Two in one: LG G5 camera review

Caution with the back lens cover glass (or crystal or whatever it is). Apparently it breaks pretty easily. Mine broke, leaving a ragged hole over the wide-angle lens, while in my pocket. The normal camera still works, but the wide-angle is now prone to some nasty veiling flare on the right half of the image.

The local phone repair place tells me that their parts supplier tells them that all replacement lens covers in the US are sold out. I've been waiting for almost a month, and now it's going to be another week yet. They hope.

Sounds like it might be a weak point in the G5.

Jun 14, 2016permalink

My G5 is now fixed. It cost about $45 (USD), which seems to be about the standard charge for most mobile phone repairs. It took less than 10 minutes to do the actual repair, once they got the part.

Jun 20, 2016permalink

In 3 days I get the LG 360 Friends Cam keep U posted...

Jun 6, 2016permalink

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4015294#forum-post-57901737

Jun 11, 2016permalink

clipping path king

nice LG G5 camera review and I love this lovely one . thanks for your nice judgement s

Jun 3, 2016permalink

plytybetonowe

It's a great phone. I buy it and make a lot photos .

Jun 2, 2016permalink

(unknown member)

I bought a G4 because the results from raw are good. JPEG on an LG is execrable so why post rrsults instead of just saying you have to use RAW. The other reason to buy is the panoramas but thry are hopeless as thry have thr same lowres blocky appearance the jpegs here have with added massive exposure shifts on any scene not being the same tone everywhere. It alters exposure as you pan instead of using a single consistent exposure

May 23, 2016permalink

aLmoravado

I don't have a G5 but I am planning on getting one, since it offers more for photography lovers than any other phone out there (overall).

May 18, 2016*permalink

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxtDotUH3k8

Simply not true Video Qual very good the stabilisation is the best. Only in very low light its not so good - where I dont take pictures. The flash pic is underexposed. Some Compression artifacts in pics jpg are there

@ 6:30 Video mode test

( Video in german)

May 19, 2016*permalink

aLmoravado

Thanks! I just checked the clip. Video is quite good, and is as good as the S7, if not better. Still pictures, however, nothing is as good as the S7.
Again, the presence of a wide-angle camera more than makes up for the difference in image quality... At least for me.

May 19, 2016permalink

BrunoPereira

Mine will arrive tomorrow! I'm expecting its arrival to test it!

May 11, 2016permalink

_vlad

I am quite surprised by low quality rendering - water color quite often especially in greens. Having V10 and G4 I hardly ever got this level of smearing. I think LG with this model has gone Samsung route - quite heavily overprocessing the JPG. V10 renders - at least in comparable scenes - visibly more naturally - not to mention available full manual video mode.

May 10, 2016permalink

A-Frame

The LG G5 jpeg engine is not great. Using the DNG RAW mode shows the potential of this phone. I posted samples here:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57739745

LG should include advanced JPEG options for compression and noise reduction and or improve the jpeg engine.

May 11, 2016permalink

MikeDPR

Would be really nice if reviews include 35mm-equivalent focal length and sensor size information shown in the spec list. Thanks.

May 10, 2016permalink

magneto shot

dont stop at 2.

May 10, 2016permalink

My goddness the sound is so good with the B&O Module

May 9, 2016permalink

qaz111111

If you are a photographer you will take pictures with what ever is available and you will be able to get better shots than the less experienced. The shots people get with phones never cease to amaze me. You must come to terms with the reality that the opportunity to criticize does not make one a critic. Non photographers (as you would) get meaningful things and have fun doing it. Where's the harm in that? Art, after all, is in the eye of the beholder.

May 8, 2016*permalink

farhadvm

well said :)

May 8, 2016permalink

skytripper

Although there are undoubtedly some photographers who take pictures with their smarphones, smartphone "photographers" are generally not photographers at all, but merely consumers who take snapshots with their smartphones. Having the ability to hold a camera in your hand and press the shutter does not make one a "photographer" any more than drawing lines on a piece of paper makes one an "artist".

May 7, 2016permalink

having the ability to post a comment does not make one a pundit any more than typing a sentence on a computer makes one a linguist.

May 8, 2016*permalink

photoshack

I'd sure love to know what the phuck deriding people who can take photographs with ANYTHING WHATSOEVER has to do with this article...specifically.

May 8, 2016permalink

nawknai

Most people who own DSLRs aren't photographers, either.

I don't really see the point you're trying to make. No qualification makes someone "a photographer". Am I a photographer because "I'm really into it"? No. Is someone a photographer only if they're really good at it?

May 10, 2016permalink

" No qualification makes someone "a photographer" " - yes there is, the qualification is someone who takes photographs.

