Hello,.
My current phone for years has been the Samsung Galaxy S4. I believe the aspect ratio of its screen is the same as a standard wide-screen movie (or wide-screen TV, 16:9. It seems like 16:9 widescreen is standard for laptops now too. (Although i preferred the older 4:3 taller laptop screens.) Likely desktop monitors as well. I think Android and Windows tablets are all 16:9 as well, although the Ipad (at least the older ones) is 4:3. So I think the 16:9 aspect ratio of my Galaxy S4 screen is pretty standard now for most types of screens, including phones 5 inch screens and under.
I am thinking of getting a bigger screen phone, or phablet. Although there are disadvantages with the increased size, I also see advantages, especially with my aging eyes, and think it might somewhat be able to function as a small tablet, while still fitting (even if not as well) in a front (male) pants pocket..
I think the size for a "phablet" is considered 5.5 inches and higher. Many are 5.5 inches, some 5.7 inches, and some even larger, such as 6 inches. By far the most common though, seem to be 5.5 and 5.7 inches.
I understand that the reported measurement of screen size is the diagonal measurement, from one corner diagonally across.
Well, there could be different combinations of height and width that would end up measuring 5.5 inches diagonally, for example.
So my first question is-- does a designated screen size of 5.5 inches refer to a specific screen height and width, or are there multiple different 5.5" screen sizes, that all end up being 5.5" diagonally? Or is it standardized?
I compared my S4 with a 5.5" screen phone in a store. The 5.5" phone was only slightly wider, but MUCH longer than my S4. (That description is holding the phone portrait, of course.) As the S4 is already standard widescreen aspect ratio, that would make the phone I saw much wider (if landscape) or longer (if portrait) than standard widescreen movies, TVs, laptops, Android tablets, etc. I can understand why they might not want to make the phone much wider, making it harder to hold. On the other hand, one wonders how valuable a larger screen is if the increase in size is mostly in one direction, and the aspect ratio of the screen becomes so skewed, so much longer and narrower (portrait) than other screens?
However, regarding my earlier question- if 5.5" screen size is not sometihng standardized, but could be different combinations of height and width to add up to 5.5" diagonally, then all 5.5" phones might not have that skewed extra long and narrow screen aspect ratio? Which is it? All 5.5" screens the same height and width (of screen, not phone), or do they differ?
If one goes larger than that, to 5.7 inch, might that more likely add width as well as length, to have a more normal aspect ratio? Or do those still keep a similar width (in portrait), while adding still more length, to create an even more skewed longer and narrow (portrait) aspect ratio?
I am eager to hear whatever info and insight you have on this issue. Thanks in advance for your input.
Although I have a new phone now, I am still curious about this question. For instance, whether a 5.5 inch screen, referring to the diagonal measurement, refers to a standardized screen height and width, or whether that might differ among phones, only that the diagonal measurement ends up at that number?
And other questions I asked in the OP.
Thank you.
I'm not sure what the V10 used, but it's likely the same as the G5 and G4 - the IMX234, which was a 16MP 5312 x 2988 (16:9 ratio), 1/2.6" sensor with 1.12 μm pixels.
The V20 is now using a IMX298, same sensor in the OP3, with 16MP again, but this time it's 4608 x 3456 (4:3 ratio), 1/2.8" sensor, but still with 1.12 μm pixels? Not sure how that is possible... this is according to the Wiki page with image sensor specs. The wide-angle seems to be the IMX219 which is a measly 1/4" sensor, so don't expect anything decent in lower light levels.
I'm not really pleased with the move to a 4:3 ratio sensor. I really loved the 16:9 view on the G4 and V10 when I had those. I don't print or edit photos, and only view on my phone or PC... just a lot more pleasing to look at. I'm also confused as to how the pixel size remained the same, yet the image sensor shrunk in size. It does now have PDAF which is nice, but hell, the Note 4 had that 2 years ago... about time LG caught up. I don't have high hopes for this camera. I feel like if LG could use a high MP 1/2.3" sensor like Google or HTC, they'd be much better off and actually reign as the mobile photography kings in terms of detail/resolution even though Sony themselves probably have the best sensor on the market in their Xperia lineup, but bomb the software processing year after year.
