From the perspective of product experience and design ideas, I prefer to call Reno4 the real Reno4, and it is more appropriate to call Reno4Pro Reno3 Ultra. If you don’t have the patience to read this article and only care about the configuration, let me briefly summarize:
1. Reno4 Pro is based on the overall design of Reno3 pro, adding new color matching and AG technology, and upgrading to FindX2 standard version of the imaging system and the version of the 65W charging system.
2. Reno4 is a product that comprehensively corrects the appearance and perception errors of Reno3, and makes some necessary simplified configurations compared to Pro. The gap between it and the Pro is not as huge as the previous generation, and the performance is more robust.
If you want to hear me say something different, then start with the function of Reno3Pro and the inheritance of Reno4Pro. I will briefly talk about the actual product experience later.
Reno4Pro is a link between the past and the future
Before Reno3 Pro, many manufacturers wanted to make their phones thinner and lighter. In the past two days, I heard that the boss of a large factory scolded the product manager because all the products in 2019 were brick-shaped. This year’s new products are all light and thin. As for the recently released main products, more than half of the models have chosen the thin and light route. But thinness and lightness always come at a price, the impossible triangle paradox of SOC, image module, and battery.
The emergence of Reno3Pro has made almost all manufacturers start to consider whether they can challenge this impossible triangle. It doesn’t matter if it can’t be solved. Is it okay to improve the bottom line of these three factors as much as possible? For example, Samsung has achieved the best in thinness, lightness and performance. As a result, this year we saw the Nova7 and Honor 30 series, which overturned the design of the Nova6 series; we saw OPPO’s Reno4 series; and we also saw the follow-up vivo X50 series.
The fact that the entire industry has reached the same goal through different paths is a collective reflection on last year’s brick-and-mortar trend, and everyone’s choice of components that are not too tight on the hips to build new thin and light products is a guide to this year’s consumption trends.
In this sense, the Reno4 series complements the shortcomings of the Reno3 series and is also an inheritance of the exploration of thinness and lightness under mainstream performance. On the basis of Reno3Pro, it has made up for a lot of regrets (although the performance of the SoC remains unchanged).
The Reno4 series is an offline machine. The basic logic of offline machines is the comprehensive effect of appearance, brand, service and price system. This year’s market is facing great challenges. As a product model that has filled in its gaps but lacks major improvements, Reno4 still has to wait and see whether it can achieve practical results offline by relying on the selling points of appearance, screen, fast charging and anti-shake video. Market validation.
Actual experience with Reno4 Pro: Ultra version of Reno3Pro, Value version of FindX2
The Reno4Pro I have is titanium blank white, and my Reno3Pro Put together, the design styles are of the same origin and there is not much difference. The official size data is: 7.6mm thickness, 172 grams weight. The actual thickness measured with a vernier caliper (error accuracy 0.05mm) was 7.65mm, and the net weight measured with a food scale was 172 grams. Reno4Pro’s mid-frame opening, COP packaged Samsung SuperAMOLED curved screen, back cover size, front opening position and size are no different from Reno3Pro. The aviation aluminum middle frame of Reno3Pro is made of sandblasted rose gold, while the middle frame of this titanium blank Reno4Pro is made of polished silver. The Reno series has always done a good job in integrating the color of the card tray, and this time it is no exception. It is integrated with the middle frame, and there is almost no color difference or material difference.
The picture above is a group photo of Reno4Pro, Reno3Pro and FindX2. The FindX2 glass version is 8mm thick, and the 7.6mm Reno4Pro can still feel the slight difference in thickness.
In terms of the appearance design of the lens module, it inherits the general vertical design of OPPO, and the color matching has been greatly adjusted. The black color block of Reno3Pro has been adjusted to three lenses placed independently, with a translucent glass substrate close to the color of the back cover. The ancestor of doing this is Apple, which was once ridiculed by the industry circle as: rising again and again. The bulging and bulging is just a visual feeling, and the actual size does not bulge and bulge again.
As for whether this looks good or not, it’s a matter of opinion. From the perspective of marketing publicity, it is true that there is something to say about convenience for offline shopping guides. I personally think this one looks better than the Apple one, maybe because I don’t quite accept Apple’s triangular distribution. The semi-transparent glass substrate and the design of the back cover color are perfect, whether it is Apple or OPPO, it is very interesting. What’s even more interesting is that when everyone is willing to pile module parameters on the lens cover, OPPO has not done so for a long time, and this time is no exception.