May 10, 2016permalink

nawknai

Either way sort of proves my point. Either everyone who takes photos can be called a "photographer", or there really is no difference between "photographer" and "non-photographer" since there's no qualification or licence that you need to earn to be deemed as such. Photography isn't med school.

So yes, everyone who takes photos is a photographer. No qualification necessary, although some sort of camera is a requirement.

May 14, 2016*permalink

User9396614328

This comment is aging, but I could not resist.

I take pictures which makes me a photographer. I'm not Annie Leibowitz though.

I drive a car which makes me a driver. I'm not Schumacher, though.

There are millions of very good photographers out there who are not holding kilograms of gear to make photographs. The tool does not make the craftsman. A true craftsman chooses and uses the tool to get the job done.

We have new tools now in the chest. They are not replacing the old ones anytime soon - and maybe never will. Times do change. But there's no need to feel superior about "being a photographer" because you've invested in - and may even be good with - the traditional stuff.

Jun 17, 2016permalink

srados

Taking snapshots of the life or objects with photography enabled device it is called photography. Not everyone will make money out of it. That is called professional or commercial photography. So yes, everyone is photographer, we moved from Daguerreotype, photographic process employing an iodine-sensitized silvered plate and mercury vapor, in the studios, and 3 minute exposure from early 1800's until today when we equipped anyone to do it so with their telephones, instantaneously.

Jul 8, 2016permalink

So, the main camera is good, but not great. The wide angle camera is fair, but not really good, but you really like the fact that it's there.

Considering just how bad the reviews for this smartphone overall have been everywhere, it doesn't seem as though these cameras are going to move the sales much. Very few people consider the camera as being more than one aspect of consideration, and rarely the biggest aspect.

Perhaps if this was a better phone overall.

May 7, 2016permalink

Well, of course we focus our review on the camera and not on the other elements of the device...that said, what exactly is it that's so bad about the G5?

May 7, 2016permalink

vadims

> Very few people consider the camera as being
> more than one aspect of consideration

True, but that's only because no-one has done it right so far. And with current obsession with super-slim phones, I can't see it happening any time soon.

Panasonic DMC-CM10 was a step in the right direction, and LG G5 brought some interesting ideas, but both were/are lacking... Let's wait see what the future holds.

There *is* a market for camera phones. I mean, phones with cameras in them treated at least equally important to the main function. I'm one of potential purchasers since, even though I always carry Sony RX100m2 on my belt, I still find it less convenient than a *proper* camera phone would be under many circumstances.

May 7, 2016*permalink

A-Frame

I read lot of these LG G5 reviews. I think the implementation of the modular design and build quality could be better. However, I think the phone feels quite well made. Performance wise there is really nothing to complain about. The UI is fast and call quality is excellent. I chose this phone over other phones because of the dual camera and the modular feature. I posted test photos here:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57725594

May 8, 2016*permalink

From what I've seen, all of the latest flagship phones got great reviews and bad reviews. Different people like different things. (Shocking revelation)

I like my G5 just fine. Is it perfect? No. Would I be happier with an S7 or an HTC 10? I doubt it. Are there people who'd be happier with one of those? I'm sure of it.

I don't know where "the main camera is good, but not great" comes from. As smartphone cameras go, it's top-tier. The only complaints the review had were in JPEG rendering, and you can shoot DNG and avoid all of that.

And the wide-angle is better than fair. It's absolutely not on a par with the main camera, but it's infinitely better than the wide-angle lens on any other smartphone out there (because there aren't any).

For me, the modular design was a "so what" feature. But I bought my G5 when the "free battery and charger" promo was running, and I've found it quite liberating to not worry about how much charge is left in my battery, because I've got a charged spare.

May 8, 2016permalink

I'm not criticizing your concentration on the camera, it's to be expected. It's also been stated on the site that it's what you're going to do.

I'm just saying that I've not read a review of this phone, overall, despite what some other posters are saying here, that has been better than just ok.

Since your review of the camera itself is good, but not outstanding, the phone itself would need to be very good to compare with the best Android and iOS models, and it's not.

May 10, 2016permalink

Tiano L

Lars, interesting review. It seems that the LG G5 doesn't have a shutter prority mode (ISO adjusting automatically to any given speed). I find this omission to be quite irritating in a high end phone (at least, there are many times I wish my LG G4 had this feature). Is there any technical reason for that? Thanks, Tiano

May 7, 2016permalink

You can do it with the Camera FV-5 app. But my experience has been that the five-stop adjustment range that ISO offers is too limiting. You really need to be able to vary the shutter speed as well in order to handle the wide range of scenes that the camera will encounter.

Give FV-5 a try on your G4 and see what you think.

May 7, 2016permalink

markyboy81

It seems that very few phones offer this feature. In fact, as far as I know, the only phones that do (in the stock app) are; S4 zoom, K zoom, possibly CM1 - all these could be better described as cameras with phones bolted on the back!

