Galaxy S9 Dual Aperture: Gimmick or Great Feature? – Gary Explains

Read the full post: | Samsung’s Galaxy S9 includes a camera boasting a dual aperture. Is this is a great feature for taking next-gen smartphone pictures of is it a gimmick? Let me explain!

Download the Android Authority App:

Subscribe to our YouTube channel:
Stay connected to Android Authority:

Follow the Team:
Josh Vergara:
Joe Hindy:
Lanh Nguyen:
Jayce Broda:
Gary Sims:
Kris Carlon:
Nirave Gondhia:
David Imel:
Bailey Stein:


Author: Rafael


37 thoughts on “Galaxy S9 Dual Aperture: Gimmick or Great Feature? – Gary Explains

  1. Business Opportunity in Ruvol

    I have invented a Board Game [still unpublished and not yet out in the market] that I believe is guaranteed to be as challenging and exciting as CHESS. I called it “RUVOL.”

    It is my hope that one day Ruvol may surpass chess as the “Number One Board Game in the World.”

    The weakness of chess is it always starts in fixed positions that the opening moves become “memorizable.” In fact, not a few have so mastered the moves that they can play against their opponents “blindfolded.” It is for this very reason that the great Bobby Fischer introduced his so-called “Fischer Random Chess,” where the starting position of the pieces is “randomized” to make the memorization of openings impracticable. Fortunately, it is also for this reason that I invented Ruvol where “every game” has been calculated to be a challenging one to play.


    I detailed everything in my YouTube video. Here is the link:


    It is worthwhile to note that the people who play chess will be the same people who will play Ruvol. In my Google search, I learned there are around 800 million chess players in the world. Even just a small percentage of these 800 million is good enough to earn big money from Ruvol either as an ONLINE GAME BUSINESS or as a PHYSICAL PRODUCT DISTRIBUTOR.

    You may contact me at:

    Thanks and God bless!

    The Ruvol Inventor

  2. not just that its a gimmick, its a gimmick that actually can make the photos worse. The smartphone sensor is already very small and it really needs all the light it can get. now making the aperture smaller actually causes less light to enter the sensor, hence it increases ISO or it decreases shutter speed or both which should actually result in slightly more grain and bit more motion blur which is quite opposite of what Samsung said it wanted to achieve with this. the bigger aperture can only be an issue with DSLRs with big sensors where the points which are not in the "depth of field" can become blurry as a part of the "blur gradient" (the farther you are from the area of depth of field the blurrier you become). the thing is that smart phones have such tiny sensors that the depth of field of such lens is alot bigger than Larger Sensors so mostly everything is in focus, if anything people want more bokah out of their smart phone then Less. so in-conclusion, its a horrible Gimmick which causes worser looking photos and causes more money to implement. Samsung, please fix.

  3. It does the job it lets in more light for pictures and takes good enough pics for me for a camera phone, the pixel may take better pics but no headphone jack and no expandable storage is a deal breaker…love my S9

  4. You dont wanna argue with the prof when it comes to these. Even though im not as knowledgeable like him, i think of the s9's features as a gimmick also.

  5. This is not an upgrade this is creating not like huwawei added a 3rd lens which gives an exellent camera. but they didn't do something new so samsung is creating new features with smartphone camera and soon you'll understand with the new galaxy series.

  6. GREAT VIDEO!!! FINALLY someone telling the truth, when Samsung brings new "feature" EVERY other phone reviewers immediately start to compliment it and calling Samsung the perfect phone… But not here! You're the MAN !

  7. Like Gary said, i also think this feature really doesn't bring any major benefit to the IQ and purely a gimmick. Changing the aperture to smaller ones will be a benefit for cameras with bigger sensor from 1" size and beyond, but for sensors as small as those from smartphone cameras? nothing..

  8. Most of the time , flagships launch phone with gimmicky features that have no real world use. But for marketing purposes they use it to sell as much as possible.

  9. A more practical feature would be the ability to switch between a range of multiple apertures like manual ISO setting.
    For Example: 1.5, 1.6,1.7 till 2.4…
    I think the dual aperture is a step towards that direction. But fixed dual aperture is more of a gimmick in practical sense.

  10. Manufactures hit a wall when designing the optics for smartphone camera system given the strain on 1.size or the thickness and 2. cost (VIVO has patents to add prism system doubling the light path length but to achieve the precision in mass production is difficult for now).
    It's not easy to maintain the optical quality at f/1.5 or even larger aperture on such small form factor, so I believe Samsung optimized the optical design at f/2.4 (especially for the center sharpness and chromatic aberration control), but maintain f/1.5 for low light shots despite a bit tradeoff on optical performance. They might hope that f/1.5 being the largest aperture (albeit marginally) on a smartphone could bring some bragging rights and marketing hype, but it's not a good sign a company resort to this type of gimmick instead of true innovation, be it software side or hardware side.

  11. No one is testing this in a next to no light situation which makes this review and most others invalid. There is a huge difference in almost black situations. Samsung advertise it as a camera that can see in the dark but all your photos are in the day except one. What a poor review.

  12. Why did they take all their test photos in the daytime on a cloudy day?

    While I'm not saying I believe Samsung (I'm more likely to believe Gary), all Samsung promotions show the 2.4 being used in bright, sunny conditions and the 1.5 being used at night.

    Doing these tests in the same conditions would've been a heck of a lot more convincing.

  13. It may be a gimmick in a way but you won't be able to tell the true physical difference which is not a gimmick unless you change the shutter speed in pro mode and switch between the two apertures. When you go into pro mode and don't change the shutter speed settings the camera will compensate for either aperture and produce a similarly exposed shot from what the camera deems correct. Just to make things fair.

Comments are closed.