in subjects being blurred in group selfies. Our testers also observed some image artifacts, including ghosting, halos, and ringing.
In video mode, exposure and color are handled just as well as in photos, but we did notice some instability in autofocus and the depth of field is limited as in photo mode. Textures are rendered well, with a high level of detail, but the main drawback of the camera in video mode is the ineffective video stabilization when walking while recording. In this type of situation, you will notice a lot of camera shake in video shooting.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos) vs Ultra-Premium selfie scores
This chart compares the overall scores of SBMARK Selfie photos and videos between tested devices and references. The average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. The average and maximum scores for each price segment are calculated based on the SBMARK device database.
Test summary
About SBMARK selfie tests: For scoring and analysis, SBMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 1,500 test images in both controlled laboratory environments and natural outdoor, indoor and low-light scenes, using the front camera’s default settings. The photographic protocol is designed to take into account the user’s needs and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as close-ups and group selfies. Assessment is done by visually inspecting images Cons a natural scene reference and making objective measurements on graphical images captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 1 to 1,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K. For more SBMARK Selfie Test Protocol information, please click here. More details on how we rate smartphone cameras can be found here. The following section collects the key elements of SBMARK’s comprehensive testing and analysis. Comprehensive performance evaluations are available upon request. Contact us to find out how to receive a full report.
Photo
130
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
144
Huawei P50 Pro
Huawei P50 Pro
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos) vs Ultra-Premium photo scores
Photo tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise under various lighting conditions. Focus range and presence of artifacts on all images captured under controlled laboratory conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All of these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help in understanding the main strengths and weaknesses of the camera.
Exposure
88
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
90
Huawei P50 Pro
Huawei P50 Pro
Color
ninety two
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
100
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Exposure and color are the key attributes for technically good images. For exposure, the main attribute evaluated is the brightness of the face in various use cases and lighting conditions. Other factors evaluated are contrast and dynamic range, eg. the ability to make details visible in both light and dark areas of the image. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera’s ability to deliver the same rendering when shooting consecutive images in a row.
For color, the analyzed image quality attributes are skin tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability.
In this difficult backlit scene, the S22 Ultra manages good exposure and nice contrast on both sides. The camera also does a good job of keeping details on the brighter background, even if you notice some clipping. There are slightly better details in the background of the S21 Ultra’s image, but the face exposure is brighter on the S22 Ultra. Compared to the iPhone, the S22 Ultra exhibits better highlight retention and contrast.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), good exposure on both sides, good retention of background highlights
Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos), good exposure on lighter skin, slight underexposure on darker skin, good retention of background highlights
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max, good exposure on lighter skin, slight underexposure on darker skin, slight overexposure on background
In this close-up, the two Samsung devices offer very similar exposure. Compared to the iPhone, the background cutout is less strong and the contrast is better. Facial exposure is a bit darker, though.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), good exposure on the face, slightly overexposed sky
Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos), good exposure on the face, slightly overexposed sky
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max, good exposure on the face, overexposed sky
In this graph, you can see that the S22 Ultra offers good exposure in all conditions. Overall exposure is better than the comparison devices.
This graph shows the brightness measured on the 18% gray spot of the Colorchecker® graph versus the light level (in lux). The white area represents the region where the brightness is considered correct.
In this scene, both Samsungs produce fairly neutral white balance and beautiful skin tones. The red wall in the background is more saturated on the iPhone but the skin tones are too red too.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), neutral white balance, accurate color rendering
Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos), neutral white balance, accurate color rendering
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max, warmer white balance, slightly reddish skin tone
Under interior lighting, the white balance is more neutral on the iPhone, but the skin tones are still too red. Both Samsung phones once again produce very similar colors, with a cooler color cast and more neutral skin tones.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), natural complexion, neutral white balance
Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos), Natural Skin Tones, Neutral White Balance
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max, warmer white balance, slightly reddish skin tone
Focus
95
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
97
Huawei P50 Pro
Huawei P50 Pro
Autofocus tests evaluate the accuracy of focusing on the subject’s face, the repeatability of precise focus, and depth of field. While a shallow depth of field can be nice for a single-subject selfie or close-up shot, it can be problematic in specific conditions like group selfies; both situations are tested. The accuracy of the focus is also evaluated in all real images taken, from 30 cm to 150 cm, and in low light conditions up to the outdoors.
All three comparison devices are equipped with autofocus systems in the front camera, which allows them to focus correctly on different distances to the subject. In the focus range graph below, we can see that all three devices provide focused images over all distances to the tested subject (any acuity greater than 80% is considered to be in focus).
This graph shows the sharpness versus shooting distance at a light level of 1000 lux.
