Smartphone Camera Reviews - DXOMARK

106

123

105

125

123

110

124

109

116

55
Bokeh

73
Preview

134
Zoom

106

118

Wide

121

138
Video

100

116

108

119

100

119

114

118

107

119

110

118

Use cases & Conditions

Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.

BEST 175

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 160

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 132

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 149

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

Position in Global Ranking

28^th

1. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

157

2. Huawei P60 Pro

156

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

154

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

154

5. Google Pixel 8 Pro

153

5. Oppo Find X6 Pro

153

7. Honor Magic5 Pro

152

8. Oppo Find X6

150

8. Vivo X100 Pro

150

10. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

149

11. Google Pixel 8

148

12. Google Pixel 7 Pro

147

12. Honor Magic4 Ultimate

147

14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

146

14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

146

16. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

145

16. Apple iPhone 15

145

18. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

144

19. Huawei P50 Pro

143

20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

141

20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

141

20. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

141

23. Google Pixel 7

140

23. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)

140

23. Vivo X90 Pro+

140

23. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

140

27. Huawei Mate 40 Pro+

139

28. Xiaomi 14

138

29. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

137

30. Vivo X90 Pro

136

30. Xiaomi 13 Pro

136

30. Xiaomi 12S Ultra

136

33. Huawei Mate 40 Pro

135

33. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

135

33. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)

135

36. Google Pixel 6 Pro

134

36. Vivo X70 Pro+

134

38. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

133

38. Apple iPhone 14

133

38. Google Pixel Fold

133

38. Google Pixel 7a

133

38. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)

133

38. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

133

44. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

131

44. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

131

44. Xiaomi 13T Pro

131

47. Motorola Edge 40 Pro

130

47. Oppo Find X5 Pro

130

47. Xiaomi 13

130

50. Huawei P40 Pro

129

50. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra

129

50. Xiaomi 12T Pro

129

50. Xiaomi 12 Pro

129

54. Oppo Find X3 Pro

128

54. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

128

56. Apple iPhone 12 Pro

127

56. Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders

127

56. OnePlus 11

127

56. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

127

56. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

127

61. Google Pixel 6

126

61. Honor Magic4 Pro

126

61. Vivo X70 Pro (MediaTek)

126

61. Vivo X60 Pro+

126

65. Apple iPhone 13 mini

125

65. Apple iPhone 13

125

65. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

125

65. Vivo X50 Pro+

125

69. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

124

69. Xiaomi Mi 11 Pro

124

71. Xiaomi 13T

123

72. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

122

72. Google Pixel 6a

122

72. Honor 90

122

72. OnePlus 10 Pro

122

72. OnePlus 9 Pro

122

77. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

121

78. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

120

78. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)

120

78. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro 5G

120

81. Honor Magic Vs

119

81. Sony Xperia 5 IV

119

83. Sony Xperia 5 V

118

83. Sony Xperia 1 IV

118

85. Apple iPhone 12 mini

117

85. Apple iPhone 12

117

85. Honor Magic V2

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)

117

91. Apple iPhone 11

116

91. Asus Zenfone 8

116

91. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

116

94. Honor 70

115

94. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Snapdragon)

115

94. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

115

94. Xiaomi 12T

115

98. Nothing Phone(1)

114

98. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G

114

98. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G

114

98. Oppo Find X5

114

98. Oppo Find N2 Flip

114

103. OnePlus 8 Pro

113

103. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G

113

103. Xiaomi 12

113

106. Oppo Reno8 5G

112

106. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

112

108. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G

111

108. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos)

111

108. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)

111

111. Google Pixel 5

109

111. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G

109

113. Asus ROG Phone 7

108

113. Fairphone 5

108

113. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Exynos)

108

113. Xiaomi 11T Pro

108

117. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

107

118. Oppo Find X3 Neo

106

119. Sony Xperia 1 III

105

120. Motorola Edge 40 Neo

103

121. Huawei P40

102

121. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G

102

123. Black Shark 5 Pro

101

123. Motorola Edge 30 Pro

101

125. Apple iPhone SE (2022)

100

125. Google Pixel 4a

100

127. ZTE Axon 30 Ultra

128. Oppo Find X5 Lite

129. Oppo Reno4 5G

130. Oppo A94 5G

130. Vivo X80 Lite 5G

132. Samsung Galaxy A72

132. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G

132. Samsung Galaxy A25 5G

135. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 5G

136. Oppo Reno6 5G

137. Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G

137. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G

139. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G

140. OnePlus Nord CE 5G

141. Samsung Galaxy A15 5G

141. Vivo Y76 5G

143. Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

144. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G

145. Sony Xperia 10 V

145. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G

147. TCL 40R 5G

148. Realme 9i 5G

148. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13

150. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G

151. Honor 90 Lite

152. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)

152. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G

154. Fairphone 4

154. Oppo A78 5G

154. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G

157. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G

158. Motorola Moto G62 5G

159. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G

160. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G

161. Sony Xperia 10 IV

161. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12

161. Xiaomi Redmi 13C

161. Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G

165. Honor X7

165. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G

167. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11

168. Honor 70 Lite

169. Motorola Moto G23

170. Oppo A77 5G

171. Honor X8 5G

171. TCL 406

173. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022

174. Crosscall Action-X5

175. Samsung Galaxy A22 5G

176. Crosscall Core-Z5

177. Oppo A57

177. Oppo A16s 5G

179. Samsung Galaxy A05s

179. Xiaomi Redmi 12C

Position in Premium Ranking

3^rd

1. Google Pixel 8

148

2. Apple iPhone 15

145

3. Xiaomi 14

138

4. Apple iPhone 14

133

4. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

133

6. Xiaomi 13T Pro

131

7. Xiaomi 13

130

8. Xiaomi 12T Pro

129

9. OnePlus 11

127

10. Vivo X70 Pro (MediaTek)

126

11. Apple iPhone 13 mini

125

11. Apple iPhone 13

125

13. Xiaomi 13T

123

14. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)

120

15. Apple iPhone 12

117

15. Apple iPhone 12 mini

117

15. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)

117

15. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)

117

19. Apple iPhone 11

116

19. Asus Zenfone 8

116

19. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

116

22. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G

114

23. Xiaomi 12

113

24. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)

111

25. Google Pixel 5

109

26. Fairphone 5

108

26. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Exynos)

108

26. Xiaomi 11T Pro

108

29. Oppo Find X3 Neo

106

30. Huawei P40

102

31. Black Shark 5 Pro

101

31. Motorola Edge 30 Pro

101

33. ZTE Axon 30 Ultra

34. Crosscall Core-Z5

Pros

Accurate target exposure in all tested conditions
Fairly neutral white balance in all tested conditions
High details preservation in photo and video mode
Low level of noise in photo mode
In tele mode, high level of details

Cons

Exposure adaptation issues often visible in video in most tested conditions
Low contrast on faces under bright light and backlit conditions
In video mode, noise is noticeable in low-light conditions
Artifacts such as flare and ghosting often visible in photo mode

The Xiaomi 14 showed marked improvements in image quality, particularly in video, when compared to its predecessor, the Xiaomi 13, partly due to hardware enhancements such as a larger sensor and bigger aperture.

The device received high marks for its texture-noise tradeoff, with images that had a high level of details and low noise in most tested conditions.The texture-noise tradeoff is one of the best we have seen for this price range, outshining its direct competitors. The Xiaomi’s neutral white balance in most situations means that the device is particularly well suited for taking photos of landscapes. However, when taking photos of people outdoors, the images often showed mixed results, with low contrast on faces, and sometimes overexposure of the target. This would affect the color rendering, which was at times inaccurate and desaturated. The device showed some irregularity in autofocus. When photographing action scenes, images would contain some artifacts, such as ghosting, giving the photo an unnatural photo rendering.

The Xiaomi 14’s zoom performance was good for its segment, helped by the tele module’s 50 MP sensor, which provided images with rich textures, especially when using the long-range zoom.

The Xiaomi 14’s video experience was much improved from previous generations. Target exposure was accurate and videos contained a wide dynamic range whether indoors or outdoors. Similarly to still photos, videos contained a lot of details and texture, while white balance remained fairly neutral. Video autofocus was a bit unstable while panning a scene, but autofocus in general was much better than it was on the Xiaomi 13. In addition, videos also showed some exposure instabilities in several tested conditions.

The Xiaomi 14’s video performance in low light was a little behind that of its competitors from the same price segment, mainly because of more noticeable noise and some inaccurate skin-tone rendering.

Test summary

About DXOMARK Camera tests: DXOMARK’s Camera evaluations take place in laboratories and in real-world situations using a wide variety of subjects. The scores rely on objective tests for which the results are calculated directly by measurement software on our laboratory setups, and on perceptual tests in which a sophisticated set of metrics allow a panel of image experts to compare aspects of image quality that require human judgment. Testing a smartphone involves a team of engineers and technicians for about a week. Photo, Zoom, and Video quality are scored separately and then combined into an Overall score for comparison among the cameras in different devices. For more information about the DXOMARK Camera protocol, click here. More details on smartphone camera scores are available here. The following section gathers key elements of DXOMARK’s exhaustive tests and analyses. Full performance evaluations are available upon request. Please contact us on how to receive a full report.

Xiaomi 14 Camera Scores vs Premium

This graph compares DXOMARK photo, zoom and video scores between the tested device and references. Average and maximum scores of the price segment are also indicated. Average and maximum scores for each price segment are computed based on the DXOMARK database of devices tested.

Photo

137

Xiaomi 14

160

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

For scoring and analysis, DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2,600 test images both in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The photo protocol is designed to take into account the main use cases and is based on typical shooting scenarios, such as portraits, family, and landscape photography. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements on images of charts captured in the lab under different lighting conditions from 1 to 1,000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Xiaomi 14 Photo scores vs Premium

The photo tests analyze image quality attributes such as exposure, color, texture, and noise in various light conditions. Autofocus performances and the presence of artifacts on all images captured in controlled lab conditions and in real-life images are also evaluated. All these attributes have a significant impact on the final quality of the images captured with the tested device and can help to understand the camera's main strengths and weaknesses.

Xiaomi 14 – Accurate target exposure, neutral white balance. The level of detail is high, and noise is well controlled.

Autofocus irregularity and speed: 1000Lux Δ0EV Daylight Handheld

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for tripod and handheld conditions

This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with the level of lux, for two holding conditions. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition

This graph shows the evolution of visual noise metric with the level of lux in handheld condition. The visual noise metric is the mean of visual noise measurement on all patches of the Dead Leaves chart in the AFHDR setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

Zoom

134

Xiaomi 14

158

Huawei P60 Pro

About DXOMARK Camera Zoom tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate over 400 test images in controlled lab environments and in outdoor, indoor, and low-light natural scenes, using the camera’s default settings and pinch zoom at various zoom factors from ultra wide to very long-range zoom. The evaluation is performed by visually inspecting the images against a reference of natural scenes, and by running objective measurements of chart mages captured in the lab under different conditions from 20 to 1000 lux and color temperatures from 2300K to 6500K.

Xiaomi 14 Zoom Scores vs Premium

This graph illustrates the relative scores for the different zoom ranges evaluated. The abscissa is expressed in 35mm equivalent focal length. Zooming-in scores are displayed on the right and Zooming-out scores on the left.

Video

138

Xiaomi 14

158

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

DXOMARK engineers capture and evaluate more than 2.5 hours of video in controlled lab environments and in natural low-light, indoor and outdoor scenes, using the camera’s default settings. The evaluation consists of visually inspecting natural videos taken in various conditions and running objective measurements on videos of charts recorded in the lab under different conditions from 1 to 1000+ lux and color temperatures from 2,300K to 6,500K.

Xiaomi 14 Video scores vs Premium

Video tests analyze the same image quality attributes as for still images, such as exposure, color, texture, or noise, in addition to temporal aspects such as speed, and smoothness and stability of exposure, white balance, and autofocus transitions.

Xiaomi 14 – Acceptable target exposure in low-light conditions with some limitations in dynamic range and noticeable exposure adaptation. Skin tones are not always accurate, and noise is visible. Details, however, are quite well-preserved for such a low-light condition.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels

This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation video score with the level of lux in video. DMC detail preservation score is derived from an AI-based metric trained to evaluate texture and details rendering on a selection of crops of our DXOMARK chart.

Spatial Noise
Temporal Noise

Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level

This graph shows the evolution of spatial visual noise with the level of lux. Spatial visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup. DXOMARK visual noise measurement is derived from ISO15739 standard.

Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level

This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

The post Xiaomi 14 Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra Camera test

DXOMARK — Wed, 31 Jan 2024 13:02:02 +0000

We put the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

Primary: 200MP sensor, 24mm equivalent f/1.7-aperture lens, AF, OIS
Ultra-wide: 12MP sensor, 13mm equivalent f/2.2-aperture lens, AF
Tele 1: 10MP sensor, 67mm equivalent f/2.4-aperture lens, OIS, AF
Tele 2: 50MP sensor, 111mm equivalent f/3.4-aperture lens, OIS, AF
Video: 8K at 24/30fps, 4K at 30/60/120fps, 1080p at 30/60/240/960fps, HDR10+

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

144

camera

144
Photo

118

123

121

125

123

115

124

116

70
Bokeh

82
Preview

145
Zoom

107

118

Wide

105

121

137
Video

116

100

119

110

119

103

118

116

119

115

118

Use cases & Conditions

Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.

