Try the Realme GT Neo 3: a quick recharge, but not only that

Realme opted for a triple module here consisting of a 50 Mpx wide-angle IMX766 module whose lens opens at f / 1.9, an 8 Mpx ultra wide-angle, as well as a 2 Mpx macro module to capture and close-up shots. The primary sensor is used in many mid-range and high-end devices, including the Realme GT 2 Pro or the Oppo Find X5 and X5 Pro. But it produces a very different set of results depending on the remaining spec sheet and the optimization of each device.

Facing a smartphone at an equivalent price, but betting more on the photo, the indestructible Google Pixel 6 is also equipped with a 50 Mpx core module, however the confrontation is dangerous.

Main module: 50 Mpx, f/1.9, eq. 24mm

The main 50MP module takes snapshots at 12.5MP by default. It benefits as much as its congeners from the technology pixel binding allowing four pixels to merge into one to get more light when they run out.

Google Pixel 6 (12.5 Mpx, f/1.9, eq. 25 mm, ISO 45, 1/125 s)

Realme GT Neo 3 (12.5 Mpx, f/1.9, eq. 24 mm, ISO 100, 1/100 s)

In the day, it is clear that the translation is convincing. We can never reach the level of detail and juice of the Google Pixel 6, but it’s possible to get good shots. The set is very clean and has fairly fair colorimetry. We found that the Realme smartphone applies even more digital smoothing, as can be seen on the cover of the book, losing most of its brutality. This phenomenon is likely to be expressed when light is lacking.

Google Pixel 6 (12.5 Mpx, f/1.9, eq. 25 mm, ISO 806, 1/4 s)

Realme GT Neo 3 (12.5 Mpx, f/1.9, eq. 24 mm, ISO 3637, 1/15 s)

The night shot was very useful, but a curtain painted in red seemed to fall off the photo and disturbed the overall colorimetry. So the colors look washed out. Darkness is obligatory, we lose most of the dive. It is especially felt on the periphery, which is not visible in this shot. It is still possible to get interesting shots as long as there are light sources. The Pixel 6 is more convincing to exercise.

50MP mode

It is always possible to take advantage of the highest definition from the photo application. For this, we allocated an area of ​​0.45 Mpx per shot; enough to get an idea of ​​the difference in size.

Realme GT Neo 3 (50MP, f/1.9, ISO 4303, 1/15s)

Realme GT Neo 3 (50MP, f/1.9, ISO 100, 1/100s)

Day or night, the switch to 50 Mpx mode never convinced us. There’s very little gain in detail in good conditions, but it doesn’t have to be enough to pick up shots four times heavier. Especially since storage is not expandable.

Ultra-wide-angle module: 8 Mpx, f/2.3, eq. 15mm

Google Pixel 6 (12 Mpx, f/2.2, eq. 17 mm, ISO 54, 1/100 s)

Realme GT 2 (8MP, f/2.2, ISO 197, 1/100s)

The ultra wide-angle module is far from as qualitative as the wide-angle, but it provides an honest interpretation of good lighting conditions. We can identify all the elements of the scene, even if the level of detail falls for the most part. The GT Neo 3 pays off by forcing a bit of a difference. Against all expectations, the Pixel 6 Pro also doesn’t shine, especially due to the lack of juice and even a much better overall colorimetry.

Google Pixel 6 (12 Mpx, f/2.2, eq. 17 mm, ISO 1130, 1/8 s)

Realme GT 2 (8MP, f/2.2, ISO 5955, 1/13 sec)

Not surprisingly, the result of the darkness is less convincing. It should be noted, however, that most of these modules create an unreadable image of our night scene. This is not the case here, as we can still identify more elements than the Google Pixel 6, at the cost, however, of a less controlled colorimetry.

front and video module

For this GT Neo 3, the company opted for a 16 Mpx front sensor whose lens opens at f / 2.5. It may be less mean than the Realme GT 2 Pro, but it still allows you to take good selfies during the day, if you’re not very active. High level of detail and accurate colors. In addition, dynamics are well managed, even if it is always the cause of the problem.

The main sensor can shoot in 4K and Full HD at 30 fps. The result was really nice. The image benefits from good contrast ratio and high level of detail. The colors are a little worse than they really are, but nothing bothersome. It’s less convincing when it comes to the ultra-wide-angle module, which we never recommend for video.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *