"Pixel 4a", which is a low-priced version of "Pixel 4", finallyOfficial announcementit was done. The price in Japan is 42,900 yen. It is less than half the price of Pixel 4, and it is a price range close to the selling range of middle range models.
However, whether it's cheap or bad, Google itself says that it is "about the same" as the upper model when it comes to the appearance of the camera. I will leave details such as specs in a preliminary article, but if it is a camera performance equivalent to Pixel 4 at this price, it can be said to be shocking. Does Pixel 4a really have that ability? Although it is a short period of time, we will deliver an impression that touches the real machine.
First of all, the camera. It looks like a Pixel 4 with a lens and flash embedded in a "pedestal", but the Pixel 4a has a single camera. It's not a dual camera, just a design taste that matches that of the Pixel 4.
The angle of view is equivalent to 27 mm in 35 mm format. Normally, when using a smartphone with a wide-angle camera, there is always a scene where I think "I should be able to shoot with a slightly wider picture", but HDR is also effective and the image is very sharp. You can also use dual exposure compensation, and you can lift up only in dark places, or on the contrary, darken bright places and leave details.
The night view mode, which has become a hot topic like a night vision scope, is still alive. To some extent, I shot a building at night with light, but the noise in the dark place is small and the details of the building are well reflected. However, HDR is a little weak, or there are overexposed areas. Compared to the picture taken with the "P40 lite 5G" at the same place, I also had the impression that the size of the difference in brightness was not completely covered.
Even when shooting a darker building, the power of night view mode was fully demonstrated. A typical smartphone is full of noise and the details will collapse, but the dark parts of the building are well captured.
What's even more amazing is the picture taken with the lights in the room turned off and only a little twilight from the outside. Even the shades of the figure are well depicted, and it is much cleaner and clearer than the naked eye. Of course, all the above pictures were taken by hand. You can see that the camera performance of the high-end model, which had a good reputation in the night view mode, has been inherited.
The next thing I tried was the super-resolution zoom. Although the Pixel 4a does not have a telephoto camera, it is said that super resolution zoom has been achieved by improving the algorithm. However, the magnification is subtly different, and the Pixel 4 zooms up to 8x, while the Pixel 4a zooms up to 7x, with a slightly lower magnification. I wonder if this side is the difference due to the presence or absence of a telephoto lens.
As you can see from the picture below, unlike the mere digital zoom, the characters on the enlarged signboard are clearly visible. As you can see, there are some areas where the image is slightly unclear, but with a 7x zoom, this is quite practical.
Despite being a single camera, it also supports portrait mode. You can use machine learning to identify the subject and blur the background. If you take a picture in portrait mode, two pictures will remain depending on whether or not there is blur. It is true that the bokeh is too strong and it looks a little unnatural if you are used to the natural bokeh by the lens, but even the fine details such as hair are firmly recognized as the foreground, and the person and the background are well separated. You can see that
The Pixel 4a has a Snapdragon 730G chipset and does not include the "Pixel Neural Core" that is specialized for machine learning processing. The Snapdragon 855 has a difference in processing power from the Pixel 4 that also has a built-in Pixel Neural Core. However, this difference seems to be different in the processing speed in the background, not in the image quality. In fact, when I took a picture with Pixel 4a and then immediately opened it, the words "Processing" and a progress circle were often displayed at the bottom of the screen.
The night view mode is easy to understand, but as the process progresses, the picture gradually becomes brighter overall. In other words, the photos are processed in the background after they are taken. We did the same for Pixel 4, but maybe Pixel 4a had more chances to see it, as it was a little less powerful. It's not too slow to process, but it's a drawback that you can't decide immediately whether you want to retake the shot or not.
I wanted color
The camera image is almost the same, and if you hear that it is less than half the price of Pixel 4, it may seem like a dream terminal, but in addition to the above processing capacity, it seems that cost reduction is planned Is not a few. A typical example is the case. The Pixel 4 has a rigid body made of metal and glass, while the Pixel 4a is made of polycarbonate and has a smooth texture. Pixel 4 is also matte processed, honestly, it does not look like glass, but even if you touch it, you can clearly see the difference.
Recently, even in the middle-range smartphones that cost around 30,000 yen, metal and glass are often used, so this cheap texture is a bit disappointing. Speaking well, it has a soft texture and a cute impression, but in that case, I would like to have at least white and other color variations, not just one black color.
Since the in-camera is simplified, biometric authentication is only fingerprint authentication mounted on the back. It's true that this is easier to use when you go out, as Corona's evil has increased the chances of wearing a mask, but in the case of using it at home, it is still easier to unlock if you have face authentication. .. It may be that we could not meet the security requirements, but I feel that it would have been nice to have face recognition installed after explaining the risks, as with other companies' terminals.
The decisive factor is the goodness of cospa
Despite such dissatisfaction, the image quality of the camera far exceeds that of a typical middle range model. It is truly unbelievable that the terminal with camera performance approaching the high end is 42,900 yen including tax. The point that I would like to evaluate is that it is a model compatible with eSIM which is rare as a middle range model. Considering the price as well, I felt that I was more satisfied than Pixel 4. It can be said that it is also a good choice as a terminal used for MVNOs and sub-brands.