BEST 175

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 160

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 132

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 149

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

Position in Global Ranking

18^th

1. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

157

2. Huawei P60 Pro

156

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

154

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

154

5. Google Pixel 8 Pro

153

5. Oppo Find X6 Pro

153

7. Honor Magic5 Pro

152

8. Oppo Find X6

150

8. Vivo X100 Pro

150

10. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

149

11. Google Pixel 8

148

12. Google Pixel 7 Pro

147

12. Honor Magic4 Ultimate

147

14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

146

14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

146

16. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

145

16. Apple iPhone 15

145

18. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

144

19. Huawei P50 Pro

143

20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

141

20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

141

20. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

141

23. Google Pixel 7

140

23. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)

140

23. Vivo X90 Pro+

140

23. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

140

27. Huawei Mate 40 Pro+

139

28. Xiaomi 14

138

29. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

137

30. Vivo X90 Pro

136

30. Xiaomi 13 Pro

136

30. Xiaomi 12S Ultra

136

33. Huawei Mate 40 Pro

135

33. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

135

33. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)

135

36. Google Pixel 6 Pro

134

36. Vivo X70 Pro+

134

38. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

133

38. Apple iPhone 14

133

38. Google Pixel Fold

133

38. Google Pixel 7a

133

38. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)

133

38. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

133

44. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

131

44. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

131

44. Xiaomi 13T Pro

131

47. Motorola Edge 40 Pro

130

47. Oppo Find X5 Pro

130

47. Xiaomi 13

130

50. Huawei P40 Pro

129

50. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra

129

50. Xiaomi 12T Pro

129

50. Xiaomi 12 Pro

129

54. Oppo Find X3 Pro

128

54. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

128

56. Apple iPhone 12 Pro

127

56. Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders

127

56. OnePlus 11

127

56. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

127

56. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

127

61. Google Pixel 6

126

61. Honor Magic4 Pro

126

61. Vivo X70 Pro (MediaTek)

126

61. Vivo X60 Pro+

126

65. Apple iPhone 13 mini

125

65. Apple iPhone 13

125

65. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

125

65. Vivo X50 Pro+

125

69. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

124

69. Xiaomi Mi 11 Pro

124

71. Xiaomi 13T

123

72. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

122

72. Google Pixel 6a

122

72. Honor 90

122

72. OnePlus 10 Pro

122

72. OnePlus 9 Pro

122

77. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

121

78. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

120

78. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)

120

78. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro 5G

120

81. Honor Magic Vs

119

81. Sony Xperia 5 IV

119

83. Sony Xperia 5 V

118

83. Sony Xperia 1 IV

118

85. Apple iPhone 12 mini

117

85. Apple iPhone 12

117

85. Honor Magic V2

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)

117

91. Apple iPhone 11

116

91. Asus Zenfone 8

116

91. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

116

94. Honor 70

115

94. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Snapdragon)

115

94. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

115

94. Xiaomi 12T

115

98. Nothing Phone(1)

114

98. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G

114

98. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G

114

98. Oppo Find X5

114

98. Oppo Find N2 Flip

114

103. OnePlus 8 Pro

113

103. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G

113

103. Xiaomi 12

113

106. Oppo Reno8 5G

112

106. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

112

108. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G

111

108. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos)

111

108. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)

111

111. Google Pixel 5

109

111. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G

109

113. Asus ROG Phone 7

108

113. Fairphone 5

108

113. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Exynos)

108

113. Xiaomi 11T Pro

108

117. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

107

118. Oppo Find X3 Neo

106

119. Sony Xperia 1 III

105

120. Motorola Edge 40 Neo

103

121. Huawei P40

102

121. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G

102

123. Black Shark 5 Pro

101

123. Motorola Edge 30 Pro

101

125. Apple iPhone SE (2022)

100

125. Google Pixel 4a

100

127. ZTE Axon 30 Ultra

128. Oppo Find X5 Lite

129. Oppo Reno4 5G

130. Oppo A94 5G

130. Vivo X80 Lite 5G

132. Samsung Galaxy A72

132. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G

132. Samsung Galaxy A25 5G

135. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 5G

136. Oppo Reno6 5G

137. Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G

137. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G

139. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G

140. OnePlus Nord CE 5G

141. Samsung Galaxy A15 5G

141. Vivo Y76 5G

143. Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

144. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G

145. Sony Xperia 10 V

145. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G

147. TCL 40R 5G

148. Realme 9i 5G

148. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13

150. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G

151. Honor 90 Lite

152. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)

152. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G

154. Fairphone 4

154. Oppo A78 5G

154. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G

157. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G

158. Motorola Moto G62 5G

159. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G

160. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G

161. Sony Xperia 10 IV

161. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12

161. Xiaomi Redmi 13C

161. Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G

165. Honor X7

165. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G

167. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11

168. Honor 70 Lite

169. Motorola Moto G23

170. Oppo A77 5G

171. Honor X8 5G

171. TCL 406

173. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022

174. Crosscall Action-X5

175. Samsung Galaxy A22 5G

176. Crosscall Core-Z5

177. Oppo A57

177. Oppo A16s 5G

179. Samsung Galaxy A05s

179. Xiaomi Redmi 12C

Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking

16^th

1. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

157

2. Huawei P60 Pro

156

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

154

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

154

5. Google Pixel 8 Pro

153

5. Oppo Find X6 Pro

153

7. Honor Magic5 Pro

152

8. Oppo Find X6

150

8. Vivo X100 Pro

150

10. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

149

11. Google Pixel 7 Pro

147

11. Honor Magic4 Ultimate

147

13. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

146

13. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

146

15. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

145

16. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

144

17. Huawei P50 Pro

143

18. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

141

18. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

141

18. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

141

21. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)

140

21. Vivo X90 Pro+

140

21. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

140

24. Huawei Mate 40 Pro+

139

25. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

137

26. Vivo X90 Pro

136

26. Xiaomi 13 Pro

136

26. Xiaomi 12S Ultra

136

29. Huawei Mate 40 Pro

135

29. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

135

29. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)

135

32. Google Pixel 6 Pro

134

32. Vivo X70 Pro+

134

34. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

133

34. Google Pixel Fold

133

34. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)

133

37. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

131

37. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

131

39. Motorola Edge 40 Pro

130

39. Oppo Find X5 Pro

130

41. Huawei P40 Pro

129

41. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra

129

41. Xiaomi 12 Pro

129

44. Oppo Find X3 Pro

128

44. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

128

46. Apple iPhone 12 Pro

127

46. Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders

127

46. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

127

49. Honor Magic4 Pro

126

49. Vivo X60 Pro+

126

51. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

125

51. Vivo X50 Pro+

125

53. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

124

53. Xiaomi Mi 11 Pro

124

55. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

122

55. OnePlus 10 Pro

122

55. OnePlus 9 Pro

122

58. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

120

59. Honor Magic Vs

119

59. Sony Xperia 5 IV

119

61. Sony Xperia 5 V

118

61. Sony Xperia 1 IV

118

63. Honor Magic V2

117

63. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

117

65. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Snapdragon)

115

65. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

115

67. Oppo Find X5

114

67. Oppo Find N2 Flip

114

69. OnePlus 8 Pro

113

70. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

112

71. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G

111

71. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos)

111

73. Asus ROG Phone 7

108

74. Sony Xperia 1 III

105

Pros

Vivid and pleasant brightness across all conditions for photo and video when viewed on HDR display
Accurate target exposure down to low light in photo
Neutral white balance and precise color rendering in most test scenarios for photo, zoom and video
Good detail in bright light
Well-controlled noise in bright light for photo and video
Effective video stabilization

Cons

Noise, particularly in the shadow areas and corners of the frame in photo
Noise in low-light video
Shallow depth of field results in out-of-focus background subjects in group shots
Noticeable delay between pressing the shutter and capturing under various test conditions
Exposure and white balance instabilities in photo and video
Video focus slow to react
Loss of fine detail in low light

The Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra delivered a decent performance in the DXOMARK Camera tests and was a slight overall improvement over its predecessor S23 Ultra, helped by a 200MP image sensor in the main camera, a range of new AI features, and the latest Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 chipset. Our testers particularly liked the Samsung’s portrait shots in bright light, which offered vivid and natural color that in some shots felt even more realistic than on the Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max. It’s difficult to tell to which degree the AI exactly contributes to image quality, but it certainly appears that the new AI tools and Samsung’s existing imaging technologies have helped to greatly improve the rendering of some images.

The S24 Ultra ultra-wide camera did very well in bright light, and at the other end of the zoom spectrum, the addition of two tele modules contributed to good detail and overall image quality across a wide range of tele zoom scenes. The new model has to make do without its predecessor’s 10x tele camera, but this did not appear to have had any major impact on tele zoom quality, with the S24 Ultra still producing fairly good detail at long range.

Video is arguably the area that benefits least from the S24 Ultra’s software and hardware improvements. Our testers noticed more pleasant and natural colors than on the S23 Ultra, but video clips were also significantly impacted by exposure and color instabilities. Thanks to better noise reduction and improved color, the S24 Ultra’s video could still keep up with its predecessor, but video results lagged overall significantly behind the class-leading Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max, which outperformed the Samsung across pretty much all video test categories.

Although the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra camera didn’t set any records, the latest flagship from Samsung is a very capable all-round device that provides a more than satisfactory performance for all types of photography in various kinds of scenarios.

BEST 149

Friends & Family

With its pleasant colors and nice contrast in most shooting conditions, the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra is a good option for portrait photography. However, a slight delay between pressing the shutter and actual capture of the image means it’s not your best bet for photographing moving subjects. There is a risk of missing the decisive moment. While the camera’s shallow depth-of-field could result in some out-of-focus faces in group shots, it can also add a nicely blurred background to the pleasant skin tones and good exposure of close-up portrait shots.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – High contrast on HDR display, excellent color rendering, and pleasant skin tones

BEST 132

Lowlight

The Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra performed fairly well in dim lighting conditions, with usually pleasant exposure, nice colors and fairly good detail. However, in our tests the latest Samsung’s flagship still struggled with noise reduction, exposing noise in the shadow areas and corners of the frame. In video mode, our testers noticed a significant loss of detail when recording in low light.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – High contrast on HDR displays, nice color rendering

Test summary

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra Camera Scores vs Ultra-Premium

Photo

144

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

160

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

While the hardware in the S24 Ultra main camera module has remained very similar to the predecessor S23 Ultra, image output has been significantly improved, in large part due to the introduction of a new Ultra HDR format. The S24 Ultra sample images in this article come with an embedded gain map that applies the HDR rendering when the image is viewed on a compatible display. When viewed on such a display, the Samsung’s HDR images offered vivid and pleasant brightness, with accurate target exposure down to low light. In addition, white balance was neutral, with accurate color rendering in most conditions. In bright light, the S24 Ultra still images showed good detail and image noise was well under control. However, when shooting in dimmer conditions, a loss of fine detail became noticeable and noise started creeping in.

Please note: The Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra images were evaluated using the device’s HDR format, which is not applied to the thumbnails on this page. Please click on the thumbnail to open the original files with embedded gain map. The Apple iPhone images on this page embed the gain map in the HEIC format, which unfortunately cannot be displayed on a web page.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra Photo scores vs Ultra-Premium

Exposure

118

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

123

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Exposure is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The main attribute evaluated is the brightness of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the contrast and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.

The S24 Ultra did very well in the exposure category, thanks to the combination of the new HDR format and Samsung’s rendering. Compared to the previous S-series generation, our testers could observe significant improvements in several areas. The HDR format allowed for much more natural contrast between highlights and the subjects when viewed on an HDR display. Thanks to Samsung’s image tuning, the S24 Ultra’s exposure performance was on a very similar level to the iPhone 15 Pro Max we had tested previously. Still, some challenging conditions showed some slight face exposure issues on the device, and the device lagged behind some competitors like the iPhone 15 Pro Max because of slight tone-mapping instabilities when shooting a series of images.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Slight underexposure on face, good highlight retention, fairly natural contrast when viewed on HDR display

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Slight underexposure, good highlight retention, fairly natural contrast on background, slight contrast issues on subject

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra – Slight underexposure, highlight clipping in background, SDR format is unable to take advantage of HDR display

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – High contrast when viewed on HDR display, especially in the highlights

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra – SDR format does not take advantage of HDR display

Color

121

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

125

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

Color is one of the key attributes for technically good pictures. The image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors but we respect a manufacturer's choice of color signature.

In terms of color, improvements over the S23 Ultra were again noticeable, especially when shooting in daylight conditions where white balance and color accuracy were excellent. The Samsung also delivered pleasant skin tones in several conditions, with a softer rendering than the predecessor, where skin tones could often be oversaturated. On the downside, our testers noticed some warm yellow casts and color inaccuracies in indoor and low light.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Pleasant skin tones

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Pleasant skin tones

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra – Oversaturated skin tones on the foreground model

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Slightly unnatural colors

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

Fairly accurate colors

Autofocus

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

123

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

Autofocus tests concentrate on focus accuracy, focus repeatability, shooting time delay, and depth of field. Shooting delay is the difference between the time the user presses the capture button and the time the image is actually taken. It includes focusing speed and the capability of the device to capture images at the right time, what is called 'zero shutter lag' capability. Even if a shallow depth of field can be pleasant for a single subject portrait or close-up shot, it can also be a problem in some specific conditions such as group portraits; Both situations are tested. Focus accuracy is also evaluated in all the real-life images taken, from infinity to close-up objects and in low light to outdoor conditions.

During the autofocus tests, our experts observed a noticeable delay between pressing the shutter and the image being captured in a range of shooting conditions, especially in high-contrast scenes. In some group shots, we also noticed that the camera focused on a face in the background, instead of the face closest to the camera.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Foreground face out of focus

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Foreground face in focus

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra – Foreground face in focus

Autofocus irregularity and speed: 1000Lux Δ4EV Daylight Handheld

This graph illustrates focus accuracy and speed and also zero shutter lag capability by showing the edge acutance versus the shooting time measured on the AFHDR setup on a series of pictures. All pictures were taken at 1000Lux with Daylight illuminant, 500ms after the defocus. On this scenario, the backlit panels in the scene are set up to simulate a fairly high dynamic range: the luminance ratio between the brightest point and a 18% reflective gray patch is 4, which we denote by a Exposure Value difference of 4. The edge acutance is measured on the four edges of the Dead Leaves chart, and the shooting time is measured on the LED Universal Timer.

Texture

115

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

124

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Texture tests analyze the level of details and the texture of subjects in the images taken in the lab as well as in real-life scenarios. For natural shots, particular attention is paid to the level of details in the bright and dark areas of the image. Objective measurements are performed on chart images taken in various lighting conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The charts used are the proprietary DXOMARK chart (DMC) and the Dead Leaves chart.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for tripod and handheld conditions

The level of captured detail in backlit scenes was significantly better on the S24 Ultra than on the predecessor S23 Ultra. Backlighting is particularly challenging in terms of detail rendering, and our testers found the Samsung to be up there with the very best in such difficult conditions. This said, in scenes with lower contrast, detail tended to be significantly lower than on the best-in-class devices, especially when shooting outdoors.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Detail

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Decent level of detail

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Detail

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Excellent level of detail

Google Pixel 8 Pro - Detail

Google Pixel 8 Pro - Decent level of detail

Noise

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

116

Honor Magic5 Pro

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, landscapes, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Noise on moving objects is also evaluated on natural images. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition

In bright light, image noise was pretty well under control, but it became quite intrusive under typical indoor lighting where the S24 Ultra lags behind competitors such as the iPhone 15 Pro Max and sometimes even its own predecessor, the S23 Ultra. In low-light conditions, the S24 Ultra was closer to the level of the competition, especially when shooting handheld.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Noise

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Visible luminance noise on subject

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Noise

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Slight noise on subject

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra - Noise

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra - Slight noise on subject

Artifacts

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G

The artifacts evaluation looks at lens shading, chromatic aberrations, geometrical distortion, edges ringing, halos, ghosting, quantization, unexpected color hue shifts, among others type of possible unnatural effects on photos. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction on the score. The main artifacts observed and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main photo artifacts penalties

Overall, image artifacts were fairly well under control on the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra, but our testers noticed some hue shifts near saturated areas and color quantization, both artifacts that are more challenging to manage with the new HDR format. Unlike on some competitors, the introduction of AI imaging tools resulted in image rendering that was quite natural. Compared to its predecessor, the Galaxy S24 Ultra device showed fewer fusion artifacts and overall image rendering was realistic.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Hue shifts near saturation, noise on subject and background

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Better handling of color artifacts near saturation, slight noise in corners

Bokeh

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

Bokeh is tested in one dedicated mode, usually portrait or aperture mode, and analyzed by visually inspecting all the images captured in the lab and in natural conditions. The goal is to reproduce portrait photography comparable to one taken with a DLSR and a wide aperture. The main image quality attributes paid attention to are depth estimation, artifacts, blur gradient, and the shape of the bokeh blur spotlights. Portrait image quality attributes (exposure, color, texture) are also taken into account.