Nitemare3219 said:
I'm not sure what the V10 used, but it's likely the same as the G5 and G4 - the IMX234, which was a 16MP 5312 x 2988 (16:9 ratio), 1/2.6" sensor with 1.12 μm pixels.
The V20 is now using a IMX298, same sensor in the OP3, with 16MP again, but this time it's 4608 x 3456 (4:3 ratio), 1/2.8" sensor, but still with 1.12 μm pixels? Not sure how that is possible... this is according to the Wiki page with image sensor specs. The wide-angle seems to be the IMX219 which is a measly 1/4" sensor, so don't expect anything decent in lower light levels.
I'm not really pleased with the move to a 4:3 ratio sensor. I really loved the 16:9 view on the G4 and V10 when I had those. I don't print or edit photos, and only view on my phone or PC... just a lot more pleasing to look at. I'm also confused as to how the pixel size remained the same, yet the image sensor shrunk in size. It does now have PDAF which is nice, but hell, the Note 4 had that 2 years ago... about time LG caught up. I don't have high hopes for this camera. I feel like if LG could use a high MP 1/2.3" sensor like Google or HTC, they'd be much better off and actually reign as the mobile photography kings in terms of detail/resolution even though Sony themselves probably have the best sensor on the market in their Xperia lineup, but bomb the software processing year after year.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do not know why all oems are going with 4:3 ratio it looks ****ty when showing a photo or taking a photo on the phone which is 16:9 also most monitors and TVs are 16:9 , it's just everyone following apple as usual. If the headphone jack goes I think I will meltdown )))
My PC Monitor is 4:3 (NEC 24" CRT) and my Canon takes 4:3 pictures, which works good together and when printing 4x6, 5x7, or 8x10 sizes on my Epson. But for phones, it makes more sense to have a 16:9 image sensor, as that is the same aspect ratio as the phone's display and when viewed on an HDTV. I was glad that the Note 4 DE I got 2 years ago used a 16:9 sensor, but it looks like the Note 7 went back to 4:3 (not sure why). I was hoping the V20 was also going to use 16:9 for its sensor.
FAUguy said:
My PC Monitor is 4:3 (NEC 24" CRT) and my Canon takes 4:3 pictures, which works good together and when printing 4x6, 5x7, or 8x10 sizes on my Epson. But for phones, it makes more sense to have a 16:9 image sensor, as that is the same aspect ratio as the phone's display and when viewed on an HDTV. I was glad that the Note 4 DE I got 2 years ago used a 16:9 sensor, but it looks like the Note 7 went back to 4:3 (not sure why). I was hoping the V20 was also going to use 16:9 for its sensor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honestly the only reason is to follow a trend. 16:9 is so much better even if it is just so it fills the screen.
ipmanwck said:
I do not know why all oems are going with 4:3 ratio it looks ****ty when showing a photo or taking a photo on the phone which is 16:9 also most monitors and TVs are 16:9 , it's just everyone following apple as usual. If the headphone jack goes I think I will meltdown )))
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's because the lenses are spherical, so you have a circle to work with. Since we can't yet produce cost-effective circular sensors, we need rectangles to fill it and since a 4:3 rectangle fills a circle much better, using a 16:9 sensor is basically just cutting usable space, or making your pixels smaller (which would give us poor low-light photos). BTW the most area-efficient sensors would be 1:1, but that is not a standard aspect ratio, so we use the closest one (4:3). I hope you can all understand my photography-nerd rambling.
