The Galaxy S10+(opens in a new tab) is everything I expect from Samsung(opens in a new tab) after a decade of refining its Android phones.

The phone's large, notch-free display is a visual treat on the eyes. Samsung's One UI customization of Android 9 Pie(opens in a new tab) is clean, fast, and responsive — exactly the way software should be. The Galaxy S10+ powers through up to two days on a single charge. The cheapest model has twice as much storage as the least expensive versions of Apple's latest iPhones. There's a new third camera on the backside and a second one on the front.

Headphone jack, fast wireless charging, water resistance, expandable storage, etc. — the list goes on and on. You name a feature and the Galaxy S10+ probably has it.

On paper, the Galaxy S10+ puts most other phones to shame. But after using the Galaxy S10+ as my daily driver for two weeks — spending intimate time with it in Barcelona during the hectic Mobile World Congress(opens in a new tab) and at home in New York City — I quickly became less convinced the new additions Samsung's touting are must-haves.

Features like the display's inset "hole punch" for the selfie camera, ultra wide-angle camera, ultrasonic in-display fingerprint reader, and reverse wireless charging are all innovative (if not catchup to the many Chinese phones that have similar capabilities), but they're all very 1.0-ish. Some features are even step backwards from the staid Galaxy S9 and S9+(opens in a new tab). 

The Galaxy S10+ is Samsung's best, most feature-packed phone yet, and it is indeed a marvelous melding of glass and metal. But so was the Galaxy S9. 

With a $999 starting price tag, the Galaxy S10+ is anything but cheap and the most expensive in the S10 family when compared to $749 S10e and $899 S10.

But as I've said a great number of times before: Don't just look at the $1,000 price and let your jaw fall to the ground. Remember, you're paying for a phone that should last you at least the next two years (maybe even longer). $999 gets you a ton of features and it's more true for the S10+ than any other phone. 

For starters, you get 128GB of storage, which is double the amount on the base iPhone XS Max, for $100 less than what Apple charges. 

The 128GB version is the best version for most people — if you need more you can easily add with an inexpensive, high capacity microSD card — but if you have the money to spend, you can get a 1TB version (with ceramic back instead of glass) for $1,599. I don't recommend this model because it's so, so expensive, but as Ariana Grande says in "7 Rings": "I see it. I like it. I want it. I got it." You do you, my friend.

If you've seen one "glass-and-metal sandwich" phone you've basically seen them all, right? I think this every time I wrap my paws around a new phone that apes Samsung's signature aesthetic, and every time I'm reminded of why Samsung does it best.

The formula for the S10+'s design is the same as the S9 and S8: a Gorilla Glass top and bottom that bleeds into a sturdy metal frame. But even though other phones like Huawei's Mate 20 Pro(opens in a new tab) have copied this look, the S10+ out-thins them all with a thickness of only 0.31 inches. 

Samsung provided me with the Prism White model to test and I gotta say it's pretty as hell. The finish isn't a solid white, but more of an iridescent colorway that sometimes looks pinkish, sometimes looks aqua, and sometimes silver. It's a fresh finish that isn't too gaudy and in my opinion only makes the phone look more luxurious.

This time around, the screen is larger (6.4 inches on the S10+ compared to the 6.2 inches on the S9+) and looks even better because of the shrunken top and bottom bezels.

A larger display is a big enough selling point for most people, but what really makes the S10+'s screen shine is how it looks. The new Dynamic AMOLED display is truly gorgeous from all angles. It's also really bright and colors are rich and even more accurate than before. But don't take my word for it: Display Mate's calling(opens in a new tab) the screen "visually indistinguishable from perfect."

And the screen really is worthy of such high praise. It's hard not to get sucked into all of its pixels. My only complaint is the pill-shaped "hole punch" or "double hole punch" as some people are calling it. I have nothing against the "hole punch" trend, but I think Samsung messed up by putting the inset camera cutout in the upper right. 