In a similar way to the S23 Ultra, the S24 Ultra uses one of its tele camera modules (67mm equivalent focal length) when shooting in bokeh mode. Thanks to the compression of perspective, this longer focal length is much more suitable for portrait shots than the wide angles used by some competitors.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Accurate depth estimation, natural segmentation

Rendering of the Samsung’s bokeh shots was fairly natural and pleasant, with subjects well isolated from the background. However, despite a generally very accurate depth estimation in real-life shots, some errors were noticeable in our lab scene. Our testers also noticed some white balance and depth estimation instabilities across consecutive shots of the same scene. But overall, the camera delivered stable results in bokeh mode.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Segmentation failures on the palettes and on the crown

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra - Segmentation failures on red wires in the crown

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Slight segmentation errors on red wires and top spikes

Preview

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

Preview tests analyze the image quality of the camera app's preview of the image, with particular attention paid to the difference between the capture and the preview, especially regarding dynamic range and the application of the bokeh effect. Also evaluated is the smoothness of the exposure, color and focus adaptation when zooming from the minimal to the maximal zoom factor available. The preview frame rate is measured using the LED Universal Timer.

On the Galaxy S24 Ultra, the preview image on the device display was generally close to the captured image. In some difficult backlit scenes, dynamic range was lower in the preview than in the final image, but things were much improved over the S23 Ultra in this respect. In addition, our testers found the preview image to be pretty smooth and stable while zooming in or out.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Capture

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Preview – Slightly stronger highlight clipping than capture

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra – Capture

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra – Preview – Entire background is clipped

Zoom

145

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

158

Huawei P60 Pro

About DXOMARK Camera Zoom tests

The Samsung S24 Ultra is one of the better devices that we have tested in the zoom category. In our tests, the long tele lens allowed for excellent results at long tele range settings, and the secondary tele helped achieve very high levels of detail across the entire tele zoom range. This new zoom configuration will be compared to its predecessor, which was equipped with one 230mm-equivalent focal length tele module. The performance of the ultra-wide camera was remarkable when shooting in daylight, and while at 14mm equivalent, the field of view was not quite as wide as on some direct competitors, it still allowed you to capture a large portion of the scenery.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra Zoom Scores vs Ultra-Premium

Video Zoom

The Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra did very well in video zoom and was on par with the iPhone 15 Pro Max. Pinch zooming was stable and quite smooth, without any jerkiness in the video. Exposure was quite stable as well. On the downside, white balance transitions were quite noticeable when switching from one camera module to another. Given that the Samsung comes with a total of four modules, this is more problematic than on a device with fewer camera modules, but the overall experience was still pleasant.

Wide

105

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

121

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

These tests analyze the performance of the ultra-wide camera at several focal lengths from 12 mm to 20 mm. All image quality attributes are evaluated, with particular attention paid to such artifacts as chromatic aberrations, lens softness, and distortion. Pictures below are an extract of tested scenes.

The S24 Ultra ultra-wide camera module comes with a 35mm-equivalent focal length of 14mm, which allows you to squeeze a lot of the scene into the image, but it is not as wide as some competitors. Ultra-wide images showed quite good color, texture as well as low noise levels when shooting in bright light. However, noise was quite noticeable in the shadow areas of the frame and when shooting under indoor lighting or in low light.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Slight noise, neutral white balance

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra – Slight noise, neutral white balance

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Slight noise, warmer white balance

Tele

107

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

118

Huawei P60 Pro

All image quality attributes are evaluated at focal lengths from approximately 40 mm to 300 mm, with particular attention paid to texture and detail. The score is derived from a number of objective measurements in the lab and perceptual analysis of real-life images.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length

This graph shows the evolution of the DMC detail preservation score with respect to the full-frame equivalent focal length for different light conditions. The x-axis represents the equivalent focal length measured for each corresponding shooting distance and the y-axis represents the maximum details preservation metric score: higher value means better quality. Large dots correspond to zoom ratio available in the user interface of the camera application.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length

In our zoom tests, exposure and color were excellent across all zoom settings. Target exposure was always accurate, with a fairly wide dynamic range. White balance and color rendering were usually accurate as well, even when shooting in high-contrast conditions and in difficult backlit scenes. Image quality remained very good at long-range tele, thanks to the dedicated long tele module. Images had high levels of detail, accurate exposure, and a wider dynamic range than on the S23 Ultra. In addition, color rendering and white balance were accurate.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Long range tele

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Good detail, well-controlled noise

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra - Long range tele

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra - Loss of fine detail

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Long range tele

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Loss of fine detail, slight noise

Close range tele has also been improved over the preceding model, but our testers noticed unnatural detail rendering on some occasions. The camera had a tendency to apply strong noise reduction on landscape shots at the expense of texture. Portrait shots on the other hand were fairly noisy.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Nice colors, loss of fine detail, noise on subject

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra – Inaccurate color rendering, loss of detail

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Slight color cast, loss of detail, noise on subject

Video

137

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

158

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

The Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra’s video mode offers a wide array of frame rates and formats, including a 960fps slow-motion mode at 1080p, providing great creative flexibility to mobile video makers. In addition, the device is capable of recording 10-bit HDR footage videos (HDR10+ mode), allowing for HDR rendering with compatible displays and apps. With this technology now fairly commonplace on flagship models, the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra video mode was tested at 4K resolution with a frame rate of 60fps (auto-fps) and in HDR10+ format.

In our tests, contrast and the quality of the colors were improved by the HDR rendering, but the S24 Ultra would have benefited from a more stable auto-exposure and auto-white balance processing, with instabilities having a significant impact on video rendering in most conditions. These instabilities meant that the S24 Ultra video struggled to keep up with the Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max (tested in HDR mode) and sometimes even the Galaxy S23 Ultra (tested in SDR). In addition, the video focus was sometimes slow to react to changes in the scene.

Still, the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra was able to match the quality level of its predecessor thanks to its good noise reduction, effective video stabilization, and noticeable improvements in terms of color rendering and white balance, and it could outperform the S23 Ultra if the instabilities mentioned earlier are mitigated via a firmware update.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra Video scores vs Ultra-Premium

Exposure

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

116

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

HDR10+ video format means that the footage is supposed to take advantage of the capabilities of HDR displays. It includes a wider range of luminance, and a wider color gamut than SDR displays, significantly improving the user experience. Target exposure in video was accurate most of the time, but subjects could be underexposed in some high-contrast indoor scenes. Our testers also found contrast to be slightly too strong in some scenes. This resulted in stronger shadow clipping than we had observed on the Galaxy S23 Ultra. Exposure adaptation issues and instabilities were also much more visible on the S24 Ultra than on its S23 Ultra or the iPhone 15 Pro Max.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Exposure adaptation issues

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Stable and accurate target exposure

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra – Stable and accurate target exposure

Color

100

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

119

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Like exposure, color benefited from the addition of HDR recording, with more accurate color rendering, as well as a more pleasant and neutral white balance, when compared to the Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra. However, some skin tone types could be rendered unnaturally under indoor conditions and in low light. In addition, strong white balance instabilities were observed in low light.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – White balance instabilities, slightly pink skin tones

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Stable and fairly neutral white balance, slightly yellow skin tone

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra – Stable white balance with yellow cast and slightly yellow skin tones

Autofocus

110

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

119

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

In our tests, the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra’s video focus was slow to react to changes in the scenes, and our testers observed focus-tracking issues when recording in bright light at 60fps. Still, the S24 Ultra was more accurate than the S23 Ultra, which appeared to struggle to focus on the right subject in low light on some occasions. In comparison, the iPhone 15 Pro Max delivered very accurate focus across all conditions, as well as very smooth and fast focus transitions.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Slightly slow focus reaction

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Fast focus reaction

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra – Slightly slow focus reaction

Texture

103

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

118

Oppo Find X6 Pro

Texture tests analyze the level of details and texture of the real-life videos as well as the videos of charts recorded in the lab. Natural videos recordings are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the level of details in the bright and areas as well as in the dark. Objective measurements are performed of images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The charts used are the DXOMARK chart (DMC) and Dead Leaves chart.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels

The Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra delivered nice and natural video detail in bright light conditions, with slightly less sharpening than the S23 Ultra. When moving on to dimmer scenes, a lack of detail became often noticeable. Only some edges remained sharp while faces lost a lot of their skin texture and main features. Overall detail performance was close to the S23 Ultra but could not quite match the iPhone 15 Pro Max in most conditions.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Detail

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra - Good detail, some loss of very fine detail

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Detail

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Very good detail

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra - Detail

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra - Good detail, some loss of very fine detail

Noise

116

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

119

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure, temporal aspects on real-life video recording as well as videos of charts taken in the lab. Natural videos are visually evaluated, with particular attention paid to the noise in the dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Objective measurements are performed on the videos of charts recorded in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux. The chart used is the DXOMARK visual noise chart.

Spatial Noise
Temporal Noise

Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level

Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level

This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

Like its direct competitor, the iPhone 15 Pro Max, the Galaxy S24 Ultra usually controlled image noise well in our tests and delivered video footage that was almost free of noise when recording in bright light. In low-light scenes, the Samsung could not quite keep up with the Apple, with some fine noise visible on textured areas, as well as chroma noise on areas of plain color. Still, the S24 Ultra results were an improvement over the S23 Ultra in most conditions.

Samsung S24 Ultra - Noise evaluation

Very fine noise visible

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Noise evaluation

Very fine noise visible

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra - Noise evaluation

Visible noise

Stabilization

115

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

118

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jello artifacts and residual motion blur on walk and run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

In our tests, the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra’s video stabilization was very effective, with very little camera shake when walking or even running while recording. However, frame shifts were slightly more noticeable than on the iPhone. The same is true for residual vibrations in challenging conditions.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Effective stabilization when walking while recording

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Effective stabilization when walking while recording

Google Pixel 8 Pro – Effective stabilization when walking while recording

Artifacts

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Xiaomi 12S Ultra

Artifacts are evaluated with MTF and ringing measurements on the SFR chart in the lab as well as frame-rate measurements using the LED Universal Timer. Natural videos are visually evaluated by paying particular attention to artifacts such as aliasing, quantization, blocking, and hue shift, among others. The more severe and the more frequent the artifact, the higher the point deduction from the score. The main artifacts and corresponding point loss are listed below.

Main video artifacts penalties

Video artifacts were overall well-controlled by the latest Galaxy S-series device, with few to no artifacts impacting the user experience. This said, the camera’s high contrast and saturated colors could on occasion result in noticeable hue shifts around bright elements of the frame, as well as on faces. When recording in low light, some ghosting was visible on moving subjects. This was pretty much the same on previous S-series models but is controlled better on the iPhone 15 Pro Max.

The Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra is able to offer an adaptive frame rate that uses 60fps in bright light and indoors, which is on par with the iPhone 15 Pro Max. In our tests, this resulted in very smooth perceived motion. In low light, the frame rate drops to 30fps to allow for overall good quality in dimmer light conditions.

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra – Slight ghosting on face and shaker

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – No ghosting

Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra – Slight ghosting on face and shaker

The post Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro+ 5G Camera test

DXOMARK — Mon, 29 Jan 2024 15:04:21 +0000

We put the Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro+ 5G through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

Primary: 200 MP, f/1.65, 1/1.4″, multi-directional PDAF, OIS
Ultra-wide:8 MP, f/2.2
Macro : 2 MP, f/2.4

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

121

camera

123
Photo

104

123

125

102

123

124

116

60
Bokeh

64
Preview

109
Zoom

118

121

117
Video

116

119

119

107

118

107

119

118

Use cases & Conditions

Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.

BEST 175

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 160

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 132

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 149

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

Position in Global Ranking

77^th

1. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

157

2. Huawei P60 Pro

156

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

154

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

154

5. Google Pixel 8 Pro

153

5. Oppo Find X6 Pro

153

7. Honor Magic5 Pro

152

8. Oppo Find X6

150

8. Vivo X100 Pro

150

10. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

149

11. Google Pixel 8

148

12. Google Pixel 7 Pro

147

12. Honor Magic4 Ultimate

147

14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

146

14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

146

16. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

145

16. Apple iPhone 15

145

18. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

144

19. Huawei P50 Pro

143

20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

141

20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

141

20. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

141

23. Google Pixel 7

140

23. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)

140

23. Vivo X90 Pro+

140

23. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

140

27. Huawei Mate 40 Pro+

139

28. Xiaomi 14

138

29. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

137

30. Vivo X90 Pro

136

30. Xiaomi 13 Pro

136

30. Xiaomi 12S Ultra

136

33. Huawei Mate 40 Pro

135

33. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

135

33. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)

135

36. Google Pixel 6 Pro

134

36. Vivo X70 Pro+

134

38. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

133

38. Apple iPhone 14

133

38. Google Pixel Fold

133

38. Google Pixel 7a

133

38. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)

133

38. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

133

44. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

131

44. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

131

44. Xiaomi 13T Pro

131

47. Motorola Edge 40 Pro

130

47. Oppo Find X5 Pro

130

47. Xiaomi 13

130

50. Huawei P40 Pro

129

50. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra

129

50. Xiaomi 12T Pro

129

50. Xiaomi 12 Pro

129

54. Oppo Find X3 Pro

128

54. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

128

56. Apple iPhone 12 Pro

127

56. Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders

127

56. OnePlus 11

127

56. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

127

56. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

127

61. Google Pixel 6

126

61. Honor Magic4 Pro

126

61. Vivo X70 Pro (MediaTek)

126

61. Vivo X60 Pro+

126

65. Apple iPhone 13 mini

125

65. Apple iPhone 13

125

65. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

125

65. Vivo X50 Pro+

125

69. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

124

69. Xiaomi Mi 11 Pro

124

71. Xiaomi 13T

123

72. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

122

72. Google Pixel 6a

122

72. Honor 90

122

72. OnePlus 10 Pro

122

72. OnePlus 9 Pro

122

77. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

121

78. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

120

78. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)

120

78. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro 5G

120

81. Honor Magic Vs

119

81. Sony Xperia 5 IV

119

83. Sony Xperia 5 V

118

83. Sony Xperia 1 IV

118

85. Apple iPhone 12 mini

117

85. Apple iPhone 12

117

85. Honor Magic V2

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)

117

91. Apple iPhone 11

116

91. Asus Zenfone 8

116

91. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

116

94. Honor 70

115

94. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Snapdragon)

115

94. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

115

94. Xiaomi 12T

115

98. Nothing Phone(1)

114

98. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G

114

98. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G

114

98. Oppo Find X5

114

98. Oppo Find N2 Flip

114

103. OnePlus 8 Pro

113

103. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G

113

103. Xiaomi 12

113

106. Oppo Reno8 5G

112

106. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

112

108. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G

111

108. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos)

111

108. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)

111

111. Google Pixel 5

109

111. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G

109

113. Asus ROG Phone 7

108

113. Fairphone 5

108

113. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Exynos)