BolintsMiki said:
It's because the lenses are spherical, so you have a circle to work with. Since we can't yet produce cost-effective circular sensors, we need rectangles to fill it and since a 4:3 rectangle fills a circle much better, using a 16:9 sensor is basically just cutting usable space, or making your pixels smaller (which would give us poor low-light photos). BTW the most area-efficient sensors would be 1:1, but that is not a standard aspect ratio, so we use the closest one (4:3). I hope you can all understand my photography-nerd rambling.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That was very informative actually! Thank you. I like learning stuff...
Sent from my awesome T-Mobile LG V10!
Nitemare3219 said:
I'm not sure what the V10 used, but it's likely the same as the G5 and G4 - the IMX234, which was a 16MP 5312 x 2988 (16:9 ratio), 1/2.6" sensor with 1.12 μm pixels.
The V20 is now using a IMX298, same sensor in the OP3, with 16MP again, but this time it's 4608 x 3456 (4:3 ratio), 1/2.8" sensor, but still with 1.12 μm pixels? Not sure how that is possible... this is according to the Wiki page with image sensor specs. The wide-angle seems to be the IMX219 which is a measly 1/4" sensor, so don't expect anything decent in lower light levels.
I'm not really pleased with the move to a 4:3 ratio sensor. I really loved the 16:9 view on the G4 and V10 when I had those. I don't print or edit photos, and only view on my phone or PC... just a lot more pleasing to look at. I'm also confused as to how the pixel size remained the same, yet the image sensor shrunk in size. It does now have PDAF which is nice, but hell, the Note 4 had that 2 years ago... about time LG caught up. I don't have high hopes for this camera. I feel like if LG could use a high MP 1/2.3" sensor like Google or HTC, they'd be much better off and actually reign as the mobile photography kings in terms of detail/resolution even though Sony themselves probably have the best sensor on the market in their Xperia lineup, but bomb the software processing year after year.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have faith. The sensor alone is only half of the equation. Processing is just as important if not more important. Just look at. The lowlight capabilities of this phone. Same sensor yet it takes better pics than the one plus 3. The HTC 10 has the same sensor as the Nexus 6p and the 6p is a lot better still because of processing. Lg has great processing. No one ever talked about the g5 or g4 or v10s sensors because lg really excellent at their outstanding processing. While I agree I prefer 16:9 over 4:3 it just seems that's where it's going. Most if not all smartphone cameras are 4:3 now. There's probly a reason. Maybe to fit the controls and toggles on the screen at the same time. Maybe for eis since it crops the image or perhaps helps with the jello effect with ois. I had the g5 before returning it because of the build quality and the camera was outstanding. Krystal key from Android authority did a comparison and the g5 was her favorite camera. I'm sure we will even get one or two updates soon to improve the camera even. Plus you have. The more robust manual controls on a smartphone to date. I myself can't wait to use focus peeking like DSLRs have!!
Nitemare3219 said:
I'm not sure what the V10 used, but it's likely the same as the G5 and G4 - the IMX234, which was a 16MP 5312 x 2988 (16:9 ratio), 1/2.6" sensor with 1.12 μm pixels.
The V20 is now using a IMX298, same sensor in the OP3, with 16MP again, but this time it's 4608 x 3456 (4:3 ratio), 1/2.8" sensor, but still with 1.12 μm pixels? Not sure how that is possible... this is according to the Wiki page with image sensor specs. The wide-angle seems to be the IMX219 which is a measly 1/4" sensor, so don't expect anything decent in lower light levels.
I'm not really pleased with the move to a 4:3 ratio sensor. I really loved the 16:9 view on the G4 and V10 when I had those. I don't print or edit photos, and only view on my phone or PC... just a lot more pleasing to look at. I'm also confused as to how the pixel size remained the same, yet the image sensor shrunk in size. It does now have PDAF which is nice, but hell, the Note 4 had that 2 years ago... about time LG caught up. I don't have high hopes for this camera. I feel like if LG could use a high MP 1/2.3" sensor like Google or HTC, they'd be much better off and actually reign as the mobile photography kings in terms of detail/resolution even though Sony themselves probably have the best sensor on the market in their Xperia lineup, but bomb the software processing year after year.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I purchased a LG G4 for $325 back in November 2015 and I just got the V20. Did some camera comparisons between the G4 and V20 and here's my unprofessional findings:
The V20 videos, although a little better in quality, they are not what I expected from a 2016 flagship devices. Sounds great, but not much of an improvement over the G4.
