Announced in December 2019, the Samsung Galaxy A71 is the latest mid-range smartphone from the South Korean electronics giant. Key device specifications include a massive 6.7-inch Super AMOLED display, a Snapdragon 730 chipset, and a high-capacity 4500 mAh battery.
The camera configuration is impressive, too, with a quad-sensor setup on the rear that includes standard wide and ultra-wide cameras, as well as dedicated sensors for macro shots and depth sensing. The primary camera features a 64MP 1/1.72-inch sensor with 0.8µm pixels linked to a 26mm-equivalent f/1.8-aperture lens, with the second ultra-wide camera offering a 12MP sensor and 12mm f/2.2-aperture lens. For close-up photography, the macro camera uses a 5MP 1/5.0-inch sensor with 1.12µm pixels and 25mm f/2.4-aperture lens. A 5MP sensor with a f/2.2-aperture lens provides depth estimation for blurring the background on bokeh shots.
For smartphone video enthusiasts, the Samsung Galaxy A71 captures 4K footage at 30fps, with higher frame rates of 240fps and 960fps available when dropping resolution down to Full HD 1080p capture. A gyroscope-based Electronic Image Stabilization System (gyro-EIS) promises smoother playback on static handheld videos, as well as those captured with walking or panning actions.
Let’s see how the Samsung Galaxy A71’s camera performed in our image quality analysis.
Key camera specifications:
- Quad camera setup
- Primary: 64MP 1/1.72-inch sensor with 0.8µm pixels and 26mm f/1.8-aperture lens
- Ultra-wide: 12MP sensor with 12mm f/2.2-aperture lens
- Macro: 5MP 1/5.0-inch sensor with 1.12µm pixels and 25mm f/2.4-aperture lens
- Depth: 5MP sensor with f/2.2 aperture-lens
- Dual Pixel PDAF autofocus (primary camera)
- Quad-LED dual-tone flash
- HDR (photo/panorama)
- 4K 2160p/30fps video
Please note: We used a Xiaomi Redmi K20 Pro for some comparison shots in this review. This device is labeled Xiaomi Redmi K20 Pro on the device body and packaging. However, in both the Android settings and in the camera EXIF data, the device name is listed as Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro, thus indicating that both phones are identical.
Conclusion
While Samsung’s mid-range A-series devices aren’t meant to rival the manufacturer’s excellent photography of its flagship models, the new A71 doesn’t really improve on the A9 we tested a year ago. From both the main and ultra-wide cameras you can expect well-exposed images in good light, excellent dynamic range and well-saturated color, but blue color casts can also make outdoor images disappointing.
Detail is generally low in all images and regular autofocus failures in low light can be frustrating. Samsung has significantly improved the bokeh rendering on the A71 compared to the A9, which is a bonus for portrait shooters, but the quality of both zoom and night shots is low.
The same analysis holds out for video, with acceptable exposure and color generally, but low detail and jerky autofocus when tracking makes successful videos a challenge. Samsung enthusiasts after top-quality photography would be advised to plumb for one of their flagship models, but if budget makes that impossible, there are better alternatives for photography in the mid-range market.
Conclusion
While Samsung’s mid-range A-series devices aren’t meant to rival the manufacturer’s excellent photography of its flagship models, the new A71 doesn’t really improve on the A9 we tested a year ago. From both the main and ultra-wide cameras you can expect well-exposed images in good light, excellent dynamic range and well-saturated color, but blue color casts can also make outdoor images disappointing.
Detail is generally low in all images and regular autofocus failures in low light can be frustrating. Samsung has significantly improved the bokeh rendering on the A71 compared to the A9, which is a bonus for portrait shooters, but the quality of both zoom and night shots is low.
The same analysis holds out for video, with acceptable exposure and color generally, but low detail and jerky autofocus when tracking makes successful videos a challenge. Samsung enthusiasts after top-quality photography would be advised to plumb for one of their flagship models, but if budget makes that impossible, there are better alternatives for photography in the mid-range market.
Photo
Pros
- Accurate exposure with wide dynamic range
- Well-controlled noise outdoors and indoors
- Vivid and pleasant color outdoors
- Nice bokeh effect
Cons
- Strong ringing in all conditions
- Low detail in all conditions
- Low detail in zoom shots
- Slow autofocus in all conditions, with failures in low light
- Blue color cast in outdoor images
Video
Pros
- Good exposure indoors and in bright light
- Effective stabilization in static handheld videos and when walking
Cons
- Low detail and visible noise in all conditions
- Limited dynamic range
- Visible ringing and color quantization artifacts
- Poor autofocus tracking with jerky convergence