108

113. Xiaomi 11T Pro

108

117. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

107

118. Oppo Find X3 Neo

106

119. Sony Xperia 1 III

105

120. Motorola Edge 40 Neo

103

121. Huawei P40

102

121. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G

102

123. Black Shark 5 Pro

101

123. Motorola Edge 30 Pro

101

125. Apple iPhone SE (2022)

100

125. Google Pixel 4a

100

127. ZTE Axon 30 Ultra

128. Oppo Find X5 Lite

129. Oppo Reno4 5G

130. Oppo A94 5G

130. Vivo X80 Lite 5G

132. Samsung Galaxy A72

132. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G

132. Samsung Galaxy A25 5G

135. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 5G

136. Oppo Reno6 5G

137. Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G

137. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G

139. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G

140. OnePlus Nord CE 5G

141. Samsung Galaxy A15 5G

141. Vivo Y76 5G

143. Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

144. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G

145. Sony Xperia 10 V

145. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G

147. TCL 40R 5G

148. Realme 9i 5G

148. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13

150. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G

151. Honor 90 Lite

152. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)

152. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G

154. Fairphone 4

154. Oppo A78 5G

154. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G

157. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G

158. Motorola Moto G62 5G

159. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G

160. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G

161. Sony Xperia 10 IV

161. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12

161. Xiaomi Redmi 13C

161. Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G

165. Honor X7

165. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G

167. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11

168. Honor 70 Lite

169. Motorola Moto G23

170. Oppo A77 5G

171. Honor X8 5G

171. TCL 406

173. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022

174. Crosscall Action-X5

175. Samsung Galaxy A22 5G

176. Crosscall Core-Z5

177. Oppo A57

177. Oppo A16s 5G

179. Samsung Galaxy A05s

179. Xiaomi Redmi 12C

Position in High-End Ranking

7^th

1. Google Pixel 7

140

2. Google Pixel 7a

133

3. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

127

4. Google Pixel 6

126

5. Google Pixel 6a

122

5. Honor 90

122

7. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

121

8. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro 5G

120

9. Honor 70

115

9. Xiaomi 12T

115

11. Nothing Phone(1)

114

12. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G

113

13. Oppo Reno8 5G

112

14. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G

109

15. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

107

16. Apple iPhone SE (2022)

100

17. Oppo Find X5 Lite

18. Oppo Reno4 5G

19. Vivo X80 Lite 5G

20. Samsung Galaxy A72

21. Oppo Reno6 5G

22. Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G

22. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G

24. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G

25. Sony Xperia 10 V

26. Fairphone 4

27. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G

28. Sony Xperia 10 IV

29. Crosscall Action-X5

Pros

Accurate target exposure on portrait scenes in outdoor and indoor conditions in photo and video modes
Fairly high texture level in outdoor conditions in photo and video modes
In photo, extended depth of field in a multiplane scene
In video, residual motion is fairly well managed while walking
In close-range tele mode, fairly high level of detail

Cons

In photo mode local coarse and chromatic noise is visible, especially in low-light conditions
Occasionally inaccurate skin-tone rendering in portraits in both photo and video mode
Visible white balance casts, especially under tungsten illuminants in photo and video modes
Segmentation artifacts in bokeh are sometimes visible on subject
Video autofocus instabilities
Limitations in preview, when compared with final capture

The Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro+ 5G made some improvements over its predecessor, the Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G, with the device delivering images that were correct from the standpoint of quality.

Casual photographers will appreciate the Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro+ 5G‘s capabilities in capturing nice stills in most light conditions.

In low-light scenes, image noise was sometimes quite high.

The Redmi Note 13 Pro+ 5G showed a notable score improvement over its predecessor in zoom, but the lack of a dedicated tele module meant that image quality was still limited in the medium and long range.

In video, performance was mixed amid some exposure and autofocus instabilities, which could affect the overall user experience.

When compared with other High-end devices ($400-$600), the Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro+ 5G camera ranked near the top end of the segment.

Test summary

Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G Camera Scores vs High-End

Photo

123

Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

160

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G Photo scores vs High-End

Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro+ 5G – Accurate target exposure; extended depth of field but inaccurate skin tones

Autofocus irregularity and speed: 1000Lux Δ0EV Daylight Handheld

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for tripod and handheld conditions

Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition

Zoom

109

Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

158

Huawei P60 Pro

About DXOMARK Camera Zoom tests

Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G Zoom Scores vs High-End

Video

117

Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

158

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G Video scores

Xiaomi Redmi Note 13Pro+ 5G – Exposure and autofocus instabilities are visible; residual motion is visible and bad color rendering.

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels

Spatial Noise
Temporal Noise

Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level

Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level

This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

The post Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro+ 5G Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

Vivo X100 Pro Camera test

DXOMARK — Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:56:35 +0000

We put the Vivo X100 Pro through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

Primary: 50MP 1/0.98″ sensor, f/1.75-aperture lens, Dual Pixel PDAF, OIS
Ultra-wide: 50MP, 1/2.76″ sensor , 15mm equivalent f/2.0-aperture lens, AF
Tele: 50MP 1/2″ sensor, 100mm equivalent f/2.5-aperture lens, AF, OIS
Video: 8K, 4K at 60/30fps, 1080p at 60/30fps

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Vivo X100 Pro

150

camera

149
Photo

113

123

115

125

123

117

124

114

116

70
Bokeh

81
Preview

155
Zoom

118

114

121

145
Video

104

116

110

119

102

119

112

118

117

119

112

118

Use cases & Conditions

Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.

BEST 175

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 160

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 132

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 149

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

Position in Global Ranking

8^th

1. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

157

2. Huawei P60 Pro

156

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

154

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

154

5. Google Pixel 8 Pro

153

5. Oppo Find X6 Pro

153

7. Honor Magic5 Pro

152

8. Oppo Find X6

150

8. Vivo X100 Pro

150

10. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

149

11. Google Pixel 8

148

12. Google Pixel 7 Pro

147

12. Honor Magic4 Ultimate

147

14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

146

14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

146

16. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

145

16. Apple iPhone 15

145

18. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

144

19. Huawei P50 Pro

143

20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

141

20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

141

20. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

141

23. Google Pixel 7

140

23. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)

140

23. Vivo X90 Pro+

140

23. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

140

27. Huawei Mate 40 Pro+

139

28. Xiaomi 14

138

29. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

137

30. Vivo X90 Pro

136

30. Xiaomi 13 Pro

136

30. Xiaomi 12S Ultra

136

33. Huawei Mate 40 Pro

135

33. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

135

33. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)

135

36. Google Pixel 6 Pro

134

36. Vivo X70 Pro+

134

38. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

133

38. Apple iPhone 14

133

38. Google Pixel Fold

133

38. Google Pixel 7a

133

38. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)

133

38. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

133

44. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

131

44. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

131

44. Xiaomi 13T Pro

131

47. Motorola Edge 40 Pro

130

47. Oppo Find X5 Pro

130

47. Xiaomi 13

130

50. Huawei P40 Pro

129

50. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra

129

50. Xiaomi 12T Pro

129

50. Xiaomi 12 Pro

129

54. Oppo Find X3 Pro

128

54. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

128

56. Apple iPhone 12 Pro

127

56. Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders

127

56. OnePlus 11

127

56. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

127

56. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

127

61. Google Pixel 6

126

61. Honor Magic4 Pro

126

61. Vivo X70 Pro (MediaTek)

126

61. Vivo X60 Pro+

126

65. Apple iPhone 13 mini

125

65. Apple iPhone 13

125

65. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

125

65. Vivo X50 Pro+

125

69. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

124

69. Xiaomi Mi 11 Pro

124

71. Xiaomi 13T

123

72. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

122

72. Google Pixel 6a

122

72. Honor 90

122

72. OnePlus 10 Pro

122

72. OnePlus 9 Pro

122

77. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

121

78. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

120

78. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)

120

78. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro 5G

120

81. Honor Magic Vs

119

81. Sony Xperia 5 IV

119

83. Sony Xperia 5 V

118

83. Sony Xperia 1 IV

118

85. Apple iPhone 12 mini

117

85. Apple iPhone 12

117

85. Honor Magic V2

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)

117

91. Apple iPhone 11

116

91. Asus Zenfone 8

116

91. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

116

94. Honor 70

115

94. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Snapdragon)

115

94. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

115

94. Xiaomi 12T

115

98. Nothing Phone(1)

114

98. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G

114

98. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G

114

98. Oppo Find X5

114

98. Oppo Find N2 Flip

114

103. OnePlus 8 Pro

113

103. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G

113

103. Xiaomi 12

113

106. Oppo Reno8 5G

112

106. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

112

108. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G

111

108. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos)

111

108. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)

111

111. Google Pixel 5

109

111. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G

109

113. Asus ROG Phone 7

108

113. Fairphone 5

108

113. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Exynos)

108

113. Xiaomi 11T Pro

108

117. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

107

118. Oppo Find X3 Neo

106

119. Sony Xperia 1 III

105

120. Motorola Edge 40 Neo

103

121. Huawei P40

102

121. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G

102

123. Black Shark 5 Pro

101

123. Motorola Edge 30 Pro

101

125. Apple iPhone SE (2022)

100

125. Google Pixel 4a

100

127. ZTE Axon 30 Ultra

128. Oppo Find X5 Lite

129. Oppo Reno4 5G

130. Oppo A94 5G

130. Vivo X80 Lite 5G

132. Samsung Galaxy A72

132. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G

132. Samsung Galaxy A25 5G

135. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 5G

136. Oppo Reno6 5G

137. Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G

137. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G

139. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G

140. OnePlus Nord CE 5G

141. Samsung Galaxy A15 5G

141. Vivo Y76 5G

143. Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

144. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G

145. Sony Xperia 10 V

145. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G

147. TCL 40R 5G

148. Realme 9i 5G

148. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13

150. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G

151. Honor 90 Lite

152. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)

152. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G

154. Fairphone 4

154. Oppo A78 5G

154. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G

157. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G

158. Motorola Moto G62 5G

159. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G

160. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G

161. Sony Xperia 10 IV

161. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12

161. Xiaomi Redmi 13C

161. Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G

165. Honor X7

165. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G

167. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11

168. Honor 70 Lite

169. Motorola Moto G23

170. Oppo A77 5G

171. Honor X8 5G

171. TCL 406

173. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022

174. Crosscall Action-X5

175. Samsung Galaxy A22 5G

176. Crosscall Core-Z5

177. Oppo A57

177. Oppo A16s 5G

179. Samsung Galaxy A05s

179. Xiaomi Redmi 12C

Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking

8^th

1. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

157

2. Huawei P60 Pro

156

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

154

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

154

5. Google Pixel 8 Pro

153

5. Oppo Find X6 Pro

153

7. Honor Magic5 Pro

152

8. Oppo Find X6

150

8. Vivo X100 Pro

150

10. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

149

11. Google Pixel 7 Pro

147

11. Honor Magic4 Ultimate

147

13. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

146

13. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

146

15. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

145

16. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

144

17. Huawei P50 Pro

143

18. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

141

18. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

141

18. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

141

21. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)

140

21. Vivo X90 Pro+

140

21. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

140

24. Huawei Mate 40 Pro+

139

25. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

137

26. Vivo X90 Pro

136

26. Xiaomi 13 Pro

136

26. Xiaomi 12S Ultra

136

29. Huawei Mate 40 Pro

135

29. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

135

29. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)

135

32. Google Pixel 6 Pro

134

32. Vivo X70 Pro+

134

34. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

133

34. Google Pixel Fold

133

34. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)

133

37. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

131

37. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

131

39. Motorola Edge 40 Pro

130

39. Oppo Find X5 Pro

130

41. Huawei P40 Pro

129

41. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra

129

41. Xiaomi 12 Pro

129

44. Oppo Find X3 Pro

128

44. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

128

46. Apple iPhone 12 Pro

127

46. Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders

127

46. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

127

49. Honor Magic4 Pro

126

49. Vivo X60 Pro+

126

51. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

125

51. Vivo X50 Pro+

125

53. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

124

53. Xiaomi Mi 11 Pro

124

55. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

122

55. OnePlus 10 Pro

122

55. OnePlus 9 Pro

122

58. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

120

59. Honor Magic Vs

119

59. Sony Xperia 5 IV

119

61. Sony Xperia 5 V

118

61. Sony Xperia 1 IV

118

63. Honor Magic V2

117

63. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

117

65. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Snapdragon)

115

65. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

115

67. Oppo Find X5

114

67. Oppo Find N2 Flip

114

69. OnePlus 8 Pro

113

70. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

112

71. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G

111

71. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos)

111

73. Asus ROG Phone 7

108

74. Sony Xperia 1 III

105

Pros

Low noise levels in photo and video
Fairly good detail in photo and video
Good detail and low noise across all zoom settings
Nice face contrast in portrait shots
Fairly accurate and fast autofocus in photo mode
Generally accurate white balance and color rendering in outdoor videos

Cons

Occasional color casts
Artifacts, including ghosting and unnatural texture rendering
Exposure adaptation issues in video mode
Slight underexposure, especially in low light and backlit video scenes
Jello effect and moving texture artifacts
Occasionally inaccurate depth estimation in bokeh mode

The Vivo X100 Pro performed very well in the DXOMARK Camera tests, thanks to the excellent light collection capabilities of the large 1/0.98″ Sony IMX 989 sensor in the main camera module. The same sensor was already used on the predecessor X90 Pro and in other ultra-premium segment models, including the Xiaomi 13 Ultra, and the sensor contributes significantly to the Vivo’s very good texture and noise results across all light levels, down to low light.

In photo mode, images had better contrast than what we had previously seen on the X90 Pro, but in some conditions, our testers noticed slight underexposure and shadow clipping. Colors were pleasant in all shooting conditions and overall color rendering was improved over the X90 Pro, despite some occasional white balance instabilities. Our experts also observed some unwanted image artifacts, including ghosting in scenes with fast motion.

In terms of its zoom capabilities, the X100 Pro is among the best devices we have tested to date, thanks to very good image quality from ultra-wide to medium-range tele settings. Zoom images showed good detail and a fairly wide dynamic range. In the case of tele zoom, this was helped by the 100mm equivalent periscopic telephoto lens, which is a big step forward from the 50mm variant on the predecessor. In addition, at f/2.5 the aperture of the tele lens is slightly wider than on some direct competitors.

The camera also provided a great experience when recording videos, with good stabilization and high levels of detail in static scenes. On the downside, our testers occasionally noticed slight exposure adaptation issues in changing light conditions.

BEST 149

Friends & Family

The Vivo X100 Pro delivered very good results when shooting images or videos of friends and family, thanks to fairly good skin-tone accuracy across all light conditions, as well as good detail and low noise levels. The camera also managed accurate focus on the subject of the scene in most situations, but the autofocus could sometimes be a little slow to lock on.

Vivo X100 Pro – Pretty natural skin tones and pleasant color rendering

BEST 132

Lowlight

In low light, the camera captured pretty impressive levels of detail and controlled image noise very well in still images. Target exposure, though, could sometimes be slightly low. Low-light video quality was overall good as well, thanks to good detail preservation and fairly pleasant color rendering. On the downside, some exposure instabilities and temporal portrait issues were sometimes noticeable.

Vivo X100 Pro – Decent detail and good target exposure

Test summary

Vivo X100 Pro Camera Scores vs Ultra-Premium

Photo

149

Vivo X100 Pro

160

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

In photo mode, the Vivo X100 Pro delivered very good results across pretty much all tests. The camera managed to capture good detail in most shooting conditions, while keeping noise levels low. Portrait shots had nice contrast and color. The autofocus was an improvement over the X90 Pro but a little slow, which resulted in an average score for this category. Our testers also observed some unwanted image artifacts, including ghosting and unnatural rendering of textures, especially in night portraits and low-light shots. Dynamic range was more limited than on some competitors, but overall the Vivo X100 Pro’s photo mode competes with the best devices in the Ultra-Premium segment.