The V20 pictures, are VERY disappointing. Initially set on the 12MP 16:9, I changed it to the 16MP 4:3, I found pictures to be more watercolour and less sharp than the G4. This is especially true when looking at grass blades and bricks.
Tried this in both auto and manual mode, and still the G4 came ahead. Loss of detail is very disappointing, especially when I've paid more than double the G4 ($770) for this phone.
Sadly, I'm going to return this back to T-Mobile and wait a little until the S8 comes out (hopefully without the home button and backwards capacitive keys). Maybe by that time the Pixel XL 128GB will drop in price and I'll consider that. Even though the phone experience is snappy and fast, and I kind of like the second top screen, along with the finger print reader, it's the camera that makes or breaks the phone for me. And in this case, it is very disappointing to have the G4 beat it.
ipmanwck said:
16:9 is so much better even if it is just so it fills the screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm surrounded by 16:9 screens everywhere. Why this move to 4:3 capture... Because bandwagon IMO.
rudbwoy said:
I'm surrounded by 16:9 screens everywhere. Why this move to 4:3 capture... Because bandwagon IMO.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know man. Stupid companies copy Apple all the time it's annoying. I know why it's being done but they should really fill the screen like then do in video capture. Was considering v20 but the g4 was such an amazing photo phone nothing beat it and has beat it for a while. Video capture is still better on Samsung though because sound on the g4 is poo and stabilisation is not great.
Very interesting...I was just about to make a post about this, but I'm glad that I found this thread.
The V20 does a lot worse in low light than my Note 4. I am pretty disappointed with it not meeting my expectations. To date, My S7 and Note 4 take the best pictures and that's sad in a way that it out classes the V20 camera. :/
imx298 was a big mistake for a flagship with this price
imx378 could be a good choice...
iunlock said:
Very interesting...I was just about to make a post about this, but I'm glad that I found this thread.
The V20 does a lot worse in low light than my Note 4. I am pretty disappointed with it not meeting my expectations. To date, My S7 and Note 4 take the best pictures and that's sad in a way that it out classes the V20 camera. :/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The s7 is so so good in low light. Was just taking photos inside in the dark of the kids dresses up in masks etc with only torch light and the photos were really good. My g4 cannot get much in that light but will be interesting to see what the v20 can do.
That's disappointing, I find the Pixel XL pretty uninteresting except of course for the amazing camera and I was thinking about exchanging it for a V20...
Additionaly the OP3T might get a IMX398 http://www.gsmarena.com/oneplus_3t_said_to_feature_a_sony_imx398_sensor-news-21328.php so I guess I'll have to wait for that OP3T now
Or the new Huawei Mate?
rudbwoy said:
I'm surrounded by 16:9 screens everywhere. Why this move to 4:3 capture... Because bandwagon IMO.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually it was the other way around.
16:9 is a terrible aspect ratio for just about anything other than a movie on a very big screen.
Skripka said:
Actually it was the other way around.
16:9 is a terrible aspect ratio for just about anything other than a movie on a very big screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wait...what?
calculateaspectratio
At my work, most if not all, the monitors are 1920x1080. Even the projectors in the conference rooms, (I've had the facilities people take out the 4:3 projector screens so we can use the wall), I've set to 1920x1080. At home, all I have are 16:9 TVs.
When I take pics and videos, and create family slide shows and such, all are 16:9....so I can play them back on my 16:9 TVs and devices.
16:9 is terrible? I don't know about that.
rudbwoy said:
Wait...what?
calculateaspectratio
At my work, most if not all, the monitors are 1920x1080. Even the projectors in the conference rooms, (I've had the facilities people take out the 4:3 projector screens so we can use the wall), I've set to 1920x1080. At home, all I have are 16:9 TVs.