The depth of field of the S22 Ultra is wider than that of the S21 Ultra but is still somewhat limited. Background subjects in group photos tend to be slightly out of focus. In comparison, the background is slightly sharper on the iPhone 13 Pro Max.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), shallow depth of field
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), crop: precise autofocus, wide depth of field
Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos), shallow depth of field
Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos), crop: precise autofocus, slightly limited depth of field
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max, shallow depth of field
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max, crop: precise autofocus, wide depth of field
Structure
74
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
79
Asus ZenFone 7 Pro
Asus ZenFone 7 Pro
Texture tests analyze the level of detail and texture of subjects in images taken in the laboratory as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, special attention is paid to the level of detail in the facial features, such as the eyes. Objective measurements are performed on map images taken under various lighting conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different types of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary SBMARK (DMC) chart and the Dead Leaves chart.
Evolution of the sharpness of the texture with the level of illuminance
This graph shows the evolution of texture sharpness with the lux level for two sealing conditions. Texture sharpness is measured on the Dead Leaves graph in the Close-up Dead Leaves setting.
Our lab measurements show that the texture sharpness on the S22 Ultra is greater than the comparison devices for most conditions, except in very bright and very low light.
Under internal lighting, the S22 Ultra produces better details than the iPhone. Textures also look more natural than on the S21 Ultra.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), internal structure
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), crop: high levels of detail
Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos), internal structure
Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos), crop: good fine detail
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max, internal structure
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max, crop: good fine detail
Noise
52
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
90
Huawei P40 Pro
Huawei P40 Pro
Noise tests analyze various noise attributes such as intensity, chromaticity, grain and texture on real life images as well as graphical images taken in the laboratory. For natural images, special attention is paid to noise on faces, but also on dark areas and in conditions of high dynamic range. Objective measurements are performed on graphical images taken under various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different types of dynamic range conditions. The graph used is the SBMARK Dead Leaves graph and standardized measurement such as visual noise derived from ISO 15739.
When shooting outdoors, the noise levels on the S22 Ultra are higher than on comparison phones. Noise is more intrusive in the shadows and background.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), external noise
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), crop: high levels of background noise and shadows
Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos), external noise
Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos), crop: light luminance noise on background and shadows
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max, external noise
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max, crop: almost no visible luminance noise
Things change indoors and in low light, where noise remains visible but is similar to the S21 Ultra and less intrusive than the Apple phone.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), internal noise
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), crop: quite visible noise on the face and walls
Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos), internal noise
Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos), crop: quite visible noise on the face and walls
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max, internal noise
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max, crop: slight noise on the face, loud noise on the walls
Manufactured goods
82
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
87
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Google Pixel 6 Pro
Artifact evaluation examines lens shading, chromatic aberrations, distortion measurement on the dot and MTF chart, and ring measurements on the SFR chart in the lab. Particular attention is paid, among other things, to ghosting, quantization, halos and variations of shades on the face. The more severe and frequent the artifact, the greater the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts observed and the corresponding point loss are listed below.
Main penalties for photographic artifacts
Ghost artifacts can be noticeable when capturing high-contrast scenes or in low-light conditions. Our testers also observed some ringing.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), artifacts
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), crop: ghosting on moving elements
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), artifacts
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), crop: ring on high contrast edges
Bokeh is tested in a dedicated mode, usually in portrait or aperture mode, and analyzed by visually inspecting all images captured in the lab and under natural conditions. The goal is to reproduce portrait photography comparable to that taken with a DSLR and a wide aperture. The main image quality attributes to look out for are depth estimation, artifacts, blur gradient, and bokeh blur spotlight shape. The attributes of the portrait image quality (exposure, color, texture) are also taken into account.
This difficult scene is handled quite well by the S22 Ultra’s bokeh mode. Correctly, no blur was applied to the plant as it is in the same plane as the subject. In addition, the simulated opening creates a pleasant overall effect. Some artifacts of slight depth are visible. This is the same for the other devices which also apply a slight blur to the plant.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), slight depth artifacts but natural blur and simulated aperture
Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos), good depth estimate but some depth artifacts
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max, good depth estimate but some depth artifacts
video
144
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
146
Huawei P50 Pro
Huawei P50 Pro
About SBMARK Selfie Video Tests
SBMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2 hours of video in controlled laboratory environments and natural scenes in low light conditions, indoors and outdoors, using the default settings of the front camera. The assessment consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken under various conditions and carrying out objective measurements on graphical videos recorded in the laboratory under different conditions from 1 to 1000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300 K to 6,500 K.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos) vs Ultra-Premium video scores
Video tests analyze the same image quality attributes as still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, as well as temporal aspects such as speed, exposure uniformity and stability, white balance, and autofocus transitions.
Exposure
81
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
86
Apple iPhone 13 mini
Apple iPhone 13 mini
Color
84
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
87
Asus ZenFone 7 Pro
Asus ZenFone 7 Pro
Exposure tests evaluate facial brightness and dynamic range, eg. the ability to make details visible in both light and dark areas of the image. The stability and temporal adaptation of exposure are also analyzed. Image quality color analysis examines skin tone rendition, white balance, color shading, white balance stability, and its adaptation when the light changes.
In this video scene, the S22 Ultra produces accurate exposure with a good compromise between different skin tones and good retention of detail Cons the bright background. The dynamic range of the iPhone is wider but the exposure is rather dark.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), well balanced exposure, good background highlight retention
Apple iPhone 13, well balanced exposure, good background highlight retention
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max, wider dynamic range and better highlight retention but underexposure on faces
Target exposure is slightly better than comparison devices in low light and quite similar to the S21 Ultra in bright conditions (slightly above target but still acceptable).
This graph shows the brightness measured on the 18% gray spot of the Colorchecker® graph versus the light level (in lux). The white area represents the region where the brightness is considered correct.
Video white balance on the S22 Ultra is cooler than on the iPhone, but skin tones look more natural than on the S21 Ultra predecessor.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), Natural complexion, neutral white balance
Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos), slightly less saturated skin tone, warm white balance
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max, warmer white balance, beautiful skin tones
Structure
88
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
97
Asus ZenFone 6
Asus ZenFone 6
Consistency tests analyze the level of detail and texture of real-life videos, as well as graph videos recorded in the lab. Natural video recordings are evaluated visually, with particular attention to the level of detail of the facial features. Objective measurements are performed on images of graphs taken under various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart.
The video texture measured on the S22 Ultra is similar to the S21 Ultra but noticeably superior to that of the iPhone 13 Pro Max.
This graph shows the texture and sharpness of the edge versus the light level (in lux). The texture and sharpness of the edge are measured on the deadleaves graph in the video deadleaves setting.
The texture level is higher for the S22 than for the S21 and similar to the iPhone.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), very good detail
Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos), good detail
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max, very good details
Noise
64
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
83
Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra
Noise tests analyze various noise attributes such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, texture, temporal aspects on real-life video recordings and graph videos taken in the laboratory. Natural videos are evaluated visually, with particular attention to noise on faces. Objective measurements are performed on card videos recorded under various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The graph used is the SBMARK visual noise graph.
Spatial evolution of visual noise with the level of illuminance
This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise graph in the video noise setting. SBMARK visual noise measurement is derived from the ISO15739 standard.
Time evolution of visual noise with the level of illuminance
This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Visual temporal noise is measured on the visual noise graph in the video noise setting.
Video noise is well under control in indoor conditions and in low light conditions. The noise levels are lower than the competitors.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), noise well under control
Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos), more noise and underexposed
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max, loud noise
The results that we can see in the clips above are confirmed by our laboratory measurements. The noise levels on the S22 Ultra in the lab are lower than on the iPhone 13 Pro Max.
This graph shows temporal visual noise and the chromaticity ratio of temporal noise to light level (in lux). The temporal visual noise and the chromaticity ratio of the noise are measured on the visual noise graph in the video noise setting.
Stabilization
74
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
82
Huawei Mate 40 Pro
Huawei Mate 40 Pro
The stabilization assessment verifies the device’s ability to stabilize footage using software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any other means. The assessment examines overall residual motion on the face and background, smoothness and gelatin artifacts, during walking and panning use cases under various lighting conditions. The video below is an excerpt from one of the tested scenes.
While stabilization works well when holding the camera still, it’s not very effective when moving around while recording. There is still a lot of residual camera movement in the footage. The S22 Ultra is worse than both comparison devices in this respect.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), ineffective stabilization on the go
Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos), better stabilization
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max, better stabilization
Manufactured goods
88
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)
ninety two
Apple iPhone 12 mini
Apple iPhone 12 mini
Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ring measurements on the SFR graph in the lab, as well as frame rate measurements using the Universal Timer LED. Natural videos are visually evaluated with special attention to artifacts such as quantization, hue shift, and face rendering artifacts, among others. The more severe and frequent the artifact, the greater the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and the corresponding point loss are listed below
Main penalties for video artifacts
Anamorphosis (perspective distortion) can sometimes be evident on faces near the edge of the frame. In this clip, this is especially noticeable on the face on the right.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos), anamorphosis at the edge of the frame
Start a new Thread