Vivo X100 Pro Photo scores vs Ultra-Premium

Close-Up

Close-up is the third use case score introduced with DXOMARK Camera version 5. It evaluates the camera’s ability to capture detail at subject distances below 10 cm and magnifications as close as possible to 1:1.

The X100 Pro smartphone offers a nice macro mode, using its ultra-wide camera for capture. Thanks to the larger image sensor in the ultra-wide module, the new model captured better detail when compared to the predecessor X90 Pro.

Though it is not part of the DXOMARK test protocol, it is worth mentioning that using the device’s 100mm equivalent focal length tele module results in macro images with an impressively high level of magnification.

Vivo X100 Pro – Good detail

Vivo X90 Pro – Fairly good detail

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Good detail

Exposure

113

Vivo X100 Pro

123

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

In our tests, exposure was stable with good contrast in most conditions. However, our experts found the dynamic range in portrait shots to be more limited than on the X90 Pro and the iPhone 15 Pro Max, especially in low light.

Vivo X100 Pro – Good contrast and accurate target exposure

Vivo X90 Pro – Slightly low contrast but wide dynamic range

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Good contrast and wide dynamic range

Vivo X100 Pro – Good contrast but slightly limited dynamic range

Vivo X90 Pro – Pretty wide dynamic range

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Good contrast and dynamic range

Color

115

Vivo X100 Pro

125

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

Color rendering was pleasant with a fairly neutral white balance across all shooting conditions. However, our testers noticed some white balance instabilities. Skin tones were often rendered unnaturally in backlit scenes but this is not uncommon, even among premium devices.

Vivo X100 Pro – Neutral colors

Vivo X90 Pro – Slight yellow color cast

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Fairly neutral white balance

Vivo X100 Pro – Noticeable yellow color cast; fairly accurate skin tones

Vivo X90 Pro – Lack of contrast in skin tones

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Natural white balance

Vivo X100 Pro – Realistic skin tone

Vivo X90 Pro – Slightly inaccurate skin tone

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Realistic skin tone

Autofocus

Vivo X100 Pro

123

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

Compared to the predecessor X90 Pro and the Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max, the Vivo X100 Pro had a wider depth of field. In our tests, most scenes were focused well, but our experts found the autofocus to be slightly slow to react when compared to other devices in the class, especially in low light.

Edge acutance irregularity and average shooting delay along all tested conditions

This graph illustrates focus irregularity and speed as well as zero shutter lag capability, for different light conditions. Each point is the result of the aggregation of the measurements for a group of 30 pictures per conditions. The y-axis shows the average acutance difference with the best focus in percentage. The lower the better. On the x-axis, a negative delay means the photo is taken just before the user triggers the shutter, a positive delay means the photo is taken just after. The closer to 0 ms, the better. Acutance and delay are measured respectively using the Dead leaves chart and the LED Universal Timer, on the AF HDR Setup.

[Missing IDs in shortcode]

Texture

117

Vivo X100 Pro

124

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for tripod and handheld conditions

In laboratory testing, the X100 Pro captured good detail, as seen in the graph above, even when shooting in low light. Fine skin texture was also rendered nicely in close-up portraits taken at night. In perceptual testing, the resulting image showed very good detail preservation in low light, as seen below.

Vivo X100 Pro - Detail

Vivo X100 Pro - Good detail

Vivo X90 Pro - Detail

Vivo X90 Pro - Slight loss of texture

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Detail

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Loss of fine detail

Noise

114

Vivo X100 Pro

116

Honor Magic5 Pro

Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition

In our tests, the Vivo X100 Pro managed to keep noise levels in photos low across all test conditions.

Vivo X100 Pro - Noise

Vivo X100 Pro - Low noise on face

Vivo X90 Pro - Noise

Vivo X90 Pro - Slight noise

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Noise

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Slight noise on face

Artifacts

Vivo X100 Pro

Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G

Unwanted image artifacts were fairly well under control on the X100 Pro, but our testers observed ghosting in some shooting conditions, as well as fusion artifacts and flare among other artifacts.

Main photo artifacts penalties

Vivo X100 Pro – Ghosting in some conditions

Bokeh

Vivo X100 Pro

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

The X100 Pro’s portrait mode performed well in our tests, achieving the same score as the predecessor X90 Pro, despite a different bokeh mode rendering. On the X100 Pro, depth artifacts could sometimes be observed, as well as a non-uniformity of the bokeh effect, especially in the background. This said, the subject was isolated well from the background.

Vivo X100 Pro – Good subject isolation, fairly accurate depth estimation

Vivo X90 Pro – Good subject isolation

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Subject well emphasized, good depth estimation

Vivo X100 Pro - Bokeh mode

Vivo X100 Pro - Some segmentation errors

Preview

Vivo X100 Pro

Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

Dynamic range of the preview image on the X100 Pro display was close to the actual captured image in most conditions, but the level of detail was lower. Some differences were noticeable when shooting in bokeh mode, however, mainly in terms of blur intensity and depth estimation.

Vivo X100 Pro – Capture

Vivo X100 Pro – Preview: Dynamic range well preserved

Vivo X100 Pro – Capture

Vivo X100 Pro – Preview: Bokeh effect is different than the captured image

Zoom

155

Vivo X100 Pro

158

Huawei P60 Pro

About DXOMARK Camera Zoom tests

The Vivo X100 Pro was among the best devices tested to date in the zoom category, especially for photo zoom, thanks to good image results across all zoom settings. Thanks to the wide aperture, the Vivo was also one of the best zoom performers in low light.

Vivo X100 Pro Zoom Scores vs Ultra-Premium

Video Zoom

Video zoom performance was not quite as performant as for photo and not even on the same level as the X90 Pro. The difference was most noticeable at ultra-wide settings where the level of captured detail was lower on the X100 Pro. This said, overall image quality was still decent.

Wide

114

Vivo X100 Pro

121

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

The Vivo X100 Pro ultra-wide camera is among the best we have seen, even though at 15 mm equivalent the maximum angle of view is not quite as wide as on some competitors. Images usually contained a lot of detail, but our testers found detail rendering to be slightly unnatural sometimes. Overall, ultra-wide performance was great indoors and in low-light conditions, with noise well managed across all light conditions.

Vivo X100 Pro - Ultra-wide (18mm)

Vivo X100 Pro - Good fine detail, but very slightly unnatural detail rendering on branches

Vivo X90 Pro - Ultra-wide (18mm)

Vivo X90 Pro - Slightly lower detail

Apple iPhone 15Pro Max - Ultra-wide (18mm)

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Lower detail

Vivo X100 Pro - Ultra-wide

Vivo X100 Pro - Neutral white balance, good detail, low noise

Vivo X90 Pro - Ultra-wide

Vivo X90 Pro - Blueish cast, good detail, noise

Apple iPhone 15Pro Max - Ultra-wide

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Neutral white balance, loss of fine detail, noise

Tele

118

Vivo X100 Pro

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length

In terms of tele zoom, the Vivo X100 Pro offers a native zoom factor of around 4x (100mm equivalent). In our tests, the Vivo was the best device to date for tele photography, thanks to high levels of detail and well-controlled image noise. Compared to the predecessor X90 Pro and the competition, the improvements were most noticeable at medium and long-range tele settings, thanks to the comparatively long 100mm equivalent tele module. Tele zoom portraits showed good detail on face, even when shooting in difficult conditions, such as in low light or scenes with high contrast. However, our testers sometimes found the detail rendering to look slightly unnatural.

Vivo X100 Pro - Long range tele

Vivo X100 Pro - Accurate exposure, good detail on face, low noise

Vivo X90 Pro - Long range tele

Vivo X90 Pro - Highlight clipping, loss of fine detail, noise

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Long range tele

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Slight underexposure, loss of fine detail, noise

Vivo X100 Pro - 90mm

Vivo X100 Pro - Unnatural rendering of texture in the beard

Tele performance was excellent in low light, with good preservation of fine detail and low noise levels. This is a noticeable improvement over the X90 Pro and puts the X100 Pro ahead of the competition in terms of tele zoom shooting.

Vivo X100 Pro - Medium range tele in low light

Vivo X100 Pro - High level of detail, low noise

Vivo X90 Pro - Medium range tele in low light

Vivo X90 Pro - Less detail, slight noise

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Medium range tele in low light

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Loss of detail, noise

The Vivo X100 Pro was capable of producing decent image quality up to a 10x tele zoom factor, outperforming even the Huawei P60 Pro and making it one of the best devices for shooting at the longest tele settings.

Vivo X100 Pro - 10x tele at 1000lux D65

Vivo X100 Pro - More fine detail than competition

Huawei P60 Pro - 10x tele at 1000lux D65

Huawei P60 Pro - Loss of fine detail

Video

145

Vivo X100 Pro

158

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

The Vivo X100 Pro comes with a dedicated Vivo V3 image 6nm processing chip, which offers a 20% boost in processing speed compared to its predecessor. It also powers the camera’s 4K portrait video mode, which is Vivo’s answer to Apple’s “cinematic” video feature, which was first introduced with the iPhone 13 Pro. However, Vivo aims to take things one step further by offering five types of rendering: Nature Portrait, Summer Sea Breeze, Classic Movie, Retro Soft Focus, and HK Night. The camera is capable of recording in 8K resolution at 30 fps and in 4K at a frame rate of up to 60 fps. In slow motion motion, impressive frame rates of up to 960 fps in Full-HD resolution are achieved.

Our video testing was performed in SDR mode, which produced the best overall quality footage. In this mode, the Vivo offered a fairly pleasant video rendering but could not quite compete with the class-leading iPhone 15 Pro Max’s HDR video.

Vivo X100 Pro Video scores vs Ultra-Premium

Exposure

104

Vivo X100 Pro

116

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

During the video exposure tests, our experts noticed some temporal instabilities, mainly when recording in daylight conditions. Footage also showed a fairly low exposure, especially in low light, but dynamic range was wide. Overall, the Vivo X100 Pro’s video exposure results were not quite on the same level as the predecessor X90 Pro’s.

VivoX100 Pro -Target exposure is accurate, but some instabilities are visible

Vivo X90 Pro – Target exposure is accurate, but slight instabilities can be visible

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max -Target exposure is accurate and fairly stable

Color

110

Vivo X100 Pro

119

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Video color was quite pleasant, with neutral white balance. This is an improvement over the X90 Pro where color casts tended to be visible. Like for exposure, our testers noticed some temporal instabilities, especially in low light, but overall footage recorded on the Vivo showed realistic color rendering. It was not quite as vivid as the HDR videos of the iPhone 15 Pro Max, though.

Vivo X100 Pro – Neutral white balance

Vivo X90 Pro – Color cast

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Fairly neutral white balance

Autofocus

102

Vivo X100 Pro

119

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

In our video tests, the Vivo’s autofocus performed well in most scenes, with fairly smooth target tracking and accurate focus, except in low light, where focus in portrait scenes could be unstable. Focus transition between subjects was very good, though.

Vivo X100 Pro – Subjects are well focused

Vivo X90 Pro -Subjects are well-focused, convergence is a bit slow

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max -Subjects are well focused

Texture

112

Vivo X100 Pro

118

Oppo Find X6 Pro

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels

Overall detail preservation in video was pretty high, with good detail on subjects and textured areas in our real-life test scenes. In addition, our lab measurements showed high levels of fine detail across all light conditions. However, some slight texture artifacts were sometimes noticeable.

Vivo X100 Pro – Pretty good scene integrity

Noise

117

Vivo X100 Pro

119

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Spatial Noise
Temporal Noise

Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level

Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level

This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

Video noise was well managed on the Vivo X100 Pro when compared to the Vivo X90 Pro. There was still some room for improvement in terms of noise artifacts in portrait scenes, especially when recording in low light, but other than that, spatial and temporal noise were handled pretty well.

Stabilization

112

Vivo X100 Pro

118

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any other means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jello artifacts and residual motion blur on walk and run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

Video stabilization on the Vivo X100 Pro was overall effective, with walking motion and static hand-holding being counteracted well. However, we observed some sharpness differences between frames and also noticed some deformations and jello effect in low-light recordings, which affected the rendering as a whole.

Vivo X100 Pro – Some camera shake but overall good stabilization

Vivo X90 Pro – Camera shake but overall good stabilization

Apple iPhone15 Pro Max – Pretty good stabilization

Vivo X100 Pro – Jello effect at the start of the clip

Artifacts

Vivo X100 Pro

Xiaomi 12S Ultra

Main video artifacts penalties

Overall, the Vivo X100 Pro controlled the most common video artifacts quite well, but some artifacts, including color quantization, aliasing and moire, were still noticeable.

The post Vivo X100 Pro Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE Camera test

DXOMARK — Thu, 14 Dec 2023 14:58:58 +0000

We put the Samsung Galaxy S23 FE through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

Primary: 50MP sensor, f/1.8-aperture lens, Dual Pixel AF, OIS
Ultra-wide: 12MP sensor, f/2.2-aperture lens
Tele: 8MP sensor, f/2.4-aperture lens

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

127

camera

124
Photo

106

123

108

125

102

123

108

124

116

50
Bokeh

67
Preview

123
Zoom

118

109

121

131
Video

116

103

119

119

109

118

107

119

115

118

Use cases & Conditions

Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.