For righties like me, I found myself constantly swiping down from the hole punch with my right thumb. This led to smudges and fingerprints on the front-facing camera.

Now, this isn't a problem if you use two hands — one to hold the S10+ and one to swipe down from the top to access the notifications panel or quick settings — or if you're a lefty and use your left thumb. But as a righty, it drove me nuts because I'd constantly have to wipe down the front-facing cameras with my scarf or t-shirt before taking a selfie. 

I get that putting the hole punch in the left would have made the S10 phones look like other Android phones, but it also made me realize the merits of a center-aligned notch. On the iPhone X, XS, and XR, the screen's "horns" can both be swiped down without leaving any smudges on the camera housed in the notch. The asymmetrical hole punch on Android phones doesn't. Other than this annoyance, I have no qualms with the hole punch.

Samsung says the Dynamic AMOLED screen also reduces harmful blue light by up to 42 percent. I can't say whether it really works or not — I didn't notice myself falling to sleep more easily while using the S10+ right before bedtime compared to a Note 9 or iPhone XS — but I can tell you the screen is less yellow when the "blue light filter" setting is turned on. I'd love to see some studies to back up whether the blue light filter has an impact on getting better sleep or not.

My minor disagreement with the placement of hole punch aside, the S10+ is a mighty fine smartphone stuffed with features galore.

All of the Samsung tentpoles are still present, including the microSD card for storage expansion, fast wired and wireless charging, IP68 water and dust resistance, and a headphone jack. It's good to see Samsung sticking to its guns and not removing features while others are nixing them left and right.

The S10+ has a new Wireless PowerShare feature that lets you wirelessly charge another device like Galaxy Buds(opens in a new tab) or another smartphone. I was excited for this, but the charging is really slow for juicing up another phone. In 15 minutes my iPhone XS managed to get a one percent wireless charge from the S10+. Not great.

I wasn't able to test the Wireless PowerShare on Galaxy Buds — maybe they charge faster because the battery is smaller — but until I try them out, I'm going to say reverse wireless charging isn't a must-have. It could be versatile feature when the charging gets faster, but for now, it's not a feature that'll push anyone to buy an S10.

The S10+ also has excellent battery life. I frequently got up to two days of battery  even with the resolution dialed up to the WQHD+ setting (3,040 x 1,440) from the default FHD+ (2,220 x 1,080) resolution. Samsung did good including a 4,100 mAh battery in the S10+.

The ultrasonic in-display fingerprint sensor is easily the most disappointing new feature on the Galaxy S10+ because it feels less like an upgrade and more like a downgrade.

Instead of a fingerprint reader embedded in the display that's as fast and as accurate as one that's mounted on the back or side or front "chin" bezel (remember these?), the S10+ is saddled with a sensor that's slower and less responsive.

I understand in-display fingerprint sensors are really popular on Android phones these days and Samsung's ultrasonic fingerprint reader is the most secure of them all. It's much, much harder to spoof compared to the optical in-display fingerprint readers in phones like the OnePlus 6T(opens in a new tab). But the S10+'s sensor just isn't good enough.

Sure, the Galaxy S10's in-display fingerprint reader worked even when my fingers were wet or dirty, but in general, the sensor failed to recognize my fingers more often than is acceptable. Constantly failing to unlock my Galaxy S10+ with its finicky sensor only made me miss the rear-mounted fingerprint reader on the Galaxy S9 more.

Why did Samsung replace what was a fast and accurate fingerprint reader with one that's less reliable, but seems cooler because it's embedded in the screen? My guess is Chinese phone makers like Huawei, OnePlus, and Vivo are forcing Samsung to. When the competition has already copied virtually all of the features that make Samsung phones special, newness (even if the innovation is inferior) now trumps all.

And if that's the reason, Samsung shouldn't have caved in. I'm all for moving the needle with new innovative tech, but when it's inferior to what came before it, it's a step backwards and worse for users.