Personally I never got on with FV-5 but as an alternative that also offers shutter priority mode you could try pro shot - this app has other nifty features such as controlling noise reduction, jpg compression, focus assist and many more. One of the complaints I had with manual mode on the LG V10 is shutter lag (not sure if the G5 suffers with this) but pro shot solves this - it's blazingly fast.

Jun 2, 2016*permalink

Tiano L

I also have Pro Shot. As you say, it offers shutter priority. It also has a brilliant user interface - much better than the one on the LG G4. But I´m not using it very much since it´s very unstable, has no HDR mode, it´s limited to 800 ISO and flash metering is hit - or - miss.

But again, it´s user interface and options are IMO so much better than any other high-end phone´s stock app that I wonder why big players like Samsung, Apple or LG aren´t making anything similar.

Jun 25, 2016permalink

Max Iso

What are the chances LG will develop a dual shot feature? The 16mp lens isn't as wide but they could only use the center portion of the 12mp WA frame and average it into the 16mp file. If both shots are fired at the same time/SS it could be a way to reduce noise, even improve resolution.

Is this too much engineering for LG?

May 7, 2016permalink

ybizzle

I bought the G5 specifically for the wide angle lens. Now I just can't go back...It is quite remarkable how much more you can fit in!

May 7, 2016permalink

A-Frame

The LG G5 looks better in person than in photos. The wide angle lens is fun. Performance wise I agree the jpegs are over processed. The dng files look much better. I'm pretty excited about the possibilities of future modules. The Cam Plus is OK but not something I would use daily. Overall it's a great phone.

May 6, 2016permalink

noflashplease

I'm glad to see that DPReview is rolling smartphone reviews back into the regular website.
LG is a reputable manufacterer and it's good to see a company that actually innovates. I'm not sure I'm convinced by the battery grip and dual camera setup, but on the other hand, at least LG is trying. Compare that Apple, which had the audacity to update the 2012 vintage iPhone 5 form factor into the "new" iPhone SE. At least LG is trying while Apple literally "phones it in" with the latest iPhone.

May 6, 2016permalink

Max Iso

I just bought a G5 two weeks ago. Coming from a Note 3 and 4, i dont mind larger phones, which is why i will get the G5's battery grip. Not so much for photos as i don't use the camera that much, but for another 1200mAh of battery.

I held a demo of it and it will also be more comfortable to just hold the phone that way when im watching Netflix ect. IMO all phones should offer battery accessories.

May 7, 2016permalink

Peiasdf

Apple added back the 4" form factor because people keep asking for it. You can see on the Android side how many people ask for 4" phones with flagship hardware to get an idea.

Go to GSMArena to get iPhone SE's review. SE keeps up with all the latest phones and have better battery than all Android except Galaxy 7.

May 8, 2016permalink

Peiasdf

LG really screwed up with G5 and the sales number shows it. It is already the ugliest of flagships (especially after the beautiful V10) and the friend modules just make it uglier.

The camera is good, not as good processing as iPhone and Samsung and not as good hardware as HTC. I hope LG put something amazing in the V11

May 6, 2016permalink

you're executing lg's master plan of profit exceedingly well. by creating an ugly product, people like you will comment about the beautiful V10 and buy that instead.

May 7, 2016permalink

I believe that the flash is single-LED. Also, as far as I know the laser-focus is exclusive to the 16-Mpix main camera; the wide-angle camera uses conventional contrast-detect focusing.

May 6, 2016permalink

A non-photographic correction to this statement: "An area of the display is always on, showing notifications, even when the device is in sleep mode."

Although widely reported that way, it's not "an area of the display". The full display is dimly lit, with only a small area actually showing anything. This is an option, so you can shut it off. And the dim backlighting automatically shuts off whenever the proximity detector is triggered, such as when the phone is in a pocket or purse, or lying face-down. So it doesn't use nearly as much power as it sounds.

May 7, 2016permalink

odpisan

I wonder

WHEN

Pentax
(or one of unimportant market-players like Canon or Nikon)
;o)))

gets the right

IDEA:

a FF camera which can be used also as cell-phone.
We have already everything in DSLRs which are small computers as cell phones are ..

Is it so dificult to include bluetooth headset & some cell-phone functions too?
:o))))))))))

May 6, 2016*permalink

Richard Murdey

"a FF camera which can be used also as cell-phone."

You mean with a data connection to a mobile network for uploading images, or are you seriously wanting to take calls on your Pentax K-1?