BEST 175

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 160

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 132

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 149

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

Position in Global Ranking

56^th

1. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

157

2. Huawei P60 Pro

156

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

154

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

154

5. Google Pixel 8 Pro

153

5. Oppo Find X6 Pro

153

7. Honor Magic5 Pro

152

8. Oppo Find X6

150

8. Vivo X100 Pro

150

10. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

149

11. Google Pixel 8

148

12. Google Pixel 7 Pro

147

12. Honor Magic4 Ultimate

147

14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

146

14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

146

16. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

145

16. Apple iPhone 15

145

18. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

144

19. Huawei P50 Pro

143

20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

141

20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

141

20. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

141

23. Google Pixel 7

140

23. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)

140

23. Vivo X90 Pro+

140

23. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

140

27. Huawei Mate 40 Pro+

139

28. Xiaomi 14

138

29. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

137

30. Vivo X90 Pro

136

30. Xiaomi 13 Pro

136

30. Xiaomi 12S Ultra

136

33. Huawei Mate 40 Pro

135

33. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

135

33. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)

135

36. Google Pixel 6 Pro

134

36. Vivo X70 Pro+

134

38. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

133

38. Apple iPhone 14

133

38. Google Pixel Fold

133

38. Google Pixel 7a

133

38. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)

133

38. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

133

44. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

131

44. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

131

44. Xiaomi 13T Pro

131

47. Motorola Edge 40 Pro

130

47. Oppo Find X5 Pro

130

47. Xiaomi 13

130

50. Huawei P40 Pro

129

50. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra

129

50. Xiaomi 12T Pro

129

50. Xiaomi 12 Pro

129

54. Oppo Find X3 Pro

128

54. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

128

56. Apple iPhone 12 Pro

127

56. Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders

127

56. OnePlus 11

127

56. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

127

56. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

127

61. Google Pixel 6

126

61. Honor Magic4 Pro

126

61. Vivo X70 Pro (MediaTek)

126

61. Vivo X60 Pro+

126

65. Apple iPhone 13 mini

125

65. Apple iPhone 13

125

65. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

125

65. Vivo X50 Pro+

125

69. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

124

69. Xiaomi Mi 11 Pro

124

71. Xiaomi 13T

123

72. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

122

72. Google Pixel 6a

122

72. Honor 90

122

72. OnePlus 10 Pro

122

72. OnePlus 9 Pro

122

77. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

121

78. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

120

78. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)

120

78. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro 5G

120

81. Honor Magic Vs

119

81. Sony Xperia 5 IV

119

83. Sony Xperia 5 V

118

83. Sony Xperia 1 IV

118

85. Apple iPhone 12 mini

117

85. Apple iPhone 12

117

85. Honor Magic V2

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)

117

91. Apple iPhone 11

116

91. Asus Zenfone 8

116

91. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

116

94. Honor 70

115

94. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Snapdragon)

115

94. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

115

94. Xiaomi 12T

115

98. Nothing Phone(1)

114

98. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G

114

98. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G

114

98. Oppo Find X5

114

98. Oppo Find N2 Flip

114

103. OnePlus 8 Pro

113

103. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G

113

103. Xiaomi 12

113

106. Oppo Reno8 5G

112

106. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

112

108. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G

111

108. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos)

111

108. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)

111

111. Google Pixel 5

109

111. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G

109

113. Asus ROG Phone 7

108

113. Fairphone 5

108

113. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Exynos)

108

113. Xiaomi 11T Pro

108

117. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

107

118. Oppo Find X3 Neo

106

119. Sony Xperia 1 III

105

120. Motorola Edge 40 Neo

103

121. Huawei P40

102

121. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G

102

123. Black Shark 5 Pro

101

123. Motorola Edge 30 Pro

101

125. Apple iPhone SE (2022)

100

125. Google Pixel 4a

100

127. ZTE Axon 30 Ultra

128. Oppo Find X5 Lite

129. Oppo Reno4 5G

130. Oppo A94 5G

130. Vivo X80 Lite 5G

132. Samsung Galaxy A72

132. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G

132. Samsung Galaxy A25 5G

135. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 5G

136. Oppo Reno6 5G

137. Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G

137. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G

139. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G

140. OnePlus Nord CE 5G

141. Samsung Galaxy A15 5G

141. Vivo Y76 5G

143. Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

144. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G

145. Sony Xperia 10 V

145. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G

147. TCL 40R 5G

148. Realme 9i 5G

148. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13

150. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G

151. Honor 90 Lite

152. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)

152. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G

154. Fairphone 4

154. Oppo A78 5G

154. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G

157. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G

158. Motorola Moto G62 5G

159. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G

160. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G

161. Sony Xperia 10 IV

161. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12

161. Xiaomi Redmi 13C

161. Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G

165. Honor X7

165. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G

167. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11

168. Honor 70 Lite

169. Motorola Moto G23

170. Oppo A77 5G

171. Honor X8 5G

171. TCL 406

173. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022

174. Crosscall Action-X5

175. Samsung Galaxy A22 5G

176. Crosscall Core-Z5

177. Oppo A57

177. Oppo A16s 5G

179. Samsung Galaxy A05s

179. Xiaomi Redmi 12C

Position in High-End Ranking

3^rd

1. Google Pixel 7

140

2. Google Pixel 7a

133

3. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

127

4. Google Pixel 6

126

5. Google Pixel 6a

122

5. Honor 90

122

7. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

121

8. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro 5G

120

9. Honor 70

115

9. Xiaomi 12T

115

11. Nothing Phone(1)

114

12. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G

113

13. Oppo Reno8 5G

112

14. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G

109

15. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

107

16. Apple iPhone SE (2022)

100

17. Oppo Find X5 Lite

18. Oppo Reno4 5G

19. Vivo X80 Lite 5G

20. Samsung Galaxy A72

21. Oppo Reno6 5G

22. Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G

22. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G

24. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G

25. Sony Xperia 10 V

26. Fairphone 4

27. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G

28. Sony Xperia 10 IV

29. Crosscall Action-X5

Pros

Nice color rendering
Accurate target exposure and wide dynamic range
Good ultra-wide performance
Effective video stabilization

Cons

Autofocus instabilities and artifacts, for example, moving texture, in low-light video
Ghosting on moving subjects
Noise in low light, especially in photo mode

The Samsung Galaxy S23 FE offered a very solid overall performance for a High-end segment device in the DXOMARK Camera test. The overall score comes pretty close to the more expensive Galaxy S23 and is noticeably higher than the more budget Galaxy A14 5G. Colors, and in particular skin tones were rendered nicely and images offered rich detail. A wide dynamic range ensured decent shadow and highlight detail in high-contrast scenes, and the good performance of the ultra-wide camera makes the Galaxy S23 FE a good option for landscape photography. On the downside, some artifacts like ghosting on moving subjects could be noticeable, especially when capturing low-light scenes.

Results in video mode were pretty good as well, especially when recording under daylight conditions. Video stabilization worked effectively and the recorded footage had high levels of texture. However, with decreasing light levels artifacts made an appearance, specifically a vibration of some areas of the frame.

Test summary

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE Camera Scores

Photo

124

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

160

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE Photo scores

Exposure

106

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

123

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Color

108

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

125

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

Exposure and color are the key attributes for technically good pictures. For exposure, the main attribute evaluated is the brightness of the main subject through various use cases such as landscape, portrait, or still life. Other factors evaluated are the contrast and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Repeatability is also important because it demonstrates the camera's ability to provide the same rendering when shooting several images of the same scene.
For color, the image quality attributes analyzed are skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, and repeatability. For color and skin tone rendering, we penalize unnatural colors but we respect a manufacturer's choice of color signature.

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE – Nice colors and wide dynamic range

Samsung Galaxy S23 – Nice colors and wide dynamic range

Samsung Galaxy A14 5G – Limited dynamic range, hue shift in the sky, highlight clipping

Autofocus

102

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

123

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

Autofocus irregularity and speed: 1000Lux Δ0EV Daylight Handheld

Texture

108

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

124

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for tripod and handheld conditions

Noise

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

116

Honor Magic5 Pro

Noise tests analyze various attributes of noise such as intensity, chromaticity, grain, structure on real-life images as well as images of charts taken in the lab. For natural images, particular attention is paid to the noise on faces, and landscapes, but also on dark areas and high dynamic range conditions. Noise on moving objects is also evaluated on natural images. Objective measurements are performed on images of charts taken in various conditions from 1 to 1000 lux and different kinds of dynamic range conditions. The chart used is the Dead Leaves chart and the standardized measurement such as Visual Noise derived from ISO 15739.

Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition

Artifacts

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G

Main photo artifacts penalties

Preview

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE – Preview – Highlight clipping

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE – Capture – Wider dynamic range than preview

Zoom

123

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

158

Huawei P60 Pro

About DXOMARK Camera Zoom tests

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE Zoom Scores

Wide

109

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

121

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE – 13mm equivalent – Good texture rendering

Samsung Galaxy S23 – 13mm equivalent – Unnatural texture rendering, orange color cast

Tele

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

118

Huawei P60 Pro

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length

Video

131

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

158

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE Video scores

Exposure

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

116

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Color

103

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

119

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Exposure tests evaluate the brightness of the main subject and the dynamic range, eg. the ability to render visible details in both bright and dark areas of the image. Stability and temporal adaption of the exposure are also analyzed.
Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE – Good colors and dynamic range

Samsung Galaxy A14 5G – Good colors, limited dynamic range, exposure instabilities

Samsung Galaxy S23 – Good colors and dynamic range

Texture

109

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

118

Oppo Find X6 Pro

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels

Noise

107

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

119

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Spatial Noise
Temporal Noise

Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level

Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level

This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

Stabilization

115

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

118

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Stabilization evaluation tests the ability of the device to stabilize footage thanks to software or hardware technologies such as OIS, EIS, or any others means. The evaluation looks at residual motion, smoothness, jellow artifacts and residual motion blur on walk and run use cases in various lighting conditions. The video below is an extract from one of the tested scenes.

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE – Effective stabilization (4K 30fps), only few instabilities

Samsung Galaxy A14 5G – Strong sharpness differences between consecutive frames (1080p 30fps)

Samsung Galaxy S23 – Very good stabilization (4K 60fps)

Artifacts

Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

Xiaomi 12S Ultra

Main video artifacts penalties

The post Samsung Galaxy S23 FE Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ Camera test

DXOMARK — Thu, 16 Nov 2023 21:46:53 +0000

We put the Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

Primary: 48MP, 24 mm equivalent f/1.4 – f/4.0-aperture lens (auto-adjustable), AF, OIS
Ultra-wide: 40MP, 13mm equivalent f/2.2-aperture lens, AF
Tele: 48MP, 90mm equivalent f/3.0-aperture lens with OIS, AF

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

157

camera

160
Photo

121

123

121

125

123

118

124

115

116

80
Bokeh

83
Preview

152
Zoom

114

118

Wide

121

148
Video

114

116

114

119

119

109

118

112

119

114

118

Use cases & Conditions

Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.

Top score

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

Top score

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 132

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

Top score

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

Position in Global Ranking

1^st

1. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

157

2. Huawei P60 Pro

156

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

154

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

154

5. Google Pixel 8 Pro

153

5. Oppo Find X6 Pro

153

7. Honor Magic5 Pro

152

8. Oppo Find X6

150

8. Vivo X100 Pro

150

10. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

149

11. Google Pixel 8

148

12. Google Pixel 7 Pro

147

12. Honor Magic4 Ultimate

147

14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

146

14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

146

16. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

145

16. Apple iPhone 15

145

18. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

144

19. Huawei P50 Pro

143

20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

141

20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

141

20. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

141

23. Google Pixel 7

140

23. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)

140

23. Vivo X90 Pro+

140

23. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

140

27. Huawei Mate 40 Pro+

139

28. Xiaomi 14

138

29. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

137

30. Vivo X90 Pro

136

30. Xiaomi 13 Pro

136

30. Xiaomi 12S Ultra

136

33. Huawei Mate 40 Pro

135

33. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

135

33. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)

135

36. Google Pixel 6 Pro

134

36. Vivo X70 Pro+

134

38. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

133

38. Apple iPhone 14

133

38. Google Pixel Fold

133

38. Google Pixel 7a

133

38. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)

133

38. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

133

44. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

131

44. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

131

44. Xiaomi 13T Pro

131

47. Motorola Edge 40 Pro

130

47. Oppo Find X5 Pro

130

47. Xiaomi 13

130

50. Huawei P40 Pro

129

50. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra

129

50. Xiaomi 12T Pro

129

50. Xiaomi 12 Pro

129

54. Oppo Find X3 Pro

128

54. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

128

56. Apple iPhone 12 Pro

127

56. Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders

127

56. OnePlus 11

127

56. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

127

56. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

127

61. Google Pixel 6

126

61. Honor Magic4 Pro

126

61. Vivo X70 Pro (MediaTek)

126

61. Vivo X60 Pro+

126

65. Apple iPhone 13 mini

125

65. Apple iPhone 13

125

65. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

125

65. Vivo X50 Pro+

125

69. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

124

69. Xiaomi Mi 11 Pro

124

71. Xiaomi 13T

123

72. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

122

72. Google Pixel 6a

122

72. Honor 90

122

72. OnePlus 10 Pro

122

72. OnePlus 9 Pro

122

77. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

121

78. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

120

78. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)

120

78. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro 5G

120

81. Honor Magic Vs

119

81. Sony Xperia 5 IV

119

83. Sony Xperia 5 V

118

83. Sony Xperia 1 IV

118

85. Apple iPhone 12 mini

117

85. Apple iPhone 12

117

85. Honor Magic V2

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)

117

91. Apple iPhone 11

116

91. Asus Zenfone 8

116

91. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

116

94. Honor 70

115

94. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Snapdragon)

115

94. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

115

94. Xiaomi 12T

115

98. Nothing Phone(1)

114

98. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G

114

98. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G

114

98. Oppo Find X5

114

98. Oppo Find N2 Flip

114

103. OnePlus 8 Pro

113

103. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G

113

103. Xiaomi 12

113

106. Oppo Reno8 5G

112

106. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

112

108. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G

111

108. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos)

111

108. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)

111

111. Google Pixel 5

109

111. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G

109

113. Asus ROG Phone 7

108

113. Fairphone 5

108

113. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Exynos)

108

113. Xiaomi 11T Pro

108

117. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

107

118. Oppo Find X3 Neo

106

119. Sony Xperia 1 III

105

120. Motorola Edge 40 Neo

103

121. Huawei P40

102

121. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G

102

123. Black Shark 5 Pro

101

123. Motorola Edge 30 Pro

101

125. Apple iPhone SE (2022)

100

125. Google Pixel 4a

100

127. ZTE Axon 30 Ultra

128. Oppo Find X5 Lite

129. Oppo Reno4 5G

130. Oppo A94 5G

130. Vivo X80 Lite 5G

132. Samsung Galaxy A72

132. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G

132. Samsung Galaxy A25 5G

135. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 5G

136. Oppo Reno6 5G

137. Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G

137. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G

139. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G

140. OnePlus Nord CE 5G

141. Samsung Galaxy A15 5G

141. Vivo Y76 5G

143. Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

144. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G

145. Sony Xperia 10 V

145. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G

147. TCL 40R 5G

148. Realme 9i 5G

148. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13

150. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G

151. Honor 90 Lite

152. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)

152. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G

154. Fairphone 4

154. Oppo A78 5G

154. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G

157. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G

158. Motorola Moto G62 5G

159. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G

160. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G

161. Sony Xperia 10 IV

161. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12

161. Xiaomi Redmi 13C

161. Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G

165. Honor X7

165. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G

167. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11

168. Honor 70 Lite

169. Motorola Moto G23

170. Oppo A77 5G

171. Honor X8 5G

171. TCL 406

173. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022

174. Crosscall Action-X5

175. Samsung Galaxy A22 5G

176. Crosscall Core-Z5

177. Oppo A57

177. Oppo A16s 5G

179. Samsung Galaxy A05s

179. Xiaomi Redmi 12C

Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking

1^st

1. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

157

2. Huawei P60 Pro

156

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

154

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

154

5. Google Pixel 8 Pro

153

5. Oppo Find X6 Pro

153

7. Honor Magic5 Pro

152

8. Oppo Find X6

150

8. Vivo X100 Pro

150

10. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

149

11. Google Pixel 7 Pro

147

11. Honor Magic4 Ultimate

147

13. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

146

13. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

146

15. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

145

16. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

144

17. Huawei P50 Pro

143

18. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

141

18. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

141

18. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

141

21. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)

140

21. Vivo X90 Pro+

140

21. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

140

24. Huawei Mate 40 Pro+

139

25. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

137

26. Vivo X90 Pro

136

26. Xiaomi 13 Pro

136

26. Xiaomi 12S Ultra

136

29. Huawei Mate 40 Pro

135

29. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

135

29. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)

135

32. Google Pixel 6 Pro

134

32. Vivo X70 Pro+

134

34. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

133

34. Google Pixel Fold

133

34. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)

133

37. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

131

37. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

131

39. Motorola Edge 40 Pro

130

39. Oppo Find X5 Pro

130

41. Huawei P40 Pro

129

41. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra

129

41. Xiaomi 12 Pro

129

44. Oppo Find X3 Pro

128

44. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

128

46. Apple iPhone 12 Pro

127

46. Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders

127

46. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

127

49. Honor Magic4 Pro

126

49. Vivo X60 Pro+

126

51. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

125

51. Vivo X50 Pro+

125

53. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

124

53. Xiaomi Mi 11 Pro

124

55. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

122

55. OnePlus 10 Pro

122

55. OnePlus 9 Pro

122

58. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

120

59. Honor Magic Vs

119

59. Sony Xperia 5 IV

119

61. Sony Xperia 5 V

118

61. Sony Xperia 1 IV

118

63. Honor Magic V2

117

63. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

117

65. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Snapdragon)

115

65. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

115

67. Oppo Find X5

114

67. Oppo Find N2 Flip

114

69. OnePlus 8 Pro

113

70. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

112

71. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G

111

71. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos)

111

73. Asus ROG Phone 7

108

74. Sony Xperia 1 III

105

Pros

Very wide dynamic range, accurate exposure on portraits and landscape shots
Nice colors in most conditions
Good texture/noise trade-off in photo and zoom, very good detail and low noise levels
Fast and accurate auto-focus, fairly effective video stabilization
Variable aperture allows for optimized depth of field for each scene.
Nice blur effect and accurate subject isolation in portrait mode
Pleasant macro perspective, thanks to use of 3.5x tele

Cons

Loss of details in high-contrast and low light video
Noise in indoor and low light videos with motion
Face contrast and skin tones could be better in challenging backlit scenes
Highlight clipping in some high-contrast scenes
Artifacts including ghosting, hue shift or color quantization in photo and video

The Mate 60 Pro+ is Huawei’s latest flagship device in its Mate Pro series that continues to test the limits of high-performing smartphone cameras. Thanks to the upgraded imaging hardware and Huawei’s imaging software expertise, the Mate 60 Pro+ delivered excellent results in the DXOMARK Camera tests, capturing the top spot in our ranking.

