The main selling point of the Xiaomi Redmi 9T has to be the quad camera set up and the 6,000mAh battery. Today, we look at the cameras.
For the Redmi 9T, the main camera is still 48MP with f/1.8 aperture and 1/2.0″ sensor size, while the ultrawide is 8MP with f/2.2 aperture and 1/4.0″ sensor size, which is usual for the mid-range sector. The stated field of view is 120 degrees, which is quite large.
Both of the other cameras are 2MP, but only one of them is useable. It’s dedicated to macro photography, while the other is utilized for portrait stills depth sensing.
On the front, there’s an 8MP sensor with a 1/4.0″ sensor and an f/2.1 aperture.
The Camera UI
It’s business as usual with the camera app, which hasn’t hung up too often. Swiping left and right cycles between the various camera modes; more options for each camera mode can be found on top of the viewfinder; and the menu offers up a few more settings as well as the camera app’s general settings menu.
The macro camera, interestingly, does not have its own mode; instead, it can be accessed by switching to Photo mode and tapping on the menu in the upper-right corner of the viewfinder.
The phone’s overall daylight performance was excellent in my opinion. There’s a little noise here and there, generally in the sky or in a uniform background. The quantity of sharpness and detail, on the other hand, makes for a pretty nice photo. The colors are little warmer than they should be, and the contrasty appearance is typical of Xiaomi mid-rangers. And, while not flawless, the dynamic range is more than adequate. When you move indoors, even on a bright sunny day, sharpness and detail quickly deteriorate.
There are no advantages to switching to the 48MP mode. They’re noisy, and the quality isn’t as fantastic as it is on ordinary 12MP images. It’s pointless to use it.
The rendering of the ultrawide camera may appear to be similar to that of the main camera at first glance, but don’t anticipate the same degree of quality. There is evident edge softness, the photographs have more noise, and the sharpness and detail are low. Colors, contrast, and white balance, on the other hand, appear to be the same as on the main camera.
The ultrawide snapper is probably excellent enough for casual social media sharing, and it may surprise you, but it’s very much on level with the competition. Even with far more expensive phones, ultrawide cameras are frequently severely defective.
Let’s speak of night mode
It’s not pretty, but, it can at times, do the job. Colors are washed out, there is little detail, and there is a lot of noise. To be honest, the images appear to be crisper than we expected, and there is no fogging. The biggest problem with the low-light samples is that they are dark and underexposed, with blown highlights.
The specialized night mode, on the other hand, can go a long way. It only takes a second or two to create and stack the required shots, but the results are significantly superior to what you can get with the usual photo mode. The noise-suppression algorithm is far from ideal, as it occasionally washes out fine information, but it does a good job of controlling noise.
The selfies are a little drab, and the subject’s complexion appears to be lightened. There is a lack of detail, as well as a lot of noise, especially in low light. The subject’s face can be underexposed and soft in more complicated settings. However, in optimum settings, there is a lot of detail. It’s to be anticipated that the portrait mode is a little hazy around the edges.
But, I found it perfect. Can’t complain much.
They should have just done away with it, I even have nothing good to show for it, it’s that bad.
The absence of autofocus and the low resolution of only 2MP are the main drawbacks of macro cameras in general. When it comes to macro stills, there are a lot of things to consider. The lighting conditions must be ideal, the subject must be still, and the focusing distance must be estimated. Taking a few photographs can assist, but don’t expect amazing results in terms of sharpness, detail, color, or overall performance.
The video on this device is generally underwhelming, unless you have some really great lighting conditions.
The smartphone can only record videos in 1080p at 30 frames per second. Electronic image stabilization is also unavailable, so your films will always appear wobbly.
In terms of Full HD video quality, it’s about as good as you’d expect from a low-cost smartphone. The dynamic range is limited, and there is a lack of detail and sharpness. Only the colors stand out, and the contrast is good.
Here is a sample video:
To sum it up, the quad camera setup on this device will do you some good, until you are in places with low light.