May 7, 2016permalink

odpisan

Ofcourse .. I was joking - but if I think this joke over once again, wouldn't it be nice to take phone calls also 4 ex. over K-1 conected with phones-net & only with head set .. WHY not?
:o)

May 7, 2016permalink

grasscatcher

Growing up, i had an alarm clock radio made by Goldstar. That was a great old radio, from the 60s. Who knew that one day, Lucky Goldstar (LG) would have one of the top camera phones out there....? They were mostly known for soap and toothpaste back in the day... :)

May 6, 2016permalink

DukeCC

I wonder where cell phone cams are in relation to flagship DSLRs? I would guess many surpass the Nikon D2HS, which came out in Feb 2005 at $3,500. But still quite a jump to the Nikon D3, at $5,000 in 2007--not nearly there yet.

Talking overall performance--not just megapixels. And just a SWAG.

May 6, 2016permalink

GabrielZ

Aren't smartphone camera reviews supposed to be on the Connect sister site? Has it been incorporated into DPReview?

May 6, 2016permalink

Simon Joinson

it has

May 6, 2016permalink

RedFox88

That phone wouldn't fit in a pocket. The "grip" is too big. If you out a grip that doubles the phone area, you should just use a real camera.

May 6, 2016permalink

well, if you'd read the review you'd know that the grip is an optional accessory that can be as easily removed as it can be attached :)

May 6, 2016permalink

Impulses

Ehh... It's probably still no thicker than some of the first gen smartphones like the HTC EVO/Desire... I like the idea of a combo grip/battery/controls, extra battery could've been bigger tho.

May 6, 2016permalink

fatdeeman

You could literally take any smartphone on the market, double or even triple the thickness of it and it would still fit in your pocket unless you were wearing those ridiculous super skinny jeans.

People seem to forget things like the Nokia 5110 which was described as "diminutive" at the time of release.

May 7, 2016permalink

Bernard Carns

Thank God this didn't take us to the white background website!

May 6, 2016permalink

RedFox88

Looks like connect is dead. Now the phone page of dpr.

May 6, 2016permalink

Allison Johnson

Connect as a separate URL has been retired, but mobile reviews and news will live on here.

May 6, 2016permalink

Impulses

That's great, I was never a fan of the dichotomy or the back and forth clicking... This will make the Connect content I care a about more visible (no offense to Lars).

May 6, 2016permalink

Bernard Carns

Now if I could just get the light theme nag to go away on the main page......

May 6, 2016permalink

Unless you're trying to mimic a gopro, then a telephoto seems a better option.

May 6, 2016permalink

I'd say that totally depends on your requirements and style as a photographer. Independently it is, from an engineering point of view, easier to add a wide angle than a tele to a phone camera.

May 6, 2016permalink

yslee1

Nothing wrong with a wide-angle, but I think most of us would prefer a proper rectilinear ultrawide.

May 6, 2016permalink

"Independently it is, from an engineering point of view, easier to add a wide angle than a tele to a phone camera."

Is it? Sure a real telephoto is going to extend rather, but we're talking tiny sensors and no actual need of a telephoto lens for the same angle of view as a telephoto.

Meanwhile, the gopro thing is covered. Give us something new.

May 7, 2016permalink

He's just saying that because he thinks it's true, but it's not.

May 7, 2016permalink

78 degree field of view? What's that.

I think most of us here understand 35mm equiv better. And we're just fine with ignoring the comment arguments for those with 'equiv' issues.

May 6, 2016permalink

The problem is aspect ratio. The two rear cameras are 16:9, so converting to a 3:2 35mm equiv is a bit of a challenge. By the way, the 78 degrees (and 135 degrees for the wide-angle) are measured diagonally.

If you look at the diagonal angle of view on a 3:2 aspect ratio, the rear cameras are approximately 27mm and 9 mm. But if you're going to crop your captures back to 3:2 or 4:3, you're going to get a tighter field of view than that.

When compared against a conventional 4:3 camera, the magnification of the main camera is more like a 34mm equiv than 27mm.

May 6, 2016permalink

So....it's really not that complicated and dpreview could have given us the equiv 35mm anyway.

May 7, 2016permalink

it's not complicated for spies like mr. bond, but you did ask the question

May 7, 2016permalink

Well, it's more complicated than that, because "conventional" cameras aren't 4:3, they're wider. Full frame, as well as APS-C cameras, by far the greatest number of conventional cameras have a 3:2 ratio. Small point and shoot digital models tend to be 4:3 more often, but these cameras are dying out rapidly.

But when talking about 35mm equivalent, it's 3:2.

May 7, 2016permalink

EwanMC

If you don't need the wide-angle, the main camera is the same as on the G4 .

May 6, 2016permalink

same specs but definitely improved processing.

May 6, 2016permalink

Mark K

G5 might be the most ambitious product ever made by LG. Combination of good camera, great sound, fast processor, etc is good, only if these features come in one piece, instead of modules.

May 6, 2016permalink

ovatab

I love Madrid. Wrong food, dude!

May 6, 2016permalink

what food are you talking about?

May 6, 2016permalink