x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA

Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Review

Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017)

Posted: , by Victor H.

Tags:

Pages

Camera

Just ‘okay’. Slow to focus and photos are not too rich in terms of detail.

Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Review
The camera app interface - Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Review
The camera app interface - Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Review
The camera app interface - Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) Review

The camera app interface


The J5 (2017) comes with a 13-megapixel, 27mm f/1.7 camera on the back, and a 13MP, 28mm f/1.9 shooter up front.

The camera app supports the neat double-click the home key shortcut to launch, and it is the familiar clean Samsung affair. You swipe up and down to switch between the front and rear cameras, and swipe left to see effects and right for modes. You have an auto mode, pro mode (with limited controls including White Balance, ISO, Exposure and Metering), Panorama, Continuous shot, HDR, Night, Sports and Sound and Shot. To start recording video, simply tap on the red button right next photo shutter key.

Image Quality


So how do images turn out?

First, what strikes me most about using this camera is that it is much slower than on other phones. The camera app takes longer to start and focusing is noticeably slower than on pricier phones. This means you will have more blurry images and it’s harder to capture those impromptu moments.

Then, there is an even bigger problem: in images with both dark and bright areas, there's some overexposure and highlights tend to burn (that is, to turn out white). This can be remedied by using HDR mode, but it won't turn itself on automatically, and its use adds a longer delay between shots. Image quality itself is about average.

Here, you truly get what you pay for, which is not a lot: an image that is not particularly rich in detail or dynamics. There is also a slight oversharpening going on, but the big issues are the overexposure, burning of highlight, lack of proper detail and hard-to-nail focus.

The front camera, on the other hand, is actually better than average. Give it enough light and it will capture very detailed pictures, but it does fairly well in moderate light as well.


Image size:
Use our samples comparison tool to see photos from more phones

Camera speed

Taking a pic (sec)Lower is better Taking an HDR pic (sec)Lower is better CamSpeed score Higher is better CamSpeed score with flash Higher is better
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) 1.6
2.5
336
328
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2016) 3.1
No data
482
266
Samsung Galaxy A5 (2017) 1.8
2.9
No data
No data
Motorola Moto G5 Plus 1.8
2.6
1118
669
View all

Video quality


The new J5 can shoot video at up to 1080p Full HD resolution, and the quality is… not great. The camera supports continuous auto-focusing, but it is often so slow that it will miss the moment when it has to switch the focus. And it is completely inept to shoot outdoors when you have a little bit of sun: everything turns out wildly overexposed. You can try to manually turn down exposure, but then you lose dynamics. There seems to be some slight form of video stabilization, which prevents the footage from looking too shakey, but that does little to help.



Sound quality


There is a single loudspeaker located right above the lock key on the right handside. It delivers plenty of punch, but sounds too tinny and lacking definition. You can’t expect too much from a phone, and we are happy we get the extra loudness, something important when you are trying to show friends a funny video on the web.

There is an audio jack on the bottom as well, which is also nice.

Audio output

Headphones output power (Volts)
Higher is better
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) 0.53
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2016) 0.49
Samsung Galaxy A5 (2017) 0.53
Motorola Moto G5 Plus 1.015
Loudspeaker loudness (dB)
Higher is better
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2017) 76
Samsung Galaxy J5 (2016) 77
Samsung Galaxy A5 (2017) 75
Motorola Moto G5 Plus 77.6
View all


22 Comments
  • Options
    Close





posted on 18 Jul 2017, 07:28 1

1. Nexus4lifes (Posts: 208; Member since: 13 Feb 2014)


A 5.2” AMOLED display with an HD resolution in 2017 is a bit sad. apple iphone se rated excellent by iphonearena has a less than 720p display...

posted on 18 Jul 2017, 07:44

2. Spyro (Posts: 267; Member since: 29 Mar 2017)


I am perfectly fine with my 4" screen. At least my SE doesn't have a sh*tty camera and poor performance, let alone my camera can shoot in 4k.

posted on 18 Jul 2017, 07:47 1

3. Nexus4lifes (Posts: 208; Member since: 13 Feb 2014)


HAHA se costs $449 j5 will be around 199...

posted on 18 Jul 2017, 07:50

5. kiko007 (Posts: 5383; Member since: 17 Feb 2016)


The SE is around 300 bucks lol. What country do you live in?

posted on 18 Jul 2017, 14:28 1

17. sgodsell (Posts: 4855; Member since: 16 Mar 2013)