When I take pics and videos, and create family slide shows and such, all are 16:9....so I can play them back on my 16:9 TVs and devices.
16:9 is terrible? I don't know about that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Vertically short monitors but fat are bad for anything other than theater movie watching. Movie watching isa minority of most computer LCD use. Most users would benefit from 4:3 or 5:4 in normal use. Less scrolling, and easier reading. Less wasted space of just filler going unused. It isn't isn't until you're dealing with UHD 30" class that 16:9 really works with 2 side by side windows.
LCD makers switched to basically only 16:9 to save on margins and manufacturing expense...not because it was better. Was also a carrot to get consumers to replace otherwise functioning gear.
What are you talking about? 4:3 yields no benefit in a society where wide screen has taken over monitors, tvs and projectors. Unless you're living in the 90s there is No advantage to having that aspect ratio in 2016.
It's 2016, good luck finding a new TV or even monitors in a 4:3 aspect ratio. It's a dead aspect ratio so there is zero point in making cameras with this aspect ratio.
We can argue about how 4:3 is better but the fact is in society 16:9 is everywhere there is no reason to use 4:3 when everything runs 16:9. There is no benefit to it.
Sent from my LG-H901 using XDA-Developers mobile app
evo4g63t said:
What are you talking about? 4:3 yields no benefit in a society where wide screen has taken over monitors, tvs and projectors. Unless you're living in the 90s there is No advantage to having that aspect ratio in 2016.
It's 2016, good luck finding a new TV or even monitors in a 4:3 aspect ratio. It's a dead aspect ratio so there is zero point in making cameras with this aspect ratio.
We can argue about how 4:3 is better but the fact is in society 16:9 is everywhere there is no reason to use 4:3 when everything runs 16:9. There is no benefit to it.
Sent from my LG-H901 using XDA-Developers mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A) He just listed reasons for why this is happening.
B) Saying there is no benefit to 4:3 means you don't know anything about photography.
After using several onscreen navbutton phones in the past and having this S8 for 5 days now, I see almost no reason as to why the 18.5:9 screen aspect ratio decision was made.
It would still have a big screen, probably close to the S7 Edge size.
The only thing I can think of is that Samsung is used to creating apps for 16:9 ratio screens because previous phones had physical navbuttons. Maybe they didn't want to have to mess with that and just put the navbuttons on the screen and increased the length to accommodate the extra buttons taking up space on the button; still allowing them to make 16:9 native apps. I just don't like it. It makes for an awkward Android experience, especially with unsupported apps.
I disagree. Based on the number of pre-orders alone for this phone, it will soon become one of the most popular android phones in use. As use increases, more companies will fit their formatting to the unusual aspect ratio. The fact that the G6 also has this aspect ratio (and yes, I know it's not exactly the same, but close enough) means that there will be more impetus for developers to accommodate the screen. I think this is a big step forward in the mobile phone industry, it just needs to take some time for the rest of the industry to catch up.
marinebio94 said:
I disagree. Based on the number of pre-orders alone for this phone, it will soon become one of the most popular android phones in use. As use increases, more companies will fit their formatting to the unusual aspect ratio. The fact that the G6 also has this aspect ratio (and yes, I know it's not exactly the same, but close enough) means that there will be more impetus for developers to accommodate the screen. I think this is a big step forward in the mobile phone industry, it just needs to take some time for the rest of the industry to catch up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The preorders aren't an indication of the abnormal height of the phone, but the infinity screen itself. They could've kept it infinity just the same with 16:9.
Why do you think this is a big step forward? What purpose does the super tall phone serve in your opinion?
Hoping we can have a good discussion.