In appearance, the titanium blank AG coating feels different from other similar products. The products I have with AG coating are: OnePlus 7T Pro and OPPOReno3 Pro. These two feel smooth to me and have moderate damping. The AG touch of the Reno4Pro titanium blank has a bit more damping, and the graininess of the coating is clearly perceptible, and the clay feel of Texas Hold'em poker chips is very strong. A huge advantage of this generation of titanium blank coating is that it leaves almost no fingerprints, while the AG of similar products still leaves a little fingerprints. In addition, this time OPPO continues to cooperate with Pantone colors and launches two new colors: Crystal Blue and Crystal Red. This color system is created using OPPO's patented technology RenoGlow, which is very special.
In terms of configuration, as I said at the beginning, the overall configuration is basically the same as that of Reno3Pro, and the imaging module completely inherits that of FindX2. The ultra-wide angle uses a 16:9 ratio CMOS, Sony IMX708. 1/2.4 inches, a little smaller than the 1/2-inch IMX586, but larger than the 1/2.8-inch IMX350 used daily. Natively directly output 12-megapixel photos in 16:9 format, with a maximum aperture of F2.2. The main camera lens is OISIMX586 F1.7, which has been polished for more than a year. I have taken many sample photos of the performance of this main camera and I am very satisfied with it. The 2X telephoto lens is a 13-megapixel CMOS lens that combines with the main camera to perform 5X hybrid computing imaging. In previous reviews of the FindX2 series, I talked more about IMX689 and IMX586. Today’s article will mainly show the performance of IMX708.
In terms of performance indicators, the biggest highlight of Reno4Pro and Reno4 is the standard 65W SuperVooc 2.0 flash charge, 4000mAh battery, and front-lug solution, which can be fully charged in 36 minutes. This is the first time that OPPO has put its most powerful charging technology into its main offline products.
SoC and baseband indicators still use the Snapdragon 765G chip with built-in X52 5G baseband. The performance and baseband capabilities of this chip are far from superior, but the performance of the ISP is relatively stable. Although the AI ??test results are not too high, it is still enough to meet the needs of this module. Reno3Pro has proven that its imaging system can be played on 765G.
To briefly summarize, the standard version of Reno4 is a huge change compared to Reno3. At least it does not have a plastic middle frame and a water drop screen; Reno4Pro is the Value version of FindX2. The main difference lies in the 90Hz COP package. FHD+ Samsung flexible AMOLED screen and Snapdragon 765G chip. So, here comes a fun question, if Reno4 Pro uses the Snapdragon 865 chipset, will you choose Reno4 Pro or FindX2?
Brief review of the imaging system: Convincing color accuracy performance, exactly the same as FindX2
If you are familiar with the imaging system of FindX2, you can basically skip this part. If you have a Reno3Pro, then I suggest you pay attention to this part about the ultra-wide-angle imaging quality. The rest are basically the same, there is no difference.
The reference mobile phones used in the brief review of the imaging system are FindX2 Pro (IMX689 main camera, IMX586 ultra-wide angle) and FindX2 standard version (same module as Reno4Pro).
In terms of color comparison of the main camera, I will use Reno4Pro and two FindX2s to compare; in terms of imaging details, I will mainly use Reno4Pro and FindX2Pro to compare to see where the gaps and differences are.
It should be noted that the IMX708 itself is a 16:9 format CMOS. If the film is produced according to 4:3, the body will be cropped into a photo of about 9 million pixels. The 4:3 format of the IMX586 is 12 million pixels (1.6μm). Judging from the actual performance, the overall color of FindX2Pro is on the plain side (the subsequent performance of the basic color of indoor cultural relics basically proves this), while the overall adjustment of Reno4Pro (also including FindX2) is more positive. The main hardware difference between the two in terms of white balance and color temperature is that FindX2Pro has a color temperature sensor and, in theory, FindX2Pro's judgment is more trustworthy. In actual shooting, if the naked eye is used as the main criterion, FindX2Pro's feedback in green is slightly conservative, while Reno4Pro's is more positive.