Apple's own website in the US lists the iPhone SE for $399. In Canada it's $580 for that tiny fart of an iPhone SE. Although many places are offering BOGO deals, buy an iPhone 6s or 7 and get a free iPhone SE. But nowadays we are seeing buy an iPhone 7 and get a free iPhone 7 as well. I guess Apple has to get there market share up any way they can. Please buy our recycled icrap.

posted on 18 Jul 2017, 07:52

7. Spyro (Posts: 267; Member since: 29 Mar 2017)


Better to stick with quality than trash.

posted on 18 Jul 2017, 07:53 1

8. Lumbergh (Posts: 318; Member since: 14 Feb 2016)


SE doesn't have "stuttery performance" lol.

posted on 18 Jul 2017, 07:49

4. maherk (Posts: 4845; Member since: 10 Feb 2012)


You can't deny the fact that a 720 Amoled screen is less sharper than a 720 lcd screen, especially if there is at least 0.5" in size difference.

posted on 18 Jul 2017, 07:55

9. Spyro (Posts: 267; Member since: 29 Mar 2017)


Even if I were a troll, I wouldn't defend trash.

posted on 18 Jul 2017, 09:13

10. Victor.H (Posts: 785; Member since: 27 May 2011)


Do you realize the difference between a PenTile display with a 5.2-inch size with HD resolution, and a full RGB display with a 4.7-inch resolution? If you did, you would know that the iPhone has a much sharper display.

posted on 18 Jul 2017, 10:49 1

15. xeroxchap (Posts: 48; Member since: 11 Oct 2016)


Victor. H......hmmm.... again... stop being so pissy abt your real boss *Insert Fruit Here"..and act a bit professional.... dnt leave salty comments to ppl who provide traffic to this site...U have your opinion and u clearly mentioned it in your article...comments section is for the readers....otherwise disable comments and keep on praying to Apple !

posted on 18 Jul 2017, 11:09 1

16. g2a5b0e (Posts: 3814; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)


It's quite ironic that you're the one who sounds salty here. It's not like he didn't say anything that isn't true.

posted on 18 Jul 2017, 19:29

19. xeroxchap (Posts: 48; Member since: 11 Oct 2016)


yes...actually i was.... i am not getting paid by iphonearena to write an article......
Girl bye!

posted on 18 Jul 2017, 09:14

11. g2a5b0e (Posts: 3814; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)


In all fairness, you're comparing a 4" screen to a 5.2" screen. The iphone screen clearly has a higher PPI. On top of that, it came out 1.5 years ago.

posted on 18 Jul 2017, 07:51 1

6. Lumbergh (Posts: 318; Member since: 14 Feb 2016)


"Stuttery performance"

Sounds like Samsung. They gotta get these lag issues fixed.

posted on 18 Jul 2017, 09:28

12. WAusJackBauer (Posts: 316; Member since: 22 Mar 2015)


The cons on this review are a joke.

posted on 18 Jul 2017, 09:49

13. g2a5b0e (Posts: 3814; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)


They all sound like legit knocks to me. And as someone who used a J7 for a weeks after I lost my Note 5, I can vouch for the validity of them. I'll never use another Samsung that isn't a flagship. That's for sure.

posted on 18 Jul 2017, 10:46

14. You_Dont_Say (Posts: 329; Member since: 26 Jan 2015)


Stuttery performance is no laughing matter.

posted on 18 Jul 2017, 18:29 1

18. airoid (Posts: 75; Member since: 13 Dec 2016)


I noticed that any phone that has better battery life than iPhone then PA doesn't put iPhone in comparison chart for you to compare hahahaa

posted on 18 Jul 2017, 20:36 1

20. cheetah2k (Posts: 1746; Member since: 16 Jan 2011)


Why bother scoring anymore itrollarena. I mean your scoring consistency is worse than the local weather man..

posted on 19 Jul 2017, 16:24 1

21. Stappy3 (Posts: 57; Member since: 09 Dec 2015)


How is an HD display for a pretty low priced budget phone sad?

posted on 21 Jul 2017, 11:27

22. madara82 (Posts: 33; Member since: 01 Jul 2017)


what i dont like with this phone is lacks any form of special water protection or other super-powers, in case you were wondering. maybe atleast water resistant will be better.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

PhoneArena rating:
6.5Good
Display5.2 inches, 720 x 1280 pixels (282 ppi) Super AMOLED
Camera13 megapixels
Hardware
Samsung Exynos 7 Octa, Octa-core, 1600 MHz, ARM Cortex-A53 processor
2 GB RAM
Size5.76 x 2.81 x 0.31 inches
(146.3 x 71.3 x 7.9 mm)
5.64 oz  (160 g)

Latest stories