The Huawei is the best device tested to date for still imaging, delivering great photo results across all use cases. Our testers particularly liked the excellent trade-off between detail retention and noise reduction, the accurate target exposure, wide dynamic range and pleasant color rendering. When shooting in low light, exposure remained pleasant and the level of captured detail remained high. Thanks to its variable aperture that optimizes depth-of-field for each scene, the Mate 60 Pro+ is also an excellent option for group portraits, achieving good sharpness on all subjects in the frame. In addition, its ability to freeze motion and minimize motion blur as well as the fast shutter response, make it easy to capture the decisive moment in moving scenes.

Still image results were excellent not only when using the primary camera but across most portions of the zoom range, from the widest 13mm setting up to around 150mm where texture started to become softer. Thanks to great detail, low noise, a reliable autofocus system and a wide dynamic range the Huawei’s ultra-wide camera was the best we have tested to date. Tele results at medium range were excellent, too, with beautiful textures and low noise, even in low light images.

Like its top-end rivals the Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max and the Google Pixel 8 Pro, the Mate 60 Pro+ was tested in HDR video mode. Video stabilization was among the very best we have seen, and results were overall excellent for most video sub-tests, making the Mate 60 Pro+ a great option for recording moving images. However, there is much room for improvement in video quality attributes such as texture and noise when compared with the best-in-class video devices.

Please note that photos were captured by default in an HDR format that is proprietary to Huawei. Photos can be displayed with their HDR capabilities on some of the latest Huawei smartphones, and tablets, using the latest Huawei operating system. However, Huawei’s proprietary system is not widely compatible with other Android devices, including even some Huawei devices (such as laptops). We also do not possess the necessary visualization tools to assess Huawei’s proprietary HDR format, and therefore, our evaluations were done using an SDR visualization workflow.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Wide dynamic range, accurate exposure and good detail, even in very challenging conditions

Top score

Friends & Family

The Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ is an ideal smartphone for taking pictures and videos of friends and family, taking the number one spot in our corresponding ranking. Motion blur and ghosting effects were very well under control when shooting moving scenes, allowing for precise capture of the decisive moment. Only very rarely did our testers observe fusion artifacts on challenging high-contrast scenes.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Wide depth of field in group shots, good detail, nice skin tones

BEST 132

Lowlight

The Mate 60 Pro+ was also among the best devices tested to date in terms of low-light capabilities. In dim conditions, the camera offered a wide dynamic range, allowing for good detail in both the highlight and shadow areas of the frame. Image noise was well under control and images showed high levels of detail as well as natural texture rendering, even when shooting at night.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Wide dynamic range, high levels of detail, very slight noise

Test summary

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ Camera Scores vs Ultra-Premium

Photo

160

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

In photo mode, the Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ delivered the best score of all devices tested to date, thanks to excellent results that were on par with, or better than the best rivals across almost all sub-tests. Our testers especially liked the excellent texture/noise trade-off, the fast and accurate autofocus and the wide depth of field that is made possible by the Huawei’s variable f/1.4 – 4.0 aperture.

In addition, exposure was accurate, with a wide dynamic range, across all test conditions, and color rendering was mostly accurate, with only some slight occasional color casts. The simulated bokeh effect in portrait mode was nice, with very accurate depth estimation and subject isolation, and in macro mode the Mate 60 Pro+ was capable of capturing good detail and a nice perspective, thanks to making use of its 3.5x tele camera. The device also did well in the preview category, with the preview image on the device display, in terms of target exposure and highlight retention, closer to the final capture than on the previously tested P60 Pro.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ Photo scores vs Ultra-Premium

Close-Up

Close-up is the third new use case score introduced with DXOMARK Camera version 5. It evaluates the camera’s ability to capture detail at subject distances below 10cm and magnifications as close possible to 1:1.

Using the tele camera in macro mode, the device rendered close-up shots pleasantly, with nice perspective compression.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Good subject isolation, thanks to the macro tele module

Huawei P60 Pro – Good subject isolation, thanks to the macro tele module, slightly undersaturated color

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Less pronounced subject isolation, nice colors

In our macro tests, white balance instabilities and motion blur on moving subjects could have a negative impact on image quality, but the camera captured good detail that was rendered in a natural way.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Natural detail rendering, shallow depth of field

Huawei P60 Pro – Noticeable detail sharpening, shallow depth of field

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – High levels of detail, wider depth of field

Exposure

121

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

123

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

The camera managed accurate target exposure across all light conditions. In addition, exposure was stable across a series of consecutive shots.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Accurate target exposure

Huawei P60 Pro – Accurate target exposure

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Accurate target exposure

Our testers found the Mate 60 Pro+ camera to produce a very wide dynamic range. However, in high-contrast scenes some highlight clipping was observed.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Slight highlight clipping on sky and subjects

Huawei P60 Pro – Slight highlight clipping on sky and subjects

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Slightly stronger highlight clipping

In backlit scenes, the Mate 60 Pro+ could struggle with contrast on subjects, rendering them very flat.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Lack of contrast on foreground subject, inaccurate skin tones

Color

121

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

125

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

In our tests, colors were generally rendered nicely. White balance was particularly nice in low light, producing a pleasant warm cast.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Warm color cast, nice colors

Huawei P60 Pro – Nice colors, greenish cast

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Nice colors, more neutral white balance

When shooting in daylight conditions, greenish or yellowish color casts could be noticeable on occasion.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Yellow/green color cast

Huawei P60 Pro – Neutral white balance

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Slight green color cast

Under typical indoor lighting, skin tones could sometimes be desaturated, making for a slightly unnatural rendering.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Pale skin tones

Huawei P60 Pro – Accurate skin tones

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Accurate skin tones

Overall, our testers observed slight white balance instabilities in all test conditions, with slightly inconsistent results across a series of consecutive shots.

Autofocus

123

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

Edge acutance irregularity and average shooting delay along all tested conditions

Thanks to its variable aperture, the Mate 60 Pro+ is capable of optimizing depth of field for any scene. In group shots, the Huawei produced a wider depth of field than its rivals, allowing for good sharpness on all subjects.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Depth of field

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Sharp background subject

Huawei P60 Pro - Depth of field

Huawei P60 Pro - Sharp background subject

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Depth of field

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Background subject out of focus

Autofocus irregularity and speed: 5Lux Δ0EV Tungsten Tripod

Thanks to a responsive and accurate autofocus in all light conditions, the Mate 60 Pro+ was capable of capturing the decisive moment in moving scenes.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Very slight motion blur

Texture

118

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

124

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for tripod and handheld conditions

In our tests, the Mate 60 Pro+ captured high levels of detail and images with natural texture rendering. The excellent real-life results were confirmed by objective measurements in the lab.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Outdoor texture

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - High levels of detail

Huawei P60 Pro - Outdoor texture

Huawei P60 Pro - High levels of detail

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Outdoor texture

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Slight lack of detail

In some specific scenes, a local loss of detail in the frame could be noticed.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Local loss of detail

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Loss of detail around the subject's mouth

Noise

115

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

116

Honor Magic5 Pro

Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition

In our tests, the Mate 60 Pro+ kept image noise very well under control across all test conditions. Luminance noise reduction was effective, even in areas of plain color. However, on occasion it could also result in color quantization and chromatic noise.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Low light noise

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Good noise reduction

Huawei P60 Pro - Low light noise

Huawei P60 Pro - rather visible noise

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Low light noise

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Visible noise

Artifacts

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G

Main photo artifacts penalties

Our testers occasionally observed unwanted artifacts, such as fusion artifacts, ghosting and hue shift, in the Mate 60 Pro+ test samples, especially when shooting high-contrast scenes.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Artifacts

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Fusion artifacts

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Artifacts

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Hue shift

A moiré effect was sometimes noticeable on fine patterns in the frame.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Artifacts

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Moiré

Bokeh

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

The Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ is an excellent option for simulating a DSLR-like look in bokeh mode. In our tests, it offered good depth estimation, a realistic bokeh shape and fairly good detail in both single and group portraits. The captured images also showed good exposure in most conditions, and spotlight rendering was better than on most rivals, thanks to accurate shapes and colors, even in night shots. Only in some bokeh shots did our experts spot some subject isolation errors.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Good subject isolation and blur intensity

Huawei P60 Pro – Accurate subject isolation

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Good subject isolation but lack of background blur

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Bokeh mode

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Accurately shaped spotlights

Huawei P60 Pro - Bokeh mode

Huawei P60 Pro - Slightly inaccurately shaped spotlights

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Bokeh mode

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Slightly inaccurately shaped spotlights

Preview

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

Our experts found the preview on the Mate 60 Pro+ to be quite improved over the P60 Pro. However, it is still not on the same level as the class-leading iPhone 14 Pro. Our testers noticed several differences between preview and final capture, especially in bokeh mode, where depth estimation was significantly different in preview, with blur often applied to subjects. On the plus side, preview target exposure was pretty accurate in most conditions and close to the captured image. This was not true for dynamic range, though, which was more limited in preview.

Zoom

152

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

158

Huawei P60 Pro

About DXOMARK Camera Zoom tests

In addition to the outstanding image quality of the primary camera, the Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ also delivered exceptional results with both its tele and ultra-wide modules. The Huawei’s results in the Wide category were the best of all devices tested to date, thanks to rich detail and a very effective noise reduction that, unlike on most rivals, did not appear to have a negative impact on detail and fine textures. The autofocus system worked reliably, and images showed a wide dynamic range, pleasant skin tones and accurate white balance. However, our testers also noted some small artifacts. Anamorphism (subjects close to the edge of the frame appearing stretched) was not always corrected and some slight ringing and aliasing were noticeable on high-contrast edges in the frame. Hue shift could be observed around clipped areas in bright skies.

Overall, the Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ captured very nice images across most of its zoom range, from the widest 13mm up to around 150mm. At longer tele settings, images got noticeably softer. Some rivals, including Huawei’s own P60 Pro, do better at long-range tele, thanks to faster apertures in the tele lens. The Mate 60 Pro+ tele camera offers only a relatively slow f/3 aperture. This said, image quality was excellent at medium range, especially between 70mm and 150mm. In this range, texture rendering was beautiful, especially in portraits, and noise levels remained low, even in low light.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ Zoom Scores vs Ultra-Premium

Video Zoom

When zooming while recording video, the framing transition between primary camera and ultra-wide module was convincing, but our experts observed some exposure and white balance jumps. Overall, the Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max offered better results with smoother transitions between camera modules.

Wide

121

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

The Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ is the best device tested to date in the wide category, thanks to great texture rendering and low noise levels.

Huawei Mate P60 Pro + - Ultra-wide (13mm)

Huawei Mate P60 Pro + - Excellent detail

Huawei P60 Pro - Ultra-wide (13mm)

Huawei P60 Pro - Good detail

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Ultra-wide (14mm)

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Less detail and more noise

Tele

114

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

118

Huawei P60 Pro

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length

At close and medium range tele the Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ delivered high quality images with rich detail and textures.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Medium range tele

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ - Excellent texture

Huawei P60 Pro - Medium range tele

Huawei P60 Pro - Excellent texture

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Medium range tele

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max - Lower level of texture

Video

148

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

158

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

About DXOMARK Camera Video tests

The Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ comes with HLG HDR video mode (HDR Vivid) that provided the best overall results and was therefore activated for our video testing. Both comparison devices, the P60 Pro and iPhone 15 Pro Max, were tested in HDR mode as well. Overall, the Mate 60 Pro+ could not quite match the best in class iPhone 15 Pro Max and Google Pixel 8 Pro, but was still among the best smartphones tested to date for video recording.

Video stabilization was particularly good, offering excellent motion compensation. Results in all other video test categories were excellent as well, but the Huawei lagged very slightly behind the best in class in most of them.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ Video scores vs Ultra-Premium

Exposure

114

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

116

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Dynamic range in video clips was generally quite wide, with good highlight retention in high-contrast scenes, especially when recording in daylight or under typical indoor lighting. Target exposure was generally accurate, even in difficult backlit scenes. This said, unlike the best in class iPhone 15 Pro Max the Huawei showed some slight contrast issues on occasion.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Accurate face exposure

Huawei P60 Pro- Accurate target exposure on face

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Accurate face exposure

Target exposure on faces remained good in low light, including on dark skin tones. However, some slight adaptation issues could sometimes be noticeable during scene transitions.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Accurate exposure on both faces, slight exposure transition issues

Huawei P60 Pro – Slightly underexposed faces

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Slightly overexposed faces

Color

114

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

119

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Image-quality color analysis looks at color rendering, skin-tone rendering, white balance, color shading, stability of the white balance and its adaption when light is changing.

Video white balance was accurate under daylight and indoor conditions. Colors, including skin tones, were generally accurate in recorded video footage.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Very slight blue cast

Huawei P60 Pro – Very slight blue cast

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Accurate white balance and skin tones

When recording video in very low light a green cast was sometimes noticeable in the shadow areas of the frame.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Green cast in the shadows

Huawei P60 Pro – Slight color cast in shadows

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Nice colors

Autofocus

119

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

The video autofocus was generally fast and smooth, with nice transitions, including in low light. This marks a significant improvement over the P60 Pro.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Good focus accuracy in low light

Huawei P60 Pro – Very slight focus inaccuracy on face

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Good focus accuracy in low light

Texture

109

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

118

Oppo Find X6 Pro

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation video score vs lux levels

Measurements for video texture were high across all test conditions in the lab. This was generally confirmed by out real-life results, including on faces. However, our testers noticed a lack of detail in scenes with a high dynamic range or backlighting. In the lab, we also occasionally saw floating texture artifacts when handholding the device for recording.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Visible floating texture artifact in background

Noise

112

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

119

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Spatial Noise
Temporal Noise

Spatial visual noise evolution with the illuminance level

Temporal visual noise evolution with the illuminance level

This graph shows the evolution of temporal visual noise with the level of lux. Temporal visual noise is measured on the visual noise chart in the video noise setup.