In terms of key resolution, at 100% detail magnification, I did not find a difference that is easily identifiable with the naked eye. In other words, the resolution of IMX708 is not weak in the face of IMX586. In the current ultra-wide-angle selection, the 40-megapixel level of IMX586 and IMX608 is the first level, so the IMX708 can definitely become a level slightly lower than the first echelon, better than the mainstream IMX350.
I know that many people will preconceptionally believe that IMX689 is better than the IMX586 on the left. If we think that correcting the white balance is something the device itself should do, then the color temperature sensor of the IMX689 plays an important role. Indeed, the color, details, and depth of field control of the picture on the right are better than the IMX586 on the left. But I still want to explain that the actual color at the scene is like the picture on the left. When FindX2Pro photographed cultural relics indoors, it did a certain degree of color temperature correction on bronze and gold vessels to make them more pleasing to the eye. But in terms of real feedback, Reno4Pro and FindX2 are more authentic.
Reno4Pro, FindX2 and FindX2Pro can all eliminate the stroboscopic interference of LED lights and make their own judgments on colors under the interference of indoor spotlights. Of these three pictures, the color performance of FindX2 that is most consistent with the original appearance is so accurate that it surprised me. FindX2Pro is more elegant, while Reno4Pro is more lively. As for likability, people have different opinions. After all, reduction is objective and liking is subjective.
Under warm ambient light, the actual color of this deer is more direct from Reno4 Pro. FindX2 Pro has optimized and adjusted the color temperature to make it look more normal. In terms of details, IMX689 retains more details and greater dynamic range in indoor dark light, which is expected.
For the sample part, I chose to shoot the indoor environment of Nanjing Museum, one of the four largest museums in China. The main purpose is to know whether Reno4Pro can provide the best performance under the strange ambient light and color temperature conditions of the museum. An excellent imaging effect. Compared with the top IMX689+IMX586, what are the advantages and disadvantages?
FindX2 Pro’s 5X imaging has two modes. Within a certain focusing distance, IMX689 will be used to force crop, which is the so-called telephoto macro mode. Reno4Pro uses the main camera and a 2X mid-focus lens for hybrid imaging of telephoto and macro. My previous evaluation of the IMX689 was that 2X cropping was not bad, and forcing 5X cropping might be a bit difficult. In this set of sample photos, neither of the two photos accurately reflects the color on the spot. The IMX689 still corrects the color temperature and is lighter; the Reno4Pro is a bit richer. Key imaging details, Reno4Pro's 5X hybrid, the details shot in low light are better than the IMX689 forced cropping.
For the static image part, my summary is as follows:
1. Reno4Pro can provide a first-class ultra-wide-angle module with 16:9 specifications, which can directly compete with the IMX586 without falling behind. .
2. Compared with FindX2Pro, Reno4Pro lacks an independent color temperature sensor and retains the laser focus system. For indoor shooting, Reno4Pro does not suffer from all kinds of weird color temperature shifts like other competing products. Instead, it restores the essence as much as possible. Its big brother FindX2Pro actively adjusts the white balance to make it look more natural.
3. In other parts, such as the periscope 5X compared to the hybrid zoom 5X, there is not much difference in color performance under the bright sun, and the periscope is still slightly better in terms of details. FindX2Pro has made certain optimizations to the periscope in dark light, which is better than hybrid zoom in terms of focusing speed and imaging clarity.
4. The color performance of Reno4Pro and FindX2 with the same module is not completely consistent. Personally, I prefer the adjustment strategy of FindX2 at the moment. Of course, there is no problem if the two are made exactly the same, it just depends on what OPPO thinks.
To summarize:
In terms of product strength, Reno4Pro provides a performance reduction in a thin and light body, and other parts are similar to FindX2 solutions, combined with the new body process and 65W charging to undertake the task of OPPO’s main offline sales in the next period of time.
This task is not easy at all. There are too many competing products at the same time, and all kinds of fancy functions and gameplay will make the Reno4 series face huge challenges. Judging from actual experience, Reno4Pro has nothing wrong with it. If you insist on saying that it has no innovation at all, it doesn't matter. After all, other manufacturers have also introduced various shell replacement technologies, right?
I like the product very much; sales volume is left to consumers to vote with their money.