You could argue that Apple has the same problem: Face ID is slower than Touch ID. It's a fair point, but there's one big difference: Face ID and Touch ID are two different types of biometrics with one using your face and the other using your fingerprints. It's an apples to oranges comparison. The S10's ultrasonic fingerprint sensor is the same kind of biometric system as the regular fingerprint reader on the S9 with both recognizing fingerprints; it's more of oranges to oranges comparison.

At the end of the day, the in-display fingerprint sensor is an okay first-gen sensor, but disappointing on such a pricey phone. Registering your fingerprints correctly (at an angle as opposed to vertically) improved my hit-rates, but the S9's rear sensor is still superior in every way.

Phones used to have two cameras: one on the front and one on the back. But these days it’s a lot more complicated and usually for the better.

The S10 has a total of five cameras: two on the front and three on the back. All of them are not equal, though. Each camera has its own focal length to achieve a different field of view — essentially how much fits into a photo.

Starting from the back of the S10, there’s a 12-megapixel wide-angle camera lens with variable aperture (f/1.5-2.4). This is the default shooting mode when you fire up the camera app.

The second rear camera is a 12-megapixel telephoto lens with f/2.4 aperture. This camera gives you 2x zoom (optical and not digital so details are sharper).

And lastly, there’s the third camera on the back. This new camera — the first on any Galaxy S or Note phone — is a 16-megapixel ultra wide-angle lens with f/2.2 aperture. Flipping to this camera gives you a really wide field of view that fits more (i.e. people, scenery, etc.) into a shot. It’s like having a GoPro built right into the phone.

The two cameras on the front of the S10+ are a different system compared to the back. Whereas the cameras on the back all have a different field of view, the second camera on the front is only used to improve the main 10-megapixel (f/1.9) selfie camera. This second camera on the S10+ is called a “ToF” (short for Time of Flight) camera and helps to create better portrait selfies by using the "3D depth map" data it collects to isolate subjects in the foreground and more realistically blur out the background.

The question people want to know is whether or not the ultra wide-angle camera takes phone photography to the next level or not.

I love shooting with phone cameras more than with the thousands of dollars worth of DSLR and mirrorless cameras and lenses I’ve acquired over the years, and I want to say hell yes, the ultra wide-angle camera is a game changer.

But as much as I like that the S10’s (all of them) have an ultra wide-angle camera, the quality of its images leaves a lot to desired. Photos taken with the ultra wide-angle camera are good enough to toss up on Instagram or Twitter where additional image compression will crush the details even further. 

For the vast majority of users, this is fine — better to get the really wide view than not. But as someone who's trying to justify spending $900 (S10) or $1,000 (S10+), I don't think it's acceptable to have pictures that often come out soft and have blurry or smeared details.

As you can see in the two sets of photos above, having three different cameras gives you three different kinds of shots. You can include a lot into a shot with the ultra wide-angle camera or zoom in super close with the 2x telephoto camera.

Each camera is useful and toggling between the three is as simple as tapping a tree-shaped icon in the camera app. But I'm not satisfied with the image quality of the ultra wide camera. I know I'm nitpicking, but I couldn't unsee the muddy details when I was editing ultra wide photos for Instagram, especially shots taken in dim lighting or at night. The poorer-than-expected image quality from the ultra wide camera was enough to stop me from posting any pictures to my feed.

Photos taken with the regular wide-angle camera and 2x telephoto camera are noticeably sharper than ones shot with the ultra wide-angle camera and it's easy to explain why: both come with optical image stabilization (OIS) whereas the ultra wide-angle camera has doesn't.

I tried a bunch of things in hopes of getting sharper ultra wide shots, but none helped. From turning off the AI Scene Optimizer (but then nighttime photos would look worse), to manually locking the autofocus, to using the "pro" mode to manually adjust the settings, there's really no getting around the softness of the ultra wide-angle camera. Perhaps, a future software update can tone down the image processing so details don't get smushed together.