Video noise was generally well under control in static scenes, including our lab tests. However, noise can be challenging to control with an HDR video format and in some real-life scenes we observed noise in scenes with motion or light transitions.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Noise on walls during panning

Huawei P60 Pro – Lower noise, strong focus instability

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Slight noise

Stabilization

114

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

118

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Video stabilization is one of the Mate 60 Pro+’s main strengths. It worked very well, even when walking or running while recording. Camera shake was well under control and unwanted artifacts were kept to a minimum.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Excellent stabilization

Huawei P60 Pro – Excellent stabilization

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – Excellent stabilization

Artifacts

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

Xiaomi 12S Ultra

Main video artifacts penalties

During our video tests, a range of unwanted artifacts were observed, including hue shift near clipped areas, significant aliasing and occasional ghosting in videos with moving subjects. Unlike the class-leading iPhone 15 Pro Max, the Mate 60 Pro+ does not offer a high 60fps frame rate in daylight and indoor light conditions.

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ – Visible ghosting

Huawei P60 Pro – No ghosting

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max – No ghosting

The post Huawei Mate 60 Pro+ Camera test appeared first on DXOMARK.

Asus ROG Phone 7 Camera test

DXOMARK — Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:48:55 +0000

We put the Asus ROG Phone 7 through our rigorous DXOMARK Camera test suite to measure its performance in photo, video, and zoom quality from an end-user perspective. This article breaks down how the device fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases and is intended to highlight the most important results of our testing with an extract of the captured data.

Overview

Key camera specifications:

Primary: 50MP 1/1.56″ sensor, 1 μm pixels, f/1.9-aperture lens, AF, OIS
Ultra-wide: 13MP sensor, 12.5 mm equivalent, f/2.2-aperture lens

Scoring

Sub-scores and attributes included in the calculations of the global score.

Asus ROG Phone 7

108

camera

126
Photo

103

123

106

125

106

123

124

116

60
Bokeh

56
Preview

52
Zoom

118

121

106
Video

116

119

119

118

119

103

118

Use cases & Conditions

Use case scores indicate the product performance in specific situations. They are not included in the overall score calculations.

BEST 175

Outdoor

Photos & videos shot in bright light conditions (≥1000 lux)

BEST 160

Indoor

Photos & videos shot in good lighting conditions (≥100lux)

BEST 132

Lowlight

Photos & videos shot in low lighting conditions (<100 lux)

BEST 149

Friends & Family

Portrait and group photo & videos

Position in Global Ranking

113^th

1. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

157

2. Huawei P60 Pro

156

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

154

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

154

5. Google Pixel 8 Pro

153

5. Oppo Find X6 Pro

153

7. Honor Magic5 Pro

152

8. Oppo Find X6

150

8. Vivo X100 Pro

150

10. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

149

11. Google Pixel 8

148

12. Google Pixel 7 Pro

147

12. Honor Magic4 Ultimate

147

14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

146

14. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

146

16. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

145

16. Apple iPhone 15

145

18. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

144

19. Huawei P50 Pro

143

20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

141

20. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

141

20. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

141

23. Google Pixel 7

140

23. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)

140

23. Vivo X90 Pro+

140

23. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

140

27. Huawei Mate 40 Pro+

139

28. Xiaomi 14

138

29. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

137

30. Vivo X90 Pro

136

30. Xiaomi 13 Pro

136

30. Xiaomi 12S Ultra

136

33. Huawei Mate 40 Pro

135

33. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

135

33. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)

135

36. Google Pixel 6 Pro

134

36. Vivo X70 Pro+

134

38. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

133

38. Apple iPhone 14

133

38. Google Pixel Fold

133

38. Google Pixel 7a

133

38. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)

133

38. Samsung Galaxy S23 (Snapdragon)

133

44. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

131

44. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

131

44. Xiaomi 13T Pro

131

47. Motorola Edge 40 Pro

130

47. Oppo Find X5 Pro

130

47. Xiaomi 13

130

50. Huawei P40 Pro

129

50. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra

129

50. Xiaomi 12T Pro

129

50. Xiaomi 12 Pro

129

54. Oppo Find X3 Pro

128

54. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

128

56. Apple iPhone 12 Pro

127

56. Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders

127

56. OnePlus 11

127

56. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

127

56. Samsung Galaxy S23 FE

127

61. Google Pixel 6

126

61. Honor Magic4 Pro

126

61. Vivo X70 Pro (MediaTek)

126

61. Vivo X60 Pro+

126

65. Apple iPhone 13 mini

125

65. Apple iPhone 13

125

65. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

125

65. Vivo X50 Pro+

125

69. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

124

69. Xiaomi Mi 11 Pro

124

71. Xiaomi 13T

123

72. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

122

72. Google Pixel 6a

122

72. Honor 90

122

72. OnePlus 10 Pro

122

72. OnePlus 9 Pro

122

77. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro Plus 5G

121

78. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

120

78. Samsung Galaxy S22 (Exynos)

120

78. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 Pro 5G

120

81. Honor Magic Vs

119

81. Sony Xperia 5 IV

119

83. Sony Xperia 5 V

118

83. Sony Xperia 1 IV

118

85. Apple iPhone 12 mini

117

85. Apple iPhone 12

117

85. Honor Magic V2

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 FE 5G (Snapdragon)

117

85. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Snapdragon)

117

91. Apple iPhone 11

116

91. Asus Zenfone 8

116

91. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Snapdragon)

116

94. Honor 70

115

94. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Snapdragon)

115

94. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

115

94. Xiaomi 12T

115

98. Nothing Phone(1)

114

98. OnePlus Nord 2T 5G

114

98. Oppo Reno8 Pro 5G

114

98. Oppo Find X5

114

98. Oppo Find N2 Flip

114

103. OnePlus 8 Pro

113

103. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro+ 5G

113

103. Xiaomi 12

113

106. Oppo Reno8 5G

112

106. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

112

108. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G

111

108. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos)

111

108. Samsung Galaxy S21 5G (Exynos)

111

111. Google Pixel 5

109

111. Xiaomi 12 Lite 5G

109

113. Asus ROG Phone 7

108

113. Fairphone 5

108

113. Vivo X60 Pro 5G (Exynos)

108

113. Xiaomi 11T Pro

108

117. Samsung Galaxy A54 5G

107

118. Oppo Find X3 Neo

106

119. Sony Xperia 1 III

105

120. Motorola Edge 40 Neo

103

121. Huawei P40

102

121. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 Pro 5G

102

123. Black Shark 5 Pro

101

123. Motorola Edge 30 Pro

101

125. Apple iPhone SE (2022)

100

125. Google Pixel 4a

100

127. ZTE Axon 30 Ultra

128. Oppo Find X5 Lite

129. Oppo Reno4 5G

130. Oppo A94 5G

130. Vivo X80 Lite 5G

132. Samsung Galaxy A72

132. Samsung Galaxy A34 5G

132. Samsung Galaxy A25 5G

135. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13 5G

136. Oppo Reno6 5G

137. Samsung Galaxy A52s 5G

137. Samsung Galaxy A52 5G

139. Samsung Galaxy A33 5G

140. OnePlus Nord CE 5G

141. Samsung Galaxy A15 5G

141. Vivo Y76 5G

143. Samsung Galaxy A15 LTE

144. Samsung Galaxy A53 5G

145. Sony Xperia 10 V

145. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11 Pro 5G

147. TCL 40R 5G

148. Realme 9i 5G

148. Xiaomi Redmi Note 13

150. Honor Magic5 Lite 5G

151. Honor 90 Lite

152. Honor Magic6 Lite (5300 mAh)

152. Samsung Galaxy A23 5G

154. Fairphone 4

154. Oppo A78 5G

154. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12 5G

157. Samsung Galaxy A14 5G

158. Motorola Moto G62 5G

159. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11S 5G

160. Oppo Reno8 Lite 5G

161. Sony Xperia 10 IV

161. Xiaomi Redmi Note 12

161. Xiaomi Redmi 13C

161. Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G

165. Honor X7

165. Honor Magic4 Lite 5G

167. Xiaomi Redmi Note 11

168. Honor 70 Lite

169. Motorola Moto G23

170. Oppo A77 5G

171. Honor X8 5G

171. TCL 406

173. Xiaomi Redmi 10 2022

174. Crosscall Action-X5

175. Samsung Galaxy A22 5G

176. Crosscall Core-Z5

177. Oppo A57

177. Oppo A16s 5G

179. Samsung Galaxy A05s

179. Xiaomi Redmi 12C

Position in Ultra-Premium Ranking

73^rd

1. Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

157

2. Huawei P60 Pro

156

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

154

3. Apple iPhone 15 Pro

154

5. Google Pixel 8 Pro

153

5. Oppo Find X6 Pro

153

7. Honor Magic5 Pro

152

8. Oppo Find X6

150

8. Vivo X100 Pro

150

10. Huawei Mate 50 Pro

149

11. Google Pixel 7 Pro

147

11. Honor Magic4 Ultimate

147

13. Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

146

13. Apple iPhone 14 Pro

146

15. Apple iPhone 15 Plus

145

16. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

144

17. Huawei P50 Pro

143

18. Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max

141

18. Apple iPhone 13 Pro

141

18. Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

141

21. Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (Snapdragon)

140

21. Vivo X90 Pro+

140

21. Xiaomi 13 Ultra

140

24. Huawei Mate 40 Pro+

139

25. Vivo X80 Pro (Snapdragon)

137

26. Vivo X90 Pro

136

26. Xiaomi 13 Pro

136

26. Xiaomi 12S Ultra

136

29. Huawei Mate 40 Pro

135

29. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon)

135

29. Vivo X80 Pro (MediaTek)

135

32. Google Pixel 6 Pro

134

32. Vivo X70 Pro+

134

34. Apple iPhone 14 Plus

133

34. Google Pixel Fold

133

34. Samsung Galaxy S23 Plus (Snapdragon)

133

37. Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max

131

37. Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Exynos)

131

39. Motorola Edge 40 Pro

130

39. Oppo Find X5 Pro

130

41. Huawei P40 Pro

129

41. Xiaomi Mi 10 Ultra

129

41. Xiaomi 12 Pro

129

44. Oppo Find X3 Pro

128

44. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5

128

46. Apple iPhone 12 Pro

127

46. Asus Smartphone for Snapdragon Insiders

127

46. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip5

127

49. Honor Magic4 Pro

126

49. Vivo X60 Pro+

126

51. Samsung Galaxy S22+ (Exynos)

125

51. Vivo X50 Pro+

125

53. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold4

124

53. Xiaomi Mi 11 Pro

124

55. Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max

122

55. OnePlus 10 Pro

122

55. OnePlus 9 Pro

122

58. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 5G

120

59. Honor Magic Vs

119

59. Sony Xperia 5 IV

119

61. Sony Xperia 5 V

118

61. Sony Xperia 1 IV

118

63. Honor Magic V2

117

63. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Snapdragon)

117

65. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Snapdragon)

115

65. Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G (Exynos)

115

67. Oppo Find X5

114

67. Oppo Find N2 Flip

114

69. OnePlus 8 Pro

113

70. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip4

112

71. Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 5G

111

71. Samsung Galaxy S21+ 5G (Exynos)

111

73. Asus ROG Phone 7

108

74. Sony Xperia 1 III

105

Pros

Accurate exposure in video and in photo, especially in portraits
Accurate autofocus on faces, down to low light
Faithful and well rendered colors in daylight
Fairly accurate subject isolation in bokeh mode
Smooth and stable exposure in preview when zooming in
Effective video stabilization

Cons

Inaccurate skin tones in video
Highlight clipping
Lack of fine detail in all light conditions
Noise in low light
Color shift in the sky in high-contrast scenes, occasional color casts in night shots
Poor zoom performance

The Asus ROG Phone 7 provided reliably good image quality when shooting with the main camera module, thanks to accurate target exposure, especially on portrait scenes, as well as faithful and fairly pleasant colors. But the camera’s performance struggled to keep up with other Ultra-premium category devices.

The autofocus performed swiftly and accurately, but color shifts were often visible in the sky in high-contrast scenes, and on occasion our testers also observed color casts in low-light shots. Despite a fairly high level of captured detail, night performance was overall fairly poor, due to high noise levels. The ROG Phone 7 also lacks a dedicated tele camera, which limits taking zoomed-in shots.

In video mode, recorded clips showed generally good exposure and a wide dynamic range. However, colors could sometimes be inaccurate. While the autofocus reacted quickly, our testers observed some AF failures. Video footage offered fairly high levels of detail, but noise levels were usually also high, especially when recording in low light. On the plus side, video stabilization worked effectively, compensating well for camera motion and keeping frame shift well under control. Sharpness differences between frames were only noticeable in low light.

Test summary

Asus ROG Phone 7 Camera Scores

Photo

126

Asus ROG Phone 7

160

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

About DXOMARK Camera Photo tests

Asus ROG Phone 7 Photo scores

Exposure

103

Asus ROG Phone 7

123

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Asus ROG Phone 7 – Accurate subject exposure

Samsung Galaxy A34 5G – Fairly accurate subject exposure, slight clipping in the background

Honor Magic5 Pro – Accurate subject exposure

Color

106

Asus ROG Phone 7

125

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

Asus ROG Phone 7 – Fairly nice colors

Samsung Galaxy A345G – Nice colors but slight cast

Honor Magic5 Pro – Nice colors but slight cast

Autofocus

106

Asus ROG Phone 7

123

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

Edge acutance irregularity and average shooting delay along all tested conditions

Autofocus irregularity and speed: 300Lux Δ0EV TL84 Handheld

Texture

Asus ROG Phone 7

124

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score vs lux levels for tripod and handheld conditions

Noise

Asus ROG Phone 7

116

Honor Magic5 Pro

Visual noise evolution with illuminance levels in handheld condition

Artifacts

Asus ROG Phone 7

Xiaomi Redmi 12 5G

Main photo artifacts penalties

Preview

Asus ROG Phone 7

Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

Asus ROG Phone 7 – Capture

Asus ROG Phone 7 – Preview – Similar rendering to capture but with slight highlight clipping in the background

Zoom

Asus ROG Phone 7

158

Huawei P60 Pro

About DXOMARK Camera Zoom tests

Asus ROG Phone 7 Zoom Scores

Wide

Asus ROG Phone 7

121

Huawei Mate 60 Pro+

Asus ROG Phone 7 – Accurate exposure, good dynamic range, fairly good texture/noise trade-off, slightly oversaturated colors

Honor Magic5 Pro – Accurate exposure, good color and texture/noise trade-off

Samsung Galaxy A34 5G – Accurate exposure, slight white balance cast, lack of detail and slight noise

Tele

Asus ROG Phone 7

118

Huawei P60 Pro

DXOMARK CHART (DMC) detail preservation score per focal length

Video

106

Asus ROG Phone 7

158

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

About DXOMARK Camera Video tests