Disagree. This should be the standard much more comfortable than s7 edge. Not because of the edges but becaus3 of the slim side ratio. Would not buy another 16:9 phone ever again
I really don't know why people are *****ing about the aspect ratio. With modern Android you don't notice this at all because the developers know how to deal with constaints of interface elements. Now you can see one google news more. You have more space above the keyboard. List views have one more entry. Whats the problem with that? Maybe there are apps that are incompatible but I have yet to see one.
To be honest I've not encountered any issues worth talking about, related to elongated screen. If there is software that can take advantage of extra screen (and there will be more coming soon), great, if not there are bars on the screen just like if I had larger bezel (or like watching 4:3 program on my HDTV). Actually I have hard time telling where the screen ends and bezel starts. I was expecting to miss physical home button, but since it is now permanent part of the screen and it is still there, except invisible, it doesn't bother me at all. And benefits of longer screen are great: finally we can have 2 programs display properly on the screen at the same time, typing is much easier, with more text displayed, web pages show more, with less scrolling, most cinema movies are shot at 1.85:1, some are as wide 2.39:1 etc.
In my opinion.. the only issue with the weird aspect ratio is that it fools some people into thinking their screens are so much bigger than it actually is. The S8 for example has only 2% more screen area than a 16:9 5.5" screen while the S8+ has 17% more screen area. The regular S8 screen is also narrower than screen on iphone 7 plus.
If you are going from a 5.5" 16:9 ratio phone like the iphone 7plus.. the regular S8 WILL feel like a smaller screen in comparison.
eduardmc said:
Disagree. This should be the standard much more comfortable than s7 edge. Not because of the edges but becaus3 of the slim side ratio. Would not buy another 16:9 phone ever again
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can keep the exact same slim side ratio and reduce the height of the S8 to get roughly the same size screen as the S7 Edge in a much smaller body. Not sure where you were going with that.
I'm actually quite happy with the screen.
the extra wide/tall screen helps create better immersion in 3D games, improves field of vision in VR, and compensates for the screenspace now lost to the onscreen buttons(or in my case, my physical keyboard)
the slimmer design also makes the phone more comfortable to hold, the S8 has the perfect width for me.
pete4k said:
To be honest I've not encountered any issues worth talking about, related to elongated screen. If there is software that can take advantage of extra screen (and there will be more coming soon), great, if not there are bars on the screen just like if I had larger bezel (or like watching 4:3 program on my HDTV). Actually I have hard time telling where the screen ends and bezel starts. I was expecting to miss physical home button, but since it is now permanent part of the screen and it is still there, except invisible, it doesn't bother me at all. And benefits of longer screen are great: finally we can have 2 programs display properly on the screen at the same time, typing is much easier, with more text displayed, web pages show more, with less scrolling, most cinema movies are shot at 1.85:1, some are as wide 2.39:1 etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You made a few good points:
1. Multi-window works better
2. Bit more room to type
3. More webpage for scrolling less
While those are good, if I was given a decision I'd still take a shorter phone. I personally prioritize the size of the phone over many other things.
If this phone was released as 16:9 with a 5.5" screen (same as S7 Edge), it would be slightly larger than an iPhone 6/7. Which is insane because their screens are only 4.7". To me the iPhone is the perfect one-handed size phone with every other hardware being not so great.
The S7 was a 5.1" phone and the natural progression could've been to a 5.5" 16:9 phone in a smaller body than the S7 with the same size screen as S7E. I really think they went with 18.5:9 because of the apps. I bet you this screen would be 16:9 if you chopped off the navbar softkeys. Could be wrong though.
I'm really just nitpicking
I've actually enjoyed the taller screen. I went with the plus and am still able to function just as I was able to on the s7e. It gives you an option to expand apps that aren't already expanded to take full advantage of the screen, and watching video with bars on the side isn't a big deal to me, because as was said above that would be the bezels on an older s model phone and I prefer(love) the look of this one. An iphone may have the perfect ratio, but the resolution doesn't compare to these screens and that's what I'm looking for more than the ratio, just my opinion of course. That bixby button on the other hand...