Below, you'll find a couple of comparisons between the S10+'s wide and ultra wide cameras. They look good, but they could have been better. I'm not asking for perfection, but when Google and Apple are raising the bar using computational photography techniques that use deeper machine learning and image processing to enhance photo quality, it's disappointing to see Samsung try to brute force it with hardware alone. Samsung needs to get onboard with computational photography or risk getting left behind.

Like any ultra wide-angle lens for a real camera, there is some noticeable distortion to the images — straight edges appear curved and warped. The curvature isn't as extreme as what you'd get from a fisheye lens like the kind found on a GoPro, but it is noticeable as you move further away from the center of the photo.

By default, ultra wide-angle photos will have a slight bend to them. However, you can straighten out the curve by turning on the "ultra wide lens correction" within the camera app's settings (under the "save options" menu). 

As you can see in both sets of photos below, turning on the lens correction makes shots look more natural. "Corrected" photos are still saved in full 16-megapixel resolution, but you will see some minor differences.

Besides the obvious tighter framing of each shot, some things like lights are exposed differently. Take a look at the street lights on the left side of the night shot below. In the non-corrected photo, the lights appear as orbs. But in the corrected image, the lights are starbursts. In the second set of photos, there's also more chromatic aberration(opens in a new tab) (the prismatic fringing visible on edges) along the silver gates.

Of course, smartphone cameras can't be tested in a vacuum and comparing the S10+'s cameras to competing phones is the only way to see which one takes the best photos.

Naturally, I pitted the S10+'s cameras against the S9+, iPhone XS Max, Pixel 3 XL, Huawei Mate 20 Pro, and the OnePlus 6T in a variety of shooting scenarios and the shots didn't exactly surprise me.

Overall, the OnePlus 6T took the least-pleasing and worst photos in my opinion (not shocking since the camera's always been one of the weakest points on OnePlus phones) and the Huawei Mate 20 Pro came in second to last. Huawei's phone can take great shots, but only if you mess with the manual mode. For regular point-and-shoot pictures (how most people use their phones), it was too hit-and-miss.

The bottom line is: the S10+'s main camera is marginally better than the S9+ and still produces more saturated colors than the iPhone XS and Pixel 3.

Is it a good camera? Sure it is. But I wished Samsung had done more to blow every other phone camera away. This is the third year in a row Samsung's kept virtually the same image quality for its Galaxy S phones. It really feels like Samsung's either hit a ceiling or resting on its laurels. 

I urge the company to strongly invest in improving image processing. The S10+ has a powerful trio of rear cameras, but if it only had better software, it could produce photos that beat the pants off the Pixel 3.

The S10+'s portrait mode (Live Focus as Samsung calls it) is different and better this time around. Previous Samsung phones like the S9, Note 9, and Note 8 zoomed in on portrait photos using the 2x telephoto camera. On the S10+ (and S10 and S10e), portrait shots use the wide-angle lens and as you can see in the comparison shots, the resulting photos look different.

Besides having a wider field of view similar to what you get from the iPhone XR's single rear camera, the S10+'s portrait shot has better details, more accurate colors and solid isolation between the background and foreground compared to the S9+'s. You can still adjust the background depth after the shot's taken, but you no longer get the twofer "close-up" and a "wide-angle" shots like on the S9 and Note 8 and Note 9.

The Pixel 3 XL's single camera portrait mode continues to impress and is arguably the best. One thing I noticed and didn't like: how saturated the iPhone XS and XR's photos are. They're so much yellower and redder compared to the others. It would be in Apple's best interest to tweak these colors because they're too warm.

Huawei's Mate 20 Pro and the OnePlus 6T simply can't hold up to the others with one having a light vignette around the corners and poor foreground and background separation (look at Mike's head on the Mate 20 Pro pic) and the other being too soft in the face (notably in his glasses and facial hair).

The selfie camera also works a little differently. For whatever reason, the 10-megapixel camera is zoomed in instead of zoomed all the way out like it is on the S9. There's a button you can tap to zoom out to get a wider view, but this is a trick; you're not switching between the two cameras in the hole punch, just artificially cropping out of the main camera.

This trickery creates the illusion that you get a wide lens and a ultra wide-angle lens like you do on the Pixel 3, but you're really not.

Below, you can see the regular default field of view when you fire up the selfie camera and then the wider field of view when you tap the zoom out button. No offense, but I can crop in on a selfie by myself if I really want to. There's no need to pull silly tricks like this, Samsung.

Selfies from the S10+ are fine. There's less "beautification" going on and you can definitely see details are sharper, dynamic range is improved, and exposure is better (see areas like the nose, forehead, scarf, and fluorescent lights in the selfies below), but we're reaching a point where the changes are relatively minor.

A big leap forward would be like the Pixel 3's Night Sight(opens in a new tab), but for selfies. It might be a bit extreme, but using algorithms to greatly improve detail sharpness and exposure could be something to look forward to.

How about low-light selfies? At first, the S10+ selfie looks virtually indistinguishable from the S9+'s. But comparing them side-by-side, there's more dynamic range and highlights in the S10 selfie.

They're all acceptable for posting to social media, but the devil is in the details. Both the S10+ and S9+ still have quite a bit of purple fringing coming from the street lights, which is something you don't want. The Mate 20 Pro's too red and the OnePlus 6T shot is too soft.

This round is a toss between the Pixel 3 XL and iPhone XS. The Pixel 3 XL takes the sharper image (you can see it in the legible "Hudson Blvd Park" sign on the left side of the photos), but the iPhone XS has the more accurate colors (less yellow with just the right amount of red in my face).

For portrait selfies (again, Live Focus as Samsung calls them) with the front-facing cameras, you can see Samsung's improved things just a bit.

The background is more blurred with the S10+ versus the S9+. The HDR does a better job at exposing the shot so you get more dynamic range in areas like the sky. Of course, better isn't the best. And in this scenario as well, the iPhone XS Max and Google Pixel 3 XL take better portrait selfies with more dynamic range and greater sharpness.

With the S10+, the camera applies a haze-like filter applied on top. The Mate 20 Pro is way off with on the color temperature, producing a photo that's too red, and the OnePlus 6T blows out the sky and destroys the details in areas like the wooden panel on the right side.

From what I can tell, the depth camera does help with portrait selfies, but the Pixel 3 and iPhone XS are still the cameras to beat. 

Several effects can also be applied to Live Focus selfies. There are four effects to choose from (blur, spin, zoom, and color point) and they're all kind of dull. I'm not saying the studio lighting effects on the iPhone's portrait mode are the greatest ever, but they're sorta neat if in what that they're trying to replace a complete studio's worth of lighting equipment.

Kudos to Samsung for not ripping off the portrait lighting like the Honor View 20 and on other Android phones, but these four effects feel like they were tossed in at the last minute just to have some effects.

It's impossible to not be biased when comparing photos across smartphone cameras. Everyone has a different preference; some people prefer flatter images, some like more saturated colors, and others like more contrast and moody tones.

Maybe you're looking at these photos on your phone and thinking I'm being a snob. But that's my job — to tell you about the differences and whether they matter or not.

We can agree to disagree literally over the details, but as always I leave you with a gallery of shots taken with the S10+ and open my Twitter (@raywongy(opens in a new tab)) and Instagram (@sourlemons(opens in a new tab)) if you want to talk more about the cameras. And, of course, you can click on all the photos to enlarge them to their original resolution.

The Galaxy S10+ is not starving for power. It and the rest of the S10 family is powered by Qualcomm's newest Snapdragon 855(opens in a new tab) chip, which provides up to 45 percent faster CPU processing and up to 20 percent faster graphics compared to the previous Snapdragon 845 chip.

Benchmarks from Geekbench 4(opens in a new tab) backed up these performance gains. The Galaxy S10+ scored an average of 3,502 on the single-core test, which is about 48 percent faster than the Galaxy S9+. The S10+ also scored an average of 10,668 on the multi-core test making it about 27 percent faster than the S9+ for applications that require more power.

These speed boosts make the S10+ operate faster and smoother than before, but they still lag behind the iPhone XS and XR's A12 Bionic chip(opens in a new tab), which is about 27 percent faster on single-core tasks and 6 percent faster on multi-core.

Looking over at these scores, you can see Qualcomm's(opens in a new tab) closing the gap on multi-core performance, but its Snapdragon chips still have some major catching up to do on single-core performance to compete with Apple's custom mobile silicon.

Ultimately, all this extra performance means more runway for apps that need more power to play with. Large and expansive 3D games like Fortnite and Arena of Valor, or video editing apps, or augmented reality apps will no doubt get updated to squeeze every last drop of performance out of the Snapdragon 855 chip.

Even if you don't play resource-heavy games or edit video, you'll still see some noticeable improvements all across Android.

The S10+ runs Android 9 Pie with all of the bells and whistles Google added to the release, including features like adaptive brightness and adaptive battery, digital wellbeing, gesture-based navigation.

In typical Samsung fashion, Android 9 Pie is covered up with a new skin called "One UI." But don't let that scare you away if you've disliked Samsung's Android skins like the "Samsung Experience" or "TouchWiz" in the past.

To my surprise, One UI is both aesthetically pleasing and more functional than Samsung's previous customizations of Android. One UI isn't quite Samsung's own iOS 7 moment, but the nearly top-to-bottom interface revamp is prettier, faster, and simpler than before. There's even a dark mode for the UI, which is something every phone should copy.

Unlike previous tweaks to Android, One UI is more than just a shedding of veneer that's accumulated over years of piling on new features. Samsung designed it to be more usable.

For example, in certain Samsung apps like Messages, Clock, and Gallery, the content is pushed about halfway down the screen with headers placed on the top (sorta like the ones on iOS) so that it's easier to tap on things with one hand. It's good to see companies think more about usability as phones get larger with bigger screens.

I also like that Samsung's loosened its grip on the physical Bixby button located on the left side of the S10+. You can now program the button to open another app(opens in a new tab) or shortcut with a single-press or double-press. Whichever you setting you pick, the other defaults to launching Bixby. 

It sucks Samsung won't let you replace Bixby with another digital assistant such as the superior Google Assistant or Amazon's Alexa, but letting you remap the button is a step in the right direction.

And if you care, Samsung's tweaked its AR Emoji to be less creepy. Compared to the old AR Emoji, the new ones are more cartoonish with less realistic skin tones.

As someone who genuinely enjoys using Apple's Animoji (especially for FaceTime calls with my mom), I like that Samsung stylized the AR Emoji to look more inviting. That said, I was part of the minority of people who didn't hate the old AR Emoji. I took them for what they were: cheesy caricatures and nothing more.

The Galaxy S10+ (and S10 by extension) has all of the makings of a premium flagship smartphone. It has seemingly every feature under the sun and then some. But I feel Samsung fumbled on the execution of the new features.

The display is stunning, except for all of the fingerprint smudges left on the selfie camera as a result of swiping down on it all the time. The ultra wide-angle camera is cool for taking more epic shots, but the image quality is lacking. The fingerprint sensor is now embedded underneath the display like on other Android phones, but it's slower than the regular one on the S9. The Wireless PowerShare feature is handy for charging up Galaxy Buds or lending another phone a little power, but the charging is slow.

I'm not dismissing these new features as trivial, but in their current form, there's still a lot that needs to be improved. Maybe the Galaxy S11 will iron out all of these shortcomings.

As it stands, the S10's a good phone and you'll probably like it a lot if you get one — it's worthy of being placed on a pedestal to celebrate the Galaxy S's 10th anniversary — but it's hardly the powerful shockwave that sends all other phones back to the drawing board.